[Archive] CDO 8th Edition Ravening Hordes (CD) errata

Grimstonefire:

Attached is the 8th edition CDO errata we’ve been working on for the Ravening Hordes: Chaos Dwarfs list.

This is the only version we will have listed as a sticky, unless GW produce an ‘officially supported’ one.

If there are any issues you would like raised, please post them below and we will consider them for future revisions.



Click here to download the Chaos Dwarf errata for 8th edition Ravening Hordes

Grimstonefire:

Thanks to Thommy, Baggronor, cornixt and Swiss for doing most of this.  I may have missed a few people.

Thommy H:

We’ll also be happy (well, I will be anyway - can’t necessarily speak for everyone else!) to field any queries about why certain decisions were taken and why certain interpretations were favoured over others. That’s not to say the FAQ is up for debate, but it can be useful to have “designer’s notes” in these kinds of situations.

Da Crusha:

everything looks pretty good. the only things I have problems with, nitpicking really, 2+ ward against flaming, bull centaurs following ALL the rules for cavalry and 50mm bases for monsters.

I understand why the armour of the furnace got changed to “2+ ward save against flaming attacks”, because of the Dwarf FAQ, but on the other hand the High elf Dragon princes retained their immunity to flaming attacks.

The only problem I have with Bull centaurs following ALL of the rules of cavalry is our most holy and elite bull centaurs now fear fire. BRB Pg 69

I understand that other monstrous mounts have 50 mm bases but, these are not easy bases to get a hold of.

Willmark:

I understand that other monstrous mounts have 50 mm bases but, these are not easy bases to get a hold of.

Da Crusha
4 25mm bases and glue together. Add modeling putty and all set.

cornixt:

everything looks pretty good. the only things I have problems with, nitpicking really, 2+ ward against flaming, bull centaurs following ALL the rules for cavalry and 50mm bases for monsters.

I understand why the armour of the furnace got changed to "2+ ward save against flaming attacks", because of the Dwarf FAQ, but on the other hand the High elf Dragon princes retained their immunity to flaming attacks.

The only problem I have with Bull centaurs following ALL of the rules of cavalry is our most holy and elite bull centaurs now fear fire. BRB Pg 69

Da Crusha
These are the issues we discussed the most, and they were discussed with the exact same parallels in the 8th ed changes. It was pretty annoying that there wasn't enough consistency for the fire immunity, and the only relatable unit for BCs are Centigors, which fear flaming attacks.
I understand that other monstrous mounts have 50 mm bases but, these are not easy bases to get a hold of.
This was a no-brainer, since they were set as 50mm bases way back in 6th edition on the base-size chart.

Nicodemus:

Thank for this guys. Great work getting it organized… not that we had a lot to build on from the Ravening Hordes list :wink:

~N

Grimstonefire:

@Da Crusha

I think the fearing fire thing was because it would be ruling in our favour over something where we don’t have to change to make the list playable in 8th.

That was one of the really tricky ones to resolve.

Da Crusha:


@Da Crusha
I think the fearing fire thing was because it would be ruling in our favour over something where we don't have to change to make the list playable in 8th.

That was one of the really tricky ones to resolve.


Grimstonefire
yeah I could see how difficult it would be to judge this one, at least we have high Ld, and won't have to worry about it much.

The thing that bugs me the most is the armour of the furnace, 2+ ward save against fire, its the only ruling that is unnecessarily detrimental imo.

Thommy H:

Armour of the Furnace was changed to be brought into line with the Dwarf FAQ ruling, with a similar item in the Beastman book and with another similar item in the rulebook. Essentially, it appeared to us that “immune to Flaming attacks” was being gradually changed to “2+ ward save against Flaming attacks” more or less across the board in 8th, and that Armour of the Furnace should be altered accordingly. We’re aware that the High Elves still have total immunity with one of their magic items, but that’s the only counter example around by the looks of things.

Originally the Taurus was going to be nerfed in the same way, but it was deemed appropriate to leave it totally immune given the background. So swings and roundabouts, really.

Baggronor:

The thing that bugs me the most is the armour of the furnace, 2+ ward save against fire, its the only ruling that is unnecessarily detrimental imo.
I would point out that the Armour is actually better now, as it gives the wearer a 2+ ward against Flaming Attacks, not 'fire-based weapons and spells'. Before, it would have offered immunity to Warpfire Throwers, Fireballs, etc, but would have done nothing against a flaming cannonball for example. Now, you get a 2+ ward save and the Taurus is completely immune ;)
The only problem I have with Bull centaurs following ALL of the rules of cavalry is our most holy and elite bull centaurs now fear fire.
Yeah, this also came up, but it was the general consensus that we didn't want to actually add additional rules. If we had done, we would have added all kinds of stuff (and we had some pretty cool ideas :)) but that wasn't the point of the errata.

Thommy H:

The risk as well is that by introducing too many caveats, you defeat the purpose of reclassifying them as cavalry in the first place. They can already use additional hand weapons like infantry, so you don’t want to keep piling on the exceptions - we could have just given them Swiftstride and +1 armour save if we wanted to do that, but making them cavalry is an elegant solution to an old problem. I myself was the one who raised the point about them fearing Flaming Attacks when we were writing this, but I was convinced to leave it alone for the sake of simplicity.

As out of character as it is, there are a few things to remember: firstly, it’s not that hard to shove something in the unit that causes Fear (like a Bull Centaur character with the Shrieking Blade) or you could give them the Banner of Eternal Flame - it would take a harsh opponent to rule that a unit fears one of its own abilities! And, if all else fails, they’re testing on Ld 9 anyway. They’re quite unlikely to ever suffer too many ill effects from this.

cornixt:

You could say that they are afraid of impure fire that is not blessed by Hashut. Or something.

blowie:

Good errata. As I would expect for the most part.

IMO, shame that we can no longer us the Banner of Slavery to re roll Animosity test. Or have I miss read it?

Thommy H:

You could never use it for that.

Da Crusha:

well, sounds good I’ll start using it.

Niibl:

I think that making Bull centaurs monstrous infantry instead of cavalry would have been the simplest solution. No “…in all aspects but they use weapons like infantry”, no fear of fire (and on the downside no additional save). Sure, it would be in conflict with centigors and they would be the only 1W, cav.-base monstrous infantry but these factors are all irrelevant for the rule and therefore no additinal explanation would be needed.
It would also be more fitting for BULLcentaurs IMHO.

I’m just curious, why was the 4 models=1 rank line put ito the amendments?

Grimstonefire:

It was a clarification that the 4 wide rule is unchanged.

Kered:

I have been muling over the different troop types and I think that the one which suit bull centaurs are best are monstrous beasts(the only main problem is montrous ranks.) or just infantry with swift stride rule how ever much I would like the +1 to the armour save, I’m interested in what other people think would be best.

Sorry if that was a bit off topic.

Over all it’s a good clarification on things for the new edition I’ll be sure to refer to it in games.

Niibl:

It was a clarification that the 4 wide rule is unchanged.

Grimstonefire
x.x
Yes..err..No, I mean why wasn't the 4 wide rule dropped with the amendments (in the spirit of standardisation and simplyfication etc.)? Wouldn't it have been more reasonable drop it as an obsolete artefact from good old times?
As I intend to field blunderbusses five wide, I just fear that I miss some important detail.