1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Don't have enough monsters? Or just want to show off your painting skills. Why not try entering the Monster Mash! - Click here for more info.
    Dismiss Notice

AoS We have the attention of GW regarding the toad nerf

Discussion in 'Seraphon Discussion' started by darren watson, Feb 15, 2018.

  1. Canas
    Skar-Veteran

    Canas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    2,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    in which faq? I can't find it on the site
     
    Crowsfoot likes this.
  2. Ikky
    Jungle Swarm

    Ikky New Member

    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Awesome!
     
    Crowsfoot likes this.
  3. darren watson
    Kroxigor

    darren watson Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    635
    Trophy Points:
    93
     

    Attached Files:

    Crowsfoot likes this.
  4. IggyStarhost
    Temple Guard

    IggyStarhost Active Member

    Messages:
    203
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Just to be clear, does this mean we can set up a toad even if the rippers are setup in the sky?
     
    Crowsfoot and darren watson like this.
  5. Aginor
    Slann

    Aginor Fifth Spawning

    Messages:
    7,845
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's what the FAQ doesn't prevent anymore due to the wording change, so yes. :)
     
  6. IggyStarhost
    Temple Guard

    IggyStarhost Active Member

    Messages:
    203
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Nicely done Darren! Could you now let the exclude the Ripper from the rule of 1? Pretty please
     
    Crowsfoot likes this.
  7. Aginor
    Slann

    Aginor Fifth Spawning

    Messages:
    7,845
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    :D
    If you consider that Rippers were probably one of the main reasons to invent that rule of one in the first place.... I'd say it is rather unlikely. :D
     
    Ecozh, Seraphage and Crowsfoot like this.
  8. Canas
    Skar-Veteran

    Canas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    2,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    To be honest.. that's dumb... the rippers ability is specificly designed with the intention of being used multiple times. It makes virtually no sense for the rule of one to pop up from something like that... Thought frankly the entire rule of 1 is :p
     
    Crowsfoot likes this.
  9. Aginor
    Slann

    Aginor Fifth Spawning

    Messages:
    7,845
    Likes Received:
    10,668
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah it is a band aid, and a bad one. But that is still the reason why it exists. Preventing infinite numbers of attacks like Rippers and a few other units are capable of.
    Sure they are unlikely but apparently that wasn't taken into consideration.
    Meanwhile there are other abilities that can still cause infinite wounds at a low probability and still won't break the game (Foot of Gork spell) So...talk about double standards.
     
    Canas and IggyStarhost like this.
  10. Canas
    Skar-Veteran

    Canas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    2,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the whole rule of one is a terrible bandaid and mostly just seems to break the "cool" stuff as opposed to actually targetting the problematic stuff... Not to mention the inconsistencies. really wish they'd thought that one a bit more through..
     
  11. IggyStarhost
    Temple Guard

    IggyStarhost Active Member

    Messages:
    203
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Why is the ability of the Rippers nerfed and Foot of gork not? Both have a roll condition to move on and rules cleary state thats how it is intended. Sorry if this was asked a milion of times
     
  12. Canas
    Skar-Veteran

    Canas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    2,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Most likely cuz they just didn't pay a whole lot of attention and phrased it in such a way that Foot of gork wasn't included and since foot of gork never was seen as problematic noone bothered to chang it...

    Or if you want to give it a positie spin; Foot of gork has a fairly high casting value, and to get it off again it needs a 4+ and an available target. With those kind of requirements you'l rarely get more than maybe 2-3 extra hits in. Rippers have re-rolls on their to hit rolls with swoping dive, giving them a 75% chance for every attack to generate another. They'l generate a hell of lot more extra hits like that. Though that ignores the fact that they also still need to wound & get passed the opponents save... Basicly; rippers look scarier on paper as they can annihilate a single unit completly whereas Foot of gork will only severly wound multiple units. And when optimizing people tend to prefer to abuse mechanics that entirely destroy an opponent as opposed to "merely" crippling him so rippers probably saw more "abusive" cases.
     
  13. Crowsfoot
    Slann

    Crowsfoot Guardian of Paints Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,474
    Likes Received:
    11,674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nice going @darren watson

    So we are back to deploying the toad as before, excellent.
     
  14. Crowsfoot
    Slann

    Crowsfoot Guardian of Paints Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,474
    Likes Received:
    11,674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hmmm, Foot of gork is a spell and it's cast once therefore the rule of 1 won't apply, rippers are attacking again therefore it is affected, that's how I always thought it worked,same with Arkhan and curse of years he casts it once but has multiple wound possibilities, does that make sense or have I got it totally wrong?
     
    Seraphage and Canas like this.
  15. Canas
    Skar-Veteran

    Canas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    2,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yup, that's the basic "logic" behind it. Though it's an arbitrary distinction as the end-result is the same and the mechanic involved doesn't really differ in any aspect other than it's phrasing.
     
    Crowsfoot likes this.
  16. Crowsfoot
    Slann

    Crowsfoot Guardian of Paints Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,474
    Likes Received:
    11,674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree and if the rippers are affected so should the spell results.
     
    Canas likes this.
  17. IggyStarhost
    Temple Guard

    IggyStarhost Active Member

    Messages:
    203
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Ghm,.. the wording doesnt say it makes another attack but another ‘hit roll’. Arent those two different things?

    I looks like you are here staying ‘within’ the ability. Where as with Kroaks CD you have to cast again.
     
    Crowsfoot likes this.
  18. Crowsfoot
    Slann

    Crowsfoot Guardian of Paints Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,474
    Likes Received:
    11,674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your right but as your rolling to hit it implies "another attack" with the spells like "curse of years" you just roll if you get a 6+, then a 5+ etc

    I don't see the difference, well I do Rippers could cause infinite hits as the roll to hit does not diminish, so why not change it to act like "curse of years" I know it is reflected in the unit cost but it still seems unfair.
     
  19. Canas
    Skar-Veteran

    Canas Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    2,620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Meh, the entire rule is just stupid and shouldn't have existed to begin with. Abilities like those of the Rippers or even Kroak's shouldn't be that problematic to balance and are already designed with a inherent limitations. It shouldn't have been an issue to just tweak the numbers as opposed to just take out what made the ability special... I really wish they'd not done it this way as it also affects a lot of other stuff (e.g. the fact that you can't buff 2 units with mystic shield leading to stupid situations where your opponent will just attack the unbuffed one....) and getting rid of it now is going to be problematic...
     
  20. Jason839
    Chameleon Skink

    Jason839 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    370
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Honestly the poor quality of the rules written by games workshop is part of why I haven’t played competitively in over a year. I grew so tired and exhausted arguing with rules lawyers every single tournament. They all know the rules as they are obviously intended to be but they refute them so they can gain an advantage. Keep up the good work getting this all sorted out.
     
    Canas likes this.

Share This Page