Ninth Realm Ep.41 The Broadside Bash is Here

Ninth Realm Episode 41

The Broadside bash is here

Grundstok-Gunhauler Khardron-Overlords-Grundstok-Thunderers

New Releases:  The Grundrstock Thunderers & Gunhauler on pre-order

 

Walk about the Realms: we talk about our games, projects and/or reaction to things that week.

001 pasted image 0 pasted image 1 pasted image 2 pasted image 4

New Rumor mill photo:

RumourEngineApril26

Warscroll: Assassin

 

https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-shadowblade-assassin-en.pdf

 

Main topic:

Broadside Bash Is here?  AAAAAAAAHH!!!

To promote: http://www.gatewayopen.com/

 

Question to the show:

I entertaining the idea of playing in a couple of your AOS tournaments. And have a couple of rules questions I was  hoping that you could answer as my crew is new to AOS coming over from 8th edition.

Questions:

  1.  We would like to know how you are ruling on the citadel woods.  As far as movement and the trees.

 

Example: As we have a couple of Sylvaneth players and Beastclaw players.  And with the sizes of the thundertusk/Stonehorn bases not being able to pass between the tree bases.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/02/26/age-of-sigmar-spotlight-sylvaneth-part-4/

 

 

ITC Championship Rankings

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2017-aos-itc-rankings/

Upcoming events two weeks out(for now)

Tags:

About Mariana

Self proclaimed "Swiss Army Nerd"

12 Responses to “Ninth Realm Ep.41 The Broadside Bash is Here”

  1. John April 27, 2017 5:57 pm #

    Hey I just want to make a small, hopefully constructive criticism. I really like Scott and he has a ton passion for AoS and brings his awesome incite about the hobby to the show but he seems to over talk you guys a lot in these podcast/videos and as a viewer/listener I like to listen to both Reece and Jason’s input as well. I do see that this happens because he is really excited about something and his point is almost always valid and I am not saying I want him to leave the show or anything extreme but I like all of you guys and your best episodes, in my opinion, are when all three of you are bantering equally about the topics. Still one of the best AoS podcasts out there keep it up guys.

    • Scott April 27, 2017 8:11 pm #

      So your saying I talk too much, 😳. I love being part of the show and contributing when I can. It’s always great getting feedback from a listener. Honestly, thanks for the input. I like it better when we are all there also. #BringbackMariana
      😊

  2. Jonny April 27, 2017 9:35 pm #

    We’re can I find the “you can’t move trees ” rule?

    Love the show! Never stop talking Scott! <3

    • Scott April 28, 2017 6:48 am #

      In “The Rules” it states
      MYSTERIOUS LANDSCAPES
      The landscapes of the Mortal Realms can both aid and hinder your warriors. Unless stated otherwise, a model can be moved
      across scenery but not through it (so you can’t move through a solid wall, or pass through a tree, but can choose to have a model climb up or over them)

      Also in the FAQ they answered
      Q: Please clarify when/if it is necessary to count vertical movement as part of the distance a model moves, especially with regard to climbing scenic walls. If the height of the wall exceeds a model’s movement, is the wall unclimbable, or can it be climbed over multiple turns? Can a model run up the wall?
      A: The vertical distance needed to climb up and down a wall counts as part of the distance a model is able to move. This may require a model to spend several turns climbing an especially high wall (you will need to remember how far it has climbed each turn). Models can run while climbing a wall. Note that models which can fly ignore scenery (and other models) as they move, and therefore the vertical distance is not included when working out how far they have moved.

      Q: A model cannot move through scenery but can move across it or climb it (unless it is stated otherwise on the scenery warscroll, I presume). Are my Drakespawn Chariots allowed to climb a Fortress Wall or move down from a Witchfate Tower or Fortified Manor?
      A: For simplicity and ease of play, the core game rules allow any model to climb any piece of scenery. If you wish, you may want to say that models are only allowed to move to places that they could reach ‘in real life’, but you will need to apply a certain amount of common sense and discretion in order to make such a rule work
      well

      I copied and pasted these I hope I did not miss any corrections to the paste.

  3. Garry Leonard April 28, 2017 7:35 am #

    Not moving through trees is part of the core rules. So, i see where your coming from is blocking people’s movement with trees etc, that can be tough, but that just means they are strong against monsters.

    I am kind of an advocate for not moving the trees because scenery wise no other piece of scenery works this way. I can pick up a build and put my models where the wall was?? The tree movement is a hold over from fantasy to allow movement trays, and this eventually transitioned to 40k because it made the terrain feature easy to play around. The other reasoning was that the forest stood for more than just the three trees, but now it doesn’t

    I personally agree with the unmovable trees because:

    1. It’s not intuitive to a new player that has a forest that you can arbitrarily move a tree but no other terrain features

    2. I played war machine and to me it just makes the forest feel like it’s that same 2d terrain which is silly to me.

    3. it makes the line of sight blocking of the tree get ignored kind of arbitrarily. I know this a rather small point.

    4. another small point, but i’ve seen it repeatedly. If some one has a none GW forest that may not be modular, it could be destroyed my players trying to pull the tree off assuming it works on GW terrain pieces.

    I will be honest it is kind of silly a monster can’t knock a tree down, and perhaps this mechanic can be added in GH2 or future editions of the rules. Though your regular storm cast eternal pick up a tree and walking under it??? seems silly, and reduces the usefulness of the terrain feature.

    Great show guys so happy your on youtube.

    • Reecius
      Reecius April 28, 2017 7:39 am #

      Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Garry. Perhaps it is my 40k roots that makes me feel so against it. But throwing immovable objects around is just brutally powerful for armies that rely on moving by foot. It could cause a shift in the meta away from things like Stonehorns, etc. which would be a bummer to see less big nasties that can’t fly.

      But, I do see your points. I just want my monsters to smash through trees like a big brute, haha.

      • Oggthrok April 28, 2017 10:20 am #

        Thank you for your perspective on the movement of trees on Citadel Woods, Reese!

        Many people I hear on podcasts or see in forums like this seem almost excited to glue their trees down and develop new tactics, but to me this has been very much like “bases don’t matter,” in that you lose a lot and gain little if you actually follow this rule.

        In particular, it really locks you into using just the Citadel Wood. Homemade woods become difficult to create, because opponents will want exacting copies of the base size and the circles the trees fill within.

        Even very high quality alternatives that attempt to match the dimensions of the official product (such as those found on this very website!) are difficult if someone is worried the alternative trees don’t match the trunk dimensions or whatever of the plastic Citadel model.

        And, what if my model’s base is too big, but his feet could squeeze between the tree and limbo between the limbs? After all, the base doesn’t matter, it’s in the base rules…

        • Reecius
          Reecius April 28, 2017 10:57 am #

          Yeah, good points. It is a weird situation. Good points though on the base size issue. The only thing stopping us from measuring the feet is tournament house rules, which could just as easily apply to moving the trees, too, lol.

  4. Nick April 28, 2017 12:50 pm #

    About the painting, In our scene we had the same issue a longtime back. We ended up calling it “Badger Painting”, do the eyes, bits of metal and a stripe of colour along the back/front of the mini.
    Our rulepacks ended up having the requirement of 3 colours, fully painted and based, no Badger Painting!

    It was a pain to see but thankfully it died out eventually.

    • Nick April 28, 2017 12:55 pm #

      While fully unpainted armies happened, it was still welcomed at tournaments for people to play too, can’t blame a guy for building an army last minute or a new guy getting into the scene coming to the tournament.
      Most ended up moving the above requirement to painting scores (effectively a draw at max painting requirements, of which there weren’t many).

      • WestRider April 28, 2017 1:11 pm #

        I’ve always like the idea of granting all Units “Preferred Enemy: Unpainted Models” or something similar. Doesn’t stop anyone from Playing, but there’s a definite incentive to get stuff painted. Might want to specify that “badger painting” or whatever the local equivalent is counts as “unpainted” for that purpose.

  5. zero-charisma April 29, 2017 6:59 pm #

    Hey Reecius (or anyone who knows i suppose), this is off topic to this issue, but i recently found your 2016 article on slaves to darkness with a bunch of knights as any idea you had. Is this any sort of viable at this stage of the game? i really like the idea of a bunch of knights running around.

    Also, is it at all viable to play a “Lord of Chaos” on foot? I love the idea of the only thing making my army connected to chaos is when my Lord pops into a Demon Prince.

Leave a Reply