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.

Grey Templar wrote:
So?


most units that can take shields have it in the "weapon" section.

Not in 8th they don't. O&G and TK all have separate sections for weapons and shields.

See entry for Tomb King. And Goblin/Orc Bosses.

And? In actual rules it still isnt a weapon. It is armour, as it works EXACTLY like a shield. Exactly meaning EXACTLY- so it is a piece of armour

I think GW broke it. Ogres already have bad armor, and really T4 is not hard to kill with tons of missile fire, especially when units can fire multiple shots. However, the RAW, do state it is the exact same manner as a shield but it can be used when mounted. The description does say it is used in pit fighting, and that is is often used to bash people's skulls in, but as far as the rules go it does not count as both a shield and a hand weapon anymore. Which I think is dumb and it should be changed back. I looked it up in my book when I got home yesterday.

I would have liked if it was a Shield that could parry while mounted AND it gave you +1A. or maybe for every parry save that is passed with it causes a Str4 hit on the attacking unit/model.

DukeRustfield wrote:O&G and TK all have separate sections for weapons and shields.

Ahem, goblin wolf riders and boarboys want a word with you.

nosferatu1001 wrote:And? In actual rules it still isnt a weapon. It is armour, as it works EXACTLY like a shield. Exactly meaning EXACTLY- so it is a piece of armour

I was countering the argument that shield selections are joined with weapons. In 8th they aren't. A shield is a shield and has its own rules in the BRB. And "works" != "is". A car can work like a truck, but it's still a car.

This all come backs to magical interference section in the BRB p. 500

Wizards cannot choose magic armor unless they have an option for 'normal' armor.
[snip]
The only exception to this is when a Wizard has armor as part of his standard equipment or an option for 'normal' armor, such as light armor, or a shield.
[snip]
The chief examples of this kind of Wizard are the dread Chaos Sorcerers of the frozen north.

Butchers do not have an option of a shield. They have an option of an ironfist. Which WORKS in exactly the same way as a shield. Is ironfist = 'normal' armor? It's easy to argue both ways (obviously).

I'm a lover fat boy McFatties. But I like balance more. And fluff. It simply doesn't make sense for unarmored, self-healing, high T, high W Guttcasters to wear the best magic armor when they don't even bother to wear the worst non-magic armor. I mean, someone please explain that. It's nonsense. Ironguts have access to heavy armor because they are elite troops (it not being easy to get armor that fits Ogres...). Bruisers and Tyrants can wear it too. Butchers, who are on par with those guys in terms of prestige in the tribe, don't wear it. Don't have the option. It's not because they can't, it's because they don't want to. They're not covering their religious guts:

Of all true Ogres, only the Butches do not wear a gut-plate -- they trust their guts to the protection of the Great Maw

Oh, except when they wear magic platemail??? Come on! That's just rules-raping. It makes no sense in the fluff at all.

It's a massive departure from all the other army books. If they wanted it done, they could have spared a sentence. What they did spare was to highlight (in the fluff) that they don't wear armor.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

HoverBoy wrote:

DukeRustfield wrote:O&G and TK all have separate sections for weapons and shields.

Ahem, goblin wolf riders and boarboys want a word with you.

Well, O&G is typically Orcy since they aren't consistent even on the same page. I.e., Boarboys and SavageBoars and Goblin Wolf and Goblins....

So I'm down with saying it's irrelevant.

nosferatu1001 wrote:And? In actual rules it still isnt a weapon. It is armour, as it works EXACTLY like a shield. Exactly meaning EXACTLY- so it is a piece of armour

Symantically, not quite. It doesn't work EXACTLY like a shield because it offers something a shield doesn't: a parry save while mounted.

Not that that discounts it being marked as armor and thus allowing access to magic armor. I don't know the exact wording/placement of Ironfists, so can't really comment past that.

An ironfist works in exactly the same way as a shield--an Ogre using an ironfist benefits from a bonus to its armor save, and may be eligible to make a Parry save as described in the Warhammer warbook.

DukeRustfield wrote:

Wizards cannot choose magic armor unless they have an option for 'normal' armor.
[snip]
The only exception to this is when a Wizard has armor as part of his standard equipment or an option for 'normal' armor, such as light armor, or a shield.
[snip]
The chief examples of this kind of Wizard are the dread Chaos Sorcerers of the frozen north.

Butchers do not have an option of a shield. They have an option of an ironfist. Which WORKS in exactly the same way as a shield. Is ironfist = 'normal' armor? It's easy to argue both ways (obviously).

The only exception to this is when a Wizard has armor as part of his standard equipment or an option for 'normal' armor, such as light armor, or a shield.

It says "such as light armor or a shield"

such as means it is NOT an exaustive list. other things can be armor, like helmets.


The Ironfist is clearly armor of a unique kind to ogres, but armor regardless.



I know it is useless in a rules argument, but when Jervis was asked about this at Gamesday by a member of the Ogrestronghold he confirmed that it was deliberatly put in so Butchers and SMs could get magic armor.

I garuntee that we will see the FAQ clarifying that SM and Butchers can indeed purchase magic armor.

Grey Templar wrote:

DukeRustfield wrote:

Wizards cannot choose magic armor unless they have an option for 'normal' armor.
[snip]
The only exception to this is when a Wizard has armor as part of his standard equipment or an option for 'normal' armor, such as light armor, or a shield.
[snip]
The chief examples of this kind of Wizard are the dread Chaos Sorcerers of the frozen north.

Butchers do not have an option of a shield. They have an option of an ironfist. Which WORKS in exactly the same way as a shield. Is ironfist = 'normal' armor? It's easy to argue both ways (obviously).

The only exception to this is when a Wizard has armor as part of his standard equipment or an option for 'normal' armor, such as light armor, or a shield.

It says "such as light armor or a shield"

such as means it is NOT an exaustive list. other things can be armor, like helmets.


The Ironfist is clearly armor of a unique kind to ogres, but armor regardless.



I know it is useless in a rules argument, but when Jervis was asked about this at Gamesday by a member of the Ogrestronghold he confirmed that it was deliberatly put in so Butchers and SMs could get magic armor.

I garuntee that we will see the FAQ clarifying that SM and Butchers can indeed purchase magic armor.

I agree with this

Shield is armor, Ironfist is a shield, therefore ironfist is armor. This is simple deductive logic you used in math to do proofs.

#edit I typed Ironfish instead of Ironfist lol

We don't even need the shield argument as it is a piece of wargear that improves your armor save. ergo, it is armor.

Crom wrote:
I agree with this

Shield is armor, Ironfist is a shield, therefore ironfist is armor. This is simple deductive logic you used in math to do proofs.

#edit I typed Ironfish instead of Ironfist lol

Awesome, I want an Iron fish!

They had to take Iron Fish out of the game, way too over powered....


As for the Iron Fist, it reminds me of a martial arts concept, which was simultaneous attack and defense. Most Chinese (and other Eastern) martial arts usually are conceptual, and built off of ideas and not just the hard technique you learn in a form or a kata. There are 100s of ways to apply any said set of motion or technique. Simultaneous attack and defense puts the practitioner in an optimal position to attack, and while attacking their attacks can easily also act as defense.

So imagine you are an giant fat ass super strong Ogre. You have basically an over sized Iron clad boxing glove on, with maybe some spikes or whatever. When I say over sized, I mean like the size of a small shield. Obviously, this gives you the mobility to attack with in your straight forward gates, and it occupying enough space will also allow for automatic defense. I basically started an Ogre Army because I want to make them Cathay influenced, with tattoos, and an eastern look because GW refuses to give me a Cathay/Nipon army. Ogres are known to travel, and they obviously pick up different arts of combat from their travels, just read their fluff and look at some of their war gear options. It is my opinion the Iron Fist should give both the +1 to armor save and the parry save, along with it being a hand weapon. That is really not that much to ask for considering there are troops in other armies that have way better options.

The rules clearly state it is just a shield though, and shields count as armor, now if the Iron Fist also counted as a weapon then it may get weird, since you cannot have an additional hand weapon with a magic weapon, and if it is a weapon does it still count as armor?

So, I think logically we can all come to a conclusion that it is only a shield and counts as armor, just like shields do for everyone else, and the only benefit it has is that it can be used on mounted creatures, which is honestly not that big of a deal. Ogres don't have a lot of mounts, nor do I see you building a huge mounted Ogre army. You are still going to have your blocks of bulls, and your other nasty foot units doing most of the work in your army.

Grey Templar wrote:We don't even need the shield argument as it is a piece of wargear that improves your armor save. ergo, it is armor.

First off, shields aren't armor. They are their own heading under the BRB. Conveniently enough, called Shields.

Second, Mournfangs, and every other mount, improve your armor save. But they are not armor. Same with Chariots. Same with Scaly Skin. And some weird stuff that works like cover.

I've yet to hear an explanation why Butchers, who "trust in the Great Maw to protect their guts" and thus don't wear armor, will wear magic armor. Pretend you're not a lawyer in a court of law trying to get for your Butcher client everything possible, but a gamer standing over a fantasy world. Can anyone honestly say it makes sense that they shun armor of all kinds unless it's enchanted. Is there any other unit in the game that does that, let alone a caster?

But really, I'm open to persuasion, I just haven't heard anyone try and argue it other from the stand-point of, "this will make my Butcher stupid powerful, so it makes sense."

Besides the fact that it doesn't even need to be "armor" to allow the wearing of magic armor (counter-intuitive, but the rules)?

Fluff != game rules. That isn't even a remotely valid argument point.

Is it a shield? Seems that way , therefore it allows the use of magic armor.

Ogre wizards getting access to magic armor is the same token as Chaos wizards getting access to magic shields.
Chaos wizards can choose magic shields (when they can't get mundane ones) because they have a special type of armor.
Ogre wizards can get magic armor because they have access to a special type of shield.

Personally, I don't see the point to magic armor. Best you can get is a 4+ ward, (which is cheaper as a talisman), or force an opponent to re-roll to wound you (which isn't huge as being T5).


From a Fluff stand point
How about savage orcs wearing magic armor? Fluff says no armor but when something as rare and unique as magic gear shows up, you can bet the most important individual is going to be packing it.
What armor are the butchers wearing? All I've seen is the re-roll to wound me helm (which doesn't cover the belly), or the dragon helm (for the better ward vs flaming).

Firebellies do wear gutplates, can take ironfists and as such, why shouldn't they get access to armor?
What is the "Stupid Powerful" build that you get by having access to armor?


AS for the silly Car is like a Truck, that's a great example. A car is like a truck, but it isn't EXACTLY like a truck. A car doesn't have an open storage area, doesn't have higher wheel clearance or any number of other differences.
If GW didn't say Exactly, followed by a specific exception, I'd say you've got a position that can be defended.


-Matt

You forget that one armor that gives a 2+ armor save.
I dunno bout stupid powerful but that and the ward talisman makes for a hard to kill caster.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually of the 3 wizard types the firebellies don't get ironfists.

HawaiiMatt wrote:

Firebellies do wear gutplates, can take ironfists and as such, why shouldn't they get access to armor?
What is the "Stupid Powerful" build that you get by having access to armor?

Actually, Firebellies can't take an Ironfist. Yet another reason (arguing RAI) that the whole Ironfist allowing magical armor may have been a conscious decision. But we all know where arguing RAI gets us: Sad FaceLand

DukeRustfield wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:We don't even need the shield argument as it is a piece of wargear that improves your armor save. ergo, it is armor.

First off, shields aren't armor. They are their own heading under the BRB. Conveniently enough, called Shields.

Second, Mournfangs, and every other mount, improve your armor save. But they are not armor. Same with Chariots. Same with Scaly Skin. And some weird stuff that works like cover.

I've yet to hear an explanation why Butchers, who "trust in the Great Maw to protect their guts" and thus don't wear armor, will wear magic armor. Pretend you're not a lawyer in a court of law trying to get for your Butcher client everything possible, but a gamer standing over a fantasy world. Can anyone honestly say it makes sense that they shun armor of all kinds unless it's enchanted. Is there any other unit in the game that does that, let alone a caster?

But really, I'm open to persuasion, I just haven't heard anyone try and argue it other from the stand-point of, "this will make my Butcher stupid powerful, so it makes sense."

If GW games went on fluff alone, Space Marines would kill everything, then invent inter dimensional travel and conquer the fantasy world. It is very logical that they can in fact wear magic armor, magic items in Fantasy aren't always what they appear either and there is no WYSIWYG rules to go with it. Armor could be some plating attached to a garment, it doesn't have to be a full set of plate mail.

Chaos Wizards aren't T5 with W5, either. That's always been what Ogres are about: T and W.

Personally, you haven't looked at all the builds all over the intertubes. If you don't see the value of giving a heavy armor +4 ward +ironfist to a melee powerhouse who self-heals with every cast, then you're alone, because everyone else does.

You're right about Savage Warbosses. And they are another lord with nothing but shield and options for magic items. Though theirs is obviously just a regular shield.

Firebellies aren't the discussion. Firebellies don't have in their fluff that they don't wear armor. And they can't take Ironfists, anyway. So they don't get armor.

If GW didn't say Exactly, followed by a specific exception, I'd say you've got a position that can be defended.

But they didn't say Exactly. They said "works exactly..." If they said it was exactly a shield, that would be it. But it says it works the same way as a shield and then it explains what that means. If you view the same page an Ogre Pistol follows "the same rules as an additional hand weapon." Period.

A wrench can work exactly like a hammer if you turn it sideways and bang on a nail. It is not a hammer.


I mean I don't amazingly care. But the downside is there really isn't a lot of reason to take a Tyrant over a Slaughtermaster. In nearly every case the SM will live longer and do more damage, not to mention buff and such--this is assuming he's great maw. Unless they both last one round of combat or something. Not including BS, there's 6 pts of stat difference between them in exchange for lvl 3 wizard and a cost of +40pts. Already I see most people recommending not taking Tyrants and just grabbing Bruisers with casters.

DukeRustfield wrote:Chaos Wizards aren't T5 with W5, either. That's always been what Ogres are about: T and W.

Personally, you haven't looked at all the builds all over the intertubes. If you don't see the value of giving a heavy armor +4 ward +ironfist to a melee powerhouse who self-heals with every cast, then you're alone, because everyone else does.

You're right about Savage Warbosses. And they are another lord with nothing but shield and options for magic items. Though theirs is obviously just a regular shield.

Firebellies aren't the discussion. Firebellies don't have in their fluff that they don't wear armor. And they can't take Ironfists, anyway. So they don't get armor.

If GW didn't say Exactly, followed by a specific exception, I'd say you've got a position that can be defended.

But they didn't say Exactly. They said "works exactly..." If they said it was exactly a shield, that would be it. But it says it works the same way as a shield and then it explains what that means. If you view the same page an Ogre Pistol follows "the same rules as an additional hand weapon." Period.

A wrench can work exactly like a hammer if you turn it sideways and bang on a nail. It is not a hammer.


I mean I don't amazingly care. But the downside is there really isn't a lot of reason to take a Tyrant over a Slaughtermaster. In nearly every case the SM will live longer and do more damage, not to mention buff and such--this is assuming he's great maw. Unless they both last one round of combat or something. Not including BS, there's 6 pts of stat difference between them in exchange for lvl 3 wizard and a cost of +40pts. Already I see most people recommending not taking Tyrants and just grabbing Bruisers with casters.

I agree with this....

I tend to give my magic users dispel scrolls, or items that help with casting, and a ward save. I don't think I have ever built a butcher/slaughter master with magic armor.

DukeRustfield wrote:Chaos Wizards aren't T5 with W5, either.

Can't heal themselves too.

I run my SM general with the Armor of Destiny and an Ironfist for 4+/4+ save. He is my general and I need him to stay alive. I also take the Crown of Command and the Channeling staff. I need him to survive.

T5 and 5 wounds isn't as durable as it seems.

I think Armor of Silvered Stee + Talisman of Preservation would be more durable, goes well with an AHW.

Grey Templar wrote:I run my SM general with the Armor of Destiny and an Ironfist for 4+/4+ save. He is my general and I need him to stay alive. I also take the Crown of Command and the Channeling staff. I need him to survive.

T5 and 5 wounds isn't as durable as it seems.

Armor is 50, crown is 35 and staff is 15.
4+ armor doesn't matter much on a T5 model that is immune to poison. Anything that's going to have ease wounding you is going to ignore your armor. You're pretty much depending on your 4++ ward to keep you alive. You can get that with the talisman.

Tricksters helm is better than 2+ armor on a T5 model.
VS S1 to S7, both have the same effect, as the chance of armor saving equals the chance of re-roll wounding, but the helm also improves your armor save, and still gives a benefit against S8 or high, or attacks that allow no armor save.
The down side of the helm is that hits that auto-wound, that don't ignore armor give the edge to 2+ armor save. Since the Slaughtermaster ignores armor, I don't think there is anything in the game that falls into that category.


Advantage helm.




-Matt

DukeRustfield wrote:

If GW didn't say Exactly, followed by a specific exception, I'd say you've got a position that can be defended.

But they didn't say Exactly. They said "works exactly..." If they said it was exactly a shield, that would be it. But it says it works the same way as a shield and then it explains what that means. If you view the same page an Ogre Pistol follows "the same rules as an additional hand weapon." Period.

but that additional paragraph after "works in exactly the same way as a shield" only applies to mounted Ogres and it says they get all the benefits. and if we're going to talk semantics then I would say that using Magic Armour is one of those benefits.

on foot = shield
mounted = all the benefits of shields

Grey Templar wrote:T5 and 5 wounds isn't as durable as it seems.

You're being ridiculous now. A giant is T5 W6 in the same book. If you had to buy spell levels from 0, the Slaughtermaster would actually be a discounted giant. Give him a 4+ ward and he's a Slann, except with +9 (as in NINE) to attributes. A Lord of Change is only T6 W5 (at a 450 cost, mind you). It might not seem durable to you, but it's durable to the entire warhammer universe peer group.

Lotet wrote:

DukeRustfield wrote:

If GW didn't say Exactly, followed by a specific exception, I'd say you've got a position that can be defended.

But they didn't say Exactly. They said "works exactly..." If they said it was exactly a shield, that would be it. But it says it works the same way as a shield and then it explains what that means. If you view the same page an Ogre Pistol follows "the same rules as an additional hand weapon." Period.

but that additional paragraph after "works in exactly the same way as a shield" only applies to mounted Ogres and it says they get all the benefits

No, it doesn't. It says they get a bonus to armor save and may be eligible to make a Parry as described in the BrB.

You think T5 W5 is durable, meet my sphinx, T8 W4 and undead, enjoy that, and its a mount

Enjoy it when you crumble after the Slaughtermaster uses your Heirophant as toilet paper.

DukeRustfield wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:T5 and 5 wounds isn't as durable as it seems.

You're being ridiculous now. A giant is T5 W6 in the same book. If you had to buy spell levels from 0, the Slaughtermaster would actually be a discounted giant. Give him a 4+ ward and he's a Slann, except with +9 (as in NINE) to attributes. A Lord of Change is only T6 W5 (at a 450 cost, mind you). It might not seem durable to you, but it's durable to the entire warhammer universe peer group.

Sure, T5 is great against Str3. but when you get Heros or Lords wacking on you you will go down fast without saves, and I don't fancy trusting myself to get enough Gutmagic spells off each turn to heal back up from more then minor damage.

Call me paranoid, but I want my caster to live. for 8 more points then the 4+ ward, I get a 4+ armor in addition to the ward. thats pretty good.