I'm playing in a tournament soon, and one of the players who always seems to be on the final table brings Abaddon ( and a Daemon Prince).

I've always found uber characters like that a hard nut to crack. So many attacks, so many kills, high wounds, decent armor and invuln....

In fantasy, I'd challenge a character with a champion ( unless running Brets), put wounds on the unit and break them that way ( if possible).

In 40K, you can't do that......so yeah, you can do things like heap shots at him and his squad, you can ignore him, you can try and bring your own ubercharacter...

What do you think is the best way to beat down someone like this? Imagine the character in the best optimal position...with a squad of badasses...

Kharn has worked for me one on one but 9 zerkers and kharn in a land raider is the scariest thing i have seen for chaos if not gazhgkull on his waaagh! but what army do you have sorry if not chaos or orks but they are all I can help thats not basic like shoot him a lot

They call them Demolisher cannons for a reason you know... S10 Ap 2 the uber character is an invl save away from being obliterated

My personal favourite has to be multiples of the humble Tyranid lashwhip. Such characters aren't very scary if they are getting one attack per round.

An alternative (that can work for many armies) is using an assault screen. Stick cheap stuff out in front for them to assault then blam the crap out of them and countercharge.

Best way to handle Abby is a Grey Knight GM with Sacred Incense and a MC Nemesis.

Strike at the same Initiative thanx to the Sacred incense and insta-SLAY him with the Nemesis. You might loose your GM, but its a good trade-off.

Grey Knight Grand Masters make pretty much the best character hunters since even Eternal warriors are not immune to their Nemesis Force weapons.

Abby-check
Lysander-check
Phoenix lords-check

...once I even killed Scarbrand...THAT was a game winner.

Does Gift of Chaos affect Eternal Warriors? I can't remember, but I've had my SM HQ voiped by the power several times. Just make sure you have a spawn model laying about.

I deal with difficult characters like I deal with MC's, volleys of fire. The nastier ones are generally Eternal Warriors, and in large units, so most one hit wonders won't get it done. Torrents of fire are necessary to get the job done. Make the character take the saves, and eventually they will fail them.

Really the NFW should not be able to instant an Eternal Warrior... it is clearly a rules lawyer loop hole.

G

KaloranSLC wrote:Does Gift of Chaos affect Eternal Warriors? I can't remember, but I've had my SM HQ voiped by the power several times. Just make sure you have a spawn model laying about.

Gift of Chaos doesn't insta-kill or inflict wounds. In KP games it's better to not put a spawn into play.

Also, just remember that big characters take big points. No big characters = more little guys = more special weapons that kill big guys fairly easily. I personally believe the guy with more models and more melta guns always has the better chance at winning.

I would point the Demolition Cannon away from strong single characters. Sure it means that they're one invulnerable save away from death, but that's still only one chance they have to die. Point it at something else, like a big group of infantry (more stuff to smash) or a bunch of transports. Either use mass fire on the strong characters, or use something like a Sternguard squad with hellfire rounds. 250 points for 10-20 3 to hit, 2 to wound shots per turn sounds pretty good. They won't make it have to use it's invulnerable, but it would mean that it would have to make up to 20 saves per turn. No matter how good your save is 20+ should almost guarentee a dead model.

I, as , Eldar, find that I am generally faster than "Uber-Characters", so I can just get out of their way and ignore them. Or attack them with a wraithlord.

Not to mention that if they are Eternal Warrior (like Abbadon), the demolisher only causes a scratch on them. Minimize them and move on to other things you can hurt.

Use abusive things that 'remove models from play' instead of Instant Death attacks. The Shokk Attack Gun comes to mind.

Just shoot them to death.

I'm completely serious, the best way to kill off those UBAR characters is saturation of wounds, before they get into combat. Massed S6-7 just ends them because they still roll ones. Armies like Eldar, IG, and Tau should be able to shoot them off the board by turn 2. Even orks (with Lootas) can dump so many wounds into an uber character that they're at 50% or less before combat, and even something as terrifying as Abaddon suddenly isn't so scary when he's only got 1 wound left before he hits the massed 30 boy assault unit.

sourclams wrote:Just shoot them to death.

I'm completely serious, the best way to kill off those UBAR characters is saturation of wounds, before they get into combat. Massed S6-7 just ends them because they still roll ones. Armies like Eldar, IG, and Tau should be able to shoot them off the board by turn 2. Even orks (with Lootas) can dump so many wounds into an uber character that they're at 50% or less before combat, and even something as terrifying as Abaddon suddenly isn't so scary when he's only got 1 wound left before he hits the massed 30 boy assault unit.

QFT
Nothing is scary if you throw enough massed firepower at it. That is why things like Scatterlaser Warwalker squadrons and Lootas are so popular in 5th.

a Slaaneshi Daemon weapon works well.

Not against characters immune to instant death it doesn't.

Typically Abbadon runs in a landraider with a unit of Chaos terminators or Berzerkers. Sure in theory it sounds good to shoot him off the table but in practice that can be the rub.

G

Cheese Elemental wrote:Not against characters immune to instant death it doesn't.

Still a power weapon with 3 + 1d6 attacks .

Green Blow Fly wrote:Typically Abbadon runs in a landraider with a unit of Chaos terminators or Berzerkers. Sure in theory it sounds good to shoot him off the table but in practice that can be the rub.

G

That's actually the best overall scenario for the defending player. Abby+Friends+Transport soaks up almost 1/3 of a 2000 point list. Every shooty army can stop a Land Raider (Immo+) before it gets into assault range, and the non-shooty armies are generally hard enough to soak up the hits and attrition them away with 600-700 points to work with.

honestly the most effective non hands on approach ive seen is my friend running 2 farseers with mind war and just warring him/her to death. When combined, I have seen multi wound models like abbadon get mind war jumped, and killed in one turn.

Although a good idea, it really only works for models on the board (i.e. not in transports) and with reasonably poor saves (i.e. not in cover). If those are the two criteria that apply, then you may as well just shoot them to death with S6+.

Not only the points issue, but if all else fails, bait them. Let them smash through that lone tac squad up front so they can get shot to hell. Losing consolidation into another combat made a huge weakness for assaulty characters/units.

You really have the annoying tendency to over simply things... maybe it comes from playing against scrubs all the time. There are plenty of ways to shield a landraider for a couple of turns.

G

sourclams wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:Typically Abbadon runs in a landraider with a unit of Chaos terminators or Berzerkers. Sure in theory it sounds good to shoot him off the table but in practice that can be the rub.

G

That's actually the best overall scenario for the defending player. Abby+Friends+Transport soaks up almost 1/3 of a 2000 point list. Every shooty army can stop a Land Raider (Immo+) before it gets into assault range, and the non-shooty armies are generally hard enough to soak up the hits and attrition them away with 600-700 points to work with.

Shooting him is not as effective as people will lead you to believe. You can shoot your whole army at him, and you will just make him angry. Not only that, but if you are wasting your armies shooting on him, what is the rest of your opponents army doing to you?

You really need to see his stats profile to know that shooting him for most armies is a waste of time. That toughness 5 with a 2+/4+ save is very hard to get though. Add eternal warrior and FNP and you are in for a long day if you are shooting him. Also, if he is in a unit he has bullet catchers there to eat a lascannon or melta gun shot.

Let’s take some of the most powerful shooting units in 5th edition and see what they do to him:

15 Lootas shooting at him will average 30 shots and 10 of those will hit. Of those 8.3 will wound, and 1.4 failed saves. Then with FNP that is down to .7 wounds. That is not that impressive.

War Walkers with scatter lasers are a little worse. Of 24 shots, 12 will hit, 8 will wound, and 1.3 failed saves, .65 chance for him to take a wound after FNP.

If you unload on him with 4 melta guns you have 2.6 hitting at BS4, 2.2 wounding and 1.1 failed saves. Better, but still only one wound.

And those are the best options for shooting him. If you shot him with bolters/lasguns/basic infantry it would take most of your army to put a wound on him.

The best ways I have found to counter him is to just ignore him. If you can get him out of his land raider (if he has one) he is only moving 6” or so a turn.

Or you can counter him with assault. You can throw your uber character at him and try for mutual annihilation. I have killed him with a Tzeentch demon prince, and other heavy hitters. You can also try to take him out with a unit that has a lot of power weapon attacks, or rending. Eldar and Tyranids do that the best because of their high Int. If you do not have that, Abaddon will take out your unit first before they get to swing. Assault Termies with Storm Shield and Thunderhammers might be able to stand up to him as well.

Old Zogwart will keep him away if you're playing Orks, it's hilarious when you hear someone shout in a tourny "OH CRAP!" usually it's Zogwart turning someone's hero into a squig ^_^

One of my friends in our gaming group usually runs him, in a land raider with some berserkers the first time i put him down with my avatar of khaine, the second time was with a squad of 12 genestealers, but yes he is particularly tough to take down.

SoB could be effective at killing abbadon. The flying canonness can stop his transport, seraphim can tie him up in a phyrric assault for a turn, then unload a couple of rapid-firing sister squads in his face. Using divine guidance reduces him to his inv. save only and, with that many shots, you would consider yourself very unfortunate not to kill/reduce-to-1-wound him.

If he has a retinue, unload an exorcist or two to get rid of a few ablative wounds.

As someone else pointed out, if someone is running Abby with all the trimmings, it'll take up one heck of alot of his points meaning you won't have to worry about using a significant portion of your army to deal with him.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Really the NFW should not be able to instant an Eternal Warrior... it is clearly a rules lawyer loop hole.

G

So "codex rules" is a rules lawyer loophole now?

It's interpretation of the rules, not the codex. I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that the 3rd edition rule for the NFW was intended to instant death a 5th edition model with Eternal Warrior. In fact this was never ruled on by GW and came about by way of the INAT FAQ. At the time there was a lot of love going around for Grey Knights as an underdog appealing army.

G

I'm with Shane on this one. Whilst it almost certainly isn't intentional that NFW's can get round the eternal warrior rule, i think it's a happy co-incidence. NFW's are meant to be the most powerful weapons out there and i would not be at all surprised if a new GK/DH codex had wording that let them keep this effect.

A happy coincidence does not make for a good call on a rule. You are saying that a weapon that inflicts instant death works on a model with eternal warrior while the rule for eternal warrior states exactly the opposite. A rose I'd a rose by any name. Just because the entry for the NFW states that is slays the model outright does not mean it is not instant death, it is most certainly instant death.

Green Blow Fly wrote:It's interpretation of the rules, not the codex. I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that the 3rd edition rule for the NFW was intended to instant death a 5th edition model with Eternal Warrior. In fact this was never ruled on by GW and came about by way of the INAT FAQ. At the time there was a lot of love going around for Grey Knights as an underdog appealing army.

G

NFW's don't cause instant death, they slay outright. THAT is the wording in the codex. If you want to subscribe to the "yea but they meant this...." crowd, you create many more problems than you will solve. The ONLY way to interpret NFW rules is that they can kill off eternal warriors when you consider GW's new stance of not updating wargear within older codeii.

So you're saying that NFW's should be UPDATED to cause the "instant death" rule? Thats fine...we need to also upgrade our assault cannon to fire 4x rending, and our storm sheilds need to also be a 3+ invuln, of course this would also mean that Daemonhunter servitors need to be suceptable to "mindlock" and then there are some other rules to change.....

On second thought, nevermind...we'll keep our "outright slayage" NFW's, and if you play a Grey Knight in a GW or Adepticon Tournement...guess what rules you'll have to play by....

....Yes, Scarbrand just got "Slain Outright".

Kill outright Is inflicting instant death... To say it's not is incorrect. Eternal Warriors are immune to instant death. Kill outright equals instant death in every sense of the term, it's just another name for the same thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I never play Skarbrand by the way. If someone was all funny about I'd just shot the grand master with the grinder's tongue insta death him. Sorted.

Green Blow Fly wrote:A happy coincidence does not make for a good call on a rule. You are saying that a weapon that inflicts instant death works on a model with eternal warrior while the rule for eternal warrior states exactly the opposite. A rose I'd a rose by any name. Just because the entry for the NFW states that is slays the model outright does not mean it is not instant death, it is most certainly instant death.

Dunno how many times this needs to be said, but.....

Ignoring "codex rules" for a minute...since "codex rules" esentially make basic Inquisitor weilded Force Weapons even kill off Eternal Warriors....Ignoring that....

"NEMESIS force weapons" are not "Force Weapons" any more than "Flamers" are "HEAVY flamers" or "Bolters" are "Heavy Bolters"(they're not) Therefore "Nemesis Force Weapons are not subject to any of the rules concerning mundane "Force Weapons".

"Nemesis Force weapons" SLAY MODELS OUTRIGHT. They do not cause instant death at all, in any way shape or form.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Green Blow Fly wrote:Kill outright Is inflicting instant death... To say it's not is incorrect. Eternal Warriors are immune to instant death. Kill outright equals instant death in every sense of the term, it's just another name for the same thing.

Inflicting "instant death" is inflicting a specific rule in the rulebook. NFW's do not inflict this special rule. The same way that Grey Knight Assault cannons do not inflict "rending" rules when they hit.

...You're cherry picking in reverse.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I never play Skarbrand by the way. If someone was all funny about I'd just shot the grand master with the grinder's tongue insta death him. Sorted.

Too bad he still uses the "retinue" rules when with his terminator bodyguard. You cannot pick him out....even in close combat. Sorry.

Thank you all for the replies!

I've decided to take my Space Wolves and use my WG Termies with a Rune Priest to counter characters. Since you can outfit them anyway you want, a Storm Called squad with lightning claws and stormshields and thunderhammers should do well against Abaddon and other Uber Characters, as they go first when charged and do well in HTH.

I will miss the unit when the new Codex comes out.

I will post here how the tournament went and if I faced Abadabadabooey.

Slain Outright is the same thing as 6,6 on a SAG. Anyone who dares say my infernal ichor of instant doom doesn't remove from play your model can go *grabs self*.

I forgot about Old Zogwort. A wonderful character-killer. Oh, what's that, Abbadon has turned into a squig? Oh dear, now where's you hitting power?

zogwort lol suddenly maccrage is weaker than a grot =P

da mind worm ...JUST STAND THERE AND THINK OF ALL THE BAD THINGS YOU HAVE DONE ....lol no wounds etc so off you go my son

So the consensus is that if a model is killed immediately regardless of how many wounds it has that is not instant death? I can see if Abby scattered off the table during a deep strike and you rolled a 1 or 2 for the mishap. Turning him into a spawn is different, he is basically transmorgified. To me the term kills outright is the same as instant death, you are applying semantics to say it doesn't. A NFW is a S6 FW, the table in the codex specifically tells us so.

G

But its rules state "slain outright" as in straight up slaughtered, not just instant-death, but greater than that. Like, butchered alive.

Slain outright is on a grander scale than mere insta-death attacks. If GW wanted it to cause insta-death, they would have said so in its rulings. Regular Force Weapons are ruled as such, while as Nemesis Force Weapons are ruled as Slain Outright.

Again it's all just semantics as far as I am concerned. Nowhere in the rules does it state slain outright is butchered alive... You are whimsically adding on your own opinion which has nothing whatsoever to do with the rules. In fact i think it makes my line of reasoning stronger. I understand it's quite useful for those that play GK and want to interpret it this way but obviously they are very biased and have a stake in their claim.

This would be better addressed over in YMDC instead of hijacking this thread. Someone should query this there IMO.

G

Look at it this way GBF, a normal force weapon uses the psychic power to enhance the powerweapon effect of the weapon, causing massive damage when it goes through the target. Eternal warriors with their massive resistance to damage are not killed by this. Nemesis force weapons literally cause massive explosive effects when they hit. Just because you are an Eternal warrior does mean you will survive being exploded from the inside out by a massive blast of psychic force.


As for the OP, one thing to remember is persistence. If you can kill it over the course of two or three turns, with minimal loses, go ahead. A lot of people don't shoot things if they don't think they can kill/cripple it in one turn, which is a big mistake with really tough units like this.

More fanboy fluff does not equate to rules.

G

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

KaloranSLC wrote:Does Gift of Chaos affect Eternal Warriors? I can't remember, but I've had my SM HQ voiped by the power several times. Just make sure you have a spawn model laying about.

Gift of Chaos doesn't insta-kill or inflict wounds. In KP games it's better to not put a spawn into play.

Also, just remember that big characters take big points. No big characters = more little guys = more special weapons that kill big guys fairly easily. I personally believe the guy with more models and more melta guns always has the better chance at winning.

Absolutely true... Being a tyranid player it's all about multiples of decent special weapons that can either focus on a character or kill other things. I'd much rather have 2 elite carnifexes with stranglers and talons rather than a godfex that costs twice as much. Or two small cost dakka tyrants instead of one giant flying one that doesn't have a decent invulnerable save anyways.

GBF, nemesis force weapons were around the same time the rulebook had rules for specifically weapons that cause 'instant death'. Its not like a case of a codex being out before there was a rulebook statement to clarify the rules. NFW are simply different and hold their own ruling. SAG is a perfect analogy, it doesnt cause 'instant death' as this specific phrase is nowhere in the gun description. By your idea you could argue 'remove from play' is the same as 'instant death' as a model is technically losing all its wounds at once. It simply isnt so, as the specific wording is all that counts as Shane has been putting it down. RAW isnt RAI no matter which way you slice it...

Gah. This is beginning to sound like a MTG Q&A session!

@General Hobbs: There is no one way to deal with abby/uber characters. Best thing to do is look at their rules, try to find some weakness your army can exploit, then give it a go!

With SW/SM's you don't really have cheap troops to tarpit him and i'm guessing you don't have a mech force that can just dance around him. Thus, Anything that can negate his 2+ and FNP will be a winner!

GBF I would ask you to look at the Eldar codex, under the rules for the Diresword. It has almost the same wording (if different mechanics) as the NFW and it is in the same book that Eternal Warrior was first introduced. It is not a case of "that rule wasn't around yet" its a case of "its a different rule, that essentially does the same thing".

Eternal Warriors only take one wound from a force weapon.

G

Is that specified anywhere? I'm curious as I've never faced a force weapon...

Read the rule for Eternal Warrior in the rulebook.

G

How is Abbadon getting FNP as people have stated he has??

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it just says eternal warriors are immune to instant death. It doesn't say anything about only taking 1 wound.

I will check when I get home.

Ok, I have a .pdf version of the rule book (copied from mine) here at work and it's just a single sentence... Seems something like that should have more than a sentence when it covers such an important topic.

Assuming by Eternal Warrior you mean "Mark of Chaos Ascendant" (in terms of Abaddon) all it says is he is immune to the Instant Death rule, it says nothing about the Slain Outright ruling. The only special abilities granted to Abaddon are being Fearless, an IC, his special weapons, and having the MoCA. I just checked.

Edit: The only CSM Eternal Warrior is the Daemon Prince. An DP's aren't so big compared to Abaddon, but still.

GFC please read the rules for force weapons on page 50 of the rulebook.

G

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:Ok, I have a .pdf version of the rule book (copied from mine) here at work and it's just a single sentence... Seems something like that should have more than a sentence when it covers such an important topic.

So indeed it says the force weapon inflicts "instant death". And that those who are immune to instant death are not affected. Question solved. Thank you!

Ifyouseek, what is this "slain outright" rule... Is that something you made up or is there an actual rule that is wholly different than instant death? I just want to make sure I'm not missing anything here.

There is no slain outright rule. The NFW is S6 force weapon as shown in the table in the DH codex.

G

Thanks... Just checking to make sure. Guess what I really need to do is take a look at the DH codex. I really don't know a thing about it.

The DH codex has a table which list the effect the NFW has depending upon the rank of the GK wielding it. Under the Grand Master entry, it gives a strength bonus and counts as both a power weapon and a force weapon.

The DH codex entry for Force weapons states:"...If the test is passed then the opponent is 'slain outright', no matter how many wounds it has".

The entry makes no mention of instant death and that, i suspect, is where the confusion arises because people start to argue about semantics.

It could well be a mistake by GW (look up the waveserpents front armour value in the rulebook for a good example of this) but as they have never, to my knowledge, officially corrected 'slain outright' to 'instant death' i'm happy to roll with it. GK's do need a bit of a hand after all...

you don't decide on the outcome of a rule because an army needs it. That is the weak sauce. Teh DH codex was written years earlier than the 5th edition rules. Most likely the designer used the phrase out of hand.

G

Oh, I forgot about the chart for the NFW. Wow, I feel like an idiot now.

All it is is a Power-Force weapon, really, with a fancy name.. As the codex states in the weapon's table that it is indeed a Force weapon, just with better stats as GBF has mentioned...

Apologies.

Teh DH codex was written years earlier than the 5th edition rules. Most likely the designer used the phrase out of hand.

Yes bu the DH book was written after the 3rd edition rulebook, which also includes the rules for Instant Death. If it were intended to be ID, they would have called it that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ifyouseekamy wrote:Oh, I forgot about the chart for the NFW. Wow, I feel like an idiot now.

All it is is a Power-Force weapon, really, with a fancy name.. As the codex states in the weapon's table that it is indeed a Force weapon, just with better stats as GBF has mentioned...

Apologies.

Yes, but the rules for DH Force Weapons are in their codex, so you follow them, per codex>rulebook.

Well I did not face Abadadabooey...

But I did face Kharn.

