Carnelian

DWell that was definitely worth waking up at 5am for. The hollow hero is a really fine sculpt. Really impressed The infantry and cavalry aelves are nicely classic - but boy, none of them compare to Teclis and his mount... That mount is just absolutely brilliant. Very noble yet very alien . Exactly the sort of mythical beast that I love the Mortal Realms for having! I think the nurgle sorcerer is totally cool too and the seraphon terrain piece also looks excellent and I can't wait to read more about the coalesced!

It can be a bit frustrating but i think it's a good way of making it occasionally worth not taking a subfaction and instead choosing your own trait and artefact.

I'm probably being dense but I can't find it. Could you direct me to how to block someone via mobile?

Perfectly understandable if that's how you like it to play, but I'd simply point out that by giving one player control over the turn roll and sequence of possible doubles, you have taken that opportunity away from the other player. Personally speaking I prefer the roll off precisely because it takes a bit on control off one player and means they can't necessarily rely on enacting a plan and deployment with a guarantee of going first or second turn but must instead react more tactically within the game instead. That's how I prefer my games - with as many meaningful decisons made in-game as possible, rather than decisions made pre-game. But that's my personal preference of course. I won't get into any protracted conversation on this point, as by now it's very old news, I'd just point people to the core rules as written, attached, and people can make up their own mind about how to interpret it

If there was one thing I could change about AoS, it would be the same way the first turn priority is worked it out - I would change it to the way it is worded in the core rules pre-Faq. I don't like how one of the two players will be able to guarantee the first or second turn at the time that they are deploying. I think it makes battalions too important and also makes alpha strike armies a bit too strong. I would therefore change it to a roll-off after deployment, with draws going in favour of the first player to finish deploying. Either that, or I would change the rules so that a battalion MUST all be dropped at once - so if you know you are going to chose first or second, your opponent can at least set up after you to try to counter that.

The reports I saw (pic attached) were pretty clear that nothing is coming soon

If you look at the report coming out of the questions at the Open Day it looks like Seraphon are not coming anytime soon so probably best to temper expectations for any release for them at all

My guess is that they remake everything and it features no old models - closer to Bonereapers than Gitz. It just feels like that is the future, but that's just my gut feeling

I said in another thread I emailed them 5 times with no response but I've since ended up phoning them and they were helpful (although I spent 5+ mins in a queue).

I hope it's more in line with the quality of story telling in recent battletomes and the core book rather than the Realmgate Wars

I'm very excited for it but that may be a bit premature as I don't really know what the contents will be

I have emailed hachette 5 times to ask them to change my address for Mortal Realms and got no response back at all

I'm expecting a total new army with no existing models alongside it. But who knows?

Or is it possible that they've learned from selling out and increased supply to meet demand? No, no, you're right KO are finished and there's not loads of ppl jumping on the KO ship this morning

I should add that these outcomes would of course change if you were not using a 4+/4+/rend 0 attack. If you're attack was 6+ to hit/3+ to wound/-4 rend, then it would almost always be best to buff the hit role.

I'm not sure what inputs you are using but in principle the rend is another D6 chance outcome, just like to hit and to wound, so if you adjust the outcome of the rend D6 from 1/6 to 2/6, it will effect the damage outcome in exactly the same way as if you adjust the to hit or to wound from 1/6 to 2/6. If you think of it like that, it should be easier to see that dice modifiers work in exactly the same way for each statistic. The complexity comes from the fact that rend interacts with your opponent's armour statistics in a way that to hit and to wound do not. The result of this interaction means that there are different outcomes via different enemies and so there is not nornally going to be a single stat which it is better to buff in ALL circumstances. I'm not sure which stats you are using to get those damage outputs, but if you are using attacks that hit on 4s, wound on 4s with 0 rend, then yes I agree that if the opponent had a 5+ or 6+ or no armour save, then you'd be better off with a hit buff rather than a rend buff. If your opponent has 4+ save, then it won't make a difference which you buff - your increasing the chance of success by the same amount either way. If your opponent has a 3+ or 2+ armour save, you're better off with the rend buff. Because 1s always fail, you're also better taking a to hit buff over a rend buff against a 1+ save using those attacks. Whatever is most useful will depend on the game meta, i.e. which units will you most likely face, which units pose the most difficult problems for your particular army, which statistics can get buffed and in what way etc.

I really really hope we get some battalions for s2d cultists and darkoath!

I'm afraid this is not how maths works. Hit is not a better stat because it affects more dice rolls (unless you're comparing abilities that trigger on a certain dice roll such as mortal wounds on a six). For a normal attack, hit, wound and save rolls are all equally vital in determining damage. For example, the chances of damage going through when hitting on 4s (50%), then wounding on 3s (66.66%) followed by a 3+ save (33.33% for an unsuccessful save) is the same as the chance of damage going through when hitting on 5s (33.33%), then wounding on 4s (50%) and then saving on 5s (66.66% chance of unsuccessful save). In both attacks, there is an 11% chance of the attack being successful - the order of operations does not matter. Rend does not increase in value if damage goes up. Both rend and hit and wound all remain exactly the same in determining the chance/percentage of the attack going through, no matter what the damage that is being applied at the end is. In the above examples, there is an 11% chance of the attacks going through whether they are damage 1 or 2. Whether it is better to be buffing hit or buffing rend is dependant upon all that stats involved, so we'd need to see the full hit, wound and save to know whether it was better to buff hit or rend. For example, if you buff a hit stat from 4+ (50%) to 3 plus (66.66%), then you are increasing the chance of damage being successful by about one third (33%). If however you were reducing a save from 2+ (16.66% of unsuccessful save) to 3+ (33.33% unsuccessful save) then you've increased the chance of damage going through by double (100%). If you buff something by one point, then because AoS uses a D6 system, you're always adding one point out of six. In general it is better to chose to buff a weaker stat (like 6+) rather than a strong stay like a 3+(especially given that a 1 is always a fail so no need to buff 2+ stats). Of course the different factor with rend is that you don't know what save your opponent's army will be and sometimes rend will be useless if the opponent has no save. However, that is balanced out by the fact that within the meta of the game you do need a way of dealing with high armour save units, particularly when they can re-roll their saves and rend is v valuable in doing this.

This looks ace

That's some good tentacles

Well done and thanks to everyone involved

I don't think that he revives at the first moment of Shadespire's existence - I think he escapes Shadespire but arrives at the moment just before Shadespire is created (that's him crawling out of the mirror). The more I tgink about the more unsatisfied I am by this book. Too many unanswered questions that go beyond interesting ambiguity.

I could not disagree stronger. 2019 has seen the best battletomes ever, with the best fiction and lore in them since AoS began, the most flavourful and well written rules in them since AoS began and the clearest rules since AoS began. And of top of that, they've upped their response time for Faqs and errata - which is a Good Thing.

I don't know. I dare not venture outside to the dark, for I am a cautious soul.

We're about to get a new battletome on preorder on Saturday so there is not much point looking at lists until the dust settles from that release. Anyway though, welcome to the change club!