Neil Arthur Hotep
-
Posts
4,317 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
104
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Neil Arthur Hotep
-
-
Since it seems to be a popular topic, here's a separate thread for it.
Infantry heroes are often pretty weak in AoS. Can this be changed? Should it be changed?
This episode of Warhammer Weekly gets into the topic and has some explanations of why things might be as they are:
-
2
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Snarff said:
I personally expect either all of order or FS/KO/CoS. Can't imagine too much effort will go into the rules since they're being relegated to legends in like 2 months.
He might see an update for 4th, right? I remember a few Legends warscrolls being updated in the transition from 2nd to 3rd, but maybe I dreamt that?
-
12 hours ago, Poryague said:
It literally does. "Ignore the effects of "guarding hero" ability when picking the target for thier shooting attacks". It literally says ignore that rule when picking targets. If you ignore the rule you get zero benifit from it. When you pick a target for their shooting attack you ignore the effects (plural) of guarding hero . There is clear case guarding hero is entirely ignored as written not just the targeting aspect.
Spoiler
It seems to me that, when looking at Sniper-Master, Guarded Hero and Fight (as a stand in for "Shoot") next to each other, it is fairly clear that the effect of Sniper Master is limited to the target selection in the Declare step of Shoot.
Maybe this helps you see where I am coming from. What's the difference between these rules:
"For the rest of the turn, this unit can ignore the effect of the Guarded Hero ability (full stop)."
"For the rest of the turn, this unit can ignore the effect of the Guarded Hero ability when resolving its shooting attacks."
"For the rest of the turn, this unit can ignore the effect of the Guarded Hero ability when picking the target for its shooting attacks."
IMO, it's fairly clear that these three rules would interact differently with Guarded Hero, disabling all of its effects, only the -1 to hit and only the targeting restriction, respectively.
Since I don't think it's very fruitful to discuss rules in-depth before the full core rules are even out, this will be my last post on this particular topic. In the end, I think it's confusing enough that we will get an FAQ ruling, anyway.
-
6
-
-
1 minute ago, Poryague said:
It says " can ignore the effects of guarding hero" if guarding hero is ignored all the effects of the ability are ignored . It's as though that ability doesn't exist.
It does not say that, dude. Maybe they want it to be like that, but they would have to errata it.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Poryague said:
It say to ignore gaurded hero. Which if ignored means no benifit at all from it. Your hero just dies.
"...when picking targets."
Not when you resolved your shooting attack.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Tonhel said:
If I read The sniper-master ability correctlty it doesn't ignore the -1 to hit that is given by "Guarded hero". It only means that the hero can be "picked" as the target of the shooting attack.
What do you think is this the correct interpretation?
Seems to only affect picking targets, not the -1 to hit.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Luperci said:
Newly born rat child being told their only purpose in life is to no-scope freeguild marshals
Is he from a Call of Duty game? Is that why they painted him in only browns?
You just know Skaven would be super toxic in chat, too. "Get owned-possessed, manling noob-noob."
-
1
-
7
-
-
Just now, Hoseman said:
So Grombrindall going direct to Legends discards the duardin soup isnt it?
What they didn't tell us is that Fyreslayer and KO are also going directly to legends to make dorf soup possible.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Marcvs said:
Not really feeling that reduction in range and rend for now
Yeah, right? Although a literal sniper hero should surely be on the upper end
-
4
-
-
Just now, Snarff said:
I think this is a great way of tackling it. With heroes like the Warlock engineer you can now target out protected heroes explicitly, but you can't make a shooting heavy list and just kill all enemy heroes buffing units before those units even come close to combat.
It's extremely frustrated to play an army like FS and your heroes positioned carefully to buff your infantry just get sniped out before any of them get a chance to be in combat range. There's just no real counterplay to that besides not bringing any heroes.
I am hoping that the Fusil-Major gets a similar rule. Being a sniper should be niche in AoS for ranged units, so that they can be worthwhile without being able to point-and-click whole infantry blocks.
-
Some new info from the latest model reveal:
Some things that stand out to me:
- Look Out, Sir! is still in the game under a new name. Seems otherwise identical to its last incarnation.
- Crit(Auto-Wound) is an ability that exists.
- A sniper rifle has a range of 24".
- SKRYRE keyword exists.
-
1
-
26 minutes ago, Acrozatarim said:
I like the fact he's got a jezzail, as it means there's a character to nicely pair up with the jezzails in the box. I wonder if he gives a bonus to jezzails or the like.
You were right! He actually works as a spotter for a unit of Jezzails.
-
2
-
-
Just now, Chikout said:
@SG Warhound suggested we're getting three new warlocks; this one, the leaked one and a new arch warlock. I think that's why he looks relatively plain. He's the most junior of what will be 4 warlock options.
I think he looks pretty neat, but the brown-on-brown paint job is not doing him any favors.
Also, someone needs to tell Skaven how telescopes work.
-
1 minute ago, Snarff said:
I don't think Legends has an image problem as much as that legends rules aren't maintained. If Grombrindal gets a beautiful 3rd Warscroll with bravery on it, it'll be quite useless as soon as 4th hits. And if they commit to it and continuously update the rules (which they haven't before for Legends rules to my knowledge), why not just keep the model available? It's just one more model to print, they add new heroes to factions all the time.
Of course, the best thing would be to have models perpetually for sale, properly integrated into a faction. That much is clear.
But starting from the assumption that GW is not always able or willing to do that for every commemorative or side game model? Putting them into Legends right away is the best solution. What other options are there?
- Release them with no rules: "But they already put out a model, why can't I use it in game?"
- Release them with matched play rules, then legends them next edition: "Great bait and switch, GW! I would not have bought that model if I knew you were squatting it."
- Release the model and update the rules: "Why is this weird out of production model from 6 years ago required to play competitively? Great pay to win game you got there, James Workshop!"
-
2
-
4 minutes ago, Snarff said:
It is definitely the best way to handle models which won't always be available (otherwise you'd get 'Pay to Win' situations very fast) but I don't think that's the main point people are disappointed about.
It's disappointing that Grombrindal has been built up in AoS so much recently (2 White Dwarf short stories series, one of which was novelized with a bigger story alongside it, a new design, a role in Broken Realms, an appearance in a Gotrek book, etc.) and that there's finally an AoS model for him, and then they make it limited edition.
They could've easily done something like they did with Gotrek. Multi-faction, still with rules, great model to paint and show off too. But this just goes on the pile of limited one-off models they've released recently. Especially in terms of Duardin models we've had four in the past couple of years. (Jakkob Bugmansson, Torrk Lenssen, Brakki of the Gilded Key and now Grombrindal)
It's certainly reasonable to want more dwarf action in AoS. I'd like to see that, too. But maybe 4th ed is finally the time for it
I stand by what I said about Legends having an image problem, though. If they had a separate category which was functionally the same, but called "Narrative rules" or whatever, I really believe people would be more accepting of it.
-
3 minutes ago, Sception said:
until the end of whatever edition they're published in, at which point they stop being playable even for casual & narrative due to not being updated to work with the current ruleset. Every previous legends scroll will still have bravery instead of control, for instance, and many already have rules text that makes no sense in 3rd edition, let alone 4th. The stuff going into legends in 4th will be relatively playable until 5th (unless their legends scroll has some unit breaking typo in it that never gets fixed), at which point they'll not really be playable anymore.
It's not the end of the world, there's always homebrew, but I don't think there's any spin or purely perception based change that will fix why most players don't care for legends rules and consider their units being shifted to legends the same as if they were removed outright.
The perception change I am talking about is that at time of release, legends rules are just as good as non-legends rules (for non-tournament play). Putting a model's rules directly into Legends tells you what to expect: You can play this unit for now, but don't count on them being a permanent fixture in the game. This is 100% the best way to handle limited edition and side game models.
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, Chikout said:
A lot of the disappointment on here seems to come from unrealistic expectations. As far as I'm aware Grombindal has never had rules as part of the core game for AoS or Warhammer fantasy. It's always been semi unofficial white dwarf magazine rules.
He's also not really been involved in the main narrative of either game. It was Grungi that was the mysterious old character in the broken realms book and not Grombindal. Him getting a dedicated novel as the most he's ever had unless I'm forgetting something from fantasy.
There's still potential for an official unified Duardin faction but it will be because of Grungi and not Grombindal
It's also a bit frustrating to see the community as a whole just ignoring sections of the rules. If a designer sat down to write a warscroll and battle plans it worth at least taking a look rather than dismissing it out of hand.
Wouldn't it be great if one of things to come out of some of these changes is the community actually embracing legends.
Legends rules have an image problem. They are treated as a warscroll graveyard, when it would be much better to treat them as non-tournament legal rules. Legends rules are perfect for casual matched play and narrative games.
-
3
-
-
1 minute ago, Tonhel said:
What a mini! Best version of him to date.
But can someone point out the KO and FS stuff on him? It's mentioned in the article. I gonna buy this one, but he will a king TOW 😄
I think the pocket watch and weights on his belt are KO bits. I don't know enough about Fyreslayers to point out their stuff, though. Maybe the rune on the axe?
-
2 minutes ago, Jagged Red Lines said:
Damn, why legends rules
That's the best part! Straight into casual-only, so he can get fun fluffy rules and we don't have to worry about a limited edition model messing up competitive play for the next three years.
-
9
-
-
2 minutes ago, Luperci said:
I hope if slaanesh does get free they swap places with another God and we get to see that, Nagash or Khorne in space prison would be funny to see
Release the Malerion faction and then put him into deity jail right away.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, PraetorDragoon said:
Which is why I was in favour of having basic heroes join units. Its much more in line with what both designers and players want out of it. Having the heroes seperate in AOS isn't the best setup when we don't want basic heroes to be able to take units on their own.
Having infantry units give 4+ bodyguard to infantry heroes in their own regiment seems like a soft incentive they could implement without messing up a bunch of edge cases. But I suspect they will just leave it at Look Out, Sir! for now.
-
1 minute ago, Tonhel said:
Lol, yeah you are correct, but isn't it a bit sad that the threat of a foot hero is so low, that you can just ignore it. It's even more humilating for a Chaos Lord 🤣
Seems to me that either it gets focus fired or it gets ignored. Not really sure how you get out of that dilemma.
More to the point, I also think that if heroes were so good that you would never prioritize normal troops over them, people would be complaining about how hero hammer is too strong instead. Really, overall I think it's quite nice that normal troops are often the deciding factor, rather than heroes.
-
2 minutes ago, Tonhel said:
Again a named character :-D, would love to see them as a more generic Witch hunter option that can specialize verus wizards, daemons, undeath and etc.. .
I more or less agree, but if the "single guy" provides a good buff it probably will be more interesting to kill it instead of the bigger units. You probably wouldn't kill the foot hero for the damage output, but for the buff the foot hero provides.
Yeah, no idea why they decided to give us three different witch hunter units and then made them all unique characters.
I don't actually know if heroes getting sniped in melee will be a big concern in 4th. It's hard to predict how the interactions will play out. I can definitely see myself making the decision of trying to wipe out an infantry block on a 4+ save rather than trying to deal with a 3+ save on a hero model. Even more so if "anti-hero" is less common than "anti-infantry" or "anti-cavalry" melee troops, because that also changes target priority pretty significantly. And, of course, regular units are better at capturing objectives, and that's what wins games in the end.
-
2 minutes ago, Beliman said:
Let's wait and see. The system already supports specializations, USR are so open that each heroe or special/magical weapon could be really unique and interesting without being crazy. As an example:
-
#DuelistHeroe:
- USR: Anti-Heroes (mortal).
- Parry (ability). Passive/ Fighting Phase: Can't be hit with a better roll of 4+.
Even artifacts and weapons can be really unique with that.
I like running the ven Densts in Cities for that reason. You gotta respect damage 4 attacks against wizards, no matter who you are. Using Anti-X for similar abilities on melee heroes should help make them a threat without just invalidating melee infantry. Actually, 3" combat range should remove a lot of that concern, since concentrating that much hitting power into a single guy is no longer a big advantage vs. infantry blocks.
A Chaos Lord with Anti-Infantry (Double Damage) should definitely feel suitably epic.
-
1
-
#DuelistHeroe:
Thoughts on 4.0's New Rules
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
Here you go, guys: