mystycalchemy

Unfortunately, I don't believe Whitefire Tome is an apt example here for what you're trying to argue. Whitefire tome is worded as such because it can be given to a unit that is not a wizard. If it did not have that second clause, it would read as such: "If the bearer is a WIZARD, they know all the spells from the lore of whitefire instead of only 2." Thus, it would not perform at all on anything but a wizard. You could, legally put it on a wizard, but without that second clause, the artifact does nothing on a non-wizard, thus, the statement saying a spell can be cast is required. If we look at evocators the same way, let's remove the troublesome words from the FAQ. "Each EVOCATORS unit in your army can know 1 spell from the lore of invigoration." If this is how the FAQ was worded, they wouldnt be able to cast any spells from LoI at all, as their warscroll states they can only cast empower. The FAQ for the Lore MUST say they are able to cast a spell, it MUST contradict the warscroll's rules (and state as such) so that Evocators are able to cast the spells. The FAQ doesn't say that so it can be misconstrued into meaning they get two spells, its literally required so that Evocators work as they are meant to. It's written poorly, but not THAT poorly. i know you're in this for good fun. But consider how your opponents are gonna think about this. If I saw this, I'd call the TO over to confirm cause most TOs i can think of wouldnt go for this kind of exploitation.

You got me on horrors, but they didn't also try to add more spells to them after the fact. And while I disagree with your interpretation, it'll all probably change in a month

This is correct. Also, no other unit in the game says "This unit can only cast <spell>." Which is likely why games workshop worded it this way. Why didn't they just remove that sentence from Evocators? Who knows. Technically, there's nothing implying they get an extra cast in here either. The sentence exempting the normal rule refers only to the sentence that they can only cast empower (and nothing else) as if it didn't specify that, nothing would work. If the last sentence is trying to specify order, why doesn't it say outright? And why would GW write a rule that FORCES players to cast spells in a specific order? There's no reasoning for that lore-wise or anything. They could've, but GW also thought Vanguard-Hunters were okay until 3rd edition changed their stats.

Just like Zamik says, it adds the option to cast. The part that says "attempt to cast" is only there to clarify that they are eligible to cast the spells. For instance, Curseling from Tzeentch would not be able to cast it as he is not an EVOCATORS unit. Doesn't mean they get a cast that "doesn't count"

They can only attempt to cast one spell per hero phase. The exception only changes the highlighted portion. RAW this doesn't work. 1 spell, nothing says they can cast LoI spells in the same phase as empower.

Agreed on the Female Knight- part! And as for the odd-man out, just buy a second box and build a second Knight! Then you'll have two knights (hopefully they can take lances too) and a unit of two Stormdrake Guard!

DRAGON CAVALRY

Everyone has their own tastes, personally I think it's a wonderful model with a great deal of character in a very well-executed pose. We won't know until the book comes out or GW previews rules. Safe bet though. August, that's all the information we have. Entirely likely to be the end of the month, this is what GW often does, I believe they did that with the Space Marine and Necron codexes at the start of 9th ed 40k. We won't know until the book comes out or GW previews rules. July 3rd, about a month ago. There's a number of speculative reasons why Vandus isn't the new Lord-Commander. For one, Vandus already has rules! GW doesn't like to remove models that have rules that they are still producing, so it'd be strange to have Vandus, Lord-Celestant of the Hammerhands and Vandus, Lord-Commander of the Hammers of Sigmar in the same book. They've only done this once (that I'm aware of) with Radukar in Soulblight Gravelords and I doubt they'd do it again so soon. Especially because, unfortunately, not everyone reads the novels religiously. Not everyone was around during AoS first edition. So there's a good chance that many Stormcast Players don't even know who the heck Vandus is, so there's no difference between Vandus and Bastian, as far as they're concerned. Also, I haven't read every story, but Vandus seems like the type to either be elevated to a Celestial (like Yndrasta or Celestant-Prime) or choose willingly to remain the Lord-Celestant so that he can better serve Sigmar in the way he knows best, with Heldensen through Korghos Khul's head. You'd have to be more specific 😛 there's a lot of controversy going on with GW's updated Fan Content Policy, but that'd be best discussed elsewhere. That was a lot of questions >_< lol

It's been announced, but the only reveals we've had are the Stormkeep rules this past week on Warhammer Community.

Annihilators have a 2+ save, crash like meteors from deep strike and do mortal wounds when they charge, rather than on 6s to hit like Retributors. Also only 3 to a unit instead of 5 (as far as we're aware). They also do not have the Paladin keyword, but that doesn't matter much with the removal of Warscroll Battalions (which may change in the new battletome, but that's unknown at the moment).

We know for a fact Vanquishers are battleline (unconditional) and I believe in the preview stream on dominion release day they said Vigilors are Battleline if the Knight-Judicator is your General. The vanquisher info comes from a points page that was shown in the Learn to Play videos on the official website.

