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.

 RiTides wrote:
There actually is, because they tell you exactly what to roll and don't have silly rules like some of the ones here that are causing issues (like the mustache one). These kinds of rules questions comes up on the PP forums all the time and are quickly officially answered...

I'm not a PP apologist, but you really can't compare the ambiguity in this ruleset to theirs.... It's night and day!

For AOS - how exactly is this ambiguous?

Warhammer: Age of Sigmar uses six-sided dice (sometimes abbreviated to D6).

What is there to question ?

 Haight wrote:

 Thud wrote:

 Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
So how do you build a force and then know if your in the realm of playable with each other.

All you need is Fateweaver and a Screaming Bell.

Allows you to play hundreds of games every evening, and win every one. Lotsa fun!

Explain to me how you interpret "once per game, you can change the result of a single dice roll to the result of your choosing." into "I can change it into a result that doesn't exist in the game and is impossible to achieve."



I know where you're going, its shoddily written on the part of the bell, but if someone legitimately pulled this, after a long, pregnant pause of a deadpan my response would be "Ok. If you can make two normal dice come up with an unmodified result of 13, you not only win, but i'll want to play a game with you again in both of our natural lifespans."

I mean really. An ounce of common sense. Fateweaver's ability does not magically allow you to get a dieroll of 47 on 1d6, 13 on 2d6, or negative 4 on eleventyd6.

But the result does exist in game. Its right there.

kairos's rules don't say the result needs to be possible. You just choose it.

Its not that people are going to do it, just like people aren't going to take 5 Nagash's, but its an easy way to illustrate problems in the rules.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Sim-Life wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Sim-Life wrote:
Tell me where the rules say you're restricted to only choosing what it's possible to roll on 2d6.

This right here is why GW gave up on trying to make a normal game.

Why? Other companies can make a tight rule sets with minimal holes. Why should GW get free pass for having holes in their rules that you can drive a tank through?

"Tell me where it says I can't" isn't a hole in the rules, it's a hole in your reasoning. There's nothing in Warmachine telling me I can't roll d20s, either.

Agreed, and well said.

To quote Not Dice, a fellow infernal from my days as an Infernal for PP "The rules don't say I can't ? Well, the rules don't say I can't hit you in the face with a toaster, either." That quote stuck with me throughout the almost 3 years I did Infernaling with Privateer.



Both PP games and AoS are what are called positive clarification games. The rules tell you what you can do ; by that virtue, they do not have to call out everything you cannot do, as it would literally be impossible to do. Sometimes those rules require clarification as to mechanical operation or intent (or both!). PP does a good job of this, whereas GW used to give it a reasonably well intentioned try (we'll see if they continue).


Anyone using the "The Rules don't say i can't" as a justification as to why AoS is a weak rule set : post another ruleset that is "strong" by comparison, and i'll immediately engage in the same logic. Hell i'll save us both the time: I guarantee you that the ruleset posited doesn't say I can't run over my opponent if I lose, but if I win, they have to buy me lunch. Therefore, because it doesn't say that, if i lose, i'm redecorating my opponent in radial tire print & Road Grease Grey, or getting a fething sammich outta it.


Look, the AoS core rules are... goofy. There are some Fozzi Bear warscroll rules that are wokka wokka wokka. Konrad's is clever, most of the rest are stupid, the bell's is unnecessary. But let's not take a goofy ruleset we're all trying to come to terms with and go completely off the rails and intentionally make it worse than it really is through gakky logic and non-starter conclusive leaps.

ok so i never have the rules hole lawyering nonsense to deal with...

but i am at a loss as to how this a playable game?

there is no army building guides.

you can literally take everything you own or make a unit as big as you want..

i mean 100 zombies all get +3 to hit and to wound ... or take 100 Nagash's .. just cuz

I got the white dwarf and read the rules. They look quite simple and easy to use, certainly better than 8th, IMO.
Then I looked at the Dwarf PDFs, and now I'm not so sure about AoS. I don't like what they've done to Gyrobombers, no more dropping templates onto hordes of clanrats, just D3 instakill, or Cannons, with no more line passing through and creating a visual effect of the cannonball smashing through, just d6 wounds, or what they've done to the thunderers who now don't have any melee to speak of, as well as my beloved organ gun, which now looks like it isn't worth bringing, and THERE ARE NO MORE RUNES!
Runes were, IMO, the best bit of being a dwarf player. At least now that thunderers aren't just warriors with guns, there is some point to brining warriors.
Oh w8 no, since it's model count not points, all my warrior models are now proxying as longbeards, because grumbling is way more awesome and you don't have to worry about points racking up.

 tenebre wrote:
ok so i never have the rules hole lawyering nonsense to deal with...

but i am at a loss as to how this a playable game?

there is no army building guides.

you can literally take everything you own or make a unit as big as you want..

i mean 100 zombies all get +3 to hit and to wound ... or take 100 Nagash's .. just cuz

Rules hole lawyering nonsense - sorry as long as there is any kind of rule in any kind of game - someone will try and exploit, pick holes in it or otherwise lawyer it. We are stuck with them as this thread shows.

re army building - yeah its way odd but there are some thoughts - once I have played a few games may have more of an idea.....

Actually, as i read more and more of the silly rules on the warscrolls, like Settra's one with the kneeling, the maintain arrogant expression one for the elves, kraggi's if you're younger rule, the goldtooth guy's bribe your opponent with real things rule, I think I might actually enjoy this game.

I will give GW credit for trying something radically different. But I'm still not seeing the game yet. I hope they aren't expecting the community to finish their game for them.

 Freytag93 wrote:

Sim-Life wrote:

jaceimba wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Not to ruin a good bit of whining but the exact rules are this:

Peal of Doom: In your hero phase, the
Screaming Bell tolls. Roll two dice, add the
scores together and consult the table below
to see what happens (no modifiers can be
applied to this roll). If a result says that it
effects units ‘within range of the Peal of
Doom’, consult the Damage Table above to
see the current range of that effect.

Again: color=red](no modifiers can be applied to this roll)[/color]

Of course that means you might get to roll off for results, so you auto win only half the time.

I know that some say that changing the dice result would count as applying modifier to the roll, which you can't. I'm just pointing out that fateweaver ability is base on the possible result of the d6 roll so you can't get result of 13 even if the rule let you use it with screaming bell.

It isn't a modifier. You aren't adding or subtracting from itz you are changing it.

Kairos's rules say "change the result to a result of your choosing". By putting the result of 13 on the table, the rules acknowledge that you can acheive it, even if it's through cheating.

Tell me where the rules say you're restricted to only choosing what it's possible to roll on 2d6.

That was my thinking as well. It doesn't say change a dice or the dice. It literally says change the result. And the result can be anything of your choosing. Now you could argue that this is modifying the dice roll, but again as Sim-Life said it isn't modifying it by subtracting or adding or rerolling or anything. It just changes the result.

All in all, I would say RAW that you could change the result to a 13 and win. My opponent can (and probably will) argue that that isn't legal. At worst, we roll off and I have a 50% chance to win the game phase 1 of turn 1

Of course, this is all semantics because I would never want to run an army like this. I don't need that much

Don't forget RAW Fateweaver would let you choose the result of those roll offs too.

 Haight wrote:

Spoiler:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Sim-Life wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Sim-Life wrote:
Tell me where the rules say you're restricted to only choosing what it's possible to roll on 2d6.

This right here is why GW gave up on trying to make a normal game.

Why? Other companies can make a tight rule sets with minimal holes. Why should GW get free pass for having holes in their rules that you can drive a tank through?

"Tell me where it says I can't" isn't a hole in the rules, it's a hole in your reasoning. There's nothing in Warmachine telling me I can't roll d20s, either.

Agreed, and well said.

To quote Not Dice, a fellow infernal from my days as an Infernal for PP "The rules don't say I can't ? Well, the rules don't say I can't hit you in the face with a toaster, either." That quote stuck with me throughout the almost 3 years I did Infernaling with Privateer.



Both PP games and AoS are what are called positive clarification games. The rules tell you what you can do ; by that virtue, they do not have to call out everything you cannot do, as it would literally be impossible to do. Sometimes those rules require clarification as to mechanical operation or intent (or both!). PP does a good job of this, whereas GW used to give it a reasonably well intentioned try (we'll see if they continue).


Anyone using the "The Rules don't say i can't" as a justification as to why AoS is a weak rule set : post another ruleset that is "strong" by comparison, and i'll immediately engage in the same logic. Hell i'll save us both the time: I guarantee you that the ruleset posited doesn't say I can't run over my opponent if I lose, but if I win, they have to buy me lunch. Therefore, because it doesn't say that, if i lose, i'm redecorating my opponent in radial tire print & Road Grease Grey, or getting a fething sammich outta it.


