Three questions came up during the last War of the Ring session thst I would love to some agreement on.
1. If Tremor is cast, all formations within 6" of the caster are affected. Does that include the caster's formation? In essence, would the spellcaster be tremoring himself?

2. If I roll off and win a heroic duel and don't kill the enemy hero, does the enemy hero now get to roll the chart and try and kill off my hero? This came up when I heroic dueled vs Elrond with my Troll. I won the duel, but didn't score enough hits on the chart to kill him, So, my opponent said he now got to roll on the chart and see if Elrond got a change to kill my troll.

3. Does my hero have to be in base contact with an enemy hero to heroic duel that enemy hero? I had a situation where Gothmog was in my formation but not in base contact with Galadriel. My opponent said I could NOT use Gothmog even though our formations were in contact. On this one I am going to tell you my opinion and say I can because the I believe the book states only the formations have to be touching not the hero dueling each other.

1. Yes
2. No, Elrond doesn't get to fight, how can he? You roll a number of dice equal to the difference of the values thrown during the duel - Elrond would be on minus numbers!
3. Exactly as you say.

As has been said:

1. Yes, the rules don't say otherwise, which may or may not have been an oversight. Some people think it was intended to negate the caster's formation, but there is no evidence to support that.

2. No, the rules say nothing about that and, as was said, you roll on the chart a number of times equal to the difference between your rolls and fight values (D6+F+1 for attacker and D6+F for defender), so they would have to let you roll more times, if they wanted to play it that way, lol

3. As you have said, they merely need to have formations touching. If you wanted a houserule that makes it "more believable", as long as the companies are touching (including corner to corner), they could duel, but the rulebook states formations need to be touching only.

Is your opponent new to the game? Are you new to it? If the answer to the first is no, then the player seems a little unscrupulous and if the answer to the latter is yes, they are teaching you poorly and being unfair.

Regarding the spell, common sense usually says "why would you do something that hurts yourself". However, in WotR there are already spells which provide a "benefit" while at the same time causing the formation damage (Strength from Corruption, for example). So it is possible GW intended this to be a two-edged sword.

Considering FAQs are the most rare of rarities coming from GW we probably just need to wait until someone uses it in an official BR in WD.

_________________
Wait ye the finish! The fight is not yours.
Beowulf

http://TacticsInMiniature.com

I appreciate the comments to the questions I had. I am not new to the game and play with a group of about 12 since the War of the Ring came out. What irritates me is every time I play these guys there is some rule question or some new interpretation of the rule that changes how the game is played. For example, the "in order to duel, your heros have to be touching" really irritated me and almost cost the game. Again, wish there was a FAQ. I can't tell you how many games I get into where people tell me if I cast Tremor it hurts my own formation. Now why would GW do that? Seriously. If GW meant tremor to do your own caster's formation's harm, they'd so so, like strength from corruption. The other interpretation of if I don't kill the enemy hero in a duel he gets t roll the chart and try and kill mine, just makes me laugh. That is also what I am talking about when it comes to people conjuring up a strange interpretation of the rules. So, you can either can [word deleted] and not play anyone or just make your point and move on and play an uphill battle.

Again,

Really appreciate the answers to the questions I had. When I play someone and it's been a while, I'll usually study the book for a couple of days and play some mini scenarious to iron out the tactics and usually prefer the literal interpretation of the book...if it's in the book you can do it, if it's not, then you can't.

Still, GW does leave ambiguities in the game. For example, some abilities allow another formation to use a epic hero's might (like Saruman). When i played my last game, I tried to do this with some crossbows that had no hero. I was told I couldn't use Saruman's might because I did not have a hero in that formation and an ordinary foot soldier can't use might so you can't. I still disagree because the book doesn't say "a hero in a formation", and only mentioned another jsut another formation" but I let it go anyway knowing it cost me a tactical advantage.

I look forward to a FAQ but I don't think we are going to get one soon. Battlehosts has been planned for some time and I have read the book already and there's no FAQ we've been looking for but we do get some cool new miniatures. Perhaps a FAQ will be coming after the supplement is released this week.

This is what irritates me about the game, or rather the gamers it attracts, because the rules are so long they don't get read properly and players make up rules that they think they have read or believe them to be, your Duel propblem is the classic example where a quick read of the rule would have given the correct answer. I do agree with you on Tremor to, it just doesn't sit right with me.

If it doesn't explicitly omit the unit from the rules, unless there is an FAQ or errata stating otherwise, the unit is affected. That's the way that GWs games have always been played and meant to be played. It's unfortunate, but true. Having said that, an FAQ is out now and it states that the unit is exempt from the spell, which makes it somewhat more useful

With the Overlord special rule, there is no question. You are right. It states a formation may use the might as if it were its own. You essentially make a normal troop a character or something by giving them might to use. Also, if it ever comes up with an opponent again, point out that it is in tactica by GW as well as their battle reports and there is no ruling stating that it is not played this way. 3 key points backing you up against their whinge of "you need a hero". A hero gets their own damned might anyway!

It amuses me that you think one isn't coming out for some time as one did earlier today, lol A News & Rumour thread has been posted and it's been linked to in the WotR FAQ? thread.

hithero: I agree wholeheartedly. The game is great fun, some of the rules did not rectifying/amending/explaining, but common sense or readin the book properly can solve a lot of those.

The new WOTR FAQ says that Tremor doesn't affect the caster's formation! Check out the Astronomican on GW website if you haven't seen it yet.

_________________
Better, though difficult, the right way to go, than wrong, though easy, where the end is woe. John Bunyan - Pilgrim's Progress

as per the GW FAQ Tremor does not effect his own unit ..... the wizard is strong enough to control it.

it says in the rulebook that if the heroes are not in base to base then they cannot dual but they also said to make it more believable move them into base to base contact. SOOOO make your games epic and move them

As for the Dualing whoever wins the dual rolls on the chart. the loser does not do anything....

Can't beleive the timing...as you will receive! Th FAQ is out and it was a good read and I am really glad to see that rule about Tremor clarified. The game is really is really fun. What I think my group's issue we don't have house rules. We don't like to do that with any of the games and I think we all think we've got the rulebook interpreted correctly. However, I do think our group should actually write down an ambiguity and write an answer to it and post it in the store so we all play off the same sheet of music. Call it house rules or not, I think it'll help because we tend to bound back and forth between many other games and sometimes don't always remember what we settled on before but the questions I've been asking have never been quite resolved and it's good to know that about 90% of the time I've had the same interpretations as you all...that makes me think I am reading the book correctly.

Now I am off to the store to get the new supplement, terrain, and miniatures...Go ISENGARD!