wisetiger7

Have you tried turning it off and on again?

Gotcha. For some reason I thought he was back.

<crickets chirping>

Also, will you be posting everyone's lists, like last year?

IcyHot mixed with ghost pepper extract. Check.

Dude. Bro. That looks awesome. Let's see it painted!

Three questions: 1. In Scenario 3 All About the Core, does "Each unit standard" include all unit standards or only core unit standards? 2. Same Scenario, do you get a bonus point for the BSB staying alive as well? 3. In Scenario 5 King of the Hill, does "Each friendly hero" mean Hero or Character? In other words, do you get a point for a Lord on the hill too? Or just Heroes?

I have two starter boxes of Directorate I've been meaning to put together, so I'm down for some Firestorm Armada if others are. I also have the book in pdf. If anyone wants a copy, pm me your email address. Otherwise, I have Retribution army for WarmaHordes, and a Grey Knight Killteam.

I don't know much about Lizardmen; I have seldom seen them in action. But from what I can ascertain from the book, if you go slann and monsters, I would think Troglodons would be the way to go. Arcane Vassal will allow you to extend the range and LoS of your spells, making your slann more effective across the battlefield, someone who will most likely be in a slower unit, and want to stay back anyway. Plus Primeval Roar is awesome for that one time buff to Predatory Fighter for grouped units. Divining rod isn't a bad way to get an extra channeling attempt either, for a mere 15 pts. It doesn't seem that great in combat, low WS and only a 4+ save, but it's a great support monster, and still has S5 TStomp, so it would be great for combo charges, especially in the flank/rear, as it has slightly higher Movement at M7 than other monsters save Carnosaurs. The only thing I question is why the eff is Spit Venom not poisonous?!?

Buh... When I went to the Team Check In thread, I counted 25 teams. That's 100 players that plan on being there. 70 spots open means there's going to be a very tight race on picking up the remaining tickets. Unless you guys are expecting 30% of those teams to drop out...

LOL

Regarding The Curse of Anraheir "The Curse of Anraheir is a hex with range of 36". The target unit suffers a -1 penalty to its To Hit rolls (to both its shooting and close combat attacks) until the start of the caster's next Magic phase. In addition, the unit treats all terrain (other than impassable terrain) as dangerous terrain and will fail Dangerous Terrain tests on a 1 or 2, rather than a 1. The Wizard can choose to extend the range of this spell to 72". If he does so, the casting value is increased to 13+." [bRB page 165] Regarding Dangerous Terrain "Some areas of terrain are incredibly treacherous and present a very real risk to life and limb. When a model marches, charges, flees, overruns or pursues into or through an area of dangerous terrain, it is called upon to take a Dangerous Terrain test - roll a D6. On a 2-6, the model successfully negotiates the dangers of the terrain and reaches its destination safe and sound. If a 1 is rolled, however, the model has suffered a terrible mishap and suffers a wound with no armor saves allowed... As such, cavalry, monstrous cavalry and chariots treat all terrain other than open ground as being dangerous terrain, as described above. A chariot that fails a Dangerous Terrain test suffers D6 wounds instead of 1." [bRB page 117] Regarding Open Ground "Open terrain is the most prevalent type of battlefield terrain and thus the 'default' setting - any terrain not specifically classed as something else is to be treated as open ground. All the rules as presented thus far assume that your game is being played on open terrain - grassy fields, sandy flats, sun-parched earth, and so on. It therefore doesn't affect the game, and we don't need to provide any further detail." [brb page 116] Regarding Usirian's Incantation of Vengeance "Usirian's Incantation of Vengeance is a hex spell with a range of 18". The target unit suffers -D3 to its Movement (to a minimum of 1) and treats all terrain (even open ground) as Dangerous Terrain, testing every time it moves (including when charging, fleeing, pursuing, moving compulsorily, etc.) until the start of the caster's next Magic phase. The Wizard can instead choose to extend the range of this spell to 36". If he does so, the casting value is increased to 13+." [Tomb Kings AB page 61] So... Let's say there is a unit of cavalry (Dragon Princes) on open ground. Curse of Anraheir has been cast on it. Let's also assume there is a forest a couple inches in front of it. On the other side of the forest, there is another forest a couple inches away, which, nestled within, is an enemy unit (Wildwood Rangers). Now let's say the Dragon Princes charge the Wildwood Rangers, and make the distance. How many Dangerous Terrain checks do they have to take? By RAW it would be 4. [see below for graphic] As stated in Curse, "the unit treats all terrain (other than impassable terrain) as dangerous terrain". Open Ground (interchangeable with Open Terrain) is a form of terrain, as evidenced in its rule above, and further reinforced by the submission of the Dangerous Terrain rule that states "all terrain other than open ground", which identifies open ground as terrain. This would mean that it would take a test on the Open Ground as it is moving into or through Open Ground, then into or through the first forest, then into or through Open Ground again, then finally, into or through the second forest which houses the charged enemy unit within. That's 4 checks, ladies and gentlemen, all of which fail on a 1 or 2. I hate GW. I bring up the Tomb Kings spell because it piles on the fact that yes, open ground should be considered terrain as it states "...treats all terrain (even open ground)..." Where some might consider the spell's wording to indicate that Open Ground embodies a separate entity than the other terrain, I'd like to indicate that the use of the word 'even' in this context is used to emphasize the inclusive nature relative to other terrain. I'd like to reiterate that Curse states that the only type of terrain that is not treated as dangerous terrain is impassable terrain, affirming the inclusivity of Open Terrain. So the questions that arise from these rules is three-fold: 1) Is Open Ground/Open Terrain considered to be terrain? If so, 2) Is a unit moving over Open Ground/Open Terrain subject to Dangerous Terrain checks if under Curse of Anraheir? If so, 3) How many checks does it take in the aforementioned scenario?

