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.

I'm reading these posts and some people are saying that the farsight bomb is now illegal. Is this true or are they blatantly misinformed as to what the farsight bomb is?

Can you give us a quote or link to these posts?

Well someone was saying that the farsight bomb was illegal because you can't join independent characters with monstrous creatures but I usually use the farsight shadowsun bomb with 7 bodyguards and gun drones. Is that illegal too?

 TheCadreofFi'rios wrote:
Well someone was saying that the farsight bomb was illegal because you can't join independent characters with monstrous creatures but I usually use the farsight shadowsun bomb with 7 bodyguards and gun drones. Is that illegal too?

The people you were reading were either idiots or very misinformed. What is now illegal is the O'VesaStar, which is vastly different then the Farsight Bomb.

Ahhh ok yea that's what I thought. The ovesa star was about the two riptides joining right? I knew that would be illegal when they said that new rule. Are there any other death stars that are now illegal?

 TheCadreofFi'rios wrote:
Ahhh ok yea that's what I thought. The ovesa star was about the two riptides joining right?

Right, although running the whole Justice League (all special character commanders plus O'vesa in the unit) is still legal though.

 ace101 wrote:

 TheCadreofFi'rios wrote:
Ahhh ok yea that's what I thought. The ovesa star was about the two riptides joining right?

Right, although running the whole Justice League (all special character commanders plus O'vesa in the unit) is still legal though.

Why is that legal?

You cannot join an IC to a unit that has a MC in it. It doesn't matter who joins first or who joins last. What matters is that IC's are joined at the end of your Movement phase and there's a MC in there.

One version of the Farsight bomb is illegal now yes. The one where you include tigirius in and fish for gate of infinity. You were able to start on board with that tactic and jump 24 at the first turn, getting into range with your guns nearly all the time.

 jy2 wrote:

 ace101 wrote:

 TheCadreofFi'rios wrote:
Ahhh ok yea that's what I thought. The ovesa star was about the two riptides joining right?

Right, although running the whole Justice League (all special character commanders plus O'vesa in the unit) is still legal though.

Why is that legal?

You cannot join an IC to a unit that has a MC in it. It doesn't matter who joins first or who joins last. What matters is that IC's are joined at the end of your Movement phase and there's a MC in there.

Because Ovesa himself is an IC, so he can join units as there is no MC in the unit he is joining.
He can no longers join another Riptide like he ysed to though.

Yes, the point is that as long you chain up the "joins a unit" so that every time O'vesa is the last to join-it works.

It was never a good unit though anyway.

i never understood what was so awesome about the ovesa star anyway. Its expensive as holy gak and only mildly more shooty than that amount worth of normal riptides.
Yes i know it was 2 riptides getting buffmander benefits, but this adds up to well over 800pts to do it since you have to have Farsight (165pts) your warlord to even get Ovesa, which is ~280pts on his own, a second riptide for ~200pts depending on options, and buffmander which is 210pts. Considering the buffmander wont be a tanking this unit you could shave 65pts but its still expensive as hell to do this trick.
Or, i could just not do that and field 4 riptides for the same flippin cost.

Wrong.

If person A joins person B, at that moment the occurence of person B joining person A has already happened.

You cannot do one without the other happening simultaneously.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
i never understood what was so awesome about the ovesa star anyway. Its expensive as holy gak and only mildly more shooty than that amount worth of normal riptides.
Yes i know it was 2 riptides getting buffmander benefits, but this adds up to well over 800pts to do it since you have to have Farsight (165pts) your warlord to even get Ovesa, which is ~280pts on his own, a second riptide for ~200pts depending on options, and buffmander which is 210pts. Considering the buffmander wont be a tanking this unit you could shave 65pts but its still expensive as hell to do this trick.
Or, i could just not do that and field 4 riptides for the same flippin cost.

Several reasons:

It gives a heavy burst cannon rerolls to hit, monster/tank hunter, and ignore cover. The numbers on this are absurd and make even Pask jealous. Sure, you could buy another Riptide for the cost of that buffmander, but the special rules more than double the effectiveness of the burst cannon. Against jinking Wave Serpents with holo fields, the cannon is over 8 times as effective.

You have an independent character monstrous creature. When you get struck with an AP2 attack, you can use LoS to just redirect it onto a drone and let them soak it with their invuln. This massively improves the squad's durability.

Riptides have relatively lousy leadership. Farsight's not completely worthless, since he does fix this problem.

Sure, you can mimic some of this with markerlights, but markerlight sources are universally fragile. This unit was exceedingly difficult to kill, since any weapon you chose would be redirected onto a model that was best suited to tank it.

 Sir Arun wrote:
Wrong.

If person A joins person B, at that moment the occurence of person B joining person A has already happened.

You cannot do one without the other happening simultaneously.

This is actually wrong. Consider a Farseer and a unit of Guardians. The Farseer has permission to join the Guardians as per the rules for ICs. However, there is nothing in the book giving the Guardian unit (or any other unit for that matter) permission to join anything. By your interpretation, the Farseer could never join the Guardians, as they do not also have permisssion to join.

He isn't wrong however about the matter in question. It can't be done.

Lshowell wrote:
He isn't wrong however about the matter in question. It can't be done.

Yes he is...


Try reading the second sentence of the IC's rule.....

O'vessa is an IC. Other IC's are allowed to join him as you are given a restriction, then given a permission that breaks the restriction.

You are not given a permission. Gw intended for it to make sense but as we all know they are only human and make mistakes
Their intent was to not allow mc and ic to be in the same unit. Even if you join the ic last, at the end result, you have an ic with an mc which is illegal. All this arguing is simply people who want to use the loop hole in gw rules structure. Hopefully soon we can get an FAQ there clears all this up so these threads can stop.

Lshowell wrote:
You are not given a permission. Gw intended for it to make sense but as we all know they are only human and make mistakes
Their intent was to not allow mc and ic to be in the same unit. Even if you join the ic last, at the end result, you have an ic with an mc which is illegal. All this arguing is simply people who want to use the loop hole in gw rules structure. Hopefully soon we can get an FAQ there clears all this up so these threads can stop.

Then you have a permission that does absolutely nothing and was just space filler.... Not logical....

You honestly feel as though gw intended for you to have to think out the order in which units join each other for you to simply join an ic and a mc? I am not at all trying to argue with you or upset you, I'm just trying to understand your point of view better as opposed to mine.

Lshowell wrote:
You honestly feel as though gw intended for you to have to think out the order in which units join each other for you to simply join an ic and a mc? I am not at all trying to argue with you or upset you, I'm just trying to understand your point of view better as opposed to mine.

Not at all.
If the permission for one IC to join anothef overrides the restriction, which it must or it does nothing, then there is no order required for any tau IC to join O'Vessa as they are allowed to join him because he is an IC.

So an IC can't join an MC, but an MC who is also an IC, can join an IC since the entity he is joining isn't an MC...?

By this logic we could have ovesa team up with a bunch of fire warriors for extra protection

 Sir Arun wrote:
So an IC can't join an MC, but an MC who is also an IC, can join an IC since the entity he is joining isn't an MC...?

By this logic we could have ovesa team up with a bunch of fire warriors for extra protection

Sure. It's that or just remove IC from his rules instead of botching a fix like this.

 Sir Arun wrote:
So an IC can't join an MC, but an MC who is also an IC, can join an IC since the entity he is joining isn't an MC...?

By this logic we could have ovesa team up with a bunch of fire warriors for extra protection

And due to the second line of the IC rules IC's can join O'vessa as well. There is no "order" required to join him.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
So an IC can't join an MC, but an MC who is also an IC, can join an IC since the entity he is joining isn't an MC...?

By this logic we could have ovesa team up with a bunch of fire warriors for extra protection

And due to the second line of the IC rules IC's can join O'vessa as well. There is no "order" required to join him.

You are assuming that

even though A /= C,

because A = B,

A = (B+C)

instead of A /= (B+C)

in other words:

If Red and blue can be friends, but red and yellow cannot be friends, red and green can still be friends because green is a mixture of blue and yellow and green's blue component allows it to be friends with red, overriding its yellow component that would otherwise disallow green to be friends with red.

 Sir Arun wrote:

 Steel-W0LF wrote:

 Sir Arun wrote:
So an IC can't join an MC, but an MC who is also an IC, can join an IC since the entity he is joining isn't an MC...?

By this logic we could have ovesa team up with a bunch of fire warriors for extra protection

And due to the second line of the IC rules IC's can join O'vessa as well. There is no "order" required to join him.

You are assuming that

even though A /= C,

because A = B,

A = (B+C)

instead of A /= (B+C)

in other words:

If Red and blue can be friends, but red and yellow cannot be friends, red and green can still be friends because green is a mixture of blue and yellow and green's blue component allows it to be friends with red, overriding its yellow component that would otherwise disallow green to be friends with red.

I am assumeing nothing but the fact that GW does not write rules that serve zero purpose at all.

Lets assume for a second you are correct: What does the second half of the IC rule accomplish then? Does it allow one IC to join another IC? No, they could already do that with the standard rule. So what exactly does the second part of it accomplish? By your reading, absolutely nothing and it could be removed.

OR

when they say "They can join other Independant Characters, though, to form a powerful multi-character unit".... The "though" ties it back to the preceding restriction and over rides it.

I think ovesa can still join the other 7 battle suits but he can't join another riptide that isn't an independent character is what I'm getting from the new independent character rules.


Also, where are the faq's for 7th ed.

 TheCadreofFi'rios wrote:
I think ovesa can still join the other 7 battle suits but he can't join another riptide that isn't an independent character is what I'm getting from the new independent character rules.

This is correct.

There is already a thread on this in YMDC. No need for it here.