• 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.

8th Ed. New Lizardman army book and info

Animaux said:
the rule about only 1 supporting attack is in the main rule book which also states thats if a rule in an army book would change a rule in the main book that the army book wins

thus PF is an army rule thus it overrules main book its crystal clear imo
Click to expand...

Crystal clear depending on the wording. It seems to me like one of those things that will end up being disputed by people and need a roll off or the inevitable FAQ
 
Darius the Insane said:
Animaux said:
the rule about only 1 supporting attack is in the main rule book which also states thats if a rule in an army book would change a rule in the main book that the army book wins

thus PF is an army rule thus it overrules main book its crystal clear imo
Click to expand...

Crystal clear depending on the wording. It seems to me like one of those things that will end up being disputed by people and need a roll off or the inevitable FAQ
Click to expand...


not really unless PF rule says thats supporting attacks don't get the ability then it applys to all models with the PF rule which includes sarus etc in supporting ranks, the main rule book will heve no outcome on this argument because it states it does not apply it is entierly down to the PF rule in the new lizzy book
 
I do agree with everyone that has said that the mandatory pursue with PF really hamstrings our troops. I find it quite common that you manage to break a unit just in time to reform to avoid a flank charge. With mandatory pursuit you just have to suck it up and take the charge, which is harsh if you are playing something like Bretonnians, or against chariots.

Skinks are expendable, it's why you take them, so if you lose a wizard or 2, you've still got your main caster and probably a backup. "Needing" them to keep the army in line seems stupid. Skinks have low leadership, meaning they don't generally lead well. I just dont understand. Warhammer Fantasy is a big game of chess and if you position wrong, and you break your line, you get hit from 2 or more sides.

Perhaps if we complain enough they will FAQ/Errata it?

I can live with the changes to the Slann who is my favourite character. He is nerfed, yes, but give him the channeling staff and you get 1 dice (possibly 2 if you're lucky) per phase. Save up another from his dispel dice ability and you get 2. This should be easier with the reroll of a failed dispel attempt discipline. Given that I usually got about 3 good spells off a turn for 3 extra dice from rumination (now gone), that isn't a huge drop from 3 dice to 2 in the new edition. It's annoying, yes, but we knew it was coming.

I also understand nerfing the salamanders, fair enough as they were a little OP taking out 1/3 to 1/2 of a horde sometimes. They are still pretty solid in the new rules. I just dont understand why you need a skink, who is (as stated earlier) 1/5 the age of a saurus and about the same in size, giving orders. And always having to be 6 inches, why? Can't the Slann command his own troops? I want expendable skinks. They are T2, which just screams "expendable." Nobody sneeze!

Ok I'm done :P

So, now onto the comments about finding a way to make it work. My thoughts are to have lots of lvl 1's running around within 3" of the Saurus or TG (same troop type type for a 4+ LoSir) with wildform. or in 10 cohort skinks. You just need that maneuverability against smaller units - you know, the ones where 1 DE crossbowman saves his ward but then flees because he is at -9 combat res. It's not always useful to pursue, especially if you are surrounded or otherwise set up for other charges.

Does wildform stack if you have 2 lvl 1's for instance for +2T? T6 Saurus might make a charge in the flank or rear survivable.
 
I just don't get what GW are trying to do.
I usually take 30 saurus with spears and a tooled up Scar-Vet. The combination of Predatory Fighter and Wyssan's Wildform on this unit sounds pretty damn good. But then they need a skink to babysit them so they wont charge off after a sacrificial unit and be set up for a flank charge. THERE'S A FREAKING SCAR-VETERAN IN THE UNIT

Maybe if the rule is written as any lord or hero within 6"
 
It isn't all bad. We all expected some nerfs and it happened. I think the army is still going to be competitive but in a different, more synergistic way.

I really hope that we see PF changed so that it works for supporting attacks, not only because I think it should be also because it will be a pain in the a** to have to roll on that separately. So, we have to make 3 dice rolls (before introducing characters into the mix) just to see all of hits? That's pretty clunky.

Hey, the must pursue rule could be worse - you could be forced to charge too! Lol.

That aspect of the rule sucks and I'm sure I'll curse Vetok's name every time it screws me over, but I'm ok with it. It makes no sense that the Slann doesn't give the save as well, since he is the General and racial leader and all that. That aspect of it is stupid, but I'm not gonna nerd rage over it. I generally run a Skink Priest and I think I'll often throw in a Chief in my Skrox unit since they got so cheap, so I don't think it is as bad as all that.
 
I honestly don't think the negative aspect of Predatory Fighter is gonna be that big of a deal.

Why? Because it only goes off when we have the option to pursue. Not overrun, pursue.

It's really freakin' hard to send a sacrificial unit in with the express purpose to die lots, enough to lose the combat, but not enough to wipe the unit.

The enemy could do this, by making a large unit with no banner, incredibly wide frontage to reduce rank bonus. But to be big enough to withstand a pummeling from a Saurus squad and have models remaining, that unit is going to take up valuable deployment space, -and- be reasonably expensive.

