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.

Which is why it is a good job it doesnt work.

You cannot have a summaryu of the rule if the rule does not exist. By NOT including the rule in the 5th ed codex it cannot be summarised, and therefore the difference between the BRB and Codex means the RULES for the summary section kick in, and say that the summary is to be ignored.

Nos, you would be correct only if the Codex stated a new way that Tyranid Monsterous Creatures fire.
No such rule, as you say.
For all of the other stuff that the Codex DOES conflict with, Hormagaunts having a new WS of 3 instead of the 4 that is listed for example, I totally agree. The codex dominates that into a paste by having new stats. Since its not actually conflicting with the codex after a FAQ... I guess its an "oh well".
I do actually know what a summary is, yes. Says so right on the same page that tells me the universe is a big place and whatever happens, you will not be missed.

As for only getting 6 shots... I dunno about that either.
According to the rule, if I fire two identical guns, it counts as firing a single twin linked weapon. It would still be 12 shots, twin linked, that counts as a single weapon.
The only thing weird about it would be twin link redundancy. The guns are already both twin linked, so doubling the shots and twin linking them doesn't really affect anything. That the rule says it fires a 'single twin linked weapon' wouldn't mean that I fire just one of the already twin linked guns.
Bioplasma is just sweet, sweet gravy in that scenario.


But seriously. Who plays like that? No one I've ever played two games with.
So calm down, its just a game. A game with really flawed rules in places, but still just a game.

Also, this is still off topic. Please stop slavering at the mouth to prove me wrong on anything except the rule Mercer started talking about.

Not really slavering at the mouth, but you are easter egg hunting and coming up with some pretty warped conclusions.

DT - by not stating the rule the summary is invalid.

You are STILL ignoring that the BRB contains a SUMMARY of rules. Without the original rule it is not a SUMMARY and is, by the rules of the SUMMARY ignored. By NOT having a rule it tells you the rule does not exist. If the rule does not exist it cannot be summarised. Idiot proof logic....

How difficult is it for you to understand? Noone else has this problem.

nosferatu1001 wrote:You are STILL ignoring that the BRB contains a SUMMARY of rules. Without the original rule it is not a SUMMARY and is, by the rules of the SUMMARY ignored. By NOT having a rule it tells you the rule does not exist. If the rule does not exist it cannot be summarised. Idiot proof logic....

Because the rule exists in the BRB. Sure its in the summary section, but so what? It doesn't conflict with the codex in any way. Those are the rules of the summary.
To summarize: Thats just sloppy rules legislation. Imma abuse it if I wanna. (You wont be there).

Maelstrom808 wrote:Not really slavering at the mouth, but you are easter egg hunting and coming up with some pretty warped conclusions.

Are they not well worded and succinct points that I am making? That there are 'warped conclusions' is the whole nature of examinning the Rules As Written.
Stuff sometimes gets interpreted in a way that sucks.
Might as well be sucking for you. Thats Pimpin'!

Doesn't suck for me at all. I'm a Tyranid player so every "find" you've pointed out would benefit me just fine. The rules are poorly written so it requires at least some sense of logic and reasoning to make the game work, otherwise you can look at the "Fun List of RAW fun" thread that points out just how badly the game breaks down if you take every word to the letter of the law. Good luck at a tournament or even most gaming scenes with your brand of "pimpin". I think we're done here.

I will just address the topic here and will not broach upon other subjects discussed such as cumulative/non-cumulative devourers and summaries in the BRB.

First off, I'm also a tyranid player.

Now I can honestly say that without a shadow of a doubt (or maybe it is without a shadow of the warp) that this argument is full of doubts. It appears that there are references in the book where "inflicted" is used to refer to both a pre-saved wound as well as a post-(un)saved wound. Therefore, I will not be going into the RAW, besides to say that you should discuss with your opponent before the game on how to play it out and to roll for it if you can't both agree.

What I will dwell on is the RAI, or rules-as-intended.

To me, fluff is not enough to justify the intent. While some may say Leech Essence is used to suck out the life energy of a target and doesn't necessarily have to kill him (instead turning his hair to space wolf grey), fluff can also be used to say that LE does kill the individual much as a vampire kills an individual when he drinks his blood, thus sucking his life out. And as big and voracious a hive tyrant is, it can probably drain the essence of an elephant before it is satiated. A human life force is probably just a mere snack to the tyrant.

What concerns me is game-balance. Did the designers intend for power to be balancing (thus, affecting only unsaved wounds) or unbalancing (affecting all successful wounds, whether saved or not). Here you have a power that is free and can potentially regenerate 3 wounds for the tyrant each turn (on rolls of 5,6 against MEQ's or 4,5,6 against GEQ's) while, at the same time, killing 3 enemy models.

In comparison, the tyrant can take Regenerate for 20pts. That ability has the power to regenerate 3 wounds (but only if the tyrant has already lost 3 wounds) only on rolls of 6's. The only saving grace about regenerate is that you do not have to be within 12" of an enemy unit to use it.

To me, I think it is crystal clear that Leech Essence was not meant to be more powerful than regenerate and so much cheaper. Game-balance-wise, it makes a lot more sense that LE only kicks in if the target takes a wound and fails his saves.

DT

The codex DOES disagree witht he summary, because the codex does not have that rule.

According to the rules of the summary section IF the codex disagrees with the summary (to whit: does the codex say something different to the summary? Not saying anything IS different to saying something.) then the summary is ignored.

SUmmary states: Rule X exists
Codex states: Rule X does not exist

Therefore codex /= summary, summary loses. You are wrong on this matter.

Sooo... average 2 dice gives you a 2/3 chance to regen a wound off of a marine before saves. pretty much a sure thing if you get 3 dice. Regen, rolling 3 dice, will give back a wound 50% of the time. I can see how leech essence is better, but not game breakingly better. Only Hive tyrant or swarmlord could even possibly do it.

Like a vampie sucking the bloo... A Marine isn't a capri sun packet, Jy. Hes psychically draining a whole unit of part of their life essence, not just draining one or two dudes and going "Mmmm, juicebox!". Remember that cover saves also apply. Hell, even HAVE to apply to not be an unsaved wound automatically against a standard marine. The power is AP2. No armor saves, so only a invuln or cover save blocks it.
And you're saying fluffwise that you're unsure of how many wounds a marine can take before dying? They fight for hundreds of years, often thousands. Somewhere along the line, even Calgar stubs his toe and yells "Ow, son of a HORUS that hurt".
Instead, wonder fluffwise how a marine thats throwing himself against a dirt barrier gets to take cover against a psychic attack that drains the life out of you. Worms? Worms get in the way? Hive tyrant spits and says ew worms?

OR

The hive tyrant is a huge psychic undying horror that regenerates himself not just on the battlefield but also across the galaxy. (mmm, thats good fluff)
Also, the rules support the wording mercer brought up.

Doomthumbs wrote:Someone wise just informed me that Vect;s rules are different from the wording I posted. I was using the 2001 DE Codex, not the new one.
Apparently he has a new weapon, Obsidion Orbs, that say "Each wound caused by an Obsidian Orb will heal a wound Vect has has suffered earlier in the battle."
As it says Wound and not "Unsaved Wound", it means even if someone passes a save against it he gets to heal a wound.

That creates a logical conundrum.

How can Vect be healed of wounds he suffered earlier in the battle, and saved from at the time, so they ceased to exist?

Yeah, the wise man PMed me the info, and its just general. No page numbers or actual quote. I personally havn't seen the new codex, Killkrazy. I'm far from a DE expert.

But that was listed as a possible similarity to this problem. The Hive Tyrant Leech Essence power never specifies saved or unsaved. I agree with you that what I quoted from the PM I was sent does not seem to make sense regarding the Hive Tyrant, or anything.

I get what you're saying though. Its similar to Old One Eyes FAQ coverage. Does he get to roll a die for EVERY wound that he suffered, even the ones he has already regenerated? No. FAQed out of possibility, as the Vect one also seems to be.

I dunno though, I can only interpret what I can read, and I dont have a new DE codex.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Maelstrom808 wrote:Doesn't suck for me at all. I'm a Tyranid player so every "find" you've pointed out would benefit me just fine. Good luck at a tournament or even most gaming scenes with your brand of "pimpin". I think we're done here.

So you both agree that this stuff is ridiculous (even unusable) AND you wish me luck in my future games?
I think we are done here. I'm glad we all grew as a result of this thought process.

I wasn't aware that pimping came in different brands. I thought there was only that one style.