| Author |
Message |
SBG |
|
Post subject: A bit confused...
 Posted: Nov 19, 2008 - 05:04 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Canada
Posts: 771
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
OK guys, I'M a bit confused.
I'm playing on the MBBL, this is where I might get lost. I though that Tomb Guardians, under LRB 5.0, were 3-5-1-8 Break Tackle Regeneration.
I thought that under the same rules, Flesh Golems in a Necromantic team were 100 K.
Is there a FAQ or errata I'm missing, cause I'm having questions from everywhere around here!
I got LRB 5.0, as well as the FAQ & Errata document. Is there something else I need. We are currently concluding our season before testing LRB 5b.
Fred |
_________________
Winner of Soup Bowls I, II, III (Chaos Dwarves); IV, V (Dwarves); XIII (Orcs); XIV (Dark Elves) & XVII (Chaos).
Forget the Yankees, forget the Habs: THAT'S a Dynasty!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Post subject: Re: A bit confused...
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 - 07:02 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2696
Location: Undisclosed
|
|
SBG wrote: I'm playing on the MBBL,
Why not ask on the MBBL forum?
Quote: I though that Tomb Guardians, under LRB 5.0, were 3-5-1-8 Break Tackle Regeneration.
Nope, that was an experimental roster that's been dropped.
Quote: I thought that under the same rules, Flesh Golems in a Necromantic team were 100 K.
Not under LRB5 - they are under LRB5b (the 2008 Rules Review), but the MBBL isn't starting that till Dec 1st. |
_________________
_____ and rankings - that is all
#27 of the "24 club" (due to some dodgy accounting)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
SBG |
|
|
Post subject: Re: A bit confused...
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 - 10:20 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Canada
Posts: 771
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote: SBG wrote: I'm playing on the MBBL,
Why not ask on the MBBL forum?
Darkson: I was saysing that this might explain my confusion. When I have a MBBL question, of course I ask it on the MBBL forum... |
_________________
Winner of Soup Bowls I, II, III (Chaos Dwarves); IV, V (Dwarves); XIII (Orcs); XIV (Dark Elves) & XVII (Chaos).
Forget the Yankees, forget the Habs: THAT'S a Dynasty!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject: Re: A bit confused...
Posted: Nov 20, 2008 - 11:28 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
SBG wrote: OK guys, I'M a bit confused.
I'm playing on the MBBL, this is where I might get lost. I though that Tomb Guardians, under LRB 5.0, were 3-5-1-8 Break Tackle Regeneration.
LRB 5.0 Khemri should have Undead Mummy stats and the skeletons should be 30k and not have Thick Skull. The Break Tackle Mummies were experimental for a year and rejected during the most recent BBRC vote for another year of testing. A new roster has been put forward for the last year of testing.
Quote: I thought that under the same rules, Flesh Golems in a Necromantic team were 100 K.
Not in LRB 5.0. That is an experimental change put in place by the 2007 Rules Review for testing for LRB 6.0 ... that testing was approved to continue for another year by the 2008 Rules Review.
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
SBG |
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: A bit confused...
Posted: Nov 21, 2008 - 08:07 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2003
Canada
Posts: 771
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Thanks Galak.
Basically the FAQ & Errata doc. was the testing ground for LRB 6.0, with the new published book being the final testing rules before they get offically approved in roughly year. Do I get it right?
Fred |
_________________
Winner of Soup Bowls I, II, III (Chaos Dwarves); IV, V (Dwarves); XIII (Orcs); XIV (Dark Elves) & XVII (Chaos).
Forget the Yankees, forget the Habs: THAT'S a Dynasty!!!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
GalakStarscraper |
|
|
Post subject: Re: RE: Re: A bit confused...
Posted: Nov 23, 2008 - 01:45 PM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Feb 11, 2003
United States of America
Posts: 1562
Status: Offline
|
|
SBG wrote: Thanks Galak.
Basically the FAQ & Errata doc. was the testing ground for LRB 6.0, with the new published book being the final testing rules before they get offically approved in roughly year. Do I get it right?
Fred Yes you have it right.
Galak |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
