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.

Trashcan wrote:Lets say I stick Logan with some Long Fangs to make them relentless. If I split fire between, say, a looted wagon and a unit of boyz do I have the option to charge either unit in the assault phase? I've shot at both so I should have the choice, ya?

Hmm, I am not too sure. I would say you have to assault whatever logan shot at, because he does not benefit from the Fire Control Rule. I am not sure though.

If I put a terminator with CML and storm bolter with a unit of long fangs can I fire the CML and SB at two separate targets?

No.

Can a terminator with CML fire the CML and a combi weapon or does the CML rule only apply to storm bolters?

Storm Bolters only.

Rawr Ninja'd ya Kaaihn!

Trashcan wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:

Trashcan wrote:Here's something that may tilt the RAI debate towards the pro multiple attempts at dispelling camp - Wolf Tail Talismans

If a model or the unit he is with is affected by a psychic power then roll a d6, on a 5+ it's nullified. This is an option for all Rune Priests and comes standard on Njal. I think, clearly, this is precedent for multiple dispel attempts (if you can't make multiple attempts, then this item has no use on RP's)

Just to throw a wrench in your argument, it has a use if you take a Rune Priest without taking Njal. Indeed, you can't actually take a Rune Priest with Njal anyway, since he has all the psychic powers and you may not duplicate powers.

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. A rune priest comes standard with a Runic Weapon, which is what gives you the 4+ negation in 24'', and the option to buy a second 5+ negation (the Wolf Tail Talisman). Njal has a 3+ Negation and comes equipped with a WTT. If you can't stack dispel attempts then a WTT on a rune priest is useless and Njal has redundant wargear.

Ah, I see what you are saying. I was off in the wrong direction to what you were getting at, sorry about that. Yes, you are correct that since a Priest can't drop his runic weapon, what possible use does he have to purchase a WTT, without even getting into Njal. That does lend weight to the idea that multiple attempts to block are fine for Wolves.

Trashcan wrote:Here's a few more questions:
Lets say I stick Logan with some Long Fangs to make them relentless. If I split fire between, say, a looted wagon and a unit of boyz do I have the option to charge either unit in the assault phase? I've shot at both so I should have the choice, ya?

I would think so. The rules say that you must assault the unit you shot at though, so technically it sounds like you have to declare the assault against both? That seems a bit strange.

Trashcan wrote:If I put a terminator with CML and storm bolter with a unit of long fangs can I fire the CML and SB at two separate targets?

No, because it says the unit splits fire and you declare by model for who shoots at what target using the normal shooting rules.

Trashcan wrote:Can a terminator with CML fire the CML and a combi weapon or does the CML rule only apply to storm bolters?

Looks like storm bolter only. The combi-weapon is not the storm bolter, the storm bolter is what the combi-weapon is attached to.

The chaos daemons book has an ability that allows a single model to fire at multiple targets, then it can assault any of the targets it shot at.

I know that's chaos daemons, not SW, but either way I think the BGB doesn't say you "must charge what you shot at", which would cause confusion, but rather that you can't assault something you didn't shoot at IF you shot that turn.

I'd say that you can charge both units, providing that you don't break coherency. Models would have to charge at the unit it shot at. Should only one unit be chargeable with the aforementioned caveats, I think that I would allow it. I can't cite any rules to support my view, just my opinion.

Then again, you're kind of in trouble if your Long Fangs are in assault range.

Not if Logan's part of the squad!

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at. A rune priest comes standard with a Runic Weapon, which is what gives you the 4+ negation in 24'', and the option to buy a second 5+ negation (the Wolf Tail Talisman). Njal has a 3+ Negation and comes equipped with a WTT. If you can't stack dispel attempts then a WTT on a rune priest is useless and Njal has redundant wargear.

Not redundant. If you fail with the runic weapon, you can try again with the tail as long as the psychic power affects him or the unit he is with.

In regards to the topic, if you got 4 runepriests within range then you roll 4 dice.

It's fluffy, as the SW would be big on anti-psyker wargear since the 1K sons are their historical adversaries.

I would say Logan and the long fangs can choose which of the 2 units they shot at to charge.. it would be less confusing this way..and even by rules it covers that you can only assault a unit you shot at but it didn't say how many LOL hehe

Spellbound wrote:I think the BGB doesn't say you "must charge what you shot at", which would cause confusion, but rather that you can't assault something you didn't shoot at IF you shot that turn.

