Switch Theme:

Riptide Firing Ordnance - can it move?  [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
Rough Rider with Boomstick



Wiltshire

 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Tactical_Genius wrote:

Incorrect I'm afraid. If you had actually read the full example I gave a few pages ago, you would know that it is possible for the vehicle to become immobilised partway through movement, meaning that we have a literally identical situation.
RPJ (according to you):
moves 3" then immobilised by terrain
Cannot move any further
Can move an additional 1"

Ordnance + multitracker (according to you):
Fires ordnance
Cannot fire anything else
Can fire an additional weapon

RPJ (according to the rules):
moves 3" then immobilised by terrain
Cannot move any further

Ordnance + multitracker (according to the rules):
Fires ordnance
Cannot fire anything else



Incorrect again I'm afraid. Notice how he said "sweeping advance" and not "pile in".


Red: This example is correct for what you are arguing, it provides a broken example of the rule.

Blue: Whichever way he choose to try and use a stat line modifier, its still wrong. A power fist works exactly the same way, modifying the str of the attack but not setting it to a new value for anything else... yet the same equation in used in the rulebook for all modifications to model stats. In all of thier examples all they have to do is follow the equation, even puting codex stuff in that they claim breaks it, and they would still arrive at the correct result.

Red: Don't you think an emerging pattern of brokenness with your application of the rules might be saying something about that selfsame application?
Blue: I was not stating that the interpretation is correct (although I believe it is, following your application of pg.7, which is his point), I was saying how you cannot claim an FAQ for something else as supporting your claim.
   
Made in us
Sneaky Lictor





Idaho

Tactical_Genius wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Tactical_Genius wrote:

Incorrect I'm afraid. If you had actually read the full example I gave a few pages ago, you would know that it is possible for the vehicle to become immobilised partway through movement, meaning that we have a literally identical situation.
RPJ (according to you):
moves 3" then immobilised by terrain
Cannot move any further
Can move an additional 1"

Ordnance + multitracker (according to you):
Fires ordnance
Cannot fire anything else
Can fire an additional weapon

RPJ (according to the rules):
moves 3" then immobilised by terrain
Cannot move any further

Ordnance + multitracker (according to the rules):
Fires ordnance
Cannot fire anything else



Incorrect again I'm afraid. Notice how he said "sweeping advance" and not "pile in".


Red: This example is correct for what you are arguing, it provides a broken example of the rule.

Blue: Whichever way he choose to try and use a stat line modifier, its still wrong. A power fist works exactly the same way, modifying the str of the attack but not setting it to a new value for anything else... yet the same equation in used in the rulebook for all modifications to model stats. In all of thier examples all they have to do is follow the equation, even puting codex stuff in that they claim breaks it, and they would still arrive at the correct result.

Red: Don't you think an emerging pattern of brokenness with your application of the rules might be saying something about that selfsame application?
Blue: I was not stating that the interpretation is correct (although I believe it is, following your application of pg.7, which is his point), I was saying how you cannot claim an FAQ for something else as supporting your claim.


Where is the ruling stating that you sweeping advance, quickening, and init 10 happen at init 10? Trying to look it up but all I found was the related FAQ above that is not what they were talking about, and another FAQ that says things like lash-whip, or the necron coils and quickening conflict and you have to roll off to see which is used.


Finding 2 examples of brokenness is no cause for alarm, if there were not 100's of examples of issues with the rules you would have a point, but also then there would be no point for this forum because GW would have perfectly worded and inter-meshing rules.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/26 20:35:59


 
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Buffalo, NY

Steel-WOLF, I'm honestly curious. How does one know when to apply codex>BRB? Is it all the time? If so, why do you denounce other issues of codex>BRB? Is it only sometime? If so, how do you know that those situations the "rule" applies?

I can name numerous instances of codex rules/wargear that give bonuses yet you claim they don't apply because...?

At this point, I think this thread needs to be locked because it is not going anywhere.

Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia 
   
Made in gb
Rough Rider with Boomstick



Wiltshire

 Happyjew wrote:
Steel-WOLF, I'm honestly curious. How does one know when to apply codex>BRB? Is it all the time? If so, why do you denounce other issues of codex>BRB? Is it only sometime? If so, how do you know that those situations the "rule" applies?

I can name numerous instances of codex rules/wargear that give bonuses yet you claim they don't apply because...?

At this point, I think this thread needs to be locked because it is not going anywhere.

100% this.

