AoS Lizardmen and summoning (lets keep discussion civil)

[Mr Phat]

I understand that it makes little sense, but it does make Some sense.

From a design perspective it makes sense because the "summon this unit" spells would fill an entire warscroll for themselves.

From a list-building perspective it makes sense because of the "Clone special character" issue.

From a "rules writing" perspective one could argue that it has parallels to older books that says "this unit can do this which is described in another units entry", like in the 8th VC book the mortis engines "Banshee Swarm" ability refers to the Banshees Ghostly Howl rule

As it is now, I tend to agree with Blaze, as it is not clear if the unit has to be on the field or not.
I hesitate to take the advantage in uncertainties like this.

Ixt raises a fair point that it doesnt "limit it" to the spells it says he knows, just that he knows them.
Its not enough for me to "hold up in court" though :/

 

[hdctambien]

So you're saying that any ability can be used if the model is not on the field? Passive ability or not. You can't say that it would work for a passive ability and not for an active one...

First of all, the rule about Slann Wizards knowing about the Summon spells isn't even an Ability. It's listed under the Magic header, which comes after the Abilities header. It's just a rule.

But yes, that is what I am saying. I am also saying that those abilities (Except for the Summon Spells) don't do anything unless the unit is on the field.

Read some (all?) of the abilities, passive or not, that the Warscrolls provide. They all specify "this unit can..." or "units within x inches of this unit can..." both types of abilities require the unit to be deployed in order to have any affect what-so-ever.

Saurus Old Blood:
Wrath of the Seraphon: In the heat of battle, an Oldblood’s cold fury radiates outward and drives its lesser kin into a rage of their own. You can re-roll wound rolls of 1 for Saurus models within 5" of an Oldblood.​

If you don't have an Old Blood on the field and you try to invoke this ability, it will effectively do nothing because no units will be within 5" of a non-existing Old Blood.

Ripperdactyl Riders
Toad Rage: In your first hero phase, place a Blot Toad anywhere on the battlefield for each of your units of Ripperdactyl Riders. In each of your movement phases, roll a dice and move the Blot Toad up to that many inches. Blot Toads do not count as enemy models to either side. If a Ripperdactyl attacks an enemy unit that is within 2" of any Blot Toad, it makes 3 attacks with its Vicious Beak instead of 1.
​

If you have 0 units of Ripperdactyl Riders deployed then you get to deploy 0 Blot toads.

Slann Wizards know the Summon Ripperdactyls spell, in addition to any others they know.​

This rule has no requirements about the unit being deployed. It just says that Slann Wizards know a spell. Not, "Slann WIzards within x inches", not "in the first hero phase, this unit conveys the Summon Ripperdactyls spell to all Slann Wizards", just "Slann Wizards know the spell" ... all of them.

 

[Ixt]

This rule has no requirements about the unit being deployed. It just says that Slann Wizards know a spell. Not, "Slann WIzards within x inches", not "in the first hero phase, this unit conveys the Summon Ripperdactyls spell to all Slann Wizards", just "Slann Wizards know the spell" ... all of them.

Again, I get what you're saying. To some extent, I agree with you. However, the inconsistency is still there and because of that, I hesitate to read the summoning rule/take advantage of it in the way you propose. The example that you're using is pulled from a different unit's warscroll, which doesn't answer the question of whether a player must take that warscroll to activate that ability.

Will they rule in your favor? It's likely, because the game design is meant to be completely open. Until then, however, I retain my position that because the Slann's warscroll specifically states that the Slann knows only three spells, and that a fielded unit's warscroll takes precedence over an unfielded warscroll (or that unfielded warscrolls are basically inoperable), summoning is not included in his list of spells.

 

[protector]

Until then, however, I retain my position that because the Slann's warscroll specifically states that the Slann knows only three spells, and that a fielded unit's warscroll takes precedence over an unfielded warscroll (or that unfielded warscrolls are basically inoperable), summoning is not included in his list of spells.

By that logic GW would be unable to ever introduce a new spell to an army, because all of the casters have that phrase in their warscroll. Also both GW store managers (Two different stores) in my area confirmed that slann can summon units that are not currently on the field.

And if you continue with your line of thought then you would have to roll off against your slann's warscroll rule superceding any fielded warscroll, because the contradiction is still in place whether the unit is fielded or not. The only way for it not to contradict itself is to interpret that all warscrolls whether active or not can modify other warscrolls if it is stated on them.

 

[Ixt]

By that logic GW would be unable to ever introduce a new spell to an army, because all of the casters have that phrase in their warscroll. Also both GW store managers (Two different stores) in my area confirmed that slann can summon units that are not currently on the field.

Confirmed, how? With hearsay? Their own interpretation? Until I see it in writing from GW, I'm skeptical.

Unable to introduce a new spell? How so? It's only a matter of adding the spell to the core rules, and creating precedence via errata. That's nothing new for GW. Look at the Lore of Undeath.

And if you continue with your line of thought then you would have to roll off against your slann's warscroll rule superceding any fielded warscroll, because the contradiction is still in place whether the unit is fielded or not. The only way for it not to contradict itself is to interpret that all warscrolls whether active or not can modify other warscrolls if it is stated on them.

No. By your logic, you'd have to roll off regardless.

My position, again, is that taking a unit's warscroll modifies the Slann's by adding special rules (in this case, a spell). Not taking the warscroll causes no change. The question is whether you have to take the warscroll in order to modify the Slann's -- we already know that the Slann's warscroll can be modified/that all warscrolls can be modified, it's just a matter of how.

Speaking of... which e-mail address do we send rule questions to?

 

[protector]

Confirmed, how? With hearsay? Their own interpretation? Until I see it in writing from GW, I'm skeptical.

As skeptical as you may want to be it does not change the rules. Does Oxyotl lose the ability to appear anywhere he wants once he is removed from the board unless a 2nd Oxyotl is also in play allowing me to utilize his Ambush rules? I'm not really interested in convincing you because you seem incredibly entrenched in your opinion, and I think I'm batting a 0 when it comes to changing someone's fiercely held beliefs over the internet lol

Unable to introduce a new spell? How so? It's only a matter of adding the spell to the core rules, and creating precedence via errata. That's nothing new for GW. Look at the Lore of Undeath.

So to add a new spell they would then need to change the core rules? And they did that when rolling out the End Times which changed the entire game system dramatically? Or they could just put it in a new units warscroll, hmmm I think I will take those odds.

No. By your logic, you'd have to roll off regardless.

My position, again, is that taking a unit's warscroll modifies the Slann's by adding special rules (in this case, a spell). Not taking the warscroll causes no change. The question is whether you have to take the warscroll in order to modify the Slann's -- we already know that the Slann's warscroll can be modified/that all warscrolls can be modified, it's just a matter of how.

Speaking of... which e-mail address do we send rule questions to?

So your stance is that new rules in warscrolls do not apply until placed on the battlefield? And I would then say my stance is that new rules in warscrolls apply as soon as they are released. For you to concede the point you are saying that GW must submit a FAQ clarifying that their new rules only apply when fielded on the board or when published, well I guess our long awaited FAQ dreams can still live on in AoS.

toblakai84@gmail.com, or just a PM would do.

 

[hdctambien]

taking a unit's warscroll modifies the Slann's by adding special rules (in this case, a spell). Not taking the warscroll causes no change.

What does it mean to "take a warscroll"? That isn't defined anywhere in the rules. When I play I "take" all of my warscrolls. And at some point during deployment I stop deploying models.

The rules don't say "abilities from a warscroll are only triggered if a warscroll is taken." The rules never use the phrase "to take a warscroll." Taking a warscroll is not a thing.

Warscrolls are rules.

"All models are described by warscrolls, which provide all of the rules for using them in the game."​

That doesn't even say "each warscroll provides the rules for a single model" There is plenty of room for GW to provide the rules for multiple models (all Slann Wizards) over a series of several warscrolls. And that is precisely what they are doing.