I think I agree with MexicanNinja on this one. First, he never said OFCC is the place for WAAC lists/players. I think we are all in agreement there. Secondly, I agree, there is a time and place where WAAC can be enjoyable. Our group plays some very tough lists against each other once in a very long while. And a lot of the time, we bring lists that we think are average-hard lists, but end up being way OP. That is usually the last time we play those lists, because as a group, we like friendlier games. But I agree with MN in that for the most part, WAAC is an attitude, not an actual list. Every list will have strengths and weaknesses. Yes, sometimes weaknesses won't be too apparent, and strengths will overshadow them. But the way the game is built, if your list is strong against one or more armies, it doesn't necessarily mean it is strong against all armies. There is a sense of balance established within the foundation of the game. There will always be some weakness to exploit. Sure it won't always be apparent. Sure you might need to retool a list to beat the hard one. And then they will retool theirs to beat yours, etc. Similar things happen in real battle. If you lose a battle, you analyze where you were weak, and compensate for it, or find a weakness in your enemy, and exploit it. WAAC is an attitude, more than anything. Yes there are broken lists. Yes there are really hard-to-beat lists. But there are ways to beat them. IF, however, you and your opponent agree to bring the cheese, and you don't have the WAAC mentality, then yes, you can still have an enjoyable game, even if the both of you bring WAAC-y lists. And even with a WAAC mentality, if you can enjoy the game even if you lose, then yes, that could be good to. Who wants to play against someone who gives up before the game even starts? You play to win. You don't play to lose. The difference is grace. If you can have grace in victory or defeat, that, I believe, is prominent in the Spirit of OFCC. That, I believe, is what MN is trying to say.

Da fuq?!? (I hope this is a joke ) If you are referring to their whole army as chaff (as in, they are worthless throwaways), then yes, I guess it's all chaff. But true chaff has to be HE. Hands down. Eagles and core Reavers = best chaff ever... Yes dark riders are slightly better than Reavers, but Eagles beat out anything anyone else can field with regards to chaff. 20" fly move, multi-role (redirectors, railroaders, war machine hunters, weapon team hunters, march blockers, flank and rear charging for CR, etc), can hunt down other chaff with WS5, S4, T4, 3W, and has moderate leadership to rally in case you choose to flee. All for 50 points, and the possibility for upgrades like ASF with I4. Not only are they the very definition of chaff, their multiple roles and incredibly cheap cost make them the best chaff in the game. Period. Reavers in core is incredible. For 80 points you get almost all the functionality of an eagle. 18" fast cav move, fills all the same roles, can be upgraded (I almost always give spears and bows for multi-role functionality) to be S4 on the charge, have 5 shots a round, even when they flee and rally or march and shoot, offering something the eagles don't, multi-threat in range and close combat, as well as not being pinned down by anti-fly spells. With two eagles, and as many core Reaver 5-man units as you want, it is an army bred to control the battlefield. These are the best throwaway units in Warhammer. Boom. Knowledge dropped. *drops mic*

Lacy gently wafting curtains...

May we ask how the changes came about regarding the deadline, ratings system, and points modification? And why 5 days before the original deadline?

While drak makes a valid point (and I can see it from his point of view), I have to agree with MexicanNinja. Rules that are specific for a certain army (including their FAQs) do not necessarily translate over to other armies, or general rules themselves. If this Frenzy rule for Blood Knights was intended for all cav units with Frenzy, then they would have included it in the BRB FAQ, not the army specific FAQ, and used a specific army as an example. For instance: "Q: If a character is required to join a unit and all units are required to test to see if they are held in reserve or moved on from a board edge at the start of a turn, how is this resolved? (p97) A: Before rolling for any units you must nominate which unit each character that is required to join a unit is going to be deployed with and then roll once to determine if they all turn up or all are delayed. For example a Skaven army with a Grey Seer on a Screaming Bell is playing against an Orc & Goblin army with Skarsnik. The Grey Seer would have to nominate which unit of Clanrats or Stormvermin he is joining before any rolls are made to see which units are delayed by Skarsnik." [bRB FAQ pg. 9] In this example, we see a rule that encompasses all armies (in the BRB FAQ), yet makes reference to specific armies to explain it. Because the Frenzy reference is specific to the Vampire FAQ, we must assume that it is ONLY in reference to that specific unit of Blood Knights. The Ogre FAQ refers to the question of whether or not a Slaughtermaster can take magical armor. Though it was not initially intended, GW has issued the response that it is allowed, even though they ask that players not take advantage of it, as it was not their original intention. Using drak's point of view, then all wizards who can take mundane armor should not take magical armor as it is against GW's original intent. That is objectively false, and thus we must conclude that it is specific to Ogres only, not all wizards, and respectively, Frenzy to Blood Knights. We also know that GW has the language to explain whether rider and mount or only the rider or only the mount get Frenzy (as evidenced by the Savage Orc Boar Boyz entry) since the release of the first 8th Ed Army Book, and so we can conclude that Frenzy (without the "riders/mount only" caveat) includes both rider and mount.

Might want to consider this: Under Vampire FAQ - "Q: Do the Nightmares in a unit of Blood Knights benefit from the Extra Attack special rule from the unit’s Frenzy? (p45) A: No."

"Blood Frenzy: Once the Carnosaur (not his rider) has inflicted an unsaved Wound, it immediately becomes the subject to Frenzy. Furthermore, the carnosaur never loses its Frenzy."

Thanks Swan, and thanks Raindog. It's good to get that cleared up!

So here comes the Frenzy-mount question again: Under Wild Riders - "SPECIAL RULES: Always Strikes First (Riders only), Devastating Charge (Riders only), Fast Cavalry, Fear, Forest Stalker, Frenzy." [WE Army Book pg. 47] Under Frenzy - "To represent their fighting fury and lack of self preservation instincts, Frenzied troops have the Extra Attack and Immune to Psychology special rules." [bRB pg. 70] Under Extra Attack - "A model with this special rule (or who is attacking with a weapon that bestows this special rule) increases his Attacks value by 1." [bRB pg. 69] Under Cavalry and Special Rules - "Unless otherwise noted, special rules that apply to the mount do not normally also apply to the rider, and vice versa. There are, however, a few exceptions: If the rider or the mount causes Fear or Terror, then the entire combined model is assumed to cause Fear/Terror. If either the rider or the mount is subject to Stupidity, then the whole model is affected by the result of the test. If either the rider or the mount are Immune to Psychology or immune to Fear, Terror or Panic, then so is the whole model. If either the rider or the mount have Frenzy, then the whole model is subject to the Berserk Rage, but only the element with the Frenzy rule gains an Extra Attack." [bRB pg. 82] Under Warriors of Chaos Errata - "Page 24 - Army Special Rules, Mark of Khorne. Add the following line to the second paragraph: 'In the case of models with the cavalry, monstrous cavalry, chariot or monster unit type, only the rider has the Extra Attack special rule.'" [WoC FAQ pg. 1] Under Savage Orc Boar Boyz - "SPECIAL RULES: Animosity, Frenzy (Savage Orcs only), Choppas (Savage Orcs only), Size Matters, Thick-skinned, Tusker Charge (War Boars only), Warpaint." [O&G Army Book pg. 41] So I know that this has been debated before. I believe RAW-wise, at least for Wild Riders, the Frenzy rule is applied to all elements of the unit. The reason for this is because within the same Special Rules entry, there are rules (ASF and Devastating Charge) that are specific to the riders only. This affirms that Frenzy is not specific to rider or mount, but applies to both. This is further backed up by the fact that the Savage Orc Boar Boyz entry specifically states Savage Orcs only, NOT the boars as well. If Frenzy for Wild Riders was only supposed to be on the Riders themselves, and not their mounts, they would also have included the "Riders only" caveat. Thus we must conclude that both the Riders and the Steeds of Kurnous have the Frenzy rule, and thus the Rider gets the Extra Attack special rule and the Steed gets the Extra Attack special rule. I included the Mark of Khorne as well, for reference only to the fact that the WoC book and FAQ indicate that the Mark itself goes on the rider. However, I believe that the Banner of Rage gives Frenzy to the entire unit, mounts included. Could we please get a ruling one way or the other so there is no disagreement come tourney weekend? Thank you in advance!

Take pride, Portland gamers. High Elf, High on Acid, Attacks Woman's BMW with a Sword

Your mom's a bus... Cause, you know... Multiple people ride her at a time.

Personally, I like the list. Paraphrasing MexicanNinja, there are a ton of stuff that you could be taking that would be the asspain-staple of vamp lists, but you're not, and that's commendable. I love the chaff/redirectors in the list. In an army that doesn't move as fast as you might want, the redirectors will give you some spacing and board control back. Lord on Dragon is awesome. I'd say deck him the eff out. There isn't much punch to your list save the horrors and support throne, so you need some hitting power. With the threat of being cannoned as a lone target, coupled with potential crumble factor if you lose him, it is more than acceptable to make him a very tough focal point for your army, both tactics-wise and modeling possibilities. I don't get the 'bus' comment either. There isn't anything that's MI to bus. If by 'bus' you mean star, 9 is way too few for a star, you'd need at least 18 to get that third rank's attacks in. If anything, it is just a very tough unit, and only one out of 13 units. Ghouls will likely have some decent hitting power, but die in droves, so its better for pitting than anything else, so I think the Horrors have an acceptable quantity as an offensive unit with some staying power. I'd say it's a solid list.

Though you may have your Tyrant as your general, for me, I prefer to give a little protection to my slaughtermasters. Not by armor saves or ward saves, but rather inability to hit him. Fencers blades and Glittering Scales is a great combo. Fencers blades gives him an extra attack and WS10. That means most core troops with WS3 or 4 need a 5+ to hit him. With Glittering Scales, they only hit him on 6's. Even chaos warriors only hit him on a 5+. Couple that with T5, that makes him hard to wound with the average rank and file - S3 needs 6's, S4 needs 5+, and so on. This makes him hard to hit and hard to wound. Throw on an Opal Amulet for a little save protection, and you've got a pretty formidable fighter/caster. Most people use a L1 to take Lore of Maw, so the Slaughtermaster can take another lore. Just something to think about, as Maw is a little weak, compared to some of the Basic 8 they can take. But if that's your intention, I commend you. I think it is a softer list than what you brought the year before, definitely more in the spirit of OFCC, I would think. But I think it could be a very fun list, well-rounded, and you got a little of everything to make if fun for you as well as your opponent. PS. I love maneaters!