Hull Points, Part One:
Here's the thing. GW have had a significant amount of time to produce this book, and from the artwork, it's clear which part is most important in their eyes as a use of that time.
Perhaps they should have spent the same amount of detail on the Reference section. Here are a list of vehicles that can never ever be Wrecked, as they have zero STARTING Hull Points, by RaW:
Blood Angels;
Rhino,
Razorback,
Predator,
Land Speeder,
Whirlwind,
Vindicator,
Land Raider,
Land Raider Crusader,
Land Raider Redeemer,
Drop Pod
Dreadnought
Dark Angels;
Rhino,
Razorback,
Drop Pod,
Land Raider,
Land Raider Crusader,
Land Speeder,
Predator,
Vindicator,
Whirlwind,
Dreadnought,
Master Sammael's Land Speeder,
Space Wolves;
Drop Pod,
Land Raider,
Land Raider Crusader,
Land Raider Redeemer,
Land Speeder,
Predator,
Razorback,
Rhino,
Vindicator,
Whirlwind,
Dreadnought,
Venerable Dreadnought,
Bjorn the Fell-Handed
Grey Knights;
Land Raiders,
Land Raider Crusaders,
Land Raider Redeemers,
Rhino,
Razorback,
Stormraven,
Dreadnought,
Venerable Dreadnought,
Black Templars;
Rhino,
Razorback,
Land Speeder,
Predator,
Dreadnought,
Land Raider,
Vindicator,
Land Raider Crusader,
Drop Pod
Sisters of Battle;
Rhino,
Space Marines;
Land Raider Crusader,
Land Raider Redeemer,
These vehicles can still be destroyed by using Penetrating Hits, in the usual fashion, but the Hull Points rules tell you that you are Wrecked if reduced to zero. You can't reduce a zero to zero, these vehicles are either blown up or Wrecked through the old-school method of stripping their weapons and Immobilising them...oh, wait, they took that away! ;-) So, the only way to destroy anything on the above list, until they errata their ridiculous oversight, is to Explode them, by RaW.
Have fun with that, users of those 56 omitted vehicles, ignoring Glances like it's 1997...
And no, don't reply with 'but TKE, most of those are in the Space Marine section, just look there!' - a) This is crap. Common Sense isn't Common, not everyone will know to do this; b) A note to this effect would have taken less than a line to produce ["If you cannot find stats for a vehicle, check under Space Marines instead."] and c) Reference Guide > Codex > BRB - if we use the Reference Guide to do BA Rhinos, they lose Fast. For GK ones, they lose Fortitude and Psychic Pilot...etc etc.
And that still wouldn't answer the ones with Unique Profiles, ie Bjorn and Sammael. It's a very sloppy job indeed, and depressing that so many vehicles could be so carelessly forgotten - especially when Chaos Rhino and Chaos Land Raider got entries, but Redeemers and Crusaders (different capacity to Land Raiders, so none of THAT bull please...) were completely ignored.
It makes me has a sad.
17 comments:
:face palm:
Are we REALLY going here with this? The only ones on the list that are even semi-questionable are Bjorn and Sammael, as I could see them having "bonus" HP. The rest, yes, it's annoying they weren't completely and redundantly specified, but a rhino is a rhino is a rhino is a rhino, etc.
Don't be THAT GUY.
Too late. He just spent 20 minutes checking and typing out all of those vehicles and posting it on this blog.
If someone was to be reading a 40k blog, they would have the sense to know to look in the space marine section for their Blood angel space marine Rhino.
I found a few typos while reading the book. Since the reference has one gun type of "Rapis Fire", that means they can't rapid fire right? RAW it has to rapis fire. This game is fun!
This is silly.
If you really play this way in your free time, fine, but I can say without any pause that NO tournament will ever let it be played this way.
Let's spend our time more productively? You're one of the smarter bloggers out there, especially when not raging, find some real rules failures that we actually need to fix with written word and not backhands from judges.
They said you could find them in the appendix. They never said it had to be listed under your codex. Same name, same stats for those listed, no reason to list them multiple times. You'll notice that Blood Angels also don't have listings for "Space Marine", etc.
+1 to the previous comments.
He's been on to me about this all day.
Its not that he will just play without the Hull points, its just the fact that GW seem to have left out the "check Space Marine reference table" meanig that anyone who reads into this as much as he did would take this stance.
But as I have said to him a few times now. Common sense should take over.
RAW or not, all Marine vehicles are more or less the same thing.
As in the case of the BA's vehicles, the codex takes presedences and the vehices gain fast. However, they would still have HP like all other codices.
We all know GW is sloppy and lazy when it comes to writing rules and faqs. So we have to pick up the slack when they fuck up.
An issue like this just needs a modicum of common sense to fix it.
While I can more or less agree with the concesus of comments...
Does this now mean, since it isn't written, that Imperial Missile launchers get flakk missiles?
I'm not trolling, just furthering a discussion.
CK
I think some are missing the point. If we don't call them on sloppy and crappy rules writing, then they will have no incentive to change thier ways.
Is my blog likely to change that alone? Hardly. But it's the principle - and I'm nothing if I'm not a man of my principles.
Bjorn and Sammael, apart from anything else, are unique models in the game, and their omission is a clear mistake, and should have been corrected in the specific FAQs, if not in the (non-existant) BRB one.
Either way, there is a reason this was the first of the articles.
Dear lord... hide me in the corner!
CK
Read up on missile launchers, it says it requires an upgrade to get Flakk. pg 57
Rules lawyering is like farting, if you have to push to hard it is probably crap...
SDM - Yah, I read that. No one gets an upgrade. I've been looking for a profile or something.
thanks,
CK
Come on Mike. I can understand the casual guys going nuts over this omission and how 'obvious' it is to correct. But you should know better. If you don't FAQ this we all know guys that will try it. Even if you backhand them at NOVA, addressing it early will save you headaches.
Just to note, TKE, the "Space Marine" reference by your definition wouldn't work for Codex: Space Marines either. You'll notice that each unit's Codex-specific units are listed under Codex: . Units available in multiple codices are listed without "Codex:" listed in front. This applies not only to Space Marine units, but also to Harlequins.
You can still be nit-picky about it, but from seeing the headers for each section, I can tell you the omission is intentional.
hmm. part of my sentence got chopped off for using brackets. Looks like you can still make sense of what I was saying though :)
RayJ has a point. Blood angels are space marines, and the entry doesn't say Codex: space marines. So that solves that.
Well spotted - though Space Wolves are not Space Marines in rule terminology - and Sisters certainly aren't. But, ok, that answers BTs and DAs sufficiently without requiring FAQ.
Mike, Sandwyrm is right, the NOVA FAQ better cover this or you will see it. I'm already making up a list of rules that will terrify me for the "common sense" that this is "wasting time over" to be applied to, because "sense" is certainly not "common", which was why there were still rules errors in play for 5th Edition a week ago.
Example: Attach IC from one force to a squad in the allied force. Obviously Brothers In Arms, but can the IC+squad board a transport now? If yes, both allies or only one? To save the stress, yes, they can, they can board the transports from the squad's codex (assuming there is room), because for all rules purposes the IC just became part of the squad. However, I can already hear the howls when you pop an IC into a squad and then jump on a ride. Because it is "common sense" that the IC from one ally prevents a squad from the other ally from using its transports.
Time to model grab handles so ICs can stay under cover behind their allies' rides and stay in coherency, right?
It's a stupid rule anyway, but it does, in a very heavy handed manner, prevent one minor way of abusing the allies rules.
Post a Comment