AoS Second Edition

[IggyStarhost]

Behemoth keyword would suits better imo. Or is that the same?

 

[Canas]

Taller than X would cause havok. Monster key word makes a lot of sense.

I get that taller than X would result in numerous issues with people trying to essentially cheat the system, but that could be solved by simply only allowing official models in actual tournaments, and anyone playing like that isn't going to keep friends to play with for long anyway….

What I mostly find confusing is how inconsistent it is. A demon prince is a monster, a lord celestant on dracoth is not. What's the difference? They're roughly the same size. It's not like the demon prince is a mindles animal and thus won't listen to "look out sir". What's the reason why the demon prince doesn't benefit from it? Hell for that matter,why does a large slow weaponsplatform like a plague furnace benefit from a freaking "look out sir"? Are the skaven surrounding i pushing it around so quickly it can dodge arrows? Hilarious an image as that might be it doesn't exactly work.

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

An article explaining the new Look Out, Sir! rule.

I was hoping for it to be like 40K in that you couldn’t target heroes unless they are the closest enemy model, but it’s better than nothing. It’s certainly rubbish to say that there’s a relatively small number of ranged units in the game and that they should retain a ‘niche’ as hero-snipers. I really hate that. It’s so unrealistic to see a massive group of archers all firing at a leader character and not his horde of mates around him, which are more numerous and are instinctively seen as the greater threat. You could only do that with a weapon like a sniper rifle in reality, and since GW have veered away from doing weapon-specific special rules in AoS it makes things more difficult. The only way in which they could do it would be to say that generally units can’t fire at characters unless they are the closest enemy model and then have some specific sniper units that have a special rule saying ‘This unit can fire at enemy characters with their missile weapons even if they aren’t the closest enemy model’. That would be so much more realistic, but it’s better than it was before at any rate.

I don't like that rule… -1 to hit isn't exactly amazing on squishy heroes, the one in need of protection, while sturdier support heroes now become even more difficult to kill. E.g a squishy starpriest is maybe going to last an attack or two longer, while a lord-castellant will be nigh impossible to wound by most ranged attacks like this….

Also; it doesn't do anything to protect from spells or ranged abilities that aren't subject to hit-rolls.

And lastly, it doesn't help squishy single-model non-hero units like the skaven weapon teams, which is somewhat lame.

I mean, it's a start for protecting squishy support heroes, but it's kind of dissapointing.

true.. I suppose it at least stops those from freaking too much havoc.. Slightly better than expected, though still nowhere near what the squishier support heroes would need. At least it helps stop those from sniping the heavier frontline heroes..

I had hoped for more but at least it is a step into the right direction.

Agreed. I really was hoping for the 40K rule, but it is OK and stacks well with other to Hit roll penalties. It might even dissuade your opponent from wasting their shots on an infantry hero and might make them take the more efficient path of firing at your units.

 

[Canas]

Behemoth keyword would suits better imo. Or is that the same?

nope, most monsters aren't behemoths. But yeah, that'd already work a lot better. At least then it mostly just affects large stuff while monsters vary from huge things like a stardrake to about the size of a large mount like a demon prince.

 

[Canas]

Agreed. I really was hoping for the 40K rule, but it is OK and stacks well with other to Hit roll penalties. It might even dissuade your opponent from wasting their shots on an infantry hero and might make them take the more efficient path of firing at your units.

I think the main issue is probably that the fish elves already took a variant of the 40K rule as their special rule.. that probaly makes it impossible to apply it to everyone else...

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

I think the main issue is probably that the fish elves already took the 40K rule as their special rule.. that probaly makes it impossible to apply it to everyone else...

It’s not the same - it applies to all units not just characters. They have to shoot the closest unit.

 

[Canas]

It’s not the same - it applies to all units not just characters. They have to shoot the closest unit.

Just edited it to say "a variant of the 40K rule". Anyway, it's similar enough that they'd probably feel cheated if others got the 40K rule I guess.

 

[Aginor]

Just edited it to say "a variant of the 40K rule". Anyway, it's similar enough that they'd probably feel cheated if others got the 40K rule I guess.

Isn't that the case with Bonesplitterz? IIRC they have the allegiance ability which says that regardless of enemy rend they always get a 6+ save.
And the GHB2017 has a rule that says a natural 6 for a save roll is always a success.

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

Isn't that the case with Bonesplitterz? IIRC they have the allegiance ability which says that regardless of enemy rend they always get a 6+ save.
And the GHB2017 has a rule that says a natural 6 for a save roll is always a success.

Unsure on that one but certainly it would be annoying for Bonesplitterz players if that occurred.

Hopefully they’ll fix that for them in the new edition. Surely they’ll have a faction focus for them at some point? Bonesplitterz certainly seem to need some bonuses as certainly they are one of the armies given a tome with the fewest troop types in the game. At least Fyreslayers have a monster, and a really good and cheap one too. Bonesplitterz just have Savage Orcs divided into a couple of different units and Savage Orc Boar Boyz with several characters. They need something like a madcap siege weapon, a big monster or something else to differentiate them from the other factions.

 

[Aginor]

I checked back and indeed there is such a rule.
But at least it also has a 6+ save against mortal wounds so it isnt fully useless.

About monsters... I don't know. Bonesplitterz kinda hate monsters it seems. But some chariot or so would be cool.

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

I checked back and indeed there is such a rule.
But at least it also has a 6+ save against mortal wounds so it isnt fully useless.

About monsters... I don't know. Bonesplitterz kinda hate monsters it seems. But some chariot or so would be cool.

Certainly funny and suitably bonkers...

Or some really flimsy-looking stone thrower that can somehow flatten Stormcast Eternals easily...

 

[Crowsfoot]

I checked back and indeed there is such a rule.
But at least it also has a 6+ save against mortal wounds so it isnt fully useless.

About monsters... I don't know. Bonesplitterz kinda hate monsters it seems. But some chariot or so would be cool.

Nah that won't fit with the tribal feel, they need something like killer apes

 

[Canas]

Isn't that the case with Bonesplitterz? IIRC they have the allegiance ability which says that regardless of enemy rend they always get a 6+ save.
And the GHB2017 has a rule that says a natural 6 for a save roll is always a success.

Really? I thought the natural 6's and 1's Always succeeding/failing were just extremely common house-rules. Not official rules.

I checked back and indeed there is such a rule.
But at least it also has a 6+ save against mortal wounds so it isnt fully useless.

About monsters... I don't know. Bonesplitterz kinda hate monsters it seems. But some chariot or so would be cool.

Put the gargants in their faction. Or troggoths. Neither of those are a worthy faction on their own and they're tribal enough to fit. Alternativly give them some grot followers. The grot rock lobber is simple enough that it can fit with their army and I'm sure we can make up "tribal" grots easily enough as well.

 

[Aginor]

Really? I thought the natural 6's and 1's Always succeeding/failing were just extremely common house-rules. Not official rules.

They are official rules.
GHB2017 page 76. That specific one is the third Rule of One.

 

[Crowsfoot]

They are official rules.
GHB2017 page 76. That specific one is the third Rule of One.

I wonder if that rule will get tweaked with the new edition

 

[Aginor]

I wonder if that rule will get tweaked with the new edition

Same here. I expect it to stay though.

 

[IggyStarhost]

They are official rules.
GHB2017 page 76. That specific one is the third Rule of One.

Only to hit and wound rolls of 6. Saves not. Thats how I read the second rule. Or is it somewhere else too?

 

[Canas]

Only to hit and wound rolls of 6. Saves not. Thats how I read the second rule. Or is it somewhere else too?

yea seems to say only hit & wounds of 6 succeed. but hit wounds saves of 1 fail.
Minor sidenote, wouldn't this also imply that technicly it's impossible to stop "on a 6+ do extra damage" attacks?

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

Really? I thought the natural 6's and 1's Always succeeding/failing were just extremely common house-rules. Not official rules.


Put the gargants in their faction. Or troggoths. Neither of those are a worthy faction on their own and they're tribal enough to fit. Alternativly give them some grot followers. The grot rock lobber is simple enough that it can fit with their army and I'm sure we can make up "tribal" grots easily enough as well.

Giants would make sense as part of Bonesplitterz. Remember they already have Tribal Grots in the form of Spiderfang Grots, A.K.A. Forest Goblins, so unless they want to merge the two they will have to think of something other than that.

 

[Canas]

Giants would make sense as part of Bonesplitterz. Remember they already have Tribal Grots in the form of Spiderfang Grots, A.K.A. Forest Goblins, so unless they want to merge the two they will have to think of something other than that.

the spiderfang have a strong team going with their spiders though, shouldn't be too difficult to keep the two seperate in terms of style.