• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

AoS GHB 2020 Predictions & Desires

ILKAIN said:
so that still gives player A power over player B's terrain, as they can make it impossible for player B to place it. these rules are going to sincerely hurt armies that utilize their terrain more than others, and i think potentially devastating for Sylvaneth.
Click to expand...
yup, they can force you say to only place your terrain in a corner. Even with the relaxed requirements for the placement of faction terrain.

The more I think about this rule the worse it gets. It the whole premise of a rule like this where A is allowed to make the two options and B gets to choose which he gets is predicated on A & B wanting the same thing, so if A favours one side B will obviously pick that side leaving A with the "bad" option. But that only works if A & B want the same thing, and armies in warhammer are far too assymetrical for that to work. Without symmetrical needs this entire setup just falls apart.
 
Does the GHB trump our battletome? Our battletome states that our RSE must be 6" away from objectives. I can't imagine my opponent is going to let me put it 1" from an objective. And why aren't these placement restrictions on the warscrolls, where it would be quick and easy to find?
 
Angela said:
Does the GHB trump our battletome? Our battletome states that our RSE must be 6" away from objectives. I can't imagine my opponent is going to let me put it 1" from an objective.
Click to expand...

Yes, FAQ and publications more recent than the battletome, update and override it.
Sometime it's a nerf, sometime it's a boost.
 
Killer Angel said:
Yes, FAQ and publications more recent than the battletome, update and override it.
Sometime it's a nerf, sometime it's a boost.
Click to expand...
I went back to the GHB 2020 and it reads "and more than one 1" from any objectives, in addition to any other restrictions that apply." So doesn't that mean that we still need to be 6" from the objective?
 
Angela said:
I went back to the GHB 2020 and it reads "and more than one 1" from any objectives, in addition to any other restrictions that apply." So doesn't that mean that we still need to be 6" from the objective?
Click to expand...
seems like a redundant rule then. before ALL terrain needed to more than 6" from an objective if i remember correctly so this seems to be providing an exception for faction terrain, probably to give people like us and fyreslayers a bit more room in missions where there is more than one objective in your delpoyment zone.
 
Angela said:
I went back to the GHB 2020 and it reads "and more than one 1" from any objectives, in addition to any other restrictions that apply." So doesn't that mean that we still need to be 6" from the objective?
Click to expand...
The other restrictions refer to any specific restrictions set by the battleplan you're using. The default is now 1" to allow some of the bigger terrainpieces to actually be placeable on the table.
 
So I just got the GHB20 and am reading through it and another one of the coalesced abilities just got nerfed. Only half the games setup using the rules as written will use the terrain table that is covered by Primeval Domain.
 
xoid said:
So I just got the GHB20 and am reading through it and another one of the coalesced abilities just got nerfed. Only half the games setup using the rules as written will use the terrain table that is covered by Primeval Domain.
Click to expand...
well it's an achievement that they've managed to nerf it given how underwhelming it already was...
 
We still need to place 6" away

The New GHB just has additional restrictions for All faction objectives (even for those who dont have a restriction on their warscroll or a smaller restriction)
 
xoid said:
So I just got the GHB20 and am reading through it and another one of the coalesced abilities just got nerfed. Only half the games setup using the rules as written will use the terrain table that is covered by Primeval Domain.
Click to expand...
Simple solution is just to say "no thanks" and randomize terrain and terrain effects. We still roll 2D6 where one determines if table A or B and the other which of the 6 effects.
 
Flo said:
We still need to place 6" away

The New GHB just has additional restrictions for All faction objectives (even for those who dont have a restriction on their warscroll or a smaller restriction)
Click to expand...

ATM my new GHB hasn't arrived. Could you post a pic of the exact rule?
 
As usual, unclear rules…
You read it "this is the new general rule, unless the warscroll of the terrain got different rules"
i read it as "this is the new rules for terrains, unless the are different rules for terrains in the scenario"

If you are right, that would be truly weird...
 
No its clear, it says "in addition to other restrictions" not "instead of other restrictions" this wording is for the terrain pieces who dont have a restriction or a lower restriction
 
Flo said:
No its clear, it says "in addition to other restrictions" not "instead of other restrictions" this wording is for the terrain pieces who dont have a restriction or a lower restriction
Click to expand...

The point is: new rules override the ones already there. so, that rule should simply replace the "old" restriction of the terrain warscroll, and the "other restrictions" apply to something else.
 
Killer Angel said:
As usual, unclear rules…
You read it "this is the new general rule, unless the warscroll of the terrain got different rules"
i read it as "this is the new rules for terrains, unless the are different rules for terrains in the scenario"

If you are right, that would be truly weird...
Click to expand...

No terrain warscroll has any restrictions. The only restriction came 1) from the scenario and 2) from the old GHB 19 book that stated the 6" distance. GHB 20 overrules GHB 19 so we now have a lesser restriction.
 
Thats why they say "additional", it overrides the rules with extra restrictions

What bothers me more is something else, faction terrain is additional terrain to the 10 pieces

And the wording clearly says Player A sets up the terrain

So the battletome say the seraphon Player can setup a RSE, GHB is newer so does that mean Player A sets up our engine? ;)
 
Canas said:
No terrain warscroll has any restrictions. The only restriction came 1) from the scenario and 2) from the old GHB 19 book that stated the 6" distance. GHB 20 overrules GHB 19 so we now have a lesser restriction.
Click to expand...

Not true, faction terrain has restrictions in the battletome too, for the RSE it is 6" from objectives and 6" from all 4 edges

So with the GHB it is 6 from objectives, 6 from borders and 1 from other terrain
 
Flo said:
Thats why they say "additional", it overrides the rules with extra restrictions

What bothers me more is something else, faction terrain is additional terrain to the 10 pieces

And the wording clearly says Player A sets up the terrain

So the battletome say the seraphon Player can setup a RSE, GHB is newer so does that mean Player A sets up our engine? ;)
Click to expand...


Nope, player A sets the terrains, picked by the players from the listed pieces.
then the faction terrains are set "in addition to the features that have been set up as previously described"
(the "previously described" part, refers to the fact that player A places them all)

so it's the seraphon player that sets up the RSE, but he'll do it after the placement of the terrains by player A. This overrides the old restriction that the RSE must be placed before other terrains
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top