All times are UTC


It is currently Sat Feb 24, 2018 6:17 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 16, 2009 2:39 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:19 am
Posts: 36
Location: Denmark
If anyone finds text in the book to explain the Isengard Troll problem, please let me know.

The issue is:
Isengard Trolls are equipped with shields but adding +1D for that brings it's defense to 9 (from 8 ) compared to 7 for a mordor troll at the same cost (Mordor troll has one more fight).
Other units with shields have a base value without shield followed by the defense value with shield in parenthesis e.g. 4(5). This makes it easy to see what the defense value is when attacking front or side/rear.
As monsters only have front arc's the shield bonus is never negated. This could explain that the shield bonus is factored into the base defense of 8, instead of writing 7(8). However I can find no statement saying this is the case, so by the book the shield bonus has to be added, making the stat 8(9).

I'm confused!
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 3:44 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:19 am
Posts: 36
Location: Denmark
First post is updated after reviewing every single unit in the book. I'm sure there are more problems but I just can't find them. Pretty good quality for a book this size!!

_________________
LotR and WotR army builder
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:03 pm 
Elven Warrior
Elven Warrior
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:14 pm
Posts: 539
Location: Estonia
I dont know exactly as I dont have the Book

But acording to my memory adn experience the GW tend to write the profiles with equipment bonuses fully , that meaning the troll already has the bonus in his base profile value... :rofl:

_________________
I am the Mouth of Sauron, here him speak'
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:45 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:10 pm
Posts: 16
Mouth-of-Sauron wrote:
I dont know exactly as I dont have the Book

But acording to my memory adn experience the GW tend to write the profiles with equipment bonuses fully , that meaning the troll already has the bonus in his base profile value... :rofl:


The elves don't. They have Glaves, but the plus one is not added from what I can see. Since the Archers have the same F.

_________________
"Any sufficiently analyzed Magic is indistinguishable from Science!" – Agatha
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 5:28 pm 
Loremaster
Loremaster
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 6:26 pm
Posts: 1143
Location: In the midst of the chaos...
Cosworth wrote:
If anyone finds text in the book to explain the Isengard Troll problem, please let me know.


Page 322 - Armour Bonuses - Shield (monsters) - Included in profile.

:wink:

_________________
Studio gaarew; Gaming armies, by gamers, for gamers.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:30 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:19 am
Posts: 36
Location: Denmark
Nice find! :yay:

_________________
LotR and WotR army builder
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 04, 2009 12:37 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:33 am
Posts: 63
Location: Orthanc
Here are some... If we already have the answers to them then please let me know.

Saruman the White has a Courage value of 7. He is the only model in the whole game to have a courage value that high. A typo or is he just that special? Also, he has access to Dismay while Saruman the White Hand does not. Is this just a reinforced difference between the two types?

The rules for Grima Wormtongue need clarification. He is assigned to an enemy formation and decreases their F and C values. However, does this also affect any heroes in the formation? Furthermore, since he falls into the category of an Epic Hero can "jump" to different enemy formations in range?

Lurtz has Pathfinders (All). For starters, that category does not exist. Is it supposed to be Pathfinders (Master)? Second, does this special ability have any actual in-game benefit to a formation Lurtz joins?

_________________
And now… perfected. My fighting Uruk-hai!
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 04, 2009 12:52 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 19
Saruman's different spell lists are most likely due to his switch to evil, so yes, that should be right. The courage, I don't know, but I can see him being a very very good leader with that voice of his.

Not sure about Grima. I don't find anything that would let him jump to another formation.

Special rules on heroes do not carry over to anything. This is listed specificaly on pg. 69 in the little gray box. It's either there for fluff, or a carry over from an earlier version of the rules.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 04, 2009 1:02 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:33 am
Posts: 63
Location: Orthanc
Ogrob wrote:
Saruman's different spell lists are most likely due to his switch to evil, so yes, that should be right. The courage, I don't know, but I can see him being a very very good leader with that voice of his.


I am pretty sure the difference in spell lores is a "fluff" thing and, to a lesser extent, balancing factor but I felt the need to point it out anyway. I still find it interesting that Saruman the White has the highest courage value in the game though. It could be a typo or it could be another balancing factor.

Ogrob wrote:
Not sure about Grima. I don't find anything that would let him jump to another formation.


