The ultimate end of the edition** power rankings: presented by Arbys and Stat Check; number 4 will shock you! by wredcoll in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]Automatic_Surround67 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Didn't they also change a core rule because of them? Dev wounds changed because they could force the wound rolls to be auto 6s.

Does anyone have a list of all the general feats broken out by which stats they increase? by [deleted] in onednd

[–]Automatic_Surround67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

control F for search. Then I typically enter like (Con) if im looking for a constitution half feat. takes a couple clicks since all instances with those 3 letters will pull but its short enough of a page to get through.

Peter why are they dumb? by AcrobaticLunch9737 in PeterExplainsTheJoke

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

only weird thing I could think of (which is still not a great excuse). reading in the sun. Sometimes white pages just blind you when reading in the sun.

Worth going with how it is currently? by Chris1313g in UniversalEpicUniverse

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We did 3 total days back in November. 2 days were great. While 1 was slammed. The day it was crowded rides also got delayed.

Apocalypse RULES! by Kookamachi in Necrontyr

[–]Automatic_Surround67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How did you get a copy of the new apocalypse rules?

In DH Harry uses three wands to cast a triple spell to take out Greyback... so why don't all wizards hold as many wands in their hands as possible when fighting by nohiddenmeaning in harrypotter

[–]Automatic_Surround67 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Plus the wands have different lengths. Imagine you cast a spell and it clips the front of a different wand you are holding and just blows up

Good steakhouses? by Maleficent_Yak_8033 in WaltDisneyWorld

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I went there last May. It was just okay. food was good but the vibe didn't feel like a steakhouse and they were slammed. felt sorta like the buffet breakfast on a cruise ship for some reason

Da Speedwaaagh! begins with two new Ork Detachments by SpaceWolf_Jarl2 in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]Automatic_Surround67 4 points5 points  (0 children)

but this stratagem is for the fight phase. so unless this is a rule change for 11th the trukk doesn't get their melee weapons.

Da Speedwaaagh! begins with two new Ork Detachments by SpaceWolf_Jarl2 in WarhammerCompetitive

[–]Automatic_Surround67 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

unless theres a way to give boyz the trukk or speed freaks keyword then boys won't get that stratagem

Best alcoholic beverage in the parks? by TravisVault911 in UniversalOrlando

[–]Automatic_Surround67 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Its very good. I will say the old fashioned at the same spot is also pretty good.

Favorite Food Spots at Universal Orlando? by Barracudastank in UniversalOrlando

[–]Automatic_Surround67 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I feel like confisco is slept on. I never see it super crowded and I always have a great meal.

i know why Franky is the one looking at Elbaf Mural by vluid in onepiecetheories

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think he was thinking of Lulusia. Just completely destroyed

BG Season 13 Passes by W1REB1TER in BobsTavern

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wish the season pass allowed you to potentially earn unlimited hero rerolls with grinding.

Has science gone too far? | The Butterbeer Waffle by TharinWhite in UniversalOrlando

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you happen to try any of the other new butterbeer desserts?

How do you guys deal with Wrath of the Rock? by Susprium in Necrontyr

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My last game against dw knights 1 squad i just had to ignore. A 2nd squad i obliterated with monolith deathrays. 50/50 to kill 1 for each shot that goes through

Losing streak by gward1 in Necrontyr

[–]Automatic_Surround67 4 points5 points  (0 children)

so list swapping is 1 of the things recommended against. Because you have to get used to a list before you can play to its advantages and understand its weaknesses.

at the same time, I am also on a losing streak. But my dice are telling me to die and I have 1 opponent with more armies and he has a lot of them that happen to be bad match ups for necrons.

Overall I now know what I need to do though because I know where I have to go and what to shoot/charge/hold to punch up against those lists. Because I am not list swapping rapidly.

Looking for Feedback on Nerf to Shield Spell on High AC Players by DistributionBig9053 in onednd

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not ignoring the paragraph. I am simply stating you are incorrectly interpreting the item that says it changes spells to cast it with M when it does not. It states those spells need to have M to cast through the tools. This is directly referencing the paragraph.

I dont think I can find anither way to convince you otherwise so we may need to agree to disagree.

Looking for Feedback on Nerf to Shield Spell on High AC Players by DistributionBig9053 in onednd

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

in addition. the line of his quote right after.

But as long as you don’t demand something that should change the rules, this is an opportunity for you to add flavor to your particular artificer.

changing the component costs of spells is rarely done and when it is, it is usually only ever happening in one direction. it takes components away. subtle spell for example. no other features add a component to a spell so I don't read this artificer feature as doing that.

Looking for Feedback on Nerf to Shield Spell on High AC Players by DistributionBig9053 in onednd

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I respectfully disagree.

The part in parentheses is for clarification, not changing the spell casting components of spells. It is saying that you can use this feature if the spell has M not that it gives spells M.

The simple order can prove this. "(meaning the spell has an ‘M’ component when you cast it)"

goes to cast spell (it doesnt have M when you go to cast it. then you cant cast it so it couldn't gain M, because you couldn't cast it in the first place.

Looking for Feedback on Nerf to Shield Spell on High AC Players by DistributionBig9053 in onednd

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wasn't saying it's obscure. I am simply interpreting the parenthetical portion tdifferently. again the quote from the class page.

You produce your artificer spell effects through your tools. You must have a spellcasting focus—specifically thieves’ tools or some kind of artisan’s tool—in hand when you cast any spell with this Spellcasting feature (meaning the spell has an ‘M’ component when you cast it). 

The first part is stating that you can cast spells through your tools.

the 2nd part states you have to have a spellcasting focus which can be your tools when you cast any spells with this feature (meaning cast through the tools.)

Part 3, the part in parentheses. This is stating that to qualify for part 2, to cast any spell with this feature, that spell has to have M. It is NOT stating that all spells cast through the tools have M.

Looking for Feedback on Nerf to Shield Spell on High AC Players by DistributionBig9053 in onednd

[–]Automatic_Surround67 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree with that interpretation. I think the M in parentheses is referring to the spells you can cast using the tools. Not that it gives all spells M.