If you're enjoying AoS, great for you.

Now try to play at least semi-competitively, face Screaming Bell and Kairos or a single scarab swarm and insta lose with no chance to win.

1) It's a permissive rule set, so you cannot pick a number other than those provided by the dice. The possible results of a D6 are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6; Kairos does not have the ability to set the dice roll to any other number. In the Oracle of Eternity rule, if you replace "result" with "top face" you'll see how the grammar supports that interpretation. It doesn't say "a" or "any" result; the definite article indicates that the result must be drawn from the set of possible results. It's annoying that GW likes to use "dice" for both the singular and the plural, but the same logic applies regardless of the number of dice and how broadly you want to interpret the word "roll".

2) Deploying a single Tomb Swarm hidden and selecting Endure for Sudden Death, results in immediate loss because you have no models on the table.


Mod's edit:
These first two posts were off topic in "Recognition to Rick Priestley".
Still, the content has its interest and deserves a thread of its own.
Let's discuss it in another thread, with appropriate title.
Thanks,
Calisson

If you replace "result" with "top face" you have a completely different rule

The rule for both models talks about "result" and Kairos can change any "result" to any other "result". There are no restrictions in place.

The pertinent language may come in the main rules set: "Warhammer: Age of Sigmar uses six-sided dice (sometimes abbreviated to D6)." p1 main rules.

How can you change the result of a D6 to any number other than 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6? Basic logic applies: if I flip a coin, the potential exists for three results: heads, tails, or lands on its side. If I change the result, I can only select from one of those three outcomes - I can't say change the result to, say, "cereal" because that's not an option.

Don't get me wrong, AoS is utter garbage as a game and a mockery of the Fantasy player base by GW, and I emphasize with the urge to rightly ridicule and demean the stupid special rules in the warscrolls for existing model ranges, but in this case it doesn't quite apply. The rules do clearly state that the game uses D6 and there are only six possible results on a D6. Thus, you cannot choose 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, or 12 for the dice that Kairos changes, which is what the instant win formula would need, because those are not possible results.

But you don't change a result of a d6.
you change a result on the screaming bell table.

Simple answer there - the jackwad who brings that "army" gets shamed, and you never play them again.

Hmmm, yes, I guess it could be read either way.

As I said elsewhere, that this conversation is even possible demonstrates the failure of design that happened here. This wasn't some "oh a new ruleset had unintended consequences with an old book", this was all done at the same time.

Every game system has loopholes and exploits. Granted, some have more than others, and some are more egregious and inexplicable than others. AoS seems to fall in that category.

Nonetheless, games with the level of complexity required to be interesting, challenging, and fun are going to have that. No offense to those of you who enjoy "Candy Land", but such is generally the case. It's just a fact. The best designed RPG or wargame ever is still going to have ways where sufficiently motivated people can find and abuse rules exploits.

Good rules-creation is important, but it's also equally (if not more) important to choose your opponents carefully. Life is too short, and leisure time too limited, to spend gaming with douchebags.

Yes I understand that this is not generally possible in competitive tournament situations. In cases like that you should prepare yourself to tolerate more underhandedness than you ordinarily would, and respond accordingly. I will also point out that different game systems attract different kinds of gamers. I play in an Axis and Allies tourney every year at GenCon, with total strangers, and haven't run into a bad opponent yet in terms of sportsmanship and respectful behavior. I can't say the same for Warhammer Fantasy events, despite the fact that many of them have dedicated "Sportsmanship awards", while A&A events generally do not. (And that is before the advent of Age of Sigmar, obviously)

Most games manage to avoid day 0 auto-win conditions however.

For all you disparage Candy Land and games of it's ilk, Age of Sigmar is definitely at that end of the wargames complexity spectrum. Even games designed specifically to be simple like DBA or Memoir '44 have more robustness to them.

Have you played the starter box, Arq?

I would, if I could find anyone who owns it... the FLGS hasn't even bothered to open one for demo games.

If you live in Belgium, you're welcome to join me for a game

I'd take you up on that, but I'm in Ireland. I can see it working okay as a standalone boxed game on the assumption that it's all there ever will be, but it'd be like Heroquest to D&D and just leave you houserulling more additions. I am marginally tempted by the Assassin board game that's out, however.