Druchii.net
http://www.druchii.net/phpBB3/

Cauldron in 8th
http://www.druchii.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=65773
Page 1 of 3

Author:  Saragos [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Cauldron in 8th

Well, the FAQ is out, and as I feared, it looks like the Cauldron will take something of a hit. The new rules are as follows

"Replace the rules for the Cauldron of Blood with the following:

M WS BS S T W I A Ld
Cauldron of Blood - - - - 10 3 - - -
Hag Crew 5 4 4 3 3 1 6 2 8
Death Hag 5 6 6 4 3 2 8 3 9
Unit Type:War Machine
Crew: The Cauldron has a crew consisting of a Death Hag and
two Hags.
Special Rules
Khainite, Ward Save (4+)
Cauldron of Blood: The Cauldron receives two attacks for each
Hag crew, and three attacks for the Death Hag, instead of one
attack per crew model as would normally be the case for a war
machine. Add +1 to the number of attacks received by each
crew model as long as they are Frenzied. All attacks are
Poisoned Attacks. Use the best armour and ward saving throw
available to any surviving member of the crew against all
wounds that are suffered by the Cauldron. Remove one Hag
model when the first wound is inflicted on the Cauldron of
Blood, the second Hag when the second wound is inflicted, but
only remove the Death Hag when the fourth wound is
inflicted.
The Blessings of Khaine and Altar of Khaine special rules are
used unchanged.


So, looks like it's going to be easier to take out. Also, no more magic resistance or terror...unless Altar of Khaine special rule is what gives it that. I don't have the rulebook in front of me, I'm at work. Can anyone check that?

Author:  Tethlis [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:33 pm ]
Post subject: 

Even with the strange wording for the new rules, the Altar will be much more difficult to take out than most standard warmachines. 4 crew wounds and a Ward Save will be tremendously useful, and if an opponent wants to focus his missile fire on trying to score 6s, I will accept that.

Author:  Saragos [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 7:42 pm ]
Post subject: 

So, does it lose its terror and magic resistance, or am I remembering wrong? The entry for the cauldron is in two spots in the army book; which part does the faq override? What about the rule about the hags never charging, etc?

Author:  Aeth [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 10:09 pm ]
Post subject: 

Yes terror and MR are now gone. And the Hags are no longer Hags, they are 'Hag Crew' so can't accept challenges. As it is now classed as a warmachine it can also be targeted but that lore of metal spell.

Author:  Voodoomaster [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 10:26 pm ]
Post subject: 

but the rules still remain on p93 so yeah this is helpful, i suspect terror was overlooked but magic resistance annoyed me as a 3+ ward against spells would be nice indeed.
also they are missing eternal hatred and their two hand weapons.... yeah its a mess

Author:  Red... [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:28 pm ]
Post subject: 

and frenzy too. The Death Hag presumably retains hers, but it turns out that the downgrade from hag to hag crew disappointed the attendants so much that they became too apathetic to be frenzied. Now they just sit and discuss the weather while sitting atop their cauldron of tomato juice.

Author:  C_freman [ Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:47 pm ]
Post subject: 

There are many cases where other rules got left out (steam tank not having the rules for the steam points is an example), so I'm pretty confident that the Terror and MR rules are still there, just not in this version of the FAQ.

Author:  Tethlis [ Sat Jul 10, 2010 12:16 am ]
Post subject: 

c_freman wrote:
There are many cases where other rules got left out (steam tank not having the rules for the steam points is an example), so I'm pretty confident that the Terror and MR rules are still there, just not in this version of the FAQ.


Agreed. GW believes that there's an element of "common sense" that players apply to their rules, and that common sense probably dictates that Terror, Frenzy and MR(1) remain part of the rules. Of course, they opened the door with RAW and RAI years ago, and we're still feeling the backlash.

Given that these early games will be a mess of rule interpretation and armybook unraveling anyway, I will probably continue to use Terror, Frenzy, etc. until something more concrete is presented. If it hasn't been resolved by the time an 8th edition tournament roles around, I will ask the event organizers for a ruling.

Author:  Phierlihy [ Sat Jul 10, 2010 12:21 am ]
Post subject: 

Read the new rules for Terror and you'll realize the Cauldron doesn't need it anymore. Losing Terror was not an oversight.

Author:  Bitterman [ Sat Jul 10, 2010 12:48 am ]
Post subject: 

phierlihy wrote:
Read the new rules for Terror and you'll realize the Cauldron doesn't need it anymore. Losing Terror was not an oversight.


Assuming it can't charge, yes. Though it should still cause Fear, yet apparently doesn't. (And the charge question is not crystal clear. Unit type War Machine can't charge, but the CoB is unit type Unique).

[Edit] Allow me to retract that - even though the VBRB says it is Unique, the update clearly states it is of unit type War Machine, not "like" a War Machine as I thought when I wrote the above.

Still, Fear would still be useful. (Not to mention MR and the other stuff that's unclear).

Author:  Olderplayer [ Sat Jul 10, 2010 4:40 am ]
Post subject: 

The FAQ's don't appear to be well-thought out and carefully written since they had the COB as one thing in the BRB but another in the FAQ, same with the Anvil for Dwarf armies. I actually like the fact that that the death hag dies last. It makes her a better BSB and one should still be able to put gifts of Khaine on her, at least I hope.

The one that kills me is the boost in the T for the stank from 6 to 10.

Author:  Calisson [ Sat Jul 10, 2010 7:07 am ]
Post subject: 

Loosing terror will matter if the COB is charged itself by a terror-causing monster and fails its break test.

Author:  Fuzzydeath [ Sat Jul 10, 2010 7:11 am ]
Post subject: 

There's another thread in the main forum about the FAQ but I'll say here that don't forget that as a war machine, the cauldron can only be attacked by so many models.

I don't have my own personal private copy of the brb yet but going by memory, it was a max of 6 infantry or 3 monstrous infantry can even attack a war machine. That gives our Cauldron crew quite a fighting chance, and would indeed give some thought as to why they would have lost some fighting prowess.

Author:  Voodoomaster [ Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:30 am ]
Post subject: 

Calisson wrote:
Loosing terror will matter if the COB is charged itself by a terror-causing monster and fails its break test.

but the crew are immune to psychology due to frenzy so that point is revoked.
but yes it is a bummer that terror no long causes the "ahhh run away" when you are near it, but still at least have it cause Fear cause it is a dirty great big bowl of death and most people who end up near it will have their inside added to its contents.

Author:  Phierlihy [ Sat Jul 10, 2010 4:31 pm ]
Post subject: 

Actually because the Cauldron of Blood is a War Machine, a failed Terror test would result in the Witches cowering under the cauldron and not shooting in the Shooting phase (or in other words - no effect whatsoever). In combat, the Hag and her attendants may kill a handful of the enemy but more will still step up and wipe the T3 Witch Elves out.

If you haven't yet, get a pen and actually edit out exactly what the FAQ tells you to edit out. The Cauldron unit does not have Frenzy, does not have Additional Hand Weapons, and does not have MR1. I wish I did, I love my cauldron. But until the wizards at GW that wrote this mess rewrite it, we're screwed.

Author:  Timz [ Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:43 pm ]
Post subject: 

phierlihy wrote:
Actually because the Cauldron of Blood is a War Machine, a failed Terror test would result in the Witches cowering under the cauldron and not shooting in the Shooting phase (or in other words - no effect whatsoever). In combat, the Hag and her attendants may kill a handful of the enemy but more will still step up and wipe the T3 Witch Elves out.

If you haven't yet, get a pen and actually edit out exactly what the FAQ tells you to edit out. The Cauldron unit does not have Frenzy, does not have Additional Hand Weapons, and does not have MR1. I wish I did, I love my cauldron. But until the wizards at GW that wrote this mess rewrite it, we're screwed.


"Add +1 to the number of attacks received by each crew model as long as they are Frenzied" would disagree with your response completely.

From that we have evidence they're frenzied. But currently lack evidence for the Terror or MR1.

But as long as we know they certainly had someone making mistakes and forgetting to write the special rules, there's no reason to have certainty that it doesn't keep MR1.

We don't know yet.

MR1 on a 200+ point statue with 3 frail unarmored people under it certainly isn't game-breaking, but we DE will survive whatever the outcome.

Author:  Phierlihy [ Sun Jul 11, 2010 3:05 am ]
Post subject: 

And if you do as I said and actually edited your book as the FAQ tells you to, what abilities for the Cauldron of Blood are left? Not Frenzy. Not Terror. Not Magic Resistance. And not Eternal Hatred.

I do see the "add +1 to the number of attacks..." sentance. Those same geniuses also tell us to use the best armor save available. If you were to give the unit Frenzy via a spell perhaps, then they'd get to make use of that extra attack.

Author:  Timz [ Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:38 am ]
Post subject: 

phierlihy wrote:
And if you do as I said and actually edited your book as the FAQ tells you to, what abilities for the Cauldron of Blood are left? Not Frenzy. Not Terror. Not Magic Resistance. And not Eternal Hatred.

I do see the "add +1 to the number of attacks..." sentance. Those same geniuses also tell us to use the best armor save available. If you were to give the unit Frenzy via a spell perhaps, then they'd get to make use of that extra attack.


Does a Dark Elf / Shadow / Death / Metal / Fire spell give Frenzy?
No.

Does it make sense adding an entire sentence about cauldron crew having +1 attack from Frenzy if they don't possess frenzy?
No.

Also, a Death Hag and normal Witch Elves have Eternal Hatred AND Frenzy by default. It doesn't say to modify the Death Hag character's stats at all in the FAQ.

Your conclusion not only doesn't make sense, but it is unsupported.

Author:  Bitterman [ Sun Jul 11, 2010 9:43 am ]
Post subject: 

Is there a single other unit anywhere in the game that does not have Frenzy but has in the text "if some spell from some undetermined source somehow and for some reason gives them Frenzy, don't forget to add +1 A for Frenzy"?

No. No, there is not. So why on Earth would they do that for the CoB? If they're talking about +1 A for Frenzy, it must be because they have Frenzy. Same for Poisoned Attacks.

So if they left out Frenzy and Poisoned Attacks, but did intend them to have it, what else did they forget? We've had this discussion in our gaming group (took at least half an hour) and concluded that we can probably allow Eternal Hatred and Additional Hand Weapon (though some insisted not even that!) but not Terror and Magic Resistance. Which is probably a fair enough compromise, but is it what GW intend? I have no f*@%ing idea.

Author:  Phierlihy [ Sun Jul 11, 2010 2:58 pm ]
Post subject: 

Bitterman summed it up quite nicely - we really have no idea what the GW rule-monkies were thinking when they wrote the Cauldrons errata. I do see your side of the argument and I hope it is true. However as a gentleman, I feel it is my responsiblility to play with the weaker of the options and not push for the personal gain it would give.

As such, the errata specifically asked me to cross out Eternal Hatred, Terror, Frenzy, and Magic Resistance (1) so that's what I did. They did not tell me to remove poison nor additional hand weapons so those, stay.

Author:  Bitterman [ Sun Jul 11, 2010 6:53 pm ]
Post subject: 

phierlihy wrote:
Bitterman summed it up quite nicely - we really have no idea what the GW rule-monkies were thinking when they wrote the Cauldrons errata. I do see your side of the argument and I hope it is true. However as a gentleman, I feel it is my responsiblility to play with the weaker of the options and not push for the personal gain it would give.

As such, the errata specifically asked me to cross out Eternal Hatred, Terror, Frenzy, and Magic Resistance (1) so that's what I did. They did not tell me to remove poison nor additional hand weapons so those, stay.


I think you're a bit confused... or less politely, making things up completely. It "tells you to remove" Frenzy every bit as much as Poisoned Attacks, so no idea why you class them separately. And if you tells you to remove those but they obviously still have them, why not EH too?

Author:  Phierlihy [ Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:23 am ]
Post subject: 

Oops, my bad! They did not tell me to keep Poisoned Attacks so those go to. I must have not have been as thorough as I meant to be.

So no Poisoned Attacks, MR, Terror, Frenzy, or Eternal Hatred. Thanks for pointing that out!

Author:  Timz [ Mon Jul 12, 2010 1:29 am ]
Post subject: 

phierlihy wrote:
Bitterman summed it up quite nicely - we really have no idea what the GW rule-monkies were thinking when they wrote the Cauldrons errata. I do see your side of the argument and I hope it is true. However as a gentleman, I feel it is my responsiblility to play with the weaker of the options and not push for the personal gain it would give.

As such, the errata specifically asked me to cross out Eternal Hatred, Terror, Frenzy, and Magic Resistance (1) so that's what I did. They did not tell me to remove poison nor additional hand weapons so those, stay.


Incorrect. They did not actually tell you to cross out any of those. So stop acting stupid.

Author:  Melikai the wicked [ Mon Jul 12, 2010 2:47 am ]
Post subject: 

I honestly dont see the difference between the new rules and the old, Sure the cauldron lost MR and terror but if you think about it it really doesnt need them. Terror is downed played and since its classed as a war machine its never gonna charge anyone anyways so why bother to have that rule as for MR, well a loss but we have a 4+ ward so its no big deal as MR gives us a ward of 4+ anyways. I think it makes the COB a more acceptable unit to bring in battle and ppl wont complain as much as we give our horde of spears killing blow :twisted:

Author:  Phierlihy [ Mon Jul 12, 2010 3:30 am ]
Post subject: 

Timz wrote:
Incorrect. They did not actually tell you to cross out any of those. So stop acting stupid.


And I quote "replace the rules for the Cauldron of Blood with the following..."

What exactly does that mean to you then Mr Wizard??

Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/