Abstract_duck
-
Posts
89 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Abstract_duck
-
-
In regards to the trees, I do feel like the following would be technically legal:
This faction terrain feature consists of 1-3 scenery pieces. If an Awakened Wyldwood has more than 1 scenery piece, each piece must be set up touching all of the other pieces to form a circle with an area of open ground inside the circle. The area of open ground inside the circle is considered...
I'd say that you are technically still forming a circle if you, say, do this:
As I said, I wouldn't do it in a friendly game.. But if you are playing someone who is unreasonably strict in regards to the navigate realmroot etc.. perhaps something to consider.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, KrispyXIV said:
Yeah... I'm honestly not sure what that FAQ actually means. It refers to "these placement restrictions" as if those would be apparently in the previous question, but the only rational interpretation of that would be the placement restrictions of the terrain in question (its not clear).
The reference to 17.0.3 doesn't appear to even be valid.
And, to add to that.. There seems to be no reference to the placement rules in the General's handbook. So I'd argue that these don't apply to woods set-up during the game.
-
Ouch.. Didn't catch that.
Not sure if I agree though, since it states: Abilities that allow you to add Awakened Wyldwood terrain features to the battlefield will tell you how to set them up. In addition, they must be set up more than 3" from all models, objectives, other terrain features, endless spells and invocations.
I'd argue those are the only rules, then, for trees set up during the game.
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Ragest said:
They have destroyed Sylvaneth xd
(again)
You're talking about the wyldwoods missing navigate realmroots? Quote obviously an oversight, though.. since they explicitly state in the FAQ that the ability is replaced by an ability on the warscroll, you can reasonably presume that it still exists.
-
3
-
-
I don't think people would disallow using it. Since the FAQ states that is ought to be replaced by the same skill on the warscroll. Quite obviously the point here is that, for instance, living cities, could also use the teleport instead of just sylvaneth.
--
New winterleaf command seems nice with drycha. Double mortals with ranged, right? What was the ruling with flaming weapon & unique's, again?
-
23 hours ago, Mark Williams said:
One of the new FAQ questions confirms that units that redeply don't count as moving. What you can or cannot do after redeployment will be covered in the ability text rather than the core rules (ie. most redployment or setups specify that you cannot move in your movement phase).
Q: Some abilities allow a unit to be set up ‘instead of making a normal move’. Does a unit set up with such an ability count as having moved? A: No, unless the ability specifically states otherwise.
What FAQ states that? It seems quite relevant to a discussion in the sylvaneth forum a while back, in regards to the new wyldwoods and treelords
-
4 hours ago, Kirby said:
Whats the feeling on unit sizes for the new units in Dominion. Do we think Praetors and Annihilators with continue as a 3 man unit, or will they come later in a box of 5?
I realise the GHB says 3. But what are the chances that the battletome will change this?My guess is that they'll stay 3. Apart from the reveal, I can imagine that units of 5 will make them stray too close to the paladin units. In units of 3 they fullfill a niche, as far as that's possible in stormcasts.
-
1
-
-
57 minutes ago, Havelocke said:
After taking another look at the rules, I think a strong argument can be made that this is legal. Even more than that, I think you could even make a normal move, if you want to, as well. There are two rules that work together to justify this...
Core 8.0, Last Sentence - Once you have made a normal move, run or retreated with a unit, you cannot pick it again in that phase.
Core FAQ - Q: Some abilities allow a unit to be set up ‘ instead of making a normal move’. Does a unit set up with such an ability count as having moved? A: No, unless the ability specifically states otherwise.
As written, this suggests that you may pick a unit and make a teleport instead of moving, and the unit will not have moved. You may then pick the unit a second time and make a normal move or run, as the rules do not stop you from picking a unit twice, only from moving twice.
It's important to note that the above is only based on exactly what's written in the rules, without giving consideration to common sense. It seems extremely unlikely to me that this is the way the abilities are intended to function.
(As written, this will only work with Spirit Paths and Waypipes. It won't work with Navigate Realmroots or Sinister Ambush, however, because of the first sentence of those abilities states that they take place "at the end of the movement phase". Per the core rules FAQ, this means the ability occurs after all other movement has taken plac
Again it seems to come down to the definition of 'instead'. I'd agree on not doing it , though. Although, what would seem to be new is a rule ambiguity in favor of sylvaneth.
You made me reread the new Awakenend Warscroll and navigate realmrootd, and seems like you can explicitly move/retreat into range and teleport once into range of the tree in the same turn. Before you had to explicitly either move or teleport. All in all.. Perfect for those moments where you are not quite close enough to the woods to tele, or piled in just a bit too much. I think this is quite big in using the teleport when you want
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, plavski said:
You can also run instead, as that's not a normal move or retreat. So you could hop out of combat, run to another point and capture it on the other side of the board.
Ive never heard that one before, running after the set up. Can more people confirm this?
-
52 minutes ago, JSH said:
Thanks for the answers.
I have another question. I quote the Spirit Paths from the faq.
‘In your movement phase, if this unit is within 6" of an Awakened Wyldwood in your army, it can walk the spirit paths instead of making a normal move or retreating.’
If a treelord is engaged in combat, to teleport, it has to do it instead of a retreat move, right?Does that mean he can't charge in the same turn?
This topic was argued a few pages back. Basically it depends on your definition of 'instead of'. Considering it is a set up, and not a move, i would argue that you can still charge. It is not an alternative move/retreat action, but an alternative action to the move/retreat action
-
One more possible reason why wood placement during the game is not faction terrain (although I believe Mirage's earlier argument settles it), and therefore the 3" doesnt apply:
The warscroll says: 'only Sylvaneth can take this faction terrain feature'. Since other armies can take, for instance, a TLA, that would imy 1 of 2 things: (1) they (e.g. cities or other allies) cannot use his tree placement skill if the trees are a faction terrain, or (2) placement of Awakened woods during the game implies that it is not faction terrain, therefore meaning faction terrain placement rules do not apply.
Considering all other point, and because it would be strange otherwise, I would argue (2) is the case. Here, warscroll conditions apply instead. These conditions are quite nice. All in all, these placement skills are a massive, massive buff to sylvaneth.
-
12 minutes ago, Golub87 said:
In all of my wargaming hobbies, people can play against me with empty bases as far as I am concerned.
This is an expensive hobby and excluding financially less fortunate from any space due to aesthetic reasons is never a good thing.
Yeah, agreed. I'd definitely pass playing with someone who's very adamant about these things. It would probably not bode well for a friendly game if someone cares that much about the shape of your plastic. I feel GW's stance makes economical sense for a company because they want to make money.. but I feel like there is no other reasonable defense of the stance.
That said, if i use empty bases and the like, I would be more lenient in regards to re-do's, if my opponent claims they've had a mix up about what unit it represents. If i feel like they are abusing it, I can always choose to play with someone who doesn't.
-
1
-
-
I'd want to see the coalitions possibilities before being too happy about the concept in regards to sylvaneth (I like the transfer of allegiance keyword in general). Generally, you pay quite a steep price for the sylvaneth teleport ability in the effectivety of sylvaneth warscrolls point wise. I can imagine GW limiting our allies because they might simply be too effective with our allegiance ability.
-
12 hours ago, Ian Wallsh said:
I don't get why people hate Lumineth so much....?
Sure the rules could do with a little tweaking 'here and there'...
But their beautiful figures with exquisite Lore and inspiring stories about them..
Surely a 'bad general blames the rulebook ' applies here and it's up to the opposing player to use all their cunning, ingenuity and luck to beat them.....?
Remember 'The greater the odds the greater the glory' and if a General is truly worth his/her 'Salt' they will prevail...
You should try Beasts of Chaos or Sylvaneth for some of that sweet glory - There will indeed be sufficient salt to be worthy of.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, a74xhx said:
That's a lot of points though.
Maybe it's time for the return of the double branchwraith? Cheap as chips and I'd still take a second wraith over a branchwych
I'd think the security of 2 warsongs for his signature spell & throne+verdant blessing is well worth the points, especially now that MSU is going to be a thing.
-
3 hours ago, Havelocke said:
What was your opponent playing @Abstract_duck? It sounds like you got a bit unlucky to not get it off until turn three, and would normally be more reliable, but it's also a pretty disruptable combo, offering multiple chances to unbind.
Yep, I was ust very unlucky. Rolling lot's of 2's and 1's - not even getting spells off with the +1 warsong bonus all the while using Chalice (rolling 1,1,2 and the like) so I didn't lose out on the spells because of dispells. Was good for the game though, since the time I got it off was a bit too much
-
Had a game with the new rules.
Loved being able to place down a forest with less trees. It enabled the possibility of putting down a forest near my objectives, and somewhat in the way of the opponent. Stacking drayds and forest+places of power on the objective was easy like this.
Also tried the Warsong+spellportal+chalice+balewind. I had some trouble getting it off, but managed to do so in the 3rd turn, without any prioor buff's. I don't think I'll be using it again like that. It hit about 5 units, dealing at least 20 mortal wounds without any risk associated to it. It didn't really matter for the game. But, not too fun for a casual game, I think. I was quite unlucky with my first casts, getting lot's of 1's and 2', even with the chalice, but normally I'd say the combo is a bit too reliable and safe & rewarding massive turtling.
-
59 minutes ago, Kaylethia said:
Unbuffed, using only their 1-damage profile on all models and without using Martial Memories, their statistical output looks like this: 10 T-revs with blades
Thanks! That seems a bit more decent then I thought, especially if you can ping off a few wounds with your ranged!
-
7 minutes ago, Kaylethia said:
10 is better for combat activations and unwounded heroes while giving up a bit of output compared to 2x5, as two leaders have good odds with their single dice rerolls if you give them the 2 damage weapons. 2x5 has better odds of making the charge.
Fair, though I feel like their output is still too little to kill off an unwounded hero if they are unbuffed, though. at that point you might be using 160 points to kill off a 80 point unit over a few rounds since you're looking at about 6 per turn if you get all of them in range against a unit with a 5+ save - granted, the banner helps. But yeah, it depends on your goals. I'd love to hear if they are actually quite decent hunters, though.
