Cauldron in 8th

How to beat those cowardly High Elves?

Moderators: Layne, The Dread Knights

User avatar
Demetrius
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1070
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:36 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by Demetrius »

They have poisoned attacks, it states in the FAQ "All attacks are Poisoned Attacks". You can find this in the middle of the big paragraph in the description of the COB.
Olderplayer
Executioner
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 7:06 am

Post by Olderplayer »

There is a suggestion that a revised FAQ may come out to address some of the issues with the poorly written FAQs.

This discussion is missing part of the new rule. The FAQ makes clear that war machines are all combined with no separate crew. The surprise was that they classified the COB as a war machine rather than as unique. In the FAQ, the Cauldron has T10 (so does the Anvil for Dwarf armies) and the crew gets the T of the war machine when facing "ranged attacks" (pp. 108 and 109 of the new BRB) and the crew's armour save and ward saves are then taken into account. The rules are not entirely clear but I would assume ranged attacks include magic missiles but am not absolutely sure about direct damage spells, hexes, and magical vortexes since the BRB is explicit in the rules about shooting at war machines but not explicit wrt magic attacks st war machines.

Terror is kind of irrelevant but immunity to fear is important in combat. I think frenzy goes with the death hag in the army book. I'm worried that true line of sight will give a shot at the unit.
User avatar
Phierlihy
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 2089
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:19 am

Post by Phierlihy »

Demetrius the Betrayer wrote:They have poisoned attacks, it states in the FAQ "All attacks are Poisoned Attacks". You can find this in the middle of the big paragraph in the description of the COB.


Woohoo! Nice find!!
User avatar
Thanee
Rending Star
Rending Star
Posts: 5030
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2002 6:10 am
Location: Germany

Post by Thanee »

Timz wrote:So stop acting stupid.

phierlihy wrote:What exactly does that mean to you then Mr Wizard??


And both of you immediately stop with comments like this! Keep it civil. Thanks!

Bye
Thanee
User avatar
Red...
Generalissimo
Posts: 3750
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Baltimore

Post by Red... »

Hmmm, I didn't see this thread, so I'll post up my conclusions which I argued on a different thread here as well.

1. No unit in any current warhammer book anywhere can benefit from a special rule unless it is specificallyincluded in its army list entry. That's why WoC have the same special rule repeated in EVERY single entry that it applies to, same with High Elves and Speed of Asur (or whatever its called) and Dwarves with relentless (and indeed our own kin, have eternal hatred stamped at the bottom of every single entry in the book). The bottom line is that you don't get a special rule unless the army book entry specifically says you do.

2. The Hag Crew are not the 'hag' champions from the witch elf entry. In fact, the same document that lists them as hag crew and not hags (page 1) also then FAQs that they are specifically NOT hag champions (page 2). So clearly they are not the same and cannot have the stats, equipment or special rules just cross-applied. And again, witch elf rules do not cross-apply, as special rules must be individually printed next to each units specs, not just cross-applied globally.

3. There are clear stats and special rules allocated for the hag crew in the errata. They give the specs and the special rules of: khainite, ward save (4+), blessings of khaine and alter of khaine. These are the special rules and specs that apply for the hag crew - they are defined clearly in this area and do not need defining elsewhere or cross-applying from other entries about witch elves or hags in the book. So, the hag crew have: khainite and ward save. They do not have eternal hatred or frenzy. Nor does the machine have terror or MR1.

4. Yes, the errata says that while the attendants are frenzied that they get +1 attack. Unfortunately because it doesn't specify that they are frenzied, this is actually nothing more than a general reminder of the rules about frenzy, placed in a peculiar position. Regardless of whether its possible to give the attendants frenzy through other means or not, the fact remains that they do not have the special rule frenzy in their special rule list and so cannot benefit from it.

5. Yes, the intent is clearly that the hag crew should have frenzy and eternal hatred. But intent is not raw and rules must be followed as raw. To the poster who said that "GW believes that there's an element of "common sense" that players apply to their rules" I think you may be ad libbing your own philosophy a bit here and then saying its GWs. The rules are the rules. House ruling is fine, as is adapting the rules if your opponent agrees, but that doesn't change the basic RAW ruleset that you are deviating it from. #

6. The errata specifically tells you to replace the rules for the Cauldron of blood and replace it with the new rules and stats provided. It doesn't say "replace the bits you feel like replacing and continue using the bits that you don't feel like replacing". The absence of a rule is just as much evidence of a rule being not there as a specific note saying that the rule isn't there. Otherwise every army book list entry would have to list both the rules that a unit has AND the rules that it doesn't (e.g. dark elf warriors: eternal hatred. no speed of asuryan, no fear, no terror, no relentless, no warrior elite, etc etc.).

