Another great video as per usual! I butchered my painted untamed beasts by accidentily varnishing them with a grey primer in a moment of haste. They've been sitting neglected eversince. Perhaps its high time I give them a good scrub and bathe and repaint them.
3:13 Hi Lee, the algorithm for attack action is: 1. target a fighter 2. decide to react with (Brute Resilience) 3. roll dices 4. total the damage 5. allocate a damage tokens 6. Check if model survived. 7. remove as many allocated damage tokens as there were hits (ad 7. "Subtract 1 from the damage points allocated to this fighter by each hit from that attack action (to a minimum of 1).") Comment: Reaction description clearly says what is described in 7 steps above. Reaction description does not say: a. reduce the damage for each hit by one (to a minimum of 1) before totaling a damage b. NOR Subtract 1 from the damage points of attacking fighters hits before totaling damage (to a minimum of 1). That means the reaction has it usage against fighters with damage profile 1/x. Understanding it against the algorithm means that this should get FAQ. Interpreting "(to a minimum of 1)" with current wording screams for Errata. Source: see ATTACK ACTION: Page 68 and 69 of new core rulebook. see "Allocating damage" section: Page 69 in top right corner
Based on the algorithm the part "(to a minimum of 1)" opens the possibility to remove 1 damage tokens in situation when all rolls were miss or critical hits.
You're over complicating it, all it says is for that attack action reduce damage to hits by 1. you just have to gamble because you have to do it before the rolls are made.
The reason it says to a minimum of 1 is because some fighters have a damage profile of 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/5 (etc.) It prevents fighters from being completely nullified in terms of damage.
@@jaylnjordan1362 Hi Jayln, I am following the rules definition strictly as those were defined. I do not deny, that the intention might be different 😄 ...but the delivered product defines the algorithm as I have written above and I will be playing it exactly in that way until it will be covered by errata. Anybody that deny the statement for the rule, changes the original rule making overinterpretation and it is easy to prove it.
@@tabletopskirmishgames Can't wait, mine doesn't arrive until Monday so I'll be living 2nd edition through some of the top channels like yourself until then.
Seems like they’re encouraging players to not double up on the stronger models. And balancing the points so the basic set of models hits 1000 exactly. It was the same for Corvus, no?
Hey Chris, I like the idea of two RTP's. Would be cool to have the Beast Speaker controlling two of them! I'd go Heart Eater and then still include the First Fang to drag the enemy away from the Beast Speaker. Top up with 3 Plains Runners to rush around objectives. Could be a fun list.
