Switch Theme:

Compulsory HQ choice  [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 gb
Junior Officer with Laspistol




Manchester, UK

So I was reading the Black Templar's faq at http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1490287a_FAQ_BlackTemplars_2009.pdf

Looking at the second question, it says that even though the Emperor's Champion doesn't use up a slot he can still count as the compulsory HQ choice. Is this supported in the rules at all? I always thought you needed to fill up an HQ box on the chart to have it count towards the compulsory requirement.

Playing IG it would be nice to use a techpriest as my only hq choice in some of my more heavily armoured lists, making a codex armoured company easier.

The Tvashtan 422nd "Fire Leopards" - Updated 19/03/11

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







Did you notice the part where an Emperor's Champion is normally MANDATORY for a Black Templar army at 750 points or more?

An IG related arguments may carry more weight when the IG Priests become mandatory no-slot HQ choices.
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





The BT FAQ sets a precidence that GW may or may not use later.

That being said, there are no rules as to whether or not this is allowed or not. The BRB state that "...normally you will have to take at least one HQ and two Troops slecetions." PG 87 BRB

Some read this as you MUST take a unit that takes up a FOC slot, some take this as you must select one HQ and if it does not take up a slot, so be it. This is something that you must clear up with your opponent and/or the tournament organizer (if you are in a tournament)

The biggest issue you are going to run up against is whether or not FAQs are precident for other armies. GWAR! argues that FAQs do not overlap armies and that the BT FAQ is only for the BT regardless of whether or not a similiar situation with a different faction is present.

So if these slots must be filled by figures that take up spaces on the FOC, then no, you cannot select only the Techpriest.

If the selections needent be filled and a selection is simply the presence of a figure labeled as an HQ, then yes, you can choose the Techpriest.

I guess it all comes down to what your definition of "is" is... lol

Edit: After rereading my IG codex, I am now more likely to say that this is not allowed as the BRB states that you must make a "selection," but the IG codex states that the Techpriest Enginseer does not take up an FOC selection. Just a quick observation, but again discuss it with your opponent/TO

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/12/06 04:34:18


 
   
Made in gb
Junior Officer with Laspistol




Manchester, UK

solkan wrote:Did you notice the part where an Emperor's Champion is normally MANDATORY for a Black Templar army at 750 points or more?

An IG related arguments may carry more weight when the IG Priests become mandatory no-slot HQ choices.


Surely the fact that he is mandatory would make no difference to whether or not he counted towards the HQ slots.

s2ua7 wrote:Edit: After rereading my IG codex, I am now more likely to say that this is not allowed as the BRB states that you must make a "selection," but the IG codex states that the Techpriest Enginseer does not take up an FOC selection. Just a quick observation, but again discuss it with your opponent/TO


This seems right to me. It is a bit of a shame but it is hardly an awesome strategy so no big loss. Maybe some other codices have a slightly different wording on their HQ selections, so it may work for other armies.

The Tvashtan 422nd "Fire Leopards" - Updated 19/03/11

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





I agree with you, mandatory or not should not make a difference according to the BT FAQ. So just so we are all on the same page, here is what the BT FAQ states....

Q. Can I field the Emperor’s Champion as my
one compulsory HQ choice and no other HQs in
the army?
A. Yes, even though he does not use up an HQ
slot, he is still an HQ choice, and so he can fulfill
the minimum HQ requirement.
-BT FAQ

Now the issue is that this sets a precident stating that even though it does not take up a slot, it is still concidered an HQ and as such, fullfills the HQ requirement. In our group we have yet to come up with a concensus about whether or not vague FAQ answers are precident for other armies (when I say vague, I mean that no where in the answer is the name Black Templar or even the HQ mentioned in the question used), although we do agree that specific FAQs (such as the one concerning IG and the regimental advisors and reserve rolls, I cant remember at the time of this posting).

Ultimately I think that for this to be widely accepted that the GW is going to have to add this to a FAQ (I doubt it would be errata'd).

I agree with you on the strategy though Trick, this seems like an awesome strategy until I actually tried it. for 20 points more you get a MUCH better figure (or figures if you go with the CCS).
   
Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






s2ua7 wrote:I agree with you on the strategy though Trick, this seems like an awesome strategy until I actually tried it. for 20 points more you get a MUCH better figure (or figures if you go with the CCS).

There's nothing awesome about it, CCS's are fantastic.

But you can have a fluffy army led by an Engineseer or a Priest.
   
Made in us
Jovial Plaguebearer of Nurgle





SF Bay Area, California

Ah GW, I love you muddle with the rules.

   
Made in gb
Junior Officer with Laspistol




Manchester, UK

s2ua7 wrote:I agree with you on the strategy though Trick, this seems like an awesome strategy until I actually tried it. for 20 points more you get a MUCH better figure (or figures if you go with the CCS).


You say much better but can you imagine an army lead by this guy:



With maybe a few of these as a retinue:



You have to love the forgeworld models for their detail, if not the price or easy of use.

The Tvashtan 422nd "Fire Leopards" - Updated 19/03/11

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





Ok, those look SIIIIICK!!!! When I said better models, I meant better models with regards to in game stats and abilities. Now I have to buy me some of those figures. DARN YOU!!! lol
   
Made in gb
Guard Heavy Weapon Crewman



england

Guys going in tournament this January with IG so i need a yes or no answer can i field a engineer or priest as my only HQ choice?
.

 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Solahma






RVA

Please let dead thread rest in peace.

   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: