Liquidsteel
-
Posts
717 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Liquidsteel
-
-
27 minutes ago, PJetski said:
App is irrelevant; only the battletome and its errata actually matter
The copy/paste of 2nd edition FAQ is perplexing, but not a surprise from these smoothbrain interns they call the FAQ team
Luckily the Errata is already out as well, updated for October 2021.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Dogmantra said:
No. Only the wording on the app changed, which is either a mistake or a bizarre way to roll out an update to everyone.
But even if you go by the wording in the app, it's just choose to negate a wound. A ward is specifically a die roll with a chance of negating a wound.
Yep a Ward includes a dice roll. You can see a similar ability on Mannfred's armour. So both Cycle and Mannfred allow a Ward roll before you choose to activate the ability.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, lare2 said:
Does this basically mean it now works as it did in 2nd?
P.S. translocation nerf is bs.
No it's actually worse now unfortunately, because the model is no longer slain so doesn't trigger the new effects like Blaze.
It just allows you negate a wound when that wound would ordinarily slay the model.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, AdamR said:
Not seeing this in the faq?
It's on the new scroll for the Lord-Arcanum, you need to update the app in the play store.
-
App has been updated with changes for several Stormcast units.
Cycle is just a Ward now, so thankfully the debate can be put to rest.
Only Behemoth dragons can take the -1 to Wound trait.
No movement after translocate.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:
So are you saying that 1.6.2 applies not only to resolving the effects, but also stating that you're doing the thing? So the player whose turn it is does not have to state an intention to use any "start of the hero phase" abilities until the player whose turn it is has done everything they intend to do at the start of the hero phase?
To give a concrete example: I have a bloodthirster I could charge your hero with in your hero phase using Blood Tithe. Your hero could use Finest Hour, but you would only want to do so if I'm going to charge. Both of these abilities are done at the start of the hero phase. So since it's your turn, you have to declare whether you're using Finest Hour before I have to say whether I'm charging?
This is correct. Active player does ALL of their start of hero phase stuff first, then inactive player does their start of hero phase stuff once the active player is finished.
You've created an additional step yourself in this declaration of what you intend to do, you don't declare anything, you just do it.
As the inactive player, you do your heroic action once the active player has finished their entire start of hero phase actions, so after this you are free to charge immediately.
-
In that case the only thing that sticks out is the Vampire Lord on Foot. He doesn't really offer anything in this list.
So you could remove him and then play around more with points. Do you need you two units of wolves? Do you need the Vengorian? Have you considered a Vampire Lord on Zombie Dragon?
But otherwise if its narrative I think you're fine.
-
The conversions sound very cool.
Are you asking for feedbackon the list or just sharing?
-
On 9/24/2021 at 12:48 AM, EnixLHQ said:
Unfortunately, no.
RAW it does indeed say that Midnight Tome grants the Wizard keyword, Arcane Bolt, Mystic Shield, and one spell from Lore of the Underworlds. In addition, it grants one spell cast in your hero phase and one unbind attempt in your opponent hero phase. If they were already a wizard, this grants one additional spell cast in your hero phase.
Sounds like you get an extra spell. However, the timing of events matters and is the reason this doesn't happen.
In 2.0 it was when the wizard was added to the allegiance that spells were selected, and that came before artefacts were allocated. So this artefact had to grant both the keyword Wizard as well as everything a Wizard gets, all at once. If it didn't, then whoever got it would just be a hero wizard with no spells having missed out on that earlier spell-granting step.
In 3.0, this is spelled out in the 19.0 section, but with a difference. The Wizard keyword grants the ability to cast once and unbind once. It grants Arcane Bolt and Mystic Shield. And, lastly, it grants access to all spells that are listed on their warscroll (if any) and whatever Endless Spells you may have brought. It doesn't grant access to the spell lore of the faction, though. This is why allied wizards don't know the spell lores from their source faction. So how do you get access to the spell lore? 27.3 Enhancements.
That section lays it out. Spell lores are a part of the set of 1-each universal enhancements every allegiance gets. It applies at the same time as the artefact being allocated does. Since it's all at the same time, that hero is not a wizard until it gets the artefact, which it then becomes true after getting the artefact. There's no "allocate artefacts, and then allocate spell lores" step, so it doesn't benefit from being a wizard when spell lores are granted, it's getting the artefact instead.
And, since the last step is to assign any additional enhancements your battalions granted, if this was when you selected the Mystic Tome (because maybe you took Reikenor's and are forced your first artefact) you'd be even further out of luck for any lores since that's a whole step later.
Found your previous post, I hope you don't mind me responding.
A few assumptions have been made here that I can't find evidence for in the rules. You say enhancements are all applied at the same time, I can't see this. The step for artefacts in 27.3.3 happens before the step for spell lores in 27.3.4, so if we're going to assume anything I'd argue Artefacts happen before Spell Lores. Otherwise are you free to pick them in any order, and so you get around this by picking your artefacts first?
Regardless, even if they are applied at the same time, I see no specific rule that say they don't work retroactively/simultaneously.
Going off on a tangent a bit, but the rule for simultaneous effects earlier in the rules states that the player in charge of the unit gets to sequence the order of the rules as they see fit, so if we apply that logic here (not saying it's correct but it's something) then you sequence them as Artefacts before spells.
The reason Allies don't get Spell Lore choices is because they do not gain the benefit of Allegiance Abilities, of which Enhancements are part of.
Finally, you mention Battalions are picked after initial enhancements, however this is incorrect. 27.3 states that "Enhancements are picked after you have chosen the battalions for your army (see 26.0)". So you already have the extra pick of whatever you choose readily available to you when you get to that step.
-
On 10/13/2021 at 11:58 PM, EnixLHQ said:
I go through it a few pages back, but getting a wizard keyword doesn't give you access to spell lores, your faction's first enhancement does. This is why allies don't have spell lores, either from their host faction or the army they ally to.
Arcane Tome makes you a Wizard, therefore you benefit from the Spell Lore enhancement and get a pick.
People have been using Arcane Tome to get access to their own spell lores, as well as Flaming Weapon e.g. on Gargants.
-
Yeah for example Teclis says the spells can't be unbound, but this says the spell is simply not cast.
-
12 hours ago, Gery81 said:
Also Vanhel's used to grant an extra move too. They could have made it a choice between an extra move, or double activation.
Hmm would be cool if it was something that happened at the start of the movement phase, either you get a free move OR you can pile in and fight.
Would allow you to clear a unit maybe then move and charge again, or get that initial extra movement to prepare for another turn.
-
53 minutes ago, TheArborealWalrus said:
If there was a cavalry leader (that actually buffed blood knights), I'd take that.
Yeah I was thinking about this only last week, something like a Vampire Lord on Nightmare or Abyssal Terror, or perhaps a Lord-Kastellan similar to a Liege-Kavalos.
Ideally with a command ability to give a unit (an aura might be too strong but maybe not if only 9" or 12") a buff of run and charge.
Also it's having 10 or more wounds that makes you ignore the effects of behind Wyldwoods, not Fly. So you can be shot behind them, but you can also see over them.
-
2
-
-
If anyone is interested in Battle Reports, the guys from my club have been doing them for a little while now, and hopefully to an okay standard.
Thus week James Tinsdale is playing the list we both took to Carnage at the weekend, Nagash and Blood Knights. He went 5-0 and I went 4-1. He'll be playing against Tom and Sons of Behemat with 4 Mega Gargants.
It's a live style batrep and they interact with the chat, it's unedited so can be quite long, but you get to hear the thought processes behind things and can ask questions in chat. As it's on YouTube you can always watch it back later.
I hope sharing it is okay. The batrep will be Thursday evening as usual, around 7pm UK time.
-
4
-
-
My club mate that went 5-0 beat a Kruleboyz list with the Nagash and Blood Knights list we've been running. I'm not sure on the specifics but it included 2 killbows and a few units of boltboyz
-
I managed to go 4-1 with Soulblight at the Mancunian Carnage tournament this weekend, taking best in Grand Alliance: Death from outside the top 3.
My list was as per below, which was the same as the 2nd place finisher, bar a different artefact.
I should note, that the event gave out additional Tournament Points for a number of secondaries and soft scores. You could earn up to 20 TP's for painting, 25 for Sports, and 50 for scoring and denying your opponent a 1 per game secondary, which you had to choose from a list of 10 at the start of each game, including things such as "roll a natural 11 to charge", "leave opponent with no more or less than 1 hero alive at the end of the game", "rally back 6 or more models" etc.
Final Standings (top half):
SpoilerAllegiance: Soulblight Gravelords
- Lineage: Kastelai Dynasty
- Grand Strategy: Hold the Line
- Triumphs: Inspired
Leaders
Nagash, Supreme Lord of the Undead (970)*
Wight King on Skeletal Steed (130)*
- General
- Command Trait: Rousing Commander
- Artefact: Grave-sand Shard
Battleline
5 x Blood Knights (195)*
5 x Blood Knights (195)*
5 x Blood Knights (195)*
5 x Blood Knights (195)*
20 x Deadwalker Zombies (115)*
Core Battalions
*Battle Regiment
Total: 1995 / 2000
Reinforced Units: 0 / 4
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 103
Drops: 1Game 1 vs Seraphon on The Vice - 13 - 14 defeat at end of turn 3
Opponent was running Thunder Lizard for that sweet -1 damage and extra jaw attacks on his Sallies. He also managed to get the side with Arcane terrain, which was a big swing on my magic effectiveness. We only had 10 minutes left as we were finishing turn 3 so we called it there, with him up 13-14. He won the roll off for turn 4 and we called it there. I didn't use my artefact very effectively and was too defensive. Rousing Commander was not used due to the Wight King dying on his turn 2, which at least would have made the Blood Knights damage 3 on the charge. I also failed to kill his Engine of the Gods turn 3 by 1 wound which would have drawn the game.
Game 2 vs Blades of Khorne on Feral Foray - 16 -11 victory at end of turn 3
Opponent had Archaon, a Warshrine, Priest, Stoker and some chaff. I gave him first turn and he charged Archaon in to some Blood Knights. Failing his roar, he fought twice with Archaon, but only killed 3 Blood Knights, failing his tactic. After this I screened out the objective with the remaining Blood Knights and Zombies and pushed through the middle/other side, taking and burning 2 of his objectives and running away with it.
Game 3 vs Seraphon on Apex Predators - 21 - 2 victory and tabled at end of turn 4
This game was against a player who despite having a lot of experience with the army, had barely played AoS 3.0 and missed quite a few things. I managed to take 2 objectives and they were too far from the third to take it even with 2 turns of movement, and despite a back and forth over 2 turns of not much damage, eventually Nagash managed to run rampant and I tabled them end of turn 4.
Game 4 vs Skaven on Savage Gains - 31 - 30 victory and almost tabled at end of turn 5
This game was really great, the opponent had 6 Stormfiends, 2 x Verminlords (one fighty, one casty) plus a Foot caster and a few units of chaff. I went first and played defensive and got my buffs up. He tried an early gambit to kill my Wight King, jumping through a gnawhole and making an 11 inch charge, however I was in cover, and made 3 of my 4 saves and only took 2 damage, making 3 deathless. In the meantime he shot off my Zombies and starting on whittling down my Blood Knights. I managed to turn around and kill his General with Nagash. He won and gave away turn 3, removing the objective on my side, and managed to get his stormfiends up on to my objective in his turn and then won the double in to turn 4. He was on 28 to my 15 however we still had an hour left and it was close. I managed to take his objective with 2 units of Blood Knights and take mine back, then in the next turn take back the middle objective and kill all his units, bar 1 wound remaining on the Warpseer. He was only able to take back his home objective and score a tactic, leaving the game 31-30 to me at the end of turn 5.
Game 5 vs Soulblight on Power Struggle, 15-10 victory at end of turn 3
Another great game, with a Nagash mirror match, though he was running Nagash, Mannfred, Vengorian, with 1 x 5 Blood Knights and 2 x 10 Skeletons. Being 1 drop I had a big advantage on this battleplan in this match up. I deployed first and was conservative, and he put his Nagash out of range of unbinds. I took first turn to allow myself to cast freely, and took the centre objective with a wall of Zombies, Blood Knights then Nagash and the White King, with a unit of Blood Knights on each objective. I then brought on a unit of Blood Knights on a flank and made a 9" charge in to his skeletons, unfortunately they survived on 1 and then regened back up to 5, as he had his Vengorian nearby to put me on -1 to Wound. From this point on the opponent was on the backfoot and I was able to remove his objective turn 3, forcing him to push forward down my flank, however I was able to retake it without re-engaging him so the points carried over, and I went the opposite way with Nagash and took his, so the game was over turn 3.
Overall, I found this list to be really strong. The lack of portals in favour of a unit of zombies was not a problem, as the Zombies were crucial as bodies on objectives, screens, or just a throwaway unit to die early then come back later. I didn't attempt a single hand of dust. I also didn't use Rousing Commander once, as I was never in the right position to use it in the offensive manner I was used to. I could have used it defensively in one game, however in hindsight it wouldn't have made a difference to that game.
The Grave Sand Shard was also largely ineffective, and again was unused in a couple of games, as I was waiting for the "perfect moment". I think I could probably afford to use it earlier in some situations just as an early game buffer.
-
2
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Battlehammer Jelly Thyme said:
Be'lakors warscroll reads
Shadow Form
Ignore modifiers (Positive or negative) when making save rolls for attacks that target this model.So I read this as he can not benefit from Mystic shields (+1 to save rolls)
But if I used a re-roll failed save rolls ability would this be allowed or does a re-roll count as a modifier?Rerolls are not a modifier, core rules state that re-rolls occur before modifiers are applied.
-
1 hour ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
On the other hand, they are a good way to get a summonable unit destroyed early for Endless Legions. They also don't lose much punch because a lot of their damage comes from the d3 mortals they deal (as sad as that is).
I keep trying to fit one unit of 5 into lists, but it's often hard when I could just bring Direwolves, Fell Bats or a Vargskyr instead.
Correct, just they'd arguably be better outside of Legion of Blood.
Putting them in to the opponent turn 1 and they don't die means an easy 3 points battle tactic for the opponent is all.
-
2
-
-
The only concern with the black knights is that they are an easy target for Broken Ranks, potentially.
-
17 hours ago, PJetski said:
Cycle cannot work the way it used to work, because you remove models after allocating wounds. There is no way it can function the way it did in the previous edition unless you are purposefully playing the game wrong.
Cycle actually works just fine RAW. The issue here is not Cycle, but rather that the core rules are not clear and potentially have a paradox built into them, as you pointed out. Changing the wording of Cycle does not fix the issue in the core rules.
There is now a distinction between a slain model and a removed model. These terms were synonymous in 2nd edition, but that is not the case in 3rd edition. However, it seems some of the rules do not account for this change. In particular, 1.3 defining a destroyed unit and 14.2 stating that remaining wounds allocated to a destroyed unit are negated. These two clauses do not strictly prohibit remaining wounds from being negated after all models are slain but before models are removed, but it would be good if the rules were consistent and clear.
So either:
1. Overkill damage is also negated before you remove models (the rules do not explicitly state this, but it can be inferred); or
2. The definition of "destroyed unit" in 1.3 is wrong and it should read: "A unit is destroyed when all models in the unit are slain"; or
3. All of 14.2 is wrong - models are removed as soon as they are slain like in 2nd edition, and Cycle is a garbage ability again
I don't think it's #3 because they specifically changed how wounds were allocated and models were removed in 3rd edition. That sort of change is not done by accident... unless GW is completely incompetent
I think it's pretty clear now that your interpretation of this interaction does not work RAW; it's a paradox and the game just breaks, primarily because of the definition of destroyed. You're also going down the route of what was intended now, which you were very quick to dismiss at the start, so let's leave it there.
This is a case where you can't follow RAW and you must make a call on how you will rule it, regardless of whether this is "purposefully playing the game wrong" or not.
From what I have seen discussed, the general consensus seems to be that you follow the old FAQ's guidance, and the model simply negates 1 wound, but still triggers anything regarding being slain. This is how a couple of local TOs that run big events in my region have said they would rule it, if someone tried this.
I hope the FAQ comes out soon and puts this to rest though.
-
12 hours ago, NinthMusketeer said:
RAW is currently a mess, my best recommendation is to play it as it used to work;
When a model in range is slain, you can trigger the ability to heal one wound and they are no longer slain. If there are still wounds to be allocated, keep doing so. This means that if there is any damage 'left over' they will die again.
Notably they ARE slain and any abilities which trigger based on that (Blaze of Glory) will go off. They are not removed from play however, so a rule which requires a model to be removed from play will not trigger. 1.6.2 (the rule for simultaneous effects) can be helpful here.
If you are going to a tournament or event, however, it would be best to ask the TO how the rule will be handled.
This is definitely the most "common sense" approach to the rule.
There is also the issue regarding wounds being negated in this instance, the rules say "If a unit is destroyed, all wounds that remain to be allocated to the unit are negated and have no effect."
3.1 informs us that "A unit is destroyed when the last model in the unit is removed from play".
So you don't negate the wounds after all models are slain, you negate them after all models are removed.
CotS prevents the model being removed, therefore you don't get to negate the remaining wounds.
You can either stuck in a loop where the game can't proceed, or you accept that the rule still works like it did before, effectively healing 1 wound and allowing you a second chance to active abilities that occur when slain, such as Blaze.
-
1
-
-
Yeah you have to read between the lines a bit, but RAW it seems to be fine.
I'm not sure in which order you do them, I think you are free to sequence as you see fit, so can take the ward on Olynder then shrug. Though the hexwraiths would not get a second ward because its the same wound.
-
Current consensus is that a bodyguard shrug is not a ward in and of itself. They removed the bit about bodyguards not being able to ward and instead ruled that any roll where part of it is a ward counts as a ward.
The keyword is Negate. If part of the rule involves negating its a ward.
So Praetors are a ward, but Emerald Host or something like a Necromancer is not.
-
Yeah I agree with @Warmill.
It's the same reason I argued against people using the battalion abilities for Unleash hell more than once, as Receiving counts as Using.
There are, unfortunately, still quite a lot of grey areas where a term is used but is not codified.
You get "benefit" causing issues with certain command abilities.
Rules question - Mannfred, sword of unholy power.
in Death
Posted
The splitting attacks is a good tip. But you are right in that this ability is often difficult to utilise as something like Grave Guard almost always want to go first because of how fragile they are.
The best I've found is Zombies, parked outside then piling in.