Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 805.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • Quote from Nesro: “If a unit has two (or more) different shooting weapons, are those shots simultanious for the purpose of distributing hits? ” Yes.

  • Quote from Micalovits: “1: When a character charges out of a unit, do you use his model for determining what arc he is charging, or the unit? ” It's the former: < 21.B.d.1 Charging out of a Unit As soon as the Character declares a Charge, it is considered a separate unit (i.e. it uses its own Advance Rate, all hits from Stand and Shoot Charge Reactions will hit the Character, in case of a Flee Charge Reaction, the enemy unit Flees away from the Character, etc.). > Quote from Micalovits: “2: When…

  • Quote from youngseward: “Mist Walkers Mirror notes that the unit counts as having performed a march move. Being Shaken prohibits making a march move. Does being Shaken (from say failing a charge) prohibit use of the Mirror ” Quote from dan: “It doesn’t seem to ” Correct

  • We're aware. It will be fixed in the next update of the book.

  • Also have a look at the FAQ on page 12, which covers random movement in the vicinity of other units.

  • Quote from Kriegschmidt: “Quote from Adam: “Rank is full for standard size models if it has 5 models or more - this has nothing to do with formation. Now your formation to be legal has to have the same number of models in all ranks except for last rank which may have less models. ” Ok cheers. I guess that's what confused me (and perhaps the OP): that there's two versions of 'full', if not in name. Five is a 'full' rank. But in a legal formation with a wider-than-five front rank plus subsequent r…

  • Quote from Kriegschmidt: “what's to stop someone having a Standard height unit like this and claiming full rank bonus: ” The rulebook : 3.B Units All ranks must always have the same width, except the rear rank which can be shorter than the other ranks.

  • Layout has been informed, and we'll fix it in the next update. Until then, the character's unit entry, from where you buy the mount upgrade, specifies that the bastion counts towards IoD, and the information missing in the mount's profile doesn't override that.

  • Quote from Kisscool: “Does this unit benefit from distracting from "Defending a Wall" ? ” Assuming more than half of the unit's facing is in contact with the wall, then yes (see FAQ page 48).

  • Quote from GabbaGandalf: “so combat resolution would have been 10-10 as mentioned above and they drop out of combat? ” If the VC inflicted 3 HP losses/overkill and somehow have a rank bonus of 4, then yes, the calculation seems correct.

  • Quote from Just_Flo: “And a follow up question. Do I roll fisrt if the D3 is a 1, a 2 or a 3 before deciding between D3 or 2? ” Quote from Eisenheinrich: “< If X is the result of a dice roll, you may instead choose which version to use (before rolling any dice). > ”

  • Quote from GabbaGandalf: “Well that is the issue - it was not clear in our game and I referenced this Page but you have the point just above it talking about dropping out of combats ” With "the point just above it talking about dropping out of combats" you refer to 15.G.c? This rule applies when "a unit destroys all enemy units in base contact and finds itself no longer Engaged in Combat" - this is not the case for any of the units in the pictures as all of them are still engaged with an enemy u…

  • Quote from jimmygrill: “Actually, I'm not convinced we have a clear-cut situation here... Quote: “21.H.a.2 Grind Attacks (X) A model part with Grind Attacks resolves these attacksat its Agility. It must choose an enemy unit in base con-tact with it. The chosen enemy unit suffers a numberof hits equal to the value stated in brackets (X). Thesehits are resolved with the model part’s Strength andArmour Penetration. If a model has both Grind Attacks and Impact Hits, itmay only use one of these rules…

  • Quote from RomanRagnorak: “Which reading of the rule is correct? ” Yours . Quote from RomanRagnorak: “Is there anyway to make the spell description more clear? ” I'll look into it for the next update (this is the first time this has come up afaik, so I don't think the issue deserves an erratum, but I can see how the spell description may be misleading).

  • Quote from Kasocles: “Just like to clarify: Gauntlet of Madzhab is not considered for Touch of Greatness enchantment since it is not a mundane weapon or weapon enchantment, correct? So Infernal Weapon + Touch of Greatness + Gauntlet = Str +3, AP +3 ? ” Correct.

  • Quote from thomasb: “So the real question is what is a failed to-hit roll? Is it a roll that dosn’t hit its intended target or is it a roll that dosn’t hit anything at all? ” It's the former.

  • Quote from Norn: “So 11.E.e Multiple charge and Tiger do an align move ? ” If the warriors are touching the tigers unit without overlapping at the end of their align move, then the rules for multiple charges apply. If the warriors' unit boundary would however overlap the tigers' unit boundary, and be it only by the fraction of an inch, then the charge would not be legal.

  • Quote from Norn: “This unit defending the wall ? ” Yes. Quote from Norn: “(i know i probably already ask this question but the answer doesn't want stay in my head) ” You could always check the FAQ - this question is covered on page 48 there.

  • Quote from Danrakh: “Quote from flammy`: “About the Trolls, I am not sure I understand correctly. Currently in the Combat Simulator, only the first rank uses Belch (if you check it), and supporting attacks are made with normal hits. I was unsure they could Belch from the second rank so I did it this way. If you confirm they can use Belch as supporting attacks then I will change it so that they use Belch for all attacks (including the supporting) if Belch is checked. ” AFAIK Troll Belch is chosen…

  • Quote from Kriegschmidt: “Make Curse of Nezibkesh just the debuff and give it its own Attribute spell, which is an Incendiary token. (Spell makes it clear that the boosted debuff changes if the number of Incendiary tokens changes, so isn't a problem having the token happen just after the debuff.) ” Yeah, that's one of the alternatives we're currently discussing.