Aw crap, really?

[Dino-Czar]

Potential errata on stormsmiths (http://www.privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?t=6613) in particular and skills in general.

Might make surge and triangulation... more difficult.

[allistorpreist]

Context please?

[Dino-Czar]

In the link

here, unmasked: http://www.privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?t=6613

or


You're not wrong, but there will be an errata that you will always need LOS when you target a model.

[ZenBattleLust]

Maudlin isn't an infternal, though. Why do you think he knows something the rest of us don't?

[Dino-Czar]

Does purple name not mean infernal anymore?

[ZenBattleLust]

Does it? I'm pretty new to the new forums, having taken a long break from warmachine. I'm used to seeing the word "infernal" on an infernal. Apologies.

[Invaderzahn]

Titles seem to be based solely on post count now, so no custom "infernal" title for the infernals. you gotta go by the purple name.

Purple- Infernals
Green- Press Gangers
Red- Mods and PPS staff

[OniBeowulf]

WoW...stormsmiths not being able to hit stealth models now...they might be gathering dust for a little while.

[Dyoria]

LOS and stealth are not really related.

Stealth ? Ranged and magic attacks declared against this model when the point of origin of the attack is greater than 5 ˝ away automatically miss.

LOS is determined by:
1) Draw straight line from any part of model A?s volume to any part of model B?s volume that is within model A?s front arc.

2) The line must not pass through terrain.

3) The line must not pass over the base of an intervening model that has a base size equal to or larger than model B.

4) The line must not pass over an effect that blocks LOS, like a cloud effect.


So Stealth doesn't have an effect on the Storm Smith. The SS has LOS to the target, measure range, if its within range, perform special action. Since its not a ranged attack, it doesnt automatically miss.



The errata is to clarify that you always need LOS to target something. (So you cant target through buildings and such.)

[AxeHappy]

Well that is an unfortunate turn of events.

[Kenjiro]

This was their fix for the GMCA...

[wrabbit37]

Am I misreading, or does this only really impact Triangulation? We already knew we needed to have LOS to use our SSs as single shots. This is just a change when we have multiple SSs at once. The last version of the rules before the book came out already had that SSs require LOS, right?

[brotherscott]

The Stormsmiths need LOS and to be within RNG, but their Storm Calls are not considered attacks (they are listed as * Actions) though they cause electrical damage.

It does not affect Stealth as it is not a ranged or magic attack.

Triangulation does require LOS to the target(s), but if you have it set up right you can get 6 attacks from the rearward Stormcallers, and an additional attack from the forward Stormcaller, or if you reverse the triangle, 3 Triangulation attacks, and either two individual attacks or two surge attacks.

[whatawookie1]

Triangulation does require LOS to the target(s), but if you have it set up right you can get 6 attacks from the rearward Stormcallers, and an additional attack from the forward Stormcaller, or if you reverse the triangle, 3 Triangulation attacks, and either two individual attacks or two surge attacks.

No, it doesn't. Current concensus is that with Triangulation not having a range, it excempts it from needing LOS. The point of this thread is that an infernal has noted that this will soon change.

[GunMageinTraining]

I'm curious how it's going to work. If we'll need LoS to the Stormsmiths for duo-triangulate strkes, or if we need LoS to the targets of these effects... It's not as if I've ever gotten a Triangulation off more than once or twice total.

[Warcaster Kirin Folken]

.... I'm not understanding what the issue is.

Stealth has nothing to do with LoS of seeing a model with it.

Stealth only effects if you can make range attacks vs the target. (or block LoS)


.... So whats the problem??

[galonso]

Allegedly there is an errata coming that says you will need LOS to target a model with a Stormcall.

[whatawookie1]

Allegedly there is an errata coming that says you will need LOS to target a model with a Stormcall.

No, its already pretty clear in the rules that you need LOS for stormcall. There allegedly will be errata coming out that states you will require LOS for Triangulation.

[brotherscott]

No, it doesn't. Current concensus is that with Triangulation not having a range, it excempts it from needing LOS. The point of this thread is that an infernal has noted that this will soon change.
Ah, OK. Usually errata is a clarification for a rule, or the interpretation thereof. It seems pretty clear though that in order to target something, the attacker needs LOS.


From the MK II card .pdf-
"... this model can target up to three models whose
bases are within the triangular area between all three Stormsmith Stormcallers."
The triangular area being up to 20" apart.

