These are chat archives for BSData/warhammer-age-of-sigmar

23rd
Mar 2018
tekton
@tekton
Mar 23 2018 00:37
the good/bad news is that my game got canceled due to flood warnings- so I'll have even more time after dinner!
tekton
@tekton
Mar 23 2018 05:53
ok, some of the initial clean up is done, a pr is open but things are still rough (though nothing should be wrong per-sé with the data, just unit selection- nothing major)
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 13:06
Two quick queries...
1) I noticed @OftKilted was adding the Compendium entries to the main Death catalogue, so do we need to do the same for the other Grand Alliances? I only ask as @Cupropituvanso is I think adding the Wood Elves to a separate cat.
2) I've seen a few instances of Leader/Behemoth being selected on RSEs and, as these don't show up in the editor, I've been ticking both Leader (Primary) and Behemoth. What is the 'official' way of doing this? Should we add Leader/Behemoth as a category in the force entries so they show up?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 23 2018 13:09
To follow up/tangentially related to ^; now that everything is split out I’m planning on polishing up the seraphon; what was the final decision on where we’re putting the skinks from the compendium?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 13:11
@FreylisUK So ... the Compendium entries are technically from when everything was a completed monolithic death catalog
And items should not have Behemoth/Leader selected
That's going to be removed.
@alphalas Can they take the Seraphon keyword?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 23 2018 13:13
No they have skink and lizardmen iirc
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 13:17
Thanks @OftKilted Do we want to add the Compendium Warscrolls as separate cats? I know @Cupropituvanso wanted to add the Wood Elves specifically because he plays them, but I have a feeling that when GW release Warhammer Legacy we'll need to add them as separate cats anyway.
I guess I'm just asking whether we think there's work to do now, or whether we wait until Legacy is released.
Also thanks for clarifying the Leader/Behemoth query; I'll create an issue for everyone to check their cats and update to Leader, Behemoth instead.
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 13:32
Okay, I've added #197 to cover the Leader/Behemoth tagging issue. I'm sure most cats won't be affected but I've added a task list to cover everything anyway, so please tick off the ones you've checked when you get around to it.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 13:36
Legacy cats aren’t usable in Matched Play
The only reason I’m considering leaving TK and VC (Warscroll Compendium) in the core “death” catalog is because they are the only forces that can take only GA DEATH as their only alliance.
And there are only 2 units in the VC catalog
But there is serious merit in just stripping them out to separate catalogs, if only to make it easier to build and reference for end users
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 13:43
@alphalas Then they probably should be in a separate Warscroll Compendium Lizardmen Catalog.
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 13:44
That's kinda my thought process. It may be personal preference but I think having separate cats makes it simpler to build lists. The only real downside is that you lose the ability to combine multiple units across cats into the same force without using allies. I guess that's why it would be nice to have full inheritance so we can build everything into a separate cat and then have the GA cats reference those.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 13:44
@FreylisUK Untrue
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 13:44
How so?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 13:44
You can add them at the same level. Not as a child force
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 13:44
Of course! I completely forgot about that.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 13:45
You would just need to be using the same 'Grand Alliance'
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 13:45
In that case surely we can just get rid of the monolithic cats altogether?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 13:46
I think that should be determined on a case by case basis.
Because we could put them into a 'Grand Alliance: X' catalog ... as that is the only grand alliance they can take.
But we're really just talking minor semantics
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 13:47
My only concern with not having entirely split cats is that it may cause end-user confusion if some entries are in separate cats, and some are in GA cats, and it varies per Alliance.
Yeah - I'm a game designer by trade so semantics are important to me :)
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 13:53
I'm personally good with doing TK and VC as separate catalogs. It will make it easier for folks to see the separation of forces.
I actually debated doing that for LoN.
But given that the only difference between the forces was a single keyword and some other minor stuff .... and it made my life (indirectly) harder.
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 13:56
Well, let's see what the feedback is when we release the files - I'm sure the public will speak up if they want something changed!
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 13:59
People don't know what they want ... they just know they want a think
*to do something. Most folks are less concerned about how the sausage is made, and more concerned with the fact that they want their bangers and mash.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 14:10
yes, until/if we get inheritance, doing LoN in a simple way will be complicated. I'm not fundamentally opposed to fully split catalogues, it's just the overhead for splitting out a 3 model faction (I see you Everchosen) is time-consuming.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 14:17
You should take a look at teh coolness that the LoN catalog is now ....
The validation/hiding rules are slightly complex ... but it seems to have turned out nicely...
And appears to be hiding the alliances properly. I’ve followed the Guidance that the new Battle profiles override the older profiles for handling battleline etc.
@Mad-Spy in Azyr how does it handle the Sylvaneth Wyldwood? (IE who can take it?)
In Warscroll Builder it looks like anyone can take the 40 point version.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 14:22
Mind you they do no validation there ...
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 14:35
You can't even select scenery in Azyr.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 14:38
Any thoughts on adding a Reinforcement Point category?
Because you have a point, in that while you can 'summon' a Balewind ... you're merely using Reinforcement points to do so.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 14:41
I've never understood the requirement? You make a army with everything in and then delete the stuff you're going to reinforce, or you just set your points limit to not include the points?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 14:43
It's probably not a necessity.
Any thoughts on the addition of the 'Scenery' section to the GST and the matched play profiles?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 14:50
We had some discussion about it in #192 and #196
And brought it up in #177
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 14:53
what are the rules for the Wildwood?
I don't have the Sylvaneth tome downloaded
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 14:55
For Allegiance Sylvaneth they're 0 points.
They can be placed via a cast spell or ability.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 14:56
So you could conceivably take the summoning unit in an ORDER army?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 14:56
It's either done as an "Allegiance Ability' or via the Deepwood Spell lore.
You could also take the ability to set them up via the Artefact of the glades.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 14:57
OK, then in my opinion, you can't buy them separately then.
You just have to reserve the points if you want some
but only non-Sylvaneth have to pay
So if you take the summoning unit in ORDER allegiance, they cost you 40pts apiece.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 14:58
So, should they be in the catalog at all? Since they're really only a 'reinforcement point' item?
i.e. Could one 'buy them as part of a list' and then set them up as terrain in the pre-game phase?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:00
I don't think you can buy them and set them up as terrain.
You have to summon them in the game or have the ability.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:00
I've never seen any reference to buying terrain anywhere.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:00
exactly
I couldn't find anything either.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:01
Placing the terrain is part of the pre-game discussion. And would be potentially identified and done as part of the battleplan.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:01
Gnarlmaws are the only comparable unit
and they are specifically placed pre-game due to a NURGLE allegiance ability.
but they're also free.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:03
If you're using the 'Time of War' rules with Places of Power rule could setup a Sylvaneth Wyldwood ... if there are SYLVANETH units on the battlefield and you get the appropriate roll.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:03
the what now?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:06
Okay, in pre-game it is an option to 'Decide which realm you want to play in' in the SYLVANETH battletome. (p76)
if you decide that this is a 'Place of Power' you can use the 'Place of Power' additional rules.
It basically allows you additional benefits for players who are playing a SYLVANETH army. Much like the Cycle of Contagion fluffy rules for NURGLE.
Roll a Die, cross reference a table ... follow the results.
But it still doesn't allow you to add them directly to your list.
The Sylvaneth Wyldwood is similar from an allegiance ability, you can place one Wyldwood anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 1" away from any other piece of terrain after all terrain is setup, but before players choose territory.
(if you have SYLVANETH allegiance)
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:11
Maybe they should be included as SEs on the relevant ability?
not as their own entry?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:11
That actually sounds like a much better proposal.
Given that it doesn't look like you can buy them.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:11
i dont' think you can, no.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:13
@FreylisUK Perhaps what we should do for the 'Scenery' section is actually remove it ...
If we instead add a SE on the abilities/spells that grant the ability to cast the spell, that targets the issue directly.
For the Balewind Vortex one could actually set it up as a Rule like 'Inspiring Presence' if there are more than 0 instances of WIZARD in the army.
And reference that it costs 100 points to cast.
Sortof a 'Description Rule/Profile' type?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:20
Hmm, Vortex is a bit more difficult, in that you have to have one in your Army to trigger having the rule...
which allows you to summon it :(
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:23
The note is that you have to have the model.
If you have the model, your wizards know the spell.
“Balewind Call:If you have a Balewind Vortex model, WIZARD HEROES in your army know the Summon Balewind Vortex spell in addition to any others they know”
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:24
yes, but for our purposes, it will need to be in the list...
unless we give every Wizard the power?
which seems like overkill
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:26
a 'Balewind Model Available'? checkbox as an 'optional' rule?
like a 'use forgeworld' or 'Allegiance'?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:28
What "Use Forgeworld" optional rule?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:28
like there was in the 40K catalogs.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:28
Not anymore
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:29
Back in 7th ed.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:29
It's all valid now
Maybe we just put in Scenery but hide the RSEs appropriately.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:30
Hide if 0 Selections of WIZARD in Roster?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:30
Or we make another sub-force which is Reinforcements, and only put summonables and scenery in it?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:31
Technically that would be valid, or just make it so that you can put a 'point' value into that.
Let folks deal with what they're bringing in that by themselves.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:32
Why would it need a separate point restriction?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:32
It's not a separate point restriction
it's part of the overall roster points. Think ... "pool of points that is undefined"
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:33
well, the units in that child force will still have a point value which will be included in the Roster...?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:34
If you build it as a child force.
I'm thinking a unit type of 'OTHER' which is named 'REINFORCEMENT POINTS' or something to that effect.
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:35
I think the Balewind Vortex is a special case because it essentially has to be paid for along with everything else in your roster. We can of course hide it from selection if there are no WIZARD units in the list, but I quite like it being an entry that I have to buy and add to my roster.
WRT reinforcements, I would suggest keeping it simple and having the user simply add those units to their roster as with every other unit. That's how the 8th Edition 40K data files do it; you just buy the summonable units like any other, and 'manually' determine which are summoned and which aren't.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:36
But I don't have to determine in advance that I'm going to spend on the Balewind. I could instead take that 100 points and cast to summon two units of Blue Horrors.
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:36
So in AoS you are basically 'sandbagging' points?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:37
So, you might as well just limit your roster down by a couple of hundred points?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:38
“Sometimes a spell or ability will allow you to add units to your army, or replace units that have been destroyed. For example, the Raise Zombies spell allows you to set up a new unit of Zombies during a battle, while the Slaughterborn ability allows you to return Skarr Bloodwrath to play after he has been slain. In aPitched Battle, you must set aside some of your points in order to be able to use these units. The points you set aside are called your army’s reinforcement points.” P.77 ghb
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:38
Yeah, that's basically it, but for some people (me included!) it's nice to 'fill up' those points with something.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 23 2018 15:38
i’m with @OftKilted
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:38
There’s a whole page on it
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:38
I think what @OftKilted suggested makes the most sense.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:39
then you add the units like you said and then ignore them, or we do the child force.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:39
Adding a “Reinforcement points” ‘Unit’ with no primary type ...
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:40
I think the advantage of adding the units is that you get to print out their stats with your roster. Even if you don't know exactly what you will do with your reinforcement points you'll obviously have an idea (and you're limited by the models in your collection anyway).
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:40
@alphalas, then why haven't you advocated a similar thing in 40k? Or did you just get shouted down?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:41
Does 40k handle it differently?
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:41
40K just makes you add the units to your roster AFAIK.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:41
40k BS doesn't have any reinforcement points support
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:41
Which does have an advantage, as I pointed out above.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:41
we had discussions around it and didn't bother in the end.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 23 2018 15:42
TBH IF you are implimenting it, @OftKilted
‘d idea is probably best
HOWEVER
i still don’t really see the point
but, i’m just shlubly helper number 543621 here lol
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:44
I think that we shouldn't implement it currently for our initial 2.0 release
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:44
Like I said above, even though you have total freedom to use those reinforcement points however you want, chances are you know exactly what you're going to be using them on, and will add them to your roster if you want the stats printing out.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:44
^^
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:44
And we should probably roll back the scenery setup in the GST.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 23 2018 15:44
i disagree @FreylisUK
But i’m also an indecisive fuck lol
ALSO
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:45
Set the Wyldwood as a SE on the abilities that can cast the spell.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 23 2018 15:46
i might add doing things like that increase the tendancy of the user to use bs sans rulebooks
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:46
^ what he said.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 23 2018 15:46
which at least is something 40k is trying to discourage
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:46
I get that, but I play a lot of tournaments, and carrying a sheet of A4 with my army on versus 2+ rulebooks wins out every time.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 23 2018 15:47
i get that, i really do.
