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.

 Bloodhorror wrote:
Well, as you yourself said, the rulebook defines Daemons quite Neatly, i see no rule in Noxius Touch that allows a "Follower of Nurgle" to use it.

Therefore i'd allow any DAEMON to use it.

Units with the Mark of Nurgle are not Daemons. They can get the other benefits of The Tally, but Noxius Touch does not Apply to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unless, obviously they are Daemons as well....

Warp Talons, Obliterators, Possessed, Spawn etc. etc.

I'd argue that the noxious touch doesn't require you to have the "Daemon" rule.

The rule, in the context of the Chaos Demon in 4th editon was referring to the model.

Noxious Touch: The Daemon and its weapons are covered in the most lethal toxic substance, instantly infecting any flesh it touches. The Daemon's close combat attacks are poisoned, wounding on a 2+, as described in the warhammer 40k rulebook.

Again, "The Daemon" in this rule is not the actual "Daemon Rule"... it's simply the subject of that sentence coming from a codex where ALL critters are daemons.

Even in that respect the model in question is a Zombie, not a Daemon.

 OutlawBandit wrote:
Even in that respect the model in question is a Zombie, not a Daemon.

Right... zombies aren't followers of Nurgle, thus don't get the NT.

Regular choas marine / cultis who are followers of Nurgle would benefit from it.

 whembly wrote:

 Bloodhorror wrote:
Well, as you yourself said, the rulebook defines Daemons quite Neatly, i see no rule in Noxius Touch that allows a "Follower of Nurgle" to use it.

Therefore i'd allow any DAEMON to use it.

Units with the Mark of Nurgle are not Daemons. They can get the other benefits of The Tally, but Noxius Touch does not Apply to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unless, obviously they are Daemons as well....

Warp Talons, Obliterators, Possessed, Spawn etc. etc.

I'd argue that the noxious touch doesn't require you to have the "Daemon" rule.

The rule, in the context of the Chaos Demon in 4th editon was referring to the model.

Noxious Touch: The Daemon and its weapons are covered in the most lethal toxic substance, instantly infecting any flesh it touches. The Daemon's close combat attacks are poisoned, wounding on a 2+, as described in the warhammer 40k rulebook.

Again, "The Daemon" in this rule is not the actual "Daemon Rule"... it's simply the subject of that sentence coming from a codex where ALL critters are daemons.

I think the context is quite clear, there are other old Codexes that use the phrase "the model"
This is simply only "the daemon" may use NT

Not a Daemon, no NT.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Bloodhorror wrote:
Well, as you yourself said, the rulebook defines Daemons quite Neatly, i see no rule in Noxius Touch that allows a "Follower of Nurgle" to use it.

Therefore i'd allow any DAEMON to use it.

Units with the Mark of Nurgle are not Daemons. They can get the other benefits of The Tally, but Noxius Touch does not Apply to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unless, obviously they are Daemons as well....

Warp Talons, Obliterators, Possessed, Spawn etc. etc.

I'd argue that the noxious touch doesn't require you to have the "Daemon" rule.

The rule, in the context of the Chaos Demon in 4th editon was referring to the model.

Noxious Touch: The Daemon and its weapons are covered in the most lethal toxic substance, instantly infecting any flesh it touches. The Daemon's close combat attacks are poisoned, wounding on a 2+, as described in the warhammer 40k rulebook.

Again, "The Daemon" in this rule is not the actual "Daemon Rule"... it's simply the subject of that sentence coming from a codex where ALL critters are daemons.

I think the context is quite clear, there are other old Codexes that use the phrase "the model"
This is simply only "the daemon" may use NT

Not a Daemon, no NT.

Fair enough... let's agree to disagree.

I'm done.

 whembly wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Bloodhorror wrote:
Well, as you yourself said, the rulebook defines Daemons quite Neatly, i see no rule in Noxius Touch that allows a "Follower of Nurgle" to use it.

Therefore i'd allow any DAEMON to use it.

Units with the Mark of Nurgle are not Daemons. They can get the other benefits of The Tally, but Noxius Touch does not Apply to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unless, obviously they are Daemons as well....

Warp Talons, Obliterators, Possessed, Spawn etc. etc.

I'd argue that the noxious touch doesn't require you to have the "Daemon" rule.

The rule, in the context of the Chaos Demon in 4th editon was referring to the model.

