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.

If you want succinct, TWMs modify the profile. Six words.

That's exactly what I said. Go back and read through the thread, it's there.

G

Seriously this just goes back and forth every time it has come up:

"It is a change to the profile."

"But the characteristics of the profile are being modified."

"It is a change to the profile."

"But the characteristics of the profile are being modified."

"It is a change to the profile."

"But the characteristics of the profile are being modified."

Etc, etc,......

To keep pointing at pg7 as the Holy Grail of your answer is complete ignorance because it only addresses characteristic modifiers, not changes to the profile. As much as you want to try to the link that the changes to characteristics during a profile change are the same as characteristics being modified the logical leap you want to make is false.

Orange juice is made from oranges, but is definitely not an orange. Profile changes have characteristic changes, but are not characteristic modifiers.

Brother Ramses wrote:Seriously this just goes back and forth every time it has come up:

"It is a change to the profile."

"But the characteristics of the profile are being modified."

"It is a change to the profile."

"But the characteristics of the profile are being modified."

"It is a change to the profile."

"But the characteristics of the profile are being modified."

Etc, etc,......

To keep pointing at pg7 as the Holy Grail of your answer is complete ignorance because it only addresses characteristic modifiers, not changes to the profile. As much as you want to try to the link that the changes to characteristics during a profile change are the same as characteristics being modified the logical leap you want to make is false.

Orange juice is made from oranges, but is definitely not an orange. Profile changes have characteristic changes, but are not characteristic modifiers.

wow just wow...

* face palms *

BR - in order to modify the profile you have to modify the characteristics. Thus page 7 applies regardless of whether you like it or not...

Except that's not how it works.

Except we have another model which has a modified profile, Fabius Bile. He is S 5, not S 4(5). Same deal with the Thunderwolf Mounts

By providing the full statline it has made the stat S5 formally, not 4(5).

If you dont provide the statline you have not overridden the general rules on changes to characterisitics.

nosferatu1001 wrote:By providing the full statline it has made the stat S5 formally, not 4(5).

If you dont provide the statline you have not overridden the general rules on changes to characterisitics.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA! What orifice was that one pulled from?

Fabius Bile's rule even has "included in is profile" in the rule as does the TWM telling you to add them to the profile. Why does Bile have Str5 and not Str4(5)? Because it was added to his profile NOT his Strength characteristic.

Wow, insane laugh alert.

WHat is a profile again? A set of characteristics.

Prove that altering a profile does NOT involve altering the characteristics and you may have a point. You have been asked to do this previously and have so far failed.

Prove that altering a profile puts a modifier on a characteristic first. All evidence (Chaos Daemon mounts, for instance) points otherwise.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Wow, insane laugh alert.

WHat is a profile again? A set of characteristics.

Prove that altering a profile does NOT involve altering the characteristics and you may have a point. You have been asked to do this previously and have so far failed.

I don't have to prove it. The TWM entry specifically points out that you add them to the profile, NOT to the characteristic. That is all I need to bypass pg7.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:Prove that altering a profile puts a modifier on a characteristic first. All evidence (Chaos Daemon mounts, for instance) points otherwise.

MSP just adds another log to the bonfire consuming your argument.

+1 is defined as a modifer both in the english language and the rulebook.

By altering a profile you are modifying it.

In order to modify a profile, you have to modify the characteristics (otherwise what are you modifying? thin air?)

So yes, you need to prove that the modification of a profile somehow doesnt involve modifying the characteristic specified in the profile. You have yet to do this.

BR - nope, no it doesnt. to continue with the colourful metaphors your argument ran out of fuel 2 pages back.

Look you have been shown RAW examples that there are instances of profile changes and characteristic changes, and how they different.

You have been shown RAW examples of what profile changes actually do and what characteristic changes actually do, and how they are different.

The Multiple Modifiers rule explicitly points out characteristic changes and is completely exempt of profile changes.

The GW FAQ explicitly explains the process of what a profile change consists of for one of the characteristics in the TWM entry.

Your insistence that they are the same, combined with your ridiculous explanation for Fabius Bile, is contrary to the RAW evidence presented to you and only shows you as just being stubborn to your cause for the sake of being stubborn.

Done with this thread.

Fantastic, good to hear you have realised your argument lacks merit.

AS was explained when you first posted them, the examples do not state what you think they state, at all.

You also seem to think that a change to a profile does not cdhange any of the characteristics in the profile, and have yet to come up with an explanation as to exactly WHAT you are changing when you alter a profile if it isnt the Characteristics that form the entirety of a profile.

I suggest you read the basic rules on what a profile is made up of, and see how rediculous your argument has gotten.

This might reignite the fire, but My group use the Army Builder.

-Disclamer=
We do not consider it LAW/RAW, but it has solved many an argument
Generally is reliable and GW approved.

When you take a Wolf Lord and give him a Thunder Hammer his Strength Becomes 4/8

When you take a Wolf Lord and give him a Thunder Wolf Mount on it his Strength becomes 5
When you give him his Thunder Hammer his Strength Becomes 5/10

To us this answerd the Question along with the FAQ quite well.

Brother Ramses wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:By providing the full statline it has made the stat S5 formally, not 4(5).

If you dont provide the statline you have not overridden the general rules on changes to characterisitics.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA! What orifice was that one pulled from?

Fabius Bile's rule even has "included in is profile" in the rule as does the TWM telling you to add them to the profile. Why does Bile have Str5 and not Str4(5)? Because it was added to his profile NOT his Strength characteristic.

This made my day ya'll! Thanks so much for a good end to hte working week.



G

nosferatu1001 wrote:hmasterwheel - mainly because the rules dont work like that.

Instant death rules state, very very clearly, that modifiers to T are ignored *unless* the modifer specifically states otherwise. In otherwords, it has to be worded like Destroyer Body in the Necron codex.

By saying "+1T" you are 1) applying a modifer to T and 2) the modifier does not mention it works against ID, so it doesnt.

Whihc is why the FAQ was "needed" (an errata would have been better, to make it not a house rule) - without it the TWM Lord is T4(5), with it he is T5

Trouble is that they only bothered to correct Toughness, so currently the +1S is still a modifier, and like Furious CHarge is therefore S8(9) when wirlding powerfists and their ilk.

Cant you just assume that obviously when your fighting a marine on a vicious feral beast that you now have two opponents in front of you (realism)... hence for simplicity's sake for the game the lump both a giant fenrisian wolf with a mounted space marine on into one profile... So all the attacks are coming from one source instead of... "You dodge the Thunder Hammer, but the wolf bit you at STR 4 (rending)..." So GW for simplicity sake did a shotty job of lumping everything into one...

DEAL WITH IT, I think you're just trying to beat a dead horse here... its S5 T5, (be thankful that adding the mount doesnt also add a wound to the model (which it should imo)

Well you are green/red so obviously that is something someone like you would say. From a rules perspective you have offered nothing however. That's it.

G

First let me say.. "Aren't there worse things that are more broken and a pain in your rear than TWC?" I could multi-quote this whole thread and make an argument for or against and jump on either side. Personally, I just think that we should look at how this is different compared to a Frost Weapon or Furious Charge because both the regular TWC and Canis Wolfborn's stat blocks are RAI and RAW... so if GW slipped up (again) oh well, what are we going to do... the 40k Universe is going to end because nobody can give you the answer you are looking for....

Just saying if S5 | T5 are consistant throughout both Canis and the Fast Attack Regular choice... I see no difference in purchasing an upgrade...

For example, you are trying to add some orginality to your army and want the leader to be "Harald Deathwolf". Now if you read the following:

Harald himself rides to battle upon the great grey wolf, Icetooth. It is said that Harald's senses are so sharp he can smill the fear of his prey from several leagues distance. His Great Company goes to war accompanied by a host of lupine beasts, be they flesh and blood, cybernetic construct or even the spirits of loyal companions.

After reading that, I would create Harald Deathwolf out of the Wolf Lord section, and then purchase the Thunderwolf Cavalry upgrade which would then give the mighty Deathwolf a S5 | T5... obviously he has had more training than most on a thunderwolf because the book even names his fearful mount...

Take it how you want, but the game is supposed to be fun.. take that away and all your local 40k people you play with find other players, a little less picky =)

While there have been points for and against with each side quoting rules, there is one other aspect I would like to mention.

A space marine is t4. If he has 3 wounds, and takes an unsaved wound from a s8 shot, he will die. If you put that same space marine on a bike, the bike makes it harder to take damage thanks to +1 toughness... however if he is wounded by s8 it will still kill him.

Now, if you put him on a wolf, it makes it harder to damage him, but NOW a s8 attack that does wound suddenly wont kill him. Same space marine, same attack that causes instant death, but now its not as deadly--no sense.

Same thing with strength. A hammer doubles the strength of the marine. A wolf is stronger then the marine, and it can also attack with rends, so the strength and the number of the attacks of the marine can also go up. However, the thunderhammer is not in any way wielded by a thunderwolf. So how does the strenght of the thunderwolf modify the hammer? If you use the hammer, you LOSE the rending wolf attack, yet gain the wolf strength at the same time?

So, seeing that both sides are arguing rules back and forth, isnt it fair to consider how silly the s10 interpretation is? The wolf is running around with a thunderhammer in its mouth!? I mean, we are already greatly simplifing how twc would work by giving rending sometimes but strength/toughness/wounds all the time, but how far are we going to push the envelope?

And 8' genetically engineered super soldiers does make sense?

Here to satisfy your need for reality,

While mounted on a thunderwolf, the swing of a hammer is intensified due the the wolf and space marine both throwing their combined strength in to the swing of the hammer thus STR 10 is justified.

Need one for the increased toughness?

While mounted on a thunderwolf, both the space marine and wolf act as one when being hit, rolling with the hit and being nimble enough to not take the full force of the blow.

There, increased profile justified.

Background is important, very important indeed for it justifies the rules. Often though what is deemed silly in the mind of one player is very important to another player.

Seein that the SW FAQ only touched on T being a straight up T5 I don't think there's much room to say this applies to S as well, otherwise the FAQ would have said so.

G

Black Blow Fly wrote:Background is important, very important indeed for it justifies the rules. Often though what is deemed silly in the mind of one player is very important to another player.
Seein that the SW FAQ only touched on T being a straight up T5 I don't think there's much room to say this applies to S as well, otherwise the FAQ would have said so.
G

Yes, I can cope with you there... but if the codex already has S5 for regular TWC than an upgrade should be also, no matter how crazy it may seem... I would think it more logical to keep the STR 4 (with special weapons) and STR 5 (rending / normal)... On a side note a wolf is much more dangerous and resilient than a bike... For example, a herald on a juggernaught recieves an additional wound, and a juggernaught is obsolete compared to a Thunderwolf...

Proposed Rules:

Only the braves and most skilled have what it takes to break in one of the legendary Thunderwolves. One who has done rides to war upon a growling, hissing mountain of muscle, hatred and cybernetics eager to slaughter all before it. A character with a Thunderwolf Mount has the unit type of cavalry, adds +1 Toughness, +1 Attack, +1 Wound to his profile, and has the Rending special rule along with +1 Strength in the Assault Phase with any attack that does not use a special weapon. However, he may only join Thunderwolf Cavalry or Fenrisian Wolves units - anything else is asking for trouble!

50 points (instead of 45 points)

This should make everything come to life and be more realistic... Thunderhammers and Power Fists will now be Strength 9...

Black Blow Fly wrote:Background is important, very important indeed for it justifies the rules. Often though what is deemed silly in the mind of one player is very important to another player.

Seein that the SW FAQ only touched on T being a straight up T5 I don't think there's much room to say this applies to S as well, otherwise the FAQ would have said so.

G

Why do you switch your stance every few posts?

Background is important, very important indeed for it justifies the rules. Often though what is deemed silly in the mind of one player is very important to another player.

Seein that the SW FAQ only touched on T being a straight up T5 I don't think there's much room to say this applies to S as well, otherwise the FAQ would have said so.

Given the wording is identical for both the S & T maybe GW figured everyone could work it out? The last sentence illustrates you;ve never ever read any GW FAQs because they are never even attempting anything like the completeness that your statement takes for granted...

What strength is a basic Space marine on a Thunderwolf with a thunder hammer?

Guess wether a mighty Space marine Hero is likely to have a lower strenbgth than him?