Switch Theme:

Blight drones of Nurgle + Epidemus = Profit?  [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 lt
Brainy Zoanthrope






Do Blight drones of Nurgle count as followers of Nurgle for Epidemus' Tally of Pestilence rule (C:CD 52)?
The answer seems like yes, because they have daemon special rule and have “of Nurgle” in their name, so they can be argued to be “Daemons of nurgle”.
But they are vehicle, so I’m not sure…

 Crimson Devil wrote:
7th edition 40k is a lot like BDSM these days. Only play with people you know and develop a safe word for when things get too intense. And It doesn't hurt to be a sadist or masochist as well.

5000pts
2000pts
7000pts
 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

I would say yes. However be sure to show your stance in games when people try and argue.

Shouldnt be too much of an issue as it's a FW unit so by that already your opponent has given leeway to a special allowance

   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




Yes, as they are followers of nurgle..
   
Made in lt
Brainy Zoanthrope






Shouldnt be too much of an issue as it's a FW unit so by that already your opponent has given leeway to a special allowance

Well, now you don't have to, as all FW stuff is 40k-legal now. Unless TO explictly say otherwise.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
7th edition 40k is a lot like BDSM these days. Only play with people you know and develop a safe word for when things get too intense. And It doesn't hurt to be a sadist or masochist as well.

5000pts
2000pts
7000pts
 
   
Made in ca
Judgemental Grey Knight Justicar





Ontario, Canada

I thought the tally stuff was MoN only?

I have half a mind to kill you, and the other half agrees 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

It also includes Daemons of Nurgle.

Blight Drones are Daemon Engines of Nurgle, which makes them Daemons for all purposes.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

 Ratliker wrote:
Shouldnt be too much of an issue as it's a FW unit so by that already your opponent has given leeway to a special allowance

Well, now you don't have to, as all FW stuff is 40k-legal now. Unless TO explictly say otherwise.


Can you show me that in the 40k rulebook?
Or Codex, or GW 40 rulebook/codex faq?

   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Ratliker wrote:
Shouldnt be too much of an issue as it's a FW unit so by that already your opponent has given leeway to a special allowance

Well, now you don't have to, as all FW stuff is 40k-legal now. Unless TO explictly say otherwise.


Can you show me that in the 40k rulebook?
Or Codex, or GW 40 rulebook/codex faq?


Sure, the IA books are all GW 40k rulebooks. They contain additional rules for use with existing GW codices, and some are stand alone lists.

The very front of the books say you can use them in standard games of 40k. But you should let your opponent know beforehand. Should =/= Must gain permission.



Of course your opponent can, at any time for any reason, refuse to play the game with you.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

 Grey Templar wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Ratliker wrote:
Shouldnt be too much of an issue as it's a FW unit so by that already your opponent has given leeway to a special allowance

Well, now you don't have to, as all FW stuff is 40k-legal now. Unless TO explictly say otherwise.


Can you show me that in the 40k rulebook?
Or Codex, or GW 40 rulebook/codex faq?


Sure, the IA books are all GW 40k rulebooks. They contain additional rules for use with existing GW codices, and some are stand alone lists.

The very front of the books say you can use them in standard games of 40k. But you should let your opponent know beforehand. Should =/= Must gain permission.



Of course your opponent can, at any time for any reason, refuse to play the game with you.


No as the 40k rulebook is the 40k rulebook.
Not sure where people are getting the I can use FW whenever I want stuff at.
I don't see it listed in the Rulebook for warhammer 40k, or any codexes for said book, or any faq's referencing any of them.

   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

You will notice the 40k rulebook doesn't specifically list what codices you can use either. Guess you can't use any of them.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

 Grey Templar wrote:
You will notice the 40k rulebook doesn't specifically list what codices you can use either. Guess you can't use any of them.


you mean the codexes and statlines listed in the back?

It also says:
"from an army list in one of the Warhammer 40,000 codexes." pg 118 BGB
FW doesn't sell codexes do they?

Just checked, nope still selling Imperial Armour books

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/10/23 19:09:23


   
Made in us
Rampaging Chaos Russ Driver




jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
You will notice the 40k rulebook doesn't specifically list what codices you can use either. Guess you can't use any of them.


you mean the codexes and statlines listed in the back?

