8th Ed. Slann and challenges

[NIGHTBRINGER]

This topic seems to have fizzled out. So what is the consensus here? Can the Slann be challenged?

 

[Batu]

Since the rule (guardians) was written for 7th edition and allowed the Slann to operate just outside of the combat our house rule is the Slann in a unit of TG is placed in the 3rd rank instead of the 2nd.

Has its pros and cons but prevents the Slann from being challenged and keeps to the (theme) or (idea) or (spirit) behind the guardians rule in place.


This is the primary problem with taking 10 years to put out the army books. Rules written 10 years ago may or may not be applicable 2 editions later. IE TK 2002 / Brets 2003 were written almost 10 years ago for 6th ed.

There simply is no way to have a major rules change without having the individual (special) army rules at some point come into conflict.

 

[Ithumaer]

In the tournaments I played in over the years, I always managed to win the argument that the Slann couldn't be challenged due to him being back further. However, I also consider it a compromise seeing as the stupid rules trap the toad in the second rank so I lose supporting attacks from TG. But that's just my thought. Maybe if we can spam mail GW or something we could get a response!

 

[Arli]

With the challenge rules in 8th not requiring base to base contact, the slann can be challenged. I played a Brettonia player and his character killer had some item that forces the challenge to be accepted. Anyway, the slann lasted 2 rounds of combat with that guy.

I tried to argue the point with the sacred duty rule, but when we looked it up in the Lizardmen book, it says nothing about the slann avoiding a challenge.

 

[Eladimir]

Not only do I agree that yes the slann can be challenged I agree with some of the others that say this is a good idea to get challenged and just refuse.
Allows two extra TG attacks and if the TG lose combat the'd be testing on stubborn leadership anyways with the BSB reroll.

That being said I have in desperate times challenged or accepted to save the life of the TG. 5 wounds with a 4+ ward is pretty hard to kill unless they have an anti character challenger

 

[Ithumaer]

This is after the champ is killed, I'm assuming? Because honestly I've never had anyone manage to fight my Slann TG unit and be even able to challenge the Slann. I'm hoping to enter the 'Ard Boyz tournament coming up, which is a 3,000 point United States tournament, but since special characters are allowed, I'll be running Chakax to ensure no one is lucky enough to get to my toad.

 

[Kaax Taat]

Reading everyone's input about this leaves me concerned.
GW is infamous for writting ambiguous rules - it seems that the hand and elbo forget what the arm is doing.

I just started playing so I have no idea about the 7th Edition rules. When I read the "Sacred Duty" paragraph listed under temple Guard I can not for the life of me percieve how a tG would allow a Slann to accept a challange. Their sole purpose in life is to protect the Slann. The reason they are spawned is for just that - protect the Slann! So, I believe it is an oversight at best that GW didn't include the simple line, "Slanns may not accept challenges while in a unit of TG".

I have never written to GW, how do the Eratta questions get fielded? Who do we write to?
I can't imagine a new LM army book to be released anytime soon, So I would like to get GW to at least post a Eratta solution.

Is the simple solution to have a Revered Guardian as a unit champion? Would that eleviate the Slann?

Kaax Taat

 

[hpeders]

Hi, Im new here, but longtime, not very active LM player. in the spirit of rules-lawyering and nitpicking: the Slann can be clallenged, but not attacked.

Mods, I hope this isn´t stepping over the line- but if it is feel free to edit/delete. Quote from the Army book: The temple guard form...which an enemy wishing to attack the slann Mage-priest must first fight."

 

[Caneghem]

Hi, Im new here, but longtime, not very active LM player. in the spirit of rules-lawyering and nitpicking: the Slann can be clallenged, but not attacked.

Mods, I hope this isn´t stepping over the line- but if it is feel free to edit/delete. Quote from the Army book: The temple guard form...which an enemy wishing to attack the slann Mage-priest must first fight."

Good stuff! If I ever play someone who is enough of a rules lawyer to try to challenge out my Slann, I will calmly show him that part of the army book. Army book always trumps BRB.

Normally I'd say the quote you gave was just the fluff description of the Slann/Temple Guard. But against a rules lawyer I'd have no qualms using it, becuase I think the intention of the army book was indeed to make the Slann not a part of combat, and thus unchallengable.

Also, welcome to the forum.

 

[ShivanAngel]

Despite fluff and what not, RaW the slann can be sent to the back for refusing a challenge.

