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.
The last WotRFAQ had this delicious little tidbit:
Q: Can a leaderless enemy formation still benefit from the Overlord special rule even though no model in it has any Might? (p.69)
A: Yes.
The thought of my Mumak being able to call a Heroic Fight makes me quite giddy.
He's got a mind like a steel trap. By which I mean it can only hold one idea at a time;
it latches on to the first idea to come along, good or bad; and it takes strenuous effort with a crowbar to make it let go.
fellblade wrote:The last WotRFAQ had this delicious little tidbit:
Q: Can a leaderless enemy formation still benefit from the Overlord special rule even though no model in it has any Might? (p.69)
A: Yes.
The thought of my Mumak being able to call a Heroic Fight makes me quite giddy.
I gotta say that this ruling is made of retardation brought about through deliberate and irresponsible inbreeding.
Ahh well, if it makes it easier to play then so be it. At least it has been ruled on instead of the guessing that has been going on for nearly two years.
Yeah, they settled this question, and in a way that definitely favors the Evil players. I'm not too worried about it, because Evil armies tend to have low Might pools.
Unfortunately, their reply about the Witch King's special rule has actually made things less clear, if that were possible. I wish they had just said "Yes, for the rule to work, the Witch King must be in the formation's rear arc" instead of saying "it is usually obvious if the WK is behind a unit." Because the rear arc is something you can measure objectively, while obvious is in the eye of the beholder.
He's got a mind like a steel trap. By which I mean it can only hold one idea at a time;
it latches on to the first idea to come along, good or bad; and it takes strenuous effort with a crowbar to make it let go.
The WK "behind" issue was brought up on warseer as well.
Personally, I think if the designers wanted to be rear arc only, they would have stated it. I agree that stating rear arc would be in keeping with the guidelines as set by the rules, but there has to be some modicum of common sense in a game or it doesn't function at a fundamental level.
People seriously get pedantic about the issue; and I fear they are missing the forest for the trees. Especially right after they laud the game for being a loose affair not meant to be so literally interpreted.
I threw up a few diagrams to help illustrate the issue over there a while back:
But frankly, what is required is some remedial courses in what is "in front" and what is "behind".
It took all my effort to not post a youtube link to sesame street videos for fear of insulting people when they honestly do need elementary reminders of common sense issues.
But then again if you are bringing a WK it's best to define what 'behind' is before the game anyways, regardless of what the FAQ says, due to as you said, subjective interpretation.
In my game the other night, I showed my opponent the FAQ, then I asked him if my WK on fellbeast was behind a unit. The WK was more or less on my center table edge, and the unit in question was off to the left, about 12 inches forward.
My opponent looked at the FAQ, then looked at the table, and finally said, "Yes, I have to agree that the WK is behind that unit." Fine; I at-the-doubled for free. Then I reached for a second unit. In just a few moments, my opponent began to have second thoughts. And then suddenly he wanted to argue that the WK wasn't behind the unit after all, because he wasn't directly behind the unit.
I asked him to show me where it said the WK needed to be directly behind the unit, and he said that it was obvious that he wasn't behind the unit.
I looked him in the eye and said, "Really?"
"Tell me, is the Witch King in front of that unit?" No.
"Is the Witch King beside that unit?" Well, no.
"Is the Witch King somewhere behind that unit?" ...Obviously not.
I gave him the hairy eyeball at that. "Well, if he's not in front of it, and he's not beside it, and he's obviously not somewhere behind it, where is he?"
But it is just too powerful for him to have that ability otherwise!*
"Okay. I'll just take him off the table."
I then proceded to pass all my required courage tests and at-the-double right up into his face anyway. Then my Carn Dum chieftan, through one incredibly lucky roll, took out Aragorn in a heroic duel (thank you, Shade, and your Chill Miasma). Gulavhar shredded the unit that held Gandalf & Sauruman, the Dwimmerlaik sucked all the oxygen out of Boromir, and his dice betrayed him in roll after roll. It was, like, instant karma.
I'm gonna save that Sesame Street link on my phone for the next time this comes up.
*He uses this argument, or a variation of it, a lot.^ "It's just stupid for it to work that way; it makes it too powerful, nobody would ever field an army without it!" A curiously naive stance for someone who has been playing GW games for well over 20 years. You'd think he would have noticed by now: that's exactly what happens in every single GW game. There is always an uber-unit, or an item (or special character) or tactic that changes the game balance. 2 stanks and a war altar? Cupped hands of the Old Ones? Blood Angels? I'm going to have to point this out to him the next time he starts down that road. And also mention that not every gamer is an uber-WAAC douchebag; there are a few 40K players who haven't bought a BA army yet, after all. Some of them are still playing Tau, for pity's sake.
^He never seems to realize that his opinion doesn't constitute a valid arguement.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2011/01/08 17:31:41
He's got a mind like a steel trap. By which I mean it can only hold one idea at a time;
it latches on to the first idea to come along, good or bad; and it takes strenuous effort with a crowbar to make it let go.
All I have to say to that is that I am glad I do not know anyone like that. The reversal of his own ruling is pathetic and infantile.
Assuming it is a WK on fellbeast, what the hell do you expect him to be good at? If he goes toe to toe with something it will surely die and thats 375 points gone due to it being an easy target as a monster.
So you then use him for allowing automatic passing of at the double and use his high maneuverability to ensure that he is behind as many units as possible each turn.
Frankly, the guy has a very unique idea of whats powerful and what isn't if he is fielding bormir, aragorn gandalf and saruman in the same army while kvetching about the Witch King.
Like I said, I am glad I don't know anyone like that here.