What beats an Ubercharacter? 8 WG terminators with a rune priest with storm caller.

Sorry Nurgleboy I think we will just have to agree to disagree. I run a GKGM and I would not play that he can outright slay an EW. It's just not right.

G

I don't run anything that has EW anyway, so there should be no issues if we find ourselves across a table from each other come July. Looking forward to a great WAAAAAGH!

KEWL !!!

: )

G

Abaddon's still not an Eternal Warrior though. Just a super bad ass with all the Marks of Chaos affecting him and also immune to insta-death. But not an Eternal Warrior.

Now, still in terms of Chaos Marines, the Daemon Prince is an EW and he's not as fearsome as Abaddon, albeit to say still a bad ass to be reckoned. To take a DP out shouldn't be too hard, as he can't join any unit, thus have no ablative wounds.

As for killing Abaddon, I've never faced him, but I might run him in the future for my CSM army. But anyway, I'd assume the best way to take him out would be concentrated heavy firepower, such as AP2 tanks or guns. Higher strength helps, of course. Force him to take his 4+ invuln save. Even if he is with Termies or a squad of Berzerkers, those wounds will demenish quickly when faced with a S10 AP2 large blast coming from a Medusa siege cannon or Demolisher, and possibly even more so with 5 Plasmacannon shots from an Executioner with Plasma spons. Now, this is just from the IG weaponry, but I think you see what I'm saying.

Do any servitors other than Vanilla Marine or IG ones Mindlock? No....codex rules.

Do Dark Angel/DH vehicles use "glancing" smoke or 4+ cover smoke? "glancing"....codex rules (rulebook even specifically states this)

Do DH/WH Stormtroopers have the new AP3 lasguns? No....codex rules.

Why is a Dark Angel Apothacary so much different from a Vanilla Marine Apothacary? Codex rules.

Why do only Vanilla Marine LandRaiders have an increased payload capacity for the same points as everyone else? Codex rules.

Why do DH, Blood Angel, Space Wolf and Dark Angel Storm shields provide less protection than Vanilla Marine ones? Codex rules.

How come Assault Cannons on GKLRC's do not rend and only shoot 3 times? Codex rules.

....AND WHY OH WHY DO NEMESIS FORCE WEAPONS "SLAY THINGS OUTRIGHT" RATHER THAN CAUSE "INSTANT DEATH"?

...you guessed it.....CODEX RULES

GBF...your interpretation creates more problems than it solves. If we play your way...we have to address all these other issues.

THIS is why its played the way we're talking about. You think "slaying outright" means "instant death"...strict adherance to RAW means that you are incorrect. This is why, when considering a tournament atmosphere, you would be in the wrong in suggesting what you are suggesting.

Repeatadly trying to hammer YOUR OPINION home doesnt make you right. "RAW" and "Codex Rules" makes the interpretation that you're futily fighting against correct.

Come up with some official ruling to bring some credibility to your argument. Saying the "rulebook states that forceweapons cause instant death" doesnt cut it. The rulebook also states that smoke launchers grant a 4+ cover save...unless the codex in question states otherwise. DH force weapons do not cause "instant death"...they "slay outright". Just because YOU think that means the same thing doesnt make it so, RAW says that you're wrong in assuming such.

<<munches popcorn whilst watching battle royale between WC members>>

@Shane: Nail. On. Head.

Friendly games: Agree beforehand/roll a dice.

Club games: Club rules/roll a dice.

Tournament: Check with faq/organiser.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:<<munches popcorn whilst watching battle royale between WC members>>

Not a battle..its a debate....and not even a heated one at that.

It's like an argument between me and spidey almost lol, only slightly more logical (my friend's just straight up stubborn)

I've made all my points so need to repeat them again.



G

Green Blow Fly wrote:I've made all my points so no need to repeat them again.



G

Definatly correct, you need newer and better points anyway!

GBF, Instant Death is completely different from 'slain outright', which isn't really a rule in itself. It's an effect.

Force weapons cause instant death.

Nemesis Force weapons slay outright.

Nemesis force weapons do not follow the standard rules for force weapons. They are their own weapon with their own rules.

Cheese Elemental wrote:GBF, Instant Death is completely different from 'slain outright', which isn't really a rule in itself. It's an effect.

Force weapons cause instant death.

Nemesis Force weapons slay outright.

Nemesis force weapons do not follow the standard rules for force weapons. They are their own weapon with their own rules.

This is incorrect. Nemesis Force Weapons follow the rules for Force Weapons, found in the Daemonhunters codex. Regular Inqusitor wielded Force Weapons work exactly the same. it's not the fact that they are Nemesis Force Weapons, just that the DH codex outlines how they function.

Witch Hunters FWs do the same thing.

A NFW is a force weapon and the table in the codex explicitly states this. Slays outright is exactly the same as instant death when applied to a force weapon in 5th edition. Obviously the wielded of the force weapon does not suddenly have S10 versus a T5 model. The rules on page 50 simply say to treat the attack as instant death. Killed outright is exactly the same in this sense... It's obvious S6 is not double T5. Do you think the designer had the rule for Eternal Warrior in mind when he wrote the DH codex? You are trying to loophole a rule... A classic rules lawyer tactic.

Here I'd a question for you? Does the NFW kill outright a Hive Tyrant? Here's another... Does a D weapon kill outright a Hive Tyrant? Think about it before you spout off an answer and say codex > rulebook. You haven't brought anything new to the discussion and have been repeating yourself in every post. I on the other hand have worked through the various rules to present my case clearly and am not using hsyteria to convince people that I'm right. To be honest a passion for your army that you play just shows you are biased. Like I said I use the GKGM from time to time and I would never claim he can instant death/outright kill an EW.

On another note the EW rule simply states that the model is immune to instant death.

Green Blow Fly wrote:A NFW is a force weapon and the table in the codex explicitly states this.

It also goes on to tell us what a Force Weapon does, it does not refer to the Rulebook, it has its own rules in the codex.

Here I'd a question for you? Does the NFW kill outright a Hive Tyrant?

Yes, since Synapse gives them immunity to ID.

Here's another... Does a D weapon kill outright a Hive Tyrant?

No idea, I don't play Apocabuymorecrapfromuslypse.

Think about it before you spout off an answer and say codex > rulebook. You haven't brought anything new to the discussion and have been repeating yourself in every post. I on the other hand have worked through the various rules to present my case clearly and am not using hsyteria to convince people that I'm right. To be honest a passion for your army that you play just shows you are biased. Like I said I use the GKGM from time to time and I would never claim he can instant death/outright kill an EW.

I'm sure this is directed elswhere...?

On another note the EW rule simply states that the model is immune to instant death.

Which is funny they didn't just put that as his rule in the first place. I'll never understand the writer of the CSM codex. Very akin to the fluff line about Havocs using Rhinos a lot to redeploy...WTF?

Green Blow Fly wrote:A NFW is a force weapon and the table in the codex explicitly states this.

So what? DH forceweapons operate according to 'Codex rules' not what the rulebook states

Slays outright is exactly the same as instant death when applied to a force weapon in 5th edition.

I dunno how you come to this conclusion since is in direct opposition to RAW.

Obviously the wielded of the force weapon does not suddenly have S10 versus a T5 model. The rules on page 50 simply say to treat the attack as instant death. Killed outright is exactly the same in this sense... It's obvious S6 is not double T5. Do you think the designer had the rule for Eternal Warrior in mind when he wrote the DH codex? You are trying to loophole a rule... A classic rules lawyer tactic.

STR is meaningless in this arguement so this portion of your arguement is a complete waste of time.

Here I'd a question for you? Does the NFW kill outright a Hive Tyrant?

yes, as a matter of fact it does.

Here's another... Does a D weapon kill outright a Hive Tyrant?

dunno, dont play apocabuymorecrapfromuslypse.

Think about it before you spout off an answer and say codex > rulebook. You haven't brought anything new to the discussion and have been repeating yourself in every post. I on the other hand have worked through the various rules to present my case clearly and am not using hsyteria to convince people that I'm right. To be honest a passion for your army that you play just shows you are biased. Like I said I use the GKGM from time to time and I would never claim he can instant death/outright kill an EW.

and you would be wrong according to RAW, Codex Rules, RULEBOOK ITSELF (when you take into account what it says about Smoke on vehicles), and even the INAT FAQ.

On another note the EW rule simply states that the model is immune to instant death.

...and?

did you notice that the whole of dakka, including apparently the INAT FAQ guys, seems to disagree with you. Guess you're smarter than all of us....

I'm with Deadshane1 on this. Even though GK use force weapons the fact of the matter is they have their own rules (i.e different wording) for their force weapons in the codex. And as we all know codex trumps rulebook.

Slain outright is not the same as instant death, otherwise it would be called instant death, not slain outright.

It's the same thing.

Are you just sore because your Daemons aren't immune to the primary weapon of Daemonhunters?

Green Blow Fly wrote: To be honest a passion for your army that you play just shows you are biased.

Cheese Elemental wrote:Are you just sore because your Daemons aren't immune to the primary weapon of Daemonhunters?

Pot/Kettle

I think the whole point is that if they were the same then there would have been some sort of errata or FAQ to sort it out. Since the wording is different we have to assume (by RAW) that the intention of the ability is also different.

Yeah GW has done such an excellent job addressing all of the open ended issues with their rules in general I feel you must have missed something. I noticed you have cleverly avoided the glaring points that close this argument:

The table in the codex
The designer wrote the book years ahead of the EW rule

RAW doesn't apply in the way you are trying to use it. You just have constructed a conniving argument that's all,

And no the NFW doesn't kill a Hive Tyrant outright. I told you to read the rules.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Yeah GW has done such an excellent job addressing all of the open ended issues with their rules in general I feel you must have missed something. I noticed you have cleverly avoided the glaring points that close this argument:

Hmm... OK let's see....

The table in the codex

As stated before: the table says they are FWs, then it has the rules for FWs stated in the codex as well.

The designer wrote the book years ahead of the EW rule

And I said a while back, the Eldar codex (1st appearance of EW) has a "killed outright" weapon IN it as well, same wording, in the same book. Plus, if it were ID it would have said it was ID, since ID has been around since 3rd edition.

RAW doesn't apply in the way you are trying to use it. You just have constructed a conniving argument that's all,

Er... the RAW is working against you here, GBF. I totally understand it probably goes against the RAI (which is what you are arguing) but, unless you don't own a DH codex, I don't see how you can say/prove this.

And no the NFW doesn't kill a Hive Tyrant outright. I told you to read the rules.

Er... still don't know where you're getting this. Synapse grants immunity to ID, NFW (and all Inquisitorial FWs FTM) don't cause ID.

demolisher cannon to the face always works =)

The Angry Commissar wrote:demolisher cannon to the face always works =)

How about a Destroyer weapon? Or a Vortex Grenade?

So would you play that the eldar weapon could instant death Abbadon? Your whole argument rests on two words. Seems pretty flimsy to me.

G

Yes it can, because slain outright is not Instant Death. It's not a universal rule. Stop whining and find a way to counter it if you're so upset about it.

waaagh!orksrocks wrote:Kharn has worked for me one on one but 9 zerkers and kharn in a land raider is the scariest thing i have seen for chaos if not gazhgkull on his waaagh! but what army do you have sorry if not chaos or orks but they are all I can help thats not basic like shoot him a lot

One time I got real lucky- I assaulted a squad of Beserkers and Kharn with a Guard command squad (Last Codex) and Yarrick. I ate the squad and only lost like two guys.

Green Blow Fly wrote:So would you play that the eldar weapon could instant death Abbadon? Your whole argument rests on two words. Seems pretty flimsy to me.

G

It beats yours, which is based on two words (Instant Death) which aren't there...lol

Yes, the Diresword can put down Abbadabadoo, Tyrants, Phoenix Lords, etc. because it says it can. Although it requires a failed Ld (on a high Ld usually) test for the victim, not to mention it's a S3 model doing the supposed wounding. I think those two things are the reason that the Diresword rarely is mentioned in such debates.

to the OP:
For extra-hurty characters I deal with them on a case by case basis, for example....
Kharn? shoot him. he can be killed easy with massed bolter fire. If he is holed up in a land raider headed for you then just play keep away from the land raider untill you can pop it.
Greater demon/demon prince? use my own characters with a CC squad loaded with powerfists, he either throws attacks into the squad, taking out regular troops then getting detroyed by my character + powerfists, or he throws attacks at the character and the powerfists and massed attacks take him down.
Gazzy? put a couple of S8 shots into his unit to insta-kill some nobs, then charge into him with everything i can throw at him. whatever you do dont let him charge or you will be eaten alive. usually i avoid his charge by staying inside my landraider(s) he has to hit them with powerklaws to pop them, and then on the next turn i just charge out of the wreckage.
Abby? i dont fight against him much (read: at all) so i dunno, bend over?
DA/BA/SW characters? S8 attacks, they do not have eternal warrior.

the diresword is not a force weapon. I was hoping you would just come out and say so. The term killed outright is not a rule and is merely a desriptor to explain how the NFW instant deaths multi wound models.

G

The diresword says "removed regardless of remaining wounds."

Inquisitor FW: "slain outright, no matter how many wounds it has."

Basically the same thing, but not Instant Death.

Nurgleboy77

So do you think the term slain/killed outright was written to ignore the EW rule?

Should we always use RAW in it's strictest sense?

"Instant Death" has been in the game since 3rd edition. Since that is the case, I don't see why something that is not labeled as Instant Death should be treated as such, just because they have the same result.

As has been stated, this could easily be cleared up in a FAQ and is the only two (DH & WH) where something that is now (in 5th) ID (Force Weapons) are described as not being ID.

Should we always use RAW in it's strictest sense?

When it's this easy? Yes.

Just like Dedicated Transports. The previous IG codex and I believe either DH or WH states you cannot use another squads DT, although the 5th ed rules clearly have other rules for DTs, you must still abide by what the codex says. Good thing IG got a new bag!

you know that GW is not going to FAQ every rule that people abuse. Throwing it on GW's lap is a cop out. Be a man and take responbility for your own decision.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:you know that GW is not going to FAQ every rule that people abuse. Throwing it on GW's lap is a cop out. Be a man and take responbility for your own decision.

G

or maybe be a man and accept that someone else's interpretation is right? How can you say what GW intended? Saying I'm right because this is what they intended is a cop out when you have nothing substantial to back up your opinion.

Slain / killed outright is different terms to instant death.
if they wanted it to cause instant death then they would have stated so in the codex.

Skulltaker can kill off most characters that get in the way.

GBF, you have shown an amazing ability to ignore logic. You are arguing a point that doesnt even need to be rehashed because the rest of the 40k community readily accepts the interpretation of this rule that Nurgleboy and I (and everyone else in this thread) are trying to hammer to you once its explained.

Inat FAQ backs us up.
RAW backs us up.
Codex rules backs us up.
Even the rulebook itself backs us up. (you keep pointing out force weapons in the rulebook but you conveniently ignore the fact that the rulebook itself states that particular rules may be reworked within codexes. I.E. Smoke Launchers.)

All you've got is a RAI arguement, which doesnt work here on dakka. It doest work in tournament.

I cannot fathom why you keep ignoring the logical and correct interpretation of this rule.

I Have spoken with stores here In FL and they are all going with NFW does not remove EW from the tabel. Don't get personal.

G

GBF, stores have no real standing as far as rules go.
They did not write them, just like everyone else here.

Green Blow Fly wrote:I Have spoken with stores here In FL and they are all going with NFW does not remove EW from the tabel. Don't get personal.

G

Thats odd, considering that Stormboy97 and WCBrian live/game in FL...and they know that NFW's slay even EW's outright.

How many stores are we talking about here? I know the gaming down by miami is hard to come by...are there even any stores down there to play at? Stormboy and WCBrian havent been able to find any.

Regardless, wherever you're playing that is playing that way....must be a house rule.

I am talking about the greater Tampa area. You know I don't play down in Miami. I should have been more clear they I was referring to an area... Still it's a lot of stores.

G

....that are playing "House Rules" concerning NFW's.

No they are not shane.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:No they are not shane.

G

Then its even simpler...they're playing wrong. Let some of THEM come here and try and argue it. The whole of dakka will let them know how wrong they are too.

<<< crunch goes the popcorn, and the popcorn goes crunch!

Wow green bow fly is so wrong its really funny and he is so stubborn it amazes me..................... Crunches goes the pop corn.

Instant death = Weapon S = your Tx2, or a weapons that specifically says it inflicts instant death, like a blissgiver.
Slain outright = NFW, Sweeping Advance, Shokk Attack Gun Rolls of 6,6, Scattering off the board, etc, etc.

Does a unit with eternal warriors ignore sweeping advances, or shokk attack guns?

Still don't see anything presented here to change my mind plus scattering off the table you roll on the mishap table to wit there is only a 33% chance the unit is dead.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Sorry Nurgleboy I think we will just have to agree to disagree. I run a GKGM and I would not play that he can outright slay an EW. It's just not right.

G

So in 4th you played that FW did not "slay outright" but instead caused a single wound to creatures that were immune to ID, such as creatures within synapse? If not then you are being inconsistent in "updating" (read: changing the wording to what you think they intended) the NFW to work as a normal FW.

FW in 4th would "slay outright" a hive tyrant and this was universally agreed on. NFW have retained that wording, yet now you think it is just a "semantic difference"?

I don't think 4th edition has much relevance since there was no rule for EW.

G

EW existed, just not as a universal rule and under the name 'Immune to Instant Death'.

Instant Death is a rule incurred by the result of something very specific. If a wound is caused as a result of S=>T*2, this in turn incurs 'killed outright' and 'removed as a casualty'. The Diresword, Sweeping Advance etc. have no relation to that rule - they result in 'killed outright' and 'removed as a casualty' completely differently.

Eternal Warrior's wording is more in question here... if it mentioned anything other than what it does, it might have been a bit more subjective. But it's very clear.

The model is immune to the effects of the Instant Death rule.

That's all it is. Eternal Warrior doesn't save you. Different wargear with the same effect as Eternal Warrior might be described slightly differently, so that's the thing to watch.

I don't see what the issue is. Instant death has been around since 3rd edition. Since 3rd edition, many weapons have ignored the wording for instant death and just slay outright. What's the issue? It's always been like that. There's no hidden anything here.

What makes you think we should ignore the rule for dire swords? It slays slay outright, written ON PURPOSE like that way after 4th edition had been written. It's not like eternal warrior is a new concept either. Ever heard of synpase?

Canonness Rory wrote:
Does a unit with eternal warriors ignore sweeping advances, or shokk attack guns?

Altho i'm not familiar with the exact diresword wording ( i assume it's not the eldar WL diresword) but after reading i have to agree with the above argument. EW are not immune to sweeping advances and therefore not auto immune too other things that causes them to be 'removed from play' or 'slain outright'.

To the OP: as an Eldar player i use my Avatar or Harelquins. With rending i have never seen them not take out any Uber Character on the charge. If they are charged its a different matter tho....

you have to go back and read through this thread in it's entirety. The NFW is a force weapon and follows the rules for a force weapon found on pg 50 of the RB. The dire sword is a red herring in this discussion and shifts the focus. The dire sword is not described as killing the enemy unit outright. The term kills outright is a descriptor, not a rule and the NFW being a force weapon as described in the table in the DH codex causes instant death.

G

Force weapons are fethed due to thier write up

"Roll to hit and wound as normal, allowing any invulnerable saving throws the victim may have. The psyker may then take a psychic test to use the weapons power against any one opponant that suffered an unsaved wound by the weapon in that players turn ........... (skipped a bit since it is about usinf psychic powers) If the test is passed, the enemy model suffers INSTANT DEATH ......... (goes on with more crap once again)"

So basic force weps are gone in terms of EW.
i take it NFW are worded differently?

Green Blow Fly wrote:The NFW is a force weapon and follows the rules for a force weapon found on pg 50 of the RB.

No, they do not. They follow the rules for "Force Weapon" on pg 17 of the DH book, as do the Witch Hunters FWs, that follow the rules on pg 21.

JD21290 wrote:
So basic force weps are gone in terms of EW.
i take it NFW are worded differently?

Way to show up late for the debate and not read the thread!

Really, it has nothing to do with it being a "Nemesis Force Weapon, just that the DH (and WH!) codex describe how their FWs work (differently!).

Actually nurgleboy, i was following off from GBF's post about P50 of the book.

but as it goes, allways take the wording from the codex over the book, so if they have seperate rules in the dex then they follow those.
not a DH player, so i wouldnt know, but as far as it goes then they would be following the rules in the dex.

and im sorry, i didnt think you could really how up late on a thread, maybe you could follow what im saying aswell.
like maybe when i said earlier that slain / killed outright is not instant death.

Yo JD the term 'slain outright' is not a rule such as instant death. It is just a description of how a force weapon works if the wielder scores a wound and passes their Ld test. People are trying to use TWO words as a loophole.

G

Nurgleboy77 wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:The NFW is a force weapon and follows the rules for a force weapon found on pg 50 of the RB.

No, they do not. They follow the rules for "Force Weapon" on pg 17 of the DH book, as do the Witch Hunters FWs, that follow the rules on pg 21.

JD21290 wrote:
So basic force weps are gone in terms of EW.
i take it NFW are worded differently?

Way to show up late for the debate and not read the thread!

Really, it has nothing to do with it being a "Nemesis Force Weapon, just that the DH (and WH!) codex describe how their FWs work (differently!).

Umm... nurgling, I'm fairly certain the rules in the back of the 5e rulebook > DH. Call it a hunch, but I think that latest version is what they go by at GW.

Yo JD the term 'slain outright' is not a rule such as instant death. It is just a description of how a force weapon works if the wielder scores a wound and passes their Ld test. People are trying to use TWO words as a loophole.

No they are not GBF, they are simply stating that ID and slain outright are not the same atall.
which i do agree they are not the same.
going by wording (RAW) the model is slain outright, so thats it, gone.

It's not RAW at all.

G

How so GBF?
it says slain outright, thats how its written, then thats how its played.


says nothing about instant death.

Slain outright is just a bit of fluff to describe how the NFW works when the wielder scores a wound and passes their Ld test. It is defined as a FW in the table, refer to pg 50 of the RB junior.

G

GBF, you cant just say that "its a bit of fluff"
its stating how it works, its not fluff atall.
Ignoring rules will get you nowhere.
you either follow them or dont play.

JD stop, just stop.

G

GBF, what about my post??

No, they do not. They follow the rules for "Force Weapon" on pg 17 of the DH book, as do the Witch Hunters FWs, that follow the rules on pg 21.

What do those rules say?

G

JD stop, just stop.

Why should i stop? simply because you have no base for your argument other than saying its "fluff"?

Green Blow Fly wrote:What do those rules say?

G

Both codices say:

...the opponent is slain outright no matter how many wounds it has...

You arse just repeating yourself. It's like you want the last word which is just plain childish.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:You arse ...

Freudian slip?

Wow, that was either resorting to name calling or just plain old bad spelling.
then maybe i need to repeat it a few more times until you get the point.

...the opponent is slain outright no matter how many wounds it has...

that is the rule, not fluff.
RAW states they die, so they die.


Why would you seem to think this is instant death? it makes no reference to it at any point.

Because FWs went from "slain outright" to "Instant Death" with the advent of 5th edition. The Inq codices are the last remaining holdout of books that don't refer to the BRB for the rules for FWs. So they use their own rules.

GBF is just too skilled at "LALALALALA I can't HEAR YOU!!!" to understand.

"Allways take the rule from the codex"
like BA only gaining a 4+ from storm shields rather than the newer 3+.

The last bit i agree 100% with

GBF,

First you are asking Nurgleboy to quote the FW rules on page 17/21 (DH/WH), when he does, you just put it down by saying "You're just repeating yourself.

What is this discussion actually about? The working of NFW, or you wanting to be told you're right without being so.

Once again:

#1 NFW are a special kind of ForceWeapon -> Check (stated in DH codex)
#2 ForceWeapons inflict Instant Death -> Check (5th edition RB)
#3 Models with the EW USR (or a wording stating they do) ignore this effect and suffer 1 wound as normal.
#4 Codex trumps RB, in case of different rulings for same wargear/weapons/rules etc -> Check
#5 In contrary to point 2, the DH/WH Codex do NOT use the term "Instant Death" anywhere in their wording for Forceweapons (whether because the term didn't exist by then, or because it's meant not to be there doesn't matter -> RAW)

The only conclusion i'm getting from this exact use of RAW:

Models with the EW USR (or "Immune to Instant Death" CAN be slain by DH/WH Forceweapons/Nemesis Forceweapons.

I really cannot find anything in both the Codici and Rulebook to make a solid argument against this point. It might not be the most logical way, but RAW this is completely correct.

On the other hand, I must agree with you that GW has been really stupid concerning updates of rulings, not only for WH/DH. Some disadvantages we encounter when using RAW on the DH Codex:

- "Daemon" Rule doesn;t exist any longer
- Dedicated Transports cannot be used by other units
- 4+ CC Stormshields, against a single opponent
- Heavy 3 Assault cannons
- Less transport capacity in Landraiders
- More expensive Rhino/Chimera
- Near useless psychic powers

These are things DH players have to cope with when playing our armies, which makes DH a quiet difficult army to play with.

Grt. Pim

I'll read the DH codex tonight. Still sounds like a bit of fluff to me like when people said in 4th that Space Marines always auto regroup after falling back.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:I'll read the DH codex tonight.
G

This explains a lot....

Look I have read it many times including this weekend. I just want to go over the most pertinent items. So far it is a bunch of GK players that insist they are right.

G

im a BA / ork / nid player, not a GK player.
as for being part of fluff - its actually with the rules of the weapon, not as part of the fluff (like alot of wepaons now have)

<---not a GK player, just plays by the rules

Insist the rules are right more like, as opposed to your total lack of citation.

He is a chimer in type. It adds no weight. Neither do statements such as...

"These are things DH players have to cope with when playing our armies, which makes DH a quiet difficult army to play with."

G

No GBF, he was simply pointing out how daemon hunters use all codex only gear.
they do not use the mainstream rules for things, if its in thier dex then they must use it as its written.

So Nurgleboy77 stated that the rules for a force weapon in the DH and WH codices are the same BUT has also been saying all along that the NFW is unique. Sorry something is wrong in the state of Denmark.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Look I have read it many times including this weekend. I just want to go over the most pertinent items. So far it is a bunch of GK players that insist they are right.

G

So far as I know, I'm the only dedicated GK player to be in this conversation.

...and you should know D@MN well that I dont need to use loopholes to win games. Commenting that only "rules-lawyers" subscribe to this interpretation almost immediatly after I honestly post about NFW's in this thread is a borderline flame.

People have been arguing with your for some 4 full pages now that the sky is blue and we all keep citing rules, RAW, AND the rulebook. Yet you choose to ignore all examples and instead REPEAT YOURSELF, not citing rules, but instead simply insist that YOU'RE right.

Take a hint...noone is agreeing with you. Are you honestly saying that you have a better grasp on the rules than some 5 or so posters in this thread.

You need to bow out of this one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Green Blow Fly wrote:So Nurgleboy77 stated that the rules for a force weapon in the DH and WH codices are the same BUT has also been saying all along that the NFW is unique. Sorry something is wrong in the state of Denmark.

G

No, he's been saying that the CODEX rules for forceweapons override the forceweapon rules in the RB...and he would be right.

This is according to GW FAQ. How many more times must we all repeat ourselves before you swallow some pride and bow out of this?

I assume this facepalm is due to embarrassment from your error in deciphering the rules.

Not at all... the frustration... sheer frustration... that is all.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Not at all... the frustration... sheer frustration... that is all.

G

Look Steve, if you dont believe me (or anyone else here)...why dont you step back from this one...post it over on our forums and let all of OUR guys tell you how its supposed to be played.

I dont see why you cannot understand this other that possibly stubborness and refusal to accept that new rules and FAQ's from GW have resulted in a rather powerful weapon for DH/WH.

...and you wonder why noone takes you seriously here on dakka....

In order for that flowchart to work...the person who "got told" needs to REALISE that he "got told". Otherwise, it isnt funny.

Deadshane1 wrote:...and you wonder why noone takes you seriously here on dakka....

In order for that flowchart to work...the person who "got told" needs to REALISE that he "got told". Otherwise, it isnt funny.

were we ever supposed to? I always just took him as some troll

I said I would check the rules again tonight, but no that is not good enough... you want me to immediately capitulate. It ain't gonna happen.

