Saw 'Em Up: I rolled 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3. Let's assign letters to them to make things more clear: 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b. I have the following groups: 1a, 2a | 1b, 2b | 2a, 3a | 2b, 3b | 1a, 2a, 3a | 1b, 2b, 3b. You thought that was it? Nah, man. 1a, 2b | 1b, 2a | 2a, 3b | 2b, 3a | 1a, 2a, 3b | 1a, 2b, 3a | 1a, 2b, 3b | 1b, 2a, 3a | 1b, 2a, 3b | 1b, 2b, 3a. I deal 3 x 40 = 120 wounds before being kicked out. ...yeah, no. If statement: "You can make a group of 2 or more dice". "a" group = just 1. You don't resolve it twice, the same way you can't add to your characteristics or make bonus actions twice with other abilities. You exclude duplicates and anything you can't group with the others. Multiply the quantity of dice by 3 to get the damage. Aka: "Can you make a group? How many unique dice are in it? Deal 3x that number as damage. Ability resolved."

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

I LOVE this. You are amazing and I totally agree

Another rules area commonly missed is for Ability Dice: 1. Quads and Triples can bs used for abilities that require less dice. 2. Ability sets cannot be split. *Quads turning into doubles. 3. Each set of ability dice can only have 1 Wild dice added.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

This is true. I’ll pin the comment for educational purposes! Thank :)

I have a feeling I'll be thinking of this vid as one of the classics for a long time.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Thanks man… unless it’s an ominous warning that a “WARGAMES ON TOAST, DEBUNKED!” Video is coming up… then I guess I retire?

WGOT: "If you need to add additional words to a rule to make a ruling go in your favor you are likely not interpreting that rule correctly" Rule: "Reactions are things a fighter can do during an enemy fighter's activation" WGOT: "they can ONLY be used in an enemy fighter's activation" Also WGOT: "can is optional language... it is not a requirement in any sense of the word" All rules arguments aside thanks for addressing a lot of sticking points! The initiative, disengage, and objective controlling are all crucial rulings that may not be obvious to new players. Nice video and discussion! 😃

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

The “can” in that sense would be in reference to not being forced to use it. It may be used, it does t have to be used. You have the choice to use it, you are not required to use it. At least in my interpretation of that sentence, and the context in question :) I do see your point though! Put together like that is rather comical XD

For 'saw em up,' I interpreted it to mean only 1 group could be made (or chosen, if you do roll a 1,2 4,5,6 for example) because if multiple groups could be made the ruling should read "for each group of 2 or more dice in consecutive order..."

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

The inclusion of “that group” at the end is the cause of the multi-group condrum! But yes, I do agree that a single group would make sense especially when you consider previous rule writing from GW. Each group would fit them perfectly

It is honestly amazing how many of these strangle little rules and rulings I've managed to be affected by during my short (for now) time spent playing Warcry. Good video

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Warcry is mostly very straightforward and slick, but it likes to trip you up with nuance from time to time haha

I LOVE this video. I would legit like to see a 2 minute video walking step by step through initiative phase. I played in a tournament recently with a lot of ppl who places highly at NOVA and I think we all still messed it up lol

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

I wasn’t lying when I said initiative is BY FAR the most goofed part of Warcry. At Warhammer World SO MANY people got it wrong.

Stop yelling at me.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

NEVAH!

this video is ridiculously helpful

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

I am glad to be of assistance!

Nice video. May i suggest another misunderstood rule with khorne's reaction: When an attacker rolls critical hit, it adds one damage to the defender.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Thank you! So many reactions are kinda weird, and easily borked for sure

The crit vs hit difference is news to me. Cheers for the heads up.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Aye! Love your work man! Glad to be of assistance :)

@AlainPilon

6 ай бұрын

@@wargamesontoast BTW, after hearing it, I was looking for info about it but couldnt find anything. Where did you see this?

@wargamesontoast

6 ай бұрын

In FAQ it mentions the differentiation. Q: Some rules add to or subtract from the damage points allocated by hits from an attack action. In cases like this, does this apply to every hit and every critical hit scored by that attack action? A: No. Where an ability affects critical hits, it will specify this. www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Ex0btv3NPJxXzjMp.pdf I am aware the example in the question isn’t catch all, but the response to the question very much is.

I absolutely did the Initiative wrong. Learned something new!

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

I’m telling you, it’s the most missed rule in Warcry! Glad I could help

re: monsta killas says "a group" not "those groups" as well as "that group" (meaning 1 group) instead of "those groups" implying multiples. so even if you could make 2 groups, you would have to pick 1 to select dice from. so this seems like a clear "pick one group of dice" to me

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

I agree, although “That Group” does have multiple connotations. “Each group” would be a more traditional GW language to denote multiples, as opposed to “that group”, however.

This isn't so much a rules question, but to me picking second for Hidden Vault seems advantageous because you have more information of the board state at that point in the match.

@wargamesontoast

5 ай бұрын

It is absolutely an advantage, sadly you have very little control over who picks second!

@wargamesontoast Saw 'Em Up: make "a group", not groups, therefore make one group. When you allocate dmg, it's for each dice in "that group", not another one. Also there is explicitly stated that you exclude any duplicates, therefore rolling 112233 counts (after exclusion if duplicates) as 123.

