NinthMusketeer wrote:
I know GW naming is what it is but sometimes units come out that seem particularly egregious to me. What's wrong with "mire troggoth"? They already have their copywrite-but-not-really thing with "Breaka-Boss" so did they just have to throw in an extra noun? And why not just "killbow"? That actually seems like a reasonable and suitable orky name, but noooo it needs to be a "beast-skewer killbow".

Honestly I'd've left it at "Beast-Skewer Bow". It's the extra "kill" in there that makes it egregious.

As for the Troll, I guess they just wanted to define another type beyond 'Stone', 'River' and 'Normal'.

Yeah, 'Boltboyz' would be a perfectly serviceable and Orky name, but noooo.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I know GW naming is what it is but sometimes units come out that seem particularly egregious to me. What's wrong with "mire troggoth"? They already have their copywrite-but-not-really thing with "Breaka-Boss" so did they just have to throw in an extra noun? And why not just "killbow"? That actually seems like a reasonable and suitable orky name, but noooo it needs to be a "beast-skewer killbow".

Honestly I'd've left it at "Beast-Skewer Bow". It's the extra "kill" in there that makes it egregious.

As for the Troll, I guess they just wanted to define another type beyond 'Stone', 'River' and 'Normal'.

Honestly, Mirebrute is no better or worse than Sourbreath, Fellwater, Rockgut or Dankhold Troggoth...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Yeah, 'Boltboyz' would be a perfectly serviceable and Orky name, but noooo.

Of course 'Man-skewer' could be the name of the type of bolt weapon they're carrying. Perhaps the battletome and the full kit will give the squad leader or one of the model's in the unit a different type of bolt weapon?

Yeah, if there are multiple kinds of killbows I will retract my complaint.

I think the other troll, er, troggoth names are lame as well. They could have just left it as river troggoth & stone troggoth. Dankhold forgive since "dank troggoth" has a very different connotation, but then 'cavern troggoth' would have been a better pick in the first place imo.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I think the other troll, er, troggoth names are lame as well. They could have just left it as river troggoth & stone troggoth.

Why have a simple descriptive word when you bash two other words together for IP purposes? River and stone? No, no, no. Rockgut™ and Fellwater™. Much better. I mean, they already abandoned Orc, Elf, Dwarf, Troll and Ogre, so why stop there?

Well the whole chapterhouseism trademarkable name stuff offers no tangible benefit to begin with, but even then they already have it covered with "troggoth" which TBH I don't even dislike, lots of settings have unique names for their versions of classic tropes and that is a decent one. Better than "aelves".

"Ogor" I was rolling my eyes at until I realized it's o-gor in the same vein as ungors, bestigors, bullgors, etc.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Well the whole chapterhouseism trademarkable name stuff offers no tangible benefit to begin with, but even then they already have it covered with "troggoth" which TBH I don't even dislike, lots of settings have unique names for their versions of classic tropes and that is a decent one. Better than "aelves".

"Ogor" I was rolling my eyes at until I realized it's o-gor in the same vein as ungors, bestigors, bullgors, etc.

Better than Lizardmen getting called 'Seraphon' which...uh...unfortunately brought up a bunch of Furry smut until the web became more populated with GW and community articles on them....

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Well the whole chapterhouseism trademarkable name stuff offers no tangible benefit to begin with, but even then they already have it covered with "troggoth" which TBH I don't even dislike, lots of settings have unique names for their versions of classic tropes and that is a decent one. Better than "aelves".

"Ogor" I was rolling my eyes at until I realized it's o-gor in the same vein as ungors, bestigors, bullgors, etc.

And yet, their most popular faction is still officially called 'Space Marines'.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Well the whole chapterhouseism trademarkable name stuff offers no tangible benefit to begin with, but even then they already have it covered with "troggoth" which TBH I don't even dislike, lots of settings have unique names for their versions of classic tropes and that is a decent one. Better than "aelves".

"Ogor" I was rolling my eyes at until I realized it's o-gor in the same vein as ungors, bestigors, bullgors, etc.

I do just love how that case made it abundantly clear they have (had?) no idea how trademarks and copyrights work, from the company who sent out so many legal threads based on them.

Lets not rehash this debate again, it got dull the thousandth time.

I think we were all expressing mutual agreement rather than debate (unless you are referencing posts which have been removed) but I will respect that it's a bit tangent to the topic.

My Dominion box is on the way.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
My Dominion box is on the way.

You lucky ducky!

Got around to trying the new rules, a lot of fun. Pretty much as expected; hero & monster actions are fun, the ability to meaningfully respond to stuff during the opponent's turn adds a lot of gameplay value, command abilities are extremely useful but being once-per-phase is a great limiter.

Heroic recovery and the 5+ ward artifact are going to be cropping up as common problem-causers due to how they can be exploited (and even more so together), and MW spam remains the most effective archetype though it is somewhat counterbalanced by no-rend attacks being more useful now with save buffs capped at +1.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
My Dominion box is on the way.

From GW or a third party?

I presumed GW won't ship until Friday?

 The Phazer wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
My Dominion box is on the way.

From GW or a third party?

I presumed GW won't ship until Friday?

It depends on if you ship to store or not.

If you ship to store? They ship as part of the store's next delivery so that, barring any issues, it will be there for you on release day.
If you ship to home or any kind of non-GW shop? They'll ship the Monday after the release.

Sometimes the ship to home stuff will go out earlier if there is non-preorder products in, but it isn't a guaranteed shot.

Dominion is also a big thing so they might be pushing some out of the doors sooner to get through the hump of orders.

May also be a prior arrangement thing with their carrier, with the packages being despatched one day, and held in the warehouse until Friday or whatever.

Ordered mine from my FLGS and they arrived yesterday. Just waiting with bated breath until Saturday to collect. As soon as those doors open, I'll be there waiting with a smile.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Got around to trying the new rules, a lot of fun. Pretty much as expected; hero & monster actions are fun, the ability to meaningfully respond to stuff during the opponent's turn adds a lot of gameplay value, command abilities are extremely useful but being once-per-phase is a great limiter.

Heroic recovery and the 5+ ward artifact are going to be cropping up as common problem-causers due to how they can be exploited (and even more so together), and MW spam remains the most effective archetype though it is somewhat counterbalanced by no-rend attacks being more useful now with save buffs capped at +1.

I played as a cockatrice shame list last nice on TTS and hoo boy, it didn't really feel fair. Only 1000 points against Beastclaw raiders but dang those mortal machines/roar machines are CHEAP. 5 Cockatrices, double doombull, ungor/GBS summoning engine. Summoned 2 more Cockatrices by battle round 3.

Our FLGS got our Dominion boxes in today, so that’s nice.

Rihgu wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Got around to trying the new rules, a lot of fun. Pretty much as expected; hero & monster actions are fun, the ability to meaningfully respond to stuff during the opponent's turn adds a lot of gameplay value, command abilities are extremely useful but being once-per-phase is a great limiter.

Heroic recovery and the 5+ ward artifact are going to be cropping up as common problem-causers due to how they can be exploited (and even more so together), and MW spam remains the most effective archetype though it is somewhat counterbalanced by no-rend attacks being more useful now with save buffs capped at +1.

I played as a cockatrice shame list last nice on TTS and hoo boy, it didn't really feel fair. Only 1000 points against Beastclaw raiders but dang those mortal machines/roar machines are CHEAP. 5 Cockatrices, double doombull, ungor/GBS summoning engine. Summoned 2 more Cockatrices by battle round 3.

To be (un)fair, doom chickens would be pretty kickass even without the extra monster stuff just by virtue of point cost vs performance.

And to be honest if I get crushed because my opponent's army is OP that is frustrating, but if it is OP because of an overabundance of chickens I can live with that




You should run 2k and take 17 of them.

Rihgu wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Got around to trying the new rules, a lot of fun. Pretty much as expected; hero & monster actions are fun, the ability to meaningfully respond to stuff during the opponent's turn adds a lot of gameplay value, command abilities are extremely useful but being once-per-phase is a great limiter.

Heroic recovery and the 5+ ward artifact are going to be cropping up as common problem-causers due to how they can be exploited (and even more so together), and MW spam remains the most effective archetype though it is somewhat counterbalanced by no-rend attacks being more useful now with save buffs capped at +1.

I played as a cockatrice shame list last nice on TTS and hoo boy, it didn't really feel fair. Only 1000 points against Beastclaw raiders but dang those mortal machines/roar machines are CHEAP. 5 Cockatrices, double doombull, ungor/GBS summoning engine. Summoned 2 more Cockatrices by battle round 3.

And for more MW fun/extra fighting ability at higher pt lvs add in a few Chimeras.

Kruelboyz Breaka-boss on what might be the Sludgeraker?