-
1
-
-
Let's not forget that we haven't seen terrain rules yet. These might influence the shooting quite a bit, same with vision rules. What if, for instance, you can only deal wounds equal to the amount of units that are visible to the shooting unit, instead of being able to damage all of them if the shooting unit can shoot all of them if just one is visible
& in regards to the coherency rules: Perhaps unit sizes for Cav changes, or the idea is to buff heroes and monsters by debuffing units with multiple models. Perhaps the goal is to create, even for Cav, multiple lines of units. This would actually make sense if games are to be a bit longer. Right now, many games seem to be decided turn 3, but if the damage of a large part of your army is lessened, games might actually be longer. Now, problem here wouldn't be the coherency rules, I think, the main problem would be people abusing the rules to create weird formations, which I fear would be done in a competitive scene. But in a friendly game you can just decide not to play with someone who does that.
-
On 6/8/2021 at 9:02 AM, brattenbergus said:
Evening, folks!
Wanted to finally begin Collecting an army and wanted to start with an 1000p list. How does this list look for 1000p?
Thanks!
Allegiance: Sylvaneth
Branchwraith (80)
- Deepwood Spell: Throne of Vines
Treelord Ancient (260)
- Deepwood Spell: Regrowth
10 x Spite-Revenants (120)
10 x Tree-Revenants (160)
3 x Kurnoth Hunters (190)
- Greatswords
3 x Kurnoth Hunters (190)
- Greatswords
Total: 1000 / 1000
Extra Command Points: 0
Allies: 0 / 200
Wounds: 67
Looks good! I'd change one little thing though:
a max unit of spite rev's is 200 points, so I'd change the 10x tree rev's to 5x tree rev's. You probably want to use the tree rev's to capture free objectives and perhaps kill off a wounded hero or screen an objective you own. having 10 instead of 5 tree rev's in one unit isn't really going to help that much.
Do keep in mind that spite rev's are mostly glass cannons. Most people recommend dryads instead, especially since you have the damage covered with kurnoth's. I like a big stack of spite-rev's though
-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, keen said:
I think this a bit too simplified thinking.
I agree, you might not get a great addition for the 120pts alone. But maybe if you can use the 120pts in combination with another ~100pts you just squeezed into your 2k list before for a unit you didn't really need. E.g. you could afford a unit of Kurnoths instead of 10 dryads or something similar. So it always depends on the full context.
Sounds like a good reason to share some lists amongst each other.. I would be interested though!
To start, my gameplan for next time will be:
Gnarlroot
1x Alarielle
1x Warsong revenant (Planning to try the Warsong Bomb by hiding him in a central spot on the map, stacking a cast bonus with Chalice (anybody know the average increase in casting rolls?), +1 Balewind (and+6'' range), +2 Throne, +1 standard bonus for what I believe should be quite a decent cast for damage across the board, staying quite reliable because of the casting bonusses and only getting higher with the Throne stacks). Quite sure to get it off if you: Cast Throne for the +2 (with a Chalice +1 bonus in the forest), Balewind with the Chalice +3 from forest and throne, signature spell for the +4 with chalice. My guess would be that you are netting 4-5 mortal wounds in a 15'' range on turn 1, forcing the opponent to commit units to a unit protected by a forest - (and if you add some tree revs or kurnoths (by deploying them off-board until it's your turn)) that's regenerating.
1x Branchwraith (for the summons, ofcourse)
30x Dryad5x Tree Rev
5x Tree Rev
6x Kurnoth Scythes
-
Balewind Vortex
Spiteswarm Hive
1995 points - which might net a triumph if lucky without sacrificing too much points
By The way.. Anyone else feeling like Dead for innumerable ages should've been Alarielle's regenerative ability?
-
1 hour ago, brattenbergus said:
Yeah, I thought so too. That would be great if that's the case, that box seems like a bargain, especially if you play Warcry and slowly building an Sylvaneth army as I do.
I've bought it. I can confirm that it's the same set
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Kalimeo said:
Hey guys
Im a bit uncertain about the new wyldwood setup.
If i place 2 citadel wood pieces, do they need to connect physically with both tips?
It kinda feels like if u wanna get a warsinger into hiding, 2 trees with leaves will just be frustrating...
Jep, I think you have too. You should be able to hide the warsong revenant behind both wood pieces though since the scroll doesn't seem to state that units have to be in the forest. Correct me if I'm wrong though, but that should easily be 3'' of forest in from of him. He won't be protected from all sides, but you can probably hide him from the biggest ranged damage. A
AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion
in Sylvaneth
Posted
Besides the current situation, the idea of only placing trees In your own territory opens up interesting design ideas, I think. For instance if you could teleport to trees from everywhere on the map with less restrictions like setting up 9 inches from enemy models, it would open up an interesting hit & run style in combination with a defensive ability to protect your own territory. I think this would fit more with the flavour of defending your own ancient forests.