Not sure that it fits here, but it is warhammer IP. When I was picking up a box of the new Magic set, one of the LGS employees mentioned off-handedly that the 40k crossover set was gonna be releasing soon, which at the bare minimum includes commander decks and I believe a full booster release as well, but details are scarce. Source: me and an lgs employee.

I mean that's what I'm sayin, next sunday (tomorrow, depending on your time zone) is August 1st, so if the battletomes went on preorder, they released in august, like they said they would! I was just hoping the video they usually post would be up early so we'd know 😛

Any chance GW posts This Week in Warhammer early for a 3rd week straight? i wanna know if SCE/OWC books are going on pre-order first week of august (even though i'm sure it'll be the last week of Aug )

Its hyperbole, don't worry. You've still got the 12 current battleplans for matched play, accurate points, the tokens that came with it, endless spell rules, Ghur seasonal rules, all still fine

This is an excellent point. Not once does the article (or the tweet on the previous page here) say that SoB are getting core battalions. "and the Tome Celestial focuses on some of the biggest folks in the realms, the Sons of Behemat. Finally for the Mortal Realms, discover fresh core battalions and rules for matched play, as well as some brilliant ways to use your gargants in a Path to Glory campaign." Core battalions and Gargants are mentioned in 2 separate sentences, besides the gargants in Path to Glory, but the core battalions definitely seem like a new universal set of rules, for any army. Still not exactly happy that new matched play rules that are purely beneficial for every army are in WD, but oh well.

Yikes, not at all a fan of Core Battalions for Matched Play being in White Dwarf. WD rules have always been a little iffy, usually providing nice small rules for armies (SCE getting warscroll battalions for one of their subfactions amd a minor named character in one of their 4 articles, the rest didn't have points, as well as Gloomspite's subfactions) But wow, really not a fan of this. Although honestly, if its just battalions that allow Sons to make use of the battalion abilities, it might not be too bad (such as a battalion with 3 commander slots giving one of the free command abilities or magnificent) Though personally, give me more Anvil of Apotheosis rules gw! Anvil of Destruction with options for Kruleboyz, Troggoth Heroes, Squig-riders, Ogors, Gargants! There's plenty to make here!

Fair. But don't forget, Lord-Imperitant does more than precision deep strike! The free command ability/turn is nothing to sneeze at and definitely worth considering.

I actually went back and watched the reveal stream and when they showed off Vanquishers, Eddie said they have anti-'horde' rules, saying they get some bonus for fighting units of 5+ and a better bonus for units of 10+! It's a shame the Liberators lose their half of Shield of Civilization, though it would make them exceedingly strong in this edition, effectively giving them a free All-Out Attack and All-Out Defense if they don't move, and I'd much rather have the triple models for objectives. I'm curious if this means we'll be getting Artifacts/Command Traits for Stormkeep armies and Artifacts/Command Traits for Scions armies, as Staunch Defender obviously does nothing in a Scions list. Also has me wondering if Annihilators will be good in Stormkeeps at all, since they wouldn't be able to Scions in and do that initial burst of wounds.

Most likely in White Dwarf or the next Warcry release, assuming that release has new faction books.

Same here, but a lot of opinions here (especially about 'which unit is best') are given through a lens of tournament play. So if you never plan on going to a tournament with your list, dont let that turn you away! And even if you do plan on going to tournaments, practice with a list will go a long way then just jamming the new 'best' broken list with minimal experience But hey, I'm no tournament player, I'm just here to have fun with lightning paladins B)

Yes, but then why are they 5pt cheaper than vindictors in the new points? Id value damage 2 over a 3+ easy. Just theory craftin 😛

Off the topic of Dragons for a moment (though personally, I love them); what do you guys think will differentiate Vanquishers from Liberators/Sequitors/Vindictors? Per the points from the How to Play video, Vanquishers are 125, Liberators 115, and Vindictors 130. Obviously there's gonna be quite a lot of changes in the new book, but assuming Liberators, Sequitors and Vindictors remain unchanged from the current FAQs/Dominion Cards, Vanquishers gotta have something to make them an upgrade over Liberators/downgrade from Vindictors. I'd imagine their statline is something like 5"Mv/4+Sv/7Bv/2W (4+ since they don't have shields) but as for their weapon I'm not sure. I was thinking that damage 2 would be decent, but I doubt they would be 3+/3+/-1 still, as they'd just be the obvious best choice. Possibly 2A/4+/3+/-/2 as a potential profile. Could also see them as getting in-built buffs vs monsters (fits with the vanquisher epithet). Curious to hear what you guys think! This is mostly me just rambling and musing on random thoughts so don't take my suggestions too seriously 😛

Same thing they did with the 40k instructions rules. Its just Range, Attacks, To Hit, To Wound, Rend, Damage, as normal!

Gotcha. Im expecting that to be fixed in the battletome, so I'll just hold off from doin that until its confirmed that's the intent lmao