Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

T10

Members
  • Content Count

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Retributor

About T10

  • Rank
    Prosecutor

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. According to the Designers Commentary on re-rolls, modifiers and successful/failed rolls, if a re-roll is dependent on a success/fail condition, the actual roll is compared to the required value do decide if the re-roll is warranted. For example, if an attack has a To Hit of 4+ and a rule states that failed hit rolls must be re-rolled, then if the dice roll is 1, 2 or 3 then it must be re-rolled even if modifiers would make the roll succeed. A combination of a +1to hit and this rule can conspire to turn a "good" roll bad: You roll a 3, which is going to be a hit with the modifier, but you are forced to re-roll. Back to your issue. You roll an 8 and re-rolls are considered. Looking only at the casting value required, this is a success and must be re-rolled due to the Bloodsecrator. If you roll an 8 again the casting roll succeeds compared to the casting value, and this is overridden by the Hexgorger Skulls and hilarities ensue. -T10
  2. T10

    Pile in question

    Hi! While it is common way to play it that you apply damage and remove models as you work through the attacking unit's attacks, this is actually not how the rules work: "Once all of a unit’s attacks have been resolved, add up the damage that was inflicted. The player commanding the target unit must then allocate a number of wounds to the target unit equal to the damage that was inflicted." There is more text in the rules doc. It should not be possible for the defending unit to "rob" the attacking unit of its attacks by removing casualties in a way that drops the remaining attacks out of range.
  3. "Ooh! For me? What COULD it be!" -Pandora
  4. The game usually requires recognizing more than just 1s and 6s...
  5. GW is pushing some awful dice of late, the Sylvaneth dice in particular. What's going on here, Leaf+ to save? Swirly-skull for charge range? It boggles the mind. But the Ossiarch dice are just the worst. Is the smugface skull the 1 or the 6? Or is it it the greasy hand thing giving you an OK that's the coveted top number? Why are three out of six faces just nearly identical jazz hands? The fact that they exist make me want to meet an opponent dumb enough to use them so I can tell him never to use them. But seriously: How do I tell my opponent not to use crappy novelty dice no-one can read? -T10
  6. All that sounds like something they should have put into the actual rules for Warscroll Battalions and Allegiance Abilities. -T10
  7. Are you sure? As far as I can tell, battalions don't have a faction limitation per se. They don't have any keywords, after all. As such you only need to satisfy the organization requirements (and pay the points cost where appropriate) to use a battalion. If you can fit the required units into your allies allowance, you should be able to take the battalion.
  8. With regards to terrain and movement, it is a good practice to discuss this with your opponent before the battle, or at least before you start movement that interacts with terrain. It can be difficult to determine the ACTUAL distance a model moves when crossing an uneven fence (is it 0.9 or 1.1 inches?) or other irregular terrain shapes. Agreeing to count sections of terrain as being of a certain height will make it a lot easier to resolve movement. A house rule that works for our group in many systems is that if a model has enough movement to cross the threshold of a terrain feature, but not enough move to completely clear it, we allow the model to complete its move on the other side, touching the point where it ascended or descended. E.g.: A model with Movement 5 and a 40mm base is moving to cross a wall 3.5 inches away, the wall being 1 inch high and 1/4 inch wide. Even though the model's move would end part-way down the wall, for convenience we allow the model to end its move on the other side. We are also in agreement that this is just a convenience thing and isn't intended for "stealing inches" to get in better shooting or charge range, or grabbing objectives: When this is an issue we usually pre-measure before movement and make sure to move our models in a way that they only get to do stuff they normally would be allowed to do! At least in that turn
  9. What if we just did away with dice rolls all together? Each player just works through a series of virtual dice rolls that yield, in sequence, 1 through 6 and then repeats. Your unit has 30 attacks with 4+ to hit and re-rolling 1's and wounding on 3+ with extra 1 mortal wound on 6's to wound? Starting on 1 roll, that's 15 hits outright and 5 1's that "re-roll" into 2 more hits. For those 17 hits, starting at 6 roll, your unit score 11 wounds and 3 mortal wounds. The target unit then takes saves, starting at a 5 roll. Would't that be great, huh? Super fair, super balanced, super predictable! If we could then do away with the uncertainty of edge-case distances, perhaps using some sort of grid, then we can make this into a real game that doesn't have to suffer the vagaries of chance and opinion! Then people could play and never need to ever interact on a social level!
