PDA

View Full Version : Daemons / Undead in the Watchtower scenario



SkawtheFalconer
09-11-2010, 17:05
Hi,

Im sorry if this has been asked before, I couldn't see it using search forum...

The question is basically what happens if Daemons/Undead/another 'unbreakable' unit occupies the watchtower?

I've been playing it as if the Daemons fail their instability test, they get pushed out, but my regular Daemon opponent claims they can't be removed until they're all dead.

What is the general consensus?

Lex
09-11-2010, 17:43
I believe the rule is that the unit gets pushed out if they fail a break test. Neither Daemons nor Undead take break tests. You have to kill them all to get them out.

Sergeant Uriel Ventris
09-11-2010, 18:05
Hmm, that seems rather unfair. Any other opinions?

theunwantedbeing
09-11-2010, 18:07
Undead do crumble, so upon losing a combat they'll take additional wounds.
No more regenerating them or taking wards against them either.

Similarly Daemons crumble as well, base on what they lose by and roll for their instability tests.

Also, your limited to a unit of 20 in the watchtower to begin with.
So it's not all bad.

Greyfire
09-11-2010, 18:40
But if they can get a unit with a necromancer and a vampire in it (say on turn 2), well, in that case, you're probably hosed. I threw two units of saurus at it from turns 3 through 6 at it with little result. I was told I should have just concentrated what little fire I had at it, but it with a pure close combat army and I didn't have much of a chance since only one unit can assault at a time.

If anyone can think of a tactic that works, please let me know.

I was on the other side of the coin, with a 20 strong saurus unit in the tower at the start of the game. But turn 5 it was down to just the champion, so he left the tower to let the supporting unit in. Only problem is that my Wood Elf opponent had shot the supporting unit down to 5 models. The game didn't end on turn 6, and my last saurus died on turn 7 giving him the game.

Now that was a bloody, good game! A bitter fight to the end, and with a bit of suspense at several spots.

But the fight with the undead? I didn't find anything enjoyable about that at all. :(

Bac5665
09-11-2010, 18:46
The watchtower scenario is garbage, flaming garbage.

It is wholly unbalanced and is completely unfair for a host or reasons. In a pick up game, I refuse to play it. Now, if you don't care about balance, or know about it ahead of time, then knock yourself out. But I never play that way, and don't particularly want to.

EDMM
09-11-2010, 18:57
There are a lot of things that make the Watchtower scenario really hard, but the following things that REALLY wreck the Watchtower scenario:

Chaos Warriors of Tzeentch (Chosen of Tzeentch with 3+ ward are the worst).
Anything Undead
Anything Daemonic
Phoenix Guard

If any of the above get into the tower, you lose. You can't kill enough in 6 turns with shooting or combat to empty the tower. The Daemons and Undead are impossible to shift unless you kill EVERY SINGLE ONE. Almost nothing wins combat against the Chaos Warriors/Phoenix Guard using the tower rules, let alone breaks them on their Ld9+ re-rollable Steadfast test.

Korraz
09-11-2010, 19:00
The watchtower scenario is garbage, flaming garbage.

It is wholly unbalanced and is completely unfair for a host or reasons. In a pick up game, I refuse to play it. Now, if you don't care about balance, or know about it ahead of time, then knock yourself out. But I never play that way, and don't particularly want to.

There is more than one scenario. Be prepaired for every single one, or get what you deserve.

AMWOOD co
09-11-2010, 19:04
The simple solution is to use the Lord of Unbridled Combat Power! (tm) Simply take the strongest combat Lord you have, throw him in a powerful unit (maybe of more heroes) and go to town. Archaon would be a favourite as would a Vampire with... what's that thing going around, red flurry or something? the goal, score as much death as you can and force Daemon Instability or Unstable to kill them even more.

If they brought a hero with the Crown of Command or Standard of Chaos Glory, however, just keep killing them 'till they're dead.

Lex
09-11-2010, 19:25
Just play Skaven and use Crack's Call or play Lizardmen and use Mazdamundi. ;)

decker_cky
09-11-2010, 19:33
Interesting situation on the daemons, because they take break tests and explicitly have failed the break tests when they lose models from their crumbling. I wouldn't say RAW they're pushed out, but them crumbling does lead to an ambiguous situation. I'd play them remaining until they're all dead.

Bac5665
09-11-2010, 20:14
There is more than one scenario. Be prepaired for every single one, or get what you deserve.

'kay. Lets just say I'm wood elves. Please tell me how I prepare for the watchtower scenario. Against dwarves. Or VC. Or Daemons.

Or lets go with Beastmen against those sides. Or HE.

The watchtower scenario is over before it starts for many, many match-ups. None of the others are so bad (though some of them are still bad.) So your advice is to never play woodelves and refuse to play against dwarves.

Good plan :rolleyes:

Lex
09-11-2010, 20:15
I don't think its called a "break test". I think its called an "unstable test". I don't have my book in front of me. If I also remember correctly they are "unbreakable".

Glen_Savet
09-11-2010, 20:15
My suggestion about that scenario; remove the watch tower. Have the "watch tower" be a hill with some fences or something. If the building is causing the issues, remove that building.

theorox
09-11-2010, 20:22
My advice is don't play the Watchtower. What a terribly unfair scenario, the unit that starts in there wins if they are decently hard and can be supported, no matter what the opponent does. :/

Theo

EDMM
09-11-2010, 20:30
I don't think its called a "break test". I think its called an "unstable test". I don't have my book in front of me. If I also remember correctly they are "unbreakable".


And the rules for the Instability test specifically say it is a special type of break test. They use those words.

Lex
09-11-2010, 20:31
Interesting. Does it still say they are unbreakable?

decker_cky
09-11-2010, 20:44
Or lets go with Beastmen against those sides. Or HE.

The watchtower scenario is over before it starts for many, many match-ups. None of the others are so bad (though some of them are still bad.) So your advice is to never play woodelves and refuse to play against dwarves.

Good plan :rolleyes:

My beastmen run a large unit of bestigors with the flaming banner, and I generally have a gorebull in the army too. In watchtower, I put the gorebull in the bestigors and have them fight it out (gorebull doesn't fight unless he's stacked on a few attacks). I lose primal fury, but I have 20-21 WS4, S6 rerolling to wound attacks, which stands up to pretty much anything out there (particularly when backed by shadows magic).

When defending, I have a smaller unit then swap out with a unit of 40-50 ungors with handweapon and shield. Not much can take that out in 4-5 combat rounds.

High elves are actually awesome in watchtower, with either swordmasters or phoenix guard. Wood elves for the most part were left behind in 8th edition in many ways. This is one of those ways.

a18no
09-11-2010, 21:37
'kay. Lets just say I'm wood elves. Please tell me how I prepare for the watchtower scenario. Against dwarves. Or VC. Or Daemons.

Or lets go with Beastmen against those sides. Or HE.

The watchtower scenario is over before it starts for many, many match-ups. None of the others are so bad (though some of them are still bad.) So your advice is to never play woodelves and refuse to play against dwarves.

Good plan :rolleyes:

Actually, wood elfs are a good army for watchtower scenario. Since assaulting/defending a building allow no combat resolution 9only wounds), wood elf are on par with any unit, your skirmisher units will fight with 10 guys, no rank bonus on any side, no banner, no charging bonus. Bring big unit of dryad, with I6, 2A WS4, S4, T4 ward 5+, you can destroy lot of unit.

I found undead to be a bad army for watchtower. They don't cause that much wounds, and they are the only armys that won't benefit from the auto-steadfast when defending the building. And they can't shoot a lot (since their is a new assault on each turn, a good shooting army can shoot everyturn).

I've founds gnoblar to be very strong to defend building. With a Tyrant near and a BSB, they can re-roll steadfast at ld9, and can stand and shoot each turn (even when ennemy charge from 1").

Dwarf are too strong for that scenario. With ld9 minimum T4, good armor, they are too hard to remove from their.

Dark elf RxB are probably one of the best unit to defend the watchtower, with parry save, 24" shooting with armor piercing, with a lot of them in the building, a BSB, a lord level for ld9-10, and good magic, they can be a pain.

Good games!

EDMM
09-11-2010, 21:48
Interesting. Does it still say they are unbreakable?

They haven't been Unbreakable for an entire edition now.

They have the following special rules in the army book:
Immune to Psychology;
Fear;
Daemonic Aura;
Daemonic Attacks;
Daemonic Instability.

Daemonic Instability reads:

When Daemons lose a combat they must take a special kind of Break test called a Daemonic Instability test. In multiple combats, each Damonic unit must test separately.


In my opinion, Daemons will be forced outside the building. The rules for buildings simply state:

If the defender fails the Break test, then the garrison unit is placed outside, directly opposite the assaulting unit, as described for a unit abandoning a building (see page 127). If this cannot be done, place it as near as possible to this position. It then makes its fleeing move as normal.

There is nothing inconsistent with reading the rule as "if the [Daemonic unit] fails the Break test, then the [Daemonic unit] is placed outside directly opposite the assaulting unit, as described for a unit abandoning a building." It's a simple propositional (if-->then) statement. The Daemon unit can satisfy the precedent, so must perform the consequence when required.

Glasscannon
09-11-2010, 23:35
A trend thats slowly becoming more popular in our group is each player picks one of the missions they dont want to play, both those missions are removed from the roll. It keeps people from playing the same game type all the time and it also prevents unbalanced missions causing unhappy games.

Lex
10-11-2010, 03:37
They haven't been Unbreakable for an entire edition now.

They have the following special rules in the army book:
Immune to Psychology;
Fear;
Daemonic Aura;
Daemonic Attacks;
Daemonic Instability.

Daemonic Instability reads:



In my opinion, Daemons will be forced outside the building. The rules for buildings simply state:


There is nothing inconsistent with reading the rule as "if the [Daemonic unit] fails the Break test, then the [Daemonic unit] is placed outside directly opposite the assaulting unit, as described for a unit abandoning a building." It's a simple propositional (if-->then) statement. The Daemon unit can satisfy the precedent, so must perform the consequence when required.

I doubt it would be ruled that way. Special kind of break test is not a "Break Test". If you read further in the rule it says "The unit then makes its fleeing move as normal." I don't the the RAW or RAI would have the Daemons running from the building.

H33D
10-11-2010, 07:07
as for the crown of command comments earlier, remember that you are steadfast when you are in a building so there would be no need for the crown.

T10
10-11-2010, 09:17
If Daemons are supposed to benefit from the Steadfast rule, then their instability test must surely count as a break test.

-T10

Korraz
10-11-2010, 10:00
I doubt it would be ruled that way. Special kind of break test is not a "Break Test". If you read further in the rule it says "The unit then makes its fleeing move as normal." I don't the the RAW or RAI would have the Daemons running from the building.

So a special Close Combat Attack is not a Close Combat Attack and a special Shooting Attack is not a Shooting Attack?

EDMM
10-11-2010, 12:17
The FAQ answer that mentions steadfast for daemons just refers to it a a break test. Not even a special one.

DaemonReign
10-11-2010, 12:40
I'm just gonna stick my face into this bee-hive and say that "common sense" tells me that since Daemons never actually flee they will never be pushed out of a building like any Fleeing unit would.

Daemons (like Undead) are "unbreakable" in the sense that they can't/won't ever take a step "backwards" due do being overcome by fear or panic.

They are not, however, unbreakable in the sense that losing rounds of CC-combat doesn't hurt them at all - they're powers dwindle and they crumble and disperse into the winds of magic but they're not actually "broken" in the psychological sense.

I fully sympathize with people wanting things to be otherwise, especially with consideration of this Watchtower scenario where being "unbreakable" is so game-winning, but this is not the way to go about solving it.

Unless Flagelants or Dwarf Slayers are gonna be "pushed out" too if they're in a building and gets beaten in a round of combat - sure they might not have the intention of jumping out the windows on the back-side, they just got squeezed out of there......

I've had fun with this scenario but it does favor DoC in an imbalanced way - much more so than VC I'd say.

EDMM
10-11-2010, 12:49
Unless Flagelants or Dwarf Slayers are gonna be "pushed out" too if they're in a building and gets beaten in a round of combat - sure they might not have the intention of jumping out the windows on the back-side, they just got squeezed out of there......

We aren't bringing fluff into it at all. Flagellants and Slayers PASS every break test they are required to take. Daemons don't.

The fact that they normally do something different when taking a Break test is irrelevant. They take them - and they can fail them. That's all the building rules need to force you out.

The rule doesn't say "if the defender flees from combat." If that were the case then Daemons would be rightly immovable. It says "if the defender fails the Break test."

Lex
10-11-2010, 14:44
So a special Close Combat Attack is not a Close Combat Attack and a special Shooting Attack is not a Shooting Attack?

No, they are not. If they were the same, then an explanation would not be needed as to how they work. Special denotes some exception from the base rule. So, does the Break Test rule in the Watchtower scenario apply to only those that strictly comply with the rule or to the exceptions as well?

decker_cky
10-11-2010, 17:22
A trend thats slowly becoming more popular in our group is each player picks one of the missions they dont want to play, both those missions are removed from the roll. It keeps people from playing the same game type all the time and it also prevents unbalanced missions causing unhappy games.

I think that's pretty silly. Watch tower for sure I can see reasoning for, and I've seen some people who hated diagonal deployment, but that'll just lead to "I don't take enough banners so I don't allow Death or Glory."

Play watchtower with a hill, or something to that effect.

Killjoy00
10-11-2010, 21:48
You are missing that, while it is a special type of break test, there is no RaW way to fail it. You simply take wounds - there is no failing or passing an instability test.

EDMM
10-11-2010, 21:57
If they roll greater than the Leadership value.

That's why their BSB works.

DenWhalen
10-11-2010, 22:26
Page 30 of the DoC AB, "For each point the unit fails its Instability test by, the unit suffers one additional wound." Daemons can clearly fail their "special kind of Break test" (also page 30). Being unable to flee becomes the only issue and I think "the Most Important Rule" comes into effect, because there is no clear rule for how to handle the situation.

Maoriboy007
10-11-2010, 22:33
As a VC player undead don't seem to benefit that much from the watchtoewr, they generally rely on static res rather than combat, which won't apply in this case, gain no benefit from being steadfast, and accrue extra casualties from instability.
High Ld armies with a BSB seem just as hard to shift from a tower.

SlaaneshSlave
11-11-2010, 00:14
The Watchtower scenario's real benefit is in the meta-game. Same as Death or Glory.

Watchtower's meta-game impact is that it provides real incentive to include a core unit no greater than 20 that has LOTS of attacks. It provides a reason to not take another huge unit of death. AND provide uses for units that have little other uses. Supporting attacks & horde rules favor units with 1 attack each. Units with multiple attacks are less useful in big units, but shine in the Watchtower.

All of the sudden Nightrunners have a use...

decker_cky
11-11-2010, 00:21
All of the sudden Nightrunners have a use...

Night runners? Naw. Plague censer bearers? Now we're talking. :evilgrin:

I wholeheartedly support a block of 20-25 plague censer bearers. The only unit which can take advantage of strength in numbers in the tower to boot!

Enigmatik1
11-11-2010, 00:30
Watchtower's meta-game impact is that it provides real incentive to include a core unit no greater than 20 that has LOTS of attacks. It provides a reason to not take another huge unit of death. AND provide uses for units that have little other uses. Supporting attacks & horde rules favor units with 1 attack each. Units with multiple attacks are less useful in big units, but shine in the Watchtower.


Woe beunto you in this scenario if you army has neither...;)

Balerion
11-11-2010, 08:44
As a VC player undead don't seem to benefit that much from the watchtoewr, they generally rely on static res rather than combat, which won't apply in this case, gain no benefit from being steadfast, and accrue extra casualties from instability.
High Ld armies with a BSB seem just as hard to shift from a tower.
Not to mention that I rarely field units of 20 or less, and if I do they're usually Skeletons (rather than Ghouls or GG).

T10
11-11-2010, 08:57
You are missing that, while it is a special type of break test, there is no RaW way to fail it. You simply take wounds - there is no failing or passing an instability test.

Are you saying that the instability test cannot be re-rolled with the Battle Standard Bearer? Are you?

This is exciting stuff! I'm on the edge of my seat here!

-T10

Memnos
11-11-2010, 09:23
Interesting situation on the daemons, because they take break tests and explicitly have failed the break tests when they lose models from their crumbling. I wouldn't say RAW they're pushed out, but them crumbling does lead to an ambiguous situation. I'd play them remaining until they're all dead.

