Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
As with all warhammer fantasy armies, I tend to get into the habit of 'oo shiney!' and picking up the army book and a few models.
After reading through herdstone and librarium, and then re-reading the beastmen ambush rules, I'm curious as to what people's interpretation of this rule is, particularly, what you can have in ambush.
My interpretation of the rule is based on the words 'any' and 'a'... as "ANY beastmen unit can be held in ambush, as long as there is A unit of the same..."
This leads me to believe that the choice does not have to be on a 1 to 1 basis, for instance, I have 3 units of gors, one 20 man unit, one 15 man unit, and one 10 man unit... I deploy the 20 man unit as normal... I leave the 15 man unit in ambush as there is a 20 man unit on the table... I then leave the 10 man unit in ambush as there is a 20 man unit on the table.
I'd heard rumor that a recent battle report in White Dwarf also had them working this way (though I have not read the report myself).
they really DID write any and 'A' in the book, it really doesnt interpret 1:1 ratio at all. I didnt see this until now, but it's quite blatant.
The tourny this coming weekend hosted by Warmasters Challenge | Home of the Largest Tournaments in Canada in ontario has ruled that you must have one unit deployed for each in ambush. This is obviously not an official rule, but it is how it has been interpreted around here for tournament play. We won't know for sure which way was intended until a FAQ is released for beastmen though.
Which is done by an external company, so sometimes the rules aren't FAQd as they were meant to be by the people who wrote the books, but instead by someone else who has cursory knowledge of the book they're reading and a general overview of the rules of Warhammer. As written it will probably fall into the one to many camp unless the person reading it goes "Ooh! That sounds mean!"
There are a couple of FAQs that contradict themselves for similar reasons. Even one of the writers has complained that a FAQ for his book goes directly against a rule written on another page, not sure if it got alterred or not, was 40K so my knowledge there is limited.
Fantasy: Wood Elves, Dark Elves, Beastmen and Tomb Kings.
LotR: Misty Mountains and Rohan
Yes it is poorly worded and some have chosen to go with the 1:x ratio. Most people are using the 1:1 ratio but until the FAQ comes out it is unclear. I generally will tend to go with the way that is less beneficial to myself until a concrete ruling is made. That way I have learned to live with it one way and if it turns out it is the other then it is just better for me.
You guys really shouldn't be surprised any more by ambiguous rulings in GWs books. Infact, ive kinda come to expect it
On a more seriosu note, just be sure to clarify rules with your opponent (in friendly games) beforehand and all is good
I play it as 1 parent unit can ambush any number of units.
1:1 for me.
I rather know I've played at a disadvantage rather than finding out I've played it in conflict with how it was intended. That said, I am not taking a 'moral highground' because of it. This is just my chosen approach on the issue.
""What's the matter? Don't ya like clowns? Don't we make ya laugh?" - Captain Spaulding.
i would say the word ANY is pivotal in determining which way GW wants the rule to be read. I brought this issue up at my local GW and the manager scribbled out ANY and wrote A, and then said there, fixed.
I'd make him buy me a new book.
I like how there are all these people who play how they think GW wanted the rules. THat doesn't work. Play how it is written, because more often than not, the way the community thinks things should be isn't the way they get errata-ed.