It also says:
"from an army list in one of the Warhammer 40,000 codexes." pg 118 BGB
FW doesn't sell codexes do they?

Just checked, nope still selling Imperial Armour books


What is your point?

   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

the_trooper wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
You will notice the 40k rulebook doesn't specifically list what codices you can use either. Guess you can't use any of them.


you mean the codexes and statlines listed in the back?

It also says:
"from an army list in one of the Warhammer 40,000 codexes." pg 118 BGB
FW doesn't sell codexes do they?

Just checked, nope still selling Imperial Armour books


What is your point?


That FW units/armies still require explicit permission except in tournaments that have already explicitly allowed them. As there is nothing in the 40k Rulebook, or any of the Codexes or their FAQ's that would do such.


   
Made in us
Rampaging Chaos Russ Driver




jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
the_trooper wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
You will notice the 40k rulebook doesn't specifically list what codices you can use either. Guess you can't use any of them.


you mean the codexes and statlines listed in the back?

It also says:
"from an army list in one of the Warhammer 40,000 codexes." pg 118 BGB
FW doesn't sell codexes do they?

Just checked, nope still selling Imperial Armour books


What is your point?


That FW units/armies still require explicit permission except in tournaments that have already explicitly allowed them. As there is nothing in the 40k Rulebook, or any of the Codexes or their FAQ's that would do such.



You need explicit permission to play someone.

   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

the_trooper wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
the_trooper wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
You will notice the 40k rulebook doesn't specifically list what codices you can use either. Guess you can't use any of them.


you mean the codexes and statlines listed in the back?

It also says:
"from an army list in one of the Warhammer 40,000 codexes." pg 118 BGB
FW doesn't sell codexes do they?

Just checked, nope still selling Imperial Armour books


What is your point?


That FW units/armies still require explicit permission except in tournaments that have already explicitly allowed them. As there is nothing in the 40k Rulebook, or any of the Codexes or their FAQ's that would do such.



You need explicit permission to play someone.


Now show me a rules citation, as I have shown mine.

   
Made in us
Rampaging Chaos Russ Driver




jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
the_trooper wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
the_trooper wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
You will notice the 40k rulebook doesn't specifically list what codices you can use either. Guess you can't use any of them.


you mean the codexes and statlines listed in the back?

It also says:
"from an army list in one of the Warhammer 40,000 codexes." pg 118 BGB
FW doesn't sell codexes do they?

Just checked, nope still selling Imperial Armour books


What is your point?


That FW units/armies still require explicit permission except in tournaments that have already explicitly allowed them. As there is nothing in the 40k Rulebook, or any of the Codexes or their FAQ's that would do such.



You need explicit permission to play someone.


Now show me a rules citation, as I have shown mine.


http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1201

   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

I asked for a rules citation, and am still waiting.
Maybe I need to go further, show me a rules citation from the Warhammer 40k rulebook.

   
Made in us
Rampaging Chaos Russ Driver




jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

I asked for a rules citation, and am still waiting.
Maybe I need to go further, show me a rules citation from the Warhammer 40k rulebook.


Are you implying you can force someone to play 40k against you?

   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

the_trooper wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

I asked for a rules citation, and am still waiting.
Maybe I need to go further, show me a rules citation from the Warhammer 40k rulebook.


Are you implying you can force someone to play 40k against you?


Ok good, you cannot show evidence in the rules.

   
Made in us
Automated Rubric Marine of Tzeentch




Milwaukee, Wisconsin

the_trooper wrote:
jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
6. Dictionary definitions of words are not always a reliable source of information for rules debates, as words in the general English language have broader meanings than those in the rules. This is further compounded by the fact that certain English words have different meanings or connotations in Great Britain (where the rules were written) and in the United States. Unless a poster is using a word incorrectly in a very obvious manner, leave dictionary definitions out.

I asked for a rules citation, and am still waiting.
Maybe I need to go further, show me a rules citation from the Warhammer 40k rulebook.


Are you implying you can force someone to play 40k against you?


