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'll concede if

A)We've run out of time and I need to go.
B)I'm losing horribly and there is enough time for another full game left if we start now.
I'll ask opponants if they'd like to concede if they are clearly not having fun.
I'll concede if I'm playing a game against a kid and I've just realised he's about to get splatted.
I'll concede if I'm playing a stroppy opponant - the game is about fun for me. I don't want to feel bad for rolling fluke dice.
I'll go play somebody else.

I won't ever force anyone to play to the end - if my opponant isn't having fun, then I'm not going to make them continue.
I'd rather go back to the pub at that point

 Pouncey wrote:

Makumba wrote:
But repentia have no honor . They are resin or metal models . Or am I missing some rule here you get VP if they die or something?

It's a fluff thing. Repentia are dishonored Sisters of Battle who try to reclaim their honor through glorious battle with no armor and giant chainswords that can cut a Land Raider to shreds. Usually they end up dead, but rarely they return to the regular ranks of Battle Sisters without having died.

E.E

A human with a chainsaw (A big chainsaw, but still a chainsaw) can cut a 10-meter-long tank with 95 mm thick armour 'to shreds'? An umodified human, without even the physical advantages of power armour?

Seems 100% legit.

Game mechanics =/= fluff.

On the other hand, crazier things have happened.

Meh.

(Sorry for the slight derail.)

True, game mechanics =/= fluff.

In the fluff, Repentia can kill titans with their eviscerators. Well, actually, they can do it in game too, it just takes a little longer.

See, the Eviscerator works exactly like a chainfist - double user strength, AP1, unwieldy, 2d6 armour penetration. So, with Repentia, it's only S6 (instead of S8 on a marine), but it can still do it.

 Furyou Miko wrote:


In the fluff, Repentia can kill titans with their eviscerators.

ಠ_ಠ

How could they even reach higher than their toes? Fanaticism only takes you so far.

And isn't it AP2?

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

Makumba wrote:
But repentia have no honor . They are resin or metal models . Or am I missing some rule here you get VP if they die or something?

It's a fluff thing. Repentia are dishonored Sisters of Battle who try to reclaim their honor through glorious battle with no armor and giant chainswords that can cut a Land Raider to shreds. Usually they end up dead, but rarely they return to the regular ranks of Battle Sisters without having died.

E.E

A human with a chainsaw (A big chainsaw, but still a chainsaw) can cut a 10-meter-long tank with 95 mm thick armour 'to shreds'? An umodified human, without even the physical advantages of power armour?

Seems 100% legit.

Game mechanics =/= fluff.

On the other hand, crazier things have happened.

Meh.

(Sorry for the slight derail.)

I don't think anything in the fluff ever talks about how fast the chainswords/eviscerators turn, nor what the teeth are made out of.

Since a normal chainsaw wouldn't even be worth anything in current day warfare, I've always assumed that the chain-weapons of 40k move at a speed that simply melt right through armour. Hold it against anything for long enough and it chews its way through. Also explains the I1. Not so much that they stumble around trying to flurish them like swords, just that standing there holding it against someone for a long enough period of time isn't something people just let you do, so the unweildyness comes from finding the opening to do so.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
True, game mechanics =/= fluff.

In the fluff, Repentia can kill titans with their eviscerators. Well, actually, they can do it in game too, it just takes a little longer.

See, the Eviscerator works exactly like a chainfist - double user strength, AP1, unwieldy, 2d6 armour penetration. So, with Repentia, it's only S6 (instead of S8 on a marine), but it can still do it.

Can't two inq join them and cast hammer hand twice ? hammer hand stacks too , unlike other buffing psychic powers .

How could they even reach higher than their toes?

well if they are humanoid build like a warlord , then I expect they foot to work like a human one . destroy the talus and the foot doesn't work , even without the big toe it is drasticly hard for a humanoid to walk and impossible to run .

Makumba wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
True, game mechanics =/= fluff.

In the fluff, Repentia can kill titans with their eviscerators. Well, actually, they can do it in game too, it just takes a little longer.

See, the Eviscerator works exactly like a chainfist - double user strength, AP1, unwieldy, 2d6 armour penetration. So, with Repentia, it's only S6 (instead of S8 on a marine), but it can still do it.

Can't two inq join them and cast hammer hand twice ? hammer hand stacks too , unlike other buffing psychic powers .

Sisters don't have inquisitors. I don't know about how codex:inq works, but Hammerhand is supposed to be a GK spell, so there is no reason why codex:inq would have that.

there is a supplement that lets INQUISITORS join a lot of armies.

Makumba wrote:
there is a supplement that lets INQUISITORS join a lot of armies.

That's not a supplement. It's codex:inq. I just mentioned that. Twice.

 Purifier wrote:

I don't think anything in the fluff ever talks about how fast the chainswords/eviscerators turn, nor what the teeth are made out of.

Since a normal chainsaw wouldn't even be worth anything in current day warfare, I've always assumed that the chain-weapons of 40k move at a speed that simply melt right through armour. Hold it against anything for long enough and it chews its way through. Also explains the I1. Not so much that they stumble around trying to flurish them like swords, just that standing there holding it against someone for a long enough period of time isn't something people just let you do, so the unweildyness comes from finding the opening to do so.

The material argument is easily countered by the fact that we don't know how hard the tank armour is, either. Likely pretty hard. Besides, if we assume that the materials are somewhat equal, then the chainsword breaks down as well, or is at the very least dulled. So you would never penetrate a superthick tank with it.

And yes, game mechanics. Otherwise, why is this true?

Normal chainsaw: As effective as your fists.

Bigger chainsaw: As effective as a massive armoured gauntlet sheathed in a lethal energy field and outfitted with an additional chainblade.

And again, sorry for derailing. Should probably make a new topic on this.

Unless there's a pressing reason why I ought to concede, such as a time constraint, I carry on, partly because I like to make my foes pay dearly for their victories and partly because I think it would be unfair to deny my opponent the pleasure of a full victory that they've earned.

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

I don't think anything in the fluff ever talks about how fast the chainswords/eviscerators turn, nor what the teeth are made out of.

Since a normal chainsaw wouldn't even be worth anything in current day warfare, I've always assumed that the chain-weapons of 40k move at a speed that simply melt right through armour. Hold it against anything for long enough and it chews its way through. Also explains the I1. Not so much that they stumble around trying to flurish them like swords, just that standing there holding it against someone for a long enough period of time isn't something people just let you do, so the unweildyness comes from finding the opening to do so.

The material argument is easily countered by the fact that we don't know how hard the tank armour is, either. Likely pretty hard. Besides, if we assume that the materials are somewhat equal, then the chainsword breaks down as well, or is at the very least dulled. So you would never penetrate a superthick tank with it.

And yes, game mechanics. Otherwise, why is this true?

Normal chainsaw: As effective as your fists.

Bigger chainsaw: As effective as a massive armoured gauntlet sheathed in a lethal energy field and outfitted with an additional chainblade.

And again, sorry for derailing. Should probably make a new topic on this.

The only difference between a power fist and a chainfist is the addition of a short chainsword attachment that magically gives it additional capabilities against armored vehicles.

The only difference between a power sword and relic blade is the length of the sword and how many hands are used for wielding it, yet it goes from wounding humans to insta-gibbing them.

 Pouncey wrote:

The only difference between a power sword and relic blade is the length of the sword and how many hands are used for wielding it, yet it goes from wounding humans to insta-gibbing them.

Actually, that one has a basis in fact. Really big swords are supposed to cut enemies in half, or in the case of one guy, behead several in a single swing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweih%C3%A4nder#Application

 Pouncey wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

I don't think anything in the fluff ever talks about how fast the chainswords/eviscerators turn, nor what the teeth are made out of.

Since a normal chainsaw wouldn't even be worth anything in current day warfare, I've always assumed that the chain-weapons of 40k move at a speed that simply melt right through armour. Hold it against anything for long enough and it chews its way through. Also explains the I1. Not so much that they stumble around trying to flurish them like swords, just that standing there holding it against someone for a long enough period of time isn't something people just let you do, so the unweildyness comes from finding the opening to do so.

The material argument is easily countered by the fact that we don't know how hard the tank armour is, either. Likely pretty hard. Besides, if we assume that the materials are somewhat equal, then the chainsword breaks down as well, or is at the very least dulled. So you would never penetrate a superthick tank with it.

And yes, game mechanics. Otherwise, why is this true?

Normal chainsaw: As effective as your fists.

Bigger chainsaw: As effective as a massive armoured gauntlet sheathed in a lethal energy field and outfitted with an additional chainblade.

And again, sorry for derailing. Should probably make a new topic on this.

The only difference between a power fist and a chainfist is the addition of a short chainsword attachment that magically gives it additional capabilities against armored vehicles.

The only difference between a power sword and relic blade is the length of the sword and how many hands are used for wielding it, yet it goes from wounding humans to insta-gibbing them.

The only difference between a lasgun and a lascannon is the size, yet it goes from a fancy flashlight to one of the deadliest long range weapons in the galaxy.

In my group, one usually concedes when two conditions are met: 1. it is apparent that side is going to lose and 2) time is running our or we have been playing for hours. The time factor is what usually drives it. When we play big multiplayer games, we usually put a time limit on the game, say " the game ends at 10 pm and the side that is winning at that moment wins."

The only difference between a lasgun and a lascannon is the size, yet it goes from a fancy flashlight to one of the deadliest long range weapons in the galaxy.

That is not exactly the truth . the lasgun and lascannon are identical . One can shot the lasgun with the power of a lascannon , only the lascannon has batteries that can let it shot a few times and a lasgun that shots like a lascannon uses up its power cell in one go and has a good chance to explode while firing .

Makumba wrote:

The only difference between a lasgun and a lascannon is the size, yet it goes from a fancy flashlight to one of the deadliest long range weapons in the galaxy.

That is not exactly the truth . the lasgun and lascannon are identical . One can shot the lasgun with the power of a lascannon , only the lascannon has batteries that can let it shot a few times and a lasgun that shots like a lascannon uses up its power cell in one go and has a good chance to explode while firing .

The LC has a bigger/longer barrel to allow a better focus and longer range than the lasgun, but the rest is accurate as far as I know.

 AWesker1976 wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
There's always something left to do. Suicide-charge the Trygon that just erupted from the ground and ate half a squad, lay down one final defiant wave of lasfire before you're utterly overrun, cover the officer's retreat back into a badly battered Valkyrie which then zooms off the table on the final turn...

Even if you can't win, it can be fun fighting a retreating action or making a desperate assassination attempt.

Keep in mind some people might not think that is fun to do. Just because something can be done doesn not mean it should be done.

BTW wouldn't the Commissar execute the officer for cowardice for that action?

I mean, yeah, some people are going to disagree. That's my opinion on the whole "concede" issue, is all. If you've gotten too badly stomped to attempt to win the game, might as well come up with a different goal!

And the Commissar had ended up on the wrong end of a spore mine the game I tried that...

Till the bitter end. His proud sons never yield.
I've managed to turn the losing match into a tie for a few times - just because I kept struggling and giving every ounce of tricks and best moves I've still got. I've won twice because of this attitude - and both were against Grey Knights: another match included the infamous Dreadknight, BA allies with Death Company, and other nasty stuff my opponent just threw at me.
I could say that "from despair rises hope".

To the last man and the last round!
Only in death does duty end.

Unless the enemies of mankind need to leave for tea or something.

I do hate it when I seem to be winning and my opponent just concedes. Takes away the joy of having a proper complete battle. If I seem to be crushing your forces, I at least want to be allowed to actually crush your forces.

And anyways, it would match the lore for my legion-strength Chapter; Heroic last stands against overwhelming enemy forces in order to defend Mankind from the horrors of the galaxy, or utter annihilation of the enemies of Mankind in order to defend Mankind from the horrors of the galaxy.

 Purifier wrote:

Sisters don't have inquisitors. I don't know about how codex:inq works, but Hammerhand is supposed to be a GK spell, so there is no reason why codex:inq would have that.

Considering Inquisitors were previously - well, and still are - in C:GK, why wouldn't they have them in the separate Codex? The units are practically identical between the two. So yes, C:I gets Hammerhand. And can thus be used to give it to Sisters, after a fashion.

 tvih wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Sisters don't have inquisitors. I don't know about how codex:inq works, but Hammerhand is supposed to be a GK spell, so there is no reason why codex:inq would have that.

Considering Inquisitors were previously - well, and still are - in C:GK, why wouldn't they have them in the separate Codex? The units are practically identical between the two. So yes, C:I gets Hammerhand. And can thus be used to give it to Sisters, after a fashion.

However, any true[ Sisters player will discount it on a 5+ Deny the Witch. (I'm joking, I'm not that uptight)

The thing about chianfists that always amuses me is that they just look like the chainblade is an extended pinkie finger.

Fluff for the Eviscerator occasionally mentions an energy field, anyway. Do they're not just 'giant chainswords', they're giant power chainswords'. For the in game effect of a regular giant chainsword without a power field, reference Codex: Blood Angels (Gabriel Seth has one).

 tvih wrote:
why wouldn't they have them in the separate Codex?

Because the fact that the GK codex contains Inquisitors doesn't make them GK, and Hammerhand is described as a power for Grey Knights.
I fail to see the importance of what codex they used to share, any more than why the fact that sisters and Grey Knights used to share a codex should allow Sisters to take anything Grey Knighty.
Maybe I can buy that the Inquisitors that favour the Grey Knights as their instrument of pain have taken to liking using the power that the Grey Knights themselves use, but that doesn't have any bearing on what they have in their own codex.

It is, in fact, a codex of its own. It has a lot of special rules of its own, and even some weaknesses that the GK does not.

If you want to look at something that is weirdly different, look at the plasma syphon. That's the exact same piece of gear, but while the GK one affects Tau weaponry, the codex:inq one specifically only affects those weapons that are described as plasma by the BRB

Does that answer your question?

 Purifier wrote:

 tvih wrote:
why wouldn't they have them in the separate Codex?

Because the fact that the GK codex contains Inquisitors doesn't make them GK, and Hammerhand is described as a power for Grey Knights.
I fail to see the importance of what codex they used to share, any more than why the fact that sisters and Grey Knights used to share a codex should allow Sisters to take anything Grey Knighty.
Maybe I can buy that the Inquisitors that favour the Grey Knights as their instrument of pain have taken to liking using the power that the Grey Knights themselves use, but that doesn't have any bearing on what they have in their own codex.

It is, in fact, a codex of its own. It has a lot of special rules of its own, and even some weaknesses that the GK does not.

If you want to look at something that is weirdly different, look at the plasma syphon. That's the exact same piece of gear, but while the GK one affects Tau weaponry, the codex:inq one specifically only affects those weapons that are described as plasma by the BRB

The units are basically copy-paste from C:GK. That's one of the most common complaints about the whole C:I. Yes, there are minor differences, like I said, but mostly it's the same. May I also remind you that Grey Knights are, in fact, a part of the Inquisition? So what they used to share makes sense that they still, to a point, do. C:I is basically the C:GK Inquisition minus the GK units, because, well, Inquisition is Inquisition and having them separately from C:GK doesn't mean they're suddenly entirely different. Plus if you don't know how C:I works, how do you know about the Syphon difference, and yet apparently - based on the wording of what you said about it - didn't know about them still having Hammerhand?

Still, all this is entirely off-topic.

 tvih wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

 tvih wrote:
why wouldn't they have them in the separate Codex?

Because the fact that the GK codex contains Inquisitors doesn't make them GK, and Hammerhand is described as a power for Grey Knights.
I fail to see the importance of what codex they used to share, any more than why the fact that sisters and Grey Knights used to share a codex should allow Sisters to take anything Grey Knighty.
Maybe I can buy that the Inquisitors that favour the Grey Knights as their instrument of pain have taken to liking using the power that the Grey Knights themselves use, but that doesn't have any bearing on what they have in their own codex.

It is, in fact, a codex of its own. It has a lot of special rules of its own, and even some weaknesses that the GK does not.

If you want to look at something that is weirdly different, look at the plasma syphon. That's the exact same piece of gear, but while the GK one affects Tau weaponry, the codex:inq one specifically only affects those weapons that are described as plasma by the BRB

The units are basically copy-paste from C:GK. That's one of the most common complaints about the whole C:I. Yes, there are minor differences, like I said, but mostly it's the same. May I also remind you that Grey Knights are, in fact, a part of the Inquisition? So what they used to share makes sense that they still, to a point, do. C:I is basically the C:GK Inquisition minus the GK units, because, well, Inquisition is Inquisition and having them separately from C:GK doesn't mean they're suddenly entirely different. Plus if you don't know how C:I works, how do you know about the Syphon difference, and yet apparently - based on the wording of what you said about it - didn't know about them still having Hammerhand?

Still, all this is entirely off-topic.

GK are not entirely a part of the inquisition. They are the military arm of one of the Inquisition Ordos (Malleus.) They're not inquisitive at all. They just kill when an inquisitor points his finger.
Technically, all of the Space Marines are under Inquisition jurisdiction, so they're pretty much all "part of the inquisition." GK are just favoured by a part of the Inquisition.

Not being able to use a GK specific power is hardly "entirely different."

The reason I know some things very specifically and others not at all is because I've read threads citing those specific paragraphs from the codex, but I have not read the full thing.

Makumba wrote:

The only difference between a lasgun and a lascannon is the size, yet it goes from a fancy flashlight to one of the deadliest long range weapons in the galaxy.

That is not exactly the truth . the lasgun and lascannon are identical . One can shot the lasgun with the power of a lascannon , only the lascannon has batteries that can let it shot a few times and a lasgun that shots like a lascannon uses up its power cell in one go and has a good chance to explode while firing .

Why is this not a special rule??
FIRE LASGUNS AS LASCANNONS
ON A ROLL OF 1-5 THE LASGUN EXPLODES >

I would like to have that rule and exploding yourself with your enemy using a krak . I would take waves of IG with commisars that would explode themself when reaching melee , supported by " sniper" squads of IG man who try to shot like lascannons , but most of the time explode themselfs . No tanks , no nothing. Just waves of dudes.

Makumba wrote:
I would like to have that rule and exploding yourself with your enemy using a krak . I would take waves of IG with commisars that would explode themself when reaching melee , supported by " sniper" squads of IG man who try to shot like lascannons , but most of the time explode themselfs . No tanks , no nothing. Just waves of dudes.

My god...

IG platoons with full conscripts and IG squads, with Chenkov...


Holy ballsack....

really, it depends more on how we both feel, are we tired, in a rush to get back home, want to start another game?

sure call it when you think you have no hope,

sometimes its nice to finish the game anyways just to see what would happen... plenty of times I have snatched victory from the jaws of defeat last turn or vise versa.

quitting before turn 5 is generally not fun, win or lose, again, unless we are both in a rush or something

 Selym wrote:

Makumba wrote:
I would like to have that rule and exploding yourself with your enemy using a krak . I would take waves of IG with commisars that would explode themself when reaching melee , supported by " sniper" squads of IG man who try to shot like lascannons , but most of the time explode themselfs . No tanks , no nothing. Just waves of dudes.

My god...

IG platoons with full conscripts and IG squads, with Chenkov...


Holy ballsack....

My god...

An actual reason to take conscripts...