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.

Hello, I'm very new to the game and just recently picked up the Ork codex and a few models. I've got a basic grasp on all of the rules now, enough so that I could (perhaps with minor assistance) play a match now. However, one thing bugs me in the Codex and I don't know if I'm just being blind - what is Waaagh! movement?

The rules for Waaagh! states that "if a unit rolls a 1 when making this Waaagh! movement" which seems to indicate that there is some rolling involved. But I can't find this anywhere, as the only movement Waaagh! seems to alter is that the Orks become fleet, which involves no rolling whatsoever as far as I can see.

Am I missing something here?

Ixias wrote:Hello, I'm very new to the game and just recently picked up the Ork codex and a few models. I've got a basic grasp on all of the rules now, enough so that I could (perhaps with minor assistance) play a match now. However, one thing bugs me in the Codex and I don't know if I'm just being blind - what is Waaagh! movement?

The rules for Waaagh! states that "if a unit rolls a 1 when making this Waaagh! movement" which seems to indicate that there is some rolling involved. But I can't find this anywhere, as the only movement Waaagh! seems to alter is that the Orks become fleet, which involves no rolling whatsoever as far as I can see.

Am I missing something here?

See! See! I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE!

YOU ALL LAUGHED! YOU ALL LAUGHED AND CALLED ME A RAW WAAC TFG POWERGAMING BAD MAN AND THAT NO-ONE ELSE WOULD NOTICE THIS, EVEN NEWBIES, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE I AM VINDICATED! I AM VINDICATED I TELL YOU! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!</Evil Laugh>

-Cough- Sorry Ixias, long story, before your time. The oldies here know what I am talking about.

The reason is in 4th Edition, when the Ork codex came out, Models could not Run by default, they needed to have Fleet to do so. What the Waaagh! Rule did was allow your units to Run basically and get into assault quicker.

Now, in 5th, there is no such thing as a Waaaagh! movement, so the rule about rolling a 1 doesn't actually do anything. Many people house rule it though as rolling a 1 for that units run causes a wound, or that you simply revert to the 4th edition functionality and have to declare the Waaaagh! first before you run, which I must stress is NOT what the rules say, it is simply a House Rule. You are perfectly entitled to run first, then call the Waaaagh if you get satisfactory rolls and you won't suffer any wounds. Note that RaW this also means Ghazguls special 6" Waaaaagh movement doesn't do anything either, so you'd need to House Rule it to give an automatic 6" run if you want to restore the 4th edition functionality.

...however ...in practice most people go with any units that run and roll a one take a wound. This is how it was done in 4th and most people will look at you oddly if you don't ... well other then gwar but I'm sure he'd have found something else you'd done wrong ^__^

Tri wrote:...however ...in practice most people go with any units that run and roll a one take a wound. This is how it was done in 4th and most people will look at you oddly if you don't

Except, ya know, all the people who never played 4th, like Ixias here.

Or the people who follow the rules.

Well I'm happy that I made you happy Gwar And thanks for the answer, I was feeling mighty stupid as I sat here scratching my head ^^ I'm guessing there's still some dispute over how to treat it (judging by your answers) but at least now I know why it's written as it is =)

4th Edition Codex anomalies are the bane of my existance.

Assault ramps anyone?

Ixias wrote:Well I'm happy that I made you happy Gwar And thanks for the answer, I was feeling mighty stupid as I sat here scratching my head ^^ I'm guessing there's still some dispute over how to treat it (judging by your answers) but at least now I know why it's written as it is =)

Yeah, it's always best to ask rather than do things wrong and get set in the wrong ways.

“The fool wonders, the wise man asks.” – Benjamin Disraeli

As for the dispute, there isn't actually any regarding what the actual rules say. That is 190% clear. What the dispute is about is the "I want it to work like it did in 4th" brigade vs "I want to play by the bloody rules" brigade. I would love to be able to have my 3rd edition Bolter and Transport rules for SoB, but alas, I cannot!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

liam0404 wrote:4th Edition Codex anomalies are the bane of my existance.

Assault ramps anyone?

What, those things the BT LRC have that don't do anything?

Gwar! wrote:
As for the dispute, there isn't actually any regarding what the actual rules say. That is 190% clear. What the dispute is about is the "I want it to work like it did in 4th" brigade vs "I want to play by the bloody rules" brigade. I would love to be able to have my 3rd edition Bolter and Transport rules for SoB, but alas, I cannot!

I see, that makes it even clearer then ^^ By the way, you have an awesome avatar picture.

Gwar! wrote:

liam0404 wrote:4th Edition Codex anomalies are the bane of my existance.

Assault ramps anyone?

What, those things the BT LRC have that don't do anything?

um...what?

Sorry, I have only played in 5th edition, and don't play Black Templar. Whats this assault ramp thing? I'm assuming it has to do with the "assault vehicle" rule that vanilla land raiders have.

PraetorDave wrote:um...what?

Sorry, I have only played in 5th edition, and don't play Black Templar. Whats this assault ramp thing? I'm assuming it has to do with the "assault vehicle" rule that vanilla land raiders have.

Oh look! More 5th only people!

AND THEY CALLED ME MAD! MAD!!!!!!! PASS THE COFFEE BEANS, I NEED TO MAKE ME A LENTIL TACO WITH COTTAGE CHEESE AND MARMITE!!

In 4th, there was a rule in the Main Rulebook called Assault Ramp, which basically was the Assault Vehicle rule in the SM Codex, and vehicles would reference this rule instead of having in their codex.

However, in 5th, they removed the rule from the main rulebook and went back to specifying it in individual codexes. This means that a Black Templars Land Raider and Land Raider Crusader (having not been updated since early 4th edition which was still using the 3rd edition format for their codexes) cannot move before the passengers disembark if the passengers wish to assault that turn, which is what the Assault Ramp rule allowed. While the BT LR and LRC's still have the Assault Ramps rule, the Assault Ramp rule itself no longer exists, meaning they have no effect and no special rule allowing passengers to assault after the LR or LRC moves.

While this could be fixed with a 2 line errata from GW, they seem to think that clear rules are for wimps and that everyone should have fun from 6 hours of pre-game house ruling every time they want to play.

Yes they did. Thanks for that one GW, really helped us out there!

Now my terminators are only moderately scary as opposed to "we're going to make you have our babies scary".

In seriousness though, usually (though not always) players house rule it to allow them to assault from their LRC's, as that seems to have been then intent of the rule.

EDIT: I got edit ninja'd!!

To be fair, you DO get Tank Hunting Furious Charging UberFearless Run at you when we take casualties Terminators who have better smoke launchers, so maybe it's a deliberate thing.

You can always just move the LRC, pop smoke and then NEXT TURN disembark before moving the LRC.

Wouldn't you just house rule that you substitute the vanilla assault vehicle rule for the assault ramp rule? Since they basically do the same thing.

Usually that is what happens, the LRC is houseruled to have the same functionality as Vanilla Land Raiders.

Popping smoke on the LRC just seems.... wrong! It's tactically sound.... it just seems wrong!

Must be the mini ork in me!

PraetorDave wrote:Wouldn't you just house rule that you substitute the vanilla assault vehicle rule for the assault ramp rule? Since they basically do the same thing.

You could. But that isn't what the rules say. Just because you are restoring old functionality is no excuse IMO. It's no different to allowing Sisters of Battle disembark from the front of their Rhinos, shoot their Bolters at Unit A and then Assault Unit B, because that's how it worked in 3rd ed.

That's why you always see the discussion about house rules.

As I said, 4th ed codex anomalies are a royal pain. There are a ton of other ones too.

Black Templars and Dark angels have Storm shields that are only a 4+ inv in close combat, as opposed to the new uber 3+ ones. Their smoke launchers also downgrade all hits to glancing.

Modernising rules like this is going too far though IMHO, otherwise youre just selectively picking the best parts of both codexes.

The LRC houserule tends to make sense because most players recognise that it;s a simple oversight in the BRB.

Hehe. you should try Tau. Do you know how long i searched the BRB to figure out what a target priority test was? I think at least half the wargear at least mentions it. I'm pretty sure if you play Tau straight RAW your codex spontaneously combust and your models melt

Gwar! wrote:Oh look! More 5th only people!

I've also only ever known 5th edition. I started when AOBR came out. I suspect rather a lot of people started playing when the Dawn of War series came out/got popular and so don't know any other edition, as well. So yeah, all those 4th edition rules are definitely confusing.

@voxdei - Black templars still need to take target priority :-(

liam0404 wrote:@voxdei - Black templars still need to take target priority :-(

They do???

Is it spelled out in their codex, or does it reference the BGB's non-existent rule?

Grakmar wrote:

liam0404 wrote:@voxdei - Black templars still need to take target priority :-(

They do???

Is it spelled out in their codex, or does it reference the BGB's non-existent rule?

It's spelled out.

Gwar! wrote:

Grakmar wrote:

liam0404 wrote:@voxdei - Black templars still need to take target priority :-(

They do???

Is it spelled out in their codex, or does it reference the BGB's non-existent rule?

It's spelled out.

Ouch.

Well, liam (or any other BT players), I hate target priority, so if we ever play a game, I'm fine with a house rule ignoring it.

I'm glad someone says this besides me. I find it nuts they can't take time to update their FAQ's if they want to keep to their Haley's Comet like Codex release schedule.

Gwar! wrote:While this could be fixed with a 2 line errata from GW, they seem to think that clear rules are for wimps and that everyone should have fun from 6 hours of pre-game house ruling every time they want to play.

it does indeed suck.

One way of me mitigating it though, is to take guns that have maximum range of 12" (i.e pistols )so that it becomes a non problem

Sorry if this is thread necroing but I figured since I have a thread already it was unnecessary to create a new thread.

I'm getting a little confused over the Big Gunz. They cost 20 points per model and it says that they include 2 Grot krew per kannon. Are those included in the cost? I assume they are but I just wanted to double check.

Also, if one of the grots die, can the gun still operate? If they both die, can it still operate (I assume no on this one)?

EDIT: Oh right, one more: what does G48 on the Lobba range mean?

If one dies then the gun can still fire, from memory. Have a look at the unit type "artillery" for every question you have pre-edit.

"G48" tells you it functions as a "barrage" weapon - this is a hold over to previous editions where "G", or "guess" range weapons actually made you guess a distance in inches to the target. Hasnt been around since 3rd...

G48" is yet another throwback to 4th. It now just means the weapon has the 'Barrage' rule and a 48" max range.

As to the Gunz they are Artillery IIRC and your 2 Grots come included in the price. You need to look under the Artillery section of the BRB for full rules as to how to take casualties from these units and the effects of losing operators but I dont have my copy handy to reference a page number im afraid.

Hope that helps

Ninja'd!

It sure does help, thanks alot =)

G 48" max range 48" Barrage. so it doesn't need to have LOS but if it cannot see the target it cannot subtract their BS