They failed a Leadership test. Daemons are unbreakable - They never take break tests. They take instability tests.

Flash Felix
11-11-2010, 09:34
My suggestion about that scenario; remove the watch tower. Have the "watch tower" be a hill with some fences or something. If the building is causing the issues, remove that building.

The sanity of this solution is quite compelling to me. If you don't like the building rules, then replace the building. The scenario then works fine as far as I can see.

I thought it was worth bumping, because no-one else seems to have noticed it.

Glasscannon
11-11-2010, 11:02
I think that's pretty silly. Watch tower for sure I can see reasoning for, and I've seen some people who hated diagonal deployment, but that'll just lead to "I don't take enough banners so I don't allow Death or Glory."

Play watchtower with a hill, or something to that effect.

I dont get why peoples minds automatically soar straight for the cheesiest underhanded options, I dont know who you play with but id like to give the average player a little more credit :D

Admittedly the idea for a hill/ruin is a much better one and ive begun to play a few games with it, honestly I dont know why they made the watchtower scenario to begin with it would have been much more in tune with the new direction of 8th edition to make it a hill/ruin that can be freely fought over, already ive had some fantastic games where after 3 turns there's enormous dead piles, the winner often decided by 1 army being tabled and not the objective :P

T10
11-11-2010, 11:17
My suggestion about that scenario; remove the watch tower. Have the "watch tower" be a hill with some fences or something. If the building is causing the issues, remove that building.

I too approve of this approach.

I'd suggest a variant house rule: Instead of having garrisoned a building, the defending unit has entrenched itself on top of a hill. The unit can be of any type. The unit counts as being behind a wall (hard cover, charging enemies suffer -1 to hit). Also, the unit is immune to psychology and steadfast. If the unit is broken or destroyed in close combat then one of the units it was fighting takes its place (with the benefits mentioned above) provided it doesn't pursue or overrun.

-T10

T10
11-11-2010, 11:19
They failed a Leadership test. Daemons are unbreakable - They never take break tests. They take instability tests.

I've not seen mention of the Unbreakable rule anywhere in the Daemon special rules section. I think you are making this up.

-T10

AMWOOD co
11-11-2010, 20:16
My suggestion about that scenario; remove the watch tower. Have the "watch tower" be a hill with some fences or something. If the building is causing the issues, remove that building.

I've played King of the Hill dozens of times. The 6th edition book had something of the kind (it said use any terrain) and we used it through 6th and 7th (you cared that it didn't exist anymore, we liked it). You end up with many of the same problems, however and one extra: who wins if both players have a unit on the hill at the end? Is a unit of 20 Night Goblins worth the same as 5 Chaos Knights?

Wyrmnax
11-11-2010, 20:46
I've played King of the Hill dozens of times. The 6th edition book had something of the kind (it said use any terrain) and we used it through 6th and 7th (you cared that it didn't exist anymore, we liked it). You end up with many of the same problems, however and one extra: who wins if both players have a unit on the hill at the end? Is a unit of 20 Night Goblins worth the same as 5 Chaos Knights?

Tie, or goes down to VPs

Easy solution.

Deacon Bane
12-11-2010, 13:49
I love having other objectives. Just run across the board and slaughter the other guy, gets a little old. Besides these types of scenerios can help with balancing a game. Heaven forbid we should have to build our army lists for something other than a straight up fight. Our group has played Watch Tower often and we enjoy the change. Maybe it's just this Forum, but Warhammer doesn't have to be all about winning. It should be about playing.

EDMM
12-11-2010, 15:38
I love having other objectives. Just run across the board and slaughter the other guy, gets a little old. Besides these types of scenerios can help with balancing a game. Heaven forbid we should have to build our army lists for something other than a straight up fight. Our group has played Watch Tower often and we enjoy the change. Maybe it's just this Forum, but Warhammer doesn't have to be all about winning. It should be about playing.

How do you bring a balanced army that can unseat 40 Phoenix Guard in 6 turns?

Korraz
12-11-2010, 16:16
By calling shenanigans on the guy that places 40 PG in one tower.

Bac5665
12-11-2010, 16:32
By calling shenanigans on the guy that places 40 PG in one tower.

Ok, so he only gets five turns to kill the 40 PG, after the PG start in charge range of the tower. The point still remains that its hard to call such lists abusive when 8E screams out for such lists with the rules. The tower scenario is all about placing taking the tower with the biggest unit of infantry you have. And since big units are less of a risk than in 7E, because it's damn hard to kill all 100 chaos warriors and they don't give up a single point unless they are all dead. So anyone who plays the game for the first time and reads the rules will see that obvious, obvious outcome.

So I can't in good conscience say that GW did't intend such "abuses" because they are painfully obvious.

Korraz
12-11-2010, 17:28
I'm still not seeing how they enter the tower.

Greyfire
12-11-2010, 19:14
I'm still not seeing how they enter the tower.

They probably didn't (unless a mistake was made). They probably started as close as possible, marched as fast as the could, and enterred the building as the unit that started in it left (and they even formed up in a nice formation to protect the tower another turn). That's how a 20+ strong skellie unit with necro and vamp were able to take and hold the tower against me.

Until everyone else can raise dead, I'm going to say VC have it better than DoC. Lore of Life helps many with just that but that spell can be used only one, and some armies can't take that lore.

decker_cky
12-11-2010, 19:55
A bunch of armies including DoC can raise models with lore of life. Anything undead is horrid in a watchtower scenario since they lose models in combat then lose models to combat resolution. Everything else, being stubborn or not taking a break test will likely be just as good in the next round.

