Liquidsteel

Sure, as I said it's addressing a different but similar scenario, where the game cannot proceed due to a breakdown of the rules. Ultimately, in this case the rules also get stuck and you can't proceed with the game if you try to follow them literally as you are suggesting.

Sure, but the Core Rules FAQ allows a scenario where you do remove models then keep on allocating wounds. Does it contradict itself? Yes. Does it set a precedent/intent that we can and should apply to Cycle of The Storm? Yes.

Not sure if it was missed or ignored when I posted earlier, but the 3.0 Core Rules FAQ did get an update on what to do with excess wounds when you encounter models being removed but not slain, as people were pointing out that the new Horrors of Tzeentch warscroll would allow you to ignore infinite wounds also, similar to Cycle of the Storm. I think it shows quite clearly what the intent is, and effectively infers that you can remove models then keep on allocating wounds to a unit. "Q: If a model is removed from play while it has wounds allocated to it, but it is not slain, does this mean I can no longer allocate wounds to that model and therefore that unit? A: No. The wounds allocated to that model have no further effect and you must continue allocating wounds that remain to be allocated to its unit as normal."

He still dies, he just gets to ignore the first wound that "kills" him.

The FAQ to the FAQ provided somewhat of a response to this, which seems to probably have been aimed at the change to Horrors of Tzeentch warscroll, but you can likely infer how it should and will be ruled in this case also. I'm aware you can get around it RAW, but let's be honest, nobody will let you actually play it that way. "Q: If a model is removed from play while it has wounds allocated to it, but it is not slain, does this mean I can no longer allocate wounds to that model and therefore that unit? A: No. The wounds allocated to that model have no further effect and you must continue allocating wounds that remain to be allocated to its unit as normal."

Glorious!

I reckon we get a new book with a new hero and that's it, maybe a new Varghulf. The start collecting FEC is still a staple box for both FEC and also Soulblight, I don't see them changing that anytime soon, despite the aged sculpts. We still have this rumour engine, which I'm going to imagine is still FEC, though could quite easily be a second Warband.

Does it have to be 40? Would you consider 35? or 30? Drop another unit from the below and you can add Belladamma. Allegiance: Soulblight Gravelords- Lineage: Kastelai Dynasty- Mortal Realm: Ghur- Grand Strategy: Hold the Line- Triumphs: BloodthirstyLeadersVengorian Lord (280)*- General- Command Trait: Rousing Commander- Artefact: Grave-sand Shard- Lore of the Vampires: Vile TransferenceRadukar the Beast (315)**Battleline5 x Blood Knights (195)*5 x Blood Knights (195)*5 x Blood Knights (195)**5 x Blood Knights (195)**5 x Blood Knights (195)**5 x Blood Knights (195)**5 x Blood Knights (195)**Core Battalions*Battle Regiment**Battle RegimentTotal: 1960 / 2000Reinforced Units: 0 / 4Allies: 0 / 400Wounds: 127Drops: 2

Vampire Lord can only buff Summonable units, unfortunately. So can't give +1 attack to Blood Knights. Radukar the Wolf can, however, but requires a charge.

Plus you can take one as Artillery if you're going for 1 drop.

I'm not sure if this answers your question at all, but Goonhammer do these graphs for 40k (where re-rolling 1 dice is an option for some armies). It doesn't show the working out, but does provide the probabilities.

That's not strictly correct, the first FAQ did address this, however the FAQ to the FAQ removed it and replaced it with different responses. Currently, all abilities that attempt to Negate a Wound are Wards. Additionally, wounds that are created as a result of negating a wound (Nagash, Archaon, Hearthguard) cannot be negated, nor may wounds suffered following a dice roll where a part of the roll is attempting to negate (Stormcast Praetors, it's a Bodyguard and Ward combined). Bodyguard abilities such as Belladamma, Necro and other armies e.g. Lumineth Bladelords do not negate, they re-allocate, and so you are free to take a Ward roll, but only once (so you can't Ward - Bodyguard - Ward).

@Neil Arthur Hotep thanks for that, though when you say wards can't stack, bodyguard saves aren't wards, so necro, gorslav, Bella all still get a ward plus a bodyguard.

Can you also calculate the average wounds/mortal wounds required to kill each one please? My main gripe with the Vampire Lord is he is 5 wounds without a bodyguard save, which means most armies with decent shooting can just take him off the board from the get go without breaking stride. The Necromancer (and Gorslav) at least make the opponent consider whether shooting them is going to be worth it, but it would be good to see exactly how much needs to be dedicated to each one, on average, to take them down.

Edit due to thread being revived: core rules FAQ voids my response below, as the clause surrounding benefitting once per phase has been removed. Original: I think it comes down to what the word "benefit" means in the context of Age of Sigmar. As has been pointed out to me previously on this, apparently "benefit" was the old way of saying "receive" a command ability, though now for AoS 3 we have receive and issue making things a bit clearer. In this scenario, what does "benefit from" mean? Does it mean receive, and thus it can be stacked, or does it actually mean benefit as per the definition of the word, and thus you can only ever have +1 attack from it, regardless of how many times you actually stack the ability? I play Soulblight, and I'm the type of player to try and play every rule to my advantage, however I find this one to be a bit of a stretch purely RAW, because to me "benefit" means benefit, and you can't benefit more than once, meaning you can't ever have more than +1 attack from this ability. Even my WAAC brain would feel slightly dishonest using this one, unless cleared with a TO ahead of time.

