deynon
-
Posts
832 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by deynon
-
-
On 8/23/2019 at 4:23 PM, Sception said:
Rules wise you can stack it, but in terms of sportsmanship I reccomend you don't. I once ruined a game by multistacking this effect on an aoe damage spell. Permanently tainted my reputation.
you deserved it ahshah^^
anyway quite a lot depend on your opponent and the contest you're playing at
-
I didn't like the LoN:B battalions since their releasing.
I understand that they wanted to promote the Mortarchs, but 6 battalions and only one free of Named Characters... moreover DeathMarch has been crippled and messed by FAQs and Commentary.
I like the general warscroll battalions mechanic and I like also the idea about a Bg behind it,but LoN:B ones are too few (the least amount known almost) and they are all quite points expensive either you consider the units points needed either you take not about their respective cost in buying the warscroll battalions.
-
1
-
-
Sincerly I play both Black knights and Heixwraiths, I don't find them to be an altervative of each other.
I use them to cover different roles.
Balck Knights usualy are in units of 5 or 10 to be able to create a safe zone or a massime fast impact against the enemy. Take note that usually I play the legion of Night, so if I play them in defensive way I gain also the defensive deplyment zone bonus.
They are nice at defending but also at attacking. I miss a rend -1 on their weapons, but with the right combination they can be quite massive in attacks they can inflict, moreover if they charge.
The Heixwraith instead I use them usually in units of 5 to hunt the enemy. They're usually more resilient, and can damage bboth attacking and retreating. The ethereal rules let me block units with great rend but not many attacks (they even blocked the cafeteria of the Ex Empire). And Being them also a summanable unit I don't mind too much to make them eventually make a come back if destroyed. I find them perfect as a way to threat and stall the enemy.
Ulucky I found units of 10 of them not so good. I prefer units of 5 talking about the Hexwraith cause I find them more maneageble for the usages I give them usually.
-
1
-
-
If you need I realized also a playlist of video talking about the different parts of the Legion of Nagash if you need some detailed talking to integrate:
-
When I opened my YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCe1qXHV7vp3lcxH3mM85bhw
I started a project about a Bastilodon to magnetizing it, I created the first video:
But for the second part I was always missing a step. The bases are in the first video, but I needed something paculiar.
Recently so I've developed that "something" that was missing, so I finished magnetizing it, and =ve created "the crazy hand". I have to thank the blue stuff to be able to move forward cause helped me really a lot this time.
I have in mind some other option and magnetizing cause the Bastilodon it's a wonderful base to work on, If you add that I have an Aztech rollerpin it helps really quite a lot to develop new options^^
I'll upload this topic in the future so.
In the while you can "Total Recall" with this new hand^^
-
Skipping it qould be idiocy by GW turning off the NH:B by the releasing of LoG. NH:B is too recent.
LoG has no Access to warscroll battalions. And the ways to play LoG and NH;B are totally different. Based on rules, spells, options and so on it's a quite big different usage.
what it would have been interesting it would be make LoG part of LoN:B. To have at least access to deathmarch, or more spells
-
1 hour ago, RuneBrush said:
It's always worth bearing in mind that the Social Media guys (part of WarCom) aren't rules writers - they've answered as a fellow hobbyist, so it's a tad harsh to say their answer is silly.
Generally FAQ's come out between 2 and 3 weeks after a release - the past couple have actually come out on a Wednesday (so pretty much 2.5 weeks).
Depends on if you're wanting to include any of the endless spells in your Nighthaunt army or not. If not then it probably won't be that beneficial from a gaming perspective. The background story is pretty cool though and there's a pretty sweet mini campaign in the book (although I would imagine you will be able to find the book off bits companies).
Not much as a fellow player or the answer would be more precise.
Anyway we have to wait FAQs, but seeing deathmarch and black coach new model examples, a no it's foresighted
-
They can be really themed units in the army. Undead mercenaries ah, I miss the skeleton one.
