New Age of Sigmar FAQs (Core Rules, General's Handbook and more)

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.

**Ghaz**

Warhammer Age of Sigmar Designer's Commentary

Warhammer Age of Sigmar Errata

The General's Handbook 2018 Errata

The General's Handbook 2018 Designer's Commentary

Battletome Stormcast Eternals Errata

Battletome Stormcast Eternals Designer's Commentary

Battletome Nighthaunt Designer's Commentary

**auticus**

So now we know that

* everchosen battalions are indeed allies.

* sylvaneth woods are indeed citadel woods and get the same rules as the citadel woods

* units that have the ability to say "my model isn't slain, it comes back with a wound" can't do that if they take more damage than what that one wound can bring back.

All three things hotly debated on the interwebz.

**Galas**

"Page 69 – Chaos Allies, Slaves to Darkness
Add ‘Monsters of Chaos’ to the list of Slaves to
Darkness allies."

AT LAST. AT LAST THIS HAPPEN. F*** YEAH!

**andysonic1**

I love how the doomsayers were calling 2.0 basically dead due to all the crazy Grot and Kroak bs.

Also RIP Aspiring Deathbringer, went from a maybe to a nope pretty fast. Restricted to combat phase and units wholly within. QQ

Spoiler:

**LunarSol**

I am not seeing anywhere near the number of changes that this thread seems to be implying exist. Where are the Kroak and Wyldwood entries?

**auticus**

You have to refresh your cache. Or sort by A-Z. Otherwise it shows you the old links.

**Farseer_V2**

Some personally big changes:

-Lens of Refraction, pretty significant nerf to once per battle round

-Umbral Spell Portal - once per phase (either an endless spell OR a normal spell as well)

-Geminids - can't be affected by both geminds at the same time (so down to D3 mortal wounds and 1 debuff per unit)

**Kanluwen**

Wow, what a shocking interpretation of Sylvaneth Wyldwoods being composed of Citadel Woods!

I'm surprised by the Lens of Refraction change.

**Farseer_V2**

Kanluwen wrote:
Wow, what a shocking interpretation of Sylvaneth Wyldwoods being composed of Citadel Woods!

I'm surprised by the Lens of Refraction change.

I'm not - I think it was too good for where it was. That said I figured they'd add a 'ton a minimum of 1' caveat as opposed to the once per battle round change.

**Valander**

auticus wrote:
So now we know that

* everchosen battalions are indeed allies.

* sylvaneth woods are indeed citadel woods and get the same rules as the citadel woods

* units that have the ability to say "my model isn't slain, it comes back with a wound" can't do that if they take more damage than what that one wound can bring back.

All three things hotly debated on the interwebz.

These, and a lot of other things I've seen so far, are great. The Wyldwoods one in particular had arguments that made me want to kick puppies (and I'm sure there will still be a lot of whinging about it).

Also good to see them addressing Kroak at least a little.

**Kanluwen**

I really liked what they did for Idoneth.

Page 94
– The Ethersea
Change the final paragraph to:
‘An Idoneth Deepkin army can include up to 2
Gloomtide Shipwreck terrain features. After territories
have been chosen but before armies are set up, you
can set up the Gloomtide Shipwrecks anywhere on the
battlefield, more than 1” from any other terrain features,
more than 6” from any other Gloomtide Shipwrecks, and
more than 6” from where any objectives will be located
at the start of the first battle round. If both players can
set up a terrain feature before armies are set up, they
must roll-off, and the winner can choose the order in
which the terrain features are set up.’

**NinthMusketeer**

auticus wrote:
So now we know that

* everchosen battalions are indeed allies.

* sylvaneth woods are indeed citadel woods and get the same rules as the citadel woods

* units that have the ability to say "my model isn't slain, it comes back with a wound" can't do that if they take more damage than what that one wound can bring back.

All three things hotly debated on the interwebz.

On the last one, they can still do it to cancel outone wound. So if a liberator unit takes 3 wounds and the second one kills a guy it can still be cancelled, the third one will kill him but there won't be a 'floating' wound afterward.

I am glad for an answer on the Everchosen battalions; now we know those are RAI not part of the specific armies.

**Kanluwen**

It was also nice to see that Enclaves and the like don't get their special rules when taken as Allies.

**auticus**

Right it cancels out a wound. No argument from me there.

This came up in a recent game where my chaos mammoth killed a stardrake and did like 12 wounds and he only had 5 or so remaining.

The argument was that he was then brought back with just one wound left. I let him have that one since I could rules lawyer it both ways so for me just give it to your opponent until FAQ says otherwise.

**Unit1126PLL**

Wow, Endless Spells can't benefit from range buffs, nor can they measure range from any point except the caster itself.

That's a Morathi and Seraphon nerf...

**EnTyme**

Galas wrote:"Page 69 – Chaos Allies, Slaves to Darkness
Add ‘Monsters of Chaos’ to the list of Slaves to
Darkness allies."

AT LAST. AT LAST THIS HAPPEN. F*** YEAH!

My Darkoath Chieftain is happy. So is his pet Slaughterbrute.

Unit1126PLL wrote:Wow, Endless Spells can't benefit from range buffs, nor can they measure range from any point except the caster itself.

That's a Morathi and Seraphon nerf...

Happy to see those nerf. Endless Spells are already pretty strong. I also note that unbind buffs (or debuffs) don't apply to the dispel check.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

andysonic1 wrote:
I love how the doomsayers were calling 2.0 basically dead due to all the crazy Grot and Kroak bs.

Also RIP Aspiring Deathbringer, went from a maybe to a nope pretty fast. Restricted to combat phase and units wholly within. QQ

Spoiler:

Page 141 – Aspiring Deathbringer (both warscrolls), Slaughter IncarnateChange to:‘You can use this command ability at the start of the combat phase. If you do so, pick a friendly model with this command ability. Until the end of that phase, add 1 to the Attacks characteristic of melee weapons used by friendly Khorne Mortal units while they are wholly within 10" of any friendly models using this command ability.’

I can understand why people were freaking out about Kroak. I'm just glad to see GW was as quick to respond to the issue as I thought they would be.

**Unit1126PLL**

Interestingly, Slaanesh's Feed on Depravity rule no longer counts mortal wounds, which kinda hurts me a bit.

**NinthMusketeer**

Surprised no one has mentioned the confirmation that being base to base with multiple models essentially locks down your pile ins; you have to end at least as close to all of them.

**Unit1126PLL**

NinthMusketeer wrote:
Surprised no one has mentioned the confirmation that being base to base with multiple models essentially locks down your pile ins; you have to end at least as close to all of them.

I don't think this ruling was that surprising really. It's just the logical, normal application of the rule, imo.

**andysonic1**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:
Surprised no one has mentioned the confirmation that being base to base with multiple models essentially locks down your pile ins; you have to end at least as close to all of them.
I don't think this ruling was that surprising really. It's just the logical, normal application of the rule, imo.

This makes big chaff units a lot "better" since you can hug a scary unit and prevent them from "sliding" from model to model to get around a wall.

**NinthMusketeer**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:
Surprised no one has mentioned the confirmation that being base to base with multiple models essentially locks down your pile ins; you have to end at least as close to all of them.

I don't think this ruling was that surprising really. It's just the logical, normal application of the rule, imo.

Locally we honestly didn't know; one of our guys had played with playtesters for AoS 2 and different playtesters did it different ways.

**Unit1126PLL**

andysonic1 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:
Surprised no one has mentioned the confirmation that being base to base with multiple models essentially locks down your pile ins; you have to end at least as close to all of them.
I don't think this ruling was that surprising really. It's just the logical, normal application of the rule, imo.
This makes big chaff units a lot "better" since you can hug a scary unit and prevent them from "sliding" from model to model to get around a wall.

Right, that's what it does, but you don't think sliding 24" across 40 clanrats spaced in two ranks just with pile ins was a bit silly?

**andysonic1**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
andysonic1 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:
Surprised no one has mentioned the confirmation that being base to base with multiple models essentially locks down your pile ins; you have to end at least as close to all of them.
I don't think this ruling was that surprising really. It's just the logical, normal application of the rule, imo.
This makes big chaff units a lot "better" since you can hug a scary unit and prevent them from "sliding" from model to model to get around a wall.
Right, that's what it does, but you don't think sliding 24" across 40 clanrats spaced in two ranks just with pile ins was a bit silly?

I mean I came from 40k and I used every melee trick in the book because I ran World Eaters. There it wasn't silly, it was required. In Age of Sigmar yeah I can see that it's a bit silly.

**Unit1126PLL**

andysonic1 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
andysonic1 wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:
Surprised no one has mentioned the confirmation that being base to base with multiple models essentially locks down your pile ins; you have to end at least as close to all of them.
I don't think this ruling was that surprising really. It's just the logical, normal application of the rule, imo.
This makes big chaff units a lot "better" since you can hug a scary unit and prevent them from "sliding" from model to model to get around a wall.
Right, that's what it does, but you don't think sliding 24" across 40 clanrats spaced in two ranks just with pile ins was a bit silly?
I mean I came from 40k and I used every melee trick in the book because I ran World Eaters. There it wasn't silly, it was required. In Age of Sigmar yeah I can see that it's a bit silly.

I play Slaanesh Daemons in both systems, and in 40k you can't even pile-in move at all if you're in Base to Base with anything, not to mention multiple models.

**Wayniac**

NinthMusketeer wrote:
Surprised no one has mentioned the confirmation that being base to base with multiple models essentially locks down your pile ins; you have to end at least as close to all of them.

I'm a bit confused by this, I know in 1.0 if you were base to base, you couldn't maneuver like around a model to behind them, to get another model in. 2.0 seemingly removed this to work the way everyone I knew already played it (that you COULD do the above). Does the FAQ go back and state you cannot, or only if you're by two models, you can't move around the back to one model, because you were by two and need to be closer to both?

**Farseer_V2**

Wayniac wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:
Surprised no one has mentioned the confirmation that being base to base with multiple models essentially locks down your pile ins; you have to end at least as close to all of them.

I'm a bit confused by this, I know in 1.0 if you were base to base, you couldn't maneuver like around a model to behind them, to get another model in. 2.0 seemingly removed this to work the way everyone I knew already played it (that you COULD do the above). Does the FAQ go back and state you cannot, or only if you're by two models, you can't move around the back to one model, because you were by two and need to be closer to both?

Only if you're in B2B with 2 models. B2B with one you can still slide around all day long.

**Ghaz**

From the Designer's Commentary:

Q: When one of my models piles in, if it is equally close to two different enemy models, do I have to finish the move as close or closer to each of those models? For example, if my model is in base contact with two enemy models, does it have to finish a pile-in move in base contact with both those models?

A: Yes to both questions – if this is impossible the model cannot move.

So it is possible (but not very probable) for a model to pile-in even if it's in base contact with two enemy models, but only if the model ends it's pile-in move in base contact with those same two enemy models.

**EnTyme**

So you could still do it if the model piling in could fly or otherwise move over enemy models.

**Farseer_V2**

EnTyme wrote:
So you could still do it if the model piling in could fly or otherwise move over enemy models.

I personally don't see why you couldn't - as long as you can adhere to the letter of the law.

**EnTyme**

Yep. Model can move over enemy models, so as long as you end in base to base with the same models, it should be a legal move.