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.

Gwar!, bringin' the pain since, well, March 4th, 2009.

I think at some point in a thread, you just have to say, "OK, I know I'm right, but well, not everyone agrees." and away we go...

To ignore the Creator is to choose independence and say, "I know better than you."

Even though the Creator may say, "Well, this is how WE play it. Of course, you can play it however you want," they still know more about the intent of the rule than we do, because, well, they're the Creator. So when the Creators say, "This is how WE play it," doesn't that carry as much truth as if they burned it into a stone? Only for true believers it seems.

Gwar! wrote:How is me posting a lot spam? Im not posting random gibberish nor am I trying to make your manhood bigger.
In short, What I post isnt Spam, This is Spam:

This was resolved, I agreed to not call your frequent posting; "SPAM". Now you've spammed spam. :-( That makes you a sad panda.

Gwar! wrote:And Sazzlefrats, by GW's own admission (as I must have pointed out at least 3 or 4 times in this thread alone) the FAQ's do NOT have any weight, they are to be used only as a basis for your own house rules and you can ignore any part of any FAQ them, up to and including ignoring the whole lot or just ignoring 1 part.

You need to reread that last paragraph. They say something like; that they are useful when you play a pick-up game against someone you don't know, or at tournaments. That unequivocally, says that GW FAQs have a measure of weight. Which is what I was saying.

Gwar! wrote:Errata DO have weight as they are edits to the printed book. A rules debate forum is for debating the actual rules, not debating house rules. The fact is, by the RULES a Deff Dread will have 6 Attacks with 4 DCCW. If you wanna use the GW house rule and make it 5, that's all well and good. If GW wanted it to be 5 under any circumstances, they would have changed the Deff Dreads attacks to 2+1 in the errata section.

What is also stated in that same paragraph, is that if you disagree with GW, you are free to make up house rules to suit the way you want to play the game with your friends, meaning that in public you should use their faqs and in private... well you do whatever the heck you want to do... I won't ask, you don't tell!

In short, GW FAQs offer up 5 attacks on the charge, you and your friends can do 6 attacks if you want to.

Sazzlefrats wrote:You need to reread that last paragraph. They say something like; that they are useful when you play a pick-up game against someone you don't know, or at tournaments. That unequivocally, says that GW FAQs have a measure of weight. Which is what I was saying.

A Club saying "We use the FAQ's to the letter" still doesn't affect the rules as written in the codex and Errata does it? If I was to go to a tournament that says "We're using the GW FAQs blah blah blah", I, by coming to the tournament, accept those conditions. If a tournament wants to ban Eldar or anything painted Green I will accept those conditions as part and parcel of playing in said tournament. Still doesnt affect the Rules however.

Sazzlefrats wrote:What is also stated in that same paragraph, is that if you disagree with GW, you are free to make up house rules to suit the way you want to play the game with your friends, meaning that in public you should use their faqs and in private... well you do whatever the heck you want to do... I won't ask, you don't tell!

We use the FAQ's where it addresses a real contradiction or needs clarification. Anything not covered by that we look to the INAT FAQ (simply because its so detailed). We don't use them when the situation is as clear as well water and the FAQ does nothing but mess that up.

Not that any of this affects me anyway, I play Space Wolves and Imperial Guard.
And to take the traitor Primarchs advice: "Ok, I know I am right..."

Someone stated that maybe it was the style of the Ork codex that the basic profiles were not modified for wargear, I disagree the basic stat line is the basic stat line with the exception of ADDITIONAL wargear. Basic Ork troops have, slugga & choppa or, shoota boy variants but they share the same basic stat line, so I argue that the basic profile is correct, then add which ever wargear option you choose to that, and the codex is correct. Maybe the ork dreadnought profile is absolutely correct too but since you have some basic wargear its already in the stat line, now add variations to it based on additional wargear you may purchase. In that way its consistent with the entry for a basic ork trooper, but you note the differences in the way you had to look at it. Maybe thats why the GW Faq's says 5 attacks. FYI the chaos codex follows that same style, and I'm willing to bet that its true for almost every codex as well.

Moving on, I play Eldar, Tau and Deathguard; however and to the point, I regularly play against people with whom I don't know and I do play regularly in tournaments. You have to accept a common set up rules and errata and faq and whatever else there is so that you can get on to what's really important (aka playing the game). So if you and I were to play, its clear you and I would never come to a consensus based solely on the codex, so we'd have to follow either the INAT or GW faq, and in which one to follow I wouldn't really care as long as its something semi-official.

And BTW I had this very situation come up once before. Last round of a 34 person tournament, my opponent and I were undefeated. He was playing Orks and he had a Ork dreadnought. I remember we briefly talked about it, I don't recall how many attacks he had it might have been 6, I don't think I really cared about a single dreadnought figuring it wouldn't make it to combat anyhow, but it did and it did kill one of my demon princes and that was surprising. Eventually he ended up conceding... In tournaments I don't debate unless my opponent is dead wrong and it has a game changing effect.

Sazzlefrats wrote:Someone stated that maybe it was the style of the Ork codex that the basic profiles were not modified for wargear, I disagree the basic stat line is the basic stat line with the exception of ADDITIONAL wargear.

I am not understanding this statement now. Are you saying that the 2 Attacks on the profile for an ork boy includes the bonus attack for 2 weapons, so shoota boys will lose an attack? The situation you describe is actually inconsistent with the way ork boyz are done. Ork Biyz have 2 Attcks regardless of weapons, and gets +1 if they have Sluggas and choppas.

Same way as the Deff Dread. it has 3 Attacks basic and +1 for 2 CCW (as per the rules for walkers)

Not quite, thats the common way everyone reads the codex (including me on first read) because we aren't wacky like GW's writers are. You want it clear, hire an american to proof read the codex's!

The basic ork has a base stat line... in this case 2 attacks its on their profile. Then you are given 2 options. Either you choose slugga/choppa or shoota. If you choose slugga/choppa you add that option to the basic profile, so +1 attacks (for additonal CCWs) so 3 normally and 4 on the charge. if you opted for shoota, then you add +0 additional attacks and you end up with 2 normally, and 3 on the charge.

If shoota boyz and slugga/choppa boyz had their own entries in the codex, you would see I'm sure.. Shootas have 2 attacks on their profile, and slugga/choppa would have a big fat 3 printed on their attack profile. Since they (GW) combined the entry we have to factor in the changes.

Now the dreadnought is done the same way. Except!!! Since you don't have a shoota dreadnought and a slugga/choppa dreadnought, we don't have to do any math with the base stat line. Whatever its base stat line is, really is what it is. But for fun, lets say we had 2 types of dreadnoughts, the shoota dreadnought, and the slugga dreadnought. The shoota dreadnought would likely have one less DCCW to have more guns, and the slugga dreadnought would be the dread with 2 DCCW (or more since you are allowed to buy more!!!) So the shoota dread would take the basic profile and reduce its attack by one, and the slugga dreadnought would end up with one more attack than the shootier version. In this case we would have to do the same math that we did for the shoota/slugga boyz in the first example. So the shooty dread would have 3 (less one for one less DCCW) and end up with 2 attacks as its final numbers, and the slugga dreadnought (retaining both of its DCCWs) would keep the basic 3 attack profile. As you buy more DCCW's you get one more attack each.

If you look at the entry for the defiler in the chaos codex its exactly the same except someone got smart and eliminated the confusion by adding commentary stating that yes its all included in the basic profile.


SUMMARY:
Ork (basic) neither slugga or shoota boyz = 2 attacks
Slugga Ork = 3 attacks (this is adding wargear not included in the basic profile)
Shoota Ork = 2 attacks (this is adding wargear not included in the basic profile, but... it happens to have no effect on the attacks profile)

Ork Dreadnought 3 attacks base (no options for different types of dreadnoughts, so the basic profile is used)
For Pretend:
Ork Shoota Dreadnought 2 atttacks (3 base, but one less due to one less DCCW)
Ork Slugga Dreadnought 3 attacks (this is the base dreadnought)

But in every single other Codex where GW have included bonus attacks for wargear in the profile they have been in the "X+Y" format. In this case it should have been listed as "2+1". But it's not. So a Deff Dread with 2 DCCW has 4 attacks.

Your imaginary "shoota Dread" and "Choppy dread" are logical fallacy that have nothing to do with anything

Gwar! wrote:But in every single other Codex where GW have included bonus attacks for wargear in the profile they have been in the "X+Y" format. In this case it should have been listed as "2+1". But it's not. So a Deff Dread with 2 DCCW has 4 attacks.

This is not true in every other codex. And if it is, its in the base stat line as X+Y. Look at the Chaos codex, its very clear there. Dreadnoughts and Defilers, both have 3 base attacks that include all the standard wargear that comes on a base dread or defiler (and you may purchase additional wargear that further modifies that).

Gwar! wrote:Your imaginary "shoota Dread" and "Choppy dread" are logical fallacy that have nothing to do with anything

Actually those were examples for fun, to further explain how and why I think that the ork codex is consistent. There isn't any bad reasoning in there. It might be flawed some other way however. But not a logical fallacy.


Do you understand what I mean though?

Sazzlefrats wrote:

Gwar! wrote:But in every single other Codex where GW have included bonus attacks for wargear in the profile they have been in the "X+Y" format. In this case it should have been listed as "2+1". But it's not. So a Deff Dread with 2 DCCW has 4 attacks.

This is not true in every other codex. And if it is, its in the base stat line as X+Y. Look at the Chaos codex, its very clear there. Dreadnoughts and Defilers, both have 3 base attacks that include all the standard wargear that comes on a base dread or defiler (and you may purchase additional wargear that further modifies that).

You do know that both the Dreadnought and the Defiler have explicit instructions? Firstly, the Chaos Dreadnought only has 1 CCW by Default, and you have the option to buy a second (which it reminds you that it adds +1 attack if you do) while the Defiler has an explicit mention that the bonus attack is included.

I mean, It has the EXACT SAME armament as a Deff Dread by default, 2 DCCW. It is explicitly stated that the bonus attack is included, but it is not mentioned in the ork codex. Why would they not explicitly mention it if the attack was included? The only reason i can think of is because the bonus attacks was NOT included. If it was a typo, why did they not mention it in the errata?

GWAR come on. You aren't even trying to look at my perspective. Ignore the chaos codex, you are bypassing the parts that I was talking about in it anyways and its not super pertinent to the debate either.

I'll restart the debate. The Ork codex is consistent with base attacks on all profiles for all models/units. How do you know that the 3 attacks does NOT include the dreadnoughts basic wargear? And lets restrict this to just the Ork codex.


If there was a typo in the Ork codex for the number of attacks, GW would have erratted it. There's no typo, just a FAQ because people keep asking that question.

Sazzlefrats wrote:In short, GW FAQs offer up 5 attacks on the charge, you and your friends can do 6 attacks if you want to.

Woah! The FAQ states the Derad has 5 attacks when it has 4 DCCW. It does not say that the Dread is charging. So, the Dread would have 5 attacks, six when charging.

And to throw my two cents into the rest of the arguement. I would play with what the FAQ says at Tournaments. Friendly Games I would just ask my opponent about the situation. I really do think it should have six base as that is what the BGB says. To go back to the examples Codex Space marines which came after Orks ys a Seargent has 2 attacks base. These attacks cannot be influenced by wargear as the Seargent doesn't have to have two close combat weapons and deosn't start with them. Another example lise in the Deamon Codex, which also came out after Orks. The Soulgrinder has it's attacks listed in its profile and stats that the bonus is included. If this was as you says a typo they would have erratted it.

Sazzlefrats wrote: How do you know that the 3 attacks does NOT include the dreadnoughts basic wargear? And lets restrict this to just the Ork codex.

Because the entry doesn't say it does. If it did, this wouldn't be a problem. it doesn't however, so a Dread with 4 DCCW will get 3 Bonus attacks (as per page 72) and 3 Basic Attacks. If they wanted it to be inclusive, they would have errata'd it to say 2+1.

To say otherwise would mean that boyz have their bonus attack included (as long as we are being consistent), and would loose it if they took shootas, since their default equipment is Slugga and Choppa (and must replace these to get a Shoota), which we know is not the case.