Switch Theme:

Space Marine Rapier Quad Mortar Rules in 8th?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




Hey all,

Dunno if this is the place to post this but I can't find the rules for the Space Marine Rapier Quad Mortar.

I assumed it would be in Imperial Armour Forces of Adeptus Astartes but in that there are rules on page 43 for the Rapier Carrier but only with options for a quad heavy bolter or a laser destroyer.

Anyone know where I could find the Quad Mortar rules for these? I only recently bought a bunch of them and be a shame if I couldn't actually field them!

I thought every model that previously had rules for 40k (especially in 7th) would have rules in 8th? Were these left out by accident or dropped?

Got in touch with GW/FW but I don't expect to get a reply any time soon if at all.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





They don't have rules currently.

Also, they don't have rules, thank god.

"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."

This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.


Freelance Ontologist

When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 DarknessEternal wrote:
They don't have rules currently.

Also, they don't have rules, thank god.

Yeah because they were soooooooo bad.

Just proxy them as a different Mortar or as a Thunderfire, but my guess is that the rules will be in the new IA.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah because they were soooooooo bad.


Dunno about that. I found them to be pretty good at clearing out large units, hordes and the like, better than the Thunderfire.

But yeah figured I'd have to use them as Thunderfire Cannons for now. Bit disappointing that for whatever reason there aren't rules for them.
   
Made in us
Abel





Washington State

Heh. Trying to bring the Phosphex Rapiers into 40K? What a move. They are bad enough in 30K. Don't need them in 40K. Though there would be more ways of dealing with them in 40K, so maybe they wouldn't be that bad...

Kara Sloan shoots through Time and Design Space for a Negative Play Experience  
   
Made in us
Guarded Grey Knight Terminator






My buddy emailed Forgeworld about space marine quad mortar rules - here's the response he got back:

Hi Tim,
Thank you for your email. The Rapier Quad Mortar is Horus Heresy only, which is why it is not in the new Index book. The text on the web store is there in error and we are having the tech guys remove it as soon as possible.

"Glory in our suffering, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint"
-Paul of Tarsus

If my post seems goofy, assume I am posting from my phone and the autocorrect elf in my phone is drunk again 
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




Tamwulf wrote:Heh. Trying to bring the Phosphex Rapiers into 40K? What a move.


move? No need to throw that label or insinuation at me especially as I'm not on about Phosphex Rapiers. The quad mortars in 40k never were that or had those shells (I'm assuming they're shells).
Options were str5 ap5 heavy 4 blast or str 8 ap 4 heavy 4 sunder, that's it basically. So again, no need to say I'm trying to pull a move.

Smotejob wrote:My buddy emailed Forgeworld about space marine quad mortar rules - here's the response he got back:

Hi Tim,
Thank you for your email. The Rapier Quad Mortar is Horus Heresy only, which is why it is not in the new Index book. The text on the web store is there in error and we are having the tech guys remove it as soon as possible.


Thanks for posting their reply. It's a bit odd them saying that as the quad mortar rapier was given specific 40k rules (as a downloadable pdf) and it wasn't just text on web. Ah well.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





MadMunky wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah because they were soooooooo bad.


Dunno about that. I found them to be pretty good at clearing out large units, hordes and the like, better than the Thunderfire.

But yeah figured I'd have to use them as Thunderfire Cannons for now. Bit disappointing that for whatever reason there aren't rules for them.

He means bad as in broken. They were the most powerful unit per point ever created.

"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."

This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.


Freelance Ontologist

When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life. 
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




 DarknessEternal wrote:
MadMunky wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Yeah because they were soooooooo bad.


Dunno about that. I found them to be pretty good at clearing out large units, hordes and the like, better than the Thunderfire.

But yeah figured I'd have to use them as Thunderfire Cannons for now. Bit disappointing that for whatever reason there aren't rules for them.

He means bad as in broken. They were the most powerful unit per point ever created.


Ah ok fair enough.

Though I'm a bit puzzled as to why they're considered so powerful as compared to say thunderfire cannons? Is it down to the 4 str8 anti-armour shots? As the thunderfire was probably better for the blast anti-infantry shots? My only experience running/testing them I had three of them as my only heavy support so they obviously did more than a single thunderfire cannon (and they got neutralised quickly enough), though like for like was there really that big a difference?

I guess I might be a bit naive in my understanding of them.
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




For anyone who cares, as per the Forge World FAQ:
"A Rapier Carrier may replace its quad heavy bolter for either a laser destroyer or a quad launcher"

Which is all I was after in my original post and the wargear options I thought they'd have to begin with when I got the IA book.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: