PJetski

...in 3+ months

Cycle cannot work the way it used to work, because you remove models after allocating wounds. There is no way it can function the way it did in the previous edition unless you are purposefully playing the game wrong. Cycle actually works just fine RAW. The issue here is not Cycle, but rather that the core rules are not clear and potentially have a paradox built into them, as you pointed out. Changing the wording of Cycle does not fix the issue in the core rules. There is now a distinction between a slain model and a removed model. These terms were synonymous in 2nd edition, but that is not the case in 3rd edition. However, it seems some of the rules do not account for this change. In particular, 1.3 defining a destroyed unit and 14.2 stating that remaining wounds allocated to a destroyed unit are negated. These two clauses do not strictly prohibit remaining wounds from being negated after all models are slain but before models are removed, but it would be good if the rules were consistent and clear. So either: 1. Overkill damage is also negated before you remove models (the rules do not explicitly state this, but it can be inferred); or 2. The definition of "destroyed unit" in 1.3 is wrong and it should read: "A unit is destroyed when all models in the unit are slain"; or 3. All of 14.2 is wrong - models are removed as soon as they are slain like in 2nd edition, and Cycle is a garbage ability again I don't think it's #3 because they specifically changed how wounds were allocated and models were removed in 3rd edition. That sort of change is not done by accident... unless GW is completely incompetent

Lots of people in The Stormkeep discord are snapping them up. Judicators and Paladins, too.

They do less damage than Liberators unless you hit big units. Only do more damage if you hit 10+ model units. Why would anyone spend 10 points to reduce the save rolls of their screening unit?

All of them seem to be very good. Protectors and Grandhammers in particular are very strong. Even Decimators aren't bad, but their niche sucks and so they look like a bad version of Protectors

Errata > Battletome >>>>>>> App >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Random GW employees

We must be reading different books

I think the rest of the year is just gonna be: Harrowdeep Maybe 1-2 warbands for Underworlds The rest of the Stormcast The rest of the Black Templars Genestealers vs Custodes box from that leak Battleforces Christmas bundles New paints and hobby tools

I made a video about this I used the thread @EMMachine linked to work through my thoughts before putting the conclusions into video form. It seems to work this way RAW, but I would wait for GW to make a statement about it before you make any decisions about your lists or purchases

It would certainly weaken the list from its current state, but Ive been playing it with 4" move models (Prots or Evos) and no movement after teleporting for about 4 years now so I don't think it would totally kill it. I don't think the Grandslammer list would work though, the 9" charge (even with a reroll) isnt reliable enough Yeah the Vanguard stuff is underwhelming right now. They didn't even bother giving the VANGUARD keyword to Raptors or the Aquilor. Either Celestial Instincts to retreat & charge (though it wouldnt let you activate Comet Trail its still nice mobility) or Scintillating Trail to help reduce the chance my spells get unbound. I went with the Arcane Tome partly to get another WIZARD for the Grand Strategy. I don't think I would swap it out.

The Stormkeep Episode 4 is up This time we're talking about lists based on our initial review of the book, including two lists submitted by people from the community Come hang out in our discord for more community events like list writing competitions and hobby nights https://discord.gg/pF28GbESaz

Gardus

If you didn't believe me the first time, here is the FAQ: You can drop the Imperatant and then the Annihilators. The Imperatant deployment must be fully resolved before you can deploy the Annihilators.

Nothing in AOS happens simultaneously. All attacks, abilities, and effects are resolved one at a time. If they happen at the same time (eg. "at the end of a phase") then you still resolve them one at a time. Fully resolve one effect before moving on to the next. You can drop Imperatant with Scions and then the Annihilators >7" away since the Imperatant is now on the battlefield.

I wouldn't be surprised if Underworlds Harrowdeep came out before the rest of the Stormcast At this rate I'll see the heat death of the universe before I get to paint those new drakes

The app has never been totally consistent with the rules. In terms of authority it is always Errata > Battletome >>>>>>> App

Can't show blood in the art if you want to sell your game in china vv

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/09/30/the-new-rules-that-make-warhammer-underworlds-better-than-ever/ Harrowdeep looks great!

Is there any way for an allied Warsong Revenant to set up woods?

Yep. I have actually considered giving the Stardrake an Arcane Tome (with Chain Lightning) rather than an Amulet of Destiny just so he can help score Battle Tactics in the hero phase.

I would agree with this, the difference between Liberators and Vindictors is very minimal. If you don't give them save buffs the 3+ save characteristic is exactly the same as a 4+ save with +1 to save rolls. +1 to Wound rolls once per game is really good with Judicators, or as a backup in case you fail Celestial Blades, or if you just want to buff two different units with +1 to Wound.

Episode #3 of The Stormkeep is live This is a quick discussion about Cycle of the Storm, and how it seems to revive a unit even against infinite damage. If you want more details on how this works, come chat in our discord: https://discord.gg/C7hk88jd

No, they're not the same thing. We are going in circles and will have to agree to disagree about that. The model was slain, obviously, and it would activate abilities like Blaze of Glory before it gets removed, then Cycle will heal a wound and make it count as not slain. These timings are strictly defined and activating Cycle is not retroactively stopping other abilities that have already been resolved by the time Cycle activates.

I never said you could to this? We were discussing models that were conjured into existence with wounds suffered, but no wounds allocated to them. You are describing a different situation. No, that is not what it says. It says "Once you allocate a wound to a model" not "if a model has wounds allocated to it" as you just stated. The former is a verb, but you are conflating it with a noun. You are not reading the rule correctly! This is a moot point because there is currently no way to create a model with wounds suffered without allocating wounds to it, but if there was then 14.1 would not prevent you from allocating to either model. If the model is slain and revived you do not have to pick that model as the target because 14.1 stops once the model is slain, so reviving with Cycle works just fine. Since there is nothing in the rules to prevents two models with wounds in a unit, everything works RAW.

You missed the very important context of the first part of that statement which says "once you have allocated a wound to that model". You are inferring that you must allocate to a wounded model, but that is not what the rule says. All it says is that once you allocate to a model you must keep allocating to that model until it is slain. Interestingly, the 2nd edition rules had a clause that said you could not have two wounded models: They specifically removed this in 3rd edition.