@wargamesontoast

5 ай бұрын

Nailed it!

31:35 in your example of two groups of 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3: since it reads "excluding any duplicates" you would only have one group of 1, 2, 3. Good question about making two groups from 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 - but I still think you can only make one group, so you would go with the highest number of consecutive ordered dice: 4, 5, 6.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Without a comma, one could interpret the “excluding any duplicates” as only applying to one group, which opens up the potential to have a second group with those same numbers. The rule is a minefield of language, punctuation, and ambiguity. So much so I would legitimately agree with either side equally until an FAQ comes out because it is bonkers beyond belief. It’s all very silly, but I thought this rule was perfect for getting a community discussion going about arguably the weirdest ability in warcry :)

Of coursse You Mesin' wins. Otherwise OMDB would say that you count as having three timess the wounds, not count as three fighters. I can't imagine anyone trying to argue that in good faith...

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Abstract concepts are easy to argue in good faith, even if they end up being incorrect

also another rule that came up when playing a game last week was do modifiers stack from abilities. For example, if a vigilor uses the guided lightning ability on a model for 1 attack against that model can another vigilor then use that same ability to add an additonal extra attack against that same enemy model?

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

As far as I am aware there are no anti-stacking rules in Warcry. Unless the ability explicitly stated it doesn’t stack, then it stacks. For example, in Dispossessed, a model could use Over My Dead Body, wait, and then Over My Body to gain the effects twice and become an incredibly chonky boy. In your case I believe it would be the same idea - it would stack and then even stack with other boosts - such as from Onslaught.

wait so just to confirm, I don't know if i'm getting this right lol. If you have initiative you can choose to let your opponent activate first but by doing so they don't gain initiative right?

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

That is exactly right! They are two separate things which is suuuuper important for a few missions!

Our group treat saw them up as follow: you can make any number of groups as long as they do not contain already used values so eg: with 111256 you can make 12 and 56 for 12 damage total but if you got 112233 you can only make 123 for 9 damage total as any other results would be duplicates

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

That’s an interesting way to run it. I think it is meant to be a single group, not multiple. GW tend to use “each” when denoting multiples, so if GW meant multiple groups they’d have used “each group” not “that group”. Ultimately I think it’s far too ambiguous for its own good and 100% needs an FAQ!

Question. Can you explain having someone pinned into a wall in more detail? Do you only have to touch their base an the opponents model has to be touching a wall. An that makes them pinned?

@wargamesontoast

5 ай бұрын

It’s not an official term, but in short, what you said is right. It’s very difficult to legally disengage in that situation - if not impossible

Pretty sure for Saw ‘em up it’s only one group. The wording of “if you can make a group”. The “a” suggests it is only one, not multiple. The end which says “each dice in that group” would suggest that if you do have two groups, you get to choose which one to use. So the example of 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 - you would choose the 4, 5, 6 group because it does more damage. The 1 & 2 end up not being used.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Excellent answer!

From my point of view the Damage Allocation fulfils the video topic description. Designer and a book editor used same word to describe different things: defining terminology, explaining using an example, and describing the algorithm... Also a FAQ does not clear that problem as the description there describes different thing. It affects the reactions for skinks and for some Chaos factions.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Is this in reference to allocating damage one point at a time, and the potential for Skinks and Wildercorps to disengage after only taking a single point of damage?

Did not know that about the person with initiative choosing who goes first! Another fun rule is in Skabbik's Plaguepack. "Pick this fighter, or pick a number of objectives visible to this fighter equal to half the value of this ability (rounding up). Allocate a number of damage points equal to the value of this ability to all enemy fighters within 3" of either this fighter or those objectives." But objectives have no physical presence so what does it mean for an objective to be "visible"? Answer I think is that like Saw 'Em Up the rules just don't cover it adequately. Is the objective the token? Is the objective the exact centre of the token? (for Saw 'em Up if I had to rule it, I'd say that it specifies "a group" and "that group" singular not "groups" so 1,2 and 4,5,6 would cause a max of 9 not 15. That also dispenses with the duplicate issue of having 1,2 twice. But you have to lean too heavily on "a group" to say that this is definitely correct, since that could plausibly be explained by poor wording not by intent. Still, I think it's the best we have)

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Glad to be of assistance with initiative! Objectives maaaaay have been given more of a physical presence in the FAQ but I’m not entirely sure?? I recall some rules been added to make it so you can’t stand on some things. That might just be treasure tokens though. “That group” has connotations of multiple groups based on context, and the context of this rule is all over the place. I genuinely don’t have a definitive answer for this one, it needs an FAQ. My stance is “whatever my opponent interprets it as” currently because it’s a minefield haha

@andrewcunningham9256

7 ай бұрын

@@wargamesontoast I reckon "that group" allows the possibility multiple groups but doesn't specify that it's possible, but "a group" specifies one group.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

I agree. “Each group” would be standard GW lingo to denote multiple groups after “a group”

Rule question: shield of Azyr and Ignite weapon. IW counts a miss as a crit hit. SoA counts a critical hit as a hit. Does that work against the IW crit hit since that crit hit was originally a miss?

