PDA

View Full Version : How does lurtz work in a squad of bezerkers?



xxRavenxx
19-04-2009, 13:16
Assume seven bezerkers die, so only lurtz is left.

Do I use the units resilience, or his?

When he dies, do I then place a bezerker model back in to replace him?

If I do, do I do this if 4-5 wounds were caused to the company to kill lurtz, or do the extra wounds overflow onto the guy who replaces him?

Its a little confusing...

Babolat360
19-04-2009, 13:44
The rule is you can never have more heroes or command upgrades than "normal" warriors in the unit. So if it came down to a besrserker and Lurtz left in the unit, you'd have to remove Lurtz as the next casualty.

FuzzyOrb
19-04-2009, 15:25
Yeah, that's my opinion,too.
If it's down to Lurtz and 1 Berserker, then you remove Lurtz first, replace him with a normal Berserker and have 2 Berserkers left to fight.
That's my interpretation, although i'm not 100% sure.

Babolat360
19-04-2009, 16:16
No I'm pretty sure you don't replace Lurtz with a beserker if he dies. You only replace a model if Lurtz moves out of the unit.

FuzzyOrb
19-04-2009, 16:26
I checked again and found that you do replace the slain hero with a normal trooper. Please check page 68, 1st column under "deploying epic heroes" again for reference.

Babolat360
19-04-2009, 16:58
My mistake, you are indeed correct. However I'm a bit confused about what "note that if an Epic hero is slain you do not bring a model forward from elsewhere in the formation as you would with a normal hero" means.

FuzzyOrb
19-04-2009, 18:37
Yeah, i noticed that one, too. It's indeed confusing.
I look at it this way: To bring a model forward from elsewhere in the formation in the normal procedure when a hero is slain. Since an epic hero is also a hero, they thought it to be necessary to note that you do NOT bring a model forward from elsewhere in the formation IN ADDITION to replacing the epic hero with a normal warrior.
I guess it's a simple case of over clarification.;)

Erethor
19-04-2009, 20:22
When an epic hero joins a company, you replace one soldier with the hero. When the epic hero leaves or dies, you put the regular trooper back.

ex. Lurtz joins a company of 8 berzerkers. Remove 1 berzerker from the front and put Lurtz in it's place up front. When lurtz leaves, the berzerker goes back to it's spot.

Now, when a regular hero dies (captain, shaman, etc.) he isn't replaced by another 'normal' soldier. He dies, and you take another guy from the formation and put him in the front.

ex. When an uruk-hai captain in a company is killed (let's say through magic) he is not 'replaced' with another basic Uruk-hai. You take another uruk-hai already in the formation and move him forward to take the empty spot, effectively taking a casualty.

xxRavenxx
20-04-2009, 15:45
Thanks for pointing that out. Had completely forgotten the rule.

So. Assuming I have 2 bezerkers left, one replaced by lurtz, and the squad takes 6 hits,

Do I lose them all, or do the hits kill lurtz and a bezerker (2 hits each) and then I put the other bezerker back,

or does lurtz's resilience kick in and he takes 3 for the team?

FuzzyOrb
20-04-2009, 17:19
Lurtz resilience does NOT kick in.
I your example, the first two hits kill Lurtz (as you can never have more epic heroes in a company than normal troops).
Lurtz is replaced by a berserker immediately!
The next 4 hits take the berserkers out:(.

Llew
20-04-2009, 18:12
As a general guideline, play vague rules in whatever manner is *least* advantageous for you.

If everyone played like that, there'd be very few rules issues.

xxRavenxx
21-04-2009, 13:03
If GW could playest their rules for 5 minutes and iron out 70% of these ambiguous situations, this stuff wouldnt happen ;)

Something wierd happens every single game we play (partly because we're learning) and often there seems to be no resolution from the book.

dtjunkie19
21-04-2009, 13:12
I don't see the ambiguity in this situation, fuzzyorb explained it correctly

xxRavenxx
21-04-2009, 14:16
Theres nothing ambiguous about how a character might or might not be the last man standing in a unit, how his resillience works when he becomes one of the last men alive, how hits affect men who turn up after others die, and how to resolve the situation a player has to head to an online forum and consult a panel of "judges" to help interpret rules from six different pages to work out what on earth is happening for one single situation?

Maybe our idea of ambiguous is different...


And let us not even begin to mention duels, or heroic actions :P

Erethor
21-04-2009, 21:32
If GW could playest their rules for 5 minutes and iron out 70% of these ambiguous situations, this stuff wouldnt happen ;)

Something wierd happens every single game we play (partly because we're learning) and often there seems to be no resolution from the book.

I think that's a bit unfair. Admittedly, it's a little weird that when there's Lurtz and one berserker left, and Lurtz dies, there's suddenly 2 berserkers. But the rules clearly state that happens. There's also no such thing as "overflow" for wounds. Let's say Lurtz and the berserker take 5 hits:

The formation suffered 5 hits, enough to remove Lurtz and the first berserker as casualties, but then Lurtz is replaced by another berserker to represent the guy whose spot he took coming back to the front. Is the 1 remaining hit on the formation enough to kill him? Nope. R2. So 1 berserker left.

There's no "overflow", no ambiguity.

Again, I know it's a little weird, but it's more from an ease of gameplay perspective.

xxRavenxx
22-04-2009, 08:47
I was possibly stressing my point a little strongly, in retalliation to LLew's comment that we, as players, could eliminate rules issues by playing nice.

I personally am of the opinnion that the rules need clearing up more, to prevent this kind of thing.

I'm just going to list a few things from the last few games we've played, that seem overly hard to resolve, and could have been fixed quite quickly with a little more playtesting and correction within the book:

Lurtz and Boromir both have Mighty Blow, but Boromir's is worded sufficiently different that one of our players believes it can be used to off people in one hit within a duel. Lurtz's is worded to seeminly only work in combat. Which wording would you use? (in the middle of a game, while trying not to lose the flow of the game).

Terror. What is a terror causing creature? Does it lose it in a formation, does it not?

How do I determine "in a random direction?" (this didnt hamper us at all actually, we grabbed a scatter dice, but how is a new player meant to work it out?)

How do I "Shoot in the shoot"?

Aragorn + epic rampage + 2H weapons = killing on 1's rerolling those 1's? (they at no point seem to have said that 1's allways fail?)




There are tonnes of these little gems kicking about, some are solvable by looking at several places in the rulebook (which couldn't be placed together for reasons beyond my mortal comprehension), others just have no obvious solution. I just feel that while the game is very well put together and a lot of fun, the extra weeks work to polish it would really have helped.

Erethor
22-04-2009, 09:19
...that we, as players, could eliminate rules issues by playing nice.

I personally am of the opinnion that the rules need clearing up more, to prevent this kind of thing.

Honestly though, I couldn't agree more. As of right now, the only way to play is if a house rule is in place. THIS SHOULD NOT BE. I thought the Lurtz/Berserker thing was covered by the rules quite nicely, but there are so many nags for other things due to improper proofreading that it's difficult to keep "the flow of the game."

The Muster of Rohan
22-04-2009, 09:25
Lurtz and Boromir both have Mighty Blow, but Boromir's is worded sufficiently different that one of our players believes it can be used to off people in one hit within a duel. Lurtz's is worded to seeminly only work in combat. Which wording would you use? (in the middle of a game, while trying not to lose the flow of the game).

Boromir's Mighty Blow only works for a duel, Lurtz's only works for his formation.


Terror. What is a terror causing creature? Does it lose it in a formation, does it not?
A creature with the Terror special rule. If the COMPANY (not Formation) the Epic Hero is in gets charged, Terror test.


How do I determine "in a random direction?" (this didnt hamper us at all actually, we grabbed a scatter dice, but how is a new player meant to work it out?)
Roll two dice and use clock facings. Spin around with one arm outstretched (try not to hit anyone now! Play safe!) Grab a Blood Bowl scatter template and a D8! Use your imagination!


How do I "Shoot in the shoot"?
You're just being picky now. Typos happen.


Aragorn + epic rampage + 2H weapons = killing on 1's rerolling those 1's? (they at no point seem to have said that 1's allways fail?)
It'll cost you 415 points for a single company with no other upgrades!!! That's assuming Aragorn + Gimli + 1 company of Dwarf Warrior Kinband. For the 45 points less, I have 9 companies of Riders of Rohan who, between shooting, charging and striking first would annihilate that company. Add extra companies, by all means - it's all making the rest of your army easier to wipe out, and even a full strength formation with the command company as above can't win a game by itself.

In short, just apply a little common sense. A player who needs to be spoonfed everything probably isn't ready to play big boy games.

Llew
22-04-2009, 11:27
Theres nothing ambiguous about how a character might or might not be the last man standing in a unit, how his resillience works when he becomes one of the last men alive, how hits affect men who turn up after others die, and how to resolve the situation a player has to head to an online forum and consult a panel of "judges" to help interpret rules from six different pages to work out what on earth is happening for one single situation?

Maybe our idea of ambiguous is different...


And let us not even begin to mention duels, or heroic actions :P

I'm one of those guys who rails against GW for writing sloppy, badly-worded rules. I don't think that's the case in this instance. It's not ambiguous to me. It's pretty clear.

However, not everyone reads things the same way, and sometimes that is genuinely part of the text. For instance read the following line:

You can't put too much water in a nuclear reactor.

You probably know exactly what it says. There may be a different interpretation though. It could mean, "It is impossible to put too much water in a nuclear reactor, so don't worry and add water whenever you need to." It could also mean, "Don't put too much water in a nuclear reactor."

My point was only that it is virtually impossible for someone to write a long ruleset without some ambiguity creeping in. So when you find one of these situations that is difficult to puzzle out, play whichever one is least advantageous to you. It resolves the problem quickly.

On top of that, it's a pretty quick way to get a handle on the character of your opposing players. ;)

Sarah S
22-04-2009, 16:21
Boromir's Mighty Blow only works for a duel, Lurtz's only works for his formation.

While it seems that way now, I wouldn't count on it staying that way for long... Look for it to be clarified to be the same in the first FAQ.

Hoster
22-04-2009, 21:56
Roll two dice and use clock facings.


7 o'clock is towards the enemy, am I right?

Sorry, I realise an honest mistake, although this would be funny to watch.

The Muster of Rohan
23-04-2009, 09:12
I want to see kids try it, using one of their new-fangled digital watches...

skallagrimsson
24-04-2009, 20:31
Assume seven bezerkers die, so only lurtz is left.

Do I use the units resilience, or his?

When he dies, do I then place a bezerker model back in to replace him?

If I do, do I do this if 4-5 wounds were caused to the company to kill lurtz, or do the extra wounds overflow onto the guy who replaces him?

Its a little confusing...

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but Berserkers have the rule 'We stand alone' so no character can be placed in the formation. So the question is a moot point - though the debate has been interesting.

Lord Of The Avatars
24-04-2009, 20:37
LURTZ OWNS!!! im gna try war of the ring it sounds good...

Edonil
24-04-2009, 21:16
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but Berserkers have the rule 'We stand alone' so no character can be placed in the formation. So the question is a moot point - though the debate has been interesting.

Umm...I have to respectfully disagree. The list of rules in my book is Berserk, Indomitable, Stalwart, and Headlong Fury....no 'We Stand Alone'.

skallagrimsson
02-05-2009, 19:25
Umm...I have to respectfully disagree. The list of rules in my book is Berserk, Indomitable, Stalwart, and Headlong Fury....no 'We Stand Alone'.

Absolutely correct - please accept my apologies. Did not have the book in front of me and had not looked at it til today. an epic hero canindeed go in with the berserkers. I don't know why i was convinced the berserks had we stand alone, but i was at the time - i think perhaps because there is only ever one company per formation.

I would, on reading the rules properly this time, put the 50pt Thrydane (?) dunlendling guy in- has epic strike which means on attacking on a really good roll the company has F 10 and S 10 - nasty. lurtz is too expensive to be in the squad in my opinion - though they can hop around formations and the berserks are basically last man standing.