Noxious Touch: The Daemon and its weapons are covered in the most lethal toxic substance, instantly infecting any flesh it touches. The Daemon's close combat attacks are poisoned, wounding on a 2+, as described in the warhammer 40k rulebook.

Again, "The Daemon" in this rule is not the actual "Daemon Rule"... it's simply the subject of that sentence coming from a codex where ALL critters are daemons.

I think the context is quite clear, there are other old Codexes that use the phrase "the model"
This is simply only "the daemon" may use NT

Not a Daemon, no NT.

Fair enough... let's agree to disagree.

I'm done.

Done deal, and I agree.

 whembly wrote:

 Bloodhorror wrote:
Well, as you yourself said, the rulebook defines Daemons quite Neatly, i see no rule in Noxius Touch that allows a "Follower of Nurgle" to use it.

Therefore i'd allow any DAEMON to use it.

Units with the Mark of Nurgle are not Daemons. They can get the other benefits of The Tally, but Noxius Touch does not Apply to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unless, obviously they are Daemons as well....

Warp Talons, Obliterators, Possessed, Spawn etc. etc.

I'd argue that the noxious touch doesn't require you to have the "Daemon" rule.

The rule, in the context of the Chaos Demon in 4th editon was referring to the model.

Noxious Touch: The Daemon and its weapons are covered in the most lethal toxic substance, instantly infecting any flesh it touches. The Daemon's close combat attacks are poisoned, wounding on a 2+, as described in the warhammer 40k rulebook.

Again, "The Daemon" in this rule is not the actual "Daemon Rule"... it's simply the subject of that sentence coming from a codex where ALL critters are daemons.

Noxious Touch tells you that daemons get 2+ poisoned cc-attacks. And by only mentioning daemons, that excludes space marines, tau, eldar, necrons and tyranids from gaining its benefits.

The rules do not have to tell you what is not within the scope of its rules, only what is in it. It does not have to tell you that non-daemons (space marines, tau, eldar, necrons, tyranids) can't use it. All you need to know is that daemons can use. That is what a permissive ruleset is.

Or would you play it that bloodletters have power weapon attacks that are also poisoned? Hey, the rules say that plaguebearers have plagueswords, but it doesn't say that bloodletters don't have them....

Spoiler:

 jy2 wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Bloodhorror wrote:
Well, as you yourself said, the rulebook defines Daemons quite Neatly, i see no rule in Noxius Touch that allows a "Follower of Nurgle" to use it.

Therefore i'd allow any DAEMON to use it.

Units with the Mark of Nurgle are not Daemons. They can get the other benefits of The Tally, but Noxius Touch does not Apply to them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unless, obviously they are Daemons as well....

Warp Talons, Obliterators, Possessed, Spawn etc. etc.

I'd argue that the noxious touch doesn't require you to have the "Daemon" rule.

The rule, in the context of the Chaos Demon in 4th editon was referring to the model.

Noxious Touch: The Daemon and its weapons are covered in the most lethal toxic substance, instantly infecting any flesh it touches. The Daemon's close combat attacks are poisoned, wounding on a 2+, as described in the warhammer 40k rulebook.

Again, "The Daemon" in this rule is not the actual "Daemon Rule"... it's simply the subject of that sentence coming from a codex where ALL critters are daemons.

Noxious Touch tells you that daemons get 2+ poisoned cc-attacks. And by only mentioning daemons, that excludes space marines, tau, eldar, necrons and tyranids from gaining its benefits.

The rules do not have to tell you what is not within the scope of its rules, only what is in it. It does not have to tell you that non-daemons (space marines, tau, eldar, necrons, tyranids) can't use it. All you need to know is that daemons can use. That is what a permissive ruleset is.

Or would you play it that bloodletters have power weapon attacks that are also poisoned? Hey, the rules say that plaguebearers have plagueswords, but it doesn't say that bloodletters don't have them....

Thanks.

 jy2 wrote:
Thanks.

Wish I had time to catch-up on mine. Going through FA BOLC atm and its a lot to take in... I have 2 GT's still to write up.

 Tomb King wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Thanks.

Wish I had time to catch-up on mine. Going through FA BOLC atm and its a lot to take in... I have 2 GT's still to write up.

Slacker!

Get on it you git!

This is a case where the RAI has trumped, and will trump in a competitive situation. I've been to no tournaments, nor any friendly games, where someone has denied Plague Marines (for example) the Noxious Touch Daemonic Gift as a result of jacking up the Tally of Pestilence. Don't worry giant bug players, the poison only wounds on a 6 vs Gargantuan Creatures now.
I'm very happy that at least GW ruled the Tally makes ALL Nurgle follower attacks, including shooting attacks, ignore armor saves once 20+ wounds are done to the enemy. That's a good reason to use Cultists as a 3rd wave in an Epidemius army but only 1 unit, more is a waste, Plague Marines are better.

 Lord Krungharr wrote:
This is a case where the RAI has trumped, and will trump in a competitive situation. I've been to no tournaments, nor any friendly games, where someone has denied Plague Marines (for example) the Noxious Touch Daemonic Gift as a result of jacking up the Tally of Pestilence. Don't worry giant bug players, the poison only wounds on a 6 vs Gargantuan Creatures now.
I'm very happy that at least GW ruled the Tally makes ALL Nurgle follower attacks, including shooting attacks, ignore armor saves once 20+ wounds are done to the enemy. That's a good reason to use Cultists as a 3rd wave in an Epidemius army but only 1 unit, more is a waste, Plague Marines are better.

So how do you know RAI? They had no thoughts of allies (probably)

ps; at local tournies it doesnt fly

Gargantuan Creatures are Apocalypse only anyway and in games like that, i'm more worried about Strength D Weapons pieplating my MC's....

I've also yet to see an actual Rules Quote than can let Basic Nurgle Followers (Non Daemons) Use noxius touch. No FAQ Answer either.

I think they included the word "The Daemon" on purpose.

Remember, this was 4-5th edition, no allies. But Epidemus' tally does work on all followers of nurgle, even your opponent.

By limiting noxious touch to only daemons they remove the possibility of an opponent with a death guard chaos space marine army of steamrolling over a chaos daemons epidemus list.

Without that protection the daemon army would be sorely outclassed, since plague marines are way better troops than plague bearers.

Your saying that GW, 4 years ago, knew that they would include allies in four years and thus changed the wording before print?

Nah. Demon codex. Obviously everything is going to be written in their context, just like any other book. We've got nemesis all over the GK book, same deal with the demon codex, it's pretty much all demons.

Now I would agree that if everything that was a demon had the demon special rule, but that's not the case, because GW's left hand doesn't know what it's right hand is doing.

I've yet to see an actual rules quote that specifically denies any follower of nurgle from being affected by noxious touch, all I've seen is players with monstrous creatures in their army or players that beat by this list when they couldn't manage to kill epidemius, which is quite easy to do, complaining.

 juraigamer wrote:
Your saying that GW, 4 years ago, knew that they would include allies in four years and thus changed the wording before print?

Nah. Demon codex. Obviously everything is going to be written in their context, just like any other book. We've got nemesis all over the GK book, same deal with the demon codex, it's pretty much all demons.

Now I would agree that if everything that was a demon had the demon special rule, but that's not the case, because GW's left hand doesn't know what it's right hand is doing.

Codex creep. Deal with it.

Back in 5th, when the newer Space Marine codex came out, did you think it automatically updated the force weapons, smoke launchers and assault cannons on the other codices (especially the older Daemonhunters codex)? No, they got nothing unless told so by the FAQ's.

I've yet to see an actual rules quote that specifically denies any follower of nurgle from being affected by noxious touch, all I've seen is players with monstrous creatures in their army or players that beat by this list when they couldn't manage to kill epidemius, which is quite easy to do, complaining.

And why does a rule have to deny you the abiliy to use it? Hey, I don't see anything in the book that says that plaguebearers CAN'T take hellswords or Bolt of Tzeentch. And while we're at it, I don't see anything in the Space Marine book that says my plaguebearers CAN'T take lascannons either! All I see is players playing with how they think the rule should work (which is absolutely fine as long as you understand it is not RAW, but a houserule between the 2 players).

Most of the stuff says "The Model with....." Noxius touch and other specifics say "The Daemon..."

And Saying that they predicted allies is wrong. They simply wrote it like that for Events in which Epidemus would play against a Nurgle List, or in a doubles game where it was a team of Epidemus and a Nurgle Player.


The Daemon = Daemon Only
The Model = Whoever the feth has it

 juraigamer wrote:
Your saying that GW, 4 years ago, knew that they would include allies in four years and thus changed the wording before print?

Your opponent tallies also iirc. Which means it was worded to prevent a Nurgle CSM army from benefiting.

rigeld2 wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
Your saying that GW, 4 years ago, knew that they would include allies in four years and thus changed the wording before print?

Your opponent tallies also iirc. Which means it was worded to prevent a Nurgle CSM army from benefiting.

So you are saying that Nurgle CSM army gained benefits at 15+ kills? And that during 5th they lost one of those abilities when versus daemons? I'm still going with well what was the point then of them handing out those abilities to all follower if they didn't benefit? The final 20+ kill benefit we know works on all followers, we know the 15-19 kill one works on all followers as well. We know that the plaguesword bonus does not mention all followers, as that wouldn't make sense cause those other followers wouldn't have plagueswords. So we go to the last one in which it states RAW that all followers of nurgle gain noxious touch. Why would they give this ability to all followers of nurgle if they couldn't use it? Remember you can't really say they could've before as when the book was released there was no way to define a daemon. You would have merely followed what Epiy's Tally said. All followers (daemons of nurlge and models with the mark of nurgle) gain noxious touch.

To me its very simple cut and dry. All followers get it, just like all orks are orks. You wouldn't try and argue that I don't get a third special weapon in my 30 boyz squad would you? After all in the Ork Boyz unit there are no Ork Nobz, just normal Nobz as far as super strict RAW goes. Personally I really feel this gets into what my group labled stupid RAW. Like in 5th where Wraithguard, or any Wraith unit, some Tyrandis, and a few other models couldn't fire as they didn't have eyes to measure from.

 arinnoor wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
Your saying that GW, 4 years ago, knew that they would include allies in four years and thus changed the wording before print?

Your opponent tallies also iirc. Which means it was worded to prevent a Nurgle CSM army from benefiting.

So you are saying that Nurgle CSM army gained benefits at 15+ kills? And that during 5th they lost one of those abilities when versus daemons? I'm still going with well what was the point then of them handing out those abilities to all follower if they didn't benefit? The final 20+ kill benefit we know works on all followers, we know the 15-19 kill one works on all followers as well. We know that the plaguesword bonus does not mention all followers, as that wouldn't make sense cause those other followers wouldn't have plagueswords. So we go to the last one in which it states RAW that all followers of nurgle gain noxious touch. Why would they give this ability to all followers of nurgle if they couldn't use it? Remember you can't really say they could've before as when the book was released there was no way to define a daemon. You would have merely followed what Epiy's Tally said. All followers (daemons of nurlge and models with the mark of nurgle) gain noxious touch.

To me its very simple cut and dry. All followers get it, just like all orks are orks. You wouldn't try and argue that I don't get a third special weapon in my 30 boyz squad would you? After all in the Ork Boyz unit there are no Ork Nobz, just normal Nobz as far as super strict RAW goes. Personally I really feel this gets into what my group labled stupid RAW. Like in 5th where Wraithguard, or any Wraith unit, some Tyrandis, and a few other models couldn't fire as they didn't have eyes to measure from.

Why is it last editions Bikes could have Fleet of foot and couldn't use it?

If it's not a Daemon it cannot use NT.

 arinnoor wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
Your saying that GW, 4 years ago, knew that they would include allies in four years and thus changed the wording before print?

Your opponent tallies also iirc. Which means it was worded to prevent a Nurgle CSM army from benefiting.

So you are saying that Nurgle CSM army gained benefits at 15+ kills?

Correct - they would have if it didn't say "Daemons", for example if it says models.

I'm still going with well what was the point then of them handing out those abilities to all follower if they didn't benefit?

Because they felt like it?

The final 20+ kill benefit we know works on all followers, we know the 15-19 kill one works on all followers as well. We know that the plaguesword bonus does not mention all followers, as that wouldn't make sense cause those other followers wouldn't have plagueswords. So we go to the last one in which it states RAW that all followers of nurgle gain noxious touch. Why would they give this ability to all followers of nurgle if they couldn't use it? Remember you can't really say they could've before as when the book was released there was no way to define a daemon. You would have merely followed what Epiy's Tally said. All followers (daemons of nurlge and models with the mark of nurgle) gain noxious touch.

It's trivial to define Daemon. Before the GK FAQ, anything in the Daemon codex. And yes - all followers of Nurgle gain Noxious Touch. The ability only does anything for Daemons, however.

rigeld2 wrote:

 arinnoor wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
Your saying that GW, 4 years ago, knew that they would include allies in four years and thus changed the wording before print?

Your opponent tallies also iirc. Which means it was worded to prevent a Nurgle CSM army from benefiting.

So you are saying that Nurgle CSM army gained benefits at 15+ kills?

Correct - they would have if it didn't say "Daemons", for example if it says models.

I'm still going with well what was the point then of them handing out those abilities to all follower if they didn't benefit?

Because they felt like it?

The final 20+ kill benefit we know works on all followers, we know the 15-19 kill one works on all followers as well. We know that the plaguesword bonus does not mention all followers, as that wouldn't make sense cause those other followers wouldn't have plagueswords. So we go to the last one in which it states RAW that all followers of nurgle gain noxious touch. Why would they give this ability to all followers of nurgle if they couldn't use it? Remember you can't really say they could've before as when the book was released there was no way to define a daemon. You would have merely followed what Epiy's Tally said. All followers (daemons of nurlge and models with the mark of nurgle) gain noxious touch.

It's trivial to define Daemon. Before the GK FAQ, anything in the Daemon codex. And yes - all followers of Nurgle gain Noxious Touch. The ability only does anything for Daemons, however.

I know I'm wading back in when I said I was done... but honest question here.

Wouldn't the Epi rule override the NT rule as it's being more specific... via the "All followers of Nurgle"??

 whembly wrote:
Wouldn't the Epi rule override the NT rule as it's being more specific... via the "All followers of Nurgle"??

It grants Noxious Touch to all followers of Nurgle.
There's no text to say that every model can make use of Noxious Touch.

Never stated that Noxious Touch did not say daemon. I agree with you it does. What I disagree on is that it does nothing. Clearly nothing I say will convince you otherwise. Your strict RAW stance isn't wrong, just as I believe my RAI stance isn't wrong. In truth we've got nothing to prove the other wrong in their belief, so lets agree to disagree. It could be true that the ability does nothing, RAW supports this, but it could equally be true that the rule intends to allow CSM poisoned 2+ CC attacks. The point of this debated thread seems to have dragged to its end. Until a FAQ comes out the answer is clear though. Play how you like RAW where this does not work, house rule it to where it does, let the TO decide, etc. Need not be a big fuss.

Also as an aside what Bikes got fleet in 5th? Were they a 5th ed book?

 arinnoor wrote:
Never stated that Noxious Touch did not say daemon. I agree with you it does. What I disagree on is that it does nothing. Clearly nothing I say will convince you otherwise. Your strict RAW stance isn't wrong, just as I believe my RAI stance isn't wrong. In truth we've got nothing to prove the other wrong in their belief, so lets agree to disagree. It could be true that the ability does nothing, RAW supports this, but it could equally be true that the rule intends to allow CSM poisoned 2+ CC attacks. The point of this debated thread seems to have dragged to its end. Until a FAQ comes out the answer is clear though. Play how you like RAW where this does not work, house rule it to where it does, let the TO decide, etc. Need not be a big fuss.

If you want to discuss intent that's fine.
It's probably intended to work in my opinion. It's not that overpowered for it to work. Playing a game I wouldn't even force a roll-off.

That was all I was ever saying really. Sorry if I was unclear. I read the same bits as you in this. Under Noxious Touch, like prtty much every other daemonic gift, it says the Daemon. According to RAW there is no debate you are 100% right only daemons of nurgle can use it. I think the intent of the rule is otherwise, but that is my opinion and cannot be used as anything, but an opinion. As much as its word doesn't count for much I would be interested in what the GW line has to say on this. They still have a email for this?

 arinnoor wrote:
Also as an aside what Bikes got fleet in 5th? Were they a 5th ed book?

Autarch/Farseer/Warlock on Jetbikes. Kor'sarro Khan (although he can "Run"). Might be a couple of others I missed.

Space Marine bikes in an army led by Shrike.

 Happyjew wrote:

 arinnoor wrote:
Also as an aside what Bikes got fleet in 5th? Were they a 5th ed book?

Autarch/Farseer/Warlock on Jetbikes. Kor'sarro Khan (although he can "Run"). Might be a couple of others I missed.

Space Marine bikes in an army led by Shrike.

The eldar I knew, but discounted them as they're a 4th ed codex, but I'll admit I didn't know the Space Marine bikes had that issue. Interesting.

This argument reminds me very much of the "vehicles can't have invuln saves" argument.