-
units and warscroll battalions are " a bit" different ones.
Moreover their answer is nosense. You play units...but battlaions have different keywords from the units that compose that warscroll battalions quite often. Or they want to say that the warscroll battlion inherit also teh keywords of the units it is composed by?
Really silly answer
If they FAQ it, it's only welcomed... if they don't mess everything like deathmarch...
-
7 minutes ago, Sigwarus said:
Yes, you could. I was thinking of adding flayers or an archregent but I couldnt get the minis with short notice.
better archrent eventually. You would have been able to gain a wizard and a unit from the borders. The problem would have been the CP lost
-
@sigwarus: could you play mercenaries in the tournament?
I realized a review about the legion of grief if you are interested, so to share my thought about it
-
6 hours ago, AverageBoss said:
Yes you are ignoring an entire line of text, and you just did so again. Read Legions of Nagash again. Look at the line of text directly above Invigorating Aura. That line of text is what is most important, and that line is missing. Nowhere in LoG does it say that it is a gravesite ability, only an allegiance ability (LoN specifically says it is an ability belonging to gravesites). Arguing that you can use an ability as many times as you feel like just because is a very dangerous proposition. Your personal interpretation would result in Sylvaneth players being able to place every Wyldwood they own at the start of the game, because the placement ability must belong to the Wyldwoods themselves, along with an endless list of other broken jank.
This is seriously starting to remind me of when one user argued against the entire forum on how healing worked when LoN dropped.I brought all the text referring the lines, what it misses is the part on the wounds recovering. No text avoided.
If you say a miss somethng you should bring.
I proved that there is the same txt, only a word difference and doesn't influence anything. And even there is the link to the graveyards themselves again.
The text it's the same as in LoN:B so if you insist to apply limitations to LoG you have to apply also to LoN:B cause it's exacttly the same.
Also in LoG they say they are abilities referred to the graveyards, otherways you can't even use them at ll cause you need the graveyards, and they listed even the referring to the graveyards , I wrote the sentence about.
You continue to say that I miss part of the text, but the only one missing it it's you it seems.
I wrote the rules and showed them iy's you to continue to argue about an idea without saying the rules about.
The Sylvaneth have had liomits to their woods positioning. And anyway if they really want to do it, they are free to do it, they can't thenafter thinking of even miss a rule without being tortured so. It's not different from when someone said you could bring 4 Nagash and none could stop you with first AoS version, a totally irreal happening. And again it doesn't matter such thing with our discussion.
I don't care what it reminds you. The rules say different from what you claim, and I showed it. You only bragged about and no rule to support your idea.
-
7 hours ago, AverageBoss said:
You are ignoring an ENTIRE line of text. You can't just look at a single piece of a rule out of context, you have to read all of it.
The LoN allegiances have this line of text "Gravesites have the following abilities:". That little line is absolutely critical, as it applies one instance of the listed abilities per gravesite on the table. So if you have 4 gravesites, you have 4 separate instances of IA, 1 applied to each.
LoG is missing that line of text, which means the ability is applied to the allegiance. Since you only have one allegiance, you only have 1 (single) instance of that ability. And like EVERY OTHER ability in the game, it can only be used once per turn per instance (unless stated directly otherwise) in the ways its specifically says. And it says that you may once per turn select A gravesite.
For LoG gravesites to function like the LoN gravesites, that line of text will need to be erratad back in, or they wound need to change A to EACH, or they would need to add in an extra line allowing you to use the ability once per gravesite.I'm not ignoring it. the text for both the invigorating aura it's exactly the sam except the word I listed. And you are fogotting about the gravesites that they make you see the gravesites.
Not mind if together or not. That is an ability of a gravesite.
"if you do so, pick a gravesite (see "the unquiet dead") [...]"
nowhere it says you can only chose 1 gravesite, but simply "a".
IF you say that only one can do so it's also about the LoN:B cause it specify "this" so you can only choose a single specific one based on your idea.
You don't have a single instance of ability , it's only once based on your idea, 4 graveyards, 4 applying.
There is not "each" in LoN gravesites, so you can't say there to be the difference. I wrote the sentences related to and there is not "each" you are referring to.
Otherways it should have wittten: choose a single graveyard to apply this rule.
You can change the text, but you have to to to LoN:B too, otherays it's the same.
1 hour ago, RuneBrush said:@deynon going to have to agree with @AverageBoss, Invigorating Aura within Legion of Grief is completely different to the same named ability within the Legions of Nagash book (I have put this question in my FAQ e-mail to GW). IA within LoG is a one shot affair and not an ability added to a gravesite.
I'm assuming they did this because of the confusion if Allies could benefit from IA when LoN came out, however it's fundamentally changed how the ability works for this allegiance.
the e-mail GW gaq answering mean nothing at all till it is published as a FAQ whatever it is.
it can't be confyusing to allies.In the allies it's clearly written that they can't use the allegiance abilities. No confusion avalaible.
It's not changed.it's the same. "This" and "a" are mutual. The problem would have been "any", that would have brought a single use.
-
1
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, AverageBoss said:
In the LoN it says EACH gravesite has invigorating aura. And that Each gravesite may use invigorating aura.
In LoG it says that the Allegiance has Invigorating Aura. And that Invigorating Aura lets you select A (singular) gravesite each turn.
Those two changes together make it RAW 1 heal per turn from gravesites.nope.
if you see the text.
"At the start of your hero phase, pick a friendly SUMMONABLE unit wthin 9" of this gravesite [...]"
"At the start of your hero phase, pick a friendly SUMMONABLE unit within 9" of a gravesite [...]"
Nowhere it0s written "each" as you suggest.
and the difference "this" and "a" is not relevant, it doesn't changee the grammar. It would have been like you say only if it would have been written "any"
and even your saying that they are urrelated to the graveyard it's wrong, cause they say you to see "unquite dead" about it.
It's the same.
If you declare only a gravesite works, such it's also for LoN:B and viceversa.
-
14 minutes ago, Havkai said:
Aura stopped being an ability of gravesite. In LoG Aura is an allegiance ability as a whole. Different placement in allegiance abilities section
But it doesn't change anything at all . It's exactly the same, thre are still 4 graveyards and you can use it from each of them.
If you find problems in this you have to find problems also in LoN:B. Cause don't mind if they are under the same voice or out, they are still battle traits either position you consider. And they work the same way too.
It's still an ability asosciated to a graveyard. Even before they where not a whole anyway cause the where different aspects, but the text or so on it's still the same.
-
8 minutes ago, Havkai said:
They made invigorating aura into allegiance ability instead of gravesite ability. It basically says pick 1 unit within 9" of any gravesite and ress d3 models
I confused the"invigorating aura" with the deathly invocation
anyway
it's a battle trait either in the LoN:B and in the Legion of Grief. Even the text is the exact same when talking about "invigoratin aura" unquiet dead and deathless minions.
At least the difference between "this" and "a" about graveyards in the Invigorating aura doesn' change the result. The problem would have been it would have been written "any".
-
Why only 1 invigorting aura per Hero phase? You can use one ofr each hero
-
Ah, I've almost fogot...
You can't use the artifacts from the various battletomes, only the ones about the Forbidden Power or thMalign Sorcery, nice, isn't it?^^
-
On 6/2/2019 at 2:22 AM, EMMachine said:
Yeah, the thing with the Black Coach is really a bad thing.
I don't know if I get you right here (in case of Soulblight it should also be "Castellans of the Crimson Keep" not "Deathmarch"
We are speaking of this part of the FAQ:
The Problem is, with this FAQ in mind, a Deathmarch Battalion having the Deathrattle Keyword instead of Death could be used nicely in a Deathrattle Army or a Death Army because of the blue marked part, but you can't use it in 2.0 in a Deathrattle Army because of the Death Keyword. Because the Death Keyword is another Allegiance than Deathrattle, so anything inside the Battalion becomes an ally. The Legions do not care because Legions of Nagash shares the Legion Keyword to a Battalion, so if I choose Legion of Sacrament and want to use the Deathmarch Battalion the Battalion gets the Legion of Sacrament Keyword and becomes a Legion of Sacrament Battalion. And if they wouldn't have forgot the part about giving the Legions of Grief Keyword to Battalions too, The Legion of Grief in Forbitten Power would have Access to the Deathmarch Battalion if the Battalion had the Deathrattle Keyword.
Why can't it simply be Deathrattle + an Undead Constructions faction with a special allegiance (basicly like the Legions). Why does it have to be a second faction with the same units.
What I find really bad about the Black coach is the FAQ about asking permission to your oppponent o play the new model one with LoN... a pity that the old one is not anymore avalaible anyway...
About that FAQ is right .The problem is only now cause the Legion of Grief of Forbidden Power. Previouslyit wouldn'ì't even care. About General FAQ I've noticed they removed a previous FAQ GA warscrolls battalions avalaible to be used in any Allegiance that had it as GA. As it is now, you're right.
Anyway you could not have had access to Legion of Grief with the Deathrattle warscroll battalion cause it allows only to units to take "legion of Grief", not warscroll battalions, so the problem would be anyway the same. It should have had the text as in LoN:B, but such it isn't.For the same reason you can't use the warscroll battalions coming from the NH:B. So at the end it's stil the same: no warscroll battalions with the Legion of Grief.
And if you think about it it's quite a mocking for the Nighthaunts even more.
Obviously they can correct it with FAQs, but really, would be admitting than even when writiting so few rules lines they don't give any care.
On 6/2/2019 at 2:42 AM, Charlo said:The only thing wrong with the legions are easily FAQ'd so not really a new book needed unless they got some serious new model support in the future, which, let's face it, probably won't happen as it is just a collection of models leftover from WHFB/ End Times.
They don't need a special terrain as they have gravesites. Two spell lores is great but I think a set of specific endless spells would be pretty nice (hopefully better than the Nighthaunt ones though!) But again you wouldn't necessarily need a new tome to implement these.
The main thing I can see happening that requires a new book is the release of another entirely new death faction based on Deadwalkers/ Deathrattle... Or even Soulblight... Surely most of these units should be available in LoN (as what happened with Nighthaunt) but a new book capturing all the units the army can use and their up to date scrolls would be necessary by then.
They game the grvestites with the datacards and in the Forbidden power box you can find them too (shabby ones), otherways you have to create your own ones.
The Forbidden Spells of Forbidden Power would have been amazing ones for LoN^^
The new factioon book has been announced for this year release. And it's not a republiscing of LoN:B so (y)our wish can be done^^
-
On 5/29/2019 at 2:55 PM, EMMachine said:
Even I'm not a LoN Player I would say yes.
And those are my reasons.
- The Death Allegiance is printed into the book (and should be outdated by the Rulebook 2.0)
- There is no uniting keyword (except the optional Legions) in the Legions of Nagash Battletome (like for Beasts of Chaos, Gloomspite Gitz or Skaventide). For example Royal Terrorgheist and Royal Zombiedragon do only have the Death Keyword
- Nighthaunt units aren't up to date anymore after the Errata is telling us that we should use those from the Nighthaunt Battletome
- Nighthaunt Units had to be added to Legions with the Errata
- "Deathmarch" is a Death Battalion instead of a Deathrattle Battalion
- "Castellans of the Crimson Keep" is a Death Battalion instead of a Soulblight Battalion (which makes it impossible to use in a Soulblight Allegiance Army).
The main problem with the last two points is, that Allegiance worked different in the old edition, after you could either take the Allegiance of the Battalion or the Allegiance of the units within the Battalion. Now with the rules that units become allies when the battalion doesn't have the right keyword it hurts mostly those two battalions (especially after it is needless making them Death-Battalions after they would be Deathbattalions as well if they where Deathrattle/Soulblight Battalions)
It is understandable that the Battletome was a little cruid, after it was the first mixed keyword battletome.
As for the Legions. Instead of the following ruling:
It would be better the units that could be part of the legions would be more Keyword based (like in the Legion of Grief, where they sadly forgot the battalions.
the LoN:B GA:death has been outdated. There are a few diffwrences so it's usually ignored, but it's so by the rules.
The disrinction to the FEC id voluntarilly done. Thd,Leguons gave a common keyword, yhe leguon given itself.
The patched nighthaunt army is really a bad taste, moreover when you see the black coach
With yhe forbidden power book in some way you can
Deathmarch is done so in the way that tou can use it with GA:D, otherways it would become even more useless with the deathrattke keyword. Thd FAQs xompletely ruined it making it a waste and a mess
You can use it in Soulblight army as deathmarch cause they are Death, see FAQs
Anyway I totally agree in a reboot. There has been too many changes to the book itself. It has been done a poor work from the beginning with LoN.
6 warscroll vattalions but if you don't move a mortarch ypu have barely one avalaible (deathmarch) and even it crippled
-
On 5/8/2019 at 8:39 PM, Honk said:
And they all can’t use the charnel throne, only the mighty Archregent may use it...
Also the normale Ghoul king can. It was so also without the FAQs anyway. Cause GKoTG/DZ are not Archregent with SummonRoyal guard.
The FAQs put everythinh on betterscreen. -
1 hour ago, Vitch_EGS said:
Haha that's one of the two I'm considering too!
Might add few ghosts to have 1000 points ready to show the game to people and will definitely check the video out! Or get my childhood hero lizards finally. (Been paitent and praying to the frogs for new stuff though which has stopped me so far)
I have 200 saurus^^ I've collected them to play the Lizard' sacred armies years ago^^ And I love dinosaurs too^^ Perfect army, it's a pity now works almost only arpund slann. Anyway I'm waiting too the update, and I'm scared about how much it will cost^^ (I only hope they will redo those awful knights).
Anyway I've realised videos about them and how to modify and magnetize them if you like^^ In my signature there are some ^^
-
2 minutes ago, Vitch_EGS said:
Haha maybe it's the Irish in me but it's such a good colour normally to use compared to others like red or brighter colours, that over the years it really grew on me! And they would be Salamanders 😁
so, you'll like the video about painting green nighthaunts that I'm preparing^^
good choice, those half corrupted DA are always keeping bad shadows in their hearts, salamanders instead inflamme all their way (literally ahahah^^)
I prefer touse green on my Seraphons instead^^ (and nighthaunt^^)
-
On 3/24/2019 at 9:13 AM, Kramer said:
Hehe that should be the slogan of the whole AoS crowd 😂
Please not... otherways I don't have enough tombstones^^ I'm really pressed to convert at least a part of the models to the new bases^^ and I'm stiill tempeted to realize a mono terrorgheist army (I have yet 4 of 6 ^^). I tremple at the idea when it will bereleased the deadwalker battletome cause I'm avoiding to buil 100 zombies more from some year now...(I have other 200 yet ready...)
On 3/24/2019 at 3:17 PM, Vitch_EGS said:I'm so tempted to get more but not sure to get a different allegiance next or just nighthaunt stuff to add on. Got a new display too and empty shelf's could be used for more models instead of books... 😅
Do you have "some"prefrence towards green?^^ (are they salamanders or dark angels?)
-
1
-
Doppel vs ethereal, what do you prefer?
in Death
Posted
Do you remember that dopplenger cloak now in "a use only", so you can use it only once, right?