Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 15:18:59
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Focused Fire Warrior
|
Don't have access to the codex or update, and the FAQ on the website keeps coming out in German. Quick question: do Daemons still have Eternal Warriror across the board?
|
3000 pts. or more
3000 pts. or more |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 15:20:41
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Captain of the Forlorn Hope
|
|
"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.
I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!
We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 15:55:47
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Painlord Titan Princeps of Slaanesh
|
This is a tricky question. The BRB Daemon rule does not provide Eternal Warrior. The Codex Daemons rules do provide Eternal Warrior. Which combination of these rules applies to the official updates is a mess.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 15:58:15
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Swift Swooping Hawk
|
Codex trumps BRB. So for the moment; yes.
Christ people; when someone asks a question just answer it.
|
"If you are not naughty you get a cookie. If you are naked, you get a cookie." - Insaniak, Dakka Mod
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 15:59:07
Subject: Re:Daemons
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
The answer is yes they do. All GW did was add fear to them. The only thing anyone debates is wether or not the Daemons listed in the WD update have a 5++, but the answer to that is a yes as well. So to recap for you the only thing that changed for Daemons is the stats of a few units and they got fear.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:06:05
Subject: Re:Daemons
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
WolvesForTheWolfGod wrote:The answer is yes they do. All GW did was add fear to them. The only thing anyone debates is wether or not the Daemons listed in the WD update have a 5++, but the answer to that is a yes as well. So to recap for you the only thing that changed for Daemons is the stats of a few units and they got fear.
The answer to the second about the 5++ is not yes.
Right now Flamers and Screamers have no Invul.
Per pg 32 of the BRB "Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule more than once."
Codex trumps BRB, so Flamers and Screamers get Daemon from their Codex and cannot get Daemon from the BRB as you cannot Daemon more than once.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:11:27
Subject: Re:Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
40k-noob wrote: WolvesForTheWolfGod wrote:The answer is yes they do. All GW did was add fear to them. The only thing anyone debates is wether or not the Daemons listed in the WD update have a 5++, but the answer to that is a yes as well. So to recap for you the only thing that changed for Daemons is the stats of a few units and they got fear.
The answer to the second about the 5++ is not yes.
Right now Flamers and Screamers have no Invul.
Per pg 32 of the BRB "Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule more than once."
Codex trumps BRB, so Flamers and Screamers get Daemon from their Codex and cannot get Daemon from the BRB as you cannot Daemon more than once.
Actually they do, as they only gain that benefit once.
Unless you can show me where Codex Daemons gives flamers/screamers/Soulgrinders/etc a 5++ on a case by case basis.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/30 16:19:16
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:32:38
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
They only get the rule "Daemon" once - from their codex
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:37:58
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
you are reading that wrong.
"..benefit of a special rule.." meaning the rule itself not the benefits bestowed by the rule.
so you can only get Daemon once.
ninja'd by Nos...:(
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/30 16:38:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:39:40
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
The rule doesn't say that, the rule says I can only gain each benefit once. Automatically Appended Next Post: 40k-noob wrote:you are reading that wrong.
"..benefit of a special rule.." meaning the rule itself not the benefits bestowed by the rule.
so you can only get Daemon once.
ninja'd by Nos...:(
"Cannot gain the benefit of a rule more than once. Nothing states I cannot have a rule more than once, just each benefit.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/30 16:40:42
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:46:56
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote: The rule doesn't say that, the rule says I can only gain each benefit once. Automatically Appended Next Post: 40k-noob wrote:you are reading that wrong. "..benefit of a special rule.." meaning the rule itself not the benefits bestowed by the rule. so you can only get Daemon once. ninja'd by Nos...:( "Cannot gain the benefit of a rule more than once. Nothing states I cannot have a rule more than once, just each benefit. Look at that paragraph again. BRB pg 32 wrote: Unless specifically stated, a model cannot gain the benefit of a special rule more than once. However, the effects of multiple different special rules are cumulative. The context is clear that the BRB is referring to the "special rule" in the first sentence and then in the second sentence it refers to the "effects" or "benefits" if you will, of multiple different special rules. So for example, you can only get A(which gives invul 6++) once, but you could get A(6++)+B(5++)+C(4++) for an end result of 4++ You cannot get Daemon( EW, DA, DR, sv++, Fear) + Daemon(Fear, 5++)
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/10/30 16:52:45
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:49:02
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:"Cannot gain the benefit of a rule more than once. Nothing states I cannot have a rule more than once, just each benefit.
