Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hello,

Just at work with no rulebook doing some theoryhammer. Could someone please clarify that getting a hit from a magic weapon will negate any ward save.

Im designing an Exalted hero for my 1k WoC army that can deal with any high toughness foes i.e. Treekin/Treeman that mullered my warriors last week.

Im going down the MoK for him, Glaive of Putrefaction (which lowers Str and Tougness to 2 if wounded for the rest of the game). Armed with a flail for Str7 and WS 7, 5 attacks. This would negate his scaly skin 3+ and being magic would stop his ward save 5+, getting the wound and making him pretty useless.

If im right about magic weapons vs ward saves, I can remove 'The Other Tricksters Shard' which hes also taking.

My mathshammer is telling me with no ward save ill do 2.2 unsaved wounds on average and with ward save down to 1.48.

This pretty much completes my idea, that even losing my Exalted on the returning hits, ive taken the Treeman to S2 T2 and my hero is still cheaper.

Your thoughts please

Magic Weapons don't negate Ward Saves in general. They do negate Ward Saves granted by the Forest Spirit rule.

KSpen wrote:Hello,

Just at work with no rulebook doing some theoryhammer. Could someone please clarify that getting a hit from a magic weapon will negate any ward save.

Ehm, no. A magic weapon does not negate or modify ward saves at all. Things like the trickster shard, sneaky trinket do (which is what I carry against those pesky 4+ or 3+ ward WoC).

Maybe you have confused that with the ability to hit ethereal creatures?

Just a side-note, i'm not sure if you're allowed a flail and the glaive on the same model, and even if you were then the rule forcing you to use the glaive over the flail would mean you're stuck using it every time.

Nice response, cheers.

Yes I forgot about the magic weapon and the Glaive..so no Str7 :(

Damn, How to take down a treeman as Chaos in 1k? Im thinking magic, but thats not wholly dependable, then Ill lose combat effectivness by swapping my Exalted for Sorceror.

MoK warriors with GW? I get Str 6 vs T6, so rolling 4s. Tough slog with his saves, not to mention 6 Treekin and over a dozen Dryads with equal statline as my warriors.

Im at odds on how to beat it. Please help.

A unit of GW warriors with the Banner of Eternal Flame should be reasonable for dealing with the flammable stuff; a tzeentch sorcerer with flickering fire might also be useful (D6+1 Hits at a strength of D6+1 means that you have a fair chance of doing some damage). I'm at work at the moment so don't have the WE book to hand, so unsure about dryad loadouts, but marauders might make a good tarpit, but you might want a BSB to help them along.

The other alternative is going all out offensive with marauders, so MoK and Flails (unless dyrayds have a higher Initiative, then GWs would be better, as you're striking last anyway so you might as well be S5 for the entire combat), but they'll be lightly armoured, so they're best if there are few archers to deal with and more stuff to kill in combat.

Marauders with Flails and MoK. Yes, they only work in the first round, but that first round is enough....and theyre cheap.

Magic weapons ONLY remove Forest Spirit ward saves now

Edit: Or Flaming banner (double wounds due to flammable) on a unit of warriors. Give them MoTz for a 5+ parry save, and while you need 6s you have enough attacks to cause a couple wounds.

Would the Banner grant them magical attacks too, in which case they would cause double wounds and ignore the save?

Avatar 720 wrote:Would the Banner grant them magical attacks too, in which case they would cause double wounds and ignore the save?

No, but the Flaming Sword of Ruin spell does, and it's easy to cast to boot, getting it reliably in a low point game however can be a bit problematic.

The problem I had with Marauders is his 5 attacks plus stomp and from Treekin made me lose resolution even though I had them surrounded from rear and flank, had to roll under 4 (if I remember) for all 3 units. So my whole team broke because of the marauders.

It was my 1st game but Marauders seem a liability in prolonged combat as my opponent just targeted them and they are easy prey. I mean you could lose 2 elite units by fleeing just because you lost 6-7 marauders.

Yes, it seems the flaming banner on my warriors is a good option, thinking they need GW to roll 4s to wound vs the T6.

Nosferatu, your suggestion of relying on 6s due to many attacks seems good too, its just even knocking -1 from his armour save, he only needs 4+ to save and then 5+

Mathshammer says at S4 and 15 attacks, I have a 40% chance to wound..too low :/ with GWs its up to 2 wounds average (4 cos of flammable).

To put a banner on Marauders Ill need a BSB which is too expensive at 1k

1) You would be steadfast, as the monsters have no ranks. I assume he isnt running a massive unit of treekin, so assuming you have 5 ranks of marauders he would need 6 ranks of treekin to break Steadfast.

2) Tstomp happens after your attacks, he could well be dead by then (4s to hit, 5s to wound from at least 15 attacks should cause a few on the big beast)

3) You send the marauders in alone to soften him up first. That way, if you're lucky you're still steadfast, marauders survive for another round and you countercharge in.

Regular HW attacks would deal 1 (2 if flaming) wounds (rounded up from 0.8), GWs would deal 2.5 (5 if flaming) wounds; 3(6) if we round up, but you strike last.

Halberds give you 1.7 (3.4) wounds after saves, which would round up to 2, and 4 with flaming.

They also strike at initiative. Where a regular hand weapon would do too little damage, and a GW would strike after the Treeman, Halberds are your best compromise. AHW might give you the extra wound you need, but halberds would be effective against treekin as well.

Might be a little biased, as I love halberds for their flexibiltiy and effectiveness, but looking at the numbers, you lose 1 strength but the attacks you put out at I5 do the job without it.