Look, the AoS core rules are... goofy. There are some Fozzi Bear warscroll rules that are wokka wokka wokka. Konrad's is clever, most of the rest are stupid, the bell's is unnecessary. But let's not take a goofy ruleset we're all trying to come to terms with and go completely off the rails and intentionally make it worse than it really is through gakky logic and non-starter conclusive leaps.

I love you and thank you for this post. No sarcasm intended, but this sort of thing needs to [apparently] be said way more often.

So since I can't grow a beard or a mustache, I cannot effectively use some units.

This is fething stupid.

 Melissia wrote:
So since I can't grow a beard or a mustache, I cannot effectively use some units.

This is fething stupid.

You could always undergo hormone therapy

 Redbad wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
So since I can't grow a beard or a mustache, I cannot effectively use some units.

This is fething stupid.

You could always undergo hormone therapy

Or I could just leave my dwarves in their box and never build them up to a full army, thus refusing to give GW good money in exchange for bad rules.

 Melissia wrote:
So since I can't grow a beard or a mustache, I cannot effectively use some units.

This is fething stupid.

I'd give it to you if you pulled out a fake beard or moustache and put it on. Or even just had one in your pocket. Doesn't say you have to have grown the impressive beard, just that you have one.

Fine, I'll point to the beards on my models, and tell you if you don't 'like it to shove it up your ass.

The rule is dumb, and it's sad seeing people pretend otherwise.

Heck, if you're this torn up about it, how about I just give you re-rolls to hits and to wounds for your entire army? Wouldn't want you to be upset about the game or anything.

Rihgu wrote:
Heck, if you're this torn up about it, how about I just give you re-rolls to hits and to wounds for your entire army? Wouldn't want you to be upset about the game or anything.

The problem is Some people play games to test there abilities and minds, not for Silly goofy childishness.

If you're fine playing a game that feels like a 10yr made up the rules that is Ok, but don't get mad at others for wanting something more.

Rihgu wrote:
Heck, if you're this torn up about it, how about I just give you re-rolls to hits and to wounds for your entire army? Wouldn't want you to be upset about the game or anything.

Really don't be an ass. If you cannot see why this is not angering then don't respond. Switch the roles of you want - imagine if GW said that if you had hair to or longer than your shoulders your Elf force re rolls all hits and wounds - or if you owned lizards but no other pets the lizard men could re roll break tests. It's getting stupid and really degrading. I'm not even that old and I see how insulting it is. If you don't have breasts or at least B cup or better, you are not allowed to field any ogres.

So please do not be a jerk and dismiss people's feelings especially if there is sense to it

Quick note: I was being facetious with my comment. I think the rules are dumb too.

Thanks
austin

fidel wrote:

Rihgu wrote:
Heck, if you're this torn up about it, how about I just give you re-rolls to hits and to wounds for your entire army? Wouldn't want you to be upset about the game or anything.

Really don't be an ass. If you cannot see why this is not angering then don't respond. Switch the roles of you want - imagine if GW said that if you had hair to or longer than your shoulders your Elf force re rolls all hits and wounds - or if you owned lizards but no other pets the lizard men could re roll break tests. It's getting stupid and really degrading. I'm not even that old and I see how insulting it is. If you don't have breasts or at least B cup or better, you are not allowed to field any ogres.

So please do not be a jerk and dismiss people's feelings especially if there is sense to it

I don't see it as insulting at all? I'm notoriously bad at winning staring contests but the night goblin rule that gives you bonuses for winning one doesn't outrage me. I wouldn't consider my beard nor my moustache impressive and I'm not riled up.

I'm not the one being the jerk, I'm the one offering to make the gaming experience more enjoyable for someone else (they're the ones threatening to shove a miniature up my arse...) If they really want the re-rolls that badly, I'll give it to 'em, sure. I'm just here to have fun, and if I feel like wearing a hood to the game I may just do that and have a laugh at the bonus my wardrobe is giving me, but I won't tool my outfit around a game I'll be playing that day.


edit: I do agree that the rules are dumb, though. Silly, dumb, fun. If you're not for silly, dumb, fun, then say that and ask your opponent to please take the game as seriously as you will.

Fine, I'll point to the beards on my models, and tell you if you don't 'like it to shove it up your ass.

Always entertaining Mel

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Rihgu wrote:
Heck, if you're this torn up about it, how about I just give you re-rolls to hits and to wounds for your entire army? Wouldn't want you to be upset about the game or anything.

The problem is Some people play games to test there abilities and minds, not for Silly goofy childishness.

If you're fine playing a game that feels like a 10yr made up the rules that is Ok, but don't get mad at others for wanting something more.

This

Don't care if you're amused or not. The rules are fething slowed, and you damned well know it.

A few more special rules GW considered for AoS-

1. If you have receipts proving you spent more money on your army than your opponent you may use D10 dice instead of D6.

2. If your miniatures were painted using only GW primers and paints you may re-roll armor saves.

3. If you are shorter than your opponent your dwarves get an extra attack.

4. If you are naked at the gaming table all of your Slaanesh aligned models gain regeneration.

5. You may declare a sudden death victory by violently kicking your opponent in the groin while he is not expecting it.

6. If you have more piercings and/or tattoos than your opponent your chaos marauders may re-roll saves.

7. Your ogre army wins the game if you grab and swallow one of the enemy models.

The silly rules are kind of strange to me and I really do not like them. I am an Oldhammer player but wanted to give this game a try. The silly rules are embarrassing.

Don't care if you're amused or not. The rules are fething slowed, and you damned well know it.

Are you addressing me? All I said was I thought your comment was funny. Sheesh, ease up.

kenofyork wrote:
3. If you are shorter than your opponent your dwarves get an extra attack.

This one actually follows the theme quite well and now that you've pointed it out, I'm surprised it isn't on a warscroll.

The silly rules are kind of strange to me and I really do not like them. I am an Oldhammer player but wanted to give this game a try. The silly rules are embarrassing.

When a model has rules I don't like, I don't use it. Which is why my army has consistently sported more Slayers than war machines

kenofyork wrote:
A few more special rules GW considered for AoS-

1. If you have receipts proving you spent more money on your army than your opponent you may use D10 dice instead of D6.

2. If your miniatures were painted using only GW primers and paints you may re-roll armor saves.

3. If you are shorter than your opponent your dwarves get an extra attack.

4. If you are naked at the gaming table all of your Slaanesh aligned models gain regeneration.

5. You may declare a sudden death victory by violently kicking your opponent in the groin while he is not expecting it.

6. If you have more piercings and/or tattoos than your opponent your chaos marauders may re-roll saves.

7. Your ogre army wins the game if you grab and swallow one of the enemy models.

The silly rules are kind of strange to me and I really do not like them. I am an Oldhammer player but wanted to give this game a try. The silly rules are embarrassing.

I believe there was a thread a while back which was "Things the Space Marines should say to the Sisters of Battle" or something like that. It got to a ridiculous number of tongue in cheek suggestions like this, perhaps you should consider starting a similar thread? Would give us all a good laugh

Not sure why anyone who wants to play a game with mustache size-related rules would object to changing a 2d6 roll to a 13. Seems perfectly within the GW silliness wheelhouse, actually.

 Melissia wrote:
Fine, I'll point to the beards on my models, and tell you if you don't 'like it to shove it up your ass.

The rule is dumb, and it's sad seeing people pretend otherwise.

My crew is houseruling the Fozzie Bear Wokka Wokka Wokka rules (as we are calling them) to Automatic on the first use, 3+ each desired use thereafter if you don't want to do the silly gak, or your opponnent asks that you not do the silly gak. Greasus is being evaluated, and so are a couple others. We're thinking of Greasus being a wound cap of 5, once a game.

Fixt.


I agree though, there's some massively fething stupid things in the new rules.


My crew already has 8 house rules to try to fix it.... but its going to suck when i go to other regions i play in and say "Hey this is how my playgroup unfethed this game, do you want to play this way ?"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spy_Smasher wrote:
Not sure why anyone who wants to play a game with mustache size-related rules would object to changing a 2d6 roll to a 13. Seems perfectly within the GW silliness wheelhouse, actually.

As i said in another thread, people using the bell and weaver can auto-win the moment they put two unmodified d6 dice on the table and they (correctly) add up to 13. If they state "It doesn't SAY the "change" has to be a legal result of two dice!", then my response is "It doesn't SAY i can't hit you in the face with a toaster either."

And then I pack up my models, as I have no desire to play with a dill weed.


Agreed though, the lulz rules are dumb. I have a feeling someone wrote Konrad's rule (which is truly about the only clever one), there was probably a good office water cooler laugh (amongst, ya know, both game designers!), and then they tried to recreate that magic with the other silliness.

EDIT: I take that back.... Greasus' real world Bribe is actually quite clever.

The arbitrary stuff like "Insult your opponent with Wulfrik", "Have a moustache", "Be Younger" is nonsensical.

 Melissia wrote:
Fine, I'll point to the beards on my models, and tell you if you don't 'like it to shove it up your ass.

You really are desperate to get those Wulfrik re-rolls, eh.