Korraz
12-11-2010, 20:04
Yeah, but not 40 PGs. And I'm somewhat sure that 100 Chaos Warriors can't enter that building either.

decker_cky
12-11-2010, 20:57
The only limit is at the start of the turn. If you really want the best unit for watchtowers, it's a huge block of plague censer bearers. Nothing of equal points comes close to comparing to them. Yes, frenzy can draw them out, but they should have Ld10 rerolling to see if they fail that test.

Plague censer bearers almost double the damage output phoenix guard and swordmasters do in a head to head. They also slightly outdo frenzied chaos warriors with halberds (though frenzied nurgle warriors with halberds would win).

Other armies can in general do decently well. Load your characters into combat. Use flaming attacks. Lots of options for shaking out a big nasty unit. Drop a frenzied unit's leadership and try to force them to leave the unit that way.

H33D
12-11-2010, 22:57
It is pretty easy to set up an instant win on the watchtower scenario, depending on what army you play. The only way to balance this is to create some house rules such as:

-the watch tower is a different terrain piece instead, such as a hill

-change the rules for the specific watchtower piece for that game, such as removing steadfast from units inside, templates causing 2D6 hits instead of D6, or not allowing the General's LD or BSB re-rolls for the unit inside.

decker_cky
12-11-2010, 23:34
Show me an instant win on the watchtower. I'm intrigued.

Deacon Bane
13-11-2010, 02:07
By balanced I mean a list that can compete in each scenerio. If you know you're playing Watch Tower then of course you build your list around it. If you don't know what scenerio is being played, it is hard to prepare, so it makes sense to build a balanced list. If I know I'm playing WT then my 24 Chosen of Tzeenetch are going to be within marching distance. That same unit may not be as effective in other scenerios. I'm saying if every game is about who slaughters who, then you have certain lists above others. By adding other Victory conditions, it can even things out.

a18no
13-11-2010, 02:31
Frenzy can't draw out any unit. You can't charge from a building, even by frenzy or any magical mean.

AMWOOD co
13-11-2010, 02:54
Frenzy can't draw out any unit. You can't charge from a building, even by frenzy or any magical mean.

Here:
A unit that is Frenzied, or is otherwise forced to charge, still cannot do so if it is in a building - it must stead exit the building as close as possible to the enemy instead of charging.

As for 40 Phoenix Guard (I assume that's what PG is), Dwellers Below, Final Transmutation, and Ecstatic Seizures will do some serious damage for a turn or two (lowest expects 33% casualties). A lucky Gateway will make fast work of such a unit too. The Chaos spell, at least, are not very expensive, either (total of 15 for Gateway and a lvl 4 has +5 to cast).

FashaTheDog
13-11-2010, 03:36
While the Daemons are not Unbreakable, there does seem to be an oddity with them abandoning the Watchtower if we say failed Instability tests force the unit from the tower. The rules for abandoning a building state that the unit is placed in contact with the building and then makes its normal flee move. Since in this case we state that the Daemon's Instability is indeed a Break check for purposes of leaving the building, it seems by the wording that this would actually be a case where they take their casualties and then run because the rules for being pushed out of a garrisoned building say so. A double whammy.

On the other hand, it is stated that it is a special type of Break check, implying that it does not follow any rules for Break checks past the point where you are required to make one and the BSB and stubborn work because they are explicitly stated to do so. Steadfast in this case would not apply to Daemons as it applies only to normal Break tests. As such, I can also see the argument that Daemons stay put and take their lumps from Instability.

As far as how I would play it, if facing a Daemon player, I would rule they are not dislodged by a failed Instability. Whereas if I was (and am forced to in games over 2K) the Daemon player, I would rule double whammy. Best to just give my foe the benefit unless a league/tournament/campaign/etc organizer states otherwise and move on until there is an FAQ addressing the issue.

Kalandros
13-11-2010, 03:44
As for 40 Phoenix Guard (I assume that's what PG is), Dwellers Below, Final Transmutation, and Ecstatic Seizures will do some serious damage for a turn or two (lowest expects 33% casualties). A lucky Gateway will make fast work of such a unit too. The Chaos spell, at least, are not very expensive, either (total of 15 for Gateway and a lvl 4 has +5 to cast).


Depends if those Phoenix Guards are immune to magic with a BSB's Banner of the World Dragon, then good luck moving them out of there.

EDMM
13-11-2010, 07:29
I'm still not seeing how they enter the tower.
It's less than 12" away from your deployment zone. Seeing as how most buildings I have seen are around 5", it's always been under 10" away every game I've played. First turn march into the building after the starter unit leaves.

There is no upper limit on the number of models you can put in a building.

You can have a unit of 6.02 x 10^23 Ogres inside a building if you want.

It's a bit silly, but there it is.

The 20 model limit is only for the core unit that can start in the tower. Sub out your 20 Spear Elves at your earliest convenience for autowin.

Kalandros
13-11-2010, 08:01
Huh.... no.

page 126 "Units cannot garrison a building in the same turn in which they have marched - "

EDMM
13-11-2010, 08:24
Ah right. So turn 2 it is.

The difference being? They'll still get in before you have any realistic hope of getting the initial unit out.

frapermax
13-11-2010, 10:27
You can play the Watch Tower scenario with something else, like a hill or a forest, as the tower. They even suggest it in the rulebook. We play it like this: One guy wins the possession of the tower, the other player actually chooses what it will be. Fun for everybody (especially Wood Elves) and a lot more balanced.
fpm

JonnyTHM
13-11-2010, 12:56
Okay, here's the thing:

You can construct a list which will break the watchtower scenario for the 50% of the time that you get to place a unit in first, and then march up your better unit and only have it subjected to templates and such for the first TWO turns that it's not in there (they get to shoot, then they shoot you again after your first turn).

