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.

Howdy all,

had a few questions about some dark eldar... I played as them before, but its been a while and I'm rusty. The guy I faced was a real D-bag, so I didn't ask him to look at the dex as he was constantly arguing rules with me...

1) The list the guy ran consisted of 11 raiders, 3 ravagers, 80 wyches, plus 2 HQ's both with 9 wych retinues... is this even legal?

2) The agonizer - the guy told he that its a power weapon that wounds on a roll to HIT of 4+... that doesn't sound right to me

3) webway portal - are you able to block off exiting it? he told me it counts as a board edge and he can do anything right out of it

Thanks in advance, I want to be more prepared next time I face him (I won 17 kp's to 13, but it was rough)

I think the list is legal if and only if he took the following. 3 warrior squads with raiders, 6 groups of 10 wyches with a raider for troops and the Wych HQ's with a retinue with a raider each.

So 3+6+2=11.

The agonizer is like a poisoned PW. Only without the rerolls.

I don't know about the WWP.

Agoniser always wounds on a 4+, but not on the to hit. The raiders looks fine, as pointed out above - all elites, all troops etc. However couldnt be 80 wytches, only 60, plus 30 warriors.

The WWP IS a board edge, and as such if you place models within 1" of it on all side infantry etc could not enter using it, only jump packs etc which move "over" your models could do.

Since it looked like all of his infantry units were on skimmer vehicles, they can still come through webway portals that you have 'blocked' anyway.

Just like jump infantry or jetbikes.

He needs to read the rules on agonisers though. He still has to roll to wound after hitting you.

Rest of list looks legal.

1 If everything was embarked in raiders, only 60 wyches, and up to 30 warriors.

This was obviously a wych army, so 2 hq's, wych archite and wych dracite can have wych retinues up to 9 models if mounted in a raider.

3 ravagers is pretty standard in most DE armies as it's usually a much better choice than the other options DE have for heavies.

2 The Agoniser has to roll to hit before rolling to wound where it's an auto wound on a 4+. It's still a power weapon and can glance a vehicle on a roll of 6.

3 is accurate. Can't destroy it either. Whoever he had deploy it though couldn't move or shoot the turn it set up the portal. You basically have to kill the person carrying it to prevent it from being deployed. Nobody else can pick it up, so anything "in the warp" waiting to be deployed via the portal is destroyed when the model carrying it is killed.

Check the Dakka FAQ v.4 http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/237519.page) It answers some of these questions. It has really helped answer some questions we've had in our games.

The agonizer issue sounds like he wasn't communicating right, the to hit roll is based on WS which might have very well been a 4+. But the equipment it self has no such rule mandating it hit on a 4+.

The 80 Wyches part sounds like another communitcation issue. Did you get that number because at some point before or during the game he said something like "I can has 80 Wyches in my army"? If so then 60 Wyches in a Wych army plus 18 Wyches total for the retinues and technically speaking 2 Wych Archite\Dracite HQ's gives him 80 Wyches. We're still short three Raiders by my math though so he had to have had Raider Squads taken as Elite choices for him to field 11 Raiders. Honestley so much is under rated from that codex that it pains me to see spam lists like this.

All of that is correct and legal.

1. You can take more wyches than can fit on a raider provided they don't get on said boat. Example 10 marines and a Razorback. But honestly that list is crap.

2. Yes agonisers are PW and always wound on a 4+, think thats bad wait till the new codex and they count as posioned so you can reroll.

3. Yup it counts as a board edge so skimmers can fly right over you. On a side note just kill the portal holder before he deploys it and he will lose the game.

Actually you can have 140 wyches and 2 Wych Lords; but no raiders in that setup.

Also OP: Based on unupgraded models 98 Wyches(no syberites or special weapons, just base wyches) comes out to 1176 points; 11 raiders is 605 points; assuming the 2 Wych lords are the lower of the 2 choices thats 90 points adding 1 webway portal and 1 agonzer the Army cost(at minimum mind you) 1941 points. So I further assume that you were playing a 2000 point game that is not much room for upgrades along with the whole having too many Wyches, and too many raiders.

In short you seem to have gotten cheated very badly.

Clthomps wrote:1. You can take more wyches than can fit on a raider provided they don't get on said boat. Example 10 marines and a Razorback. But honestly that list is crap.

No, you cannot.

Page 9, Codex Dark Eldar (2nd Printing):

If the squad has ten or less models they can be mounted on a Raider...

Before the game begins he must also declare what is going to come through the Webway portal. If you kill the model then those units he declared are destroyed.

Sigmatron wrote:Before the game begins he must also declare what is going to come through the Webway portal. If you kill the model then those units he declared are destroyed.

He never declared what was coming through, only that everything was in reserves but some warrior raiders.

So my question for the agonizer, it DOES wound when you HIT on a 4+? Or is it roll to hit, and just wounds everything on a 4+ (like poisoned)? The first one seemed bogus to me, seeing as he charged me with a lord and sybarite each with an agonizer with the reroll to hit drug and killed 9 marines on the charge before even rolling to wound (same with my mephiston)...

He hits normally and then rolls to wound. He wounds on a 4+ regardless of the toughness of the target.

Sigmatron wrote:So my question for the agonizer, it DOES wound when you HIT on a 4+? Or is it roll to hit, and just wounds everything on a 4+ (like poisoned)? The first one seemed bogus to me.

That's because the first one is bogus. What's he going to do with hits on 3+ if the wounding mechanic is a 4+ on the hit roll?

Did the guy roll for the Wyche drugs at setup, BTW? The drughead squads have random drugs. It's a pretty old codex, many parts are badly worded and many players only play it by rules their sister's ex-boyfriend told them about. You know, the guy who knew the owner of the local games store? He told him how it works, honest!

Spetulhu wrote:

Sigmatron wrote:So my question for the agonizer, it DOES wound when you HIT on a 4+? Or is it roll to hit, and just wounds everything on a 4+ (like poisoned)? The first one seemed bogus to me.

That's because the first one is bogus. What's he going to do with hits on 3+ if the wounding mechanic is a 4+ on the hit roll?

Did the guy roll for the Wyche drugs at setup, BTW? The drughead squads have random drugs. It's a pretty old codex, many parts are badly worded and many players only play it by rules their sister's ex-boyfriend told them about. You know, the guy who knew the owner of the local games store? He told him how it works, honest!

He rolled for the drugs before the game (I didn't watch him roll). He also read the agonizer rule verbatim from the book... it sounded fishy, I know old rending rended off the "to hit" roll, so perhaps either he has the first DE printed dex, or he read it wrong? I'm surprised I won that game honestly, with how he said agonizer worked I lost 3-4 marines per combat just against that one weapon, lost meph in 1 combat (after I swung and he made half his invuns)...

But, then again, this same guy said that his Goblet of Spite allowed his grenades to hit on 3+ vs my dreads... and he also told me my guy got immobilized off a 4 result from a glance and had me roll off against him @_@ needless to say, he did some pretty fishy things.

You didnt watch him roll? Another mistake. DId they all coincidentally get great results on the drug chart?

Agonisers wound on a 4+, regardless of S vs T. They do not work off the "to hit". If the codex does not say "second edition" on the cover he is using the wrong version

Zid wrote:
But, then again, this same guy said that his Goblet of Spite allowed his grenades to hit on 3+ vs my dreads... and he also told me my guy got immobilized off a 4 result from a glance and had me roll off against him @_@ needless to say, he did some pretty fishy things.

Goblet of spite is actually far far more epically horrible than that.

Any models in the same unit, and any units with a model in base contact with the unit Succubus hit on a 3+ in CC - now matter what.

And they say they need a new codex! Bah =)

ChrisCP wrote:

Zid wrote:
But, then again, this same guy said that his Goblet of Spite allowed his grenades to hit on 3+ vs my dreads... and he also told me my guy got immobilized off a 4 result from a glance and had me roll off against him @_@ needless to say, he did some pretty fishy things.

Goblet of spite is actually far far more epically horrible than that.

Any models in the same unit, and any units with a model in base contact with the unit Succubus hit on a 3+ in CC - now matter what.

And they say they need a new codex! Bah =)

Wish I knew that, maybe my dreads woulda killed a few more!

So me and this same guy got into a scuff today, he insists he has the new codex (says second edition on the front cover) and had my friend read the rules for agonizer from his book... is there an erata or anything to this? seems pretty off the cuff to me and I refuse to play the guy because, as it lies, its pretty OP

It's just a poisoned power weapon, keep in mind DE have no PF or the like, and nothing above STR4 in CC.
What's some of the cheese you're feeling pressured by?

Zid wrote:So me and this same guy got into a scuff today, he insists he has the new codex (says second edition on the front cover) and had my friend read the rules for agonizer from his book... is there an erata or anything to this? seems pretty off the cuff to me and I refuse to play the guy because, as it lies, its pretty OP

Now you understand why Dark Eldar are not uncommon on tournament circuits. They're one of the only armies that have CC weapons that wound on a 4+ and ignore armor regardless of toughness - AND hit at initiative.

At least power fists hit last.

Zid wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:

Zid wrote:
But, then again, this same guy said that his Goblet of Spite allowed his grenades to hit on 3+ vs my dreads... and he also told me my guy got immobilized off a 4 result from a glance and had me roll off against him @_@ needless to say, he did some pretty fishy things.

Goblet of spite is actually far far more epically horrible than that.

Any models in the same unit, and any units with a model in base contact with the unit Succubus hit on a 3+ in CC - now matter what.

And they say they need a new codex! Bah =)

Wish I knew that, maybe my dreads woulda killed a few more!

Not quite, this is how they used to work, and what the fluff would suggest, but is no longer valid.

This is because GW FAQd that any wargear only effects enemies when it specifically states that enemies may benefit from it, which the goblet of spite does not do.

So only the unit bearing the goblet, and any friendly units in base contact with that unit get the benefits.


Regarding the Agoniser issue, I totally understand where your opponent is coming from, the trouble phrase is:

roll to hit as normal, but don't roll to wound. Instead hits cause 1 wound on a D6 roll of 4+ regardless of Strength/Toughness

Your opponent is getting hung up on the phrase "don't roll to wound" and assuming that means that the 4+ must be on the hit roll, cause if you don't roll to wound there's no other roll to take it from.

In actuality the fact that it doesn't specify "on a To-Hit roll of 4+" but rather "on a D6 roll of 4+" means it is instructing you to roll a new D6 and perform a fresh roll, this roll simply isn't a To-Wound roll and doesn't follow the normal To-Wound rules at all, it is an entirely standalone D6 test.

He's not intentionally cheating you, the DE Codex is so horribly out of date and most of it doesn't make sense in 5th Edition, his interpretation has merit, but is incorrect. Good luck convincing him of his error.

It is covered in Dakka FAQ in the latest version, but that's assuming they will abide by it. There is not an official GW errata that clarifies.

The rule reads, "roll to hit as normal, but don't roll to wound. Instead, hits cause 1 wound on a d6 roll of 4+ regardless of strength/toughness."

Roll to hit as normal = WS to WS. If you miss, you miss. If you hit, roll a D6. On a 4+ it auto wounds like a poisoned weapon. This second roll is commonly referred to as a Wound roll. Not hard to understand, even though GW had a brain fart said not to roll to wound.

I had the same issue with an Eversor assassin a few weeks ago. He's got almost the same rule with the neuro-gauntlet IIRC.

The "don't roll to wound" is basically an old way of saying.

Always wounds on a 4+ regardless of strength or toughness

Right?

Emmkay wrote:I had the same issue with an Eversor assassin a few weeks ago. He's got almost the same rule with the neuro-gauntlet IIRC.

The "don't roll to wound" is basically an old way of saying.

Always wounds on a 4+ regardless of strength or toughness

Right?

Yup.

Drunkspleen wrote:

Not quite, this is how they used to work, and what the fluff would suggest, but is no longer valid.

This is because GW FAQd that any wargear only effects enemies when it specifically states that enemies may benefit from it, which the goblet of spite does not do.

So only the unit bearing the goblet, and any friendly units in base contact with that unit get the benefits.

"Q. Am I able to gain the benefits of any of my opponent’s wargear or special rules, such as Teleport Homers, Chaos Icons, Tyranid Synapse, Necron Resurrection Orbs etc?
A. In most occasions this is clear, as the rules use the words ‘friendly’ or ‘own’ to indicate your units, and ‘enemy’ for the opponent’s. On the other hand, some rules clearly specify that they affect ‘friend and foe’. A few rules are, however, slightly ambiguous as they don’t clearly specify this distinction. As a general principle, we recommend that you cannot use or gain the benefits from any of the wargear or special rules of your opponent’s army, unless specifically stated in the rule itself (‘friend or foe’) or in an official FAQ."

So you're say that due this piece of text the penalty for using a goblet of spite is negated? When the rule itself is quite unambigious that any unit in base contact with the 'bus unit hits on a 3+ reguardless of ofther factors? (say FAQ's )

ChrisCP wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:

Not quite, this is how they used to work, and what the fluff would suggest, but is no longer valid.

This is because GW FAQd that any wargear only effects enemies when it specifically states that enemies may benefit from it, which the goblet of spite does not do.

So only the unit bearing the goblet, and any friendly units in base contact with that unit get the benefits.

"Q. Am I able to gain the benefits of any of my opponent’s wargear or special rules, such as Teleport Homers, Chaos Icons, Tyranid Synapse, Necron Resurrection Orbs etc?
A. In most occasions this is clear, as the rules use the words ‘friendly’ or ‘own’ to indicate your units, and ‘enemy’ for the opponent’s. On the other hand, some rules clearly specify that they affect ‘friend and foe’. A few rules are, however, slightly ambiguous as they don’t clearly specify this distinction. As a general principle, we recommend that you cannot use or gain the benefits from any of the wargear or special rules of your opponent’s army, unless specifically stated in the rule itself (‘friend or foe’) or in an official FAQ."

So you're say that due this piece of text the penalty for using a goblet of spite is negated? When the rule itself is quite unambigious that any unit in base contact with the 'bus unit hits on a 3+ reguardless of ofther factors? (say FAQ's )

hit on a 3+ regardless of other factors doesn't mean you can ignore FAQs, FAQs are not an in game factor, they are a supplement explaining how the rules should work.

The wording on the goblet says that "any units with a model in base contact with the succubus and/or his unit" are effected by it, this lacks the specificity called for in the FAQ "you cannot use or gain the benefits from any of the wargear or special rules of your opponent's army, unless specifically stated in the rule itself ('friend or foe') or in an official FAQ.". (emphasis mine)

There's no more reason in my mind to believe any unit means both friends and foes than there is to believe "If Terminators wish to teleport into the battlefield via deep strike and choose to do so within 6[inches] of a model carrying the homer, then they won't scatter" is indicative of both friend and foe Terminator units.

So yes I believe that what was once a disadvantage of the Goblet is no longer relevant, in summary:

"You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have the facts of life"

I like your argument dear sir (some friends my not) 3+ 2+ to hit and wound away~!