Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The Avatar of Khaine is "to all intents and purposes" a daemon. Does this mean that he benefits from the "EW" USR, which all daemons have, as specified in Codex: Chaos Daemons. Normally, I would simply say that he does not, because anybody who is familiar with the evolution of the Storm Shield knows that one codex does not affect any other, but the phrase "all intents and purposes" seems to indicate that it should take into account rules specified elsewhere. Just looking for general opinions.

I think It's supposed to apply to any weapons or effects that target or have diffrent abilities vrs daemons. I don't think he gets EW since the daemons 'dex only specifies for it's own entries. Nothing I could find in the brb indicated ALL daemons get EW. So it would appear to be a codex only special rule.

Also, is not the avatar toughness 5 or better? Not much will insta kill him anyway, aside from the odd FW or railcannon.

DarthSpader wrote:I think It's supposed to apply to any weapons or effects that target or have diffrent abilities vrs daemons. I don't think he gets EW since the daemons 'dex only specifies for it's own entries. Nothing I could find in the brb indicated ALL daemons get EW. So it would appear to be a codex only special rule.

Also, is not the avatar toughness 5 or better? Not much will insta kill him anyway, aside from the odd FW or railcannon.

+1

Won't Force Weapons kill him?

Darkjediben wrote:Won't Force Weapons kill him?

Yes, as already mentioned. But he's not exactly helpless in CC... the librarian will be hard pressed to even reach his own strikes alive, and Eldar being the nasty foes they are it's likely any Psychic tests are on 3d6. .

No, he does not have EW.

You don't use the Dæmons codex for Eldar units anymore than you use the Skaven Codex for Necron Units.

Gwar! wrote:No, he does not have EW.

You don't use the Dæmons codex for Eldar units anymore than you use the Skaven Codex for Necron Units.

Well put.

Fluff <> Rules, but here goes my rant.

Khaine is the physical manifestation of a God. Everything should be hard pressed to out-right kill him, but then i don't write the rules :(

As stated above he does NOT have EW, or immunity to ID. But lets look at what he does have:

3+ / 4++ save (throw fortune into the mix and he becomes nigh impossible to kill)
WS 10, yes folks 10. Most units will only ever land the hit on 5's and occasional 4's.
T6 so you will have to be hitting pretty hard to actually wound him almost always 4+, often more.

So with all of that said he doesn't "need" EW, just doesn't really make sense from a fluff point of view.

Gwar! wrote:No, he does not have EW.

You don't use the Dæmons codex for Eldar units anymore than you use the Skaven Codex for Necron Units.

That's not an apples-to-apples analogy, and you are implying it was a foolish question by using such clearly disparate sources for comparison. Flipping through my 5th Edition 40K rulebook, I see no unit type as "daemon" in the unit types section, and as such, it seems to be a reasonable interpretation that the universal rules for daemons, as described by Codex: Daemons would be application to a creature described as being, "to all intents and purposes, a daemon".

Furthermore, the precedent of one codex pointing to another to define how it works is not new; reference Codex: Daemonhunters, Codex: Catachans, etc. My issue is not with your determination, but with the path you followed to get it.

A better argument as to why the Avatar does not get EW is that the Daemon rule explicitly states, in part, that "this rule applies to ever model in this army..." which rather definitively excludes any other codex's models.

That argument does not imply it is a foolish question necessarily, it merely takes the principle of using rules from an unrelated codex to an extreme example so it becomes necessarily obvious why you do not cross reference army specific rules (unless told specifically to do so).

calypso2ts wrote:That argument does not imply it is a foolish question necessarily, it merely takes the principle of using rules from an unrelated codex to an extreme example so it becomes necessarily obvious why you do not cross reference army specific rules (unless told specifically to do so).

It's not an unrelated codex, it's an unrelated game. It's this sort of hyperbole that frequently leads to rather needless flaming.

Rules stating that a unit is "for all intents and purposes, a daemon" mean that looking at Codex: Daemons for guidance is a reasonable idea, and is not at all analogous to using Space Hulk to determine rules for Terminator movement in 40k.

I agree it would seem like a reasonable thing to do, but again the underlying principle behind it - which becomes obvious by taking the concept to it most extreme conclusion - is false.

I think the issue was that back when the Eldar codex was written, there was an established meaning of "daemons" in the context of the game that included special rules like invulnerable saves and being susceptible to certain types of weaponry. Now that things are more standardized and explicit, daemons just function as their own book. The problem is that these "leftovers" are still part of the playable rules, hence the conclusion.

@Ouze: The problem with the phrase "every model in this army" is that it's inclusive, not exclusive, i.e. that the rule applies to all models in the army doesn't preclude the rule applying to models in another army. (Put another way, everybody in Allentown shops at Walmart, but there are people who shop at Walmart who aren't in Allentown.)

@Calipso2ts: It's not a logical extreme, because there is a distinction to be made between rules from another sourcebook in one game (possibly reasonable) and rules from a book from another game (almost always unreasonable).

@Gwar!: I've been meaning to ask you about this for awhile: where does the codex exclusivity come from, apart from the being the most convenient way to reconcile old and new MEQ Codices?

Edit: Punctuation

MekanobSamael wrote:@Gwar!: I've been meaning to ask you about this for awhile: where does the codex exclusivity come from, apart from the being the most convenient way to reconcile old and new MEQ Codices?

The fact that 40k is a permissive ruleset, in that you must have permission to do something. "It doesn't say I can't" is not how 40k works.

Gwar! wrote:The fact that 40k is a permissive ruleset, in that you must have permission to do something. "It doesn't say I can't" is not how 40k works.

Gotchya. I'd been curious about that for awhile, thanks.

if hes toughness 6, he cant he insta killed from anything other then a force weapon, or special ability....and really...if the weilder is of such power he can actually hit and affect the avatar with such, then i think they are on equal grounds, and nuff said. otherwise, i agree with the fact that this is an old 'dex using new rules, so there will be some old rules and things that dont make sense or mesh. this is one of them