Friday 8 April 2011

Oh, and speaking of Grey Knights...

I dunno if anyone's noticed (I imagine not) but there is actually no legal option in the Codex to take Purifiers as Troops...*INSERT OBLIGATORY NERD RAGE AND "WHAT YOU TALKIN' BOUT, WILLIS?" COMMENTS*



You see, the conventional theory is that you can take Castellan Crowe (aka, pay the Crowe Tax) and then select Purifiers, as they move from their Elite berth to the Troops section - where they become doubly valuable, despite ofc already being good.

This theory is predicated upon the grey box in the entry for Mr Garran Crowe (his first name is revealed in the Bestiary section...) - which says, and I quote - "In an army that includes Castellan Garran, Purifier Squads are Troops choices"

Huh? Says any of you still unsure as to why the rule 'Keeper of Anarch' does not function as intended?

"Castellan Garran"

Well, what is that when it's at home?

I looked and looked, but nowhere in the army list is such a unit listed, therefore it is impossible to take Purifiers as Troops gosh-darn it.

Shame.

This is then to be added to the other things off the top of my head needing an FAQ in the GK book:

  • Explanation of how many Henchmen can be taken if Coteaz is included, and do they count towards FoC? ;
  • A line saying Mordak is a 1-model unit if no Ghost Knights are taken (people are silly) and that Ghost Knights can only be chosen with him.;
  • Does an Inquisitor REALLY have to replace a Nemesis Daemon Hammer (a Force Weapon) with a Force Sword if upgraded to a Psyker? ; 
  • Does a Dreadknight REALLY become Jump Infantry [with a Teleporter,] and therefore get to ride inside a Stormraven? ;
  • Can Jokaero increase the range of a Conversion Beamer? How does that work? ; 
  • With Jokaero 'Inconceivable Customisation', do you modify the roll based on the number in the unit when rolling again for a 'The Works' result?
  • How does it [Jokaero's Improved Gun Sights] interact with the 'Melta' Rule? ; 
  • Does Mordrak take Perils on behalf of Ghost Knights? Can he 'ignite' a power that is different from the Unit, as he is now an Upgrade Character?

Not a lot of issues, and no typos noticed, so that's a big plus.

May as well throw in outstanding BRB FAQ requirements:

Models without eyes are assumed to see from the 'front' of their head/helmet/sensory apparatus.  All infantry, Jump Infantry, Bike (including Jetbike), Monstrous Creature and Beasts/Cavalry models are therefore assumed to see 180 degrees toward the front of the model (Note this is intentionally generous, as befits the superhuman reflexes/improved sensory devices/hundreds of hours of training these soldiers have)  Note that Walkers use the VEHICLE rules for determining Line of Sight - meaning they use the 'Arcs of Sight' from their weapons, as described on page 59 of the Rulebook.  Remember that a Target can only be selected if it can be 'seen' by a unit in the first place.

Do Ironclad Dreadnoughts strike in Initiative order with a Chainfist, or is that deliberately inconsistent? [Ok, that isn't BRB, but still...]

I will edit changes, I know I've missed some.  lol

8 comments:

Chumbalaya said...

Only a WAAC cheesemonger like yourself would look to twist the rules for every possible advantage. I'll bet you play counts-as SW too, you jerk.

<3

Farmpunk said...

the coteaz question is handled by the coteaz rules in the bestiary.

it outlines that Henchmen ARE troops when coteaz is taken, and that will override the requirement to have an inquisitor for a warband.

That being said, you could squeeze 6 non-inquisitor warbands in, then 1 with Coteaz, and 1 with inquisitor-to-be-named later.

like a cheap DH inq. will HellRifle. (becasue S6 AP3 rending shots make people freak out for some reason.)

Restartt said...

You're wrong. His rank is Castellan, and his name is Garran Crowe. Thus, Castellan Garran =Castellan Crowe.

People want to play silly little rules lawyers about it and say "But thats fluff only"? What about the teleport homer, which tells you it only works if the fluff says it teleports? GW does use fluff as rules.

Not good enough? Heres conclusive proof. THE CODEX DOESN"T HAVE A SECTION LABELED "RULES" and "NOT RULES". Technically if you want to lawyer it out the entire codex, even the fluff is rules, just rules that don't affect most gameplay. Thus, the fact that castellan crowe is castellan garran is a rule.

Good day, sir!

Restartt said...

Actually, his name is Garran Crowe, and his rank is Castellan, so it still works.

"But thats only in the fluff, it's not in his rules - he's only castellan Crowe in rules"

A)stupid, retarded argument
B)GW uses fluff as rules alot. Check out teleport homers, every other character that ever uses/doesn't use a title in the rules when there entry does/doesn't, etc.
C)Technically, GW makes no distinction between what is an official rule and fluff (Is there a section saying this is rules, and this is background? no) Therefore the "Fluff" is technically just as legal as anything else you call a rule, so he's castellan garran too.

TheKing Elessar said...

Farmpunk, I initially agreed, but now I'm very muddled on the whole issue. I think how it will (and should) be FAQ'd is the simplest answer - with Coteaz they become 0-6 units, as Troops, taking up FoC slots.

TheKing Elessar said...

@MJSwasey - Bullshit.

Nobody calls anyone by their rank and first name.

GW DOES distinguish between rules and 'flavour text', just not as well as they could/should.

I don't give a fuck what you think of it - the facts are thus:

A)It doesn't say Castellan Crowe (for that is his name) can do it, it refers to a Castellan Garran, which is not referred to anywhere else, and therefore does not exist.
B)It is pathetic writing to make such an elementary mistake, I can only forgive it on the basis that I assume it was a translation error on the part of the Chinese printing (assuming this was printed in China)
C)It REQUIRES an Errata, just like the Space Wolves ATSKNF, or the BA Vindicators not having a Blast. Or Chaos Predators having rear armour 11.

Kriswithak said...

Castellan Garran could be Crowe's pet name for his d**k and it wouldn't matter. The rule is attached to him, and the first thing in his entry is his full name.

Sure you can rule lawyer this but you look like an utter tosser for doing so, and honestly you'll just be lumped with all the whining SM losers who will abuse anything to gain an advantage. (Often called cheating)

Yay, what a fun way to play the game.

Annointed1 said...

I would punch you in the fucking face if you stood across the table from me an argues the Crowe does not make the Purifiers troops because of a anal name typo.

Disclaimer.

Primarily, a blog to discuss the Games Workshop system Warhammer 40k, though not exclusively so. All GW IP used without permission, no challenge intended.

Pretty much everything here is my opinion. If you don't like my opinion, you are welcomed to say so. If you don't like me, but like my opinion, feel free to say so. If you don't like me or my opinion, I don't need to hear it. Why even visit?