Wargs & Cavelry Charge

spuds4ever · **Posted:** Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:35 pm

Yes. But they don't knock the trolls to the ground and the cavalry I don't think knock over wargs either as they have not got a bigger base size.

whafrog · **Posted:** Sun Apr 25, 2010 12:54 pm

General Elessar wrote:

I played a game yesterday, and I encountered this problem: do cavalry get the bonuses for charging Wild Wargs?

Yes, and they knock to ground. The rules (p50) refer to warriors on foot.

General Elessar wrote:

(and while we're on the subject, how about charging trolls?)

No, again p50, "except for models with a Strength of 6 or more". Nothing to do with base size.

General Elessar · **Posted:** Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:46 pm

Thanks spuds4ever and whafrog. One last thing: does a Great Eagle count as a Monstrous Mount? I don't it does, but I thought I'd check.

whafrog · **Posted:** Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:10 pm

Gwaihir doesn't, so I don't think the other eagles would.

General Elessar · **Posted:** Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:45 pm

whafrog wrote:

Gwaihir doesn't, so I don't think the other eagles would.

Ok, thanks.

General Elessar · **Posted:** Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:28 pm

Sorry to complicate matters, but I found a quote by accident that says Gwaihir is a monstrous mount. On page 53 of the main rules manual (in the Mumakil section), "Mounts which are also heroes (such as Gwaihir)".

Explanation?

Highlordell · **Posted:** Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:39 pm

I always thought Gwaihir was a MM, i mean, a fell beast is and they are similar in size. I swear it said somewhere in the rulebook, but don't take my word for it.

spuds4ever · **Posted:** Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:55 pm

Very good question. I don't think Gwaihir counts as a monstrous mount other wise I think it would specifically specify that he is (like with Shelob and the Spider queen). Also, he is technically not a mount as he is not ridden. Perhaps think of him like an ent but that can move further.

whafrog · **Posted:** Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:59 pm

Usually it clarifies in the profile, but I don't see anything in Gwaihir's profile that suggests he's considered cavalry. Maybe it's in a FAQ though.

Balathor · **Posted:** Tue Apr 27, 2010 10:41 pm

Gwaihir and the eagles are not monstrous mounts and which is why they are overpriced in SBG. Back when Gwaihir could be ridden by Gandalf, he was a monstrous mount, but the ORB ended that.

Sucks, but, just house rule it and they begin to get close to worth their points.

ncea · **Posted:** Wed Apr 28, 2010 4:18 am

I thought he was a monstrous mount, cause it seems a bit stupid to make it so it can only count as a monstrous mount if someone is riding on it.. thats just a dumb rule.

Ooo i found out something

Quote:

A cavalry model comprises a rider and his mount

Quote:

some mounts are so large and powerful that they can smash through other cavalary with ease, bowling to the ground riders and mounts as if they were foot soldiers. mounts with a strength 6 or higher are classed as monstrous mounts

I realise this doesnt actually prove anything but if we can say hes a "mount" then yay hes a monstrous mount

but anyway I think we should count Gwaihir as a mount.

hithero · **Posted:** Wed Apr 28, 2010 6:37 am

Note the first two words of your quoted rule " Some mounts..." Mounts means something being ridden - eagles are not, quite simple really. Eagles used to be MM in the early days when they could carry passengers but then the only had 1A. GW took this rule out of the profile, so they no longer are.

General Elessar · **Posted:** Wed Apr 28, 2010 4:26 pm

hithero wrote:

Note the first two words of your quoted rule " Some mounts..." Mounts means something being ridden - eagles are not, quite simple really. Eagles used to be MM in the early days when they could carry passengers but then the only had 1A. GW took this rule out of the profile, so they no longer are.

So that quote I gave is "out of date"?

hithero · **Posted:** Wed Apr 28, 2010 5:02 pm

Nope, your quote is 100% correct, it's just that you have yet to realize that to be a mount a model has to have a rider - eagles do not have riders.

Mouth-of-Sauron · **Joined:** Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:14 pm **Posts:** 544

I though that Spider Queen wasn´t a monstrouse mount, couse in her rules it says clearly "BOUNCE" ....receives the bonus, AS IF SHE WAS a monstures mount, so she receives the same benefits as the MM when charging but isn´t actually one :rofl:

ncea · **Posted:** Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:56 am

why cant he carry passengers?

hithero · **Posted:** Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:42 am

Because rules don't allow it.

General Elessar · **Posted:** Thu Apr 29, 2010 2:14 pm

hithero wrote:

Nope, your quote is 100% correct, it's just that you have yet to realize that to be a mount a model has to have a rider - eagles do not have riders.

But in that case my quote isn't correct.

hithero · **Posted:** Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:05 pm

General Elessar wrote:

hithero wrote:

Nope, your quote is 100% correct, it's just that you have yet to realize that to be a mount a model has to have a rider - eagles do not have riders.

But in that case my quote isn't correct.

Why not? Explain.

General Elessar · **Posted:** Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:18 pm

This is getting confusing. I suspect we may be talking about different things. Here's the quote I'm referring to:

"On page 53 of the main rules manual (in the Mumakil section), 'Mounts which are also heroes (such as Gwaihir)'."

If that is 100% correct, like you said, then Gwaihir is a monstrous mount. But, as they don't have riders, like you also said, then they aren't mounts at all. It seems you're contradicting yourself.

Wargs & Cavelry Charge

Who is online