Also preview is at 6PM BST

I ordered from bad moon cafe. I'm not at home right now but the Mrs says there's a big heavy box for me so I'm assuming that's it.

Voss wrote:
That wasn't a 'calculation error.' At the time they were still trying to mirror the high elf and dark elf books, so used basically the same point values for the 'equivalent' units (archers, spears, great weapons, halberds, etc). Except high elves had Always Strike First on everything and dark elves... didn't. So dark elves got plowed over like roadkill. So the errata was a massive discount to basically everything to account for the lack of ASF, which proved to be a terrible band-aid and meant they were underpriced vs everyone else.

Are you sure you're not mixing up editions here? HE did not have ASF in 6th edition. Just Intrigue at the Court and Immune to Panic when fighting vs DE.

In fact both armies were pretty bad in 6th.

Voss wrote:

 kodos wrote:



the other time was the DE Army book in 6th Edition which the screwed up because they had a calculation error in their formula (and we got the Errata to cut out and glue over the parts in the book)

That wasn't a 'calculation error.' At the time they were still trying to mirror the high elf and dark elf books, so used basically the same point values for the 'equivalent' units (archers, spears, great weapons, halberds, etc). Except high elves had Always Strike First on everything and dark elves... didn't. So dark elves got plowed over like roadkill. So the errata was a massive discount to basically everything to account for the lack of ASF, which proved to be a terrible band-aid and meant they were underpriced vs everyone else.

Pretty interesting mirroring of points resulting in error screwing balance in 6th ed in rule high elves got in 8th ed

I'm pretty excited for my 3rd edition core book and generals handbook to arrive tomorrow!

July FAQs are live

https://www.warhammer-community.com/faqs/

Radukar’s court get individual points but why have min/max when that’s gone in AoS 3
Newly Dead can allow Zombies to exceed starting size and the multiplying Kritza is gone.

Sometimes GW is like Tzeentch

There's 3 hands and none of them know what the other hand is doing

I wonder why they didn't do this in the first place.

 DaveC wrote:
Radukar’s court get individual points but why have min/max when that’s gone in AoS 3

So you can use them today before 3rd edition drops tomorrow

Pink horrors will be obnoxious unless you can wipe all at once. Unit of 20 has lost all pinks and blues and has thus 60 models slain. Rally. Average 10 pinks back. Fun fun fun.

Was expecting this　to be faqed.

Lumineth twin stones got nerfed to death on typical gw overcompensation. Need nerf, nerf to death.

Lumineth faq refers to unique on　loremaster which　lost that so...ghb or faq in error?

Bah, so I’m learning the new General’s Handbook has removed/no longer includes the Balewind Vortex. I’m bummed because I loved that spell and have a sweet custom model made for it.

Best Edition ever gets an FAQ before it officially hits the stores, says it all.

It is 4 pages of clarifications, and a half-page of erratae.
More than we're want though. It had better be reflected in the new app.

Tomorrow's schedule for the Preview. It seems that the first hour is now a Hang Out and Hobby show?...

Cronch wrote:
Best Edition ever gets an FAQ before it officially hits the stores, says it all.

That's only because it was Too Good for us common rabble to understand it and grasp the intricacies of it's Greatness and had to be dumbed down for the unwashed masses to enjoy. You should be thankful that our Glorious Wardens for seeing how truly wretched we are and graciously provided this fix as a freebie. They are tirelessly working to find a way to create a medium to translate their wisdom into our pathetic attempt at reason, but it continues to fall short of it's wonder in the mediums of sock puppets and crayons.

Sorry....rough morning here

I will admit, I love how the FAQs have made the Engine of the Gods ridiculously vague.

Specifically mention a Skink Priest.
Specifically state the crew function like a Mount and the Stegadon is a Mount.
Don't give us any statlines for attacks from the priest, any command abilities or other abilities.

Considering it has like, nothing, why would it care about being a Mount or not as its only attacks are mount attacks?

Wouldn't be surprised to see a patch FAQ that clarifies to 'use the skink priest warscroll in addition to the Engine Warscroll for the priests attacks, command abilities etc and add the keywords...'

So can Kragnos now use Allegiance abilities or am I reading this wrong?

WARMASTER: This unit can be included in an Orruk Warclans, Gloomspite Gitz, Ogor Mawtribes or Sons of Behemat army. If it is, it is treated as a general even if it is not the model picked to be the army’s general, and you can still use the army’s allegiance abilities even if this unit is not from the army’s faction.

 mokoshkana wrote:
So can Kragnos now use Allegiance abilities or am I reading this wrong?

WARMASTER: This unit can be included in an Orruk Warclans, Gloomspite Gitz, Ogor Mawtribes or Sons of Behemat army. If it is, it is treated as a general even if it is not the model picked to be the army’s general, and you can still use the army’s allegiance abilities even if this unit is not from the army’s faction.

No. From the Core Rules:

27.0 ALLEGIANCE ABILITIES
If all of the units in your army are from a single faction, then you can use that faction’s allegiance abilities

Having Kragnos in your army doesn't prevent the army from using that faction's allegiance abilities even though he's not from the same faction.

 mokoshkana wrote:
So can Kragnos now use Allegiance abilities or am I reading this wrong?

WARMASTER: This unit can be included in an Orruk Warclans, Gloomspite Gitz, Ogor Mawtribes or Sons of Behemat army. If it is, it is treated as a general even if it is not the model picked to be the army’s general, and you can still use the army’s allegiance abilities even if this unit is not from the army’s faction.

No, it just means having Kragnos as your General doesn't prevent everyone else from using their allegiance abilities.

Thanks, I knew it didn't seem right. He would be unstoppable in a Big Waagh army.

Another Kruleboyz silhouette. Looks like a howdah on the back of something with a grot crew perhaps?. War of Sigmar had a small note on yesterdays teaser that the Sludgeraker looks like a Crocorhino.

 Ghaz wrote:
Tomorrow's schedule for the Preview. It seems that the first hour is now a Hang Out and Hobby show?...

Spoiler:

Not that it changes anything about the scheduling or content, but it looks more like an additional show right before the preview, the latter of which starts at the same time as any other recent preview.

Seems to me if you're after the new stuff, you tune in at the normal time. If you want to see more of the Dominion models in anticipation of the new stuff, you tune in an hour earlier.

Cronch wrote:
Best Edition ever gets an FAQ before it officially hits the stores, says it all.

I know it's super cool to be an edge-lord on Dakka, but:

These faqs are to bring battletomes up to date with the new core rules.

The core rules FAQ is there to clarify things--you know, Frequently Asked Questions (plus a very small number of errata at the very end). Admittedly, they need improvement with the technical writing (does no one take technical writing in school or university/college anymore?). When I was in school, the people taking technical writing were typically engineers--not the sort of people who end up working at Games Workshop--so maybe that's part of the problem. I seriously doubt GW would be willing to pay someone with those skills to write rules.

The core rules were supposed to be the clearest, best ever rules. And we get a FAQ before the edition officially released. I'm sure you can see how it's rather funny?

Just need Yndrasta and the shield fellas, I doubt I will check the stream or whatever they do.
My interest is deflating a bit more each day regarding dominion things, dont know why. Maybe it will come back.

 Overread wrote:
There's 3 hands and none of them know what the other hand is doing

I prefer the old take on "Ask an Eldar a question" saying:

"Ask a GW rulesboy a question and he will give you three answers - each one different and wrong."

Cronch wrote:
The core rules were supposed to be the clearest, best ever rules. And we get a FAQ before the edition officially released. I'm sure you can see how it's rather funny?

Honestly?

No.

I mean, if it was a surprise or unexpected, I guess maybe I'd think it's funny? Maybe it's funny they actually released it now instead of having the questions go unanswered for 2 months?

 AduroT wrote:
Bah, so I’m learning the new General’s Handbook has removed/no longer includes the Balewind Vortex. I’m bummed because I loved that spell and have a sweet custom model made for it.

Now that's a real shame, as I just discovered this yesterday... I.Want.One.

It's no whalewind vortex, but it'll do

Cronch wrote:
Best Edition ever gets an FAQ before it officially hits the stores, says it all.

Eeh...only way to avoid would be to make no rule change that doesn't contradict old battletomes...which means you can't make any changes.

Sometimes people have silly ideas here. Make changes to core rules without causing issues with books written for old edition?

Guess common sense is too much to ask these days...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:
I will admit, I love how the FAQs have made the Engine of the Gods ridiculously vague.

Specifically mention a Skink Priest.
Specifically state the crew function like a Mount and the Stegadon is a Mount.
Don't give us any statlines for attacks from the priest, any command abilities or other abilities.

Considering it has like, nothing, why would it care about being a Mount or not as its only attacks are mount attacks?

Wouldn't be surprised to see a patch FAQ that clarifies to 'use the skink priest warscroll in addition to the Engine Warscroll for the priests attacks, command abilities etc and add the keywords...'

Umm...how about abilities that affect specifically mount but not rider?

You prefer those don't affect engine of god's stegadon but affect skink chieftain's stegadon's because...reasons?

tneva82 wrote:
Guess common sense is too much to ask these days...

Some people just want to watch the world burn...

SquealMcSqueal wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
Bah, so I’m learning the new General’s Handbook has removed/no longer includes the Balewind Vortex. I’m bummed because I loved that spell and have a sweet custom model made for it.

Now that's a real shame, as I just discovered this yesterday... I.Want.One.

Spoiler:

Ooohhh thats fun - linkage?

Cronch wrote:
The core rules were supposed to be the clearest, best ever rules. And we get a FAQ before the edition officially released. I'm sure you can see how it's rather funny?

No. Because i was expecting core rules to be changed and only way to avoid conflicts with books written for last edition is to not make any changes.

I would find it funny so to speak to be given old rulebook reprinted as new edition. Guess you want to shell out money for that?

Gw whale is often enough used but you put that to new height!

Alternatively guess you prefer banning all factions without 3rd ed battletome. So atm no army could be played. In month or so sce and orks and expand there. Yes THAT is so much better.

 Mr Morden wrote:

SquealMcSqueal wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
Bah, so I’m learning the new General’s Handbook has removed/no longer includes the Balewind Vortex. I’m bummed because I loved that spell and have a sweet custom model made for it.

Now that's a real shame, as I just discovered this yesterday... I.Want.One.

Spoiler:

Ooohhh thats fun - linkage?

https://www.myminifactory.com/object/3d-print-balewind-vortex-sharklone-144802

He has TONS of stuff like this. Check out his elementals...

 Sacredroach wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

SquealMcSqueal wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
Bah, so I’m learning the new General’s Handbook has removed/no longer includes the Balewind Vortex. I’m bummed because I loved that spell and have a sweet custom model made for it.

Now that's a real shame, as I just discovered this yesterday... I.Want.One.

Spoiler:

Ooohhh thats fun - linkage?

https://www.myminifactory.com/object/3d-print-balewind-vortex-sharklone-144802

He has TONS of stuff like this. Check out his elementals...

Thanks will have look

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Sacredroach wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

SquealMcSqueal wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
Bah, so I’m learning the new General’s Handbook has removed/no longer includes the Balewind Vortex. I’m bummed because I loved that spell and have a sweet custom model made for it.

Now that's a real shame, as I just discovered this yesterday... I.Want.One.

Spoiler:

Ooohhh thats fun - linkage?

https://www.myminifactory.com/object/3d-print-balewind-vortex-sharklone-144802

He has TONS of stuff like this. Check out his elementals...

Thanks will have look

Lee's stuff is great!
He's also got a Patreon https://www.patreon.com/minimonstermayhem

This month is serpents, last month was Dinosaurs. Well worth backing if you've got a 3D printer!

Also if you hunt through his MMF on the objects as opposed to the store tab, he's got 2 free models. One is a bust of a Mass Effect character and the other is a full dragon inspired by a MTG dragon design.

tneva82 wrote:

Cronch wrote:
The core rules were supposed to be the clearest, best ever rules. And we get a FAQ before the edition officially released. I'm sure you can see how it's rather funny?

No. Because i was expecting core rules to be changed and only way to avoid conflicts with books written for last edition is to not make any changes.

I would find it funny so to speak to be given old rulebook reprinted as new edition. Guess you want to shell out money for that?

Gw whale is often enough used but you put that to new height!

Alternatively guess you prefer banning all factions without 3rd ed battletome. So atm no army could be played. In month or so sce and orks and expand there. Yes THAT is so much better.

You...you realize I am talking about the CORE RULES errata, not the battletome erratas,right? You seem confused...

Cronch wrote:

You...you realize I am talking about the CORE RULES errata, not the battletome erratas,right? You seem confused...

I don't think getting errata in this case is weird. 3.0 rules have been out for awhile even if it hasn't officially started.
People try it out, people ask questions resulting erratas being made. Rules themselves got very few things errated.

ok, i guess it's fine to have Best Ever rules errata'd right away. I suppose they never said the rules are good, only they're the best they've written to date

There's always going to be some errata needed. Honestly we should be happy we get them so fast. I recall the times when FAQ and Erratas once went out the week before the edition ended and the next edition was starting!