I for one, as a part-time GK player, would jump for joy if the army was updated so that NFW were normal force weapons in addition to their S6 power weapon status.

Why?

-Because then Grey Knights and assassins would have frag grenades, which they don't and cannot get, and is absolutely crippling for assaulting into terrain

-Because my storm shields would grant a 3+ Invulnerable save

-Because my stupid Heavy3 Assault Cannons would be Heavy4, Rending

-Because the GK Grand Master/Captain would be WS6, just like a Force Commander/Captain

-Because all of the stupid inconsistent discontinuities that make GK weak as an overall army would removed, at the "mere" cost of a piece of wargear that rarely sees use beyond what a normal force weapon could achieve.

Seriously, you can't cherry pick which rules you want to fix. Either all of it gets updated, or none of it does. GK are overall a weak army due to ridiculous model cost and a critical lack of relevant wargear (frag grenades OMG).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Khornatedemon wrote:

Deadshane1 wrote:...and you wonder why noone takes you seriously here on dakka....

In order for that flowchart to work...the person who "got told" needs to REALISE that he "got told". Otherwise, it isnt funny.

were we ever supposed to? I always just took him as some troll

You're in the enlightened majority.

Okay so its personal now. I see all the Stelek fanbois are coming out of the proverbial closest like a maddening horde. No big deal to me. Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. That's right when you can't win an argument on the merits of pure intellect then just slag away.

Oh Snap!



G

You obviously are.

Okay so its personal now. I see all the Stelek fanbois are coming out of the proverbial closest like a maddening horde. No big deal to me. Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. That's right when you can't win an argument on the merits of pure intellect then just slag away.

1: Me and stelek dont mix, he knows my views of him, as do alot of other dakka members.

2: so you calling me an arse was not petty name calling?


GBF, you need to grow up, every troll has thier day, yours was a long time ago.
As it stands most of dakka just tend to ignore your stupid and annoying comments.
You were saying its just GK players trying to use a loophole, yet there was only 1 GK player here.
And im sorry if you dont like playing RAW, you seem to like playing your own made up versions.

Now, after being proved wrong by everyone here you still try to keep this argument going, for what?
what can you actually show us to prove your point?

Keep slagging away. I really don't care.

If you didnt care then you wouldnt be posting.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Keep slagging away. I really don't care.

you post a lot for someone who doesnt care

It's to save face. In two more pages he'll turn around and go 'HAHA, I was just stringing all you f00lz along to see how many posts I could get you to waste!'. It's a type of rationalization to compensate for having no further intellectual contribution combined with an inability to admit to being in error.

I just love the way he goes about attacking stelek even when stelek isnt here to defend himself.
Not only that, but going by what GBF has said and done he is allowed to call people names, but when others prove him wrong we are "slagging him off"

then he resorts to posting pictures of little girls.
im sorry GBF, that may be your sort of thing, but not ours.

naa, nevermind.

What did I say bad about your boy in this threAd?

G

Well, this thread is officially over.....

Are you a mod now?

Green Blow Fly wrote:So Nurgleboy77 stated that the rules for a force weapon in the DH and WH codices are the same BUT has also been saying all along that the NFW is unique. Sorry something is wrong in the state of Denmark.

G

Nope. Never said that. I just said DH and WH FWs have their own rules. Others have stated its becasue its a "Nemesis" FW, which I said...is wrong. Even if all three were worded the same, they still would act as they are written i nthe respective codices and not how the 5th ed book treats "normal" FWs.

EXACTLY like Smoke Launchers or Dedicated Transports, or the tons of other inconsistancies GW created when they plunked down "Codex> BRB".

Nice bait/Troll though GBF, you got me.

Feel any better now JD?

Not really, just thought i would see if your way of handling things worked, but posting random pointless pics doesent really do alot sadly.

Wow... anybody wants to get back on topic?

Well, first of all i'm another GK player, but nevermind.

To get back on topic:

I'm playing marines, so when it comes to kill hard characters, i'm using either lysander, or combi-plasma sternguard. (Normally i'm playing a unit like: 10 man, 2x combi-melta, 2x combi-plasma, HF, powerfist in a pod). Combining with a libbi /w nullzone and hellfire rounds, this works quiet well.

I do realise this comes in at about 400 points, but is a quiet universal squad to use, as i can handle quiet some units (Infantry, characters, vehicles).

When playing guard is always take two executioners with plasma sponsons, this will put oud about 5 templats per tank each turn.

(When playing GK's (my third army) i use the much discussed NFW Grand master)

Grt. Pim

There really isnt any need.

DH/WH force weapons work exactly the same as they did in 4th, when there were plenty of "immune to ID" creatures - like nids in synapse - that were still slain outright and did not have anything to with ID.

Sadly GBF hasn't got anything to counter the utterly solid fact that you are told to use the rules in the codex when they contradict the rulebook, and the rules in the codex work exactly the same as they did an edition ago. He has an argument alright, just not one based in actual rules.

DBF - the reason why I asked about 4th was that the equiv. of EW, "Immune to ID", was bypassed by force weapons. As I stated - you want to change the working of one rule without changing any others. You're welcome to do so, just please ackowledge that you are wrong as far as rules go, and you would prefer your own house rules. Unfortunately your conduct over the last few posts has shown you arent mature enough to do so.

I am not discussing the rule until I read the codex again tonight. If I am wrong I'll be the first to admit it.

G

Modquisition On:
Gentlemen this thread has been reported. This thread will be monitored in the hopes it can be kept from being closed. Posts made AFTER THIS WARNING that do not abide by Dakka Rule #1 will be treated harshly including suspension as appropriate for any member regardless of tenor on the board.

I will be following this thread.

... I suppose no one listens, but please, turn to the back of the 5e rulebook where it updates all the weapons and read up on how NFW works under 5th. DH is no longer current. Thank you.

BaronIveagh wrote:... I suppose no one listens, but please, turn to the back of the 5e rulebook where it updates all the weapons and read up on how NFW works under 5th. DH is no longer current. Thank you.

are you referring to the little chart that has the str, power weapon, and force weapon entries for GK nemesis weapons? It says it is a force weapon yes, but the issue is the DH book has a different description for how force weapons work, hence the debate. I believe its codex > rule book.

Khornatedemon wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:... I suppose no one listens, but please, turn to the back of the 5e rulebook where it updates all the weapons and read up on how NFW works under 5th. DH is no longer current. Thank you.

are you referring to the little chart that has the str, power weapon, and force weapon entries for GK nemesis weapons? It says it is a force weapon yes, but the issue is the DH book has a different description for how force weapons work, hence the debate. I believe its codex > rule book.

Yes, the codex trumps the rulebook when there is an overlapping issue.

So in this case, since Codex says X and Rulebook says Y, you adhere to X.

We now have 7 (SEVEN!) pages of exactly the same thing. The OP just wanted some advice in beating abby, etc... Can we please stop this?

@Frazzled: I would rather see pictures of a fluffy kitten having pens poked in it's eyes than see this thread top the the list in the 'tactics' forum. For another week.

(I hate kittens, please understand how desperate i must be to ask this)

Yea I think we're done here. This has meandered way off topic and is already brutally long.