Daramiz
-
Posts
26 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Daramiz
-
-
25 minutes ago, novembermike said:
These are pretty basic game concepts so if you're having trouble understanding I can give you a few pointers, but GW doesn't tend to define their terms pretty well. Do you have the rules quote for what an inch or a foot is?
This is silly. "Inch" has a set definition. If I want to go to outside games for a definition on "Replacement Effect" I could look at Magic the Gathering which has over a page of rules defining "Replacement Effects" (So much for being basic). Except in MtG 'When Pink Horror dies create two Blue Horror' WOULDN'T be a replacement effect but a triggered ability, so there goes that idea.
-
33 minutes ago, novembermike said:
Nah, "Counts As" works for look backs. All dice rolls are look backs, you roll the dice and then look back at it to see how to resolve an event. "Counts as" works fine there. The Horror split is a replacement ability. It looks for a specific event (a model being slain) and then replaces the effect (instead of removing the model you remove the model and add in other models). Replacement effects can't be look backs because they have to happen when the event occurs.
Quote some rules for "look backs" and "replacement effects".
-
1 hour ago, decker_cky said:
There's a rule that says to use the newest warscroll of the same name.
Slaves to darkness daemon prince is not the same name as daemon prince.
This isn't any different than Pink Horrors of Tzeentch being replaced by Horrors of Tzeentch
-
22 minutes ago, Grotruk said:
Plus i wonder why make the DD to be unmodifiable if you can't use them to avoid malus.
In this case, I really really think designers should write that DD are considered as unmodified rolls (and can't be reroll) but not that they can't be modified.
That would solve all DD issues with no FAQ needed (and would be more intuitive)
The designer notes explains that they added the can't be modified clause because of some positive modifier shenanigans they didn't like during testing. Though what those were we do not know.
-
So does the ruling on LoC being unable to change DD rolls mean that Mastery of Magic is officially a modifier? In that case, can Mastery of Magic no longer be used to complete the Mass Conjuration agenda?
-
2 minutes ago, Karragon said:
Battleshock DD can be modified so we can reliably determine if they are unmodified or not, which they are, because it is the value before those modifiers are applied.
I feel like I'm roleplaying an obnoxious rules lawyer here, but we can't even determine anything based on this because the rules say BS DD can be modified further.
-
5 minutes ago, Karragon said:
But there's already a rule that qualifies what unmodified is. "Unmodified dice roll are referring to the result after any re-rerolls but before any modifiers are applied"
Just to remove the parenthesis in their wording:
"Any rolls that have been replaced count as unmodified rolls, with the exception of save rolls and battleshock tests."
-
2 minutes ago, Karragon said:
I'm just going to quote someone off twitter to answer that:
The problem is fly high is listing an exception to existing established rules (retreat). This is quite literally the rule establishing whether DD count as modified or not.
-
6 minutes ago, Karragon said:
There's no argument for it. Zero. The errata is quite clear it says "If you spend a Destiny Dice to replace a battleshock test, the result of that Destiny Dice is modified by the number of models slain from that unit as normal." No where in there does it say that Destiny Dice count as being modified, it says they can be modified as normal.
That's like saying if you roll a 1 on the nice naturally it doesn't count as unmodified because it can be effected by number of models slain.
An earlier paragraph:
In addition, any rolls that have been replaced (with the exception of save rolls and battleshock tests) count as unmodified rolls
-
1
-
-
Just now, Sumanye said:
True! The guild of summoners says summon using Fate points, and that is explained under "From the crystal Labyrinth". If anything, this is what I'm trying to say, the word summon is not defined without context in AoS. Either way, the Designer Commentary says you can't summon Kairos with Fate Points, and even if someone wants to try and be "that guy" with summoning rules, ultimately Guild of Summoners ability uses fate points and Kairos can't be summoned.
Yeah I think the mention of fate points is the clear distinction. There is no rule anywhere that lets you spend fate points for a Kairos.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Sumanye said:
The definition of summoning is choosing a model off the summoning table. There is no general rule in AoS that defines what summoning is. For Tzeentch, summoning comes from the summon table as explained in the Battletome under "From the Crystal Labyrinth" where it clearly defines what summoning is and how it works, and Kairos isn't on that table. The GoS ability may use the LoC keyword, but it doesn't give you permission to bypass the table and it doesn't change the rules on how summoning works.
I don't think this is necessarily true. Gaunt summoner uses the word summon and has nothing to do with the battletome's summoning table.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Grotruk said:
This is what is intented but the formulation isn't 100% clearto me because it's written "Destiny Dice count as unmodified rolls (except save rolls and battleshock rolls)"
Some players are going to mention that to say a Destiny dice of 1 can't return d6 pinks.
Ugh, I hate that you are right. They can really struggle to use their words correctly sometimes.
-
21 minutes ago, HarbingerGaming said:
The hate for flamers feels so strange. I own 18 and ran them long before they were even considered viable. They are one of my favorite units in the entire game. They've never been considered good compared to other things. Now that the units once standing in the way aren't as overly powerful and they finally have a role to play everyone wants to see them nerfed and no one is taking them en masse. This was one weekend. Horrors seem to be the issue more so than most, especially when combined with Host Duplicitous, which seems to be the most competitive choice.
Flamers were fine until the new changehost. They still are fine in a vacuum.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, newsun said:
Battleshock modifies bravery, not the die roll.
Models killed is a positive modifier to the die roll. The horde bonus is a positive modifier to bravery.
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, Malakithe said:
Paragraphs and thought out sentences describing rules isnt an oversight.
The regular release of errata by GW suggests that they do sometimes overlook things in their sentences describing rules.
-
3 hours ago, Malakithe said:
It definitely wasnt an oversight. The old book and DD worked the same way. The old system and this new one are the same except for the new unmodified part. And the old one was changed cuz it used to allow you to change the result of the damage of the spells themselves.
Right, that's where the oversight may come in. They changed the rule to fix one thing and may have caused an unintended major change to how DD play out.
-
34 minutes ago, Sinfullyvannila said:
I don’t care if it feels right. It should be obvious that nerfing the entire army when there are problems with a combination of specific Subfactions and Warscrolls is the definition of an overcorrection.
I'd consider changing the Horror warscroll or point value to be a more detrimental nerf to "fair" Tzeentch lists. I'm still of the opinion that the new interaction with battleshock was an oversight. I'm interested to see what the designer's commentary regarding DD says in any upcoming FAQ about their intent.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Sumanye said:
I mean, I don't know how I could be anymore clear in explaining that this isn't the case, so I'll just agree to disagree.
However, I do agree that Horrors are too good for a combination of reasons and any one change is not likely to fix them (without being so drastic as to make them useless). I just don't think DD is the change to make. Btw, this whole thing was in response to someone earlier saying the only fixes Horrors need is the DD for battleshock. So, I don't disagree that you shouldn't try to address something if you can't fix it 100%, I just don't think this is the change to make.
Changing DD seems like the thing to hit right now. It doesn't feel right, even for units that aren't out of control like Tzangors or Acolytes.
If horrors are still a problem in the competitive scene after that, I would guess GW will go to changing points.
-
I want to like Katakros. I want him to be justified in calling himself "The Undefeated One" even though he repeatedly loses in his background lore. This is the perfect time to give him a big moment. But... this book is aimed at Chaos players so I don't expect much.
-
10 minutes ago, Sinfullyvannila said:
The destiny dice arguments are very poorly thought out.
See above. We have to use 2 dice for 2d6s now. Anything that isn’t a 5, 6 or 1 is almost worthless without a 380 point model, other than in a Battleshock test or avoiding snake eyes on the one charge I cant afford to fail each game. Like, 1/5 of my games I only get a single 5 or 6. And Pinks aren’t just “handled easily” without the Destiny Dice Change, they’d be an essentially be a worthless points trap.
I feel like you are underselling how useful this is.
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, mmimzie said:
My friend that was at the event tolde today that lvo did use the book. It made it just in time for the deadline.
Just checked the lists, these are definitely old book.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, mmimzie said:
You don't change it without more data. I don't super know the cancon results, but as I understand only 2 tzneetch list at the top tables last round with one winning? All in gyrhan where you can heal D6 with life swarm. Heck in the interview the winner even said he didn't understand his opponents list and didn't realize the threats💤. Hell they even rules for the event that the LoC could pick up endless spell anytime in the hero phase!!! This blows my mind that people are even upset.
While only 1 tzneetch list made it to top tables at lvo, and it wasn't even change host, and it didn't win. 😮
They did well at tempest. 4 in top 10. However 3 had change host? And only 2 had eternal conflag? 🎉 This is the most compelling nerf tzneetch argument. Too bad they didn't win
What awesome results worth complaining about and definitely the perfect sized pull full of condemning evidence to nuke a faction.
No one serious wants the faction to be nuked. Getting places 2-4 at Tempest and 1-3 at GW GT definitely merit evaluating whether small adjustments could be made. LVO didn't use the new tome to my knowledge, so those results don't reflect current rules.
-
5 minutes ago, Death1942 said:
This looks like the winning Cancon list and I just finished watching the final game it was in. The big trick is the tournament was held in the realm of light so the lifeswarm is buffed up, he deliberately hits his unit of pinks with the daemonrift to pop out some blues and then casts lifeswarm to heal up the pinks. I think he made the unit go from 50 effective wounds to 72 during the game so it basically can't be shifted.
Aside from that it has the usual tzeentch tricks and he played it well.Ah, I haven't watched any Cancon games but that sounds genuinely cool. That's the good play I want to see DoT armies do, rather than the teleport-point-and-shoot I've seen a lot of so far.
-
27 minutes ago, kahadin said:
I think this is the list everyone is cutting their wrists over. A bit OP 10 pink horrors and 2 units of three flamers:
Allegiance: Tzeentch
Change Coven: Eternal Conflagration
LEADERS
Lord of Change (380)
- General
- Rod of Sorcery
- Trait: Coruscating Flames
- Artefact: Shroud of Warpflame
- Lore of Change: Tzeentch's Firestorm
Fatemaster (120)
Gaunt Summoner on Disc of Tzeentch (260)
- Lore of Fate: Arcane Suggestion
- Artefact: Aura of Mutability
The Blue Scribes (120)
- Lore of Change: Fold Reality
Fatecaster, Herald of Tzeentch (110)
-Staff of Tzeentch
-Lore of Change: Bolt of Tzeentch
Changeling (120)
-Lore of Change: Treason of Tzeentch
UNITS
10 x Pink Horrors of Tzeentch (200)
3 x Flamers of Tzeentch (120)
3 x Flamers of Tzeentch (120)
10 x Brimstone Horrors of Tzeentch (60)
10 x Brimstone Horrors of Tzeentch (60)
BATTALIONS
Changehost (180)
ENDLESS SPELLS / COMMAND POINTS
Emerald Lifeswarm (50)
Aethervoid Pendulum (50)
Darkfire Daemonrift (50)
Total: 2000 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 1
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 82
The chief complainer was running petrifex nagash...
Who's list is this? Where are people complaining about it?
Playing after being tabled
in Rules Questions
Posted
Endless spells are treated as friendly models by all armies.