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.

It is simply because Vokmortian isn't a mortisan--they are those involved in the creation & maintenance of ossiarchs, which Vokmortian is not.

 Thadin wrote:
I'm not satisfied with GW's answer when it came to the Bone-Tithe Nexus however. Just another house rule I'll have to hammer out with my local play group, since we don't have a club to game at and whoever's hosting at their home sets the table(s) up beforehand.

And a Tournament Organizer would ignore whatever answer they gave in the FAQ if it didn't suit their needs, so basically the answer GW gave is what was going to happen anyway.

Barring a few exceptions the Nexus basically wants to be in the same place in most games - right in the middle. The only time it doesn't is if all the objectives are weighted to one side of the table or its an abnormal table shape.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Thadin wrote:
I'm not satisfied with GW's answer when it came to the Bone-Tithe Nexus however. Just another house rule I'll have to hammer out with my local play group, since we don't have a club to game at and whoever's hosting at their home sets the table(s) up beforehand.

And a Tournament Organizer would ignore whatever answer they gave in the FAQ if it didn't suit their needs, so basically the answer GW gave is what was going to happen anyway.

Giving an official answer, even a sub-par one, does a huge service to TOs since it means they are not responsible. By putting the responsibility entirely on TOs the current situation opens them up to criticism* that would be much reduced if GW had given a proper answer. Also, even when a rule is ignored or modified a GW ruling can reveal the intent of how it is supposed to work and provide a guideline in that way.

*Mostly butthurt whining.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 Thadin wrote:
I'm not satisfied with GW's answer when it came to the Bone-Tithe Nexus however. Just another house rule I'll have to hammer out with my local play group, since we don't have a club to game at and whoever's hosting at their home sets the table(s) up beforehand.

And a Tournament Organizer would ignore whatever answer they gave in the FAQ if it didn't suit their needs, so basically the answer GW gave is what was going to happen anyway.

Giving an official answer, even a sub-par one, does a huge service to TOs since it means they are not responsible. By putting the responsibility entirely on TOs the current situation opens them up to criticism* that would be much reduced if GW had given a proper answer. Also, even when a rule is ignored or modified a GW ruling can reveal the intent of how it is supposed to work and provide a guideline in that way.

*Mostly butthurt whining.

GW did give us rules for setting up the Bone-Tithe Nexus and those can be found on page 84 of the battletome. Any changes to those rules are up to the organizer. The closest you'll get as an answer from GW will in a rules pack from Warhammer World.

You know as well as I do that those rules are meaningless in a tournament setting since the tables are set up ahead of time.

I wish they'd just put a point cost on faction terrains, or just that they'd have never released them in the first place (I'm not sure about the grammar of this sentence sorry). At least so far the previous terrains were reasonably sized, but the Nexus is just too much, it's enormous and can affect both players. Giving a -1 to Hit on a 4+ should cost more than 0 pts, especially when the terrain is not restricted to the OBR side of the table.

The faction terrain right now is simply GW taking an allegiance ability and giving it a model and a limited range/influence on the tabletop. The Herdstone gains aura every turn and easily reaches across much of the board by the end (and that's without accounting for the fact that the enemy will be charging over the board toward you in most games).

The ossiarch terrain piece is different. For one it gets to go down wherever it wants bar objectives. It is also controlled by a specific player--all the others may only benefit a certain army but are neutral. It also has no rule relation to the army it is from; nothing about it is more beneficial to an ossiarch army than it would be to any other army, there's no thematic or mechanical tie-in with the rules (compare to say, the Ogor mawpot where a massive aoe heal is clearly more useful to an army with multi-wound models). Finally, it is notably more powerful than any of the other terrain pieces.

Overall it is going to be another contributor to making ossiarch armies very unfun to play against. IMO, it is very poorly designed for that reason (though the model is awesome).