FYI for the stomp attacks in challenges comment for base to base, the wording from the rulebook: "If possible, the models engaged in the challenge should both be moved through the ranks and placed in base contact with one another, the better to reflect their heroic duel. However, sometimes this is just not practical, so it is perfectly acceptable to leave them in place." So if not practical, don't move. However, you need to be in base to base to attack.... Long story short, even if not in B2B I would say stomps still are okay in a challenge. Things can get silly if we head down the path of pure RAW.
Re: flaming attacks, if you, as a unit with flaming attacks, roll into a unit with immune to psych that causes fear / terror, does that mean you don't take that fear / terror test, rather take a fear vs terror against that unit, as you count as causing fear. It is a dog shit way to go around explaining it but, This is the best I can come up with
I think you’re underestimating how oppressive pillar spam could be. Partly for the damage but maybe more for how it constrained and dictated movement. Sisters are still quick cav with a 4+ ward and there aren’t many bad Battle Magic spells. Maybe they’ll drop out of use given the cost, but I’m not sure they’d make a top 10 most useless units list.
17:23 I think it does mean that the swarms Fear units with flaming attacks like any other unit subject to Fear. They’re addressing a situation where otherwise that Flaming Attacks rule on the Unit Type is rarely relevant (because lots of swarms are immune to psych).
You can reroll stupidity with veteran because "stupidity is contagious" so the unit a character joins also becomes stupid and they all take the same LD test
It says "If the path of the cannonball meets a hill, impassable terrain or a high linear obstacle, it stops immediately. No further models are hit" It does NOT say "If the path of the *BOUNCE* meets a hill, impassable terrain or a high linear obstacle, it stops immediately. No further models are hit" "Crunch!" Being part of the rules that talk about bouncing is irrelevant, the book is full of rules scenarios that are outside the relevance to their surrounding rules sections
@@Snuffalaffagas Look at the text in the FAQ just before the bit you've just quoted. It's not a general statement of principle. The text you've quoted there replaces a specific piece of text that describes the situations in which a bouncing cannon ball will stop dead.
@@mjhsinclair The previous text (pre FAQ) was, "If the cannonball hits impassable terrain or a high linear obstacle, it stops immediately. No further models are hit"
@@mjhsinclair Generally speaking, Articualing your argument with references instead of vague implications makes it much clearer. So far, your argument seems to be "no because I think it shouldn't work that way"
The 'Do Skirmishers have flank or rear arcs whilst engaged in combat?' ... 'No', is pretty crazy. That means Lone Characters can no longer be Flanked or Rear charged, making super Dukes even more resilient. Whether it will have a significant impact on any units, it also means that a Skirmisher unit can no longer be Disrupted in combat.
It really feels like in 90% of the cases they decided to just go with. We accidentally messed this up, but we’re gonna keep it exactly exactly as it’s worded and not admit that. There are some things that are really obvious that are not the way they intended, but they decided to stickwith the wording.
Before the Jan FAQ, Fear from Flaming Attacks affected only Giant Rats and Warhounds. Now those attacks also affect Jungle Swarms, Rat Swarms and Snotling Mobs. All the other possible targets do cause Fear themselves and thus remain unaffected. The wording needs improvement but there really is no other reason to mention this. Or did I miss anything obvious? Maybe word it like: “Flaming Attacks against Swarms and War Beasts do cause Fear, even affecting those units that otherwise are Immune to Psychology.”
I don't think so. Immune to psychology says you automatically pass any Fear (and terror) test and the FaQ doesn't say it doesn't apply. So in essence sure you fear flaming attacks, but you automatically pass the test anyway because you're immune to psychology. I think it's just a very poor way to say units having flaming attacks do not have to test fear against any swarm or warbeast, even those immune to psychology. It was already clear, but I don't see any other explanation.
So veteran says all leadership tests besides break tests. The fact that they put in that it only doesn't work in that one scenario then it should work any other time you roll your leadership.
I think you guys passed over the spectral doppelganger change a bit too quickly. Its actually very confusing. If you have a Prophetess with the sword of the quest. She can hit at initiative 10 with the ASF profile, cast spectral doppelganger at initiative 3 and declare she is casting using the ASL profile (as the spell says any weapon equipped by the wizard), die during initiative 3 or 2 and when initiative 1 hits the doppelganger does the 2d6 hits in return.
FYI for the stomp attacks in challenges comment for base to base, the wording from the rulebook:
"If possible, the models engaged in the challenge should both be moved through the ranks and placed in base contact with one another, the better to reflect their heroic duel. However, sometimes this is just not practical, so it is perfectly acceptable to leave them in place."
