Switch Theme:

Baneblades and Storm trooper doctrine  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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




Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Obviously they have placed restrictions on which you uts get which abilities, as a baneblade unit cannot get stormtrooper ability without using a keyword with no assigned abilities whicb is directly what the FAQ was addressing.

Your statement that there is no restriction is blatantly flash and requires completely ignoring the FAQ to have any merit.

Further you obviously did not read anything I typed or the FAQ as you keep bringing up this ludicrous point that there is no restriction on which doctrine you can take when the issue is giving an unit an ability it cannot normally have without using a keyword that has no assigned abilities which is exactly what is being discussed a d what the FAQ covers.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/01/09 19:11:53


 
   
Made in us
Norn Queen






 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Lance845 wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
blaktoof wrote:
It specifically verbatim says "not to enable aywrs to circumvent restrictions on what abilities affect units.....
So you're saying that no custom chapters can ever have a chapter tactic? That's total nonsense and you know it.


No. Hes saying that if the parent regiment has a restriction that makes it so x unit cannot gain access to its doctrine then naming your army whatever you want and having that army adopt that parent doctrine comes with all the same restrictions. You cannot circumvent rules restrictions and allowances simply by renaming things.
Huh.

Am I right in thinking that ALL units with <Keyword> start off as a blank slate, right? So, nothing EVER starts with a specific Faction like <Ultramarines> or <Cadian> to start with, right?

So surely then me assigning any name to these blank slate <Keywords> is illegal? Because, as you say "You cannot circumvent rules restrictions and allowances simply by renaming things." Me naming a Tactical Squad with the <Ultramarines> keyword is therefore illegal, because it gives them rules they otherwise can't have if they didn't have that keyword. In that regard, the ONLY units which can have faction specific <Keywords> are ones that already have them, such as Guilliman, Creed, Straken etc etc.

This is a stupid line of argument. The FAQ is clear on what it addresses. It addresses cross-Faction naming, so Guardsmen can benefit from Space Marine bonuses. Not on if a custom regiment can have an entirely unrelated Doctrine.


Why is this so hard to understand?

Can Militarum Tempestus give Storm Trooper Doctrine to a Baneblade? No. So, the open <REGIMENT> keyword is meant for you to give fluff and flavor to your army. Not circumvent rules restrictions. Just because your IG army is called "Beep Boop" and chooses the Storm Trooper doctrine doesn't mean you can circumvent the restrictions of the parent Regiment you are using the doctrine for. They specifically say that in the FAQ. It is not meant for you to give rules to units that could not normally get those rules. Is the MT cannot give it to a baneblade, then anything using the MT doctrine continues to also not be able to. Because acording to the FAQ the Keyword Mechanic is not meant to circumvent restrictions.

i.e. You cannot circumvent the rstrictions and allowances simply by renaming things.


These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
 
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut




I think everyone understands the train of thought that gets to that conclusion. We just see it as being based on a false foundation. I don't think anyone's going to convince anyone else at this point, and it's just going in circles until a FAQ comes out that specifically addresses this Doctrine.
   
Made in us
Second Story Man





Astonished of Heck

blaktoof wrote:Obviously they have placed restrictions on which you uts get which abilities, as a baneblade unit cannot get stormtrooper ability without using a keyword with no assigned abilities whicb is directly what the FAQ was addressing.

Your statement that there is no restriction is blatantly flash and requires completely ignoring the FAQ to have any merit.

Then please quote the codex where it provides this restriction. You have not provided it at any point, you have simply claimed there is one. Your claim means nothing without proof. Thus the question continues to be asked.

blaktoof wrote:Further you obviously did not read anything I typed or the FAQ as you keep bringing up this ludicrous point that there is no restriction on which doctrine you can take when the issue is giving an unit an ability it cannot normally have without using a keyword that has no assigned abilities which is exactly what is being discussed a d what the FAQ covers.

Since you have not quoted anything from the AM codex which disallows any custom <Regiment> from taking the Storm Troopers Doctrine, there has been nothing you have typed to read regarding this. All you give is your claims and assertions, just as when you claimed Special Rules addressing a Unit Name were calling after a datasheet and not an actual unit.

Where is the restriction which places the Storm Trooper Doctrine as only being under the Militarum Tempestus and not a <Regiment>, and would you properly quote it?

Any inherent restriction that could be considered would be just as easily applied to the Doctrine listed after Cadia, Armageddon, and the rest. So where is the explicit restriction?

Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





blaktoof wrote:
Obviously they have placed restrictions on which you uts get which abilities, as a baneblade unit cannot get stormtrooper ability without using a keyword with no assigned abilities whicb is directly what the FAQ was addressing.


No, the FAQ was directly addressing regiments getting chapter tactics abilities or SM units getting Doctrines as well as their normal stuff.


blaktoof wrote:
Your statement that there is no restriction is blatantly flash and requires completely ignoring the FAQ to have any merit.


Your statement is based on taking the FAQ out of context to apply it when it doesn't apply, so your statement is the one without merit.

blaktoof wrote:
Further you obviously did not read anything I typed or the FAQ as you keep bringing up this ludicrous point that there is no restriction on which doctrine you can take when the issue is giving an unit an ability it cannot normally have without using a keyword that has no assigned abilities which is exactly what is being discussed a d what the FAQ covers.


Obviously you can not tell the different between not reading what you had typed, and reading what you had typed but have dismissed as an invalid argument. You're not being ignored; we just find your argument lacking and summarily reject it based on that. The unit CAN NORMALLY get the Doctrine by having the regiment select the doctrine. This is a normal function in the rules.. It chooses the Doctrine as normal. No keyword blah blah blah as you intimate.

You still need to provide proof without resorting to claiming that by not allowing a faction to be chosen you prevent the perfectly legal option of choosing a Doctrine, which is a normal procedure for the armies.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/09 20:19:47


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Actually a normal function of the rules is defined on p.84, units with <regiment> cannot select militarum Tempestus.

Stormtrooper is the militarum tempestus doctrine.

A baneblade cannot normally have the stormtrooper ability- as the regiment with that assigned traits is not a valid option. All other regiments with assigned traits are.

Any <regiment> without an assigned traits per the FAQ cannot choose stormtrooper because they are giving an unit, baneblade, an ability, stormtrooper, that it cannot normally get access to without using a regiment that has no associated rules- which is exactly what the FAQ answer covers.

If getting the stormtrooper ability on a baneblade was a normal option then <regiment> would normally be able to be replaced with the only keyword that has that assigned ability.

The FAQ deals with using keywords with unassigned traits to try and give units abilities they would not normally be able to get by using keywords with assigned abilities.

And I'm out.

This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 2018/01/09 22:55:41


 
   
Made in us
Second Story Man





Astonished of Heck

blaktoof wrote:
Actually a normal function of the rules is defined on p.84, units with <regiment> cannot select militarum Tempestus.

Stormtrooper is the militarum tempestus doctrine.

A baneblade cannot normally have the stormtrooper ability- as the regiment with that assigned traits is not a valid option. All other regiments with assigned traits are.

Right in here you missed the proper step. Yes, the Storm Troopers Doctrine is the Militarum Tempestus Doctrine, but you have yet to point out how ANY Doctrine is exclusive to the <Regiment> (so-called in the case of the MT) that is listed before the Doctrine's Name.

Where does it state that the relationship listed as:
"MILITARUM TEMPESTUS:
STORM TROOPERS
"
has any exclusivity from any other unlisted <Regiment> from getting it any more than:
"CADIAN:
BORN SOLDIERS
"
"CATACHAN:
BRUTAL STRENGTH
"
"ARMAGEDDON:
INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY
"

Without providing a proper rule providing that exclusive relationship beyond the others, your belief has zero written support. The exclusivity of the <Regiment> does not translate to the exclusivity of the Doctrine that it is required to use without it being specifically written. There is nothing in the codex which provides this exclusivity of the Doctrine that I can find, and no one, much less you, has provided any other source for it other then an unfounded relationship in your own heads.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/01/10 06:25:25


Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins





Tacoma, WA, USA

Q: If I create an Astra Militarum Regiment of my own and name them, for example, the ‘Emperor’s Finest’, and I then also create an Adeptus Astartes Chapter of my own choosing, and also call them the ‘Emperor’s Finest’, do the abilities that work on the <Regiment> and/or <Chapter> keywords now work on both the Astra Militarum and Adeptus Astartes units?
A: No.
The intent of naming Regiments, Chapters, etc. of your own creation is to personalise your collections and not to enable players to circumvent the restrictions on what abilities affect what units. It is also not intended to circumvent the restrictions on which units are able to be included in the same Detachment.


This keeps coming up and is consistently misinterpreted. This Designer's Commentary Answer prevents two things:
1. Using a custom <Regiment>, <Chapter>, <etc> keyword to allow a player to claim the abilities from one army on units in another. Even if you call both your AM Regiment and AA Chapter 'Emperor's Finest' you don't get to use the Captain's Rite's of Battle (that works on <Chapter Units&gt on AM units or can you use AM Orders on a Space Marine unit.
2. You can't call you Eldar <Craftworld> 'Emperor's Finest' and then stick them in the same Detachment as your 'Emperor's Finest' Chapter units.

That is what it is saying? It doesn't say jack about Chapter Tactics or Regimental Doctrines.
   
Made in us
Second Story Man





Astonished of Heck

 alextroy wrote:
Q: If I create an Astra Militarum Regiment of my own and name them, for example, the ‘Emperor’s Finest’, and I then also create an Adeptus Astartes Chapter of my own choosing, and also call them the ‘Emperor’s Finest’, do the abilities that work on the <Regiment> and/or <Chapter> keywords now work on both the Astra Militarum and Adeptus Astartes units?
A: No.
The intent of naming Regiments, Chapters, etc. of your own creation is to personalise your collections and not to enable players to circumvent the restrictions on what abilities affect what units. It is also not intended to circumvent the restrictions on which units are able to be included in the same Detachment.


This keeps coming up and is consistently misinterpreted. This Designer's Commentary Answer prevents two things:
1. Using a custom <Regiment>, <Chapter>, <etc> keyword to allow a player to claim the abilities from one army on units in another. Even if you call both your AM Regiment and AA Chapter 'Emperor's Finest' you don't get to use the Captain's Rite's of Battle (that works on <Chapter Units&gt on AM units or can you use AM Orders on a Space Marine unit.
2. You can't call you Eldar <Craftworld> 'Emperor's Finest' and then stick them in the same Detachment as your 'Emperor's Finest' Chapter units.

That is what it is saying? It doesn't say jack about Chapter Tactics or Regimental Doctrines.

It's in the second part of the question, which is the actual question:
do the abilities that work on the <Regiment> and/or <Chapter> keywords now work on both the Astra Militarum and Adeptus Astartes units

What abilities work on the <Regiment> Keywords? Doctrines.
What abilities work on the <Chapter> Keywords? Chapter Tactics.

If you can provide any other abilities that work on <Regiment> or <Chapter>, please present them.

Edit: But as has been pointed out before, in order for this FAQ to have ANY application to this discussion, it must first be demonstrated that ONLY Faction Keyword Militarum Tempestus Detachments can access Storm Trooper Doctrines, but the Doctrines which are listed Cadian, Armageddon, Catachan, etc, are not that exclusive.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/11 05:21:54


Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins





Tacoma, WA, USA

Did you not read what i wrote? I literally included two such abilities (Rites of Battle and Orders) in my post.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

Wait what are we on about now?

Anyways it's worth mentioning that a Successor Chapter is now forbidden from using its progenitor's Warlord Trait.

This is significant, because it means if you choose <Aurora Chapter> you are not "counts as Ultramarines" and do not get the "Ultramarines" warlord trait. However, you still get their Chapter Tactic.

This indicates that Chapter Tactics (and by extension, Doctrines) are distinct from the keywords to which they are attached, therefore decoupling the Storm Troopers doctrine from the Militarum Tempestus Keyword.

If you subscribe to precedent, that is.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




That sounds correct. It really hurts custom guard regiments, who will not benefit from the extra orders, stratagems, warlord traits and relics that the named regiments do.
Of course you get around this by "counting as" a named regiment. Which of course means you are not eligible for the storm trooper doctrine.

DFTT 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

Captyn_Bob wrote:
That sounds correct. It really hurts custom guard regiments, who will not benefit from the extra orders, stratagems, warlord traits and relics that the named regiments do.
Of course you get around this by "counting as" a named regiment. Which of course means you are not eligible for the storm trooper doctrine.


Yes, this is true.

And I will also make fun of the plastic cadians who are counts-as-someone-else who are counts-as-vostroyans really.
   
Made in us
Second Story Man





Astonished of Heck

 alextroy wrote:
Did you not read what i wrote? I literally included two such abilities (Rites of Battle and Orders) in my post.

And you were excluding the Doctrines and Chapter Tactics in your post.

Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins





Tacoma, WA, USA

And both of those have rules telling you how to apply them. Chapter Tactics apply to <Chapters> and Doctrines apply to <Regiments>. The only reason to drag the FAQ in is if someone is tying to apply something to the wrong type of Keyword.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/17 00:27:26


 
   
Made in us
Second Story Man





Astonished of Heck

 alextroy wrote:
And both of those have rules telling you how to apply them. Chapter Tactics apply to <Chapters> and Doctrines apply to <Regiments>. The only reason to drag the FAQ in is if someone is tying to apply something to the wrong type of Keyword.

And you are missing the point and purpose of the thread, which is that people were saying that the Storm Troopers Doctrine could only be applied to <Militarum Tempestus>, and others are saying it is not.

Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: