• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

AoS Realmshaper Engine good ro useless?

LizardWizard said:
At some point in the future I might write an in depth guide to Realmshaper Engine usage. I am not nearly as disappointed in its rules as a large portion of the community seems to be. There are some match ups in the current meta where if you win the deployment roll off you can really hamper your opponent. At which point I feel like a 50% chance to lame your opponent is rather amazing.
Click to expand...
yeah but that roll of comes AFTER placement. too big a gamble for most people
 
LizardWizard said:
At some point in the future I might write an in depth guide to Realmshaper Engine usage. I am not nearly as disappointed in its rules as a large portion of the community seems to be. There are some match ups in the current meta where if you win the deployment roll off you can really hamper your opponent. At which point I feel like a 50% chance to lame your opponent is rather amazing.
Click to expand...
I absolutely misspoke, I don't know why I thought it was you that told me it, here is the quote (def not you lol)
RandomTsar said:
The battletome says that it must be placed if it is included in your list.

As far as fun games go the FAQ or the designer's intent recommends you house rule to whatever is fun and fair for you. A note worth mentioning if you only play fun games, and only ever play with people who do the same. I mean there is an entire narrative game mode that frequently demonstrates the wonky-ness of the rules anyways.

My idea was to include such diversity of where to place vs who in this thread, but I might have underestimated general forum practices... lol
Click to expand...
 
ILKAIN said:
yeah but that roll of comes AFTER placement. too big a gamble for most people
Click to expand...
Very true.

It doesn't feel like my opponent having the RSE in their territory will be too much of a boon to them though. It is a large piece of terrain that is impassible to units without fly. It doesn't have any terrain rules such as Arcane, Mystical, ect. And it can't be within 6" of an objective. Seraphon are much less reliant on our alpha strikes than we use to be. Combine these traits with a very small number of armies who are going to greatly benefit from garrisoning 20 wounds not on a objective and I feel in most cases our risk will be low and potential benefit will be high.
 
LizardWizard said:
Very true.

It doesn't feel like my opponent having the RSE in their territory will be too much of a boon to them though. It is a large piece of terrain that is impassible to units without fly. It doesn't have any terrain rules such as Arcane, Mystical, ect. And it can't be withing 6" of an objective. Seraphon are much less reliant on our alpha strikes than we use to be. Combine these traits with a very small number of armies who are going to greatly benefit from garrisoning 20 wounds not on a objective and I feel in most cases our risk will be low and potential benefit will be high.
Click to expand...
Meh, issue is mostly how common those armies are that will be able to use it to their advantage. Say a guaranteed loss for 2 slightly easier wins seems like a bad trade-off in a tournament setting...
 
Canas said:
Meh, issue is mostly how common those armies are that will be able to use it to their advantage. Say a guaranteed loss for 2 slightly easier wins seems like a bad trade-off in a tournament setting...
Click to expand...
I don't think that is actually the case. Cities of Sigmar with Irondrake spam, Disciples of Tzeentch Flamer spam, and Ossiarch Bone Reapers can all be severely hampered by the RSE. Due to those armies mobility needs there isn't much potential risk for them winning the territory roll in my opinion. I might not put the RSE front and center in a deployment if the opponent has Nagash, but otherwise I think it really helps in those 3 match ups and doesn't offer much to the opponent.
 
I think that'l depend heavily on how good a player you are, and how able you are to let go of the RSE. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of players end up overcommiting to trying to retake the RSE simply because giving your opponent a free "advantage" just feels very wrong, even if the advantage is more or less irrelevant.

Plus, if you end up placing it in a corner anyway to avoid this it's not like you yourself will have a particularly great advantage either..

So yeah, unless it gets F.A.Q.-ed or someone figures out an interesting usecase I would kind of expect it to fade into obscurity...
 
I tried Killer Angel's Arcane ruins trick with RSE, and it really hepled me today. My CoS opponent (fairly new in AoS but and experienced wargamer in general) gladly took side with RSE from me, while leaving me with arcane ruins. As a result 3 out of 4 turns Kroak "overcast" Comet's call. I think, I did more mortal wounds because of Arcane Ruins than I could with RSE.

My opponent garrisoned sorceress on black dragon in it and, as a result, she did almost nothing before dying in Carnosaur's Jaws. I am sure, that it is a win-win situation in 90% of the games.
 
Nart said:
I tried Killer Angel's Arcane ruins trick with RSE, and it really hepled me today. My CoS opponent (fairly new in AoS but and experienced wargamer in general) gladly took side with RSE from me, while leaving me with arcane ruins. As a result 3 out of 4 turns Kroak "overcast" Comet's call. I think, I did more mortal wounds because of Arcane Ruins than I could with RSE.

My opponent garrisoned sorceress on black dragon in it and, as a result, she did almost nothing before dying in Carnosaur's Jaws. I am sure, that it is a win-win situation in 90% of the games.
Click to expand...

Excellent! :)
 
Alladin the Paladin said:
I also remember someone saying it must be placed. The fact that you can opt not to is refreshing.
Click to expand...
Pace 62 in our battletome:

“When terrain is set up for the battle, any Realmshaper Engine terrain features must be set up by the player whose army they are a part of...”

It doesnt say can, it specifically says must.
 
Grotpunter said:
Pace 62 in our battletome:

“When terrain is set up for the battle, any Realmshaper Engine terrain features must be set up by the player whose army they are a part of...”
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right, but FAQ says that terrains are not part of the army, so...?

That "must" means that the player must place it before the placement of all other terrains. The "must" just defines the timing of the placement that you are forced to follow.
You are never forced to set up anything. If i don't set-up the units in reserve they are killed.
 
Last edited:
Killer Angel said:
Yes, that's right, but FAQ says that terrains are not part of the army, so...?

That "must" means that the player must place it before the placement of all other terrains. The "must" just defines the timing of the placement that you are forced to follow.
You are never forced to set up anything. If i don't set-up the units in reserve they are killed.
Click to expand...
Normally, yeah. But if a rule specifically tells you that you must, it is kinda irrelevant.

The FAQ certainly makes it kinda iffy and makes the whole wording questionable in my eyes.
 
Grotpunter said:
The FAQ certainly makes it kinda iffy and makes the whole wording questionable in my eyes.
Click to expand...

you're right.
My take (and here i am trying to make up an interpretation) is that we have two rules that are colliding.
the FAQ is pretty clear, so i must conclude that the reference to the RE being a part of the army is just wrong.
That brings us to the "must", which at this point i connect to the timing (the RE must be placed before other terrains), rather than the fact that you must set-up it.

This, of course, while we wait for another clarification by GW (which they seem to made up by flipping a coin)
 
Killer Angel said:
you're right.
My take (and here i am trying to make up an interpretation) is that we have two rules that are colliding.
the FAQ is pretty clear, so i must conclude that the reference to the RE being a part of the army is just wrong.
That brings us to the "must", which at this point i connect to the timing (the RE must be placed before other terrains), rather than the fact that you must set-up it.

This, of course, while we wait for another clarification by GW (which they seem to made up by flipping a coin)
Click to expand...
Honestly Im really surprised there were so few answers in our FAQ. I feel like every week I stumble upon some super questionable rules where a FAQ is needed. Once tournaments start again Im certain we will see even more odd interactions that need explaining.

But yes I agree the FAQ you linked in the other thread indicates you have a choice in placement. Im just kinda sad they didnt make it super clear in the wording in our tome.
 
We can see more clarifications after GHB or by the end of the year.
 
Blitzkriyg said:
This specifically refers to things like the
Numinous Occulum or azerite ruins that have warscrolls but you can't take in an army and aren't used in matched play, not faction terrain
Click to expand...

Then the logical answer would have been "only faction terrains can be part of your army roster"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top