Blood Knights plus heroes to flavour, Nagash, Vhordrai etc

If you read through the past pages, you will find details of several lists that are doing okay. The book is very versatile and lists can reflect personal play style.

Yeah I can't leave Bella at home these days, she's been in almost every list I've tried recently. Vhordrai is definitely whiffy sometimes and I wish quickblood was easier to cast but alas it is what is, and thematically I have to take him.

Yeah Nighthaunt were my first army but I was immediately pushed in to Legion of Grief, then gave up and went FEC and never looked back til Gravelords came out. I've held on to the army though, collecting dust for the past 18 months, in the hope that an eventual new book gives me the impetus to play them properly.

Very nice, which list will you be taking? I'm giving the below a run out tonight against Sons of Behemat. Allegiance: Soulblight Gravelords- Lineage: Kastelai Dynasty- Mortal Realm: Shyish- Grand Strategy: Hold the Line- Triumphs: InspiredLeadersVengorian Lord (280)**- General- Command Trait: Rousing Commander- Artefact: Grave-sand Shard- Lore of the Vampires: Vile TransferencePrince Vhordrai (455)*- Lore of the Vampires: Amethystine PinionsBelladamma Volga, First of the Vyrkos (200)*- Lore of the Vampires: SoulpikeBattleline5 x Blood Knights (195)*5 x Blood Knights (195)*5 x Blood Knights (195)*5 x Blood Knights (195)**10 x Dire Wolves (135)*Units3 x Fell Bats (75)**Endless Spells & InvocationsUmbral Spellportal (70)Core Battalions*Battle Regiment**Battle RegimentTotal: 1995 / 2000Reinforced Units: 0 / 4Allies: 0 / 400Wounds: 122Drops: 2

I mean they are just guesses, but it probably won't? It came out on the fringe, some rules were definitely written with AoS 3.0 in mind (Riders of Ruin, removing the command ability on VLoZD etc). I think we will get a White Dwarf issue with new Battalions, Tactics and Strategies and that might be it.

They can't Aetherquartz each one, in Syar two can receive it otherwise it's 1, but they're probably Helon with this build. But anyway they are 2s and 3s so no pluses to hit required, and only Sevireth can be 2s and 2s with Finest Hour and maybe another with Inspired if they take the triumph. You can give Nagash Finest Hour turn 1 and also All out Defence so +2 to save. The "average" damage of 4x Wind Spirit and 1x Sevireth (under Finest Hour) is 9.72 damage against Finest Hour and All Out Defence Nagash (with 6+ ward). Sentinels are only battle line if they take another unit of wardens. Being Helon they can also consider Windchargers. Furthermore 4 x spirit build cannot be 1 drop, and Nagash can be 1 drop, so you can dictate first turn. Only way they get 1 drop is Sevireth and 2 x Spirit, which I have played against. You can do Nagash, Necromancer and chaff in Legion of Night and it's actually a decent game, they can struggle to remove hordes unless they charge in, which the zombie 6" pile in can then work around, somewhat. Not being in combat gives you opportunities to Rally. Of course, it's an uphill battle, but it's not totally unwinnable, in my opinion.

Nagash can dust them, and is very difficult to kill. Especially if you also have lifeswarm to keep him topped up. 4 wind spirits will not have good casting, once you move forward you can deny things like power of hysh, speed of hysh and lambent light.

I've been impressed with them in general, though have only got 2 units painted as I initially opted to run a horde style lists with lots of grave guard and zombies, only just about clearing my backlog (one more box of wolves to go and I'm there). Rend -1 isn't great but damage 2 is nice, or damage 3 if you can rousing commander them in Kastelai. By spamming them you can force multiple combats so neuter the save stacking game. I'll probably get up to 4 units total myself then see where we end up in January points, if it comes.

There was a strong performance from a Soulblight list this weekend at the Facehammer GT at Element Games, played by Tom Mawdsley (former Team England ETC player/captain). Went 4-0-1 in the end, losing only in game 5 to the eventual winner and from what I heard, it came down to or was partly effected by Vhordrai fluffing his lines somewhat in an important combat phase. Nevertheless it holds up what we already knew about Blood Knights, and I am pleased to see Grave Sand Shard make an appearance as I've been touting it as a strong choice in this meta, over the stock pick of Fragment of the Keep, especially when you factor in the re-rolling 1s on Deathless that banners offer. Not to say Fragment is bad, both are excellent, but nice to see it feature so well finally. Even better is the cameo from Kritza, as well as seeing him forgo any low drops in favour of Vanguard/Hunters. Worth pointing out his match ups, he played in to Archaon twice, Sons of Behemat twice, and a third list that I cannot see. So the list did not face any strong shooting it seems, though with so many blood knights it may not have been a problem anyway. I would like to have seen how that matchup would have gone against a strong opponent rounds 3/4/5.