I guess we wait on the infernal decision then.

[Waaargh]

I thought I knew what was what, but here it seems LOS and Stealth get mixed up. Everyone agrees a model 6"+ away from a Stealthed model still has LOS to him, he just automatically misses with ranged attacks and spells. Right?

[ZenBattleLust]

I thought I knew what was what, but here it seems LOS and Stealth get mixed up. Everyone agrees a model 6"+ away from a Stealthed model still has LOS to him, he just automatically misses with ranged attacks and spells. Right?

It's 5", but otherwise you are correct. A lot of people get confused with that, and mistakenly believe you can't attack a model with stealth at all from > 5" away. Just don't let yourself be confused by them.

[whatawookie1]

It's 5", but otherwise you are correct. A lot of people get confused with that, and mistakenly believe you can't attack a model with stealth at all from > 5" away. Just don't let yourself be confused by them.

No. Nobody here is really confused about whether or not SS ignores stealth. Its Triangulation. Triangulation does not currently need LOS.

[TsavongLah]

Bummer. As long as the Firefly can serve as a Triangulation point, though, I won't mind too much.

[Manse]

I join in the disappointment. I'm kind of curious what playtesting revealed that triangulating without LOS is totally overpowered. Perhaps eNemo's tiers let you take like 9 stormcallers and the playtesting sessions were lousy with triangulating death. Isn't that a pleasant thought?

I'm already unsettled by the feeling our stats/costs assume snipe and AS. Now we might have to worry about stats/costs assuming Tier 4.

Still... B13 is still 4 points so I guess I can't complain :)

[TsavongLah]

Eh, the change sounds more like another step to simplify the rules a la the stated mkII design philosophy.

[xeletor]

Until now I doubted Firefly can serve as triangulation point, due to triangulation not needing LOS. (would be OP to leave 3 SS behind cover and let FF run up). But now I think there is a good chance!
So cheer up Cygnar! And all others: EAT LIGHTNING!

[brotherscott]

Official word from an infernal near the bottom:

stormsmiths vs. stealth (http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?p=110798#post110798)

[Arkady]

@brotherscott: What does stealth have to do with it? He is saying that the word "target" in Triangulation rules means Triangulation attacks will require LOS, because the forthcoming errata will define 'target' = 'need LOS'. You said as much in that thread yourself. I'm confused now. :?

That said, who honestly cares? How often did you achieve triangulation anyway? :confused:

[whatawookie1]

@brotherscott, you completely missed the point. He is not talking about stealth. Stealth has nothing to do with this. He is saying that the word "target" in Triangulation rules means Triangulation attacks will require LOS, because the forthcoming errata will define 'target' = 'need LOS'.

That said, who honestly cares? How often did you achieve triangulation anyway?

I don't think that's the case. I think its plainly evident that this is not an argument about SS vs. Stealth and that we are being maliciously trolled here.

That's the only explanation for why we have to keep making corrections to people about what we are discussing in threads where it is blatantly obvious to anyone who can read the prior posts in the same thread.

[brotherscott]

@brotherscott: What does stealth have to do with it? He is saying that the word "target" in Triangulation rules means Triangulation attacks will require LOS, because the forthcoming errata will define 'target' = 'need LOS'. You said as much in that thread yourself. I'm confused now. :?

That said, who honestly cares? How often did you achieve triangulation anyway? :confused:

That particular thread devolved off topic, and ended up with an infernal ruling. I was just sharing...

Triangulation is not easy to pull off, but it can be done. Usually once to an unsuspecting opponent.

[knight_actual]

it's ALOT easier when you have 2 warcasters and 6 SSmiths.

:) esp when one of those casters is eNemo.

[Gorbad]

Eh, the change sounds more like another step to simplify the rules a la the stated mkII design philosophy.

That's what I thought as well. That you need LOS for the single strike, but not for Triangulation seemed a little 'odd' to me. I knew why it worked that way but it was bound to confuse and annoy someone who hadn't followed that exact line of thinking and was generally just one of those "huh?" moments.

Besides, how much is this really going to effect peoples games? These days I generally don't even run 3 Stormsmiths.

[Waaargh]

No. Nobody here is really confused about whether or not SS ignores stealth. Its Triangulation. Triangulation does not currently need LOS.

Perhaps there is no confusion in the thread, if so it's just a case of people lacking skillz in making themselves understood ;)