I retain my position that because the Slann's warscroll specifically states that the Slann knows only three spells

The Slann's warscroll does not say that the Slann knows "only three spells". It enumerates three spells that the Slann knows, but it does not limit the Slann to only knowing three spells. It says that the Slann can "cast" three spells, and then lists three spells the the Slann knows. Other warscrolls list more spells that the Slann can choose to cast.

You're using an invented idea of "taking a warscroll" to affect the rules, but that is not a thing.

 

[pendrake]

Saurus Old Blood:
Wrath of the Seraphon: In the heat of battle, an Oldblood’s cold fury radiates outward and drives its lesser kin into a rage of their own. You can re-roll wound rolls of 1 for Saurus models within 5" of an Oldblood.

Q: is this rule located on the Saurus scroll or the Oldblood scroll?

Either way, I think it is an example of the rule for model O existing on the scroll for model S.
(or else, the rule for model S existing on the scroll for model O.)​

 

[Ixt]

Q: is this rule located on the Saurus scroll or the Oldblood scroll?

Either way, I think it is an example of the rule for model O existing on the scroll for model S.
(or else, the rule for model S existing on the scroll for model O.)​

Which you have to field model O for... Why must GW make it S O confusing!?

The Slann's warscroll does not say that the Slann knows "only three spells".

It says that the Slann can "cast" three spells, and then lists three spells the the Slann knows.

That's what I was saying, yeah. It says, "The Slann knows these three spells." So... those are the three spells that he knows, as he's provided for & limited by his warscroll. If it says that the Slann knows three spells then, by extension, he would 'only' know three.

"Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three."

The rules don't say "abilities from a warscroll are only triggered if a warscroll is taken." The rules never use the phrase "to take a warscroll." Taking a warscroll is not a thing.

I'm not trying to get into an argument of semantics here, and it looks like that's exactly where we're headed. You said that you start putting down models, and when you stop, you stop, right? In that case:

"You can continue setting up units until you
have set up all the units you want to fight in
this battle, or have run out of space...
Any remaining units are held in reserve,
playing no part unless fate lends a hand."

It sounds like the units that you have put down when the battle begins are the only warscrolls that you will be using, per the "playing no part" thing. In other words, these are the warscrolls that you have "taken." Really not trying to pulls hair here, man, just paraphrasing what their intent appears to be.

So when the battle begins, all of your other warscrolls are held in reserve, "playing no part." So, no access to anything within them, because they're absent. I disagree that "all warscrolls are always available," in that regard. The rules seem to enforce that.

That doesn't even say "each warscroll provides the rules for a single model" There is plenty of room for GW to provide the rules for multiple models (all Slann Wizards) over a series of several warscrolls. And that is precisely what they are doing.

It doesn't say it, true, but it can actually be rewritten several ways to either directly say or imply that.

It's clear that we're not getting anywhere, and I'm really worried that this is going to turn toxic soon. I'm backing out before this becomes another PF thread. We're both after the same thing, and I hope that GW resolves it sooner than later. After all, this is a question that a lot of people are asking.

 

[hdctambien]

Slann knows three spells then, by extension, he would 'only' know three.

You can't just add words to a rule and say it's "by extension". The Warscroll does not use the word "only" and I do not accept that GW meant the rule to mean "only". You are adding that word yourself to change how the rule works. It doesn't even use the word "three".

"A Slann Mage-Priest knows the Arcane Bolt, Mystic Shield and Light of the Heavens spells."

It doesn't say the Slann exclusively knows those spells. It just lists those as spells the Slann knows. Later Warscrolls go on to describe more spells that the Slann knows by using the exact same phasing: "Slann Mage-Priests know the X spell."

I know how to solve problems using Algebra, Trigonometry, and Calculus. What does that statement tell you about the different types of mathematics that I know? Because I only listed three types of math do I, by extension, only know three types of math?

It sounds like the units that you have put down when the battle begins are the only warscrolls that you will be using, per the "playing no part" thing. In other words, these are the warscrolls that you have "taken." Really not trying to pulls hair here, man, just paraphrasing what their intent appears to be.

You're actually rephrasing the rule and changing it.