You waited the whole edition and got the stuff on basically the last day.

As I suspected, bound endless spells are not gone, they don't cost extra points anymore, they are directly bound to the caster.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 mokoshkana wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Guess common sense is too much to ask these days...

Some people just want to watch the world burn...

Common sense is always changing. Pretty much a lie.

Cronch wrote:
ok, i guess it's fine to have Best Ever rules errata'd right away. I suppose they never said the rules are good, only they're the best they've written to date

Did you actually, you know, read the FAQ? 1/4 of it is clarification how old commands work now, something that would be needed no matter what new edition changed, 1/3 is minor clarifications, and the rest is slapping full on WAAAC inane nonsense (I especially like 'can I move unit twice', 'if I can add +1 to roll can I add +3 if it affects 3 units', 'can I hide and tailor my army list on the fly' and 'can I declare opponent can't use his unit abilities' rules bending gak that really shouldn't be subject to FAQ if sane people asked these questions but alas, half of GW rules team job these days is telling WAAAC clowns NO IT DOES NOT WORK THIS WAY IN WHAT BIZARRE UNIVERSE THIS QUESTION MAKES ANY SENSE?? ).

Really, the only changes to which your criticism might apply is the last section, namely errata changing all of 2 sentences. Oh no, it's unusable now

tneva82 wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:
I will admit, I love how the FAQs have made the Engine of the Gods ridiculously vague.

Specifically mention a Skink Priest.
Specifically state the crew function like a Mount and the Stegadon is a Mount.
Don't give us any statlines for attacks from the priest, any command abilities or other abilities.

Considering it has like, nothing, why would it care about being a Mount or not as its only attacks are mount attacks?

Wouldn't be surprised to see a patch FAQ that clarifies to 'use the skink priest warscroll in addition to the Engine Warscroll for the priests attacks, command abilities etc and add the keywords...'

Umm...how about abilities that affect specifically mount but not rider?

You prefer those don't affect engine of god's stegadon but affect skink chieftain's stegadon's because...reasons?

You realise the rider literally has no abilities? No attack profile, no abilities as it stands currently. So it's very much a case of what's the actual point?

Congrats, you've added a caveat that is utterly pointless.

The point is if the Stegadon/Crew wasn't treated as a mount, the Engine of the Gods could take the Nimble Command Trait and gain +1" to Move or get Sacred Stegadon Helm for +1 Damage to all attacks when they charge, and I guess GW doesn't want Engine of the Gods to be able to do that.

Cronch wrote:
Best Edition ever gets an FAQ before it officially hits the stores, says it all.

This happens with a LOT of products. A good number of roleplaying games have FAQ drops within the first week of release or shortly after. Lots of video games these days have first day patches as well. I get that everybody looooooves to criticize every little thing that GW does, but let's be realistic and recognize that this is a normal occurrence in multiple forms of media.

 Mr. Grey wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Best Edition ever gets an FAQ before it officially hits the stores, says it all.

This happens with a LOT of products. A good number of roleplaying games have FAQ drops within the first week of release or shortly after. Lots of video games these days have first day patches as well. I get that everybody looooooves to criticize every little thing that GW does, but let's be realistic and recognize that this is a normal occurrence in multiple forms of media.

It is only a normal occurence because the acceptable standards of quality became lower, due to the fact most game review sites are shills, and rushing out an incomplete product then trying to fix and complete it post-relase has sadly became commonplace.

Hmmm.

Guess I’m likely getting my copy Monday or Tuesday, as no shipping confirmation so far.

Peek'd at the kiwi store; they got a promo from today to next 4th of august: buy $170 NZ online, get $17 NZ voucher.

What's even this? Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?

 CMLR wrote:
Peek'd at the kiwi store; they got a promo from today to next 4th of august: buy $170 NZ online, get $17 NZ voucher.

What's even this? Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?

They did it during (UK) lockdown as well. I don't remember if it was for every country.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Mr. Grey wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Best Edition ever gets an FAQ before it officially hits the stores, says it all.

This happens with a LOT of products. A good number of roleplaying games have FAQ drops within the first week of release or shortly after. Lots of video games these days have first day patches as well. I get that everybody looooooves to criticize every little thing that GW does, but let's be realistic and recognize that this is a normal occurrence in multiple forms of media.

It is only a normal occurence because the acceptable standards of quality became lower, due to the fact most game review sites are shills, and rushing out an incomplete product then trying to fix and complete it post-relase has sadly became commonplace.

In some cases yes, but there is also a difference between release date and the point at which a game was required to be handed over to print into books or discs and then shipped out for distribution. Any work done between those two points in time is going to result in a day one errata/patch.

Dropping the vortex is a pretty dumb move.

I know the "no model, no rule" crap is at work here but still,
owning the model and not being able to use it in V3 and on
is still an annoying issue.

One warscroll could have done it.

mortar_crew wrote:
Dropping the vortex is a pretty dumb move.

I know the "no model, no rule" crap is at work here but still,
owning the model and not being able to use it in V3 and on
is still an annoying issue.

One warscroll could have done it.

But people could've bought some third party models to represent it!
It would be stealing IP and profiting off GW's hard hard hard work!
Robbing GW of a total 000000000.1% of their monthly income!
OH THE HUMANITY

The Vortex was just so meta warping, they have done good by removing it.

I am impressed. This is the highest-quality set of new edition FAQs I can remember from GW. A handful of errors and head-scratchers, but for the most part is it straightforward and intuitive changes. Again I really like the standardization of language and terminology across the game, it just makes the game so much easier to understand and rules questions easier to figure out. Updates to the endless spells/invocations are great overall, and I liked almost all of the warscroll updates I saw. Very happy with this.

 Galas wrote:
The Vortex was just so meta warping, they have done good by removing it.

Yeah, there was really no way to make that concept work in a practical sense. They gave it several good tries at least.

Don't other factions (Stormcast and Lumineth, I think?) have spells that are basically Balewind Vortexes? Summon a spell and ride it around?

 DaveC wrote:
Newly Dead can allow Zombies to exceed starting size

They are just clarifying that it was not an error the zombies' rule doesn't include a note about going over the starting size. They still cannot, because the core rules say no unit can go above its starting size unless it has an ability which states otherwise. The zombies' ability does not state they can go above starting size, therefore they can't. Writing such a clarification into the rule would only have been used for the brief period between SGL and 3rd, after which it would just have been redundant and confusing. When they say 'written with the new edition in mind' that is the sort of thing they are referring to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rihgu wrote:
Don't other factions (Stormcast and Lumineth, I think?) have spells that are basically Balewind Vortexes? Summon a spell and ride it around?

SCE have a disc they can ride around but it functions much differently than the vortex did. The Lumineth one is more or less unusable with its new rules because the amount of space required to put it down (the whole thing must be 3" from terrain & other models) is not common or accessible enough to justify taking it in the first place.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:
I will admit, I love how the FAQs have made the Engine of the Gods ridiculously vague.

Specifically mention a Skink Priest.
Specifically state the crew function like a Mount and the Stegadon is a Mount.
Don't give us any statlines for attacks from the priest, any command abilities or other abilities.

Considering it has like, nothing, why would it care about being a Mount or not as its only attacks are mount attacks?

Wouldn't be surprised to see a patch FAQ that clarifies to 'use the skink priest warscroll in addition to the Engine Warscroll for the priests attacks, command abilities etc and add the keywords...'

Umm...how about abilities that affect specifically mount but not rider?

You prefer those don't affect engine of god's stegadon but affect skink chieftain's stegadon's because...reasons?

You realise the rider literally has no abilities? No attack profile, no abilities as it stands currently. So it's very much a case of what's the actual point?

Congrats, you've added a caveat that is utterly pointless.

If it didn't have specfication that what is mount attacks then all abilities that affect mount attacks(but not rider or unit without mount) wouldn't affect.

So stegadon carrying engine of god wouldn't benefit, stegadon carrying skink chieftain would.

You thikh that's better?

And note there is at least 1 such ability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Mr. Grey wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Best Edition ever gets an FAQ before it officially hits the stores, says it all.

This happens with a LOT of products. A good number of roleplaying games have FAQ drops within the first week of release or shortly after. Lots of video games these days have first day patches as well. I get that everybody looooooves to criticize every little thing that GW does, but let's be realistic and recognize that this is a normal occurrence in multiple forms of media.

It is only a normal occurence because the acceptable standards of quality became lower, due to the fact most game review sites are shills, and rushing out an incomplete product then trying to fix and complete it post-relase has sadly became commonplace.

That's bit different to here though. To avoid these faq's gw would have needed to write battletomes years　ago with 3rd ed in mind. At that point 3rd ed wasn't even written yet.

And then you would need errata to work in　2nd ed.

Or you can do zero changes to 3rd ed core rules.

Or ban all 2nd ed battletomes. Only 3e battletomes can be played. That would go well with players. Imagine lumineth, dok, slaanesh, sob and especially soulblight players who gets told their books got already banned.

What was so meta warping about the Vortex that doesn’t apply to the Chromatic Cogs?

It’s arrived! Joy and rapture!

Yeah, the tracking didn't even say dispatched at midnight last night but it was on my doorstep at 8am.

Meh. Ordered on first release day from GW. Still listed as 'Pending'.
So much for big companies sending things out so they arrive on release day.

My order is also showing as pending, yet I have it in hand.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
My order is also showing as pending, yet I have it in hand.

Ah... you gave me hope.

My first foray into AoS and I kinda got myself excited about this box set. I'm hoping it gets here, otherwise it's a wait till next weekend - as we'd be out when the postie comes and it'll go back to the depot to be fetched. :-(

Fingers crossed. I’m doubly lucky that the Postie arrived way earlier than normal. And my God Daughter’s birthday pressie arrived too.

This might not be the best place to ask, but what would the best paints for highlighting the new ones? Thondia brown and Orruk flesh. Thanks!

Just been to my local GW to get some paints in.

Walked away with a dice cup, pin badge and key ring, which I wasn’t expecting. That’s a clean sweep of launch goodies for me.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Just been to my local GW to get some paints in.

Walked away with a dice cup, pin badge and key ring, which I wasn’t expecting. That’s a clean sweep of launch goodies for me.

Well... my postie came with a lovely large Dominion box from GW (including some metal coin things)
Very well packaged and rulebook without a ding to the corners (my bugbear).

I must admit, the War at Amberstone Watch booklet wasn't what I expected. I was thinking it would be a few mini battles and scenarios to get people used to the rules using the minis in the box. Looks like I have a much larger book to go through before playing. Also, I'm really struggling to find points values for other types of models anywhere. I guess their Battletomes will be out of date with AoS3 and all the downloadable Warscrolls I find on GW's page don't have points at all, neither do the Warscrolls in the 99p App I started paying for. Lots to learn I guess.

Have GW given an idea when a new Battletome will be out for Kruleboyz or the new Stormcast?

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

Have GW given an idea when a new Battletome will be out for Kruleboyz or the new Stormcast?

Nope. The 'preview' in a couple hours may hint at it.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Also, I'm really struggling to find points values for other types of models anywhere. I guess their Battletomes will be out of date with AoS3...

No. Previous battletomes are still usable with 3rd edition with the FAQs which dropped yesterday and with updated points in the General's Handbook.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

Have GW given an idea when a new Battletome will be out for Kruleboyz?

I may remember it wrong but aren't they to be included in the new Orruk Warclans battletome?

 Shadow Walker wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

Have GW given an idea when a new Battletome will be out for Kruleboyz?

I may remember it wrong but aren't they to be included in the new Orruk Warclans battletome?

IF you remember it wrong, then we both remember it wrong because i am also pretty sure they're gonna be included in the Warclans.

Their Pitched Battle profiles are listed with the Orruk Warclans in the new General's Handbook. Whether or not they stay there or get their own battletome remains to be seen.

We’ll almost definitely see the Orruk/Kruleboyz and Stormcast books in the preview tonight.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Also, I'm really struggling to find points values for other types of models anywhere. I guess their Battletomes will be out of date with AoS3...

No. Previous battletomes are still usable with 3rd edition with the FAQs which dropped yesterday and with updated points in the General's Handbook.

So now I have to buy yet another book.

Thats slimy AF.

 GrosseSax wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Also, I'm really struggling to find points values for other types of models anywhere. I guess their Battletomes will be out of date with AoS3...

No. Previous battletomes are still usable with 3rd edition with the FAQs which dropped yesterday and with updated points in the General's Handbook.

So now I have to buy yet another book.

Thats slimy AF.

It's been that way for several years now, in both Age of Sigmar and 40K. It's not like this is a new change. Plus, if you only plan on playing Matched Play games and don't mind missing out on the Siege, Tunnel-fighting and Triumph and Treachery rules you don't need the Core book at all, just the General's Handbook.

If you pay for the app, the army builder portion "Azyr" has the points as you build the army. Not sure if that's updated for GHB2021.

There's also Warscroll Builder, available free on Warhammer Community, which also has the points on it, for free.

We now have a new thread for the new edition, please take the conversation there.