  10. DISTANCES Q: Sometimes a rule will specify that a model or unit needs to be ‘wholly within’ a certain distance. What exactly does ‘wholly within’ mean? A: A model is wholly within a certain distance if every part of its base is within the stated distance. A unit is wholly within a certain distance if every part of the bases of all of the models in the unit is within the stated distance. I don't think you need to measure the distances between the blue unit and the individual models in the red unit from the same blue model. In OPs example, each part of the base of each model in the red unit is within 12" of one or more models in the blue unit. As far as I can determine, this satisfies the "unit wholly within" condition. -T10
  11. The core rules describe how random movement values are rolled for to calculate the units Move in that movement phase. Are there any official guidelines for how to determine the Move characteristic of such units outside that phase, e.g. when targeted with the Pit of Shades spell? I would normally assume the answer is "roll the dice for determining their move for the purpose of resolving the spell", but considering how literal the devs are with regards to what phase an ability can be applied to it's a risky guess. E.g.: Blood Stalkers don't get to apply their Heartseekers ability if shooting in the Hero phase, because the ability says "in the shooting phase". So maybe squig hoppers and doomwheels count as 0 Move or something and are super-vulnerable to this spell...
  12. The battleshock rules should have special results on a roll of 1 or 6: On a roll of 1 no models flee. On a roll of 6, after any models have fled, an additional model flees. Ok, what's the point? Well, even if your casualties surpass the Bravery of the unit, you can get lucky and save your it even if you can't afford Inspiring Presence. Also, you need to consider spending the CP for Inspiring Presence even when the number of casualties is so low the battleshock test is a "can't fail", e.g a Bravery 7 unit taking 1 casualty. In my mind, this makes it less necessary to pay for Inspiring Presence on large horde units, and more necessary to take casualties seriously in MSU armies. -T10
  13. It seems to me that the fight first and fight last effects should have been addressed in the core rules. It can be argued that these are rare effects that should be described on the various abilities, but the same is kinda true of units that can Fly, a special trait (avoiding the term "Ability" here) that is claimed by some units, but is defined in the core rules. The result is that each instance of rules that affect when a unit fights, should be repeating the same text, but apparently there is some discrepancy. The fact that they frequently address the interaction with conflicting strike first/last rules with a catch-all phrase like "similar ability" dumps a lot of responsibility on the players to figure it out for themselves, paving the way for individual interpretations. As it stands, you should have a look at the FAQ and the Designers Commentary for more information. Personally I don't care much for the DC ruling of introducing a pre- and post-close combat sub phases. It seems artificial and counterintuitive: We are used to players taking turns in selecting a unit to fight, but suddenly here all the super-fast units in one army fights before all the super-fast units in the other army? Still, I guess that's what's adopted as the norm, so you should probably work out some concrete house rules if you want to play it differently.
  14. Warcry has alternating activation, so going first (or rather: getting to pick who goes first) is advantageous but overwhelmingly so. That game also provides benefits to the player that loses the initiative roll (fewer singles means more dub, trips or quads), AoS lacks an "empowerment" of the player losing the priority roll. There are elements that may tempt a player to elect to go second, but those are very situational - there is no core rule compensation to the player losing the priority roll, and no core rule benefit to electing to go second. Some situations where I would likely be happy to go second: E.g. There is the possibility of being the first player to move a predatory spell, but that seems very marginal in the early rounds. There are also situations where going first means a lot of wasted potential: units starting the battle round out of position and out of practical range, units engaged with distraction units, E.g. Claiming objectives at the end of your own turn means it is sometimes advantageous to first do a round of close combat against an entrenched enemy in their turn in in the hope of whittling down the defenders, gaining two turns of close combat before checking objective control instead of just one turn. Is the dearth of "go second" incentives a problem, though? I can't imagine players throwing down their rule book and go on strike to earn "go second rights", the game isn't perfect in this respect but it's not broken.
  15. Sure they do. But words and phrases like "move" and "wound roll" and "casting value" have meaning within the game because their meaning is declared in terms of rules.
×
×
  • Create New...