T10

Hah! Thanks! I guess I got coddled into confusion by the new focus-highlighting. Seriously, it seems like "single" is a lot more important in the context than the "2-5 models" and "more than 5 models" bits, but I can only really blame myself for not reading properly. -T10

From what I can tell, the coherency rules do not force units to form a single contiguous group. I may be mistaken, but this appears to be legal: Each model is within 1" of two other models in the unit. "But no-one would do that! It's unit suicide!" Well, not necessarily. This setup is less fragile than it might seem. If you lose one model, the unit size drops to 5 and it is coherent if each model is with 1" of one other model. If you lose two models, take one from each group. If you lose three or more models, remove one group and the excess from the remaining group. Also, splitting up into triplet-groups can let you grab multiple objectives, and virtually risk-free in the last turn of the game. So, is this actually legal or did I miss something? -T10

Looking at the rules for adopting the Mountain Stance. This is clearly optional. Does adopting the stance cost you anything, e.g. is it not usable along with any other ability? Is there any benefit to not adopting the Mountain Stance? The Alarith Stone mage both gets the Enduring as Rock and has the Stonemage Stance abilities. Is there any rule that says "stances" are mutually exclusive?

It seems, from the phrasing, that the Rally Back ability grants the ability to combine a Retreat and a Charge, which normally is not possible, as opposed to granting both the ability to Retreat (which is normally possible in any case!) and then the ability to Charge.

Bravery is used in other circumstances than Battleshock tests. Also, conceivably some future abilities or rules might trigger Battleshock tests without casualties having been inflicted. Jeremiert mentions the Terrogheist's shriek, there are also spells that require you to test against a unit's Bravery to resolve some effect, and in some cases a unit may use a different unit's Bravery.

What monster is this anyway?

Thanks!

I see some people play it the way that if a model is in gas contact with two enemy models he cannot move to pile in. I can't really see this supported by the rules: The Piling In rules do not specifically address the situation where there are more than one enemy model that is equally near, which is the case when there a model is in base contact with multiple enemy models. Usually in WH40k, the spiritual brother of AoS, when you need figure out the nearest model or unit and there is more than one candidate the player that is doing stuff picks one of them rather than applying the whatever rule is involved to all of them. This situation in AoS seems very similar: The text of the restriction on pile does refer to "the nearest enemy model", singular. Have I missed something here?

Thanks, I was afraid I was going crazy there a moment!

Hi! I have a sense that named characters cannot normally gain command traits, command abilities or artefacts of power, but I can't seem to find a restriction on this in the Lumineth Realm Lords book that stops Teclis from being given, for example, the Mountain's Gift artefacts from the Great Nation of Ymetrica entry. Am I imagining things, or is there something I missed?

I mean, you could always go through the game asking "What am I getting into if I do this" every step of the way, but lunch sounds like a wonderful option wherein there is at least one guy having a good time as opposed to that game that sounds like it would be two guys being miserable.

It does not seem The Light of Eltharion is actually a Wizard. How can he get access to Lore of Hysh spells?

It seems to me that the ability to set up a unit as a garrison at the start of the battle comes with an extra restriction: The terrain feature must be wholly within your territory, in addition to any other restrictions.

If this was about WH40k Ld, I'd ask what was used for

Presumably you resolve each ability you decide to activate before activating the next. So in case of Strike Quickly command ability, the player whose turn is has first go at using it. Resolve combats immediately. He then gets to activate other "start of phase" abilities until he is done. Then it is the other players opportunity to do the same. This ability is a bit like a game of Chicken: As the player whose turn it is you are normally entitled to selecting the first unit to fight. But how likely is your opponent to pay for the ability to take that away from you by fighting first instead? Is it worth paying the CP to keep an advantage you are in danger of losing?

This part of the rules is easy to miss, for sure.I wasn't even aware of this before I noticed there was units whose Save improved by the number of models. Unlike WH40k, you will not be able to "improve your save" by removing models outside of cover as hits and wounds are allocated so that after the first few models are removed, all remaining models are in cover. However, after-saves are applied as wounds are allocated to models, so some after-save rules dependent on the unit being "wholly within" can come into effect as you remove models.

The AoS designers commentary says this: Q: Some abilities say that a unit fights at the start of the combat phase. What happens if that unit is not within 3" of the enemy, but later in the phase an enemy unit piles in to within 3" of it? A: A unit that can fight at the start of the combat phase but does not do so is allowed to fight normally during the combat phase should an enemy unit move to within 3" of it. Then again, the Commentary also includes this pile of ox manure, so they may be talking out of their donkeys in general. Q: Let’s say Unit A has been made to fight at the end of the combat phase. If, when Unit A fights at the end of the combat phase, its pile-in move results in Unit B being eligible to fight when previously it wasn’t, because Unit B was outside 3", can Unit B now pile in and attack? A: If Unit A is from the army of the player whose turn is taking place, then Unit B will be able to fight (as its opportunity to fight comes after that of Unit A, and it will be eligible to fight because it is within 3" of the enemy). If, on the other hand, Unit A is part of the army belonging to the player whose turn is not taking place, then Unit B will not be able to fight (as its opportunity to fight came before that of Unit A, when it was not within 3" of the enemy). So in one case it's ok for your unit to fight later even though "it's moment" has passed, but in the other case the opportunity to fight is lost altogether, just to conform to their made-up "I fight last, you fight last" policy.

Also: It is the actual damage that is changed, it just the damage characteristic on the profile. So any effects that modify the damage, e.g. adding +1, is still all changed to 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

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.

"Ooh! For me? What COULD it be!" -Pandora

The game usually requires recognizing more than just 1s and 6s...

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

All that sounds like something they should have put into the actual rules for Warscroll Battalions and Allegiance Abilities. -T10

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.