HOWEVER
I really think it’s not worth it
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:48
If everyone's agreed then we should just roll back the changes I made and force people to take the physical Warscrolls then.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:48
Okay, I'm putting in my vote to roll back Scenery as a type (as a directly selectable unit to add to a force)
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:49
The Wyldwood seems a bit mean as it's in the actual Battletome, but I don't play them anyway so have no great preference either way.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:49
Add an SE for the Sylvaneth Wyldwood rules to any abilities/artefacts/spells that allow it.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:49
^^
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:49
Okay, and remove the Vortex altogether?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 15:49
That's what I'll be doing for the Gnarlmaw if I ever get around to Nurgle :)
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:49
You're just doing this to make me forget to reserve the 100 points in my DoT list aren't you!
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:50
If you can't remember to reserve the 100 points ... You didn't deserve that awesome spell from the Gaunt Summoner anyway. (and you'd probably forget to bring the Balewind Model)
;)
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:50
I hate you all...
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:50
Yes .... let the Hate flow through you ...
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:51
I'll make the changes now but I don't have the Sylvaneth book with me (at work). Who in the list can summon the Wyldwood?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:52
let-the-hate-flow-through-you2[1].jpg
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:52
:)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 23 2018 15:53
damnit @OftKilted i was literally about to post that
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:53
LOL
@FreylisUK It's apparently an Allegiance Ability (from the battletome ... may have been updated in GHB)
It's Spell 3 of the Deepwood Spell Lore (Verdant Blessing)
'Arcane Treasures: Sylvaneth - (1) Acorn of the Ages' allows placement of one
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:57
And a Treelord Ancient allows you to summon one.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 15:57
Alarielle Spell : 'Metamorphosis'
Allows you to place one for units killed by the spell.
Possibily some others ..
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 15:58
Okay, so quite a few! Given you get one for free as Sylvaneth anyway, is there any reason why I shouldn't just add the two Warscroll rules (Roused by Magic and Wyldwood) to the Sylvaneth Allegiance entry in the cat?
Or even as an SE in the Allegiance SEs?
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 16:05
image.png
Just tested this out and it seems to work pretty well.
I guess I should remove the max 1 Selection in Parent though, give you can take a few of them...
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 16:10
and The Wyldwood should be an SSE and linked so you don't have to replicate it :)
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 16:11
If it's an SSE can the link have a different points cost? Or will I have to use modifiers?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 16:11
And you don’t need to add multiple. Just the one. They’re free and it’s basically a spell rule.
They don’t cost until you cast
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 16:12
So just have one tick box, linking to the same SSE, 0 points?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 16:13
mods
you can mod the cost on the link
at least I'm pretty sure you can....
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 16:15
Yeah, you can. It's only really useful for Order Allegiance taking them as they have to pay for them, although from what @OftKilted was saying they might as well just be free and you tick the box if you're taking one (and want to print out the rules).
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 16:19
There are no points until it is cast
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 23 2018 16:19
Alright, I'll just make it a 0 points max 1 selection tick box thingy and we're done.
Okay, changes are in #196 (which includes the removal of the Balewind Vortex).
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 16:47
Did we pull the scenery stuff from the Allies?
Ie is the listing just wrong?
And can someone check to see if we have an actual conflict in #193 ?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 23 2018 16:49
there are no conflicts in #193. It's only introducing the Wanderers cat.
You should have seen the crap I had to deal with when I did my merge.
Basically had to rebuild the GST :(
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 23 2018 16:57
Uuuffff