No, you have it backwards. Page 33, Disallowed Assaults: ...a unit that fired in the Shooting phase can only assault the unit that it shot at...

Which means charging only 1 of the shot targets is fine. Either that or the game breaks entirely ;-)

As to the Rune Priest- isn't multiple DH Inquisitor w/mystics analogous? One drop triggers multiple models.

Lets go back to the HQs for just a second. I know the argument for Rune Priests is having powers A and B and having powers B and C are different but what about Wolf Lords?

Could I have something like this:
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF and Beast Slayer
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF and Wolf Kin

Or does the HQ clause

Codex: Space Wolves wrote: However, packs of Space Wolves work best when led by a single dominant personality, each hero respected for his own abilities. To represent this, no two characters may bear the same saga, nor may they bear the same psychic powers or wargear combination. Space Wolves are far too individual and proud for such unimaginative tactics!

This leads me to believe that the above is not possible. As the Sagas are listed separately from the wargear. So while the above combination is not legal the below would be:

Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF, WTT and Beast Slayer
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF, Combi-Flamer, and Wolf Kin

And as far as that goes, is each different combi weapon a different weapon or are they all combi weapons in this regard? So would this final combination be a legal one?

Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF, Combi-Flamer
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF, Combi-Melta
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF, Combi-Plasma

Typeline: yes, those are legal.

jmurph wrote:Typeline: yes, those are legal.

But apparently Rune Priest with Power A+B is the Same as Rune Priest B+C. -shrug-

jmurph wrote:Typeline: yes, those are legal.

Are you certain though?

The first combination:
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF and Beast Slayer
Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF and Wolf Kin

I would say is illegal. They all have the same equipment combination (Wolf Lord Terminator w/ PF) but all have different sagas (or no saga on the first). Since the rules state no two characters may bear the same saga, nor may they bear the same psychic powers or wargear combination. I underlined my specific emphasis. Having different (or no) saga does not make them have different wargear lay outs. I'm not trying to be an ass about it, I'm just pointing this interpretation out.

Kaaihn wrote:

Spellbound wrote:I think the BGB doesn't say you "must charge what you shot at", which would cause confusion, but rather that you can't assault something you didn't shoot at IF you shot that turn.

No, you have it backwards. Page 33, Disallowed Assaults: ...a unit that fired in the Shooting phase can only assault the unit that it shot at...

Well that wouldn't disallow the long fangs from charging, as they shot both units so the requirements are fulfilled. They can charge one, the other, or both.

Doesn't that quote go on to say that you can still charge other units as well, so long as your "primary" or however it's worded is the one you shot at?

Spellbound wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:

Spellbound wrote:I think the BGB doesn't say you "must charge what you shot at", which would cause confusion, but rather that you can't assault something you didn't shoot at IF you shot that turn.

No, you have it backwards. Page 33, Disallowed Assaults: ...a unit that fired in the Shooting phase can only assault the unit that it shot at...

Well that wouldn't disallow the long fangs from charging, as they shot both units so the requirements are fulfilled. They can charge one, the other, or both.

Doesn't that quote go on to say that you can still charge other units as well, so long as your "primary" or however it's worded is the one you shot at?

I think everyone is getting to into specifics with Long Fangs here.

We are all supporting the same idea, they can charge either unit they shot at.

you can't actually take a Rune Priest with Njal anyway, since he has all the psychic powers and you may not duplicate powers.

I disagree with your interpretation of that rule.

As I have posted elsewhere, I would interpret that text as follows:
1. No two characters can have the same saga
2. No two characters can have the same combination of wargear
3. No two characters can have the same psychic powers

But note the 's' in powers. That is a very powerful s.

If I have only power A and you have only power A, we have the same psychic power AND the same psychic powers.

If I have powers A and B and you have powers A and B, we have the same psychic power AND the same psychic powers.

If I have powers A and B and you have powers A and C, we have the same psychic power, but we DO NOT have the same psychic powers.

If I have power A and you have powers A and B, we have the same psychic power, but we DO NOT have the same psychic powers.

