Joined units and other questions.

A place to read and talk about our official updates, errata and addenda for Darklands. Please post all rules queries here!
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:43 pm

So I had a game recently against a fellow Darklands player and a number of different issues arose which I wondered if I could get some clarification on.

I'm not sure if these have been asked before, but a search didn't give up much information.

So firstly:

My Augur Drune attemped to cast Mutate onto my great club brute unit consisting of 5 members and a death brute who was joined to them, for a total of 6 warriors. The confusion arose when we were attempting to work out how to resolve the damage distribution of the spells effects which states: "The marked unit immediately suffers D10 invoked damage per invoked die, distributed randomly amongst the mutated warriors".

Since it mentions 'invoked die' does that mean only the dice that rolled the value needed (in our case 4 went off) are used to roll for this damage as per 6.40.5.5.1?

So I would roll 4 dice & not the 5 dice on the initial profile of the invocation?

Next, how does the random distribution of that damage work? We were reading for a good 40+ minutes and struggled to find a clear answer.

And another question is: Do both the Death brute and Brute unit count as a separate marks for the purpose of distributing that damage with the brutes being majority and the death brute being minority? The reason I ask this question is because dice distribution only covers sight and power+ focus invocations under section 6.40.5.7. (page 262-3)

And that distribution is for the avoid rolls, not damage & not for focus invocations with only effects, which I believe this counts as since it doesn't have a power+ value.

Being unable to find a section on damage distribution (I felt I'd read something before, but couldn't find it on this occasion), we rolled off and decided to use the rules under 6.40.5.7.6 (page 263) for distributing random invoked dice. As a reiteration of the question above & following on from this sequence , do I split the death brute and normal brutes into separate marks, or is it a unit of 6 marks who I distribute the dice onto? The wording of the paragraph seemed to suggest the latter, so in our case we just divided it up as 1-6 and rerolled 0,7,8,9 (we were a bit weary at this point so mistakes were made, particularly on my part).

Or should we have divided it up as 01234 the brutes & 56789 on the Death brute?

Once that dice distribution is resolved (it was 21 & only ended up on the 5 ordinary brutes) does the damage go on the wounded warrior as per page 61? Or do I have to divi it up amongst the 5 brutes for some reason? The invocation isn't too clear on this point, I assumed it was meant to be read as the invoked dice are randomly distributed, but it could easily be read as distribution of the damage, hence the confusion.

Moving on to my next set of questions, when a unit performs an attack action, the 6.20.1.2 step for declaring equipment, is that mainly for the purposes of using switch to change weapons or styles?

Also under 6.20.1.2.5, the wording here feels a bit confusing and clumsy when it reads: "An attacker must attack with all off his combat weapons when performing an attack action, although he may use each different combat weapon in separate attack actions during the same activation."

I know that this is to differentiate the different types of attack action each weapon might allow (such as stomp, trample, grab etc..) and to allow a player to take advantage of the sequence with which they perform those attacks, but is there another way to distinguish between the singular of performing an attack action and the plural of attack actions with the different weapons? I suppose this is more a whinge than anything, but that is one of the bigger blocks to understanding how the combat flows.

Another question is: When performing a charge action the unit moves in a straight line towards the enemy unit, are they allowed to performed a linked attack move action to move more models into base contact, should the position of the units involved & the engage distance mean that only one or two are able to make it into range? Or is it only allowed under 6.10.1.2 if it were an indirect engagement?

That's probably a very stupid question and I would assume it is the latter, in that they cannot perform an attack move until their next activation, once they start an hour engaged with another unit.

Another daft question I had was: If frenzied units cannot become weary & and they have charged and performed their linked attack actions, then an enemy reacts to their attacks, can they react to the reaction? I would assume not as per the combat sequence, but thought I'd check any how.

Thanks in advance for taking the time to read through my questions. If I think of any more I'll post them.
Last edited by Grizzle on Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:45 pm

Oh, one more question:

Exalt tokens and exalted tokens are two different things, correct?

So you have exalt tokens as a category of token i.e. blood, frenzied, exalted, strong, swift...etc..

And then the exalted token itself is a representation of the heart state being exalted while also being an exalt token? I ask because we've started to incorporate the proper combat results and valour tests.
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Sep 10, 2018 2:04 pm

Grizzle wrote:So I had a game recently against a fellow Darklands player and a number of different issues arose which I wondered if I could get some clarification on.

I'm not sure if these have been asked before, but a search didn't give up much information.

So firstly:

My Augur Drune attemped to cast Mutate onto my great club brute unit consisting of 5 members and a death brute who was joined to them, for a total of 6 warriors. The confusion arose when we were attempting to work out how to resolve the damage distribution of the spells effects which states: "The marked unit immediately suffers D10 invoked damage per invoked die, distributed randomly amongst the mutated warriors".

Since it mentions 'invoked die' does that mean only the dice that rolled the value needed (in our case 4 went off) are used to roll for this damage as per 6.40.5.5.1?


Correct.

Grizzle wrote:So I would roll 4 dice & not the 5 dice on the initial profile of the invocation?


Correct.

Grizzle wrote:Next, how does the random distribution of that damage work? We were reading for a good 40+ minutes and struggled to find a clear answer.


That is a very good question - and one that I too struggle to find an answer. I seem to have convered random strike/shot/invoke distribution, but not damage!

Grizzle wrote:And another question is: Do both the Death brute and Brute unit count as a separate marks for the purpose of distributing that damage with the brutes being majority and the death brute being minority? The reason I ask this question is because dice distribution only covers sight and power+ focus invocations under section 6.40.5.7. (page 262-3)

And that distribution is for the avoid rolls, not damage & not for focus invocations with only effects, which I believe this counts as since it doesn't have a power+ value.

Being unable to find a section on damage distribution (I felt I'd read something before, but couldn't find it on this occasion), we rolled off and decided to use the rules under 6.40.5.7.6 (page 263) for distributing random invoked dice. As a reiteration of the question above & following on from this sequence , do I split the death brute and normal brutes into separate marks, or is it a unit of 6 marks who I distribute the dice onto? The wording of the paragraph seemed to suggest the latter, so in our case we just divided it up as 1-6 and rerolled 0,7,8,9 (we were a bit weary at this point so mistakes were made, particularly on my part).

Or should we have divided it up as 01234 the brutes & 56789 on the Death brute?


It looks like you've done the right thing here: that's what I would have done if I needed to do it quickly.

However, there is definitely an argument for distributing damage to different marks randomly by ratios of strength; (so in the above example, 1 death brute = strength 4, 5 brutes = strength 20, ratio of 4:20) but that's tough to work out on the fly; which is why I did the strike distribution as lowest skill first, then by strength, to all members. For it to be truly random it has to be a ratio, but for reasons of game mechanics and speed I'd go with skill first / strength, as in the strike distribution.

I will ruminate on this further and try to get a quick way of doing it as an addenda. For now though, do it like strike distribution.

Grizzle wrote:Once that dice distribution is resolved (it was 21 & only ended up on the 5 ordinary brutes) does the damage go on the wounded warrior as per page 61? Or do I have to divi it up amongst the 5 brutes for some reason? The invocation isn't too clear on this point, I assumed it was meant to be read as the invoked dice are randomly distributed, but it could easily be read as distribution of the damage, hence the confusion.


Wounded warrior, always. There shouldn't be any doubt about that, ever - in the case of a unit with the same warriors in it, damage always goes on the wounded warrior, never on each member of the unit, keeping book-keeping to a minimum.

Grizzle wrote:Moving on to my next set of questions, when a unit performs an attack action, the 6.20.1.2 step for declaring equipment, is that mainly for the purposes of using switch to change weapons or styles?


Yes - basically when you declare your equipment you can't change it if you're still fighting.

Grizzle wrote:Also under 6.20.1.2.5, the wording here feels a bit confusing and clumsy when it reads: "An attacker must attack with all off his combat weapons when performing an attack action, although he may use each different combat weapon in separate attack actions during the same activation."

I know that this is to differentiate the different types of attack action each weapon might allow (such as stomp, trample, grab etc..) and to allow a player to take advantage of the sequence with which they perform those attacks, but is there another way to distinguish between the singular of performing an attack action and the plural of attack actions with the different weapons? I suppose this is more a whinge than anything, but that is one of the bigger blocks to understanding how the combat flows.


It could probably be worded differently, but I've yet to work out a better way of stating it without using more words!

Feel free to write it more effectively than I did...

Grizzle wrote:Another question is: When performing a charge action the unit moves in a straight line towards the enemy unit, are they allowed to performed a linked attack move action to move more models into base contact, should the position of the units involved & the engage distance mean that only one or two are able to make it into range? Or is it only allowed under 6.10.1.2 if it were an indirect engagement?

That's probably a very stupid question and I would assume it is the latter, in that they cannot perform an attack move until their next activation, once they start an hour engaged with another unit.


There are no stupid questions, just questions... and yes, it's the latter.

Grizzle wrote:Another daft question I had was: If frenzied units cannot become weary & and they have charged and performed their linked attack actions, then an enemy reacts to their attacks, can they react to the reaction? I would assume not as per the combat sequence, but thought I'd check any how.


No, because you can only react to an Attack action, not an Attack reaction.

Grizzle wrote:Thanks in advance for taking the time to read through my questions. If I think of any more I'll post them.


Definitely! Go for it! All questions improve the game - I must do the random damage thingy...

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Sep 10, 2018 2:05 pm

Grizzle wrote:Oh, one more question:

Exalt tokens and exalted tokens are two different things, correct?


Exult and Exulted, but yes...

Grizzle wrote:So you have exalt tokens as a category of token i.e. blood, frenzied, exalted, strong, swift...etc..

And then the exalted token itself is a representation of the heart state being exalted while also being an exalt token? I ask because we've started to incorporate the proper combat results and valour tests.


Yes, exult tokens are a category, and exulted is the representation.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Mon Sep 10, 2018 4:14 pm

Cheers, thanks for the answers rob.

I think a lot of the issues are, beyond the known ones to do with index problems, when a person has an intuitive notion that they should either have more options or feel that a situation is more lethal than expected, but that's a human thing :P.

I remember you saying many times that Darklands is meant to be brutal. And that fits with my (extremely) small knowledge of warfare from ages past, where clashes and smaller skirmishes are often over very quickly.
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Tue Sep 11, 2018 10:15 am

Grizzle wrote:Cheers, thanks for the answers rob.

I think a lot of the issues are, beyond the known ones to do with index problems, when a person has an intuitive notion that they should either have more options or feel that a situation is more lethal than expected, but that's a human thing :P.

I remember you saying many times that Darklands is meant to be brutal. And that fits with my (extremely) small knowledge of warfare from ages past, where clashes and smaller skirmishes are often over very quickly.


Absolutely. Combat is brutal!

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:14 am

Rob Lane wrote:
Grizzle wrote:Cheers, thanks for the answers rob.

I think a lot of the issues are, beyond the known ones to do with index problems, when a person has an intuitive notion that they should either have more options or feel that a situation is more lethal than expected, but that's a human thing :P.

I remember you saying many times that Darklands is meant to be brutal. And that fits with my (extremely) small knowledge of warfare from ages past, where clashes and smaller skirmishes are often over very quickly.


Absolutely. Combat is brutal!

Cheers
Rob


Hey Rob, I asked this in a different thread but to clarify : Do frenzied units, upon becoming victorious and Triumphant as an attack reaction (as opposed to being the attacker) get to perform a linked breakthrough so as to get them towards either an existing enemy unit they are now unengaged by, or a new unit that is within range?

Basically, can they do this if they are reacting to an attacker?
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:48 am

Grizzle wrote:Hey Rob, I asked this in a different thread but to clarify : Do frenzied units, upon becoming victorious and Triumphant as an attack reaction (as opposed to being the attacker) get to perform a linked breakthrough so as to get them towards either an existing enemy unit they are now unengaged by, or a new unit that is within range?

Basically, can they do this if they are reacting to an attacker?


No. To Breakthrough you have to have Charged into combat. It's in the requirements for the Breakthrough reaction - see p358.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Brightblade
Posts: 203
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:57 pm

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Brightblade » Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:27 pm

Rob Lane wrote:
Grizzle wrote:Hey Rob, I asked this in a different thread but to clarify : Do frenzied units, upon becoming victorious and Triumphant as an attack reaction (as opposed to being the attacker) get to perform a linked breakthrough so as to get them towards either an existing enemy unit they are now unengaged by, or a new unit that is within range?

Basically, can they do this if they are reacting to an attacker?


No. To Breakthrough you have to have Charged into combat. It's in the requirements for the Breakthrough reaction - see p358.

Cheers
Rob


Rob,

In the game we played, which you picked up on from my post, ala Pram and Toys :lol: Grizzle's Abhorrents performed a Breakthrough after performing a Counter Engage reaction to a Cugacx Charge. In this scenario was the Breakthrough action allowed? Or is in only applicable if Grizzle's Abhorrents had been the Charger, and not the Counter Engager?
Devlin Brightblade, Lord of Saxon Hammerwich, Slayer of Trolls, Tamer of Manticores, Petter of Flint Flang the Kill Thing from the Infernal Pits..

As you slide down the Bannister of Life, may the Splinters be kind...
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:43 pm

Brightblade wrote:Rob,

In the game we played, which you picked up on from my post, ala Pram and Toys :lol: Grizzle's Abhorrents performed a Breakthrough after performing a Counter Engage reaction to a Cugacx Charge. In this scenario was the Breakthrough action allowed? Or is in only applicable if Grizzle's Abhorrents had been the Charger, and not the Counter Engager?


Yes, because it was a Counter-Charge, which is a Charge action.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Sat Sep 29, 2018 7:54 pm

Hey Rob,

I thought I'd put this question here rather than create a new thread.

So my new question is: On the Ysian muster where it describes the scavenge action for the Nithings, it states that they must be within 2" of a combat action to do so. I probably missed the memo on the muster updates, but is this to replace the dead warrior objects left by those killed, that (I think) they used to take advantage of for gaining flesh?

In any case, would it be correct that my nithings could scuttle up behind a unit of brutes, wait till they get into combat and then scavenge from it, in the abstract, by being within 2" of the brutes?
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:24 am

Grizzle wrote:Hey Rob,

I thought I'd put this question here rather than create a new thread.

So my new question is: On the Ysian muster where it describes the scavenge action for the Nithings, it states that they must be within 2" of a combat action to do so. I probably missed the memo on the muster updates, but is this to replace the dead warrior objects left by those killed, that (I think) they used to take advantage of for gaining flesh?


Yes and no; that rule was before dead warrior tokens became a thing, so I may well change it to dead warrior tokens in the future.

Grizzle wrote:In any case, would it be correct that my nithings could scuttle up behind a unit of brutes, wait till they get into combat and then scavenge from it, in the abstract, by being within 2" of the brutes?


Yes indeed... for now!

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Sun Oct 07, 2018 8:37 am

Rob Lane wrote:
Grizzle wrote:Hey Rob,

I thought I'd put this question here rather than create a new thread.

So my new question is: On the Ysian muster where it describes the scavenge action for the Nithings, it states that they must be within 2" of a combat action to do so. I probably missed the memo on the muster updates, but is this to replace the dead warrior objects left by those killed, that (I think) they used to take advantage of for gaining flesh?


Yes and no; that rule was before dead warrior tokens became a thing, so I may well change it to dead warrior tokens in the future.

Grizzle wrote:In any case, would it be correct that my nithings could scuttle up behind a unit of brutes, wait till they get into combat and then scavenge from it, in the abstract, by being within 2" of the brutes?


Yes indeed... for now!

Cheers
Rob


Cheers for the answers Rob.

Might be trying them out tonight. ;)
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Sat Oct 13, 2018 10:49 am

Hi Rob,

I've been doing a bit of brushing up (painting and rules :P).

I was watching the Anglecynn vs Ysian battle report you and Tim did on youtube : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_5VsAodPAU

And I noticed something at around 50:10.
Once the mantichora is finished killing off the Waelwulf unit, you demonstrate the breakthrough reaction from the now unengaged (or beset) Mantichora, towards the Waelwulf Thegn.
What I'm curious about is, once you've performed it, you only attack with the remaining combat weapons on the Mantichora's profile, meaning you aren't using the bite weapon you previously used on the Waelwulfs.

Does this mean that if a unit only has one combat weapon, such as Brutes, they will only be getting bulk charger impact strikes if they were to breakthrough react & charge a new enemy unit?

This is something I've been playing wrong if so, because I was treating each breakthrough charge with my frenzied units as if it was resetting the combat weapons, but I probably should have remembered that it is still technically the same activation. :cry:
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:22 am

Grizzle wrote:Hi Rob,

I've been doing a bit of brushing up (painting and rules :P).

I was watching the Anglecynn vs Ysian battle report you and Tim did on youtube : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_5VsAodPAU


That is quite an old battle report now so I wouldn't hold too much store by it - but you're doing the right thing by asking of course ;o)

Grizzle wrote:And I noticed something at around 50:10.
Once the mantichora is finished killing off the Waelwulf unit, you demonstrate the breakthrough reaction from the now unengaged (or beset) Mantichora, towards the Waelwulf Thegn.
What I'm curious about is, once you've performed it, you only attack with the remaining combat weapons on the Mantichora's profile, meaning you aren't using the bite weapon you previously used on the Waelwulfs.

Does this mean that if a unit only has one combat weapon, such as Brutes, they will only be getting bulk charger impact strikes if they were to breakthrough react & charge a new enemy unit?

This is something I've been playing wrong if so, because I was treating each breakthrough charge with my frenzied units as if it was resetting the combat weapons, but I probably should have remembered that it is still technically the same activation. :cry:


No, it's only non-frenzied units that act in the way you describe; your Mantichora performs a new Charge Attack action, non-frenzied stuff would perform a Charge Attack action in the next battle hour. See p359, Breakthroughing into Enemy Units and the subsection below about frenzied Breakthroughing units.

So you're okay, you've been playing it right ;o)

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Thu Oct 25, 2018 3:36 am

I've got some more Nithing questions.

It says on their profile that when they scavenge you add it to the chart to the left of the scavenge rules, that runs 1-50. Now do I have to keep track of the flesh for each individual Nithing? Or can I pool all their flesh and when I'm bringing it back to the flesh pile I just dump it off one? Or do I need each individual one to bring back his own personal stash?

At the moment I've been playing it as the latter, using different coloured pens to mark each different Nithing's amount.

Also, to reword my original scavenge question from earlier in this thread: when I asked about scavenging from the brutes, am I correct in assuming that if only one of those brutes was in combat (say because of terrain making their charge awkward) could I only scavenge from within 2"of the brute in combat, or can it be any of them in range that counts?
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:45 am

Grizzle wrote:I've got some more Nithing questions.

It says on their profile that when they scavenge you add it to the chart to the left of the scavenge rules, that runs 1-50. Now do I have to keep track of the flesh for each individual Nithing? Or can I pool all their flesh and when I'm bringing it back to the flesh pile I just dump it off one? Or do I need each individual one to bring back his own personal stash?


Each individual Nithing.

Grizzle wrote:At the moment I've been playing it as the latter, using different coloured pens to mark each different Nithing's amount.


Yeah, I think that's the best way really.

Grizzle wrote:Also, to reword my original scavenge question from earlier in this thread: when I asked about scavenging from the brutes, am I correct in assuming that if only one of those brutes was in combat (say because of terrain making their charge awkward) could I only scavenge from within 2"of the brute in combat, or can it be any of them in range that counts?


Any of them really. This will be a moot point when I change them to using dead warrior tokens...

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:56 pm

Rob Lane wrote:
Grizzle wrote:I've got some more Nithing questions.

It says on their profile that when they scavenge you add it to the chart to the left of the scavenge rules, that runs 1-50. Now do I have to keep track of the flesh for each individual Nithing? Or can I pool all their flesh and when I'm bringing it back to the flesh pile I just dump it off one? Or do I need each individual one to bring back his own personal stash?


Each individual Nithing.

Grizzle wrote:At the moment I've been playing it as the latter, using different coloured pens to mark each different Nithing's amount.


Yeah, I think that's the best way really.

Grizzle wrote:Also, to reword my original scavenge question from earlier in this thread: when I asked about scavenging from the brutes, am I correct in assuming that if only one of those brutes was in combat (say because of terrain making their charge awkward) could I only scavenge from within 2"of the brute in combat, or can it be any of them in range that counts?


Any of them really. This will be a moot point when I change them to using dead warrior tokens...

Cheers
Rob


OK cheers Rob.
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:27 pm

Got a new random question, more of a rules decision question, but on the Vras muster under the spell 'mould spores' is my maths correct that the spell could potentially put out 108 corruption tokens?

This is considering it is 6 dice that can put out 2D10 per each one that goes off, with 9 being the highest roll on each die. I know it's unlikely to roll that amount, but as a focus it goes on temper vs temper and with the blight vras' potential boost to it's temper with it's blight flesh, it just sounds nasty. But my real concern was how much that might slow a game down, especially given how the corruption tokens actually add one on in addition to the original if a might test is failed.

But it's your game, I was just curious about your thoughts on this.

Also (and I'm fairly sure the answer is no but I just want to check) those dice for that spell are just straight rolls, they aren't fated, correct?
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:42 am

Grizzle wrote:Got a new random question, more of a rules decision question, but on the Vras muster under the spell 'mould spores' is my maths correct that the spell could potentially put out 108 corruption tokens?

This is considering it is 6 dice that can put out 2D10 per each one that goes off, with 9 being the highest roll on each die. I know it's unlikely to roll that amount, but as a focus it goes on temper vs temper and with the blight vras' potential boost to it's temper with it's blight flesh, it just sounds nasty. But my real concern was how much that might slow a game down, especially given how the corruption tokens actually add one on in addition to the original if a might test is failed.

But it's your game, I was just curious about your thoughts on this.


Well, my thoughts are, have you played it? Theorylands is all very well, but I will only change things if they are obviously not working for the game.

Vras players please comment here! I'm thinking of you Mr Bannon!

Grizzle wrote:Also (and I'm fairly sure the answer is no but I just want to check) those dice for that spell are just straight rolls, they aren't fated, correct?


Correct. If it doesn't say they're fated, they're not fated.

Cheers
Rob
User avatar
Grizzle
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:36 am

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Grizzle » Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:22 pm

Rob Lane wrote:
Grizzle wrote:Got a new random question, more of a rules decision question, but on the Vras muster under the spell 'mould spores' is my maths correct that the spell could potentially put out 108 corruption tokens?

This is considering it is 6 dice that can put out 2D10 per each one that goes off, with 9 being the highest roll on each die. I know it's unlikely to roll that amount, but as a focus it goes on temper vs temper and with the blight vras' potential boost to it's temper with it's blight flesh, it just sounds nasty. But my real concern was how much that might slow a game down, especially given how the corruption tokens actually add one on in addition to the original if a might test is failed.

But it's your game, I was just curious about your thoughts on this.


Well, my thoughts are, have you played it? Theorylands is all very well, but I will only change things if they are obviously not working for the game.

Vras players please comment here! I'm thinking of you Mr Bannon!

Grizzle wrote:Also (and I'm fairly sure the answer is no but I just want to check) those dice for that spell are just straight rolls, they aren't fated, correct?


Correct. If it doesn't say they're fated, they're not fated.

Cheers
Rob


Thanks for the reply Rob.

Fair enough, I'll have to see when the blight vras model is released. Or try it with a proxy.
User avatar
Rob Lane
Site Admin
Posts: 1450
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:46 pm
Location: Warsop Vale, Nottinghamshire
Contact:

Re: Joined units and other questions.

Postby Rob Lane » Tue Nov 06, 2018 10:38 am

Grizzle wrote:Thanks for the reply Rob.

Fair enough, I'll have to see when the blight vras model is released. Or try it with a proxy.


Proxy is definitely your best bet mate, he won't be available until February at least.

Cheers
Rob

Return to “Darklands Rules and Musters - Updates, Errata and Addenda”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests