Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by ElectricPaladin

  1. This is definitely the case - it's been confirmed.
  2. I love those guys! I've been saving them up to add more spites to various models. Almost all of my tree-revenants have pet spites.
  3. I'd like to second Booby's point. A single thread is just too much stuff to slog through, and it ends up being even more repetitive than your typical message board.
  4. I think that it can be fun to model FEC with the remnants of the civilization they once had, but only if that's what they're actually lugging around with them. It makes sense to me that a ghoul might carry a tattered rag that he thinks is still a beautiful banner. I also agree that it isn't as cool to model the delusions as real.
  5. No, that's a Nurgle unit we aren't going to see until Q3 next year.
  6. Hm. We probably shouldn't take this too much further, but for the record, I have a marines army, and that's really not the case. You can play a 100% primaris force; you can play a 100% old model force. You can mix the two. And in terms of both rules and novels, the primaris definitely have their own character. Buuuuut... let's not ****** off the g/mods.
  7. Because the people who think GW is phasing out the old model marines are just plain wrong. This is a new development in the storyline, not a sneaky way to roll out new models.
  8. I think the fear may be of it becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you announce that a faction that used to be big has been permanently sidelined, then sales are going to disappear, and if sales disappear you are going to have a hard time convincing anyone that you should go anywhere with it later. I'm not saying that it's ok, I just see how it's a bind for GW.
  9. On the one hand, I totally get where you're coming from - that's never happened to a model I own (or, Nagash defend my soul, an entire army), but I feel you. On the other hand, though, I feel like if the only direction things can move is "bigger," the design space is going to get crowded. At a certain point you don't have room for something new if you don't get rid of something old. In Age of Sigmar, GW has done a pretty good job of making sure that there are still things you can do with the physical models even if what they represent has changed somewhat, but you can only push that angle so far.
  10. I absolutely agree. The more generous interpretation is that GW simply hasn't decided yet. I think that's probably where the Sisters of Battle were over in 40k-land. It's not that GW wanted to let them wither and die, it's that they had no idea what to do with them. Then, when they figured it out, they started development. So perhaps, somewhat less dramatically, these mini-factions are hanging around just in case the team later on decides that they might make a good addition to/nucleus for a larger faction. Or maybe you're right and GW is just making a bad call.
  11. Do we know that every faction is going to be a grown-up faction? I feel like some of them might be doomed to languish in this way forever. Are Arcane Council or Devoted of Sigmar really ever going to get battletomes? Or do they exist to be allies and for narrative play?
  12. I saw something funny on the Internet. People Who Don't Know Anything About Linguistics: stop changing language, words have meaning, language doesn't change! protect language purity stop making up words and pronouns Linguists: all words are made up, nothing is real, everything is imaginary, chaos and anarchy, invent your own pronouns IDGAF
  13. I'm giving up on this treelord so I'm making an attempt at selling it before I just throw it out. It looks like a new missing left hand can't be gotten for love or money and I'm not a sculptor enough to make a new one. The elbow on that side is also missing, but as you can see the forearm has been pinned in place. I'd be happy to let it go for whatever seems reasonable to you or trade it for a more usable kit of lesser value. The right hand has been magnetized. I've got a Durthu sword and ancient staff - either is available upon request.
  14. English is such a dumpster fire of a language.
  15. Additionally, the entire unit must be in the range of the hero or the hunters. If the unit is half in range of a hero and half in range of some hunters, it doesn't work. The hunters don't extend the general's aura, they give you an alternative point to measure from - you still have to measure from one or the other.
  16. Honestly, the wyldwoods are why I started playing this army. The ability to manipulate the playing field by adding terrain is incredibly characterful and evocative.
  17. I do think that it will be possible to use multiple pieces to make forests with unusual shape. We do have the warscroll and it does say that an awakened wyldwood is made up of three to six (not three or six) sections, each one placed so that its points touch the points of two other sections, forming various shapes and sizes. However, I also think that @Fyrm is probably overstating how much flexibility we'll have. That said, part of the utility of owning multiple sets is going to be the freedom to make a wider variety of shapes using a wider set of pieces.
  18. Plastic blood knights will solve many issues. Not my personal budgetary issues, but other issues of great importance.
  19. I suspect that Legions of Nagash will get a new book, but probably not until all the other Death armies that are going to see an update get it. So whatever new Death book is in the works for this year (Soulblight? Deadwalker? Deathrattle? Something else? If you say Tomb Kings I'll send you to the kitten gulag) will come first and either be added to an existing legion (ie. if we get a Soulblight book that's going into the Legion of Blood) or make a new legion (a la Legion of Grief). Why? Because it's rad as hell and also old and weird, and GW seems pretty dedicated to keeping the rules up to date.
  20. Thank you, that's correct. So on a 6, a winterleaf treelord will get d6 mortal wounds and one roll to-wound that will deal one damage. Much less tasty. Not exactly bad, but less tasty. So winterleef treelords aren't uninteresting, but they aren't really taking advantage of the winterleaf combat trait any better than anyone else. For sword-hunters, a 6 will get them one mortal wound plus two rolls to-wound (two damage each). Especially as each one gets four attacks, that's many more mortal wounds for your buck. It seems to me that winterleaf sword hunters are the ******.
  21. Yeah. I went and bought a treelord myself. Plus, I can already do the household battalion, which is pretty good low-hanging fruit as far as battalions are concerned.
  22. So then if you roll a 6 you would get d6 mortal wounds from the original hit and then a to-wound roll for a d6 damage hit. Still pretty tasty.
  23. Am I reading it right that if a Winterleaf treelord rolls a 6 to hit with his massive impaling talons that's immediately 2d6 mortal wounds? And if a Winterleaf sword-hunter rolls a 6 to hit that's two mortal wounds and two to-wound rolls (that will deal two damage each if they go through)? Because that's pretty good.
  • Create New...