Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/04 14:03:39


Post by: onlainari



Will lash of submission be tier 1? Will it be used as much as holofield eldar tanks are used?

Chaos Sorcerer - mark of slaanesh, lash of submission 125pts

Demon Prince - mark of slaanesh, lash of submission 135pts

And the scary one:

Demon Prince - mark of slaanesh, lash of submission, wings 155pts

Demon Prince - mark of slaanesh, lash of submission, wings 155pts

That's right, 2 of them.

>>> A psyker may use this psychic power in the Shooting phase instead of using another ranged weapon. Pick any non-vehicle enemy unit visible to the psyker and within 24", and then take a Psychic test in order to use the power. If the test is successful, the target is moved 2D6" by the Chaos player. This move is not slowed by difficult terrain, but dangerous terrain tests are taken as normal. Victims may not be moved off the table, into impassable terrain or within 1" of enemy models. After this, the affected unit must take a Pinning test. <<<

Ok it might be hard to say without seeing the whole codex.

But two lash of submission might make for a nice first turn charge with beserkers:

12 Beserkers - skull champion with powerfist 292

Or raptors:

10 Raptors - khorne, aspiring champion with powerfist 270

Or will it be used mostly for non-combat purposes?

It makes for oblit plasma cannon killy goodness as well, since you can bunch the models up.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/04 15:59:17


Post by: Platuan4th



>>> A psyker may use this psychic power in the Shooting phase instead of using another ranged weapon. Pick any non-vehicle enemy unit visible to the psyker and within 24", and then take a Psychic test in order to use the power. If the test is successful, the target is moved 2D6" by the Chaos player. This move is not slowed by difficult terrain, but dangerous terrain tests are taken as normal. Victims may not be moved off the table, into impassable terrain or within 1" of enemy models. After this, the affected unit must take a Pinning test. <<<

Ok it might be hard to say without seeing the whole codex.

But two lash of submission might make for a nice first turn charge with beserkers:


(new emphasis mine)

Why would you want your enemies 'Zerkers charging you first turn?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/04 17:08:30


Post by: onlainari


Is there a law or something of whenever a big thread gets started the first reply is slowed?

Move the unit you want to charge with your zerkers...


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/04 17:49:26


Post by: Orlanth


As this represents the models shooting for the turn it would be hard to judge without looking at everything else. But....

1. You could stepping stone units forward so that you get to assault them, thus setting up your assaults far sooner than if you had to foot it accross the table.
2. You can move command squads or Pathfinders and other high value units out of bunkers
3. Move devestator squads behind cover terrain so they lose two turns firing.

Looks borken to me, I wonder if GW know what this spell can do and if they have playtested it at all. If you get a 'save' of some description such as a Ld test the ability is fair, but it doesnt look like you do, you just get moved. Either this rule has been reported wrong, or its yet another reason why GW games design should be outsourced.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/04 18:16:38


Post by: nikeforever22


Agree with Orlanth. Chaos would have 1-2 more tools to deal with the genestealer assault force as well.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/04 20:36:31


Post by: Janthkin


Looks borken to me, I wonder if GW know what this spell can do and if they have playtested it at all. If you get a 'save' of some description such as a Ld test the ability is fair, but it doesnt look like you do, you just get moved. Either this rule has been reported wrong, or its yet another reason why GW games design should be outsourced.


Something to replace Siren! Oh joy.

(Marines, at least, have psychic hoods. Everyone else, suck it up.)


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/04 22:33:48


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


This is a game-making skill, simple as that. It's like Nether Swap or Hook in DotA, for those who play it. Incredible.

Janthkin, Shadow in the Warp/RoWarding give a decent chance as well, surely, so that's two other armies that aren't screwed. (How coincidental that these are both powerhouse armies, heh.) I think Sisters have something that could negate it too?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/04 22:34:01


Post by: puree


Imperials - Psy hoods (good)
Nids - shadow in the warp (better than nothing)
Eldar - runes of warding (just wow!)

Unless there is something else not mentioned, it looks like a very nasty ability that most top armies get some form of 'save' against. Eldar in particular is a nasty counter - or are chaos immune to perils?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 01:42:14


Post by: Hellfury


I really hope this is a very limited item, kinda like dark blades were.

More than one of these in a list is stupid.

Hell, just one of these in a list is kinda dumb too, but not game breaking singularly.

Not as powerful as siren, but still very very good. (read: BROKEN)

Control elements have proven to be quite rare in the past. Whirlie minefields, deceiver deployment, eldrad deployment, puppetmaster psychic ability for witchhunter adversaries are about all I can think of that have any semblance of directly or indirectly controlling an enemies force.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 02:37:51


Post by: skyth


All the previous rumors had the unit in question needing to fail a leadership test as well.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 02:41:37


Post by: Hellfury


If thats true, and considering how high leadership is today for nearly everything, then perhaps not so broken. Actually, it could be considered laughable.

"I use my lash on your 60 point guard unit! I are the haxxoR!!111! Aww dammit, you have a high leadership bubble...nevermind... :S "


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 04:36:22


Post by: Orlanth


"All the previous rumors had the unit in question needing to fail a leadership test as well."

That would make it a fair weapon and a good introduction to the game, sure you have about 1:6 to pull it off on average, if targeted at a 'worthwhile' Ld9 target, but allowing for what it can do that isnt a problem. 1: 6 chance is worth it vs Pathfinders, it could make a 2+ cover a 'no save' in cityfight real easy. It could still get very nasty if chaos get leadership modifier abilities, which would make sense. Combine it with a corrupted Fear of the Darkness and can wreck havoc


Without the ld tes: borken, borken, borken.

Time will tell.




Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 05:58:38


Post by: onlainari


There is NO leadership test for the unit. Just for the psyker. I have the codex in front of me.

And you can take it twice.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 06:37:42


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


No leadership test for the unit in question. The Chaos unit in question simply takes a psychic test, and if passed BAM you're moved 2D6". Seems like the max you can take in a list is 2, and FYI a Flying Demon Prince with the requisite goodies to take this is 155 Points (Wings, MoS, Lash of Submission). Yay 1st Turn Charges with DP's or just pure game-breakingness.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 08:10:55


Post by: Janthkin


Nids - shadow in the warp (better than nothing)


When was the last time your saw a 'nid player take Shadow in the Warp?

Maybe they wil now-- no, they probably still won't.

Eldar are in decent shape, as Eldrad is there for them.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 08:22:54


Post by: Orlanth


"There is NO leadership test for the unit. Just for the psyker. I have the codex in front of me.
And you can take it twice."

How slowed. Looks like librarians and Farseers are now mandatory.
Nids are not hurt too badly by this, all their weapons are assault and the asrmy is fast moving. Guard, Orks and Tau are in trouble though, Guard in particular because of the heavy rated weapons and reliance on keeping distance and cover. Psychic Ward is no use, even if you get it! I wonder if there is a soon to be mandatory =I= ally loadout you could use to stop this?





Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 08:54:18


Post by: Lorek


Anything that forces your opponent to do something is quite powerful, and the Lash of Submission seems to go beyond the pale in this area.  It's bad enough when the Callidus does it, but that's once per game, at the very beginning. 

I see Chaos Sorcerers with this power being prime, prime targets.  Prime.  As in Rib.

Prime.




Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 08:55:16


Post by: Janthkin


Nids are not hurt too badly by this, all their weapons are assault and the asrmy is fast moving. Guard, Orks and Tau are in trouble though, Guard in particular because of the heavy rated weapons and reliance on keeping distance and cover. Psychic Ward is no use, even if you get it! I wonder if there is a soon to be mandatory =I= ally loadout you could use to stop this?


Since lesser daemons absolutely suck and no one will take them anymore, just pack in a GK HQ w/hood. As a bonus, his S6 force weapon should still make Mr. Daemon Prince a little cautious about rushing in.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 09:59:37


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


Why would you take sorcerors with this? It's a Slaanesh only psychic power that you can give to your flying demon prince.

Also from the looks of it, it's not going to do much in terms of stopping heavy weapons fire, it moves your units in the Chaos players phase, not your own movement phase.

The problem is that it moves things into charge range, off objectives, out of cover, tons of stuff that you could do with this that is just sick.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 10:21:42


Post by: Orlanth


"Also from the looks of it, it's not going to do much in terms of stopping heavy weapons fire, it moves your units in the Chaos players phase, not your own movement phase."

But if you were in cover and then find your unit behind cover, easy to do as you dont make difficult terrain moves, then your heavy weapon toting squad may have LOS blocked. Thus it takers a move to get back into a firing position.
- One turns shooting lost.
Furthermore it may be pinned.
- Potential second turns shooting lost.
Furthermore as you move 2d6 without difficult terrain it may take two turns move to get back to where you started, if that is where you need to be.
- Potential third turns shooting lost.

Now that is a worst case scenario, if you are playing on a pretty coverlesss table and your unit passes its pinning test, the Lash may do nothng to you. If in cityfight and you end up behind the building you were set up in you lose a turns shooting minimum out of this, quite likely two.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 11:00:30


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


Oh you've certainly got a ton of reasons how/why it could be used to stop heavy weapons fire, no question. I was merely trying to point out that it doesn't automatically count you as moving or something which is what I thought other people were under the impression of.

This kind of thing is absolutely huge in what it can do both offensively and defensively.

Heck just thinking about forcing Flyrants or Fex's out of cover with it so that it can get shot at by my 6-9 Oblits, it's just awesome.

From the looks of it, we're going to be seeing a LOT of Flying Slaanesh Demon Princes in the future, likely coming in pairs for each Chaos army.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 11:30:57


Post by: nikeforever22


However the average Lash pull would be 7-8 inches, so it's not that big of deal. The first turn assaults can be limited with model placement and using the placement to limit the kill zone. Also, use one's own units to block movement - unless the Lash allows Chaos to move models through other model bases'.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 14:08:39


Post by: Tacobake


d6" is enough, 2d6" is a bit much, being able to get > 6"

meh, at least GW is trying to make cool rules


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 15:13:03


Post by: Halfpast_Yellow


The Lash of Submission is slowed when you consider all the possibilities and I can see it being banned from tournaments, or getting FAQed very very quickly.

It's much worse than Siren.

A few units of T4(5) FNP Deathguard giving you trouble? just lash them into a tight circle and hit them with Blastmaster S8 AP3 Blasts, vindicator/defiler.

Havoc/Devastator squad with plenty of ablative wounds and a unit champ? Just lash the ablative wounds out of LOS at the start of your shooting phase, and pick off the Heavy weapons and powerfist to your hearts content.

Pathfinders? Lash them out of cover and blow them away. Harlequins? Lash them closer and make VoT a joke.

There is the aforementioned double Slaaneshi Daemonprince first turn charge.

bah.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 16:50:06


Post by: onlainari


Pick any non-vehicle enemy unit visible to the psyker and within 24", and then take a Psychic test in order to use the power. If the test is successful, the target is moved 2D6" by the Chaos player.

Since it targets, you have to pass VoT first to use it on harlies. Not that I think it matters because I just don't see the harlies being targeted anyway, they're probably already close enough, or in a falcon.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 19:45:25


Post by: Hellfury


I have to admit that this type of puppetmaster ability is quite cool. Broken, but still a very very neat idea. very choasy.

I still dont want to see something like this in print to be abused, but still neat none the less. I really pray that it becomes balanced. Because it would be nice to see a very nifty rule like this, but just not broken.

Thank God we have Jervis at the helm to prevent stupid rul...er...nevermind.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 20:08:49


Post by: Aeon


Bear in mind the following

The Daemon Prince is not a IC so can be targeted
T5 3+/5++ with 4 Wounds is tough but at least its not T6 or not upgradeable to a 2+ save.
The power is instead of shooting so the Prince can only charge the unit
The power is LOS only so the Daemon Prince has to be put into harms way.
The wording says you have to move the distance specified; so no bunching up for Obliterator Plasma Cannon shots

Still rude as all heck but at least they cant hide like Librarians with Fury of the Ancients...


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 21:12:50


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


The power is instead of shooting so the Prince can only charge the unit
The power is LOS only so the Daemon Prince has to be put into harms way.


Aeon, we're talking about Daemon Princes here. Since when have these two points been concerns?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 21:32:03


Post by: Aeon


Since Daemon Princes gear have been nerfed.

You cant upgrade them anymore like the old codex (ie the one that is about to be replaced)


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 21:39:29


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


I haven't seen the new one, but from what people have said, it will still be possible to upgrade them such that they can execute a first turn charge (with Lash), which kind of negates those concerns. You're right, though; I hadn't considered the nerf they've received in other areas.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 22:30:03


Post by: Aeon


Ive just checked and the only way to get a first turn charge with a Daemon Prince is to move 12" with wings; lash them forwards 2D6" and then charge 6"... actually that is pretty bad :$


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 22:48:05


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Or you could use two DPs and lash twice for a 12" + 4D6" + 6" charge, though this may be excessive!


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 22:52:42


Post by: onlainari


Wow, double lashwinged princes is scaring me. A lot! Someone come up with a name for this beast.

310pts!


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/05 23:06:42


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


FYI, it says "the target is moved by the Chaos player", so yes you can bunch them up for Template shots.

Though I'm much more in favor of the idea of moving the models in a great big old Congaline style for your DP's to run up and charge.

Move the Power Fist Sarge/AC up near the front of the konga line and then setup your nice 2" killzone from there meaning that your 5 WS7 S6 I6 attacks will likely make sure the squads power fist gets taken out, and if you leave enough models around, they'll likely pass their LD and pile in, only to get eaten in their turn, where the prince can consolodate and then fly, lash, repeat.


As for the name of this combo, I dunno, Lash, Slaanesh, there's got to be some funny S&M reference in there that could be used, but I'm drawing a blank. :p


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 00:56:48


Post by: Therion-


There's so many ways this ability could've been very balanced. For example, in my opinion the rule should (and might) say that the target unit is moved 2D6 directly towards the Sorcerer, instead of just 'moved'. If the models can be moved in any way then one could indeed bunch the unit up or make other stupid formations out of them.

It's a very powerful ability and I don't despise it completely but what I'm not happy about is that it's pretty obvious that noone will ever hear of undivided/khorne/nurgle/tzeentch HQ choices again, and we'll yet again have a cookie cutter Chaos army list 99,99% of the population plays.

As far as first turn assaults are concerned, I don't really understand what the big deal is. I think infiltrating Princes with Daemonic Speed were much worse because they could dominate half of your own deployment zone. You can see that your opponent has a Prince or two with this new psychic power, so why do you deploy within 24" of those guys? Deploy to your table edge and take the Princes down with mobile firepower.

Three other armies in the game have perfectly good counters to psychic powers already, and if they decide not to use them, then they just have to deploy to the edges and make the Princes the primary targets for turns one and two.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 01:08:43


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


There are counters of course, and first turn charges with this are actually stupidly risky if your opponent has a credible amount of Firepower.

The thing with this is what it can do to other armies since you move them 2D6" however you (the chaos player) wants them. It explicitly says that the models are moved by the Chaos player, period.

Setting it up for Turn 2/3 charges or using it to pull things out of cover to get shot is going to be huge I think.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 01:36:33


Post by: Therion-


Well, this ability won't help much against mechanised Eldar and that will definately be an uphill battle, and I can't see how most Godzilla Nids would be too hurt by it either. They've got the -5 to LD 18" bubble around them and anything moving within 24" of the Choir is going to get a worm salad in the 'nid shooting phase.

Against others? It's great that Chaos remains a competitive army. There's plenty of nerfs in the book to counter-balance a powerful psychic ability.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 01:52:46


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


Vs. Mech Eldar, it's rough no question, but 9 Oblits are nothing to sneeze at. If the Mech Eldar player goes prisms, then their prisms will get stunned down. For the Harlies via Falcon delivery you're looking at lots of mobility to block the rear hatches of the falcon since the harlies most obvious targets are the Oblits and DP's, if setup right the Mech Eldar will have a hard time.

Likewise anything that's NOT in the grav tanks is in for some trouble. Spears, Spiders, if it's not hiding in a tank I can see it having problems. And The Chaos player has a LOT of firepower to play with in 9 Oblits.

Vs Nidzilla, I've not experienced the Chior first hand, but between the Lash and 9 Oblits, you pull TMC's out of Cover and then shoot the hell out of them with the Oblits. That should kill the Flyrant in a turn, and then you start pulling down Dakka Fex's or whatever else really looks scary.

Because the Princes are WS7, Fex's are hitting on 5's. With the Lash the Prince can charge Fex's that aren't around the 18" LD bubble, and his charge range is now 18" + 2D6 for the Lash. Great for killing the Sniper Fex's.

With units like raptors in there to throw at things like that, you could easily pull out one MC or a unit of your picking with the lash and assault with raptors or other units.

Nothing against Nidzilla is a walk in the Park but I think that the new Chaos actually has the tools to take the list down, which is probably half the battle vs. a Zilla player.

Take a look at the list I posted in the army list forum, it's basically 2 Lash Princes, 9 Oblits, raptors, and some obligatory CSM's. I think it could stand up to a lot, even Zilla.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 03:48:16


Post by: Therion-


Vs. Mech Eldar, it's rough no question, but 9 Oblits are nothing to sneeze at. If the Mech Eldar player goes prisms, then their prisms will get stunned down. For the Harlies via Falcon delivery you're looking at lots of mobility to block the rear hatches of the falcon since the harlies most obvious targets are the Oblits and DP's, if setup right the Mech Eldar will have a hard time.

Haven't the price of Obliterators been increased, while their toughness has been reduced to a flat 4, while also losing heavy bolters and autocannons? Have you seen what Fire Dragons do to 3man Obliterator squads? Additionally, Chaos lost their 5-6man las/plas squads, meaning in any case their AT firepower will be less than what is was before.

Lots of mobility to block rear hatches? What actually? Daemon Princes have T5 and a 5+ invulnerable save, and they are usually the only reasonably mobile units in the whole army. If the Daemon Princes are visible they can both be taken down in one turn by the vehicles and Autarchs.

Because the Princes are WS7, Fex's are hitting on 5's. With the Lash the Prince can charge Fex's that aren't around the 18" LD bubble, and his charge range is now 18" + 2D6 for the Lash. Great for killing the Sniper Fex's.

Tyrants with implant attacks make total mincemeat out of Chaos Daemon Princes. Tyrant dual devourers cause 2,66 unsaved wounds on a Daemon Prince meaning it can easily be gunned down, and 5 implanted close combat attacks cause 2,22 unsaved wounds.

With units like raptors in there to throw at things like that, you could easily pull out one MC or a unit of your picking with the lash and assault with raptors or other units.

I simply think you're overestimating what you'll actually be able to fit into the army. It's all good on paper when you don't think about the points cost.

Take a look at the list I posted in the army list forum, it's basically 2 Lash Princes, 9 Oblits, raptors, and some obligatory CSM's. I think it could stand up to a lot, even Zilla.

Mech Eldar go against that army by maneouvring to get LOS and then killing both Daemon Princes without even having to disembark. Holo-fields suck up the 9 lascannons like they weren't even there, then the Dragons and Harlequins run through those 9 Obliterators and the game ends a massacre regardless of what any CSM or Raptor counter charge may produce in the following turn. In my opinion it's incredibly easy to score massive VP from that army with Eldar. If you try to chase the Falcons with the Raptors you will only delay the inevitable by a turn or two because then the Raptors will be gunned down first. Two biker Autarchs wipe out a squad of 8-10 Raptors in a single turn (2,22 get killed by Reaper Launchers and 6,66 die in the first phase of close combat).


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 04:23:44


Post by: cypher


I am suprised nobody has mentioned moving falcons toward the chaos line and turning them arround for rapid fire goodness into armor 10. Much easier to down them that way (still hard).

Also, when was the last time you saw implant attacks?

The lash also keeps thos annoying dakka fexes out of shooting.
Dakka fex moves into 24 in. Lash moves it out. Fex never shoots. 155 pts to stop a 118 pt fex is a bit overkill but considering that is the heart of the nid army it is worth it.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 04:45:26


Post by: Orlanth


Aeon: "Bear in mind the following

The Daemon Prince is not a IC so can be targeted
T5 3+/5++ with 4 Wounds is tough but at least its not T6 or not upgradeable to a 2+ save.
The power is instead of shooting so the Prince can only charge the unit
The power is LOS only so the Daemon Prince has to be put into harms way.
Still rude as all heck but at least they cant hide like Librarians with Fury of the Ancients...


Fair enough pojints on the Daemon Prince but even if this were all true Lash would still be borken. However according to the first post the Lash could be on a Chaos Sorceror lurking in a large unit of CSM....


Aeon: "The wording says you have to move the distance specified; so no bunching up for Obliterator Plasma Cannon shots"

The wording quoted here was "the target is moved 2D6" by the Chaos player" so stuff obliterators, I am more worried about having units placed in base to base in sight of a Defiler, one battlecannon shot, oh look, you all die on 2+.

This is worse than siren ever was. funnily enough we can see this just from rulebook quotes at first glance, yet there so called professional games designers cannot see this after months of design, 'testing' and preening themselves in White Dwarf about what they are doing for the Art of Games Design.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 05:15:05


Post by: Orlanth


Cypher: I am suprised nobody has mentioned moving falcons toward the chaos line and turning them arround for rapid fire goodness into armor 10. Much easier to down them that way (still hard).

It wasnt mentioned because it canot be done. Vehicvles cannot be targeted.


Cypher: The lash also keeps thos annoying dakka fexes out of shooting.
Dakka fex moves into 24 in. Lash moves it out. Fex never shoots. 155 pts to stop a 118 pt fex is a bit overkill but considering that is the heart of the nid army it is worth it.


If that was the worst I got from Lash would consider myself lucky. You negate a Sorcerors shooting for a dakkafex, net win to the dakkafex as it is cheaper and has friends.

Tyranids are not too badly effected, and Carnifexes hardly affected at all. also it does nothing against Falcons and little against Harlequins (who must be seen). Sweet irony.

Everyone else is potentially in for a very hard time, its all a matter of which gets targeted first, the Chaos Sorceror/Prince or the Farseer/Inquisitor/Librarian.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 05:18:45


Post by: foil7102


Has anyone though about using this to break a units coherency? 8 man devastator squad, move the 4 lascannons 2d6 forward, and the 4 extra guys 2d6 straight back. Even if you do not manage to take out the lascannons you still shut the squad up for at least a turn as it moves back into coherency.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 06:26:10


Post by: puree


Posted By foil7102 on 08/06/2007 10:18 AM
Has anyone though about using this to break a units coherency? 8 man devastator squad, move the 4 lascannons 2d6 forward, and the 4 extra guys 2d6 straight back. Even if you do not manage to take out the lascannons you still shut the squad up for at least a turn as it moves back into coherency.

I would assume that except where specified the move follows normal move rules, which is that you must end up in coherency?

I can't imagine eldar having probems, Runes of warding makes the most likely result a fail (with a high chance of perils), a chaos list built around the power is likely to be pretty weak if attempts to use the power just end up killing the guy with it (or at least stopping it).

Nids can always take shadow if they start having trouble, its not as good, but it still ups the faiure rate for ld10 to about 30%, even before any scream gets in range, again a list built around that power becomes somewhat more dubious.

Same wth psy hoods.

All arimes could of course just deploy further back, barring LOS it is impossible to stop first turn lash with 12" deployement zones even if you deploy on your edge, but it will pretty much prevent first turn assaults, whilst leaving the DP way out front of the rest of the army to hopefully be shot to shreds.

A nasty power, but the 3 lists that they probably most need it against appear to have useful counters that make reliance on it a risky proposition. Theory hammer of course, time will tell.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 06:51:45


Post by: ubermosher


If this list gets popular on the tourney scene, I imagine most IG armies will start including an Inquisitor with 'Hood.

Not to mention you'll see more S10 Demolisher cannons to squish DP's. (Aaaahh, perhaps this mechanic was designed by GW to induce more Vindicator Mk2 sales. )


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 07:02:09


Post by: puree


Posted By ubermosher on 08/06/2007 11:51 AM

Not to mention you'll see more S10 Demolisher cannons to squish DP's. (Aaaahh, perhaps this mechanic was designed by GW to induce more Vindicator Mk2 sales. )

I suppose that will be the tau counter - instant death by railgun to the exposed DP.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 07:07:57


Post by: Badger


of course deamonprices are immun to instakill (immortal warrior rule in the new codex)!!!

i think. it puts chaos in the lower end of tier1, vs others tier1 armys its good but not that good...

but vs other armys without anti-psy its just ugly (esp. tau -> broadsides,...) :/


greetings Badger


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 07:42:52


Post by: Reecius


Good lord, who thought this power up? This is very broken.

The thing that stinks about it is that it punishes already weak armies. Marines have some defense in the hood, Eldar just shut down the psychic phase, and Orks may have something with the weirdboy coming back, but tau, IG, crons, etc. get hosed. I forsee EVERY IG army coming with an inquisitor.

There is almost no risk when used against an army that has no psychic defense. Tau for example, HAVE to deploy 36" away from a deamon prince with this power or they get screwed. This power is just too dominating and game changing. on a winged deamon prince, he has a 36" LOS range to pull anything within his charge range.

The only risk against an army with some defense is that it gets hooded and then the deamon prince is sitting there with his junk swining in the breeze.

Hopefully you have to abide by normal movement rules. then you can put a chump squad in front to lure the prince out and hopefully light his ass up next turn.

The worst affected are heavy weapon units.

That's it, i am swtiching to Mech Eldar.

and the funny thing is, GW still wins. Maybe they are smarter than we give them credit for.....


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 07:53:10


Post by: Lemartes


I found a name. The Lash of Dumbmission. Your highly trained marines just go dumb and run out in a bunched formation to be mowed down. We just went dumb sarg. It's also dumb because the first time you touch another players figs and move them around knocking off a piece and he smacks you upside the head call yourself dumb. Dumb rules right IMO if anything involves playing with other persons toys that's why you bought your own.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 07:56:20


Post by: Ebon


Posted By onlainari on 08/06/2007 3:52 AM
Wow, double lashwinged princes is scaring me. A lot! Someone come up with a name for this beast.

310pts!

I hereby nominate the names 'Slash Prince' or 'Slash Wing'

It combines Lash, with Slaanesh, and rolls off the tongue pretty easily. 


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 08:04:36


Post by: Lemartes


Although the Submission works in many ways also. You have no choice in the matter as the rules clearly state I can move your nicely painted figs around with my grubby hands. Submit I tell you. Play with oil all over your hands and I would probably just concede before letting my figs be bismudged.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 08:12:36


Post by: puree


Posted By Ebon on 08/06/2007 12:56 PM
Posted By onlainari on 08/06/2007 3:52 AM
Wow, double lashwinged princes is scaring me. A lot! Someone come up with a name for this beast.

310pts!

I hereby nominate the names 'Slash Prince' or 'Slash Wing'

It combines Lash, with Slaanesh, and rolls off the tongue pretty easily. 

I'd have thought 'Slaashnesh' was the obvious one.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 08:15:02


Post by: cypher


I vote for slash prince. very cool name. Slash wing just has to many images of demon summoning.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 08:23:13


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


I don't get why everyone is thinking that Hoods and Runes of Warding will stop the thing cold.

Admittedly it'll stop some, but it's nowhere near a guaranteed shutdown, especially if there are two princes with it.

The Chior isn't all that either, it's not hard to make sure you setup your Prince about 24" away and push/pull a Flyrant or Tyrant out and then blast it with your 6 or 9 Oblits and whatever troops you've got lying around. And the whole Nid army isn't going to be within the 18" bubble, if there's a fex on a flank it'll work there to get the Prince into CC. If your whole army is advancing in this bubble, you're not in cover and you're going to get shot by 9 Oblits and then Troops who will likely either have an AP1 Bolt of Change or an AP3 Blaster Master, or a freakin Lascannon.

You also don't have to combo Princes with it, you can have the prince be further away and pull a unti towards some raptors with a Fist.

Regardless I'm sure they will do exactly what Princes do now, use terrain to hide themselves as they fly over to get a charge off. If they ever get exposed, they were likely going to have be exposed to some fire at some point anyway.

The Lash has a metric ton of uses in a game because unit position is huge, pushing units around and into/out of ranges of guns or assault is a huge ability that will be capitalized on.

It is not unbeatable, but it is broken enough to be mandatory for a lot of armies (kind of like DakkaFex's).


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 09:11:03


Post by: winterman


Once again Slaanesh gets the borken psychic power and Tzeencth and Nurgle get crap. Lash of submission may very well dictate the metagame for the next several years. Why am I not surprised.

In any case, it is a cool power that could have been more balanced (maybe a scatterdice with only a hit allowing the chaos player to determine the direction, something). Reminds me of alot of the stuff in warmachine, isntead of yet another 'kill stuff' power.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 14:08:19


Post by: Phryxis


GW is officially in a tailspin.

They don't just need to fire Gav and Jervis, they need to kill them so as to prevent the possibility of losing their minds at a later date and re-hiring them.

Seriously, how can they be so damn bad at their job?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 15:51:23


Post by: onlainari


Slash prince rolls off the tongue very nicely.

I vote slash prince.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 15:55:03


Post by: Therion-


Also, when was the last time you saw implant attacks?

Actually every single Hive Tyrant I've ever seen has always had it. Quad devourers and implant attacks is the standard line-up for the winged Tyrant, and the walking one either has quad devourers and implants or dual devourers & venom cannon & implants.
Once again Slaanesh gets the borken psychic power

Powerful yes but I still can't see why it's broken. The exact same Slaanesh spell exists in Warhammer Fantasy too only there unit movement and facing is even more crucial. In both systems the spell can be failed, resisted (immune) and dispeled. Try to put this psychic power into perspective: Chaos was just nerfed in every single way imaginable and the only positive development to be found in the army book so far has been this spell.

Voodoo Boyz: Your metagame is borderline ridiculous already so please take a deep breath and calm down. What you're saying is "First you hide your Princes then you move them so they can see the hidden enemy Hive Tyrant then you cast the spell twice on it and then you blast it with 9 Obliterators muhahaha!". I can't see how any reasonable Zilla player would ever let you get away with something like that, not to mention you're actually boasting about maneouvring with 1050 odd points to kill a 170 point model. What you conveniently forget is that even in the highly unlikely scenario that you ever pull something like this off, you're just trading units with the Tyranid player with a 1:1 ratio or worse.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 16:40:04


Post by: onlainari


That's a bad call mate.

Marines got bolter, bolt pistol, ccw, frags, and kraks. So did cult troops. Cult troops got better for their points.

Chaos did not get nerfed, iron warriors got nerfed.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 21:24:14


Post by: winterman


. In both systems the spell can be failed, resisted (immune) and dispeled.  Try to put this psychic power into perspective: Chaos was just nerfed in every single way imaginable and the only positive development to be found in the army book so far has been this spell.

Yes but while every fantasy army has some sort of anti-magic ability, many 40k armies are at the mercy of this spell. Yes there's ways to avoid the first turn disatser without a hood et al, but then again you've just dictated exactly how your opponent can deploy without getting hosed and that in and of itself is worth the 10 or so points this power costs. And you've probably just deplayed the inevitable unless you can move as fast or faster then the princes.

Plus I'm not even saying that this thing is going to break 40k but compared to the other powers it is far and away better (just like siren was compared to the BS minor powers of the other gods). Assuming this is the "only positive deveopment", then that is brokeness in my book and a missed opportunity. Not that I agree that the chaos is completey nerfed though. I recall many, even you, thought nids were nerfed hard when rumors first surfaced and yet they are now considered top tier. I think its too early to tell what kind of shape chaos as a whole will be come a year from now but we can be sure this power will figure in that outcome.



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 21:30:02


Post by: Orlanth


Lash Prince makes more sense, its less confusing, its not armed with a 'slash' and needs MoS anyway. You might as well called a Siren Daemon Prince that, but there is no need to do so, of course its a daemon, all Daemon Princes are daemons, so Siren Prince will do.
All Lash Princes are Slaanesh. You figure.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 21:44:41


Post by: onlainari


I change my vote to lash prince ^_^.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/06 22:00:11


Post by: Spellbound


How's this for a list?

HQ:

Demon Prince, Mark of Slaanesh, Lash of Submission - 135

Same darn thing - 135

Troops:

6 Noisemarines, Blastmaster - 160

5 more of the same thing - 160 each

Elites:

Dreadnought, T/L lascannon -  115?

Heavy Support:

Defiler, extra ccw - 150

Total: 1,495

 

Basically I sit there and shoot them to bits, using the Lash of Submission to either A) advance and mess up my enemy's heavy weapons so I can get everything else or B) Repeatedly push back his assault troops until I'm ready to deal with them.

 

He can go ahead and shoot my daemon princes - 5+ invulnerable gives them statistically 6 wounds against heavy weapons fire and it'll save lots of wear and tear on my marines proper.

I can also use them to move gaunt hordes out of synapse, etc.

I don't think it's a broken list, just a very pointed one that will likely give a few players quite the annoyance until they figure out what to bring.  Clustering enemy troops together for battle cannon and blastmaster goodness - oh boy!

-Spellbound



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 02:17:58


Post by: Therion-


I recall many, even you, thought nids were nerfed

...and they were, bigtime, and so were Eldar. Nowhere did I say the new Chaos wouldn't still be a decent army. What I said was that tournament Chaos was completely nerfed to oblivion (characters, oblits, csm squads, basilisk, daemonic possession) and that it's only reasonable they get something in return. Also I didn't claim that a psychic power "of always taken" is the best way to do it, but atleast it's something. Let's be honest, without this psychic power the new Chaos would be a tier 3 army.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 02:56:56


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


Posted By Therion- on 08/06/2007 8:55 PM
Voodoo Boyz: Your metagame is borderline ridiculous already so please take a deep breath and calm down. What you're saying is "First you hide your Princes then you move them so they can see the hidden enemy Hive Tyrant then you cast the spell twice on it and then you blast it with 9 Obliterators muhahaha!". I can't see how any reasonable Zilla player would ever let you get away with something like that, not to mention you're actually boasting about maneouvring with 1050 odd points to kill a 170 point model. What you conveniently forget is that even in the highly unlikely scenario that you ever pull something like this off, you're just trading units with the Tyranid player with a 1:1 ratio or worse.


I fail to see where I'm getting over-excited.  I was merely pointing out that this power is something that will be incredibly useful, even against Nidzilla armies.

The whole idea is to set it up so you get a shot at things like Flyrants (who would normally pose a problem), and then Dakka Fex's, preferably getting the Fex's into assault with the Princes. 

Also while you're talking about the Chior, I've already had it argued with me by some players locally that a Psychic Test is not a LD test (like a morale check is different from LD tests), so the Chior doesn't prevent the power from going off.  Stupid RAW issue, but it's there.

I think the power is significant in helping Chaos players deal with Nidzilla and Nids in general, even if the Choir does help the Nid player stop the power from going off.



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 03:13:43


Post by: skyth


Psychic test like a morale test is a subset of leadership test.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 03:17:11


Post by: Therion-


Also while you're talking about the Chior, I've already had it argued with me by some players locally that a Psychic Test is not a LD test (like a morale check is different from LD tests), so the Chior doesn't prevent the power from going off.  Stupid RAW issue, but it's there.


Psychic test is most definately a leadership based check, and is affected by the Choir. Psychic Scream reduces your leadership for all tests by 1, and the psychic test is made using your leadership value, not your unmodified leadership value. The Choir affects morale checks, psychic tests, tests to rally and so on. You got it already argued with some local players? Ahh ok I yield.

As far as morale check is concerned, you should get your facts straight. If something affects morale checks specifically, it doesn't affect leadership checks in general, but if something simply affects leadership checks it also affects morale checks.

Page 47 40K rulebook: "Morale checks are a very specific kind of Leadership test."
Page 52 40K rulebook: "...if a Psyker rolls a 2 or a 12 when taking the Leadership test to use a psychic power..."
Page 31 Codex: Tyranids: "...suffer a -1 to all Leadership tests."

Good try though. Send my regards to your local players. They are really pro in arguing these 'stupid RAW issues'. I'm curious, do you actually read the rules before you start arguing RAW issues?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 03:32:01


Post by: Boss Salvage


Posted By Therion- on 08/07/2007 8:17 AM
Psychic test is most definately a leadership based check ...

Culexus assassin ftw?

- Salvage



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 03:33:28


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


Nice, I never bothered arguing the point, only had it pointed out in conversation.

Irregardless the Lash will still be useful vs. a Nidzilla list even with the Chior, unless the entire allotment of TMC's is within that 18" bubble.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 03:40:52


Post by: Therion-


Nice, I never bothered arguing the point, only had it pointed out in conversation.

Of course. Now quick, go edit your post before anyone notices.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 03:52:59


Post by: Voodoo Boyz


Posted By Therion- on 08/07/2007 8:40 AM
Nice, I never bothered arguing the point, only had it pointed out in conversation.

Of course. Now quick, go edit your post before anyone notices.

I said it was something to consider since when talking about Chior vs the Lash someone brought it up. Since I don't play Nidzilla or use Psychic powers much I just let it go. I qualified my statement in the post for exactly that reason, which is why in my post I said: "Stupid RAW issue, but it's there.

I think the power is significant in helping Chaos players deal with Nidzilla and Nids in general, even if the Choir does help the Nid player stop the power from going off. "

You want to get smug about me pointing out something I thought could be an issue, qualifying  my statement as such, and then being proven wrong and acknowledging it, then fine, be that guy. 

That doesn't change the point that Nidzilla, even with the Chior, is still going to have a hard time dealing with Chaos armies revolving around 2 Lash Princes. 


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 04:08:03


Post by: Reecius


Good try though. Send my regards to your local players. They are really pro in arguing these 'stupid RAW issues'. I'm curious, do you actually read the rules before you start arguing RAW issues?


Therion, you know your numbers, but good lord you are mean spirited. Go ask someone to give you a hug.

The lash princes are going to be rediculous. And while certain units in fantasy may have immunity to magic, the ability to take dispell scrolls, etc, not all armies in 40K have similar abilities. As winterman pointed out, some armies are simply at the mercy of the power, and that is overpowering. Imagine a cron army vs this. pull one big warrior or immoprtal unit towards you, charge with both princes and then lawn-mower through the rest of the army. And if they start at their board edge like you suggest, they never participate in the game and get shot to death by heavy weapons while trying to reposition. Plus, the Princes deploy late game being HQ, so they have the chance to counter the deployment of their opponant.

Even armies with psychic defense will not be able to relibale stop this ability, baring Eldar. A hood will only stop it about once in three attempts or so, and if you have two princes, you are fairly well ensured one of them will work ever turn. Pull a large unit conga line style toward you, charge, stay locked in combat for your opponant's shooting phase then destroy the unit, and charge your turn two into his lines.

All you have to do is put two Lash Princes side by side and one of them statistically will get the power off against anyone, again baring Eldar with Runes of Warding. There is risk in that you could fail both or you may not pull the unit far enough to charge, but it is relatively minor, especially against armies with no defense. And even if you lose a prince, big deal, 150 points is a minor loss for the potential gain.

Time will tell how effective the new lists will be, and i am sure we will come up with ways to counter the lash, but at first assesment, it sounds pretty damn powerful.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 04:28:41


Post by: Orlanth


spellbound: "How's this for a list?

HQ:

Demon Prince, Mark of Slaanesh, Lash of Submission - 135

Same darn thing - 135"


Nasty though the Lash Prince is, I would far rather take a Lash Sorceror, its cheaper, does the same job and cannot be targeted (except by Vindicares, Mindwwr and such like). The Lash Prince is ultimately a lascannon magnet, still very nastyy but if you want to truely max out sorcerors are the answer.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 05:47:42


Post by: Spellbound


The demon princes are actually there TO be firepower magnets.  They can't be instakilled and as long as they're being shot at they're soaking heavy weapon shots that would otherwise be directed at my much squishier marines.  If they last long enough to do 2 or 3 turns of havoc against the enemy's ranks, I'll consider it time well spent.

And they work as counter-assault too!  Not much that I can't throw two I6 demon princes at and not be able to handle.

Basically those princes would "need" 12 lascannon/missle launcher shots to take down.  That's two full squads [or three squads dropped below half strength] still alive to shoot and cause damage, and my defiler and dreadnought are still alive. 

I don't know if it'll work, but it'd be fun to try it out!

-Spellbound



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 05:57:10


Post by: Boss Salvage


Posted By Spellbound on 08/07/2007 10:47 AM

Basically those princes would "need" 12 lascannon/missle launcher shots to take down ... and dreadnought [is] still alive.

I'd recommend not taking the las dread if you're in it to win it - and with 2 lash princes, you best be.  That dread freaks, you're getting 2 twin-las into the nearest thing, which is either a 20+ point-per noise marine unit, a 150+ point defiler or a lash prince ...

- Salvage



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 06:10:46


Post by: Da Boss


How FUN would it be to play orks against that?
"I move 6" forward."
"I push you 7" back, and shoot you."
Repeat.

FUNFUNFUN


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 06:16:21


Post by: Spellbound


Posted By Da Boss on 08/07/2007 11:10 AM
How FUN would it be to play orks against that?
"I move 6" forward."
"I push you 7" back, and shoot you."
Repeat.

FUNFUNFUN



"I move 180 orks 6" forward"

"I... I move two units back?"

"I move 120 orks forward and shoot 30 rokkits at your princes"

"I.... gun you down!"

"I advance with the survivors and fire 30 more rokkits at your marines"

"I...die horribly?"

"pretty much"

 

I'm not in it to win it, I'm just using what I have.  I used to go all assault, but now that the assault squads are marines with higher initiative and demons are crap, my assault has fizzled.  I had 6 squads of 6 marines with blastmasters already that I used for big games - time to dust them off and make use of them.  Also my defiler was already converted with an extra set of arms and my dreadnought is ALWAYS in my list, so bam!

But yeah, I could drop the dreadnought, lower the princes to sorcerors and put a second defiler in.  Don't feel like buying one though.



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 06:20:31


Post by: Longshot


The lash idea is a gimmick and will just get metagamed out of existence.

It's just not a take-all-comers ability. It won't work against armies with craptons of units and it won't work with armies in vehicles, which encompasses about 1/2 of the game right there. Won't work reliably against marines or eldar. Woops, that's the other 1/2 of the game.

So who cares?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 06:37:18


Post by: Da Boss


What size game are you playing where I can have 180 orks and 30 rokkits?

 

Having two units moved back is horrifically bad for an army that usually connects with about 30% of it's strength in turn four vs. any sort of firepower.

With the actual 18 rokkits you could expect from a 180 strong ork army, assuming you made it entirely out of sluggas or shootas, accepting that two units (6 rokkits) have been pushed back out of range, you're going to get about 4 hits on a daemon prince, 3 of which might wound, 1 of which will probably be saved. If you're sitting him in cover, hey, up them odds there.

Meanwhile, your chaos opponent will be happily exploding you with his armour and long range troops, forcing you to assault in piecemeal and die in droves.

Speed freaks of course will have no problem, but horde orks? Screwed.



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 08:46:19


Post by: Triggerbaby


The rules for the Lash aren't entirely clear, but it looks like one might be able to target enemy units in close combat. And naturally, once somebody asks the question, Gav will immediately pipe up and give an enthusiastic albeit unofficial yes. Because he is a goddam sped.

But the possibilities for abuse are both game breaking and amusing!

  • Charged by my Beserkers? Fzorgle! You will be charged again next turn by my Furious Repeating Charge!
  • My Oblits are stuck in combat with Scarabs? Fzorgle! Not when the Scarabs love the great taste of leaving combat to jump into dangerous terrain on the lava tables.
  • I have been charged by your Slugga Boys? Fzorgle! I think you'll find they prefer to stand in a circle front of my Defiler.

And let's not forget that if normal targeting rules are superceded, you can always fzorgle independant characters out of attached units and into harm's way.

Even outside the balance issues, the lash is just a terrible idea. It adds more movement to the round, and movement is the most time-intensive aspect of game. Large units take a couple of minutes to move, particularly for players who are used to moving small units. Like Chaos players. And as mentioned before, it sanctions your opponent to put his greasy sausage fingers on your models. I don't want your Cheetos dust on my Talos, fatty, and I'm assuming the sentiment is mutual.

Oh, and I love how it forces a pinning test on top of the movement. It's like the designers weren't sure if anybody would want it. I envision the following: "All it does is move enemy units? Disgusted snort. Hey, stupid person, we're trying to get rid of the useless, fluffy wargear that so bothered everybody in the last edition. Fix it, post haste. Limpwristed dismissal accompanied by small fart."

Lastly, I vote for calling our new friend the Fzorgle PrinceTM. It sounds stupid and makes absolutely no sense, just like the Lash Of Fzorgling itself.



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 09:45:06


Post by: Janthkin


The rules for the Lash aren't entirely clear, but it looks like one might be able to target enemy units in close combat.


Probably not; it does require a target, and none of the quotes have exempted Lash from the "follows shooting rules, unless stated otherwise" requirement, which bars "shooting" at units in close combat.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 09:56:07


Post by: Phoenix


Don't forget the old move of breaking up the units coherency (you, run 6-8" that way, you run 6-8" the other way, the rest of you, stay put). That will force them to move back the nex turn and keep any heavy weapons from shooting.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 10:16:23


Post by: puree


Posted By Phoenix on 08/07/2007 2:56 PM
Don't forget the old move of breaking up the units coherency (you, run 6-8" that way, you run 6-8" the other way, the rest of you, stay put). That will force them to move back the nex turn and keep any heavy weapons from shooting.

I see nothing exempting it from the move rule of having to end in coherency.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 10:19:55


Post by: Longshot


I am fairly sure you can't legally move your dudes out of coherency. The move from the lash whip has to be a legal move as far as I can tell from the reading of the rule.

Further, if you have 100+ orcs and they're packed in such a way as you can't move anywhere but forward, lash of submission is not going to do you a fat lot of good. You can't move through your own units, remember?

Against a massive IG gunline, you're going to run into similar issues. You'll start running into people who pack their dudes in such a way that you can't move their valuable units. E.g. put a group of conscripts surrounding your command gun squad so they can't move.

Once the tactic becomes generally used, it'll be easily overcome, since it's at best a stupid gimmick supporting an otherwise fairly weak overall army list. Depending on it is foolhardy. Because it's cheap you'll see a lot of people using it, but it doesn't help the fact that the rest of the list is sub-par compared to current tourney armies.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 10:21:21


Post by: Longshot


Then people will figure out that a 4+ invulnerable save and a move and shoot multimelta beats out a stupid gimmick that only works on 1/4th of armies, and it'll be all over for the crash of subcraption.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 11:21:51


Post by: Orlanth


Longshot: I am fairly sure you can't legally move your dudes out of coherency.

Agreed, it must be a legal move.

Longshot: Against a massive IG gunline, you're going to run into similar issues. You'll start running into people who pack their dudes in such a way that you can't move their valuable units. E.g. put a group of conscripts surrounding your command gun squad so they can't move.

Sorry I smell defuiler target, but now Chaos gets to take out a squad or two with it.

Longshot: Once the tactic becomes generally used, it'll be easily overcome,.....

Your tactic of packing so tight that they all die to ordnance will not be generally used.

Longshot: since it's at best a stupid gimmick supporting an otherwise fairly weak overall army list.

Its a bad codex, and it has no character, and its imbalanced, but it is by no means weak overall. There are a lot of nasty things chaos can take and do. The list is quiite capable of exploiting the unfair advantages of the Lash.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 12:40:06


Post by: Phryxis


Regarding the competitiveness and internal balance of the Codex, I think we can pretty much work backwards from the conclusions, since the conclusions are set in stone.

Phil Kelly writes Codices with great internal balance, which build very powerful lists. He's the best author they have right now, and if he wrote all their Codices the game would be in a much better place.

Jervis writes lists that are generally mediocre and include a lot of throwaway units. He has trouble with internal balance (BAs) but can somewhat mitigate it if he has long enough to work at it (DAs). He's a terrible author.

Thorpe writes mediocre lists with poor internal balance, and then adds in one or two ridiculously broken rules. After the Alaitoc Rangers list, I thought they'd have the sense to keep they guy as far away as possible, but I guess not. He's probably the worst author they have, as he combines Jervis' limitations with a penchant for random splashes of total brokenness.

I don't really know where Cavatore stands in all this. I thought he was pretty good, based on the positive reactions to the newest Fantasy rules, but if he allowed Lash of Submission past him, he's a dope.

The problem with that power isn't just that it's broken. It's that it's flexible and broken. It allows you to set up first turn charges. That's worth a ton, in and of itself. It allows you to wipe out entire units with Battle Cannon fire. That's worth a ton in and of itself. It allows you to pull a Mind War style trick and pick of single models by moving the rest to be out of LOS, so that model can be sniped. It allows you to pull units out of cover. It can be used defensively, offensively and anywhere in between.

People downplaying this rules trainwreck keep trying to mention how one particular use of it can be defeated. Great, you can defeat one angle. It's got about four more after that.

Sure, some armies can take models to defend against it (Eldar, Marines). But in order to do so, those lists now have to take Farseers with Runes of Warding, and Marines have to take Librarians. Not only does this idiot power decrease the variation in a Chaos list, it decreases the variation in OTHER lists. That's a truly powerful level of cookie cuttering. It's cookie cuttering that makes cookies out of other people's dough.

Plus, when SOME armies can defeat it, and others just get mauled by it, that's really even WORSE than if all armies get mauled by it. At least that way there's some argument that the Chaos Dex is still balanced because that tremendous power is offset by other weaknesses.

It's literally amazing to watch these idiots fumble. The last three efforts have all basically boiled down to "Marines with different HQs." They're so damn scared of messing up, they won't do much more but reduce everything to generic Marine armies. And then, when they see how dull they've made it all, they toss in a few totally broken rules.

It's like going on a date, and halfway through saying "wow, I'm sorry I've been so boring so far. Let me punch you in the throat. *smak*"

Good lord.

GOOD. LORD.

BTW, great posts Triggerbaby. You're a poet and a scholar.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 13:21:20


Post by: IntoTheRain


Honestly, even though it looks broken, the kid in me is glad to see something that is at least innovative. (has their been anything even remotely interesting in the last 3 codex?) Now the adult in me is off to break it.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 19:49:30


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Phryxis, great post. You make other posts obsolete (at least until Longshot chimes in again).

As for Cavatore, perhaps he just doesn't grok 40k. He's always seemed to be an FB guy at heart. I don't believe he would have okayed this if he were fully conversant in the system; based on old WDs, if there was one guy in the studio who knew powergaming potential when he saw it, it was him.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 19:54:00


Post by: bigchris1313


Posted By Reecius on 08/07/2007 9:08 AM

Therion, you know your numbers, but good lord you are mean spirited. Go ask someone to give you a hug.

Well, as Ed Maule once famously said: "Therion's from Finland, where comp does not exist. Where he's from the trash we're forced to field for a tournament would lose to a 12 year old."


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/07 20:35:18


Post by: bunnysarge


This heralds the cloning of several more Eldrad Ulthrans/Dadler Thrulnas/Radled Narulths/Natty Bumpos.  I'm just glad I have him painted in four craftworld colors so I can pretend I give a crap about fluff!


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 02:47:03


Post by: hotflungwok


I don't understand how this could have passed testing. The ability to move your opponent's units around almost at will, multiple times? And only a couple of the races have any chance at defending from it? Really, how could any chaos player not look at that and just drool at the possibilities? And we probably haven't even thought of everything, combos even more broken than what's been mentioned here are coming.

I'm wondering if this is a response to zilla lists. It can totaly ruin the 'you cant shoot at my genestealers, theyre hidden' thing, and can single out the dakkafexes for easy buttstomping. So are nids going to have to start taking the otherwise useless SitW just for this? Gosh I love having to use my tyrant's only psychic power one something so crappy.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 06:03:52


Post by: Sgt_Scruffy


Jesus Christ, the possibilities with this are endless. Death Company got you down? Not when you can magically Fzorgle them into range of three battle cannons. It may cause a few wounds but the first target of a DP playing against Eldar or SMs would be the Farseer/Librarian. Either set up a charge or Fzorgle them in front of the gunline. Then, BLAM, let the Fzorlging begin.

Triggerbaby said it best, and in case you hadn't figured it out, Fzorgle is my vote for what to call this. Triggerbaby, I owe you like 10 bucks


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 06:12:48


Post by: Phoenix


Posted By Orlanth on 08/07/2007 4:21 PM

Sorry I smell defuiler target, but now Chaos gets to take out a squad or two with it.



Battle cannons have been removed from defilers.  They do have access to vindicators if I remember correctly though.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 06:19:50


Post by: skyth


Defilers have the battlecannons...Just not the indirect


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 06:38:25


Post by: winterman


Don't ya wish you could Lash of Fzorgle Jervis and Gav 2D6 hundered miles away from the GW studio?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 07:51:36


Post by: Triggerbaby


I can't really take credit for Fzorgle. It's a Bob the Angry Flower word.

In terms of lists, I bet we'll be seeing more Fzorgle Sorcerers than Princes. The main use of the Lash carrier is fzorging, so they're wasted in close combat. Better to hide them inside another unit, all safe from lascannons and whatnot. The rest of the list wil almost certainly include Obliterators for sniping characters with power fists and heavy weapon troops once the rest of their unit has been Fzorgled behind cover. However, Oblits will compete with Defilers, the potency of battle cannon + fzorgle being pretty obvious. As for troops, I imagine that Beserkers will be present in most lists. Fzorgling makes charges dead simple to set up, and can help selectively eliminate plasma weapons and power fists. In any case, the Chaos player's biggest decision each turn will be where to spend his two precious fzorgles.

What will be amusing, however, is seeing the ten or twelve Fzorgle lists up against each other in upcoming tournaments. Seeing, not playing. I can't imagine anything more tedious and frustrating than six turns of 4 Fzorgles.



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 08:16:17


Post by: Hellfury


Fzorgle prince also gets my vote.

I was looking forward to going to adepticon next year, as I am becoming very close to finishing my two new armies. But I can definatly see lash of fzorgle being a top choice and quite annoying to try and counter.Especially with my already low model/squad count.
It would test the limits of anyones sportsmanship, thats one thing you can take to the bank.

No more codex creep indeed.

I wonder if GW really thought that the lash of fzorgle would really balance such things as eldrads divination ability, or the power of nidzilla?

I dont thin many people will blame me for not using the new codex. if people were smart, we could show GW exactly how much disdain we have for their newer rules by simply not purchasing the new codex and just buying the new models. After all, thats all the new codex was good for was new model releases.

It pretty much worked for codex dark angels, because we all know how much of a blockbuster hit that was.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 14:24:51


Post by: Phryxis


I also will vote for Fzorgle.

The thing about this that I love, is that it's not just Mind War, it's extra Mind War, cause Oblits come in threes. Any Marine squad with a special and heavy weapon, you just move everyone out of LOS except those two, and with three BS4 Lascannon shots, you're looking at a pretty reliable chance of knocking BOTH upgraded weapons off a squad. It's double strength Mind War, no chance to resist, plus it's got 6" more range.

I agree with Hellfury, it'd be hilarious if GW released a Codex, and the community just said "no," and refused to use it.

GW's ability to one-up my negative expectations is unreal. I was expecting the new Chaos Codex to be a dumbed down and bland version of the previous one, with general nerfing to roughly DA levels. It appears it's that. With the single most broken pyschich power (if not rule) in the entire game thrown in.

We, as an entire species, need to commit to saying only "are you f-ing slowed?" to Gav Thorpe and Jervis Johnson until they actually take the time to explain themselves. If they say anything other than "I'm sorry, I'm just very bad at my job, and not really very intelligent in general" then that doesn't count as explaining themselves.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 15:13:39


Post by: Spellbound


As unhappy as I am with the changes as well, understand they DO do quite a bit of playtesting with these rules and there's a lot of discussion.

 

I'm sure while we sit here and call the poor guy an idiot, etc he's thinking "aw, man, I thought these rules would be fun, I put a lot of work into them..."

 

10 to 1, we couldn't balance ALL list perfectly either.

For my own part I don't see what's wrong with a lot of rules - they're not that hard to figure out.  The old rules were fine, and not confusing at all.

-Spellbound



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 15:28:56


Post by: bunnysarge


That's a nice sentiment, Spellbound.  I'm sure they did put more effort into this than we are giving credit for.  The bottom line is that if I proofed a group photo for the Healthcare Finance Administration Handbook and signed my approval on it, THEN several people noticed the floating penis in the old woman's ear in the third row, I would be in no small bit of trouble.  The lash of submission is the very floating penis that is upsetting everyone, I think.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 15:43:35


Post by: Hellfury


Posted By Spellbound on 08/08/2007 8:13 PM

As unhappy as I am with the changes as well, understand they DO do quite a bit of playtesting with these rules and there's a lot of discussion.


I am sure there is. The games devs are a low functioning special ed class who cannot read anything book other than "Dick and Jane" any quicker than a neolithic pace.

The games Devs at GW definatly are pot heads. Not just any potheads either, but potheads who get premium ganja from Amsterdam on an hourly basis.

Because to allow such an item as the Lash of Fzorgle to pass "Playtesting" (Man, I moved this unit a few inches....yaaaah thats, like, sooo cool, dude!) and "discussion" (Dude! Wouldnt it be, like, cool if you could move, like, your dude-braj's models to royally piss them off? Yaaaaah, dude! Tooootally crucial!) you seriously have to be hiding behind a funky green grass haze and curtain of smoke in your mom's friend's cousin's basement. And they call the players immature.

Boy, I sure would like to give Ol' Jervis a blood test for drugs. It may explain why he has a 21st chromosome abundant child whom he has to cater to to make him able to grasp the basics of the game.
Posted By Spellbound on 08/08/2007 8:13 PM

I'm sure while we sit here and call the poor guy an idiot, etc he's thinking "aw, man, I thought these rules would be fun, I put a lot of work into them..."



yeah...see above.
Posted By Spellbound on 08/08/2007 8:13 PM

10 to 1, we couldn't balance ALL list perfectly either.

For my own part I don't see what's wrong with a lot of rules - they're not that hard to figure out.  The old rules were fine, and not confusing at all.

-Spellbound



The old rules werent bad, but trying to sit down for the first time and deciphering what the hell is going on in the chaos dex was not a fun journey. Good rules (for the most part) horrendous layout.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 17:06:18


Post by: onlainari


You guys seem to think you can bunch up your opponent's units or hide certain models in order to snipe heavy weapons.

Bunching up appears quite illegal to me and I won't allow it. You simply roll the dice, specify the direction, and I will move them for you thankyou very much. It says move the unit 2D6" not move each model 2D6" in any direction including different directions.

And trying to hide certain models is just as hard as trying to range snipe models. Possible but any good player can prevent it.

Stop overrating this rule. It's really good but seriously, stop overrating it.

It was playtested clearly, since you need 24" and line of sight. That's one dead prince right there. Who can't kill a T5 W4 3+/5+ in one turn? You? Your army sucks. I've killed multiple T6 W3/4 3+/5+ (never actually versed against 2+ princes, you?) princes (without S10) and I've had to start 18-24" away simply because they have speed or flight. Haven't you?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 17:16:54


Post by: bunnysarge


Posted By Triggerbaby on 08/08/2007 12:51 PM

In terms of lists, I bet we'll be seeing more Fzorgle Sorcerers than Princes. The main use of the Lash carrier is fzorging, so they're wasted in close combat. Better to hide them inside another unit, all safe from lascannons and whatnot.

I'd say you might as well park them with the compulsory Fearless Thousand Sons unit with 4+ inv. saves and ap3 bolters just to be on the safe side.  I wouldn't want easy targets like princes getting taken out in one round of shooting.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 18:01:51


Post by: Sgt_Scruffy


Posted By onlainari on 08/08/2007 10:06 PM
You guys seem to think you can bunch up your opponent's units or hide certain models in order to snipe heavy weapons.

Bunching up appears quite illegal to me and I won't allow it. You simply roll the dice, specify the direction, and I will move them for you thankyou very much. It says move the unit 2D6" not move each model 2D6" in any direction including different directions.

And trying to hide certain models is just as hard as trying to range snipe models. Possible but any good player can prevent it.

Stop overrating this rule. It's really good but seriously, stop overrating it.

It was playtested clearly, since you need 24" and line of sight. That's one dead prince right there. Who can't kill a T5 W4 3+/5+ in one turn? You? Your army sucks. I've killed multiple T6 W3/4 3+/5+ (never actually versed against 2+ princes, you?) princes (without S10) and I've had to start 18-24" away simply because they have speed or flight. Haven't you?

From what I saw of the rule, it simply say move the unit 2D6" in any direction. This seems to indicate that the unit may be moved by the chaos player 2D6" using legal movement rules in the BGB. I don't see where you get an argument for the models not being able to be bunched up.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 18:19:15


Post by: Hellfury


Posted By onlainari on 08/08/2007 10:06 PM
You guys seem to think you can bunch up your opponent's units or hide certain models in order to snipe heavy weapons.

Bunching up appears quite illegal to me and I won't allow it.
Read the rules much?

The last part of page 15 and the first part of page 16 should take care of that little problem.

Here, I even went so far as to show you the rule from page 16 ...



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 18:38:26


Post by: onlainari


Well it doesn't specify anywhere that it can be up to 2D6".

It doesn't even say it's subject to all the normal rules for movement. Just the normal rules for movement penalties.

Sorry but what am I meant to have read that I supposedly didn't?

Good luck moving every model 7" and getting them bunched up.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 18:47:52


Post by: Hellfury


Posted By onlainari on 08/08/2007 11:38 PM
Well it doesn't specify anywhere that it can be up to 2D6".
yeah...it does.

"Most commonly this will be D6" or 2D6" of additional movement..."

as far as normal movement rules...well then perhaps the lash does break the normal movement rules thus allowing the unit to be dispersed out of coherency? (I find this doubtful, but as you pointed out, it doesnt specify normal movement rules)

Its easy to move every model that distance and bunching them up....drop a few bases on your desk there you sitting in front of and I am sure if you try, it wont be too hard.

Pretty much the same way as someone who just deepstruck in to the field can disperse his troops from being bunched up and into a less vulnerable formation to blast markers. Its the exact opposite of the previous sentence.

and it is, quite legal mate.

I am not overrating this rule by any means, I am just finding where its limitations are, and there isnt much to its limitations.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 19:12:23


Post by: Phryxis


Bunching up appears quite illegal to me and I won't allow it.


Awesome. Not only is this rule game-breakingly broken, it also appears to be able to create lots of arguments over its exact meaning. I keep thinking this gift will stop giving, and yet it keeps floating penises by grandma's head.

I need to get ahead of it for a change: Does anybody know if this rule can give you ass cancer?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 19:21:49


Post by: Hellfury


Oh definatly. Its how Jervis plans to get rid of the vets so that the kiddies can play.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 19:30:12


Post by: onlainari


Hellfury I thought I might as well post this here too.

I decided to read all the rules concerning the movement.

I found no evidence of the lash of fzorgle saying you need to specify a directions.



>>> If the test is successful, the target is moved 2D6" by the Chaos player. <<<

Here are some rules that mimic some of the lash of fzorgle rules:



>>> If unengaged, the unit may make a second jump during the assault phase instead of assaulting. Nominate the direction the unit is jumping in and move it up to 2D6" in this direction. <<<

Neither of them are movement in the movement phase. However I believe that movement phase rules apply to movements outside the movement phase. It might not be clear but I have to assume this for rules to work properly (any references actually saying I use movement phase rules for all movement =>outside moving charging units, pile in, and units falling back<= would be nice).

This means both moves have to follow the rules for remaining in coherency. The fact that WJG says "up to" while the lash of fzorgle rules don't is what is concerning me.

Clearly LoS rules don't say you have to specify the direction, just move the unit 2D6". What you guys are arguing is that this 2D6" movement is just a normal movement phase movement and therefore follows the rule of "move any or all of the models in the unit up to their maximum movement distance".

Honestly I can't argue against this.

The "up to" in the WJG seems pointless if we accept this conclusion but I guess that's GW.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/08 21:07:10


Post by: bunnysarge


Another fun thing about this will be two chaos armies going at it.  The rules state that the unit is moved 2d6 inches by the Chaos player...


Rampant penis.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 01:27:14


Post by: Antonin


Posted By Hellfury on 08/08/2007 11:47 PM
Posted By onlainari on 08/08/2007 11:38 PM
Well it doesn't specify anywhere that it can be up to 2D6".
Pretty much the same way as someone who just deepstruck in to the field can disperse his troops from being bunched up and into a less vulnerable formation to blast markers. Its the exact opposite of the previous sentence.

and it is, quite legal mate.
Well, if you are moving your models "just after" deepstriking, then I must question your rules interpretations.

The lash says move them in a certain direction 2d6 inches.  At the end of that move, if the models are not in the same configuration as before the move, then you have not moved them in that direction, the distance indicated.  The rule does not say "up to" 2d6 inches, only to move them 2d6 inches.

With that said, what happens if you push a squad through another squad from the same army?  I see no restriction against that in the rule.

p.s. And your comment about Jervis' child was inexcusable - you really should edit that comment out.  There's no reason to beat up on him in an ad hominem attack.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 01:52:27


Post by: Saldiven


While I can see part of your argument, Antonin, another part of it is completely made up.

Nowhere in the rule does it say, "Move them in a certain direction 2d6"." It just says "move them 2d6"."

I could move each model in the unit 2d6" in any direction I want, each model independently, and I can use that movement to curve around terrain features, other models, or whatever, as long as I'm adhering to normal movement rules.

There is nothing in the rules that says that the movement has to be in a straight line in a nominated direction. Adding the "in a certain direction" is a complete fabrication that isn't supported by any other portion of the rule.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 03:56:43


Post by: cypher


I saw nothing in the rule that said you couldnt move them in a large circle to the spot 1 in in front of them.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 04:01:43


Post by: Antonin


Hmm, true. And, that answers my question about what happens if you hit another unit - you can move around the unit, in a wavy line.

However, with respect to changing the arrangement of the unit, you don't move each model in the unit 2d6 inches, you move the target "non-vehicle enemy unit" 2d6 inches. Thus, if you move the unit in a circle, then all models in that unit will move in a circle - there is no authorization for you to move each model in a different direction, only an authorization for you to move the entire unit en masse. As the rules are permissive, especially when it comes to doing nasty things to your opponent's units, you can not move the models all over the place, because the rules to not permit you to.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 04:08:13


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


So, what do the rules say about moving units? Let's look at page 15:

"When you are moving a unit, the individual models in it can move up to their maximum distance. . . ."

Oh dear.

Of course, it does go on to say that you can't break coherency, but that doesn't affect the issue of whether bunching is allowed. By RAW, it clearly is.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 04:53:37


Post by: Antonin


I'm sorry, your post makes no sense, as it has no bearing on what I said. I was not disagreeing with you that you can move the target all over the place, perhaps even including backwards for a little ways then forward (giving the appearance of going less than 2d6, let me point out).

My point is, instead, that whatever you do to the target unit is done to the target unit as a whole, not to individual models. Therefore, at the end of the move, the unit will look the same, but be in a different location on the board (unless some of its models have died to dangerous terrain tests, as provided for by the Lash rules.)

Got any more smart alecky comments about unrelated topics, TC?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 04:55:55


Post by: Antonin


Also, where does it say that the normal movement rules, which apply in the movement phase, apply? The Lash provides that you move the target unit 2d6 inches - no deviation provided, and it does not say that you use the regular movement rules. Consider the instance of a spawn, which moves 2d6 inches - you are saying that it can move less than 2d6 inches?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 05:01:57


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Not unrelated at all, Antonin. Lash allows you to move a unit, therefore you consult the rules for moving units. Upon doing so, you will find that they state that when moving a unit, you may move each individual model up to its maxmimum distance; the only limitation is that they cannot be out of coherency at the end. Therefore, your argument is a bunk.

I apologise if the relevance wasn't immediately clear to you, but I didn't anticipate that it would need spelling out like this. All As are Bs, C is an A, therefore C is a B, QED.

That aside:

Also, where does it say that the normal movement rules, which apply in the movement phase, apply?


Nowhere, you're right. However, I challenge you to find another place in the rules that defines what it means to "move a unit".

The Lash provides that you move the target unit 2d6 inches - no deviation provided, and it does not say that you use the regular movement rules.


And what does it mean to move a unit? How do you measure the movement of a unit? Page ref and quotation, please.

Consider the instance of a spawn, which moves 2d6 inches - you are saying that it can move less than 2d6 inches?


No, I'm not. According to you, though, it could, by moving backwards and forwards, were it not for the stipulation that you need to move towards the closest enemy. Fzorgled units are under no such restriction.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 06:07:03


Post by: cypher


Consider the case of moving a unit through dificult terrain. You roll and you can move them 4 inches.

Are you saying they must move 4 inches maintaining their current formation? That makes no sence and nobody does that.

When moving a unit a certain distance it generally means move everyone up to that distance following the movement rules. I see nothing to counterdict this.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 06:35:52


Post by: Therion-


I do agree with Antonin that it's a very balanced interpretation of the rule to move the entire unit 2D6 into one direction, maintaining more or less the same formation as before. What you do in the movement phase has absolutely nothing to do with this special move that Lash of Submission allows you to make.

Basically, arguing that you can move each model 2D6 into any direction you wish you are only making each and every tournament organiser restrict or ban this psychic power altogether, and when GW publishes a Chaos FAQ you can bet your ass that fair play Gav Thorpe tells you to play it exactly like Antonin here suggested.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 06:49:33


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Therion, if someone wanted to play it that way as a house rule, I'd be the first to jump at it and say yes please, yes please, oh thank god. However, it is not RAW, for reasons cypher and I have covered.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 06:53:10


Post by: Therion-


You haven't covered any hard reasons yet. Try harder.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 07:07:32


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


I guess that means you've found another place in the rulebook, other than under "The Movement Phase" and "The Assault Phase", where it tells you what it means to move a unit, and how you should go about doing it? Let's see it, then.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 07:11:25


Post by: cypher


I havent seen any reasons they should stay in formation other than trying to get "move the unit" to mean move in formation. This simply isnt the case. Every rule that moves units besides assult which spells out who goes where says "move the unit" .
Nobody moves in formation...


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 07:12:42


Post by: Spellbound


It would be impossible to keep them exactly the same position.  I think this is just a case of people not liking the implications of a power, so choosing to rebel against it.

 

To those same people:  Mind if I pretend it doesn't exist, and use the old codex instead?  I mean I'd even RATHER do that, so if you just don't believe it lemme know.

-Spellbound



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 07:18:30


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


cypher, I think the argument against this interpretation is even stronger: the rulebook simply does not tell us how to move a unit "in formation". The only way we are told that we may move a unit is by moving the models within it up to their maximum distance (or to their compulsory distance), with the occasional restriction that it must be "directly towards [whatever]". We simply can't move a unit in the way Therion and Antonin want us to.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 07:19:38


Post by: Therion-


cypher, I think the argument against this interpretation is even stronger: the rulebook simply does not tell us how to move a unit "in formation".

The rulebook doesn't tell you anything about moving your opponents' models, period.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 07:27:44


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


So actually, by RAW, no one can use Lash at all? Great argument, Therion!

It tells us how to move a unit, and Lash tells us that we may move an opponent's unit. That is all we need.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 08:38:49


Post by: Lemartes


Looks like my GK aegis suits might actually have a use again. A use against a broken mechanic but a use none the less. Makes me even happier I sold all my Chaos models. I have been dilegently selling off my 40K armies right before the release of new dex's and it has paid off. I have gone from 6 armies to just one. It really pained me to sell off my BA as I take my board name sake from one of thier characters but I was very dismayed with the current dex. Lash will be tier one IMO. Sniping fists or heavy weapons will be extremely powerfull with the advent of the new and improved combat (snicker) squads. Especially those 5 man squads that were camped out with that one las/plas/fist squad that just got dumbmissioned. Makes me greatfull I have Privateer as an alternative. I figure I will wait patiently to see if the dex writes come back around but the current trend is not a good indicator.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 08:51:11


Post by: Saldiven


Wow, am I seeing some really contrived arguments on how to neuter this psychic ability.

If you're not supposed to use the normal rules for movement (with the specefied adjustment for ignoring difficult terrain), then which, pray tell, rules for moving the unit are we to use? Some that we randomly decide to create here on the boards? There is nothing in any rule in any publication by GW concerning Warhammer 40K that even hints at that when you move a unit it's models must stay in their same relative position to each other. Something that restrictive and deviating that far from the normal rules would be spelled out, and if it isn't, we can't assume that's what they meant.

These debates on what the word "move" means reminds me of Clinton, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is" is."


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 08:52:26


Post by: Alpharius


Posted By Phryxis on 08/08/2007 7:24 PM

I agree with Hellfury, it'd be hilarious if GW released a Codex, and the community just said "no," and refused to use it.



While I agree that it would be funny (and I'd love if it happened right now, with this Codex), so long as there's a Warseer, it just won't happen...


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 09:16:08


Post by: Antonin


Posted By Saldiven on 08/09/2007 1:51 PM
Wow, am I seeing some really contrived arguments on how to neuter this psychic ability.

If you're not supposed to use the normal rules for movement (with the specefied adjustment for ignoring difficult terrain), then which, pray tell, rules for moving the unit are we to use? Some that we randomly decide to create here on the boards? There is nothing in any rule in any publication by GW concerning Warhammer 40K that even hints at that when you move a unit it's models must stay in their same relative position to each other. Something that restrictive and deviating that far from the normal rules would be spelled out, and if it isn't, we can't assume that's what they meant.

These debates on what the word "move" means reminds me of Clinton, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is" is."

Pretty simple, really - move the unit 2d6 inches in the direction you (chaos player) wants to.  Not seeing a problem, really.  The Psychic power cleanly sets out how you move, and does not include a reference to normal movement.  In fact, the discussion of how you cannot move into 1' of enemy models or into impassible terrain would be superfluous if the movement rules were actually used - there are already part of the normal movement rules.

Let me spell out a problem that appears if you consider this to be a regular move.  How about a unit that is already pinned?  It cannot move, so if the 2d6 move is considered a regular move, except for the lack of effect of terrain, then the pinning rules would provide that you can't move.

I know that you will say that the psychic rules override it, as being more specific - I would turn that around, however, and point out that the psychic power rules, being more specific than the movement rules (move 2d6 inches, no provision that it is done like a normal move) mean that the normal movement rules (and the pinning rules) are superseded by the more specific psychic power.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 09:28:49


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Pretty simple, really - move the unit 2d6 inches in the direction you (chaos player) wants to. Not seeing a problem, really.


Where does it state that you must move them all in exactly the same direction? Like I said, the power says "the target is moved 2D6" by the Chaos player." Now find me the passage in the rulebook that tells you how to move a unit.

Let me spell out a problem that appears if you consider this to be a regular move.  How about a unit that is already pinned?  It cannot move, so if the 2d6 move is considered a regular move, except for the lack of effect of terrain, then the pinning rules would provide that you can't move.

I know that you will say that the psychic rules override it, as being more specific - I would turn that around, however, and point out that the psychic power rules, being more specific than the movement rules (move 2d6 inches, no provision that it is done like a normal move) mean that the normal movement rules (and the pinning rules) are superseded by the more specific psychic power.


Please, explain to me what you mean when you say the rules for the power are "more specific". Do they tell you that all the models must move in the same direction and/or in a straight line? No, they don't, so on what basis do you decide that they may not?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 09:53:10


Post by: cypher


It cannot move, so if the 2d6 move is considered a regular move, except for the lack of effect of terrain, then the pinning rules would provide that you can't move.


I would agree. The lash says nothing about overriding pinning which spesifically says you cant move. As to which is more spesific, pinning is.

If you follow random or madeup movement rules what prevents me from moving the model 2D6 inches down (where the floor is) and determing that as the model is no longer on the table it is now gone in the same way as if it fell back off a board edge? In fact, what prevents me from moving it off the board edge?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 10:00:40


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Um, the power does state that you may not move models off the board, actually.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 11:39:49


Post by: Triggerbaby




Hey, while we're seriously discussing the stupidest possible interpretation of "move" in this context, why don't we start questioning every other word in the rule as well? 

  • The word "enemy" appears twice in the same paragraph, without qualifiers. It must refer to the same group both times.
  • "Chaos player" must refer to both players if both players have Chaos armies. If that is the case, they should dice off to see who gets to move the unit.
  • When it says "another ranged weapon", this means any ranged weapon after the first, correct? The implication being that Psykers can only use this power when they are allowed to shoot multiple ranged weapons.
  • What if the Chaos player's forces were minding their own business when they were unjustly attacked? Can the opponents really be "victims" in this circumstance? They brought it on themselves, after all. The restrictions on movement shouldn't apply in this case.
  • Since the Psyker is just a plastic or metal model, nothing is technically "visible" to it, so it can't use this power against enemy units. I'm sure that the designers would have wrote "Pick any non-vehicle enemy unit that could be imaged to be visible to the psyker if he were a real boy and his eyes were open"  if they  had actually meant that.
  • I'm pretty sure "non-vehicle" includes vehicles.

I expect serious refutations to each one of these points.



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 11:51:10


Post by: Sgt_Scruffy


Posted By Antonin on 08/09/2007 9:53 AM

My point is, instead, that whatever you do to the target unit is done to the target unit as a whole, not to individual models. Therefore, at the end of the move, the unit will look the same, but be in a different location on the board (unless some of its models have died to dangerous terrain tests, as provided for by the Lash rules.)



That argument makes absolutely no sense. Why would the unit have to look the same in a different location. Even accepting the fact that each model in a target unit has to move the entire 2D6," how do you arrive that they must be in the same shape? It would seem that you could easily move the individual models each 2D6" and arrive at a completely different formation. I'm not getting your assertion that every model must be move in exactly the same direction. I do, however, agree that the unit is going to have to remain within coherency.

 

 



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 12:22:34


Post by: Phryxis


My point is, instead, that whatever you do to the target unit is done to the target unit as a whole, not to individual models.


In order to prove this, you'll need to show where the Fzorgle rules differ from the normal rules.

In the normal movement rules, the formation of a unit can be changed as each model moves independantly, so long as they remain in coherency.

You're saying that because the Fzorgle rules refer to a target unit, not "the models within the target unit."

In the BGB, p15: "In his turn, a player may move all or some of his units up to their maximum movement distance."

The normal movement rules speak of movement in terms of units. Does that mean it's cheating for units to reform?

And does this mean that female players can't participate in the movement phase since then it'd be "her turn?"

What you do in the movement phase has absolutely nothing to do with this special move that Lash of Submission allows you to make.


Actually it does. If the same words are used to describe the movement phase as are used to describe the Fzorgle movement, then they should be carried out in the same way.

It's not that you randomly use movement phase rules to adjudicated Fzorgle movements... It's just that the same words mean the same things. The rules on the movement phase speak of "moving a unit," and that allows reformation of the squad. If the Fzorgle rules also speak of "moving a unit" why would that be carried out any differently, or with additional restrictions?

Please, guys. This rule is stupid enough without you being stupid next to it.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 12:33:54


Post by: onlainari


You use the movement phase rules for movement outside of movement phase.

This is a basic assumption and Antonin you must accept it.

Otherwise how the hell can you move this unit without rules for it, or jetpacks in the assault phase, or fleet in the shooting phase, for example.

It's clear this movement follows the rules for movement in the movement phase.

The "board edge" and "enemy model" clarifications are superfluous, as are the words "up to" in the warp jump generator. Superfluous rules don't actually provide evidence for arguments.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 14:24:27


Post by: Phryxis


fleet in the shooting phase


Good example. While the rules for Fleet speak to models directly, not to units, it says they can move D6" in the assault phase. Does this mean that they can ignore all the normal rules for movement? Can they break coherency? Can they move through impassable terrain? Through enemy models?

By the logic of Therion and Antonin, a unit of Genestealers could move up to 1" away from a gun line of Guardsmen, Fleet 6" right through them, then assault into the heavy weapons squads behind them. After all, it doesn't say movement rules apply, you just move the models D6".

Can we stop being stupid now, and get back to flaming Jervis and Thorpe?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 15:04:25


Post by: Therion-


By the logic of Therion and Antonin, a unit of Genestealers could move up to 1" away from a gun line of Guardsmen, Fleet 6" right through them, then assault into the heavy weapons squads behind them.

Don't put words into my mouth. That's outright libelous. Now please provide a quote of me claiming that by my logic one can play in the aforementioned manner.

I said I'm not convinved about your argumentation, and that it's clear that plenty of special rules apply to the Lash movement. You're convinced that it's a perfectly normal move and as such affected by all normal restrictions such as being already pinned or being locked in close combat. You haven't convinced me yet.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 15:19:54


Post by: Spellbound


Posted By Therion- on 08/09/2007 8:04 PM
By the logic of Therion and Antonin, a unit of Genestealers could move up to 1" away from a gun line of Guardsmen, Fleet 6" right through them, then assault into the heavy weapons squads behind them.

Don't put words into my mouth. That's outright libelous. Now please provide a quote of me claiming that by my logic one can play in the aforementioned manner.

I said I'm not convinved about your argumentation, and that it's clear that plenty of special rules apply to the Lash movement. You're convinced that it's a perfectly normal move and as such affected by all normal restrictions such as being already pinned or being locked in close combat. You haven't convinced me yet.



Your logic that it's NOT perfectly normal movement is that it's not in the movement phase, which neither is fleet.

Why don't you enlighten us as to why it CAN'T adhere to all the normal movement rules?  There's nothing that says it shouldn't be.  If we don't use the movement rules, how do we even know how to move the unit?  The spell doesn't actually say HOW to move, it just says move.  To find out how, we must look at the movement rules of the game.  I'm sorry you don't like the rule, but putting your fingers in your ears and saying "la-la-la I'm not liiiiistening no no no" is not going to make it go away.



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 15:49:30


Post by: Phryxis


Don't put words into my mouth.


I didn't put words in your mouth. I said "by your logic."

What that means is that if what you're saying is true, then so is this other thing. And that thing is not how anybody plays, I'm pretty sure you included.

Don't get pompous and combative. It serves no useful purpose.

You're convinced that it's a perfectly normal move and as such affected by all normal restrictions such as being already pinned or being locked in close combat.


What's extra neat is that after falsely accusing me of putting words in your mouth, you immediately put words in my mouth.

The fact is, it's not me that needs to convince you, it's you that needs to convince me. You're applying restrictions to the Fzorgle move that are not clearly stated (or stated at all) in the rules themselves. If you think there's something saying that the unit must maintain their exact formation, show me where it says that in the rules.

You can't.

A unit is a group of models. If it changes its formation, does it stop being a unit? What does moving a unit mean? Do you move the centerpoint of the unit? Do the rules cover this at all?

No.

The fact is, contrary to your 'outright libel' I am not saying that it's a perfectly normal move. I'm saying that, by the RAW, there's almost no guidance as to how it works. The same thing goes, as I said, for the Fleet move.

What people end up doing is trying to apply the normal movement rules to the extent that they don't conflict with the special rules of the situation. It's a logical thing to do it, and since I'm pretty sure you play a Fleet move by the normal movement rules, I'm pretty sure you do it too.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 20:21:54


Post by: Therion-


I didn't put words in your mouth. I said "by your logic."

Except of course that it wasn't by my logic at all, which meant you were slandering, misquoting me, putting words to my mouth, call it what you wish.
Don't get pompous and combative. It serves no useful purpose.

Don't start patronising. It serves no useful purpose.
What's extra neat is that after falsely accusing me of putting words in your mouth, you immediately put words in my mouth.

I didn't put words to your mouth. I said "you're convinced."
The fact is, it's not me that needs to convince you, it's you that needs to convince me.

I don't need to convince you of anything. You're posting here trying to advocate your subjective and narrow interpretation of the rule. All I've said is that you haven't convinced me and now you reply to me saying you don't need to. Curious. Is your shaky interpretation already the universally accepted truth?
You're applying restrictions to the Fzorgle move that are not clearly stated (or stated at all) in the rules themselves.

I'm applying restrictions? What restrictions are those exactly? To whom am I applying those restrictions to? Please quote me for reference.
The fact is, contrary to your 'outright libel' I am not saying that it's a perfectly normal move. I'm saying that, by the RAW, there's almost no guidance as to how it works.

So in short you'll just 'wing it' and apply all sorts of rules to the Lash of Submission as you go. On the other hand you want to play it RAW but on the other hand you want to use common sense. I'd like to make a "by your logic" cliché statement here but in this circumstance it's naturally impossible.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 20:35:15


Post by: Spellbound


So basically, the lash doesn't say how to move the models at all. It doesn't say "move like movement", nor does it say "move each model/the unit the distance rolled in a certain direction, maintaining the same formation it was in at the start of the move".


So nobody's right, and anyone who plays against any of us that doesn't think it works the same way we do will not have a fun game at all, or will demand we roll off for it at the start of every single game to see which way we play it.

So can we agree we see it different ways, and will play it different ways, and aren't going to change our minds? Fine.

But Therion, what will you do when you're up against chaos players in your group at home that disagree? Are you just not going to play against any chaos players, or demand they don't use this power?

-Spellbound


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 20:35:16


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Therion, I don't know if you missed my post or what, but I'm still waiting for you to show us a place in the rulebook that tells us what it means to move a unit and how we may go about doing it, other than in the movement rules (and the obviously inapplicable assault rules). You want us to "move the unit as a whole"; great, now quote me the passage which tells you how to do that.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 20:40:01


Post by: onlainari


You can goddamn fleet in the opponent's shooting phase.

STOP IT.

Make some fricken sense.

It uses the rules for movement in the movement phase because that's the only thing that makes sense.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 20:47:13


Post by: Therion-


You want us to "move the unit as a whole"

Do I? I said that moving the unit like Antonin suggested would certainly be a very balanced interpretation of the rule. Nowhere did I actually make any claims about my own needs or motives. What I see here is a bunch of guys who don't know how to play a rule, have no way to back up their own interpretation, but are so certain that they are one hundred percent right that they're willing to drag on this meaningless discussion on and on for pages. Perfect. I'll play along.

But Therion, what will you do when you're up against chaos players in your group at home that disagree? Are you just not going to play against any chaos players, or demand they don't use this power?

Disagree with what exactly? I'm only interested in what the universally accepted interpretation will be so I can prepare accordingly for tournaments. I'm a Chaos player among other armies, and I've never refused to play against anyone. As far as restrictions go the only time I've applied any restrictions on armies was at a WFB tournament I was organising because we wanted to try composition scoring out just for the fun of it.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 21:08:04


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Therion:
Do I? I said that moving the unit like Antonin suggested would certainly be a very balanced interpretation of the rule. Nowhere did I actually make any claims about my own needs or motives. What I see here is a bunch of guys who don't know how to play a rule, have no way to back up their own interpretation, but are so certain that they are one hundred percent right that they're willing to drag on this meaningless discussion on and on for pages. Perfect. I'll play along.


Of course, you're one hundred percent certain that we have no way to back up our interpretations, right? And are willing to lengthen the discussion while contributing literally nothing to it? Well done.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/09 21:49:25


Post by: Orlanth


Children calm down please.


The only way to play is to play by the rules. The rules say 'move' so movement rules apply.I.e. Sqiad coherency. As exceptions to the movement rules are already noted i.e. no difficult terrain tests no further clarification is needed. This spell is broken enough already without people trying to scatter units everywhere.

Or you might as well 'argue' that the Lash might give the target unit a 2+ cover save on the grounds that it doesnt say it doesnt.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 02:14:18


Post by: hotflungwok


The rule just says 'move' and that the movement isn't affected by rough terrain. So anything that would be a legal move would fall under this. This includes bunching up the models you moved, because that's legal, but not moving them out of coherency, because that isn't legal. Since these are the only clarifications we have, anything that satisfies them is legal. Nowhere in the rule does it say that the unit you move has to end in the same formation it began in, or that all the models have to move in the same direction, or that they have to move the full distance.

The rule has been worded very vaguely, and is very easy to take advantage of. It would be better if the rule allowed you to move all the models exactly 2d6 inches in a specified direction, but that's not what it says. We can only hope the rules writers feel the need for a breath of fresh air and remove their heads from the confines of their own large intestines long enough to issue a correction.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 02:27:36


Post by: Therion-


while contributing literally nothing to it?

I saw you trying to argue an interpretation (a house rule) without backing it up in any meaningful way, I called your bluff and you mucked it.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 02:43:03


Post by: Lemartes


That's what I like about GW clear and concise rules/wording.  I think if your on a design team the first time someone mentions a effect were you actually touch and move another person's models you take things to a whole new level.  The design team might all be chums but in the real world you often play people you have never met at a tournament.  Just how are you supposed to give full marks for sportsmanship to an opponent when he's moving two of your units every round.  You better not drop any miniatures in the process or knock a bit off because you for sure are not getting top scores then.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 02:44:26


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Saying it doesn't make it so, Therion. If someone wants to claim that "move a unit" means something other than what the only part of the rulebook to address "moving a unit" says, the onus is on him to prove it.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 03:12:24


Post by: cypher


That's what I like about GW clear and concise rules.


It is clear though. The unit is moved. Just as clear as the 10 or so fantasy rules that say the same thing. And up until now everyone has clearly known that the phrase "move a unit" means refer to the movemnt rules to see what that means (with a few exceptions that might be noted in the rule such as no terrain tests).

You guys are making up a new rule and deciding that it must be applied. My point, though mocked because I mised a point, is still valid. If you make up these new rules what is the fine print sorrounding them. Can I move one model through another? On top of another? Into another (killing it?)?

This formation move thing just doesnt exist and never has in the realm of 40k.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 04:08:36


Post by: Reecius


lol, this is rediculous.

I can't believe that this argument has gone on this long, or that i read the whole stupid thing.

It is dead simple.

Unless someone can prove that you use movement rules other than those in the movement section of the BGB, of which non are provided in the discription of the power, then you use the established movement rules. Period.

Anything else is the incorrect way to play it.

If you choose to play it incorrectly, cool for you, but you would be wrong.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 09:04:58


Post by: Longshot


Looks like this topic moved a ways in the time I was gone, but apparently someone didn't think through my comment on IG using their guys to prevent movement, because nothing forces you to make them a battlecannon target as a result. You can put a ring of dudes in such a way that prevents you from moving their guys in any meaningful fashion, and if you battlecannon some conscripts who cares?

Aside from that, I wouldn't make the assumption that Chaos can field enough useful ordnance guns to make that pay off vs. IG anymore. If you field even a single defiler you're gimping your army, because it eats up a slot for 3 obliterators, and if you actually field a vehicle in your Chaos army it'll be dead in short order because you can't get four of them anymore and your only anti-horde and anti-tank options are in Heavy.

All that aside, you're not beating Eldar with lash princes, so who cares how good it is against those hypothetical space marine lists who don't have a psychic hood?

-------------------------------------------------------

As far as the movement rules go, it's pretty clear cut and it does allow you to change formation. The reason this type of rule works with Fantasy is because there ARE such a thing as coherent unit formations in Fantasy. There is no such thing as a "formation" in 40k with which to guide your movement, so don't go inventing rules that preserve formations (since they don't exist).

So, you roll 2d6, and then move the unit as if it had a maximum range of 7" or whatever, with the caveat that you have to move every individual model that exact distance. That's the point where it differs from normal movement and it's the only point I can find (and the difficult terrain blahblah).

That is going to be a very hard rule to enforce, but I think it should hopefully prevent most of the real cheating - since in general to modify the formation in such a way as to totally mess with it would require some models being moved less than the maximum distance.

The only example of a rule that "moves a unit X inches" that would preserve formations is Warp Spider jump jets, which say you: Pick a direciton, then move the unit that way 2d6". Unfortunately for game mechanics whoever wrote up the lash was too stupid to follow this mechanic, and gave your opponent ways to abuse your units, and also gave him a reason to put his grubby paws on your models.

If I had to guess I would say they'll FAQ it so that this becomes the norm, if it even makes it out of publishing in the form it is currently in. I'd also bet that due to the maximum movement restriction you'll see most people play it this way to avoid complications.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 09:24:19


Post by: Clang


don't see why this is so complicated. Imagine you have a special ability that gives you a special move for one of your own units 2D6" ignoring rough terrain. Obviously it otherwise follows all the normal move rules, right? So Lash works exactly the same, except you're moving an enemy unit. That's certainly how i'll be playing it...


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 16:35:18


Post by: Phryxis


Is your shaky interpretation already the universally accepted truth?


Based on the responses in this thread, apparently it is.

I'll make it even simpler, so that when you avoid responding it will make you look even more ridiculous: No where does it say that Fleet moves use the normal movement rules. Is it legal to make a Fleet move directly through another model? Is that how you play it?

Nowhere did I actually make any claims about my own needs or motives.


Right, I picked up on that after a few posts worth of you being cute about it. You say something that is easily construed as agreement with Antonin. Then, when everyone assumes you're agreeing with him, you don't bother to clarify, you "play along" like your poor self explanation makes us all dumb.

You're "calling bluffs," and outmaneuvering us all. This isn't a rules discussion, it's really a competition, and you just keep winning. We're all such morons compared to you.

Let's stop this now. Put forth your interpretation or shut up. Nobody is benefitting from your useless, baseless arrogance. Especially you.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/10 17:28:34


Post by: Therion-


You're "calling bluffs," and outmaneuvering us all. This isn't a rules discussion, it's really a competition, and you just keep winning. We're all such morons compared to you.

Thank you.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/11 06:51:16


Post by: Phryxis


I'll make it even simpler, so that when you avoid responding it will make you look even more ridiculous


No, thank you.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/11 14:34:40


Post by: Da Boss


This thread is really quite funny.
"Please quote me for reference"
What, you can't remember what you said?
My own interpretation would be that you can alter the formation, because it would be damned fiddly otherwise for large units. But I would say that you should move the entire unit the full distance if you get me- if you roll 7, no moving 'em 6 or anything.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/11 21:09:44


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Da Boss, agreed, but that really won't stop bunching. It just means your opponent will need to think a little more when doing it. Something like this:



Of course, that could actually get fairly complex with a large unit, but it should be possible to bunch up enough to get maximum hits with a small blast template before bunching additional models becomes unfeasible.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/12 04:45:27


Post by: Buoyancy


Is there somewhere in the movement rules that states that a model can't double back on itself as many times as it wants?  I know that such a statement exists in the Skimmers Moving Fast rules, but I'm fairly certain that it doesn't exist anywhere else.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/12 06:15:56


Post by: Da Boss


I suppose you're right.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/12 06:28:15


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Buoyancy, the SMF rules actually seem to reinforce the idea that you can, in fact, circle or double back:

"Players may not claim their skimmers are 'circling' or moving 4" one way and 3" back. Skimmers are dependent on their speed and agility for avoiding enemy fire, and adequate velocity cannot be attained while circling."--BGB pg. 69

The bit in bold seems to be saying that circling or doubling back is in fact possible; if it were prohibited in general, it would not be necessary to specifically prohibit it here.

There's another relevant quote regarding hitting vehicles in CC, though I'm not too sure what to make of it:

"When assessing how far a vehicle has moved, only take into account the actual distance covered, moving forwards and backwards doesn't help!"--BGB pg. 71

A lot hinges on what is meant by "actual distance covered". Does it mean that it is always the case that the distance between the start and end point = the distance that model counts as moving? Or could "actual distance covered" and "distance moved" have two different values under normal circumstances, and the one cannot count for the other only in this particular instance? The answer is unclear to me.

Personally, it's uncertain enough that while I wouldn't feel comfortable using it to my advantage, but I wouldn't be confident enough to argue that it is decisively not the case if my opponent wanted to play it this way. Yay, more house rules needed in a game absolutely overflowing with them already.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/12 06:54:22


Post by: Da Boss


They need to clean up the wording. This is so gonna be FAQed in 2 years.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/13 03:57:58


Post by: Janthkin


A lot hinges on what is meant by "actual distance covered". Does it mean that it is always the case that the distance between the start and end point = the distance that model counts as moving? Or could "actual distance covered" and "distance moved" have two different values under normal circumstances, and the one cannot count for the other only in this particular instance? The answer is unclear to me.


Over-analyzing. That rule is there solely to prevent you from leaving a vehicle in the same place it currently is, while claiming the benefits of moving (e.g., skimmers moving fast, hitting in hth). Don't try to read it as implying that the ABSENCE of mention in other movement types is therefore meaningful.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/13 04:19:14


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Janthkin, like I said, I do believe the rules actually do nothing to prohibit circling or doubling back or other kinds of non "flat out" movement. I am just examining those rules that could conceivably have a bearing on it, and this is all there is.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/13 04:45:41


Post by: Antonin


I will try my level best to not exploit Lash worse than it is, and will use my understanding of the rules. If someone else tries to clump up my models, I will get a ruling from the judge, and will rely on that ruling for the tournament.

Even if every other chaos player wants to see the rule through rose-tinted glasses, that will not change my understanding of the rule. However, it's a free country, so hold whatever understanding you want of the rule! Hopefully we will have a very clear and precise ruling on point in an FAQ...

now, I wish to address another rule. Since there is a camp of posters that believes that the movement rules applies, I put the question to that camp as to whether other types of movement rules apply. For instance, do the rules that apply to a unit that has broken apply? They do appear to apply better than the standard movement rules - you move 2d6, and it is an "involuntary" move, in a direction not of the choosing of the moved unit. Furthermore, it takes place during your opponent's shooting phase (like fallback) and not during the unit's movement phase. Using your position that the lash move follows the movement rules, it is readily apparent that the lash move most closely mimics the fallback move, and therefore those are the appropriate rules to use.

You will note that I do not follow that theory - I believe the rule is clear and provides its own set of movement rules. However, for the sake of discussion, how does your approach handle the fallback move as being the appropriate set of rules?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/13 14:37:30


Post by: Phryxis


I believe the rule is clear and provides its own set of movement rules.


All the rule says is that the unit is moved 2d6" in a direction chosen by the Chaos player. There's not much there. Can the unit move through impassable terrain? Can the unit move through other models? If not, then why not?

However, for the sake of discussion, how does your approach handle the fallback move as being the appropriate set of rules?


I'm not sure what you're saying, but I would point out that a Fall Back move does not require the unit to maintain formation. On the contrary, it describes numerous situations in which the unit MUST change formation (to return to coherency, etc). It also says that the models can move anywhere within the "fall back corridor" and does so very clearly and directly. I don't see why you'd present this example, as it's clearly an example of "moving a unit" meaning that the models can change their formation.

Honestly it just seems like you're in denial right now. GW has published a rule so totally ridiclous that your brain is trying to use rules lawyering to nerf it in order to spare your sanity. It's like repressed memories or something. Rest assured that I'm right there with you, wanting to curl up in a little ball and pretend I didn't give hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to these people, but I'm sorry dude... It's already happened. Chaos gets to bunch your guys up and snipe them. Sorry.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/13 15:20:26


Post by: ShumaGorath



Chaos gets to bunch your guys up and snipe them.


I don't see how. The rule may be vague about just what they can move through but it pretty clearly states they the UNIT moves the 2d6 inches you rolled and in the direction you chose. The entire unit moves in the ONE direction and the EXACT distance that you rolled. If you bunched them up that would imply both different lengths of movement and different directions.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/13 21:56:00


Post by: onlainari


How on earth can you say the rule clearly states that you pick a direction when it doesn't even say that.

Read the rule and come back when you're ready to admit:

1. Fleet and jetpack assault moves use the movement in the movement phase rules.
2. It's ok for movement outside the movement phase to use movement phase rules.
3. The movement phase rules allow you to move up to the maximum distance.
4. You move the unit as you wish just like it was the movement phase and they were your models, with 2D6" max movement.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/14 04:16:45


Post by: ShumaGorath


Posted By onlainari on 08/14/2007 2:56 AM
How on earth can you say the rule clearly states that you pick a direction when it doesn't even say that.

Read the rule and come back when you're ready to admit:

1. Fleet and jetpack assault moves use the movement in the movement phase rules.
2. It's ok for movement outside the movement phase to use movement phase rules.
3. The movement phase rules allow you to move up to the maximum distance.
4. You move the unit as you wish just like it was the movement phase and they were your models, with 2D6" max movement.



I've read this quite a few times.  "If the test is successful the target is moved 2d6 inches by the chaos player".  Funny how its so plainly worded. 

"Pick any non vehicle enemy unit"

"The target is moved 2d6 inches by the chaos player"

No it doesn't state in one direction but nor does it state that your moving individual models.  Its pretty plain that your moving the entire unit at once at the exact distance that you rolled since it tells you to move them the exact distance rolled "Moved 2d6 inches by the chaos player".  Otherwise why not just run them far outside of unit coherency?  Movement doesn't always use the movement phase rules in this game.  Especially when the opposing player is the one doing the movement outside of the movement phase and during his own turn.

The rule is pretty plain when your not actively trying to break it for your own profit.  But then alot of rules are like that in this game.  The trick is to get a judge that doesn't like pure BS.



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/14 04:25:34


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


ShumaGorath, I reiterate the point I've been making for most of this thread: can you give me a quotation and page reference from the BGB that tells us what it means to "move a unit", and how to go about doing this? Therion and Antonin have so far declined to do this; perhaps you will oblige me.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/14 04:43:48


Post by: Antonin


T-C - That's because your position is bass-ackwards; you DON'T cite to the main rulebook for how Lash works; Lash isn't in the main book. We keep citing to the lash rules itself and showing you that it contains the movement rule. As for how you move a unit, that's simple - roll 2d6, take one model, move it that many inches, take the next model, move it the same distance in the same direction as before, rinse and repeat. At the end, unless some hanky-panky has taken place (and don't get me started about how awful the disputes are going to be about that item!) you have an entire unit that is moved that 2d6 distance. Simple.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/14 06:02:17


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Where a term is defined in the BGB, we must use that definition of the term, not whatever definition we care to make up or that is commonsensical. This is why we know that when a Daemon Prince is said to have 4 wounds, it means that he can ordinarily fail four saves before dying, not that he starts the game with 4 nasty injuries. The rules for Lash say you move a unit, and the BGB tells you what it means to move a unit.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/14 06:40:45


Post by: Schepp himself


Are you guys freakin serious? I mean I only read this tower of bullcrap because my Girl is out for the evening and I'm building a unit of Genestealers.
Don't tell meall of you are doing the same thing!

It boils down to these facts:

a) the psychic power is very powerful and unbalanced against the other powers
b) some armies can easily counter it, some don't -> pretty unbalanced for me
c) gladly, only dubious 40k gamer or power gamer will use nasty combos like taking 2 units with this power.
d) arguing about what a move is or what movement rules you use in the shooting phase just makes fools out of yourselves.

Thats all I can think off for now.

And to go back ON TOPIC AFTER GOD KNOWS HOW MANY POSTS:

No, i think its not top tier because the top tier tournament armies can counter it or at least lessen its effect.
So in a Tournament it would be the doom for some armies and for other just annoying surprise. Not what I call game breaking.

Greets
Schepp himself


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/14 06:54:21


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Schepp, it's strange that you talk about tourneys on the one hand, but claim that arguing about what rules to use for non-movement phase movement just makes fools of everyone involved. Now, I have no plans to go to any tourneys, but I daresay that a player at a tourney facing dual fzorgle, or using dual fzorgle, is going to find the issue quite relevant indeed.

As far as tiering is concerned, I basically agree with your assessment, but I don't think it unlikely that we'll see a few dual fzorgle wins nonetheless. C99's stealer shock GT list was hardly "top tier" in that it would be severely disadvantaged against mech lists, but he was lucky enough to face no mech lists at all, played well, and consequently won the thing. A dual fzorgle list is nowhere near as disadvantaged against mech opponents as stealer shock is, since all you're really losing are two psychic powers. (Also, C99 fought an uphill battle in the painting department; not everyone is going to need a perfect battle score to win Best Overall. Of course, not everyone can get good sportsmanship running a dual fzorgle list, either. . . .) It could be game-, or rather tourney-breaking--sometimes.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/14 15:47:56


Post by: Phryxis


We keep citing to the lash rules itself and showing you that it contains the movement rule.


You've been prestented with numerous problems with your ruling, and you're not listening.

1) If the Fzorgle rule contains all the rules you need, then where does it say you can't move the models through impassable terrain? Through other models? It doesn't. So it must be legal to do that, right? And further, other rules such as Fleet, Tau Jetpacks, etc. are also allowed to move through impassable terrain, other models too, right?

2) You've deciced (based on nothing) that "moving a unit" means that the unit must maintain the exact same formation. Instead of basing our definition of what "moving a unit" means on nothing, let's instead look for references to it in the BGB? On p. 48 it says "A unit that falls back must move within a corridor lying between its most extended models as shown in the diagram on the left - but each model can move anywhere within this corridor as you wish." This is "moving a unit" and it specifically says that you can move the models individually. If "moving a unit" means what you say it means, then how come it doesn't mean that in the BGB?

No please feel free to ignore those two things and tell tegeus-Cromis that he's wrong again.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/14 19:15:01


Post by: onlainari


Exactly. He's decided that "moving a unit" means "pick a direction and move it in that direction".

I have decided that "moving a unit" means "use the movement in the movement phase rules". That means no breaking unit coherency, no moving through friendly models, move up to the maximum distance etc.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/15 00:44:36


Post by: Antonin


Posted By Phryxis on 08/14/2007 8:47 PM
We keep citing to the lash rules itself and showing you that it contains the movement rule.


1) If the Fzorgle rule contains all the rules you need, then where does it say you can't move the models through impassable terrain? Through other models?
It does so, right in the Lash rule.  Allow me to quote (again, see page 11 of this thread for the original citation in full) the relevant part, in the Lash rules:  "Victims may not be moved off the table, into impassible terrain or within 1" of enemy models." 

Seems to say right there that you can't move into impassible terrain.  no rule about not moving through friendly models, so you can; though you cannot move through enemy models, by the Lash rules.

Any other questions?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/15 04:40:38


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


How about the question I've asked you three times already, and which you keep ignoring?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/15 05:30:23


Post by: Antonin


Which question is that?


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/15 14:15:16


Post by: NeverMore


This may have been answered, if so I am sorry.  Would the Lash allow the Chaos player to target an IC in the opposing army?

Since the power is used during the shooting phase and does not allow the chaos player to choose a "model", it would seem to fit that the Chaos player would still have to follow the IC rules so you could protect the IC even if it was solo thus a "unit" by having a vehicle closer than the IC to the Chaos army.

Basically I play DE and use a WWP to get to the opposing army.  If they were able to target my portal carriers and pull them forward and kill them before I open the WWP, well it would suck.  So I am trying to figure out a way to make sure I can counter that ability.  Once I am out of the portal the Lash does them no good really.

I assume that the Lash will not allow them to pull me out of assault with them?

 

NeverMore



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/15 15:46:01


Post by: Phryxis


Any other questions?


Yes, the same two questions I've asked you several times already. You did a wonderful job of focusing on the one part of the first question you can speak to, ignoring the rest of it, and then ignoring the second question altogether.

Surely you're aware you're doing this?

Let's try it again...

First question isn't just about your claim that the Fzorgle rule has all you need. It's about the fact that numerous other rules depend on using the normal movement rules in order to remain sane. Your argument is that the rules for special movement have all that is needed to adjudicate the move. Let's assume that's the case. Then let's look at the rules for Fleet. They contain no reference to enemy models, friendly models or impassable terrain.

If all the rules are there, then there's nothing stopping movement through impassable terrain, friendly or enemy models.

Get it?

The second question, which I've already posted twice, is about six posts above this one. You can use your mouse to grab the scrollbar on the right hand side of your browser and scroll up until you can see it.

While you're up there, practicing your reading comprehension, you might note that I already predicted once that you'd ignore my two points, and instead tell tegeus-Cromis he's wrong. I'm going to bet that you do it again. But I'm also going to warn you that when you do it again, you'll officially have crossed over into "slowed," and the movement rules don't allow you to come back from that lowly plane.

Make me proud.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/15 17:37:52


Post by: tegeus-Cromis


Oh, wait, you did respond to my question. My bad. You haven't responded to my answer, though.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/15 20:20:02


Post by: untitled


This Lash of Unanswered Questions could generate an entire FAQ by itself.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/16 06:50:34


Post by: Antonin


Posted By Phryxis on 08/15/2007 8:46 PM
Any other questions?


It's about the fact that numerous other rules depend on using the normal movement rules in order to remain sane.

[deleted items]

The second question, which I've already posted twice, is about six posts above this one. You can use your mouse to grab the scrollbar on the right hand side of your browser and scroll up until you can see it.
first question:  It sounds like you are talking about other rules.  I'm talking about this rule.  I don't really feel like weighing in on fleet, for example, it's really not germaine to the topic at hand.  My answer to the question you pose, as close as I can read it, is that each instance of moving requires a different analysis.  Some use the "regular" movement rules; some use a pared down version; some provide their rules for how to move.  This is in the last category.

Your second question was, frankly, incomprehensible to me.  I think it started out as a statement, and then tried to tack a question on.  I just could not see a real question in that whole paragraph at all.  I was hoping you would restate it so I could address it, but with your self-referential statement, I am still at the same loss.

With that said, I feel that I have put forward the points I can.  Some people you can convince; some you cannot.  Feel free to have the last word and post; I don't believe I'll have anything additional to say, though. 




Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/16 16:24:57


Post by: Phryxis


It sounds like you are talking about other rules. I'm talking about this rule. I don't really feel like weighing in on fleet, for example, it's really not germaine to the topic at hand.


How about this: We're both talking about 40K rules, ok?

I know you don't feel like weighing in on Fleet, because it creates huge problems for your ruling on Fzorgle. It is germaine because a ruleset depends on consistency.

You're trying to get a usable ruling on Fzorgle. Fine. The ruling you came up with is semi-usable. And in turn it makes other rules unusable. In the net, you're making the ruleset less usable.

Your solution to this seems to be to use the normal movement rules "when necessary" and then the specific rules "when they're clear enough." I hope I don't have to point out how utterly flawed and subjective that is.

Your second question was, frankly, incomprehensible to me.


Sure, and chimps don't know how airplanes work. And yet airplanes still work.

Unlike an airplane, my point is very simple. Simple enough that you could get it if you weren't focused entirely on not hearing what's being said ot you.

Fzorgle says "move a unit." You say "move a unit means some crap I just made up to nerf Fzorgle." As stupid as that is, it might still be arguable if there was nowhere in the rules that discuss what "moving a unit means." But guess what? There are places in the rules that do just that. I cited one. The one I cited makes NO requirement that the models stay in the same formation they started in. In fact it specifically says they don't have to, and that individual models may move in different directions.

It says "move a unit" and then it describes how that's done. Once again, consistency is important. You've established that you like to make up rules "when necessary" as defined by your own subjective view of which rules need nerfing and which ones aren't clear enough, but the rest of us don't have you around to tell us how to play all the time, so we have to go on what the rules actually say, rather than how they make you feel.

With that said, I feel that I have put forward the points I can.


I'm fairly sure you could do more, but you're clearly not interested in challenging the validity of your own arguments. Apparently your version of the scientific method is to come up with a hypothesis, and then get huffy and petulant when somebody points out problems with it.

You've categorically refused to respond to one problem with your ruling, then blamed your lack of reading comprehension on me en route to ignoring the second problem.

You can throw up your hands and say "let's agree to disagree" but I can assure you, we have not exhausted our ability to examine the rules on this issue. Instead, it's you that's exhausted your willingness to listen to anybody else's points.

You may think protecting your ego is the most important outcome, but the real takeaway here is comfort with the fact that people are going to expect to Fzorgle your units by normal movement rules. If you stake your ego on it, you're going to either spend your game time arguing, or come out feeling cheated. The fact is, nobody is going to buy your ruling at all, so you might as well get on board with reality now, rather than later, as a whole room full of gamers peer pressure you into a getting a clue.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/16 16:56:35


Post by: ShumaGorath



You may think protecting your ego is the most important outcome, but the real takeaway here is comfort with the fact that people are going to expect to Fzorgle your units by normal movement rules.


No one in my gaming area is. We try to avoid twisting rules so far beyond their obvious intention that it endangers the very fabric of reality though, so my group is probably pretty dissimiler than the "room of peer pressuring gamers" your talking about.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/16 22:41:41


Post by: venkh


I think there strong arguments on both sides. My instinct would be to move each model the distacnce shown on the dice and no less. You can still buch things up by moving models in different directions, as long as they remain coherent everything is hunky-dory.

The rule definately needs an FAQ, no need for any name calling or interweb wrestlemania. GW screwed up by not making the rule clear in the first place.


Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/17 01:13:06


Post by: Sgt_Scruffy


Posted By ShumaGorath on 08/16/2007 9:56 PM

No one in my gaming area is. We try to avoid twisting rules so far beyond their obvious intention that it endangers the very fabric of reality though, so my group is probably pretty dissimiler than the "room of peer pressuring gamers" your talking about.


If by twisitng rules you mean playing the game with the rules that are provided, then, yes, your groups is probably pretty different than others; and can I please have Gav Thorpe's and Jervis Johnson's phone numbers because you must have them since you know exactly what this rule intends. Give me a break.

 



Lash of submission tier 1? @ 2007/08/17 11:27:16


Post by: Phryxis


We try to avoid twisting rules so far beyond their obvious intention that it endangers the very fabric of reality


Oh, come on.

I'm not twisting anything. I've already explained why my interpretation, the prevailing interpretation in these forums, is the closest to correct. I'm not suggesting that this interpretation is ironclad fact (once again GW has put out problematic rules) but it is the most supportable. To pretend that it's actually the LEAST supportable is ridiculous.

I directed my previous posts at Antonin, but you can feel free to jump right in. If my arguments are so stupid that they warp spacetime, I'm sure you can explain why they're so wrong instead of posting an overlong and underimpressive "nuh-uh."