Apology accepted and apologies if my tone came off as unfriendly.

However, I would say that it is not me that is misreading the rule (other than the specification of Heroic Actions, as opposed to just using Might).

You have quoted it many times, but the key things to take from it are: formation (not hero), may perform a Heroic Action (this is an overruling exception to the rule that only Heroes may use them, otherwise why state formation instead of simply Hero? No non-hero can use Might at all, let alone Heroic Actions: note that monsters with Might are still counted as Heroes.), use Might instead of their own (a Might value of - is still a Might value. They may use the EH's Might instead of their -). Also, although you may say about GW staff and Battel Reports, intentionally you avoided the mention of the tacitca, which I'm fairly sure was written by the developers of the game and, thusly, would be the "be-all-and-end-all" on the matter. If you wish to ignore the fact that some rules overrule others, be my guest, but it's probably better for our games that we don't play each other, lol.

To the original poster: I agree that you should discuss it with your opponent first, but looking at the rules and retaining the fact that some rules (E.G. Overlord) supercede ovthers (E.G. Heroes beign the only ones able to use Heroic Actions).

Those GW articles aren't quite right for settling any debates IMO. There are rules errors in them.

_________________
http://www.roughwotr.blogspot.com

Official End to the discussion because GW just released the new updated FAQ, which states that Overlord can be used by formations without heroes. Therefore I back down because it is finally clear

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/conte ... 5a&start=2

_________________
Coordinator of the Great British Hobbit League

On the other side we might start thinking how to play Overlord's Heroic Move on a Mumak... 3d6 in one, 3d6 in 2nd and 3d6 in 3rd directions, or maybe 9d6 in one? Well done GW

_________________
Coordinator of the Great British Hobbit League

Yeah. They tend to come out with FAQ rulings that confirm what the rulebook litterally said... then, for some reason, vent a little by leaving in gems like 'it will be obvious when the Witch-King is behind'. I guess the Mumak is going in that category.

_________________
http://www.roughwotr.blogspot.com

oh gosh, well now that moria can get dueling giants, im gonna get one soon

although i do reckon that its a bit imba with the giant and mumak. sadly gandalf the white is the only good hero with overlord, although that does give ppl reason to get him more (everyone that i know prefers G the grey cause he's so much cheaper)

this does open up a whole lot of options now, as someone with prority may think that he will get to charge the beserkers... but then you can call a heroic charge and catch him off guard... then follow up with a heroic fight to utterly wreak havoc

this does give me a good reason to get trolls back in my list (i can see a future list full of trolls/ gothmog/ durburz.... just for the hell of it)

You wouldn't be able to get duelling trolls as it specifically says "a HERO in the formation", not any old thing with a decent FV".

_________________
"War does not determine who is right, only who is left."
- Bertrand Russel

Overlord would be the hero representing that would it not? Geez... I'm gonna make my own rulebook.

_________________
http://drinkingwotr.blogspot.com/ - Links to my CrAzY House Rules, Games and 'poor man's' terrain.

That's quite ironic - doesn't it also say specifically in every single other Heroic Action that a HERO can call it? Not the formation on its own? ie. That only a Hero has that ability? Therefore given that GW allows Overlord to be used without heroes, the duel can be used too - double edged sword imo.

_________________
Coordinator of the Great British Hobbit League

well it say that HEROS call the actions, and the troll can use the might to call an action and thus he his a "temorary hero" so if he can do heroic move then hes doing something heroic so why not duels?