There is nothing in his special rule about it. However, all Epic Heroes are able to jump to another formation at the start of their formation's move. Does this extend to Grima and enemy formations? Then there is still the issue of whether he affects heroes in the formation?

Ogrob wrote:
Special rules on heroes do not carry over to anything. This is listed specificaly on pg. 69 in the little gray box. It's either there for fluff, or a carry over from an earlier version of the rules.


You are correct. The interesting thing is a lot of players in my area do have terror causing epic heroes transfer that ability to their company. This is largely thanks to the Evil Reputation Fate. Is there a separate entry somewhere about heroes being able to pass terror onto their formation or company?

_________________
And now… perfected. My fighting Uruk-hai!
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 04, 2009 3:46 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:19 am
Posts: 36
Location: Denmark
I've added the Grima question to the first post. The others are more or less answered already or covered by other questions.

_________________
LotR and WotR army builder
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 04, 2009 7:55 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 19
Angrok wrote:
You are correct. The interesting thing is a lot of players in my area do have terror causing epic heroes transfer that ability to their company. This is largely thanks to the Evil Reputation Fate. Is there a separate entry somewhere about heroes being able to pass terror onto their formation or company?


Special circumstance because of the terror rules. The rules don't transfer, it's enough that a single model in the company causes terror to provoke a terror test.
The rules on pg. 63 stipulate "terror causing creature" in all cases, which is a lot more likely to mean "model" then "formation". Creature is also used in singular, which means it's enough with a single model with terror to force the test.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WotR errors
PostPosted: Mon May 04, 2009 9:39 pm 
Loremaster
Loremaster
Offline

Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 6:37 pm
Posts: 1006
Location: Medway, Kent UK
Images: 1
Some of these are easily explained:

Quote:
Dunlending Huscarls may exchange their 2 handed weapons for shields, thus making them unarmed! Ironically this increases their FV.
Where's the problem, their are no unarmed rules in WOTR.?

Quote:
Gundabad Blackshields have no weapon entry in their profile.
They have shields, therfore they have hand weapons.

Quote:
War Mûmak has 13 crew listed in formation box but only 12 attacks in crew stats.
the 13th is the commander who does not have a bow, therefore cannot attack, hence A12 for the Mumaks crew.

Quote:
Paralysing Touch causes a casualty for each hit in close combat (p.209). This wording will allow Barrow-wights to wipe out e.g. an Ent very easily as it apparantly ignores the hard-to-kill tables. The intention was probably: "Paralysing Touch ignores the targets resilience".
Doesn't mention ignoring hard to hit tables, just that each hit is a wound , so each hit rolls on the table as you suggest.

Quote:
Glaives/Pikes - These add one to the fight value but seem not to be included in the statblock as armor and shields are (see p.56 example). This takes high Elves to fight 7 though and High Elven captains equal Elrond in fight value.
Not a problem, a company uses a heroes F, so if Elrond joins a glaive armed company their Fight will be F9.

Quote:
Warmachines are not listed with the number of crew. It might be implicitly understood that when a dwarf ballista crew has 3 attacks there are also 3 crew, but only 2 are depicted. (Artillery rule explains there are always 3 crew)
Page 61 tells us artillery have 3 crew.

Quote:
Ringwraith's can be used in 3 army lists, but it's not specified if this goes for Ringwraith's on fell beasts. The witch-king on fell beast on p.207 suggests you can, but the wording on p.211 doesn't include winged Nazgul.
The box out tells us they can use Nazgul Epic heroes from page 163 - this means wraiths on wings are excluded as they are on a different page and are not epic heroes.

Quote:
Dark Marshal When he is the leader in a Mordor army do Morgul knights count as common choices from the allied list of Fallen Realms?
doesn't say he does, so no. He needs to be the leader of the BN's, if he is in another list then he isn't.

Quote:
The rules for Grima Wormtongue need clarification. He is assigned to an enemy formation and decreases their F and C values. However, does this also affect any heroes in the formation? Furthermore, since he falls into the category of an Epic Hero can he "jump" to different enemy formations in range?
A company uses a heroes F so it would be reduced, he can only jump to a friendly unit as per the rules.

Hope that helps,
Dave[/quote]
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 6:27 am 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:19 am
Posts: 36
Location: Denmark
Thanks for your input Hithero. I know you take rule interpretation serious, but as I disagree with you on a number of your points, it's fair to say your opinions are at least disputed and the rules could need a clarification.

The "statblock errors" are simply that and don't necessarily need to be a problem. Simply an observation and not so important.

Mumak - Then you'd allow 7 shots from a full Howdah instead of 6? Then you'd need 2 crew dead to have a chance of causing a stampede? Pretty significant interpretation you have there. I don't know where you have the "leader doesn't have a bow" from? from SBG maybe?

The winged nazgul issues are at least disputed. Remember the whole legendary cost discussion where the examples finally won the argument? - Well here the winged nazgul on the Angmar army picture on p.207 is a good example in favour of allowing them as core choices. The winged nazgul entry makes specific references to the ringwraith epic heroes, further indicating the relation we all know is there.

The Dark Marshall doesn't need to spell it out. The special rule is connected to the morgul knights and BN so it doesn't need repeating just because the Dark Marshal is added from another list.

As for Grima you might be right. I'd favour your version at least.

_________________
LotR and WotR army builder
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 6:50 am 
Loremaster
Loremaster
Offline

Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 6:37 pm
Posts: 1006
Location: Medway, Kent UK
Images: 1
The mumaks leader does not have a bow in model or rules. It has A12 so could shoot 12 times except for the special rule which havs it, so a maximum of 6 shots. Stampede, yes that will make a difference, guess it is a bit of sloppy rulewring or maybe it is intentional that the mumak is immune from stampeded for the first wound. Could be a sort of effect the commander has in SBG when he has Might and Will to resist stampede - never happens with the first wound.

Dark Marshal - if it were a realm wide rule then the rule would have been under his profile and not under one particular army list. His Morgul knight allegiance is specific to him leading that army list.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:03 am 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 19
The Dark Marshall's rule is listed specifically related to a Fallen Kingdoms army, so only applies if he in fact leads one of those.

Legendary formation costs were taken from example lists, a picture of a winged ringwraith is an entirely different thing. The picture in question doesn't feature movement trays either, so they must not be needed in an Angmar list, or? The entry says "Epic Heroes", not "Legendary Formations", and that's that. Two different things. You can't have Twilight Ringwraiths or the Nine Abroad either.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:30 am 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:19 am
Posts: 36
Location: Denmark
Ogrob wrote:
The Dark Marshall's rule is listed specifically related to a Fallen Kingdoms army, so only applies if he in fact leads one of those.
of course it is because you only can select those troops in a Fallen realms list. The fluff reason is that troops flock to the army because he is there (i.e. going from rare to common choices) so it shouldn't matter what "army list" he's from - it's still him.

Quote:
Legendary formation costs were taken from example lists, a picture of a winged ringwraith is an entirely different thing. The picture in question doesn't feature movement trays either, so they must not be needed in an Angmar list, or? The entry says "Epic Heroes", not "Legendary Formations", and that's that. Two different things. You can't have Twilight Ringwraiths or the Nine Abroad either.

What is sitting on a fell best if not the epic hero ringwraith? Doesn't it even lend it's special rules to the winged nazgul. Doesn't the winged nazgul specifically refer to the epic hero ringwraiths as well? doesn't a named ringwraith prohibit taking the same ringwraith on a fell beast?
Claiming they are two distinct entities is false. Nine abroad and twilight ringwraiths are not allowed for other reasons, so the don't factor into the discussion.
So even though the fluff and picture on page 207 favours winged nazgul in Angmar and Fallen realms lists as core choices you prefer a very strict interpretation of the ringwraith inclusion rules for these armies? (retorical question) I prefer a "friendlier" game and would always allow my opponent the benefit of the doubt.

Anyway, I'm just saying that these issues could do with a clarification.
So can we please agree to disagree :pray:

_________________
LotR and WotR army builder
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 11:40 am 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:19 am
Posts: 36
Location: Denmark
hithero wrote:
The mumaks leader does not have a bow in model or rules. It has A12 so could shoot 12 times except for the special rule which havs it, so a maximum of 6 shots. Stampede, yes that will make a difference, guess it is a bit of sloppy rulewring or maybe it is intentional that the mumak is immune from stampeded for the first wound. Could be a sort of effect the commander has in SBG when he has Might and Will to resist stampede - never happens with the first wound.

I can't find a reference to a leader model wihtout a bow anywhere. Where are you getting that from? I can see him in the picture - but half the crew don't have bows either - so the wysiwig argument doesn't hold up. why isn't the leader listed with might points or at least stats?
The attacks are not listed as "half the attacks value" - it's "half the number of crew rounded up". So you are saying there is a leader model without a bow that doesn't count as part of the crew for the purpose of shooting? Sounds very complicated :?
It's much easier to say that either there are 12 or 13 crew/attacks - That's why it needs to be FAQ'ed.

_________________
LotR and WotR army builder
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 12:05 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 19
Cosworth wrote:
Anyway, I'm just saying that these issues could do with a clarification.
So can we please agree to disagree :pray:


One more thing, and sure, we'll leave it there.

Pg. 162 makes reference to the section "There are Nine...", not to the epic hero ringwraith entry, which is in fact only the first half of pg. 163. Even the Ringwraith entry on pg. 163 references the below section of rules as if it was a separate rules entry.

To further differentiate the Ringwraith from the Winged Nazgul, the Winged Nazgul does not have access to any epic actions. In no way is a Winged Nazgul to be interpreted as an epic hero, not can the Ringwraith part of it move to another formation.

Epic heroes from pg. 163 does not mean Legendary Formations from pg. 162.

But all right, let's not get heated over anything as silly as rules. For my part, I hope GW produces a FAQ quick enough, and that it doesn't sound like the last Warhammer FAQ I read.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 2:33 pm 
Loremaster
Loremaster
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 6:26 pm
Posts: 1143
Location: In the midst of the chaos...
OK, try as hard as I might, I can't agree that Winged Nazgul can be included in Fallen Realms/Angmar armies. Unless you follow the standard procedure for allies. This seems strange as you could field the Witch-king as a Winged Nazgul, although he would not be the leader.


The wording reads -

Quote:
A Fallen Realms (Angmar) army is allowed to choose the following Epic Heroes as if they were part of the Fallen Realms (Angmar) army list (see page 163):


Page 163 is the entry for Ringwraith.

A Ringwraith is an Epic Hero. (Single model)

Quote:
Your army may include up to 9 Nazgul or Ringwraiths in any combination.


So, the reference to Epic Heroes means a Ringwraith.

A Winged Nazgul is a Legendary Formation. (Single model)

Quote:
Your army may include up to 9 Nazgul or Ringwraiths in any combination.



The box-out is poorly written, as, technically, there is no such model as a Nazgul. The entry is Winged Nazgul...

Now, the Winged Nazgul are Legendary Formations, not Epic Heroes. They do not have Epic Actions.

In the profile for Sauron (in both guises), Gulavhar, Buhrdur (whom, as they are mounted on 40mm or larger bases are Legendary Formations) etc, under the Epic Actions text, it is written

Quote:
X can use the following Epic actions as if he were an Epic Hero


So, there is an obvious distinction between an Epic Hero and a Legendary Formation. A Legendary Formation consisting of a single model on a 40mm base is considered a Hero, but not an Epic Hero. As the Winged Nazgul entry does not include this line of text, it cannot be classed as an Epic Hero, meaning that they are not covered by the wording of the rule.

Quote:
There are Nine...

Each time you include a Ringwraith or Winged Nazgul in your army, you must choose which of the nine Ringwraiths it represents. You may field each of the Ringwraiths only once, either as a Ringwraith, or a Winged Nazgul.


The problem here is that the term Ringwraith is used to mean two things.

In it's singular form (Ringwraith) it means the Epic Hero.

As a plural (Ringwraiths) it is used to refer to the 9 Black Riders. OR more than 1 Epic Hero Ringwraith...

Essentially, there are 9 Black Riders, which may be chosen as either a Ringwraith or a Winged Nazgul. Each can only be chosen once, but, they can take either form.

_________________
Studio gaarew; Gaming armies, by gamers, for gamers.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 10:06 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 6:26 pm
Posts: 8
Location: Isengard
Saruman the White is the good Saruman. He has access to the Spells of Command, Dismay, and Ruin. Saruman the White Hand is evil. He has access to the Spells of Command and Ruin. In the Rulebook, it states the spells of Dismay are used only seldomly by good-doers, but things of evil revel in them. If this is true, why does the Evil Saruman (The White Hand) not have access to these evil spells of Dismay? In SBG I know that Saruman could use Terrifying Aura (A spell of Dismay) because I saw it in a battle report. Please clarify why Evil people cannot use Evil spells.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: