|
fnordcircle posted:Does the new wording on concealment change that whole "I have to move closer to my attacker to get concealment because they're on the other side of this small forest and I'm only partially in" dumbness? I thought it did at first, but it's a separate thing from how forests work, if you go to the pertinent page. Shame, I get what they were going for, but it's led to some real flavor wonkiness in favor of gameplay.
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
Am I reading this wrong or can you only ever get up to +2 from Gang now?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
moths posted:Am I reading this wrong or can you only ever get up to +2 from Gang now? That has always been the case. Abilities with the same name never stack under any circumstances. There's, like, one specific rule that explicitly stacks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
moths posted:Am I reading this wrong or can you only ever get up to +2 from Gang now? Did you think gang stacked?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
One nice thing: Empower (from Strangewayes, for example) has its two sentences switched. It now first gets rid of Disruption and THEN allocates a focus. Nice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Luebbi posted:One nice thing: Empower (from Strangewayes, for example) has its two sentences switched. It now first gets rid of Disruption and THEN allocates a focus. Nice. It technically always worked that way in MK3, this was just to make it clearer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Farrow Brigands can now charge when using Hog Wild (again). Also, the clearly overpowered Wold Guardian was reined in by taking Sturdy away from it. e: Which is to make it work with Bradigus' feat, I know, but still. Wizard Styles fucked around with this message at 20:41 on Jul 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Wizard Styles posted:Farrow Brigands can now charge when using Hog Wild (again). Well then you know it's a buff, so...
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Why should I be angry about Sloan now? Someone in one of the FB groups is claiming she got buffed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
fnordcircle posted:Why should I be angry about Sloan now? Someone in one of the FB groups is claiming she got buffed. Instead of having a small chance of a top of turn 1 assassination if you have an idiot opponent her new feat is a bit of a buff in that the hunters can boost the feat shots now because it is during their activation. As someone playing Helynna I am utterly unconcerned by hunters no matter how many shots they get.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
S.J. posted:Well then you know it's a buff, so... I mean, Sturdy alone is hardly going to make or break a model, and tbh I don't really care about Bradigus or the Wold Guardian. But come on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Wizard Styles posted:Getting rid of a rules conflict with one caster by removing a rule is a buff? His DEF is low enough that not being able to be knocked down is practically irrelevant. A positive interaction with a powerful feat is a buff. Being able to be pushed or w/e is rarely going to be relevant for him outside of that. S.J. fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Jul 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Pyrolocutus posted:I thought it did at first, but it's a separate thing from how forests work, if you go to the pertinent page. Shame, I get what they were going for, but it's led to some real flavor wonkiness in favor of gameplay. I always just treat forests as also being hedges: if there's forest between the guy shootng at you and him it's concealment regardless of being completely within it or not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
S.J. posted:His DEF is low enough that not being able to be knocked down is practically irrelevant. A positive interaction with a powerful feat is a buff. Being able to be pushed or w/e is rarely going to be relevant for him. And that's a niché rule, sure, but one that can work well together with its animus, Shield Guard and Ram. It's not a big deal, and I realize that the Wold Guardian might get errata'd again in the future, but they took a rule away from a lovely model and I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to find that a little silly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
PaintVagrant posted:Did you think gang stacked? Haha, oops. Like I've said earlier, I only ever got a handful of Mk2 games in and that never came up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Wizard Styles posted:He still can't be KD'd, Sturdy is just no pushes. Derp, forgot about the knockdown thing. My bad. But removing what looks to be an obviously unintended negative rule interaction is silly to you? I mean obviously it's a buff, and arguably he needs it, since the guys purpose has changed quite a bit, he picked up more boxes and lost his anti-shooting animus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
S.J. posted:But removing what looks to be an obviously unintended negative rule interaction is silly to you? I mean obviously it's a buff, and arguably he needs it, since the guys purpose has changed quite a bit, he picked up more boxes and lost his anti-shooting animus. But that's beside the point. I just don't see why it was necessary to make the Wold Guardian work with Bradigus by removing Sturdy when they could have, for example, rewritten Bradigus' feat to make it not a push effect. Generally speaking, I think it'd be best if all these rules would let the player controlling the model with Sturdy or whatever choose whether or not to apply it, but I guess that's not in the books.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Also, I'd much rather talk about the Brigands than my half-assed throwaway joke about PP taking a rule away from the already underwhelming Wold Guardian. Because Brigands were already legit before Hog Wild charges were reinstated.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Due to a desire to just get some money to buy ret stuff for the Journeyman leagues I'm in, I have decided to allow parting out of my Skorne at 50% retail + shipping, which is listed here. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3783354 The one limitation is that I'd like any requests to be at least $150 retail so that it is worth the time and effort to pack it up and ship it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
Wizard Styles posted:Also, I'd much rather talk about the Brigands than my half-assed throwaway joke about PP taking a rule away from the already underwhelming Wold Guardian. Brigands are, in my opinion, the best unit in hordes right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
Privateer Press posted:Hand of Death. Replace the first sentence of Hand of Death with the Cool, Cannoneer has an AoE 4 gun with Grievous Wounds on the blast.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
Alpha Phoenix posted:Cool, Cannoneer has an AoE 4 gun with Grievous Wounds on the blast. Mammoth can puke out d3+1 3" grevious wounds AoEs a turn if that is true.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
So what exactly is the True Sight change?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:So what exactly is the True Sight change? True Sight will ignore clouds for determining LOS, but you will not ignore the concealment bonus models gain for being in the cloud (or any other bonuses the cloud may provide, such as druid clouds). It was worded ambiguously before as to whether or not it would ignore the concealment benefit from being fully within a cloud.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
fnordcircle posted:Why should I be angry about Sloan now? Someone in one of the FB groups is claiming she got buffed. Sloan's feat now gives +1 ROF to her and models in her battlegroup, and allows Sloan to cast Fire Group for free. I don't consider Sloan's errata a buff so much as being a shittier version of Haley1's feat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
TheInvisiblePooka posted:Sloan's feat now gives +1 ROF to her and models in her battlegroup, and allows Sloan to cast Fire Group for free. It's better with certain things because of guided fire and fire group.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
Boosting is pretty good though, and a potentially boosted damage aimed shot is a better than a granted shot outside of run shenanigans.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
Alpha Phoenix posted:Cool, Cannoneer has an AoE 4 gun with Grievous Wounds on the blast. Drake sprays with grevious wounds sound amazing. Also Siege Animantarax superiority. I really need to get one eventually.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
My sevvy list won! Turns out a trio of defender's warded Flame Bringers (who are speed 9 Mat 7 now!!) will run a train on purifiers, choir, and anything else they get their hands on. 'jack marshalled redeemer taking aim is also hella trill. I guess the exemplar did a bit of damage but mostly they did objective stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
gannyGrabber posted:My sevvy list won! Turns out a trio of defender's warded Flame Bringers (who are speed 9 Mat 7 now!!) will run a train on purifiers, choir, and anything else they get their hands on. 'jack marshalled redeemer taking aim is also hella trill. Flamebringers seem totally insane in mk3. Cant wait to try them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
OK, some quick rules questions that I think we screwed up this weekend : 1. What is affected by deceleration? I have my PG thinking I should get the ARM bonus against stuff with the magical attack icon. I'm 90% sure that's wrong though. The real quextionis what constitutes a "magic attack damage roll". I'm thinking that only attacks using your fury/focus/magic ability to roll to hit. Is that correct? That also creates an odd situation where certain attacks from spells like cyclone or flashing blade don't qualify for the ARM bonus. 2. For a Reaper, if it pulls off the drag attack, it lists that it gets an attack and then can make additional attacks. My question is do you get to make your full initial attacks of a helldiver and tusks and then start buying attacks, or does it go from its extra attack from Drag to buying extra attacks with focus? I'm thinking it's the latter, but I'm not sure enough to say something without some backup. rkajdi fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Jul 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:OK, some quick rules questions that I think we screwed up this weekend : 1. Magic Attacks are either spells or special effect (like star actions) that generally work the same as ranged attacks. If they aren't spells, they will tell you that they are Magic Attacks. 2. The good interpretation. You get a free attack then all your initials and then you can buy more if you want.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
I don't know about Decel, but Drag is the latter version. You pull them in, take a free melee swing, then you have the option to buy more.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
theironjef posted:2. The good interpretation. You get a free attack then all your initials and then you can buy more if you want. Nope. The card says you can make "additional melee attacks", which means that after the one freebie, you have to buy them with focus. Edit: Sorry about the double post!
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
TheInvisiblePooka posted:I don't consider Sloan's errata a buff so much as being a shittier version of Haley1's feat. In a straight comparison sure, but in the context of what Sloan will take in her battlegroup anyway it's fine. Haley 1 can run a great Jack gunline, but she runs an amazing combined arms force too and her feat suits that style of play.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
Also am I reading the errata right with throws? Or did nothing change? I am still confused at the wording. The way I currently understand it, is that if I throw something or someone, it goes in a straight line until it hits something of equal or larger base size, or until it hits an obstruction. If the target that I am throwing the throwee is farther than the throw distance derived by my current strength, then the throwee stops moving at that distance without deviation. I.E. if I use my Bronzeback to throw Alton Ashley (cause gently caress that guy) at Wurmwood (cause gently caress that guy) and Wurmwood is 20 inches away, then Ashley would be throw 6 5" in a straight line directly towards Wurmwood. Ashley woul land at 6.5 inches away from my Bronzeback at that exact spot since if the target is too far away there is no deviation at all with where the throwee lands. I'm not getting what if any changes the Errata made. Also, it's god damned annoying that oage numbers are referenced but they dont match in the warroom pdf.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 12:58
|
|
|
Madelyn Corbeau has earned a spot in every list with a caster who wants to play even remotely close to the front, Parlay saved Vlad's and Strakhov's asses so many times tonight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 13:30
|
|
|
PaintVagrant posted:Flamebringers seem totally insane in mk3. Cant wait to try them.  I'm not wholly convinced about taking a max unit of them, simply due to the prevalence of high arm and less units, but the min works wonders.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 14:55
|
|
|
Softface posted:Madelyn Corbeau has earned a spot in every list with a caster who wants to play even remotely close to the front, Parlay saved Vlad's and Strakhov's asses so many times tonight. Corbeau b2b behind Reznik2 with him camping 1 (and a shield guard to protect him from Eiryss stripping that focus) makes them both frustratingly invincible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
gannyGrabber posted:
Oh snap I just realized that they are totally insane with high reclaimer. God high reclaimer rules now. Hand of Fate flamebringers feated back into nice spots to go kill your caster or the things you love...
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 15:08
|
|