Anyway, that's enough from me on this topic :) Hope that came across friendly enough, sorry if it didn't :)
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. So answer the question."

Don't be a munchkin?

Image

I am an Extraordinary Druchii Gentleman
Bitterman
Beastmaster
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:08 pm

Post by Bitterman »

Yes, the errata says that while the attendants are frenzied that they get +1 attack. Unfortunately because it doesn't specify that they are frenzied, this is actually nothing more than a general reminder of the rules about frenzy, placed in a peculiar position.


Explain the comment about poisoned attacks, then. They do not have the Poisoned Attacks special rule, but all their attacks are poisoned? There simply is no way to explain that. The update is internally inconsistent - just as much for Frenzy as Poisoned Attacks, as it happens, but even if it can be explained away for Frenzy (which I don't believe it can, but let's go with it), it simply cannot be for poison.

I actually agree with almost all of what you say, but the conclusion I draw from it is that the update is broken - it is not possible to play RAW because of the poisoned attacks issue. That being the case, as it is not possible to play RAW there is no choice but to play RAI until the update is errata'd. And as we're playing RAI (there's no way to do anything else!), I'll keep Frenzy, Poisoned Attacks and Eternal Hatred, thanks. And for that matter the Extra Attack from AHW for all that the BRB and wording of the update makes it unclear whether that is allowed, too. That's not trying to seek an unfair advantage (Terror and MR seem to be gone), it's just applying consistency - where RAW don't have any, but then, RAW are impossible.
User avatar
Thanee
Rending Star
Rending Star
Posts: 5030
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2002 6:10 am
Location: Germany

Post by Thanee »

The Death Hag retains her abilities, though, or not?

So she is subject to Eternal Hatred and Frenzy, and has an Additional Handweapon.

Bye
Thanee
User avatar
Red...
Generalissimo
Posts: 3750
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Baltimore

Post by Red... »

Thanee, yes, the death hag retains all her stats and abilities, as the cauldron is a separate entity to her :)

Bitterman, I agree with you that the rules are badly written and don't really work. I also agree that it could well be that using RAI rather than RAW is the best way to go with it.

The reason this is important (and I think you agree with me on this, so its not really for your benefit as much as other posters) is that RAI should always be cleared with your opponent(s) prior to a game (or houseruled), whereas RAW doesn't need to be. By all means we should play the hag crew as having frenzy, eternal hatred and poison attacks, but only if our opponents agrees that this is okay.
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. So answer the question."

Don't be a munchkin?

Image

I am an Extraordinary Druchii Gentleman
Bitterman
Beastmaster
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:08 pm

Post by Bitterman »

Red... wrote:The reason this is important (and I think you agree with me on this, so its not really for your benefit as much as other posters) is that RAI should always be cleared with your opponent(s) prior to a game (or houseruled), whereas RAW doesn't need to be. By all means we should play the hag crew as having frenzy, eternal hatred and poison attacks, but only if our opponents agrees that this is okay.


Yup. There's actually someone in our gaming group trying to say Eternal Hatred should not apply, which to me seems nonsense but I can't argue against RAW, so if I can't convince him before next time we play... there will be no EH.

Fortunately this person is generally a level-headed and sensible chap and the rest of the gaming group have accepted EH (still some discussion over whether the Extra Attack from AHW can be used or not) so I'm confident a reasonable agreement will be reached.
L1qw1d
Malekith's Personal Guard
Posts: 890
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Location: Kittenmarsh
Contact:

Post by L1qw1d »

actually Thanee, it has always been stated that this particular DH cannot be "pulled away" from her CoB (Our Book, p. 51). The way I had to compute this was "They HAVE the abilities...but they DON'T" I mean, because of Frenzy's odd placement (as per Red... on #3) They don't have Frenzy- but the attendants attack as if they do.

It's just a notation that "Every unit is the same- this is how your army makes it different" type of thing. Terror was removed, and everything else's Terror was weakened. I'm sure there is a reason for it, and where it ISN'T ruled, it will be "worked out" after much yelling in Tournaments lol :D

The way it stands, I count the things REMOVED and what is left. The way they word it is quotable as our "Wiggle Room". I mean now that it's not "Like a Warmachine" but straight up IS a Warmachine, people will stop telling us we can't move it!
Oderint dum Metuant.
C_freman
Dark Rider
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 6:02 am

Post by C_freman »

I'll follow Red's logic:

1) The attendants no longer have the rules listed in Page 93 (which is not mentioned in the FAQ, btw, and states the special rules for the attendants, not the cauldron itself).
2) They keep two hand weapons, but they can't use them (because in the faq it states how many attacks they have, regardles of equipment).
3) Death hag can't benefit from gifts such as Rune of Khaine, because her attacks are fixed no matter what.
4) They don't benefit from the cauldron's blessings either, because the FAQ specially mentions which rules can change how they act (such as Frenzy, which they don't have but it explains how it affects them should they somehow be affected by it).
User avatar
Calisson
Corsair
Corsair
Posts: 8820
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Location: Hag Graef

Post by Calisson »

Personally I find that Red...'s logic is a little bit extreme.

Facts:
- p.50 remains unchanged. There is an entry about Hags and about Death Hags. Both have eternal hatred, Frenzy, Khainite, Poison.

- p.51 has been FAQed.
COB is now just a Khainite Warmachine, with a 4+ WS.
It goes along with one DH and two hags, which stats are recalled and match perfectly the stats of the entries with similar names on the opposite page.
MR(1) and Terror, formerly written, are not present anymore.
There used to be a mention of eternal hatred, frenzy and poison which is no more present.
There used to be no mention of AHW, there is still no such mention.

- p.93 has been FAQed (the DH entry and the BSB entry).
COB entry has not been FAQed, so RAW are unchanged.
It has eternal hatred, frenzy, Khainite, warmachine, terror, MR(1), Khaine blessings, Altar of Khaine, poison.
There is also one ruling (assistants) which means nothing anymore.

- The new COB entry specifies a maximum of attacks (2/hags + 3/DH, +1 while under Frenzy), which are poisoned.

- The new FAQ specifies that Hags don't count as champions.

- FAQ p.3 specifies that a DH may take Khaines's blessings for Hags only.




What is not a fact:
Nothing mentions that the COB Hags or DH mentioned p.51 are diverse from the Hags and DH described on the opposite page, p.50.
In the FAQ, the Hags attendants are not said to be diverse from the Hags champion upgrade, contrary to what Red says above, but just that they don't count as champions.
To say that they are diverse is interpretation.
Another interpretation is that the same Hag (same name, same stats) could be either inside a WE unit as champion, or inside a COB unit where she does not count as a champion; why in the world would the DH be the same as the non-COB-DH (no dispute on that), while the Hags would be diverse from the non-COB-Hags?



Fact again: RAW contradict themselves:
- COB has terror & MR(1) in p.93, and has no mention of them in p.51.
This is a proof that there is a mistake made by GW and that RAW are not sufficient to provide clear answers.




Anything beyond is based on interpretation.
I respect that anyone does not share my interpretations, and I expect the same respect.
I do not understand and cannot support myself the extreme interpretation that COB-Hags are diverse than Hags and/or COB-DH are diverse than DH, because I find that it leads to more RAW contradictions and helps not clarify the debate; I understand that other people may have this interpretation.



My interpretations:

Removing MR(1) and terror was clearly intended (RAI). I will not argue that the COB has it, contrary to what p.93 says, especially because p.93 is obviously missing a bit of FAQ.

A DH is a DH, a Hag is a Hag, they keep following their respective entries p.50, 93 and 96.
However, when they serve inside a COB, they have some particular limitations, listed in the FAQed p.51 and in the FAQ itself:
- a DH cannot leave the COB (p.93)
- a Hag is not a champion (FAQ)
- regardless of their AHW, they are limited to 2 attacks per Hags and 3 attacks for the DH, plus one whiled Frenzied.
- Gifts of Khaine are part of the DH entry and the WE entry, it is not a part of the Hag entry nor inside the COB entry, so I cannot provide GoK to Hags.

I see nowhere any opposition for the following:
- Eternal Hatred, Poison, Frenzy (the DH and Hags have them, and while the COB entry does not list these properties in its own entry, it does recall poison and frenzy in the comment just below, and never mentions that they are no more relevant)
- If, for any reason, the DH of Hags suffer from a reduction of 1 attack, then the COB limit does not anymore reduce their attacks and they can make full use of their AHW.
- to buy Gifts of Khaine for the DH.
- to upgrade the DH as BSB
- to challenge with the DH
- to name the DH as the general, as long as she is not BSB.
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}
User avatar
Thanee
Rending Star
Rending Star
Posts: 5030
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2002 6:10 am
Location: Germany

Post by Thanee »

Calisson wrote:What is not a fact:
Nothing mentions that the COB Hags or DH mentioned p.51 are diverse from the Hags and DH described on the opposite page, p.50.
In the FAQ, the Hags attendants are not said to be diverse from the Hags champion upgrade, contrary to what Red says above, but just that they don't count as champions.
To say that they are diverse is interpretation.
Another interpretation is that the same Hag (same name, same stats) could be either inside a WE unit as champion, or inside a COB unit where she does not count as a champion; why in the world would the DH be the same as the non-COB-DH (no dispute on that), while the Hags would be diverse from the non-COB-Hags?


The only part, which somewhat counteracts this is that the COB entry in the Errata/FAQ document lists the Hags as "Hag Crew".

Of course, it goes on to say under the Crew entry, that the crew consists of a Death Hag and two Hags (not Hag Crew).


It is simply a total mess and needs to be cleared up. :lol:

Bye
Thanee
User avatar
Red...
Generalissimo
Posts: 3750
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Baltimore

Post by Red... »

Calisson,

Yes, I agree my interpretations could be viewed as extreme. In part its because I'm irked by GW making such a mess of it. I think the key part that is clear to me in all of this is that the rules for the cauldron must now be played as RAI as RAW just plain and simple doesn't work. That's fine, but as with all RAI it needs confirming with your opponent before playing.

Your comments on the DH are essentially right: but then the Death Hag hasn't changed and that's not the difficult area here.

The issue with the hag crew is as Thanee says, they're listed as hag crew not hags in the stat line. It would be great if they said "hags" there because then it would be a lot clearer, but they don't, so we're back to RAI, because we have to interpret that they mean hags by hag crew and not a different model type. (It's also unprecedented in an army book to cross reference stats and abilities for one unit type into a war machine or other unit type in the way that is being suggested - they always list the special abilities below each entry, even if the model is the same as used in another part of the book).
Last edited by Red... on Tue Jul 13, 2010 9:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. So answer the question."

Don't be a munchkin?

Image

I am an Extraordinary Druchii Gentleman
Bitterman
Beastmaster
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:08 pm

Post by Bitterman »

Calisson wrote:My interpretations:

Removing MR(1) and terror was clearly intended (RAI). I will not argue that the COB has it, contrary to what p.93 says, especially because p.93 is obviously missing a bit of FAQ.

A DH is a DH, a Hag is a Hag, they keep following their respective entries p.50, 93 and 96.
However, when they serve inside a COB, they have some particular limitations, listed in the FAQed p.51 and in the FAQ itself:
- a DH cannot leave the COB (p.93)
- a Hag is not a champion (FAQ)
- regardless of their AHW, they are limited to 2 attacks per Hags and 3 attacks for the DH, plus one whiled Frenzied.
- Gifts of Khaine are part of the DH entry and the WE entry, it is not a part of the Hag entry nor inside the COB entry, so I cannot provide GoK to Hags.

I see nowhere any opposition for the following:
- Eternal Hatred, Poison, Frenzy (the DH and Hags have them, and while the COB entry does not list these properties in its own entry, it does recall poison and frenzy in the comment just below, and never mentions that they are no more relevant)
- If, for any reason, the DH of Hags suffer from a reduction of 1 attack, then the COB limit does not anymore reduce their attacks and they can make full use of their AHW.
- to buy Gifts of Khaine for the DH.
- to upgrade the DH as BSB
- to challenge with the DH
- to name the DH as the general, as long as she is not BSB.


I agree with all of that interpretation except the bit about AHW. I believe this is an oversight and they are not intentionally limited to 2 attacks each. It makes no logical sense why they would be allowed +1 attack for Frenzy, but not allowed +1 attack for AHW. (Both give the Extra Attack rule - it's the same rule!!!) RAW that may be the case, but I can't believe it's RAI.

And it's worth repeating that even though my interpretation largely agrees with yours, RAW are a mess and self-contradictory. So RAI (whatever interpretation is chosen) is currently the only possibility.

Actually - looking a little closer - I'm also not convinced that you can challenge with the Death Hag. How can the wounds system presented work in a challenge? It can't possibly. Her wounds are taken off last, they are not counted separately to the Hags, but the Hags can't be involved in the challenge!
Anchanrogar
Corsair
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:18 am
Location: UK

Post by Anchanrogar »

Though you've all focused on discussing the number and quality of attacks the cauldron gets in close combat, the rules changes have given it a much larger weakness.
Now that the cauldron is a war machine with a toughness value, and now that war machines fail all characteristic tests they are forced to take (excepting Ld and T), and due to the fact that crew members are destroyed if the war machine is destroyed, pit of shades and purple sun now insta kill our caudron, DH, hags/attendant hags and all by forcing it to take an I test....
Was bit of an unpleasant surprise for my first game of 8th ed.
A man without tea in him is incapable of comprehending either truth or beauty.
Bitterman
Beastmaster
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 9:08 pm

Post by Bitterman »

anchanrogar wrote:Was bit of an unpleasant surprise for my first game of 8th ed.


Unpleasant, absolutely. But at least the rules are clear... 8)
User avatar
Thanee
Rending Star
Rending Star
Posts: 5030
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2002 6:10 am
Location: Germany

Post by Thanee »

Well, it kinda makes sense, that the Cauldron cannot jump out of the hole of shadows suddenly opening beneath it. ;)

Bye
Thanee
L1qw1d
Malekith's Personal Guard
Posts: 890
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Location: Kittenmarsh
Contact:

Post by L1qw1d »

Ok- new update (it's listed as 1.1, and no regional amendments , shown by letters). only p 51 and 93 are changed. It's not a war machine any more (remove "War Machine", "Poisoned Attacks", "Attendant" & replace w/ "CoB").

The Hags are now called Attendants, and Terror, Frenzy, Eternal Hatred, and MR(1) are all back.

I think only... Eternal Hatred got re-intro'ed from last update?
Oderint dum Metuant.
User avatar
Red...
Generalissimo
Posts: 3750
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Baltimore

Post by Red... »

It's not a war machine any more


Doesn't it say "unit type: war machine"?
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. So answer the question."

Don't be a munchkin?

Image

I am an Extraordinary Druchii Gentleman
User avatar
Lord tsunami
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1308
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 9:49 pm
Location: Behind you!

Post by Lord tsunami »

it does
Dreddlore
Slave on the Altar
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 2:32 am

Post by Dreddlore »

Calisson wrote:My interpretations:

A DH is a DH, a Hag is a Hag, they keep following their respective entries p.50, 93 and 96.
However, when they serve inside a COB, they have some particular limitations, listed in the FAQed p.51 and in the FAQ itself:

- a DH cannot leave the COB (p.93)
- a Hag is not a champion (FAQ)
- regardless of their AHW, they are limited to 2 attacks per Hags and 3 attacks for the DH, plus one whiled Frenzied.
- Gifts of Khaine are part of the DH entry and the WE entry, it is not a part of the Hag entry nor inside the COB entry, so I cannot provide GoK to Hags.



The amendment to the CoB Special Rules from July define the "unit" as Khainite so we can give out our Gifts as normal ?

Therefore 50 points of Gifts of Khaine are part of the Death Hag entry but Hags don't have a seperate entry.
A hags definition, as you say is within the Witch Elves description (p.96) but within the rules for the Hag it states you can give them 25 points worth of GoK.
With this in mind does anyone believe that we should be allowed to allocate each Hag with 25 points of GoK ?

I'd then give both Hags Manbane and as I don't see that they are limited to only 3 attacks I'd give the Rune of Khaine and Witchbrew to the Death Hag ?

I'm a fairly new DE player so could be right off of target here.
In the meantime I will be emailing Games Workshop and will let you know the answer by the next edition :D
User avatar
Phierlihy
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 2089
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:19 am

Post by Phierlihy »

I see nothing that notes Hag Attendants are allowed to take Gifts of Khaine.
User avatar
Lord tsunami
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1308
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 9:49 pm
Location: Behind you!

Post by Lord tsunami »

they cant and it clearly says they can use only 2 attacks (3 if frenzied). warmachine crew can only use 1 attack normally, but they are an exception and can use 2(3). it sux i know...
Olderplayer
Executioner
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 7:06 am

Post by Olderplayer »

FAQ 1.1 added back the terror, frenzy, etermal hatred, and MR(1).
Post Reply