I am also convinced that whilst rules-as-written, models with PF should only get extra attacks from the front rank, the rules-as-intended are that every model that attacks should get it, simply because if the second rank does not, it necessitates separating out the attack dice into ranks to indicate who gets the extra attacks and who doesn't. GW are trying to simplify the game, not complicate it, and adding an unnecessary step to an already more complex combat phase is against this design philosophy.

As such, when (not if) this gets FAQ'd, as long as the person writing it isn't a complete clownshoe, it'll be FAQ'd in our favour.

As a final word, would it have killed them to just put an exception in saying "These extra attacks are not tied to specific models, but the unit as a whole"
 
Quick question,

I've read a lot on the new lizardmen, and here and there I've seen rumours about my beloved skinks.

Do the skinks get an army-wide -1Ld?

I cannot find a 'conclusive' answer (for as far as conclusive goes with all the rumours :P)

Any help would be appreciated :)

The Hunted
 
I have seen that posted in a few threads here. It appears to be correct. Not having seen the book myself, I am not sure.

That is one nerf that I do not agree with. But, I will roll with it.
 
Will this be post number 1 on page 100 of this thread?
 
The way the PF rule is written, it is not an extra attack at the start of combat, so it kind of does not fit the intent and language of the BRB limiting supporting attacks from the second rank. For example, frenzy gives an extra attack fbut not from the second rank, similarly spells that give +1 attack do not benefit supporting attacks. The PF rule is not a base extra attack always granted. It is triggered by rolling a 6 to hit. That is why I suspect it was intended to apply to supporting attacks but, givne the BRB language, is ambiguous and likely a dice off and FAQ clarification rquired.

I don't think pursuit with PF is that big of a deal. It is situational and only occurs in certain combatts, many of which you would want to puruse anyway. We dealt with this issue with frenxy and in 7th edition with hatred. Also, if the answer is having a skink priest nearby or tucked into the corner of a unit, given the priest's access to beasts a dispel scroll, ability to allow the Slaan to cast MM and DD through the skink's line of sight and range, and ability to hide in a skirmisher unit it make sense to take a skink priest anyway. My son's GT army almost always ran a "light" slann with an well-kitted oldblood because the oldblood is so potent and he found the need to use a skink priest for heavens and a dispell scroll, so the rule would have virtually no effect on his play-style unless the skink priest gets killed.

By comparison with the Daemons book, these are pretty minor issues.

On the loremaster issue, it has been my understanding you must pick and have access to the lore in order to get the loremaster (the wizard's tower or some other magical terrain says that) so loremater requires having high magic in that case. Similarly, it makes no sense to have 8 sig spells, which are really pretty good, and the ability to choose a lore, so that is likely either clarified or will be in an errata/FAQ.

That being said, I don't understand why a slann or general would not have the ability to restrain the troops given the fluff in the book. I can understand the argument that a saurus character would get his blood up and want to pursue, but not a slann. I suspect that was not well-tthought out. and may be subject to an errata or we need to see the whole context.
 
HAPPY 100th PAGE THREAD EVERYONE!

I was disapointed they didn't give lizardmen the massive-monster base for maybe the stegadon (same or different model) or other giantbeast

hmm, kroxigor character riding a thunder lizard? - can only hope for so much
 
I supose we can allways hope Forge World gives us something nice... :shifty:
 
I think everyone should stop speculating and just wait for saturday morning. I think we will all be a bit shocked at just how much has been guessed wrong on here.

Optimisim, not pesimism!!! Solutions not problems!! KFC not Macdonalds!!!
 
Razzat said:
I think everyone should stop speculating and just wait for saturday morning. I think we will all be a bit shocked at just how much has been guessed wrong on here.

Optimisim, not pesimism!!! Solutions not problems!! KFC not Macdonalds!!!
Click to expand...


dominos thanks and agree to the sentiment
 
After going over the book I have to say that I am pretty alright with the way it turned out. There are individual things I am not pleased about, mainly the fact that cold one cav is not really worth taking in the grand scheme of things, but I do find that our list has much more flexibility than it used to have. If you take everything you want on the slann it weighs in at about the same points or a little less, but it is also possible to make an effective slann that is much cheaper. Our magic items are pretty good for the most part. I find its really easy to make a blitzkrieg like army where even your foot troops are moving fast thanks to the jaguar standard. I am at peace with this change lol
 
The Hunted said:
Quick question,

I've read a lot on the new lizardmen, and here and there I've seen rumours about my beloved skinks.

Do the skinks get an army-wide -1Ld?

I cannot find a 'conclusive' answer (for as far as conclusive goes with all the rumours :P)

Any help would be appreciated :)

The Hunted
Click to expand...

Regarding your skinks: all skink troops are -1ld, gain ss of 6+, cohorts can buy poisoned attacks for close combat, rippers have a 4+ save, chamo skinks went up one point I believe, skink riders can not be targeted by any hits.
 
Stormtrooper. You have read the book already? or am I being dumb?
 
I would laugh hysterically if everything we have been reading was just disinformation by GW to drown the legitimate leaks and keep the surprise.

I doubt it, but it would be great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top