 

[Kar Gor]

Hey guys been away a while but i spotted this and thought i should raise a point

Dont army book rules overight 8th rules... ( i cant quote) but dosnt that mean our army book says that slan is in second rank always... overighting the rule where we come forawrd and where he can be challanged at all

 

[Caneghem]

Hey guys been away a while but i spotted this and thought i should raise a point

Dont army book rules overight 8th rules... ( i cant quote) but dosnt that mean our army book says that slan is in second rank always... overighting the rule where we come forawrd and where he can be challanged at all

Well, the rules say something along the lines of "any model fighting in combat". So in 8th edition the Slann is "in combat" and can technically be challenged, despite the spirit of the original army book rule.

 

[Batu]

Hey guys been away a while but i spotted this and thought i should raise a point

Dont army book rules overight 8th rules... ( i cant quote) but dosnt that mean our army book says that slan is in second rank always... overighting the rule where we come forawrd and where he can be challanged at all

Well, the rules say something along the lines of "any model fighting in combat". So in 8th edition the Slann is "in combat" and can technically be challenged, despite the spirit of the original army book rule.

If it is not in the (rules) section : bestiary etc and only in the "fluff" (history- story background etc) it does not count.

Fluff does not a rule make.

This is the inherent problem with writing an army book for 6th ed (brets/TK) or 7th edition (most books) rules and trying to incorporate them into 8th edition. (10+yr book cycle and 5yr core rule cycle is asinine.)

There will always be problems when the core rule set changes (especially when it is a drastic change like 8th ed) and the army book was not written/designed for those core rules. GW does not go through the (old) army books thoughtfully and update them to the new rules. The FAQ is a rush job at best and brings up as many "new" issues as they "fix".

Probably a base reason GW stock is not meeting their projections. While the game is enjoyable, many aspects of it are half-assed.

 

[Ithumaer]

It is interesting though, as someone brought up earlier in the thread, it does state in the Slann's Guardians rule, yes, in the guardian rule paragraph itself, that the enemy must fight the TG before being allowed to target the Slann. In a desperate situation, this passage could be argued, though personally I do agree that it's better to refuse with the toad and watch the TG butcher your foe.

 

[Caneghem]

It is interesting though, as someone brought up earlier in the thread, it does state in the Slann's Guardians rule, yes, in the guardian rule paragraph itself, that the enemy must fight the TG before being allowed to target the Slann. In a desperate situation, this passage could be argued, though personally I do agree that it's better to refuse with the toad and watch the TG butcher your foe.

Yup, +2 attacks from the TG. I have never had anyone bring this up in a game, and I won't be the one to let them in on the secret!

 

[Matis]

and what about position of models?
- if slann accepts challenge, is he moved to the front rank, or fights from the second?
- can he cast spells while locked in a challenge?
- is he still locked in the challenge in subsequent rounds of combat?
- if he refuses, is he moved to the back, or does the "stays in the second rank" rule take over?
- if he refuses, can I use his general LD for units out of combat, BSB +1 resolution and LD re-roll?
at the end of the turn of combat, while there are still enemies and combat continues
- is he moved back to the second rank?
- can I use his LD in the next turn?
- can he be challenged again?

I found out that playing a TG champ, maybe even with a magic weapon, is great for accepting challenges, since he can be raised (and is the first to be raised) by the Regrowth spell

thanks

(few could be answered by the rulebook, but taking the guardians rule into account its not as clear)

 

[Batu]

So, if you challenge a character (say unit with spears) in horde formation 10x4. the character could not refuse since he would fall back to the 4th rank and still be "in the combat" (at least as long as the horde formation was intact? (4th rank has supporting attacks)

 

[hpeders]

and what about position of models?
- if slann accepts challenge, is he moved to the front rank, or fights from the second?
- can he cast spells while locked in a challenge?
- is he still locked in the challenge in subsequent rounds of combat?
- if he refuses, is he moved to the back, or does the "stays in the second rank" rule take over?
- if he refuses, can I use his general LD for units out of combat, BSB +1 resolution and LD re-roll?
at the end of the turn of combat, while there are still enemies and combat continues
- is he moved back to the second rank?
- can I use his LD in the next turn?
- can he be challenged again?

In a TG unit the slann is always placed in the second rank (Armybook guardians rule).
While he is in the second he may act as normal (Armybook guardians rule) RAW.

if he accepts challenge he remains in second rank, can cast spells and is locked in combat.
if he refuses challenge, no effect. he remains in second rank can use LD, BSB etc.
actually quite clear. I don´t know why I didn´t see it before.

 

[hpeders]

Is nobody answering because I´m right or because I´m a stupid git for believing I might be?

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

I believe you summarized it perfectly. Your explanation brings the intended purpose of the rule perfectly inline with the RAW. Good observation!