It appears so...... I now REQUIRE you to play me.

 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

When something comes up that the rules don't define, we must fall back on the basic rules of the english language.

In fact, you have to have the english language down to even use the rules in the first place.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Automated Rubric Marine of Tzeentch




Milwaukee, Wisconsin

@jamesdean: He is right, you need explicit permission to play 40k with another person.

 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

 Grey Templar wrote:
When something comes up that the rules don't define, we must fall back on the basic rules of the english language.

In fact, you have to have the english language down to even use the rules in the first place.


Not entirely as GW does offer these rules/codexes in other various languages.
Also a funny thing, American English is very different from Britain English.

 Lord Magnus wrote:
@jamesdean: He is right, you need explicit permission to play 40k with another person.


Still waiting on a rules citation for that too.

Also I don't think even from a common sense point you need explicit permission to play with another person. For example playing in a tournament while sure you want to play the game some people you just really don't want to play but will subjugate yourself to it regardless.

I could also just go the if you're using Forgeworld models in a regular game, you're simply breaking the rules defined in the 40k rulebook, and codexes.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2012/10/23 20:04:37


   
Made in us
Rampaging Chaos Russ Driver




jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
When something comes up that the rules don't define, we must fall back on the basic rules of the english language.

In fact, you have to have the english language down to even use the rules in the first place.


Not entirely as GW does offer these rules/codexes in other various languages.
Also a funny thing, American English is very different from Britain English.

 Lord Magnus wrote:
@jamesdean: He is right, you need explicit permission to play 40k with another person.


Still waiting on a rules citation for that too.


Could you cite a rule that says someone must play you?

   
Made in us
Automated Rubric Marine of Tzeentch




Milwaukee, Wisconsin

 Lord Magnus wrote:
@jamesdean: He is right, you need explicit permission to play 40k with another person.


Still waiting on a rules citation for that too.


I think I rest my case here, there is no more talking sense.

EDIT: As you ignored earlier, trooper DID cite this rule..

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/10/23 20:04:08


 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

 Lord Magnus wrote:
 Lord Magnus wrote:
@jamesdean: He is right, you need explicit permission to play 40k with another person.


Still waiting on a rules citation for that too.


I think I rest my case here, there is no more talking sense.

EDIT: As you ignored earlier, trooper DID cite this rule..


Than I asked for a citation from the 40k rulebook,
My fault for adding that part in my quote box, probably was hard to see.

You can pay someone to play, that's not being given explicit permission it's buying.
You can force anyone to do practically anything, given the proper motivation.


   
Made in us
Automated Rubric Marine of Tzeentch




Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Ah, I see your point, however, the buying is explicit permission, and the forcing is illegal (against the rules, see troopers citation)

argument is not stronger

 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

 Lord Magnus wrote:
Ah, I see your point, however, the buying is explicit permission, and the forcing is illegal (against the rules, see troopers citation)

argument is not stronger


Again though, Dictionary definitions should not be used in a 40k rules discussion.

Buying is not always explicit permission. Not too long ago you could buy people. Did they have their explicit to do so, I think not. In some parts of the world this still happens.

Forcing is only Illegal in some parts of the world as well. Remember the whole world does not have the "Law & Order" we have.
I've been to countries where they would stick former Warlord's heads on pikes to try to gain US favor.
I somehow doubt they had explicit permission to do that.

This is why I'm trying to argue from a RAW standpoint. Soon as you go past the rules and into the Real world it gets to be a messy place.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






New Orleans, LA

Gentlemen,

31 page thread on FW here.


Do Blight drones of Nurgle count as followers of Nurgle for Epidemus' Tally of Pestilence rule (C:CD 52)?
is the ONLY question for this thread.

@Ratliker: I don't have the first darn clue, but I'd probably grant it to you.

DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
 
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





 Grey Templar wrote:
Of course your opponent can, at any time for any reason, refuse to play the game with you.

Straight to the straw-man, that's awesome. Well done.

FW units require more permission than a normal game.

"Want to play a game of 40k?"
"Want to play a game of 40k - I'm using units from IA, here are the rules so you can look over them if you want?"

The latter is what the IA books say to do.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: