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.

Arguing with yakface, after he has given a logically correct & extremely well constructed answer, is a foolish silly thing to do.

Yakface is right (as are many others in this thread.. he just puts it down so clearly) and its really simple.

@ Code : Awesome catch! Good job.

@ Razerous : Yakface is a good resource, but in the past even he has made mistakes, nor is he the only voice. Just because someone is reliable does not mean they should not be questioned.

Skinnattittar wrote:@ Razerous : Yakface is a good resource, but in the past even he has made mistakes, nor is he the only voice. Just because someone is reliable does not mean they should not be questioned.

The thing is though, here is is 100% right, yet people are still arguing against him. That's like insisting your milkshake is banana when they only sell Chocolate or Mint.

this is truly ridiculous. of course Nork is an ogryn. the real question IS what the definition of IS IS. flipforfree, did you happen to resolve this when you used to work for Bill Clinton's defence team in the mid 90's?

Gwar! wrote:

Skinnattittar wrote:@ Razerous : Yakface is a good resource, but in the past even he has made mistakes, nor is he the only voice. Just because someone is reliable does not mean they should not be questioned.

The thing is though, here is is 100% right, yet people are still arguing against him. That's like insisting your milkshake is banana when they only sell Chocolate or Mint.

Please note at no one time did I say Yakface was incorrect about Nork being an Ogryn (or ogryn) in my statement. I was simply advising Razerous not to trust a single person to think for them. I believe I have noted that Nork is an Ogryn (or ogryn), and if we are to assume that the same "No Flying Ogryns" rule applies to all Ogryns (or ogryns) then Nork can't fly. But if we can stretch things for fluff and fun a bit, and say that your average Ogryn (or ogryn) will not board a flying machine do to paranoia, Nork is probably not so pessimistic or is more loyal than the average Ogryn (or ogryn) and board with his charge. That's how I would play if/when my opponent permit. For the purposes of tournaments, I would like to see that remain open as well, though I would not roll about moaning over it, myself, as Nork doesn't seem very practical, points wise.

Skinnattittar wrote:I was simply advising Razerous not to trust a single person to think for them.

Advisement noted. I would be quite happy for yakface to think for me. I may even end up looking like gorge clooney (not that yak would but one can hope). But I never mentioned or insinuated that I wanted yak to do anything for me. Not that I wouldnt mind some sandwiches... Yak?

Skinnattittar wrote:That's how I would play if/when my opponent permit.

First off, I think its a pretty safe bet to assume that they never will.

Second, I would also like to play my autarch & use his awesome stragic modifying rules. Conversely those rules dont exist anymore. Trying to play a rule/ruling thats never existed, is IMhO, quite futile.

Razerous wrote:Trying to play a rule/ruling thats never existed

Oh, please read my previous post in regards to this.

Well, I hate to necron this thread, but I finally took a heavy look at the Nork entries. With the exception of his quote and the fluff, it is never mentioned that he is an Ogryn or subject to special rules. Granted, he shares the "Bulky" special rule, but Terminators share special rules with other units, Penal Troops share Lasguns with Guardsmen, Hormegaunts share rules with Warriors, etc... and they are all distinct units. Nork is described as being an Ogryn in the fluff, but not in his rules which is where it matters. Linking him by one special rule is neither fair nor a valid argument.

Also considering that there is no explanation as to why Ogryns can not board a Valkyrie makes this a difficult call. In the past, "It's Dark in Der" created a fluffy reason as to why Ogryns were difficult to get them to board Chimeras and other tight dark places (note that they no longer have this rule either). If we are to extrapolate from there (which isn't necessarily advisable) the reason for their ban from Valkyries would be that they are flying machines, and Ogryns and their phobias might prohibit that. Weight is probably not the sole reason, as they are already handicapped by "Bulky." Nork was exempt from the "Its Dark in Der" rule, so it would be safe to assume he is either braver than the average Ogryn (like Bone 'eads), but even more so by his loyalties and experience.

Basically, besides his fluff definition as being an Ogryn, there is no ruling to prevent him, as is pretty much the norm, fluff is ignored for 40k (much to the game's detriment I think), to keep the list of special rules shorter. Since Nork is not written in the rules as being an Ogryn, and the special Valkyrie rule only specifies Ogryns, Nork would be exempt. In both play and fluff, I feel that that is fair and not overly disruptive to play, and should be allowed.

however in the bulky rule it talks about |Ogryns

If he is not an ogryn the rule does not apply