Then again there are a few things to remember:
1) On the times that you start in the watchtower, your opponent has chosen what side each of you start on. If they're intelligent and see that you're playing DoC, Vamps, or something else where they think you have a better chance at the tower, they've probably sabotaged the one side with every negative piece of terrain they could (hell, I know where I'd put a bane stone).

By the time you get to the watchtower, your opponent must have at least 2 turns of shooting and magic, during which time they can try to cut the unit down to a more appropriate size.

If they don't want to do that, they could also just charge with lots and lots of cavalry.

2) Those other times when your opponent starts in the watch tower, they get at least 1 turn of shooting against your big watchtower unit of doom, and you have the (possibly equally) difficult task of unseating whatever unit they put in there initially).

3) Then we have the other 83% of the time that the unit with the BWUoD must be just as effective in every other scenario you play.


The short of it: If you're really concerned about what these people are doing: balance your own list first and then read ALL the rules so that you know that things aren't as bad as they are in your mind.

Glen_Savet
13-11-2010, 17:52
I've played King of the Hill dozens of times. The 6th edition book had something of the kind (it said use any terrain) and we used it through 6th and 7th (you cared that it didn't exist anymore, we liked it). You end up with many of the same problems, however and one extra: who wins if both players have a unit on the hill at the end? Is a unit of 20 Night Goblins worth the same as 5 Chaos Knights?

Have a point on the hill that marks the "throne"; closest unit to the "throne" wins?

Morkash
13-11-2010, 18:03
Hm the Phoenix Guard doesnt worry me that much (Unless with World Dragon BSB), but 30 Chosen of Tzeentch seems utterly horrific to hold the tower. Not only are they more resilient than PGs, but they are more than able to kill anything approaching...

H33D
14-11-2010, 02:24
Show me an instant win on the watchtower. I'm intrigued.

I usually put 20 thunderers with FC and shields in there. WS4, T4, 5+ armor save, 6+ parry save, and then they shoot you 20 times on their turn while they are out of combat, hitting on 3s with S4 armor piercing.

decker_cky
14-11-2010, 16:30
That's far from an auto win. :rolleyes:

Bodysnatcher
14-11-2010, 19:02
There are some daemon units I can see doing a number on those thunderers. Horror bus with buff spells is one option - Mindrazor would make them plain nasty in a building.

Yellow Commissar
15-11-2010, 04:12
I've just got to withhold judgement on the Watchtower scenario for now. I haven't played very many. I suspect there are tactics for rooting units out of buildings that perhaps haven't yet been fully playtested.

It does seem that the player who wins the roll off for the tower seems to win, but having only played it twice, that is far from definitive.

Flails seem particularly suited to attacking a building, flaming attacks, Dwellers, Final Transmutation, the list goes on depending on what exactly you are trying to dislodge from the watchtower.

H33D
15-11-2010, 05:40
That's far from an auto win. :rolleyes:

If you say so oh omniscient one. No one here will play me in that scenario in case I win the roll off.
And of course certain spell combos and uber units can dislodge them if they get lucky, nothing is 100%.
I was stating it was an 'auto-win' to exaggerate the advantage you have if you win the dice roll with a list prepared to hold the watchtower.

EDMM
15-11-2010, 07:05
That's not even a very good unit to hold the tower...

It's an alright starting unit, but doesn't really compare with a lot of units that you can get in after the fact.

H33D
15-11-2010, 07:26
You would have to slay them in 4 turns of combat, as you wont be close enough without scouts in turn 1, and booting them out in turn 6 wont necessarily give you the tower. At WS4 T4, 5+ armor 6+ ward re-rollable steadfast LD10 and a bucketload of S4 AP hits in the shooting phase they can hold easily vs. most. Especially considering you can only attack with 6 infantry models. I suppose a Gorghon could do it in a few turns but seeing as lone models would be out of combat on my turn they would be shot to pieces. Deadly infantry, perhaps Swordmasters could do it, but again with the shooting. White Lions could do it if they were lucky, but would really need Frenzy somehow. Any unit with 2+ attacks and -1 or 2 to armor would have an OK chance, especially with flaming. Really with 6 models attacking and for 4 turns you would need to cause 5 wounds per turn and you wont get that with most units. All this is only if i just sit there and let you charge the Tower repeatedly with only 20 Thunderers on my list.

Thunderers are just one unit that can easily win this scenario. They are not a slouch in combat.

I haven't even mentioned the rest of my army which would be hitting your units in order to protect the tower. There are a lot of factors in favor of the unit holding the tower and I can't think of any factors against them.

DeathlessDraich
15-11-2010, 12:22
Hi,

Im sorry if this has been asked before, I couldn't see it using search forum...

The question is basically what happens if Daemons/Undead/another 'unbreakable' unit occupies the watchtower?

I've been playing it as if the Daemons fail their instability test, they get pushed out, but my regular Daemon opponent claims they can't be removed until they're all dead.

What is the general consensus?

Both cases of winning and losing combat have to be examined:

1) An Unbreakable unit - no problems

2) For Daemons/Undead as the garrison unit and combat losers:

It is still necessary to ascertain whether they have passed or failed their Break test.

