wisetiger7

I still don't see where it gives any references whatsoever to how many dispel dice you get... Therefore, I believe that the total dispel dice in the pool (before channel attempts, stored dice, etc) is the highest 1d6, not the highest 2d6.

To take another look at the stupid ET rules for magic, GW, in their utter insanity or incompetence, did not bring up the issue of army dispel attempts or dispelling for dwarfs. It specifically states that "you must roll a d6 to see how many dice a wizard can use to dispel a spell". So, by RAW, you can choose to dispel with your army and choose any number of dice in your dispel dice pool for your dispel attempt, and dwarfs can always choose the same way, meaning they never have to roll a d6 to see how many dice they can attempt the dispel with. Furthermore, because it specifically says 'wizard' for both the d6 roll for PD and DD, it does not mention non wizards with bound spells or items with bound spells. So, apparently, when casting a bound spell with a non-wizard, again you don't have to roll the d6 to see how many you can attempt the roll with. The same with wizard-like characters that aren't wizards, like warrior-priests from Empire. They have channel attempts like wizards, but don't count as wizards. So they can cast their bound spells with any number of PD as normal. F***ing GW.

I don't understand anything you just said. All kidding aside, <asian accent> soh 'spensive!

Personally, I wouldn't mind trying the rules out. The fact that you have to roll a d6 before you attempt a spell could very well balance the 4d6/no loss of concentration. I think it would get more difficult to cast spells, now that you have to depend on the d6 roll AND the actual casting attempt roll to have a spell go off. This also may make the cheaper/less used spells usable again, since everyone is (old) loremaster. I also don't think High Elves will get THAT much better. Sure Loremaster of Hoeth is good. Teclis is good too (both get 56 spells, woo!). Book of Hoeth is the only army specific Arcane item, which can give a significant edge. But they've always had it. But short of Avatar Alarielle, no one in the High Elf army has the Loremaster special rule (which I still think is stupid as f*** - LOREMASTER of Hoeth doesn't have the Loremaster special rule, nor does Teclis, who is the High LOREMASTER). Rerolling all casting dice can be huge, to which High Elves are greatly outclassed by those armies where the Loremaster rule is available. It also says that spells can be used any number of times in each Magic phase, as long as all previous attempts to cast the spell have been successful. It does not specify per wizard. That means for you MM spammers, if one of your L1s failed to cast the spell, all the rest of your L1s can't cast it again. So it will hinder you a bit if you are banking on spamming Doom Bolt, say. If you fail with one wizard, there goes that strategy. PS. This is all speculation, according to the image posted up so far across various sites (as seen below). I don't know if I'm missing a pertinent page that might change my understanding of the new rules.

You forgot Muskrat

Ahh, true. Well... Tyrion Avatar of Khaine you could... I guess, for the most part, special characters just aren't that much better than vanilla characters, and some are a whole lot worse.

Can we at least use the SCs from ET:Khaine? I don't want to go up against Nagash or Karl Franz or Glottkin with lame version of Tyrion. Pahahaha!

Still feeling crappy, won't be making it down.

I like to place the actual bases on the movement tray while I'm fitting the edges. That way I'm not measuring using exact millimeters, but rather the actual base sizes, then add a millimeter or two. This allows for better end results, and a better overall fit for the models.

@intrinzic - I have tried pretty much every kind of movement tray out there, save the premade ones like base-x-of-war. The ones I have liked the most were ones I made out of styrene (plasticard), much like those in your link in the OP. One tip though: for every 5 20mm models (100mm), leave an extra 1-2mm of space. What took me several tries to figure out was that the styrene shrinks when you glue it (I use the Zap line glues). Not only do you have to account for this, but paint as well. People may not consider the thickness of paint on the movement tray, but it does add up. Leaving an extra 1-2mm of space will account for shrinkage (heh) and paint, and still allow your models to fit nicely. On top of that, I also cut up some tin sheets and insert them in the tray, glueing them with Zap as well. This allows for magnetization for neodymium (rare earth) magnets you glue to the underside of all your bases. Depending on the size of the magnets, this should allow for a solid magnetic hold, yet still weak enough to 'slide' models around or take off casualties. Regarding Shogun Miniatures trays, I ordered 11 plates off of them, and they all were waaay too big, especially the cavalry plates. I had an extra 4-5mm space, and that just looks ugly. Plus it is difficult to paint directly onto steel. I've heard that if you purchase their magnetic bases, they fit the trays better, but now you just have bigger bases, and more costs. The nice thing about shogun trays, though, is that the lips are so small that you may not need to paint them, as they are close to indiscernable when fielded. Balsa is okay, as is maple, but the latter is too hard to cut, and the former so soft that the slightest amount of pressure can warp it. The following are the exact products I use to make trays: Evergreen Scale Models #9020 Plain - .020" Thick (0.5mm) x 6" x 12", 3 sheets (these are the plasticard/styrene sheets) Evergreen Scale Models #369 .080" x .250" x 24" (2mm x 3mm strips, 24" long, for the edges of the trays) K&S #254 Tin Sheet 4" x 10" x .008" (for magnetizing) edit: The reason I use quarter inch wide strips is so that I can put two together and use that as separators for skirmisher units. Magnetizing these 'inner' strips allows you to pop them out so you can slide all your skirmishers together when they get into combat. And .080" is the approximate height of model bases, so it matches somewhat flush-ly with them.

I could be up for a smaller tournament. SCs?

how many people are you expecting so far?

Details? End Times? 50/50? etc.

ET:Khaine drops a week before? Might this tome be allowed at Rampage as well?

PAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

50/50 and ET allowed... what about SCs?

Sounds freaking awesome. I'm in!

The second paragraph in the Spell Generation section of the BRB states: When you chose your army, you should have selected which Lore of Magic each of your Wizards is going to use... This will sometimes be one of the Lores of Battle Magic - the eight most commonly used sorcerous disciplines included in this rulebook, but many Wizards have race-specific spell lores to choose from as well, as described in the appropriate Warhammer Armies book. The new FAQ states: Page 162 – Spell Generation At the end of the second paragraph, add: “The Lore of Undeath is available to any Wizard.” This means that choosing Lore of Undeath is a part of normal Spell Generation, as per the BRB. I agree that grey seer should be able to use Lore of Undeath. Any Wizard should, except those that say something like 'this model does not generate spells like normal, but instead do blah blah blah', like Teclis and the Loremaster (and probably others). GW is really effing lazy and doesn't like to do things correctly. They don't seem to remember their own rule that states: On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a Warhammer Armies book. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the Warhammer Armies book always takes precedence. This specifically says that the way your Grey Seer uses spells stated in the Skaven army book supercedes the BRB. The way to select spells in the Skaven army book takes precedence over the way you select spells in the BRB. If it didn't take precedence over the BRB, then Grey Seers would be able to choose Lore of Fire or Lore of Life, etc. If GW actually did it properly, they would have errata'd every Army book to state that their Wizards could also take Lore of Undeath, not to lazily put it in the BRB. Just another classic example of the lackadaisical effort on GW's part. They just wanted to rush the rule out there so they could start selling their overpriced, game-unbalancing models. Way to go GW. Hope your new CEO gets fired too. Oh, and don't even get me started on the new Wood Elf "FAQ". Tl;dr - All wizards should be able to use Lore of Undeath (except Teclis, Loremaster, and the like). And GW are full of greedy idiots.

"Page 162 – Spell Generation At the end of the second paragraph, add: “The Lore of Undeath is available to any Wizard.” " Except Teclis. And the Loremaster. And any other Wizard that doesn't "generate spells following the normal rules".

Yah, I didn't even notice this error. Yet they didn't answer any actual FAQs that players actually have. I hate GW.

Holy damn. That's a sexy f**king model.

It is rumored to have all the stat lines for every model so far and their descriptions.

How does one get -1?

Pahahaha! I love how you joke...

I like it. It keeps the feel of dwarfs without going too crazy. 20.4 for Swiss Comp though... if the range is from 10-18 (what was initially stated, don't know if that has changed), 20.4 might be a little low. Even though this is a friendly, noncompetitive event, you still might want to beef it up a little bit... Personally, I really wish they made slayer core so you could have an entire slayer army... like 3rd or 4th or whatever edition they had where you could take a complete slayer army.