• 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.

8th Ed. The Path to Awesome - Tracking Every Game Ever

Yeah, it's totally a repeat and has been covered to death.

Unfortunately, it's a common mistake to see this as a conflict and invoke Advanced vs. Basic.

Short version (longer one elsewhere) is that the BRB rule in question actually tells us that "no special rule" can give more than 1 Supporting Attack (other than Monstrous X, which allows up to 3). This IS a special rule, and thus it is "pre-covered" so to speak. It's a rare (very, very rare) instance of GW actually having foresight to begin with (in the BRB) and then not messing it up later. :)

For there to have been a conflict, the PF special rule itself would have had to say something to the effect of "even though this is a Special Rule and normally Special Rules can't give extra attacks, this one can."

Then you would have actual conflict, which is not present in this case.

The nail in the coffin is that you would have to allow spells like Smiting to grant extra Supporting Attacks as well since this spell appears in an army book published after the BRB was published. So, if you are prepared to claim PF, be prepared to allow all sorts of other extra attacks in your opponents' lists as well.


I will say, though, that this is the very definition of a question that should be in a document called a Frequently Asked Question doc.
 
I am never a fan of ignoring the rule because it might benefit my opponent, they can FAQ those spells too. As I said, I started this in Rules Help. Surprisingly there don't seem to be any threads devoted to just PF and advanced rules, the arguments are hidden in other threads (another reason I don't want to hijack yours).

On that topic: you might enjoy a few "just for fun games" where you roll out your Krox with the troglodon using that rule, and/or the skink chief in units. Talk with your opponent about friendly games to try out ambiguous or house rules for fun and maybe it will refresh the game for you for all those other times when you hate the cannons :beaver:
 
Markhaus said:
you might enjoy a few "just for fun games" where you roll out your Krox with the troglodon using that rule, and/or the skink chief in units. Talk with your opponent about friendly games to try out ambiguous or house rules for fun and maybe it will refresh the game for you for all those other times when you hate the cannons
Click to expand...

Sleboda isn't the biggest fan of house rules. He plays how he plays, and it's pretty much by the book.
 
Correct, for two reasons.

1) If I need to change the game to make it easier for me to win, then I'm playing the wrong game. The world does not revolve around me and it's very much unfair of me to ask others to give me rules-charity. Besides, change enough stuff and it's not really Warhammer we're playing after all, is it?

2) When I play checkers, there's not much I learn that I can apply to Chess. Some stuff, sure, but not much. Though it's less extreme, I feel the same way about variations on Warhammer. If I "learn" that my army can survive against cannons in a modified environment, it will be quite the system shock when I go back to playing by the actual rules and find that the tricks I used to survive cannons no longer apply. I'd much rather just play the standard game each and every time so that my experiences in one game help me get better in the next.
 
Are you coming back into the game anytime soon Sleboda? I believe you must finish some more battle reports, there are many of us who wish to read :>
 
Thanks for the interest, Jinxed.

I do want to go back at some point, but too many factors have gotten in the way. A big one is that I know for sure I won't get my army painted fully to my preferred standard in time for the Big Event next month, which means I need to focus on getting my TK ready for battle again (all of of which is painted how I want).

Also, I've pretty much lost my normal Wednesday group to the standard life-getting-in-the-way issues and my own personal situation has prevented my from attending my Friday group.


Long story short, yeah, I'll be back, but I have no clue when.

I will say this - I am only about 30 hours of painting away from finishing 28 more skinks, so I'm getting closer! Also, I've begun work on the Rippers, but that unit of 5 is probably a good 150 hours away from done. :(


Oh, also, I have to confess that the lack of FAQ is ___KILLING___ my desire to play. If you've followed my posts around the net, you probably know how much I value consistency and growth from game to game. Knowing that such key rules are unsettled really sucks.
 
Spent a couple of days reading this thread, feel I shared the joy of triumph and the despair of loss with you.
Great bat reps please keep them coming. Being a noob myself not got too much to say on units - you've certainly played more games than me.
One thing though on PF. The SCGT ( I'm told it's the biggest WFB competition in the world) allowed PF on supporting attacks. Given they allow it, I think it's a pretty good argument for its use everywhere. My gaming club followed suit, which is good for me even if all it does it make my defeats a bit narrower!
Cheers
Gary
 
Hi Gary,

Thanks for reading. I'm glad you've enjoyed the thread so far (and don't worry, there will be more!).

As to some event somewhere (no matter where and no matter how large) making a change to the rules, I can't say I support this as reason to get others to accept the same change. Any opponent of mine would still have the absolute, undeniable right to ask that I follow the rules that are printed in the books as opposed to the rules that some event somewhere used. With that being the case, I would hate to get used to playing with a benefit, building strategies around it, only to find I could not always use it in standard games against opponents who follow actual rules instead of made up ones. Make sense?
 
Sleboda said:
The SCGT ( I'm told it's the biggest WFB competition in the world) allowed PF on supporting attacks. Given they allow it, I think it's a pretty good argument for its use everywhere
Click to expand...

Related, the US Masters Rules FAQ does not allow PF from supporting attacks: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IRlWKPblnQlsOwhyXnzOwgq8zL5s4R-dhvinWJPi_gY/edit

Code: 
20.2  Predatory Fighter
Supporting attacks do not benefit from this special rule.
 
Just a point of note - you've attributed the quote to the wrong guy.


Also, just while I'm here -
Does that Masters doc also contain a section that says "Strength 3 vs Toughnss 4. This will require a roll of 5+ to score a wound" or similar?



Seems they could fill hundreds of pages calling out various rules and then telling people that they actually will be followed.

;)
 
Being a UK player the fact my club go with it suits me! I guess we need GW to FAQ it. I did see a you tube video commenting that if we don't get PF on supporting ranks it goes against some HE special rule (no idea which one!) could be worth looking into if it's a big issue where you play. Just a thought.
Looking forward o the next bat rep.
My next game is 2400 and I'm afraid I can't quite bring myself to do away withe crutch which is the Slann. As it will be only the second time I've used Salamanders au will be using them. I think my oppo is Vampire Counts.
Cheers
 
I hate to say it, but I am leaning toward the Frog BSB Temple Guard formation as well. I think I need High Magic.
 
If you can get Fiery Convocation off when using High Magic against a low (say 4 or under) block, watch the fun begin!
Takes a lot of power dice, but if you can get it away, your oppo either takes a lot of hits or uses a lot of his own Power Dice to try to dispel it as it RIP.
Played Skaven a while ago and managed to target a unit of 40+ clan rats (I think). On basis it does damage in both magic phases, and he couldn't dispel it, the block was down to single figures when it hit my block of 20+ saurus warriors.
I've not used the ability to swap out spells yet, but am seeing the benefits more and more.
There is another thread regarding the best lore for a slann - Someone on there (forgot the name) mentioned swapping one out for Melkoths Mystifying Miasma and using this in conjunction with Hand of Glory.
The other thing I've read on here (somewhere) is using the Book of Ashur with the Wandering Deliberations Discipline. This would probably mean most spells (the signature ones) being cast on only 2 dice. You can probably eat up dispel dice and still be able to cast something useful.
 
Sleboda said:
Just a point of note - you've attributed the quote to the wrong guy.


Also, just while I'm here -
Does that Masters doc also contain a section that says "Strength 3 vs Toughnss 4. This will require a roll of 5+ to score a wound" or similar?



Seems they could fill hundreds of pages calling out various rules and then telling people that they actually will be followed.

;)
Click to expand...


We tried, believe me. I figured we were getting to the point where people would have their Masters FAQ by their side, and their rulebook was the thing they'd have to scrounge around in their bag for. :rolleyes:

Amazing how many differences came up from 5 different regions battling it out for the first time. :meh:


Also, Predatory Fighter was specifically ruled as quoted both because it was the most accurate to the current rules set AND it was the ruling the Swedish FAQ team developed for the Swedish Comp system (the system used at the US Masters).
 
Wow, 2400 points goes quickly when you add a frog.

I am getting ready for a game tonight and thought I'd give the Slann another go.

Here's where my list is at the moment, though it's still in flux:

1 Slann - Ethereal, High Loremaster
1 Scar-vet BSB - Carnosaur (Loping) - Armor of Destiny, Great Weapon, Shield

12 Skink Skirmishers with Javelins & Shields
12 Skink Skirmishers with Javelins & Shields
12 Skink Skirmishers with Javelins & Shields

29 Saurus - Full Command

8 Kroxigore
1 Bastiladon - Solar Engine

1 Ancient Stegadon with Engine of the Gods
1 Troglodon


I'll post my results tonight or tomorrow. In the meantime, any thoughts? (Other than I need to shave some points.)
 
Personally I think ethereal is overrated on the slann but some people still swear by it. I think it's incredibly over priced tho.


Shield on carno for the 1+ against shooting? I've been debating using solar and shield on carno to get a 1+ save in combat but honestly I don't know. I struggle to find a scarnosaur load out I'm totally pleased with.
 
Putzfrau said:
Personally I think ethereal is overrated on the slann but some people still swear by it. I think it's incredibly over priced tho.
Click to expand...

Especially if the Slann isn't your BSB, he can get ground down by very small units with a banner when he is Ethereal :-/

I've been throwing a mostly naked Slann into a unit of Skink Skirmishers to start my games. That protects him from shooting and magic missiles. I then spend my Lord points on an Old Blood! For almost the same price as Ethereal you can get a Skink Priest to extend the range of your damage spells by 24" and just keep your Slann in the back and out of danger (with a 2+ lookout sir from his Skink guard).

Depending on your opponent, Ethereal could be completely useless. I definitely wouldn't take it against Demons, Warriors, Wood Elves, or Dwarves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top