Additionally, it seems to me that when a particular option is intended to be used only once per army, it is typically labeled "0-1" or "one per army" or something to that effect. That would be the effect of a contrary interpretation to mine: limiting every SW psychic power to one per army. If that were GW's intent, they would have stated it more clearly.

-GK

Until I see it FAQ'd I'm rolling 'a dice' for every Rune Staff.

I roll 'a dice' for all my Lascannons, too. I guess by this logic I should only roll one die for all my Lascannons at one go and either they all hit or they all miss.

[headslap]

DN

RP have two powers, so the examples in singular are irrlevant.

The priest with powers A+B+C+D does have the same powers as the priest with A+B. Both have the same powers, A+B.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
dice

• noun (pl. same; sing. also die) - a small cube with faces bearing from one to six spots, used in games of chance

kirsanth wrote:RP have two powers, so the examples in singular are irrlevant.

The priest with powers A+B+C+D does have the same powers as the priest with A+B. Both have the same powers, A+B.

So ABCD is the same as AB?

Let's try it a different way.

ASKS and AS are the same word? Because they both have AS?

kirsanth wrote:RP have two powers, so the examples in singular are irrlevant.
The priest with powers A+B+C+D does have the same powers as the priest with A+B. Both have the same powers, A+B.

RP have two powers, so the examples in quadruplicate are irrelevant.

See what I did there?

Also, someone with powers a, b, c, and d does NOT have the same powers as someone with powers a and b.

(a, b, c, d) != (a, b)

He has two of the same powers, but not the same powers.

-GK

The correct comparison would be:
ASKA and AS have the same letters. They do not have the same letters, but they do share some letters.

In short, its a ambiguous rule, because it does not state of Powers means the first clause or the second.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

GiantKiller wrote:

kirsanth wrote:RP have two powers, so the examples in singular are irrlevant.
The priest with powers A+B+C+D does have the same powers as the priest with A+B. Both have the same powers, A+B.

RP have two powers, so the examples in quadruplicate are irrelevant.

See what I did there?

Also, someone with powers a, b, c, and d does NOT have the same powers as someone with powers a and b.

(a, b, c, d) != (a, b)

He has two of the same powers, but not the same powers.

-GK

Njarl has all the powers

If we are doing math, I would agree.

I was using letters to stand for the powers listed.

If you like, I will go back and edit the names of the Psychic Powers into the post to curb your confusion.

Gwar! wrote:Njarl has all the powers

Which is how many? This is a genuine question and not a snide remark. I don't have access to the codex.

-GK


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kirsanth wrote:If you like, I will go back and edit the names of the Psychic Powers into the post to curb your confusion.

Which would change nothing.

If I have powers Whap!, Bam!, Zoom!, and Gunk! and you have powers Whap! and Bam! we have two of the same powers, but we do not have the same powers..

If I have powers Whap! and Bam! and you have powers Whap! and Zoom!, we do not have the same powers.

Hope this curbs your confusion. See what I did there?

-GK

Priest with the first two powers does have the same powers as the guy with all the powers - the first two are the same powers.

The guy with all the powers does not have the same as the priest with only the first two - he has only some of the same.

Both are the same set of guys, and one of them breaks a rule:

GiantKiller wrote:3. No two characters can have the same psychic powers

It does not say "identical sets of powers".

shrug

Kirsanth wrote:Priest with the first two powers does have the same powers as the guy with all the powers - the first two are the same powers.

Again, if I have powers Whap!, Bam!, Zoom!, and Gunk! and you have powers Whap! and Bam! we have two of the same powers, but we do not have the same powers.

kirsanth wrote:It does not say "identical sets of powers".

I disagree. I think that's exactly what that language means. Especially considering that none of the powers are listed as "0-1" or "one per army".

-GK

GiantKiller wrote:I disagree.

This.


(Yes, Gwar!, that would make it a moot point.)

GiantKiller wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Njarl has all the powers

Which is how many? This is a genuine question and not a snide remark. I don't have access to the codex.

Seven.

I believe the wording disallows you to duplicate powers. That would be individual, not combinations of powers like is specified for wargear. If they wanted to only disallow duplicate combinations, they should have added the word to powers like they did for wargear.

And I counter by saying if they wanted it to mean no two Rune Priests could share a singular power, they would have said Power, not Powers.