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.

Just a quick question and exactly that of the post title. Thanks

Dezstiny wrote:
Just a quick question and exactly that of the post title. Thanks

I believe the Tesseract Lab is a remove from play ability? If that's the case, Eternal Warrior does nothing.

Yes they are affected as the model is simply removed from play not Instant Deathed.

Draigo in a Labyrinth is hilarious, if you can pull it off.

Grey Knight tears are the tastiest.

 loreweaver wrote:
Draigo in a Labyrinth is hilarious, if you can pull it off.

Grey Knight tears are the tastiest.

This
Ohh you have a swarmlord, here ya go.

Things that RFP bypass EW.

Eternal Warrior only comes into play with Instant Death, which requires a wound that inflict it. Anything else will still gib you just as good.

GW web and community assistant told us per email that, i.e. an ork shokk gun rolling two 6s doesn't remove an everliving necron from play, as it can take his rp from everliving.

I do hate necrons and their silly rules.

 Swissivy wrote:
GW web and community assistant told us per email that, i.e. an ork shokk gun rolling two 6s doesn't remove an everliving necron from play, as it can take his rp from everliving.

I do hate necrons and their silly rules.

Not to say you are wrong, I don't know the actual ruling on that and my brother has the rulebook at my parent's house, but emails are considered irrelevant in this sub-forum because they can be wildly innacurate. I believe there was a case where two people emailed GW about the same query, and received different answers. Not 100% if that is true or mild exaggeration, but it helps get the point across.

Yes that's my feeling as well.

They also told us that they won't answer such questions anymore and asked to houserule everything we couldn't figure out on the rules/faq/codex...

 Swissivy wrote:
Yes that's my feeling as well.

They also told us that they won't answer such questions anymore and asked to houserule everything we couldn't figure out on the rules/faq/codex...

That's because they wrote a disaster of a rulesbook and don't want to take responsibility for it.

I love this game, but a good idea doesn't make it a good implementation.

 Purifier wrote:

 Swissivy wrote:
Yes that's my feeling as well.

They also told us that they won't answer such questions anymore and asked to houserule everything we couldn't figure out on the rules/faq/codex...

That's because they wrote a disaster of a rulesbook and don't want to take responsibility for it.

I love this game, but a good idea doesn't make it a good implementation.

Is the problem with the BRB or the hideously broken codex? Most of the rule problems (but certainly not all) arise from individual codex rules (mainly from 5th edition) and ridiculous FAQs that try to address them. Its no surprise that the Necron codex causes more rules arguments than any other (at least for our group). Practically every unit and character in that book breaks the rules in half and then dances on the remains, and it seems like the writers of the FAQs are scared to give a negative ruling on any Necron questions.

I would honestly prefer GW rewrite the broken codices before touching the ones that actually seem to work for the most part, but that won't happen. Necrons, Space Wolves, Grey Knights, they won't get rewrites until 7th edition most likely.