If they pass - attackers retreat
If they fail - they(garrison) are placed outside
N.B. - not a flee move yet which comes later. (Ignored by Daemons/undead)


i.e. A Break test failure or Pass is necessary to determine what should be done next.



Instability rules do not explicitly state whether the Break tests passes or fails But combining Insane Courage rules and the Daemons FAQ for Insane Courage,

I would suggest that suffering additional wounds from Instability/Crumbling should be interpreted as failing a Break test - but only for this particular scenario.

EDMM
15-11-2010, 13:47
You would have to slay them in 4 turns of combat, as you wont be close enough without scouts in turn 1, and booting them out in turn 6 wont necessarily give you the tower. At WS4 T4, 5+ armor 6+ ward re-rollable steadfast LD10 and a bucketload of S4 AP hits in the shooting phase they can hold easily vs. most. Especially considering you can only attack with 6 infantry models. I suppose a Gorghon could do it in a few turns but seeing as lone models would be out of combat on my turn they would be shot to pieces. Deadly infantry, perhaps Swordmasters could do it, but again with the shooting. White Lions could do it if they were lucky, but would really need Frenzy somehow. Any unit with 2+ attacks and -1 or 2 to armor would have an OK chance, especially with flaming. Really with 6 models attacking and for 4 turns you would need to cause 5 wounds per turn and you wont get that with most units. All this is only if i just sit there and let you charge the Tower repeatedly with only 20 Thunderers on my list.

Thunderers are just one unit that can easily win this scenario. They are not a slouch in combat.

I haven't even mentioned the rest of my army which would be hitting your units in order to protect the tower. There are a lot of factors in favor of the unit holding the tower and I can't think of any factors against them.

This is getting ridiculous now.
:rolleyes:

Pil
15-11-2010, 15:59
Daemons are unbreakable they never run from anything, and you can never break them in combat. You have to kill everyone of them. All you can hope for is that you force some extra wounds by making them test for Daemonic Instability. Same with VC, also VC don't take any kind of test they are unstable and just take wounds for the difference in combat resolution. I do agree though even as a DoC player the watch tower sucks bad. The guy with the thunders in the tower would be a nightmare, or the 20 PG and then have a BSB with World Dragon Banner join them. I honestly think having 20 PG start in the tower then move your World Dragon Banner and a beater lord into it with them flanked by Sword Masters or White Lions would be totally unbeatable.

I do really good by starting 20 horrors in the building then move my herald in with them, and flank both sides of the tower with 20 man blocks of Bloodletters with a 6 man block of Bloodcrushers on one of the far flanks. But any army can do the same kind of set up, and be pretty much unbeatable in the Watch Tower unless you just have some really really bad luck. I don't think Watch Tower, Blood and Glory, or Battle for the Pass should ever be used in a tournament personally IMHO.

EDMM
15-11-2010, 17:23
Daemons are unbreakable
Not true.


All you can hope for is that you force some extra wounds by making them test for Daemonic Instability
Which is a Break test - albeit a special one.


or the 20 PG and then have a BSB with World Dragon Banner join them. I honestly think having 20 PG start in the tower then move your World Dragon Banner and a beater lord into it with them flanked by Sword Masters or White Lions would be totally unbeatable.
Can't start with 20 Phoenix Guard in the tower, because they are not core.

apbevan
15-11-2010, 17:48
Who is letting 20 thunders fire from the building? Its a max of 5 per floor with vantage points so is your watch tower 5 levels all with windows?

Any starting core of 20 is pretty easy to break from tower in the amount of time given so the rest of the battle comes down to controlling the area around the tower.

If your worried about the swapping of units a simple strategy is to occupy the other 3 sides of the tower.

stripsteak
15-11-2010, 19:47
You would have to slay them in 4 turns of combat, as you wont be close enough without scouts in turn 1
scouts could easily reach on turn 1, deploy 12" out that is within any units charge range.


bucketload of S4 AP hits in the shooting phase 5-10 shots, maybe 15 shots is a bucketload? or do you play with 4-5 story towers?


Especially considering you can only attack with 6 infantry models.
WHere is this from? you can attack with 10 infantry models. and the starting unit wouldn't have any characters in it to defend against enemy characters that can trash rank and file.


Deadly infantry, perhaps Swordmasters could do it, but again with the shooting.
sufficiently large unit of SM to weather the shooting (15-20), with prince + bsb. could make the charge on first turn fairly reliably unless you have a amazingly skinny tower. can expect ~13 wounds...upwards of 24 if they roll perfect. or expect ~17 if they have the flaming banner.

I haven't even mentioned the rest of my army which would be hitting your units in order to protect the tower.
which will be not till turn 2 or 3 to retaliate since they are dwarf giving the opponent enough time to dislodge the thunderers as shown above SM can easily do in 2 turns. and now you are fighting against a army that has gotten around the tower faster then you and in better position to defend it.


There are a lot of factors in favor of the unit holding the tower and I can't think of any factors against them.
well considering it sounds like you don't know the building rules fully, ie bucketload of shots, and 6 infantry fighting. i'm guessing thats why you haven't thought of any factors.

Pil
16-11-2010, 03:09
Not true.


Which is a Break test - albeit a special one.


Can't start with 20 Phoenix Guard in the tower, because they are not core.

To break in combat is to turn and run away. Daemons never turn and run, or flee, so Daemons are unbreakable in a literal since. In order to have some run out of the tower they would have to be able to flee, which Daemons don't do. I forgot about the core requirement to start in the tower, I am so use to my own army where all my block of infantry are core, so I never even really noticed that they had to be core to start in the tower lol.

H33D
16-11-2010, 03:19
Sorry ten. I was mixing war machine rules with building rules. And the watchower we use is 3 floors + a roof. We used 2 floors + a roof as 20 shots as well (roof = 10 shots, house rule). 20 shots is a bucketload to me.

And you are quite right, a deathstar unit could do fine, in addition to units that fare well vs shooting as I stated earlier.

And Dwarves can charge pretty far this edition, average of 10". It wouldn't be hard to charge enemies that fail to break the other unit out since they are pushed back out of combat.

Also my grudge throwers will reduce your unit to little more than a single character, and as it will be where the majority of your points are since its a deathstar it will be an easier win.

This wasn't supposed to be a 'my beard is bigger than yours' argument, simply a statement that winning the roll at the beginning gives you a HUGE advantage if you plan for it.

A lot of people argue for the sake of arguing without paying attention to the original statement at hand, sheesh.

apbevan
16-11-2010, 04:00
A house rule to make buildings more deadly and you complain that its hard to take buildings? I can understand making house rules to have fun but thats not what it sounds like...

Personally I have never had an issue with the watch tower scenario, I play VC and Bret.
In this scenario I have played against Empire, WE, Ogres, Slayers and VC.

H33D
16-11-2010, 04:12
I never once 'complained' about how hard it is to take a building it was a general statement. I complained about the intelligence of some posters. And 15 shots is still a bucketload.

SkawtheFalconer
17-11-2010, 23:45
Both cases of winning and losing combat have to be examined:

1) An Unbreakable unit - no problems

2) For Daemons/Undead as the garrison unit and combat losers:

It is still necessary to ascertain whether they have passed or failed their Break test.

If they pass - attackers retreat
If they fail - they(garrison) are placed outside
N.B. - not a flee move yet which comes later. (Ignored by Daemons/undead)


i.e. A Break test failure or Pass is necessary to determine what should be done next.



Instability rules do not explicitly state whether the Break tests passes or fails But combining Insane Courage rules and the Daemons FAQ for Insane Courage,

I would suggest that suffering additional wounds from Instability/Crumbling should be interpreted as failing a Break test - but only for this particular scenario.

This is how I would strongly argued it is played. The rule wording seems clear to me.

apbevan
18-11-2010, 00:05
For VC at it states under Break Tests on page 33

"Break Tests
Undead cannot be broken..." do I need to continue?

The building rules say I have to take a break test just like combat rules say I have to take a break test but my army book rules explicitly state I can not be broken and instead take additional wounds.

Clevelander
18-11-2010, 06:08
For VC at it states under Break Tests on page 33

"Break Tests
Undead cannon be broken..." do I need to continue?

The building rules say I have to take a break test just like combat rules say I have to take a break test but my army book rules explicitly state I can not be broken and instead take additional wounds.

Its been erratta'd to be even clearer

Page 33 – Break tests
Change to “All Undead units have the Unbreakable and
Unstable special rules.”

Snake1311
23-11-2010, 13:36
AFAIK, the watchtower has 3 floors (2 and a roof), so you get 15 shots from in there. Its pretty wysiwyg, theres a nice clear picture on pg 151 of the BRB

H33D - whilst its unlikely that you'll take out the thunderers completely, good CC units will put a significant dent in them - and since you'll be charging from your own side, the dwarves shouldn't be able to counter-charge you. The real challenge is making sure no other dwarf infantry units jump in the tower.

decker_cky
23-11-2010, 16:41
Dwarfs actually are one of the worst at re-garrisoning the watch tower since you can't march into it. That means on turn 2, they can't make it in (I'm pretty sure the watch tower base is less than 6"), so your opponent gets 3 rounds against those thunderers. Almost everyone else can swap units on the second turn.

Yellow Commissar
24-11-2010, 00:51
Dwarfs actually are one of the worst at re-garrisoning the watch tower since you can't march into it. That means on turn 2, they can't make it in (I'm pretty sure the watch tower base is less than 6"), so your opponent gets 3 rounds against those thunderers. Almost everyone else can swap units on the second turn.
The Anvil allows them to move. I believe Dwarfs also have a rune that can allow them a march move before the game starts.

H33D
24-11-2010, 07:20
And we could always bring a huge unit of Rangers with shields to put in it on turn 2 :)
The 'watchtower' we use at the local shop is not a GW one, someone created it years ago and it has three obvious floors and a roof level. 5 x 4 = 20 for those that can't do math.

Grey Mage
24-11-2010, 16:20
The only limit is at the start of the turn. If you really want the best unit for watchtowers, it's a huge block of plague censer bearers. Nothing of equal points comes close to comparing to them. Yes, frenzy can draw them out, but they should have Ld10 rerolling to see if they fail that test.

Plague censer bearers almost double the damage output phoenix guard and swordmasters do in a head to head. They also slightly outdo frenzied chaos warriors with halberds (though frenzied nurgle warriors with halberds would win).

Other armies can in general do decently well. Load your characters into combat. Use flaming attacks. Lots of options for shaking out a big nasty unit. Drop a frenzied unit's leadership and try to force them to leave the unit that way.
And this, this shows the REAL issue with watchtower- they didnt include any gall darn rules about how big a unit could be in there, probly assuming common sense would kick in, or youd discuss it with your opponent.

Simply agreeing to a maximum unit size- like say, in this case, 20- and your problems are solved.

Though, to be fair, I might say raise it to 30 and assume the thing has a basement eh?

H33D
25-11-2010, 04:13
I am 100% behind allowing buildings to be destroyed following the special rules in the back of the book that you can choose to use. I'm sure the watchtower scenario would be much more fun :) But then again I am a dwarf player...