[40K] White Dwarf foolishness
Mario
** Whinny Rant alert
A few issues back in the North American WD, they showed a very
impressive converted Adeptus Mechanicus army that was using the Lost and
the Damned list for its 'Count As'.
The 1850pts tourney ready army showed three amazing models to be used as
Obliterators. Unfortunately the LATD list does not include
Obliterators. The models were so cool that I certainly would have no
problems playing against it and would really like to encourage GW to CA
Obliterators in that list. I'm all for a flexible open "Count As" list.
Then a couple of issues back, again the NA WD goofed up in its Battle
Report showing a Chaos variant army with some DE. If I recall it was
an Archon in a raider with a retinue of warriors. The allies rule
states that this is valid for 2000pnts + and that a LEGAL force org
should be used, mainly an HQ with min of two troop choices (otherwise
welcome to my legal allies list with 2 minimalist troop choices and 8 HQ
choices loaded to the hitl).
Am I out to lunch on this or is WD anoyingly sloppy with their stuff?
Is it unreasonable to expect that what they show should be legal? Is
the Brit edition like this?
Just wondering
Mar - WTF - IO
M Roberts
news:XKAuf.39890$OU5.33280@clgrps13...
>
> ** Whinny Rant alert
>
Hmmm, you sound a little horse . . . .
> Am I out to lunch on this or is WD anoyingly sloppy with their stuff?
> Is it unreasonable to expect that what they show should be legal? Is
> the Brit edition like this?
>
> Just wondering
The UK edition is fairly sloppy at things like this as well. The dodgy army
list slips through occasionally, the players make the odd cock-up when
actually playing the game.
Army lists usually seem designed to show off every single unit choice in
whatever they're trying to flog this month.
Cheers, Martyn
FunkyD
about flavor and
fun as it is rules.
"Ugh, that Khorne Army of yours is disgusting, I'll throw my Eldar at
it again if you like..."
"Sure, how about we give your Eldar T4 and see what happens..."
D
Myrmidon
FunkyD, Funky...@gmail.com Varfed out the following in Timo speak...
know the 40K rules. You know 'wrong hobby' and all that.
Myr ;)
--
I'll have you know that I am equivalent to *at least twice* my
bodyweight in Snotlings.
-- Brad Hann
RGMW FAQ: http://www.rgmw.org
Or...
http://www.sheppard.demon.co.uk/rgmw_faq/rgmw_faq.htm
pbo...@aol.com
Mario wrote:
> ** Whinny Rant alert
>
> A few issues back in the North American WD, they showed a very
> impressive converted Adeptus Mechanicus army that was using the Lost and
> the Damned list for its 'Count As'.
>
> The 1850pts tourney ready army showed three amazing models to be used as
> Obliterators. Unfortunately the LATD list does not include
> Obliterators. The models were so cool that I certainly would have no
> problems playing against it and would really like to encourage GW to CA
> Obliterators in that list. I'm all for a flexible open "Count As" list.
Can't LatD take any CSM Elite unit as an ally using the allies rule
presented in the list itself (same as Kroot and Hunters allies rule)?
All I know of recent WDs is that the current one shows a picture of the
forthcoming Wood Elf Great Stag, and it's a real letdown - posed in a
rearing posture I've never seen any stag adopt, with the head of a bull
and something very odd going on with its horns. The sculptor can't ever
have seen a real stag. The rider's not too bad as an extra mounted Lord
option, but his pose looks a bit dated.
Philip Bowles
Mario
I'll bite, where can I find this allies rules.
Thanks.
Chris
news:dpelg4$ber$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "Mario" <mta...@mtroyal.ab.ca> wrote in message
> news:XKAuf.39890$OU5.33280@clgrps13...
>>
>> ** Whinny Rant alert
>>
>
> Hmmm, you sound a little horse . . . .
Wow, that was fast - according to my server, only 5 minutes between these
two posts. Grammar Nazism is fun ;)
chris/bass/idoru
Doctor Rock
>
> A few issues back in the North American WD, they showed a very impressive
> converted Adeptus Mechanicus army that was using the Lost and the Damned
> list for its 'Count As'.
>
> The 1850pts tourney ready army showed three amazing models to be used as
> Obliterators. Unfortunately the LATD list does not include Obliterators.
a LatD army can include 0-1 elites choice from the CSM army list, so no
problem there
> Then a couple of issues back, again the NA WD goofed up in its Battle
> Report showing a Chaos variant army with some DE. If I recall it was
> an Archon in a raider with a retinue of warriors.
since i'm not aware of any rules for taking allies, i can't really comment.
possibly that was something that made it into the US WD but not the UK one?
pbo...@aol.com
Mario wrote:
> I'll bite, where can I find this allies rules.
>
> Thanks.
For Lost and the Damned specifically, in Codex: Eye of Terror. I think
it's identical to the rule used in Codex: Daemonhunters and Codex:
Witch Hunters (except that the allies are obviously Chaos Space Marines
rather than Imperial forces) - the rule used by the Kroot has the same
format, but I think is slightly different in what it allows. I was
rather surprised this rule didn't become universal in the 4th Ed.
rulebook, since as Al (Doctor Rock) says there are no formal ally rules
in that book - IIRC the extra FoC thing has been scrapped altogether.
The basic format of these ally rules is that, once you've satisfied the
mission's requirements from your main army list (e.g. 1 HQ and 2 Troops
of your own army in a Standard mission) you can take up to a certain
number of units from an army you can ally with: 0-1 HQ, 0-1 Elite, 0-2
Troops and 0-1 Fast Attack, I believe, for The Lost and the Damned (no
allied Heavy Support is allowed). It's a good way of doing things, and
it would be nice to see it universalised, with the rulebook stipulating
who can ally with whom (e.g. Kroot can ally with any non-Tau,
non-Tyranid, non-Necron army in their current rules, Inquisition forces
can ally with any Imperial Guard, Space Marine or Inquisition army. In
addition, Eldar might conceivably ally with Imperial, Dark Eldar
(supported in at least one fluff piece) or Tau forces, the Imperial
Guard with Tau (representing Gue'vesa auxiliaries - in fact I suspect
the new Codex might do just this), Orks (it happens according to fluff
gone by) and Chaos (Traitors - not necessarily IG cast-offs and
assorted mutants like LatD, but full-blown Traitor regiments - again,
plenty of fluff examples). So I'd do something like the following list;
Race May ally with
Space Marines (general) Imperial Guard, Inquisition, Eldar
Black Templars Imperial Guard, Inquisition
Dark Angels Imperial Guard
Dark Eldar Eldar (possibly also Chaos? Alien
Hunters?), Kroot
Chaos Space Marines: The Lost and the Damned, Imperial Guard, Kroot
Orks Imperial Guard, Alien Hunters, Kroot
Imperial Guard: Space Marines (all), Inquisition (all),
Eldar, Orks, Tau, Chaos,
Kroot
Eldar Imperial Guard, Space Marines (all),
Alien Hunters, Daemon Hunters, Tau, Dark Eldar, Kroot
Tyranids None
Tau Imperial Guard, Alien Hunters, Eldar
Kroot Imperial Guard, Inquisition, Dark
Eldar, Chaos Space Marines, Orks, Imperial Guard, Eldar
Necrons None
The Lost and the Damned Chaos Space Marines
Daemon Hunters Space Marines (excl. Dark Angels), Imperial
Guard, Witch Hunters, Alien Hunters, Kroot
Witch Hunters Space Marines (excl. Dark Angels),
Imperial Guard, Daemon Hunters, Alien Hunters, Kroot
Alien Hunters: Space Marines (excl. Dark Angels),
Imperial Guard, Daemon Hunters, Witch Hunters, Eldar, Orks, Tau, Kroot
Philip Bowles
Jim M
says...
I thought it was a Spellign Nazi comment... of course it could have just
been a "you used the wrong word post"...
Whinny -- the sound made by Equines.
Whiney -- the sound made by a losing power gamer...
--
Jim M
"Look alive. Here comes a buzzard." -- Walt Kelly (Pogo)
"The only game I like to play is Old Maid - provided she's not too old."
-- Groucho Marx
Chris
news:MPG.1e2501c2c...@news.west.earthlink.net...
>
> I thought it was a Spellign Nazi comment... of course it could have just
> been a "you used the wrong word post"...
>
> Whinny -- the sound made by Equines.
> Whiney -- the sound made by a losing power gamer...
I remember a thread here back in '97 about whether or not 'whinge' was a
word in itself, or if it meant the same as 'whine'. Folk over in the US had
never heard of the word :)
To whinge, of course, is to continually complain - it is possible to whinge
and whine at the same time, which is what happens when 2nd ed. Space Wolves
players start losing ;)
chris/bass/idoru
(Noise Marine)
Jim M
Well "whinge" still isn't in any of my Dictionaries, I would accept it as
Whin'ge which could be a contraction of the words "whine" and "binge"...
I'll never forget my first (and only) game of 40K2, Dark Angels vs. Space
Wolves, I sat in my deployment zone with interlocking fire and blew the
space puppies off the board with concentrations of mass firepower. He
lost 60% of his forces before finally getting his uber chaplain into
contact and wiping out two of my Squads in a single turn. It was at that
point that I realized that 40K2 was a broken system and decided to wait
for third edition which was due out in a few months. Oh and my opponent,
said I was cheezy for not getting into hth.
Spack
> In article <43bb...@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, linsc...@SPAMmail.tpg.com.au
> says...
>> "Jim M" <hnjc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1e2501c2c...@news.west.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>> I thought it was a Spellign Nazi comment... of course it could have just
>>> been a "you used the wrong word post"...
>>>
>>> Whinny -- the sound made by Equines.
>>> Whiney -- the sound made by a losing power gamer...
>>
>> I remember a thread here back in '97 about whether or not 'whinge' was a
>> word in itself, or if it meant the same as 'whine'. Folk over in the US
>> had never heard of the word :)
>>
>> To whinge, of course, is to continually complain - it is possible to
>> whinge and whine at the same time, which is what happens when 2nd ed.
>> Space Wolves players start losing ;)
>>
> Well "whinge" still isn't in any of my Dictionaries, I would accept it as
> Whin'ge which could be a contraction of the words "whine" and "binge"...
Unless you have a UK dictionary I'm not suprised, it's an English term
derived from whinsen, in turn derived from hwinsian, apparently :)
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=whinge
Dan
estarriol
"Spack" <ne...@worldofspack.co.uk> wrote in message
news:421vl5F...@individual.net...
years.
--
estarriol
Spack
True, but then again they are just a bunch of ex-crims we dumped on big
island ... ironic, as surely they'd be the ones whinging.
Dan
Mario
Thanks very much for this. I always fancied reading a story where Tau,
SM and Eldar are teaming up to destroy one of the bigger Nid incursions.
Mar - go allies - IO
Scott McDaniel
"Chris" <linsc...@SPAMmail.tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:43bb...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "Jim M" <hnjc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1e2501c2c...@news.west.earthlink.net...
>>
>> I thought it was a Spellign Nazi comment... of course it could have just
>> been a "you used the wrong word post"...
>>
>> Whinny -- the sound made by Equines.
>> Whiney -- the sound made by a losing power gamer...
>
> I remember a thread here back in '97 about whether or not 'whinge' was a
> word in itself, or if it meant the same as 'whine'. Folk over in the US
> had never heard of the word :)
Whoa there Nelly!
We were using Whinge here in California back in the mid 80s.
It probably did arise somewhere else, and earlier, but we were using it.
It fell out of favor in the very early '90s.
M Roberts
> says...
> > "M Roberts" <unk...@thisaddress.com> wrote in message
> > news:dpelg4$ber$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > > "Mario" <mta...@mtroyal.ab.ca> wrote in message
> > > news:XKAuf.39890$OU5.33280@clgrps13...
> > >>
> > >> ** Whinny Rant alert
> > >>
> > >
> > > Hmmm, you sound a little horse . . . .
> >
> > Wow, that was fast - according to my server, only 5 minutes between
these
> > two posts. Grammar Nazism is fun ;)
>
> been a "you used the wrong word post"...
>
> Whinny -- the sound made by Equines.
> Whiney -- the sound made by a losing power gamer...
Heh, got it in one. I was just trying to make a little jest. Obviously far
too subtle for some people. Must remember to use enormous amounts of smileys
in future. And possibly use <Humor Attempt> </Humour Attempt> tags as well.
Cheers, Martyn
Mario
>I thought it was a Spellign Nazi comment... of course it could have just
>
>
So was Spellign intentional or not, I'm out of touch with RGMW
sub-culture idioms.
Mar - huh! - IO
Jim M
says...
checker that I forgot to reconfigure when I reinstalled all of my
programs over the holidays...
Myrmidon
unk...@thisaddress.com Varfed out the following in Timo speak...
>
> Heh, got it in one. I was just trying to make a little jest. Obviously far
> too subtle for some people. Must remember to use enormous amounts of smileys
> in future. And possibly use <Humor Attempt> </Humour Attempt> tags as well.
>
> Cheers, Martyn
>
>
>
I've spent a good half an hour staring at my screen and I still
don't see the humor between <Humor Attempt> </Humour Attempt> up there.
Must be something subtle that only shows up on UK monitors.
Myr ;) :) :?) :~) 0_o
--
I thought it was the FUCKING Steam tank? Or has the official spelling
changed and I have to change my AB files again?
-- KMarkusV
Jim M
Im...@home.com says...
> In article <dph25q$e7r$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>, M Roberts,
> unk...@thisaddress.com Varfed out the following in Timo speak...
>
> >
> > Heh, got it in one. I was just trying to make a little jest. Obviously far
> > too subtle for some people. Must remember to use enormous amounts of smileys
> > in future. And possibly use <Humor Attempt> </Humour Attempt> tags as well.
> >
> > Cheers, Martyn
> >
> >
> >
> I've spent a good half an hour staring at my screen and I still
> don't see the humor between <Humor Attempt> </Humour Attempt> up there.
> Must be something subtle that only shows up on UK monitors.
>
> Myr ;) :) :?) :~) 0_o
>
>
go completely blank...
Craig Little
> In article <MPG.1e26533f...@news-server.woh.rr.com>,
> Im...@home.com says...
>> In article <dph25q$e7r$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>, M Roberts,
>> unk...@thisaddress.com Varfed out the following in Timo speak...
>>
>> >
>> > Heh, got it in one. I was just trying to make a little jest. Obviously
>> > far
>> > too subtle for some people. Must remember to use enormous amounts of
>> > smileys
>> > in future. And possibly use <Humor Attempt> </Humour Attempt> tags as
>> > well.
>> >
>> > Cheers, Martyn
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> I've spent a good half an hour staring at my screen and I still
>> don't see the humor between <Humor Attempt> </Humour Attempt> up there.
>> Must be something subtle that only shows up on UK monitors.
>>
>> Myr ;) :) :?) :~) 0_o
>>
>>
> Oh it's there all right, but in order to see it you have to let your mind
> go completely blank...
So Gav would get it instantly then.
Desert Lurker
> Mario wrote:
>
>>I'll bite, <snip>
OK, Phil, why can the Alien Hunters Ally with Aliens and the Daemon
Hunters not ally with CSM or LATD? Or Witch Hunters and LATD? I would
also say that BT would not be involved in a radical Daemon Hunters army.
Your thoughts?
Mario
Desert Lurker wrote:
> OK, Phil, why can the Alien Hunters Ally with Aliens and the Daemon
> Hunters not ally with CSM or LATD? Or Witch Hunters and LATD? I would
> also say that BT would not be involved in a radical Daemon Hunters army.
> Your thoughts?
Just a shot at it, mostly because no one will not have anything to do
with Alien Hunters, too close to Xenos for their taste. Don't
underestimate the fear people would have of the Inquisition. Imagine
finding out that someone you know knows a family who has Ebola, chances
are most people would avoid them. Magnify that fear by several magnitudes.
Mar - I know, I was there - IO
pbo...@aol.com
Even Radical Daemonhunters aren't Chaotics - why would CSM or LatD ally
themselves with them even if the Radicals were willing? Dealing with
aliens is in a whole different league - in the past even the SM and IG
did that with Imperial sanction, to the extent of having the Eldar
actively iinvolved in the defence of Ichar IV. Radical Daemonhunters
make use of Daemons, but that doesn't make them likely to fight
alongside the CSM Legions or mutants and traitors.
Or Witch Hunters and LATD?
Similar reasons, though I don't really envisage the LatD having the
coordination to ally with anyone - they either do their own thing or
they get co-opted as cannon fodder by any CSMs in the area.
I would
> also say that BT would not be involved in a radical Daemon Hunters army.
> Your thoughts?
I think it gets really complex if you start allowing armies to ally
only with subdivisions of other armies - maybe note in the BT Codex
only that they can't fight alongside Daemons.
Philip Bowles
Doctor Rock
<pbo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1136842310....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Desert Lurker wrote:
>> OK, Phil, why can the Alien Hunters Ally with Aliens and the Daemon
>> Hunters not ally with CSM or LATD?
>
> Even Radical Daemonhunters aren't Chaotics
renegade ones can be :P
> - why would CSM or LatD ally
> themselves with them even if the Radicals were willing? Dealing with
> aliens is in a whole different league - in the past even the SM and IG
> did that with Imperial sanction, to the extent of having the Eldar
> actively iinvolved in the defence of Ichar IV.
weren't the eldar eventually directly involved with imperial forces in the
13th black crusade thing as well?
> Radical Daemonhunters
> make use of Daemons, but that doesn't make them likely to fight
> alongside the CSM Legions or mutants and traitors.
radical inquisitors do foster or even found underground cults and such,
however - usually to acquire forbidden information or artefacts that they
can't get through the inquisition itself.
Desert Lurker
with the people that want to destroy them. Entry in the Army list is OK
ala Daemon hosts. I also don't see from a fluff POV The BT Marshall side
by side with a INQ lord and his pet daemon.
Dude
Jim M
says...
> Isn't WD the definition of foolishness?
>
they...
Insane Ranter
@news.east.earthlink.net:
> In article <5XeMf.38001$X7....@bignews7.bellsouth.net>, no...@no.no
> says...
>> Isn't WD the definition of foolishness?
>>
> Well they could hardly call their magazine "World Dominition" now could
> they...
Good point