So if not practical, don't move. However, you need to be in base to base to attack.... Long story short, even if not in B2B I would say stomps still are okay in a challenge. Things can get silly if we head down the path of pure RAW.
Re: flaming attacks, if you, as a unit with flaming attacks, roll into a unit with immune to psych that causes fear / terror, does that mean you don't take that fear / terror test, rather take a fear vs terror against that unit, as you count as causing fear.
It is a dog shit way to go around explaining it but, This is the best I can come up with
I think you’re underestimating how oppressive pillar spam could be. Partly for the damage but maybe more for how it constrained and dictated movement. Sisters are still quick cav with a 4+ ward and there aren’t many bad Battle Magic spells. Maybe they’ll drop out of use given the cost, but I’m not sure they’d make a top 10 most useless units list.
17:23 I think it does mean that the swarms Fear units with flaming attacks like any other unit subject to Fear. They’re addressing a situation where otherwise that Flaming Attacks rule on the Unit Type is rarely relevant (because lots of swarms are immune to psych).
You can reroll stupidity with veteran because "stupidity is contagious" so the unit a character joins also becomes stupid and they all take the same LD test
4:24 You’re looking at the wrong bullet point. Crunch is about the bounce, not the flight.
It says "If the path of the cannonball meets a hill, impassable terrain or a high linear obstacle, it stops immediately. No further models are hit"
It does NOT say "If the path of the *BOUNCE* meets a hill, impassable terrain or a high linear obstacle, it stops immediately. No further models are hit"
"Crunch!" Being part of the rules that talk about bouncing is irrelevant, the book is full of rules scenarios that are outside the relevance to their surrounding rules sections
@@Snuffalaffagas Look at the text in the FAQ just before the bit you've just quoted. It's not a general statement of principle. The text you've quoted there replaces a specific piece of text that describes the situations in which a bouncing cannon ball will stop dead.
@@mjhsinclair The only thing before my quote in the FAQ is "change the second bullet point to"
@@mjhsinclair The previous text (pre FAQ) was, "If the cannonball hits impassable terrain or a high linear obstacle, it stops immediately. No further models are hit"
@@mjhsinclair Generally speaking, Articualing your argument with references instead of vague implications makes it much clearer. So far, your argument seems to be "no because I think it shouldn't work that way"
“Cross your eyes and dot your tees?” Maybe it’s different across the pond?! 😜🇨🇦
The 'Do Skirmishers have flank or rear arcs whilst engaged in combat?' ... 'No', is pretty crazy. That means Lone Characters can no longer be Flanked or Rear charged, making super Dukes even more resilient.
Whether it will have a significant impact on any units, it also means that a Skirmisher unit can no longer be Disrupted in combat.
I love the idea of boars becoming Big 'Uns themselves ( though now I have to question why Big 'Uns get stronger boars than the actual Warboss )
It really feels like in 90% of the cases they decided to just go with. We accidentally messed this up, but we’re gonna keep it exactly exactly as it’s worded and not admit that. There are some things that are really obvious that are not the way they intended, but they decided to stickwith the wording.
Before the Jan FAQ, Fear from Flaming Attacks affected only Giant Rats and Warhounds.
Now those attacks also affect Jungle Swarms, Rat Swarms and Snotling Mobs. All the other possible targets do cause Fear themselves and thus remain unaffected.
The wording needs improvement but there really is no other reason to mention this. Or did I miss anything obvious?
Maybe word it like: “Flaming Attacks against Swarms and War Beasts do cause Fear, even affecting those units that otherwise are Immune to Psychology.”
I don't think so. Immune to psychology says you automatically pass any Fear (and terror) test and the FaQ doesn't say it doesn't apply. So in essence sure you fear flaming attacks, but you automatically pass the test anyway because you're immune to psychology.
I think it's just a very poor way to say units having flaming attacks do not have to test fear against any swarm or warbeast, even those immune to psychology. It was already clear, but I don't see any other explanation.
The sister of the Thorn reactions are way over the top.
Amusing to hear the Wood Elf players in my group cry about the sisters... :)
So veteran says all leadership tests besides break tests. The fact that they put in that it only doesn't work in that one scenario then it should work any other time you roll your leadership.
😊
I think you guys passed over the spectral doppelganger change a bit too quickly. Its actually very confusing.
If you have a Prophetess with the sword of the quest. She can hit at initiative 10 with the ASF profile, cast spectral doppelganger at initiative 3 and declare she is casting using the ASL profile (as the spell says any weapon equipped by the wizard), die during initiative 3 or 2 and when initiative 1 hits the doppelganger does the 2d6 hits in return.