You just loose too many back - S6 attacks means no armour save with halberds, and at best a 6+ ward from Tz.

AS I pointed out above though - you shouldnt be breaking as you should be steadfast; the monster as NO ranks, and treekin only get a few ranks, especially at 1k points.

Bah, I was looking at the treekin statline; was wondering why treemen only had 3 wounds.

Nos, You would need 36 attacks at S4 with the warriors to average 1 wound. You would need 14 at S5 (Halbs) and 7 with GWs.

I agree with Avatar, S5 and I5 is a good compromise and warriors will be able to get 14 attacks off usually, which means 2 wounds with the banner.

The warriors will get back 2.5 wounds too, with 4+ Arm saves. Tit-for-tat eh

(all averages)

KSpen - I'm still wonderng why you broke on a 4 - have you read about Steadfast yet?

Lol if magic attacks ignored saves daemons would be horrifying

Well it was a bit more complicated. My chariot charge from the rear into a unit mixed with his hero, 1 treeman and a few dryads. My impact hits killed his rear line and he said I couldnt attack anymore, which I now know I could have. My depleted warriors got off 2 kills on dryad but he mauled my marauders so I was at a loss, he did the resolution not me, 1st game and all.

Anyway he focused all his attacks on my marauders, which were depleted from the 1st round of combat, so had no supporting ranks. Also, the Treeman is stubbor which I assume is steadfast and he mentioned something about fear.

I keep reading the rules but much to take in.

I also forgot the attacks and stomp from my demonic mount the whole game too and I didnt know I couldnt cast magic missiles when the sorceror was in battle.

The game did go to turn 6 though and I was left with 4 knights and the chariot, while he had a treeman with 5 wounds left, hero with 1 wound left and a half dozen dryads. Lost by 245 points, 50 of which from my standard bearers.

While you may have lost, you should have had more ranks than the Treekin so you would have been steadfast - at least with your warriors. So while marauders may have fled you would have not lost everything!

Remember to have more ranks than a Monster, which has NONE, you only need 5 models - you dont need a rank *bonus*, just a *rank* (or 3 models if you are monstrous, etc)

Steadfast grants Stubborn if you meet the conditions, so if you win the treeman still tests on Ld8, from memory. It also makes you test for fear, unless you are immune through Slaanesh, so you may end up WS1

Really? So even if I lost 10 marauders but had 5 models ie warriors and my chariot on his flanks, all my tests would be to their individual leadership, or in my case , my sorceror which was also in combat.

I got a bit had tbh, I said my Tz warriors had a 5+ ward with parry, but he said I could only choose one or the other, I queried this on Dakka and you said it stacks^^

Im a little miffed losing through ignorance but hey 1st game and all. Thanks for clearing stuff up for me.

TBH you did fairly well for a first game - its a complicated old game, WHFB!

Each unit on your side that has more ranks than all enemy units is Steadfast, meaning it is stubborn. So the chariot, having 0 ranks, is NOT stubborn and so would test normally. (ie with modifiers)

For example:

Facing a treeman you have 10 marauders left (5 wide x 2 deep), 5 warriors (5 x 1) and a chariot left, after attacks

Combat res, before any wounds, would be:

you charged - so +1
Flank - +1
Rear - +2
Banner (assume you had one) - +1

So you are at 5 to start with. ASsuming you dont do any wounds, and he does at least 6 (through normal attacks and thunderstomps) you would have lost combat.

1 - the marauders have 2 ranks, 2 more than the treemen so test on their own unmodified leadership OR the generals leadership, if nearby
2 - the warriors have 1 rank, 1 more than the treeman so would test on their own unmodified leadership, or the generals if nearby
3 - the chariot has 0 ranks, which is equal to the number of ranks of the treemen, so would take the breaktest normally, with all modifiers. So Ld - 1 in this case, or generals ld -1

I hope that makes sense

Crystal. Thanks very much, sorry guys if I went off topic.

Me again, just to double check, chaos knights with ensorcelled weapons removes the forest spirit 5+ ward?

Can you list which other ward saves it negates please.

Thanks

Just forest spirits, and yes they are magical attacks.

The poorWE are the only army left to have the "poor mans" ward save; previously the Daemons did, when they were part of the Hordes of Chaos (mortals and daemons together), however when it was split out to their own army they gained a "true" ward save.

Lovely, im rubbing my hands with glee.

Did some play testing, 12 warriors Mok 4x3, GWs and flaming banner vs a treeman. Took 2-3 wounds (on average) and out of 10 goes, killed it outright in the 1st round of combat 5 out of the 10 times on the returning hits.

Going to try with 5 knights tonight^^

Noooo, don't got 4x3, you don't get any rank bonuses for anything under 5 (I do believe this is still the case) wide. Either go 10 running 5x2 or 15 running 5x3, or run your current unit 6x2.

Well I dont know the base size for a tree man but I used my 50mm Demonic mount which only 4 warriors were in base contact.
But I see what youre saying^

Just for reference, I run my warriors in a block of 18 6x3, which seems to be pretty common based on lists and bat-reps I have seen. I see 6x2 or 5x2 with 2 spare sometimes, but 18 seems to be the accepted "best" number. Good luck lighting up the treemen

hmmm, I do recall a Treeman is worth 285 points which is above the 25% max allowed for Rares in a 1,000 point game.

Treeman shouldnt be allowed then.

Am I right with this one?

I thought that was the Lord treeman?