Doesn't matter either way. The BRB rule doesn't even come into it.
Two rules, same name with different effects. It's almost a perfect case of a rules conflict.
And in such a case the Codex rule must be used.
Even if this wasn't such a clear case of a conflict, it would be one rule or another. Nothing supports the combining of special rules.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/30 16:49:38
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:50:48
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
Actually the context is clear it's talking about the "benefit"
Daemons get a 5++ as they only get the benefit once
After the comma it's talking about different named rules with the same benefiits.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:52:15
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Trigger-Happy Baal Predator Pilot
|
Gain the benefit of a special rule and Benefit from a special rule are 2 distinctly different things. The first means you can get a rule twice, but not benefit from a specific feature of the rule twice. While the second could mean you could not get the rule twice imho.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/30 16:53:01
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 16:52:36
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
grendel083 wrote:jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:"Cannot gain the benefit of a rule more than once. Nothing states I cannot have a rule more than once, just each benefit.
Doesn't matter either way. The BRB rule doesn't even come into it.
Two rules, same name with different effects. It's almost a perfect case of a rules conflict.
And in such a case the Codex rule must be used.
Even if this wasn't such a clear case of a conflict, it would be one rule or another. Nothing supports the combining of special rules.
Its right there, cannot gain the benefit of a rule more than once. that covers how do use multiple special rules of the same name. ignore the same stacked benefits unless explicitly allowed.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:16:47
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Painlord Titan Princeps of Slaanesh
|
gregor_xenos wrote:Codex trumps BRB. So for the moment; yes.
Christ people; when someone asks a question just answer it.
That is not the question he asked - there are Daemons in other books too. So the list is...
Daemons - C:CD: Have EW
Daemons -not C:CD: No EW
WD update - It is confusing, most people seem to say yes but that is not a definitive rules response.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/30 18:27:28
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:19:06
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
gregor_xenos wrote:Codex trumps BRB. So for the moment; yes.
Christ people; when someone asks a question just answer it.
Only when there's a conflict.
They wind up getting the benefits of both rules.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:30:53
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
calypso2ts wrote: gregor_xenos wrote:Codex trumps BRB. So for the moment; yes.
Christ people; when someone asks a question just answer it.
That is not the question he asked - there are Daemons in other books too. So the list is...
Caemons - C:CD: Have EW
Daemons -not C:CD: No EW
WD update - It is confusing, most people seem to say yes but that is not a definitive rules response.
Without a doubt yes to EW.
WD is an update to the Codex and the Codex Daemon rule is still applied first to all Daemons in the Codex.
The point of contention is whether or not they also get Daemon from the BRB and to that end i do not recall there ever being a special rule being applied twice to the same model.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:34:09
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets
|
So, to conclude, they have a 5++ save, Fear, and Eternal Warrior, right?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:35:28
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
and Invulnerable, daemonic assault,daemonic rivalry, fearless. Think that's the rest of them
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/30 17:35:38
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:38:44
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
No 5++.
Otherwise you have to give the Soul Grinders a 5++ as well and that is clearly not intended as the FAQ points.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:41:27
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
40k-noob wrote:
No 5++.
Otherwise you have to give the Soul Grinders a 5++ as well and that is clearly not intended as the FAQ points.
Why not all they did was add fear to the entire codex
They get the 5++ as well beings they have the special rule Daemon.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:44:21
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
Why would they need to add Fear to all units, if they apparently already have it?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:47:14
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
grendel083 wrote:Why would they need to add Fear to all units, if they apparently already have it?
Because they felt the need. It doesn't matter as adding fear in the faq doesn't prove anything.
I can only get the german FAQ atm ... not sure why.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:48:10
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
The Daemons FAQ says this : Codex Daemon FAQ v1.1 wrote: Page 45 – Soul Grinders. Leave the text in brackets for the Daemon special rule as it is but add “…and have the Fear special rule”. and the Soul Grinders codex entry says they only deploy like other daemons and are immune to Shaken and Stunned results. So clearly, GW does not want the Daemon rule to give an invul to the Soul Grinder
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/30 17:49:01
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:49:48
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
40k-noob wrote:The Daemons FAQ says this :
Codex Daemon FAQ v1.1 wrote:
Page 45 – Soul Grinders.
Leave the text in brackets for the Daemon special rule as it is
but add “…and have the Fear special rule”.
and the Soul Grinders codex entry says they only deploy like other daemons and are immune to Shaken and Stunned results.
So clearly, GW does not want the Daemon rule to give an invul to the Soul Grinder
So they gave Daemons Fear, they already had given Codex Daemons Fear, why would they give it especially to the Soul Grinder as he already has it
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:53:30
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote: grendel083 wrote:Why would they need to add Fear to all units, if they apparently already have it?
Because they felt the need. It doesn't matter as adding fear in the faq doesn't prove anything.
I can only get the german FAQ atm ... not sure why.
It would be an FAQ then, not an amendment. It's added because they don't already have the rule.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:55:51
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
grendel083 wrote:jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote: grendel083 wrote:Why would they need to add Fear to all units, if they apparently already have it?
Because they felt the need. It doesn't matter as adding fear in the faq doesn't prove anything.
I can only get the german FAQ atm ... not sure why.
It would be an FAQ then, not an amendment. It's added because they don't already have the rule.
Can't double check right now as I can't read German and the FAQ's are comin up in that language right now for some reason.
Regardless it doesn't matter as the rulebook allows the special rule to stack, just not the benefits.
It's not a conflict. so Codex does not trump BGB.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 17:59:59
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw
|
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote: grendel083 wrote:jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:"Cannot gain the benefit of a rule more than once. Nothing states I cannot have a rule more than once, just each benefit.
Doesn't matter either way. The BRB rule doesn't even come into it.
Two rules, same name with different effects. It's almost a perfect case of a rules conflict.
And in such a case the Codex rule must be used.
Even if this wasn't such a clear case of a conflict, it would be one rule or another. Nothing supports the combining of special rules.
Its right there, cannot gain the benefit of a rule more than once. that covers how do use multiple special rules of the same name. ignore the same stacked benefits unless explicitly allowed.
Just to come back to this...
The rule on page 32 covers having multiples of the same special rule. That isn't the case here. The rule is only granted once.
Instead we have a rule with two definitions. This is know as a conflict.
The rule is only being applied once, just a case of using the right rule.
Page 32 rule comes into play as an example when a unit gains rage twice (as can happen with the new Chaos SM book).
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/10/30 18:07:09
Subject: Daemons
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:40k-noob wrote:The Daemons FAQ says this :
Codex Daemon FAQ v1.1 wrote:
Page 45 – Soul Grinders.
Leave the text in brackets for the Daemon special rule as it is
but add “…and have the Fear special rule”.
and the Soul Grinders codex entry says they only deploy like other daemons and are immune to Shaken and Stunned results.
So clearly, GW does not want the Daemon rule to give an invul to the Soul Grinder
So they gave Daemons Fear, they already had given Codex Daemons Fear, why would they give it especially to the Soul Grinder as he already has it
Because......."Soul Grinders codex entry says they only deploy like other daemons and are immune to Shaken and Stunned results" is what the codex Daemon rule for Soul Grinder says.
They don't get everything that other Daemons in the Codex get from page 27. No Fearless, No Invulnerable!, No Daemonic Rivalry and No Fear
They ONLY deploy like other Daemons and then the FAQ adds Fear specifically to the Soul Grinder to complete the "Fear" loop but still not give it a invul. Automatically Appended Next Post: looks like an update to the FAQ just released but it is German for some reason.
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570038a_Chaos_Daemons_v1.1a.pdf
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/30 19:52:22
|
|
 |
 |
|