@wargamesontoast

5 ай бұрын

The attacking player would decide the order of operations, so if he rolled no natural crits and a miss whilst using Ignite, the VFS player could dictate Shield goes first and then resolve Ignite to sneak a crit through Excellent question!

@spiegel487

5 ай бұрын

@@wargamesontoast Much obliged!

On that disengage rule does that mean you can trap flyers? I know it says you cant jump...but their normal move is fly right?

@wargamesontoast

3 ай бұрын

That is correct!

Question for you. My Seraphon can turn two crits into hits with the reaction. My friend has an abilit that turns all hits into crits. So... which comes first? I would assume he would pick mine to go first because he can then completely negate my reaction.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

This is a sequencing thing. Since this is the fight phase and he is attacking, he gets to choose which effect goes first since they both seem to go at the same time. If he rolled any natural crits, your reaction would work on them. However, his ability to turn hits into crits could avoid your Reaction as he could choose to have your reaction to trigger first, before crits turned to hits. Hope that makes sense?

@kyle857

7 ай бұрын

It does. Thank you!

i have a question; if you are playing a FFA with 3 or more players, could you then react to player 2's reaction if it's player 3's turn?

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

I have no idea…Warcry gets CRAZY in games about 2 players. I think there is an argument both ways, with a leaning towards yes…maybe haha

I have an activation question. Let's say you have 3 fighters and your opponent has 2. A1, a2, a3 for you and b1, b2 for them. Round one, activate a1 - b1 - a2 - b2 - a3 In Round 2, do you have to activate each fighter in that same sequence or can you activate for example: a2 - b1 - a1...?

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

You can activate in whatever order you want :)

@ChibsterofNurgy

7 ай бұрын

@@wargamesontoast Awesome. Thanks for the video and the response.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

@@ChibsterofNurgyglad to be of assistance! Thanks for watching

ive rewatched the part about initiative for a solid 30 min now and i still dont understand what the wrong OR right way to do it is. my head is spinning and i dont even know why. I feel like youre saying "most people say it works like X but actually it works like X, common mistake" I feel incredibly insane. What do you mean i shouldnt roll off after a tie? the rules even say you do. Im actually losing my mind here, holy shit please help me

@wargamesontoast

3 ай бұрын

Okay, so you roll off after a tie. BUT you only roll off once in the process even if you tie again after wild dice have been allocated. What a lot of people do is roll off if they tie on the initial roll AND If they end up being tied after wild dice. This is wrong. Hope that helps

I dont understand the initiative explanation. I've only played two times so obviously I dont know the rules well. But doesnt the core rules specifically show an example where one player has the initiative then after wild dice the player who does not have initiative creates a tie so they roll off? It says something like "the gambit pays off and player B now gets the initiative!"

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Yes! So if there was no tie prior to wild dice allocation, making a tie forces a roll off to determine who has initiative. If players tied before wild dice allocation, if it is still a tie (regardless of the amount singles each player has, has changed), you DO NOT roll off. To seize in that instance, you must BEAT them.

@bigplap

7 ай бұрын

Ahhh! Okay that makes total sense I just misinterpreted you then. Silly me! @@wargamesontoast

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

@bigplap I probably could have explained that one a smidge better!

@draft_animal

7 ай бұрын

@@wargamesontoast Sorry to be the dense one in the room, but I'm still confused by this. Could you kindly give an example of what you mean by "if it is still a tie (regardless of the amount singles each player has, has changed)" please?

Question. So on the sticky objectives if i have 3 models on. An take control of it. Next turn i leave. My opponent has to put 4 models on the objective to take control of it?

@wargamesontoast

5 ай бұрын

No, if you move all your models off the objective they only need to get 1 model on it to take it. Sticky just means you retain control after you’ve left :) hope that helps

Something that is a huge issue is people not reading the rules. I've judged several games and top players would joke about how they've never read the rulebook line by line. They would pay hundreds to travel for events and just not. Sometimes if they got an answer they didn't like on how something worked they'd keep asking people til someone agreed with them. Many people also don't know how to search things like faq documents. For example, somebody asked in a blood bowl group "how do I know this doesn't give spp? I didn't see a rule for it." Like, there's literally a list of what does give spp. I don't want to sound old but I feel like the smartphone generations are having increasing trouble with basic rules comprehension.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Yeah this is super common. Instant access to sites like Warcrier make checking rules instantaneous, but if you don’t already know the rule to some degree, you won’t know to check if you’re correct until it’s too late

First comment yay!

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

A King amongst hedonites!

"Make a group" not make groups. So wouldn't that mean you pick A group for those Lil monsta killaz.

@wargamesontoast

7 ай бұрын

Last line mentions that group, which implies the potential for multiple groups. Does that change your answer? I’m not saying your wrong, merely introducing a potential missed variable :)

Love what you are trying to do.. but I find your explanations on initiative more confusing than the rules.. perhaps spend some time on real examples to help… and left here way more confused…

@wargamesontoast

4 ай бұрын

I may make a video covering just initiative because it is a common rule that gets done wrong :)