Ok I have a couple of basic questions. I may just be over looking something or not fully understanding it.

1.) The new Rider of the dead profile and rules. It says they're cavalry now and I could find nothing on them saying they weren't. So I assume they get the +1 attack and knock down now. Ok here is where it gets odd for me. The horse is just a horse so that means its defense 4 even though its a ghost as well? Also it says the riders come with shields and are defense 7 would this make them 8 or leave them at seven already included? The dead models on foot are defense 7 and can buy a shield bumping them up to an 8. All they other models in the game that come with shields already have the defense included in the profile. This can make a silly situation (as I understand it now anyway) where you have a calvery rider of the dead and he is D7 and his mount D4 and when an arrow kills the mount the rider that is D7 mounted would fall to the ground and be D8 now... I hope I'm missing something. HAHA

2.) Another thing I noticed in the kingdoms of men book is that riders of rohan now come with bows by default. I think this is completely absurd. Does this mean that because of the 33% rule you can no longer field a rider of rohan army without including the Eorl guys...

I haven't noticed any other silly things in the new books yet but I'm trying to wrap my head around these two things.

_________________
http://purplesoundswargaming.blogspot.com/

I'm not sure about your first point, despite my misgivings of actually making AotD cavalry, as I'm not overly familiar with the AotD mechanics. As to the second question, Riders of Rohan have always come with bows. It's why GW have suggested over the years that if you have too many RoR that would bump you over the bow limit, you only count the RoR models that are firing their bows, all others discard their bows for the game.

The oddity in the Army/Riders of the dead is that GW was lazy and transferred the profiles straight from the old book with respect to the stats and then willy nilly added wargear to the riders and not modifying the stats while making te wargear options for the foot guys which will llet THEM get to D8.

I remember the good old days when wargear meant nothing for the AotD. Whether they had a spear or shield or sword, they all just counted as hand weapons in close combat, as it was the ghostly quality of the weapons rather than their deadliness themselves which characterised them. Then there were horses and plenty of misgiving but it was accepted because it didn't make them cavalry, just gave them a longer movement. Now it seems they're just typical undead.

there is a simple way to get past the 33% limit in a rohan all mounted army : rohan royal guard on horse. they are only 3 points more and probably just worth it for the little bonuses they have. games workshop dont let you have all bows in a rohan army because you would just end up kiting the enemy around the battle field. if you really want an all RoR army just ask your opponent if they dont mind, so long as they get to have more bows then there should be no problem (unless you just camp...). on your first point, the riders of the dead are stupid, not really in keeping with the background, why would some poor mountain dwellers have horses, and even more to the point why would they bring them into a fortress and have them use up food? they are just included for them to make money and are really just gw being lazy as was already said above, they keep them as they are in wotr and are being sold.

_________________
"fool of a took" gandalf

I've been wondering another thing: why does a dwarf ranges pay THREE points for an ordinary bow? It makes absolutely no sense!

First: context. It seems kind of outrageous to me that Dwarf Rangers can shoot as well as human rangers or Elves. It's just un-Tolkien. So maybe the points mitigate that a bit.
Second: I recall from a while back, somebody did the math, and the extra range at S2 was worth the points. However, this was for LoME games with the "long march to the middle". The new scenarios probably make it less worthwhile.

You pay at least one point for the upgraded shoot value. 2 if you compare it to Haradrim or Wood Elf upgrades.

_________________
"Leave Sauron to me."
If you're in the Raleigh, NC area, let me know.

But it's not quite an "upgrade", right? It's another model. Rangers of Gondor have higher Fight, lower Def and a free boost to shoot value compared to a Warrior of Minas Tirith with a bow. Orc Trackers have lower Def and better shooting value (compared to Mordor Orc with bow) and costs less.
When even Elves pay less for Str 3 bows, and all models with throwing weapons option pay less, I just don't get why Rangers pay three for both...

Eh? Dead horses don't eat

Compare the stats of the human and dwarf rangers, you will see that the dwarf ranger with bow is accurately priced especially as the D5 dwarf makes a lot of difference in a shooting match.

Still on the topic of odd things in the new books i noticed the white council saruman seems to have incredible ranges on some of his spells. Is that an error or has he always been like that (i don't have the fall of the necromancer book to compare)?

Yes, it's one of the good things about being good, you're more powerful than your evil self.

_________________
"Leave Sauron to me."
If you're in the Raleigh, NC area, let me know.

they were alive before they were dead though, and they were all alive when they entered the mountain

_________________
"fool of a took" gandalf

Men do not eat the same food as horses and just because they lived in mountains does not mean there is no grass anywhere, besides men can eat horses which is why they are dead If you look at the film closely you will also see chariots in carvings, need horses to pull them

yes but why would you take horse into the mountain, they had no need of them their and they had no desire to leave because they went in their to escape gondor. also if you live on a mountain or nearby you probably wouldnt use chariots or have that many horses come to that, it would be unsutable for the area they were in. the only horses they might have had would be to pull carts, and would not be used as war horses. also why would the horses come back from the dead? they werent cursed!! thats animal cruelty right there.

_________________
"fool of a took" gandalf

The Dead had horses, as Tolkien tells us (through Legolas).


- Legolas, The Passing of the Grey Company

Also if you look carefully I think you can see some of the Dead on horses in the Return of the King, although it's quite hard to spot.

_________________
C.A.P.T.A.I.N. = Crazy And Proud To Admit It Now
http://chrisgomhobbyblog.blogspot.com/

i take it back then, maybe they did have horses, lol

_________________
"fool of a took" gandalf

The riders of the dead are listed as 7 D because they are not "expert riders" like all the Rohan Heroes "Theoden" and the such. So they do not benefit from the +1 defense while mounted.

What? That doesn't make sense it this situation, The Rohirrim's expert Rider mean they can use shields and bows whilst mounted, the Riders of the Dead don't have bows. Every other mounted model in the game, gains a +1 to its defence when it carries a shield.

_________________
"I am the Flying Spagetti Monster. Thou shall have no other monsters before me"
-FSM.