The rule talks about "setting up units" and "units you want to fight in this battle" and "remaining units". That rule never mentions warscrolls. It does not say anything about "warscrolls taking no part in the battle". You are equivocating "setting up a unit" with "taking a warscroll" but that is not a rule. You are making that up.

So when the battle begins, all of your other warscrolls are held in reserve, "playing no part." So, no access to anything within them, because they're absent. I disagree that "all warscrolls are always available," in that regard. The rules seem to enforce that.

You just changed the word "units" to "warscrolls" to make your point. The rule says "Any remaining units are held in reserve,
playing no part unless fate lends a hand" mentioning nothing about Warscrolls. There is no such thing as "deploying a warscroll" or "holding a warscroll in reserve" or even "taking a warscroll". Those are all constructs that do not exist within the framework of the Age of Sigmar rules.

It doesn't say it, true, but it can actually be rewritten several ways to either directly say or imply that.

The rules don't say a lot of things. For the time being maybe we should take GW by the words they wrote rather than how they might have written those words if they intended them to mean something different.

 

[Blaze]

Wow… I really don't see how one can assume the Slaan knows the spell when it's on another Warscroll. If you don't deploy that unit, you technically don't have that war scroll. It's so simple I think people are looking beyond the most simple explanation. The units have special rules that allow you summon more. But they need to be there, because it's THEIR SPECIAL RULES.

I agree that when I go to play a game, I take my whole 'ARMY BOOK' which includes all war scrolls but that doesn't mean I 'USE" them all. That is stupid thinking. When a unit is deployed that is then considered an 'active' war scroll is you will.

The logic by which you say an ability will trigger if it has no rules regarding inches and distance etc… is so flawed I actually LOL'd. You've done well pulling apart the lizard men army list and we can agree that most of the special rules apply when the unit is on the field and have range values, meaning the magic special rules applies to 'your argument'. HOWEVER. If you apply it to Lizardmen, you must also apply it to other armies. Try telling other players that special rules with no range conditions trigger regardless...

By that same logic, I don't have to declare my general on the board. In fact, since I count as having taken all my war scrolls, I can not only choose a general not on the board, I can use their ability without them fielded. Kroak ability yes please. Assasination Sudden death? Ok, but I choose Kroak who's not on the board but I also get to use his command ability. See how well THAT goes down in a game and try explaining THAT to your opponent.

I argue that you need to have the unit fielded for the war scroll special rules to apply. Otherwise it's cheating. They are special rules on separate warscolls.

 

[protector]

I argue that you need to have the unit fielded for the war scroll special rules to apply. Otherwise it's cheating.

Sadly this means that Oxyotl will never see the light of day, to use his ability you need to remove him from the battlefield, and by your reasoning this means his warscroll is no longer "active" because he is no longer fielded and as such he cannot be fielded again.

I'm sure you will rebut this with an exception to your rule or adding some arbitrary definition of having a unit fielded, which of course is not an actual term in this game system. But I'm with Ixt (philosophically because we are on opposite sides of gameplay), it is obvious to each group that the other is very wrong, and no reasoning will change this. Maybe we can get a FAQ, but until then I'm just going to have to trust the local GW rep on their interpretation, that seems to be the best authority figure until and if we ever get resolution to these types of interpretation conflicts.

 

[Blaze]

Except that Oxyotl clearly explains anything outside normal rules, within the rules of the warscroll.

If it's your turn to place a warscroll, then I don't see why it's so hard to say to your opponent, I choose Oxyotl and these are his special rules regarding deployment and passing the turn to deploy back to your opponent… It's clear for victory conditions that he counts toward total model count (since the unit scroll is a single model) and if your opponent is stupid enough to choose assassination and you feel like cheesing him, you're within your right to choose Oxyotl and never reveal him.

Don't need an arbitrary definition or an 'exception' when it's clearly outlined how to deploy AND how Oxyotl's special rules relate to deployment and gameplay. I have successfully rebutted your far-fetched comment, but you have not even touched my earlier comment. Referring to your local GW rep has no weight in this discussion, and neither does saying we need an FAQ, simply because the rules are actually (surprisingly) clear on this matter.

Please don't assume to put words in my mouth by misinterpreting what I have said regarding 'active' war scrolls and 'inactive' war scrolls in deployment regarding special rules (in context of summoning). If you fail to comprehend what I said, anything said is wasted here and anything you add to this discussion is moot.

I am also backing away from this thread because it does seem like it's going toxic and people are too close-minded to have a mature discussion using valid examples and good reason. Being obtuse and torpid for no reason is childish.

 

[pendrake]

From a list-building perspective it makes sense because of the "Clone special character" issue.

Not understanding ^ this comment.

• Special Characters
• List building
• Summoning

Please explain?

 

[hdctambien]

If it's your turn to place a warscroll

This, I think, is the main misunderstanding some people are having. You do not "place warscrolls" you place models. The rule about warscrolls says "All models are described by warscrolls, which provide all of the rules for using them in the game" but after that the rest of the rules are model/unit centric.

Warscrolls are just a way of delivering rules in a more modular way than the old Army Books. You do not "take", or "have", or "place", or "use" warscrolls. You don't "verb" warscrolls at all. Warscrolls just contain the rules to play the game.

If you don't deploy that unit, you technically don't have that war scroll.

Where is that rule written?

The units have special rules that allow you summon more. But they need to be there, because it's THEIR SPECIAL RULES.

The warscrolls define rules and tell you who those rules belong to. The Saurus Warrior Warscroll defines a rule for Slann Wizards. This rule isn't attached to the Slann-Mage Priest warscroll, it is a rule that is applied to any and all warscrolls that contain both the Slann and Wizard keyword. It is much more efficient to write that spell once and let it apply to many other warscrolls than to have to write it out on every warscroll that has the Slann and Wizard keyword.

When a unit is deployed that is then considered an 'active' war scroll is you will.

Where is that rule written?

If you apply it to Lizardmen, you must also apply it to other armies. Try telling other players that special rules with no range conditions trigger regardless...

I have yet to see a rule on any warscroll that makes my reading of the rule seem ridiculous. Find me one example from one warscroll of an ability that would both work and be crazy to work if it is able to be used without fielding the model described by the warscroll. If you find one example, then you will change my mind.

By that same logic, I don't have to declare my general on the board. In fact, since I count as having taken all my war scrolls, I can not only choose a general not on the board, I can use their ability without them fielded

This isn't logic, it's hyperbole.

The rules say: "Once you have finished setting up all of your units, nominate one of the models you set up as your general" So, yes, your general has to be a model on the board.

Again, there is no such thing a "taking a warscroll", there is such a thing as "setting up units" and "having a model on the board"

You just "need" warscrolls for the models you use because "models are described by warscrolls". Warscrolls are just rules. They don't interact with the game in any other way, according to the rules.

Heck, there is no such thing as "Army building" in AoS. You just bring a bunch (all?) of your models and take turns placing them on the board, rock-paper-scissors style, until you are both happy with the matchup.

I think Summoning is less controversial than PF in the 2nd rank, I'm surprised that I'm being considered crazy.

 

[protector]

Except that Oxyotl clearly explains anything outside normal rules, within the rules of the warscroll.

If it's your turn to 1) place a warscroll, then I don't see why it's so hard to say to your opponent, I choose Oxyotl and these are his special rules regarding deployment and passing the turn to deploy back to your opponent… It's clear for victory conditions that he counts toward total model count (since the unit scroll is a single model) and if your opponent is stupid enough to choose assassination and you feel like cheesing him, you're within your right to choose Oxyotl and never reveal him.

Don't need an 2) arbitrary definition or an 'exception' when it's clearly outlined how to deploy AND how Oxyotl's special rules relate to deployment and gameplay. I have successfully rebutted your far-fetched comment, but you have not even touched my earlier comment. Referring to your local GW rep has no weight in this discussion, and neither does saying we need an FAQ, simply because the 3) rules are actually (surprisingly) clear on this matter.

Please don't assume 4) to put words in my mouth by misinterpreting what I have said regarding 'active' war scrolls and 'inactive' war scrolls in deployment regarding special rules (in context of summoning). 5) If you fail to comprehend what I said, anything said is wasted here and anything you add to this discussion is moot.

I am also backing away from this thread because it does seem like it's going toxic and people are too close-minded to have a mature discussion using valid examples and good reason. Being obtuse and torpid for no reason 6) is childish.

I'm glad you are taking your own advice and backing away until you can obtain some open minded perspective and maturity

But since I am already aware of my own immaturity and comfortable with it I will rebut your misguided points. I have highlighted and numbered them for ease of reading lol

1) You place units not warscrolls, in fact you only ever have a single warscroll for saurus no matter how many units of saurus you field, in 8th that would be like saying I place my rulebook page 62 here.

2) You are using an arbitrary definition in how you define warscrolls, the only definition GW has put out is that they are the rules for models, in no way are they used to define a unit that has been placed on the board. And from that you are now making and exception to how you choose to interpret when that "warscroll" abilities become effective, drop the mic.

3) We agree on this, just on opposite sides, I'm flabbergasted that you don't get it as I'm sure you are with me. I say the rules in the warscroll are active at all times, you say they are only active when somehow the warscroll is fielded, except for Oxyotl because his rules are special and apply even when he is not fielded, but not slann even if they are fielded

4) The only words are yours, see above for the result just as I predicted, you did not agree with me and decided to come out with an arbitrary definition and an exception, actually I'm surprised you did both even after I predicted such.

5) I fully comprehend what you have written, the only failure here would be in your context of writing words that you do not actually mean. If you do happen to obtain a bit more maturity and a more open perspective please feel free to join back in. Of course you probably will regardless because this is the internet and people like to take things personally when they have complete autonomy for some really odd reason.

6) Warhammer is childish, seriously. We buy little metal and plastic toys, spend a lot of time painting them, then play games with them, if anyone here besides possibly Rikard (Due to this type of thing generating income) thinks we are not childish then they are being silly. And if you cannot laugh at yourself then you should never laugh at someone else, because I guarantee we are all ridiculous people, and I'm leading the way in that regard.

 

[Mr Phat]

Not understanding ^ this comment.

• Special Characters
• List building
• Summoning

Please explain?

The issue of being able to field a special character and summoning another of the same kind.
"Clone Wars"

.....
-That is stupid thinking...
-The logic by which you say an ability will trigger if it has no rules regarding inches and distance etc… is so flawed I actually LOL'd.
-If you fail to comprehend what I said, anything said is wasted here and anything you add to this discussion is moot.

Please watch the ad hominems mate.

 

[Mr Phat]

found this in the wood elves scrolls under the Treekin

"MAGIC
Sylvaneth Wizards know the Regrowth spell in addition to any other spell they know whilst there are any Tree Kin on the battlefield."

 

[Deusvult]

Whelp someelse started Monty Python quotes, so I shall leave a liking of this thread here

As for my thoughts, lets step back and take a gander at the fluff. Now before "fluff does not equal rules" just rammed down my throat, I know that it doesn't but it can add context.

IMO!
So we are now a celestial deamon lizards. I feel that this means a slann has the power to coalesce us out of whatever mystic fabric he wants. Thin air may also work, who knows. Continuing down this path. Slanns are not slouches when it comes to mental capacity, so them knowing all the spells is not that much of a stretch. When he needs a job done, he gets the bloke for the job.

Now as for the special character situation. I feel like there should be no clones. However, maybe we are too hung up on names. We know about Gor-Rok, but maybe his brother Gor-Tree is out there and they have a similar nature.

 

[pendrake]

Now as for the special character situation. I feel like there should be no clones. However, maybe we are too hung up on names. We know about Gor-Rok, but maybe his brother Gor-Tree is out there and they have a similar nature.

That is how it works in Reaper's game Warlord.

Ka-Gunk the half-ogre is the name of a Captain rank model. You can take two or three of him. Ka-Gunk was simply the first, the archetype, for a big bad dude, with a really big club and a barn door for a shield.