Note to the reader: my username is not arrogance. No, my name is taken from the most excellent of commanders: Lord Castellan Creed, of the Imperial Guar- I mean Astra Militarum - who has a special rule known only as "Tactical Genius"... Although nowhere near as awesome as before, it now allows some cool stuff for the Guar- Astra Militarum - player. FEAR ME AND MY TWO WARLORD TRAITS. 
   
Made in us
Sneaky Lictor





Idaho

 Happyjew wrote:
Steel-WOLF, I'm honestly curious. How does one know when to apply codex>BRB? Is it all the time? If so, why do you denounce other issues of codex>BRB? Is it only sometime? If so, how do you know that those situations the "rule" applies?

I can name numerous instances of codex rules/wargear that give bonuses yet you claim they don't apply because...?

At this point, I think this thread needs to be locked because it is not going anywhere.


Which instances?

Every instance you've given that I can think of you have been directly answered with the reasons why it does not work. For the stat line stuff, its not that those bonus's are not applying, its that the equation they give you to follow makes them irrelevant to the outcome.


I'm fine with a thread locking, we are not going to change each others minds. Its not that others have not also decided one way or the other, we are just the few left actually debating it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/26 20:51:53


2200
4500
3500 
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Buffalo, NY

 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Which instances?

Every instance you've given that I can think of you have been directly answered with the reasons why it does not work. For the stat line stuff, its not that those bonus's are not applying, its that the equation they give you to follow makes them irrelevant to the outcome.


I'm fine with a thread locking, we are not going to change each others minds. Its not that others have not also decided one way or the other, we are just the few left actually debating it.


And every instance is from a codex, thus creating a conflict. Ergo, codex wins.

Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia 
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





 Steel-W0LF wrote:
A power fist works exactly the same way, modifying the str of the attack but not setting it to a new value for anything else... yet the same equation in used in the rulebook for all modifications to model stats. In all of thier examples all they have to do is follow the equation, even puting codex stuff in that they claim breaks it, and they would still arrive at the correct result.

That's absolutely and demonstrably false. A Power Fist never modifies your Initiative. Ever.
It changes when you swing (and therefore when you Pile In). Saying otherwise ignores written rules and is ignorance at best.
   
Made in us
Sneaky Lictor





Idaho

 Happyjew wrote:
 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Which instances?

Every instance you've given that I can think of you have been directly answered with the reasons why it does not work. For the stat line stuff, its not that those bonus's are not applying, its that the equation they give you to follow makes them irrelevant to the outcome.


I'm fine with a thread locking, we are not going to change each others minds. Its not that others have not also decided one way or the other, we are just the few left actually debating it.


And every instance is from a codex, thus creating a conflict. Ergo, codex wins.


Thats the point. The codex IS being applied. But they lay out a formula that you follow for applying them. You are wanting to just skip right past the formula in an attempt to prove codex's cant be right all the time (which they cant be, but normally are)

Take your grenades example...or maybe it was someone else....

A model has 2 attacks, charges, has wargear that adds d3 attacks, but opts to use a grenade.... follow the equation.
2 base +1 charge = 3... 3 +1d3 = 5 (you rolled a 2), 5 attacks gets set to 1 grenade. (The codex bonuses WERE figured in.)

The same applies to initative:

Say your seargent has 4 base, a piece of wargear that gives +1, and a powerfist.

4+1=5, but the setvalue makes the 5=1. Now maybe for sweeping advance he counts as 5... I asked where that was above but never got answered.

2200
4500
3500 
   
Made in ca
Lieutenant Colonel






yeah, your codex bonus of +1 weapon to shoot WAS already applied, BEFORE you chose to shoot ordinance, which then sets it to 0 additional weapons, since you fired ordinance.


just like you said above, the codex bonus is applied, then the specific wargear (ie grenade) sets the attacks to 1

just like even if you can fire 3 weapons, or 2+1, once you decide to shoot ordinance, its 0 more weapons.

you keep flip flopping steel wolf, you cant have it both ways.

MT just gives + 1 to weapons to be fired, no matter how many weapons you can fire, you still cannot fire them after shooting ordinance, unless you have a specific rule that allows it (like heavy)

MT is applied before you choose to shoot ordinance, you seem to get that for grenades, why not MT?


 
   
Made in us
Giggling Nurgling




Colorado

 easysauce wrote:
yeah, your codex bonus of +1 weapon to shoot WAS already applied, BEFORE you chose to shoot ordinance, which then sets it to 0 additional weapons, since you fired ordinance.


just like you said above, the codex bonus is applied, then the specific wargear (ie grenade) sets the attacks to 1

just like even if you can fire 3 weapons, or 2+1, once you decide to shoot ordinance, its 0 more weapons.

you keep flip flopping steel wolf, you cant have it both ways.

MT just gives + 1 to weapons to be fired, no matter how many weapons you can fire, you still cannot fire them after shooting ordinance, unless you have a specific rule that allows it (like heavy)

MT is applied before you choose to shoot ordinance, you seem to get that for grenades, why not MT?




Just curious, but if the MT says additional weapon may be fired, wouldn't that happen after the ordinance was fired?
   
Made in us
The Hive Mind





 Steel-W0LF wrote:
Say your seargent has 4 base, a piece of wargear that gives +1, and a powerfist.

4+1=5, but the setvalue makes the 5=1. Now maybe for sweeping advance he counts as 5... I asked where that was above but never got answered.

You're misapplying the actual rules, again. Please read the actual rules before trying to answer that question.

My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
 
   
Made in us
Sneaky Lictor





Idaho

 easysauce wrote:
yeah, your codex bonus of +1 weapon to shoot WAS already applied, BEFORE you chose to shoot ordinance, which then sets it to 0 additional weapons, since you fired ordinance.


just like you said above, the codex bonus is applied, then the specific wargear (ie grenade) sets the attacks to 1

just like even if you can fire 3 weapons, or 2+1, once you decide to shoot ordinance, its 0 more weapons.

you keep flip flopping steel wolf, you cant have it both ways.

MT just gives + 1 to weapons to be fired, no matter how many weapons you can fire, you still cannot fire them after shooting ordinance, unless you have a specific rule that allows it (like heavy)

MT is applied before you choose to shoot ordinance, you seem to get that for grenades, why not MT?



That equation is for Statlines...

Is the number of weapons a model can fire on its statline?


I already said earlier that if this was used everywhere there would be no debate on the issue...

2200
4500
3500 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
.







12 pages...

Tempers flaring...

Sides refusing to agree...

...time to close?
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Buffalo, NY

 Alpharius wrote:
12 pages...

Tempers flaring...

Sides refusing to agree...

...time to close?


Please.

Circular arguments are circular.

Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia 
   
Made in us
Sneaky Lictor





Idaho

 Alpharius wrote:
12 pages...

Tempers flaring...

Sides refusing to agree...

...time to close?


ok with me too, neither side budging.

2200
4500
3500 
   
Made in us
Giggling Nurgling




Colorado

Roll off during games and wait for a FAQ. Seems to be the best option.
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

Until the FaQ you should take the least advantageous interpretation. choosing the option that gives the action taker less advantage is the more ethical choice and the sporting way to play it.

"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in us
Sneaky Sniper Drone




Firebase Zulu

 DeathReaper wrote:
Until the FaQ you should take the least advantageous interpretation. choosing the option that gives the action taker less advantage is the more ethical choice and the sporting way to play it.


Woah that can lead up to a whole new thread and argument there.
   
Made in us
Captain of the Forlorn Hope





Chicago, IL

 Miri wrote:
 DeathReaper wrote:
Until the FaQ you should take the least advantageous interpretation. choosing the option that gives the action taker less advantage is the more ethical choice and the sporting way to play it.


Woah that can lead up to a whole new thread and argument there.

How so?

Playing it so the action taker takes the least advantageous interpretation is really the meaning of ethical and sporting.

"Did you notice a sign out in front of my chapel that said "Land Raider Storage"?" -High Chaplain Astorath the Grim Redeemer of the Lost.

I sold my soul to the devil and now the bastard is demanding a refund!

We do not have an attorney-client relationship. I am not your lawyer. The statements I make do not constitute legal advice. Any statements made by me are based upon the limited facts you have presented, and under the premise that you will consult with a local attorney. This is not an attempt to solicit business. This disclaimer is in addition to any disclaimers that this website has made.
 
   
Made in gb
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle




no idea

 Alpharius wrote:

...time to close?

I just got here!

It seems to me a matter of specific trumping general.

I have a mc with 2 shooting weapons, I have permission to fire them both.
The rule that allows that, is entirely unaware of what type it is granting permission to use (its general).

I have a model with mt, I have permission to fire an additional weapon.
Similarly, the rule that allows this, is entirely unaware of what type it is granting permission to use (general).

Back to the mc, it has weapon a that is ordnance and weapon b which is heavy.
A + b, 1 + 1.

According to the ordnance rules, if I fire a, I can't fire b. That is entirely specific to ordnance weapons.

So above, I had general permissions to fire first 2 weapons, then 1 + 1 = 2 weapons with a specific prohibition to firing the second, because of the specific manner deciding its use.

The logic trail rules-wise goes yes you can, yes you can, but ends in no you can't.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/27 06:56:36


You wart-ridden imbeciles! 
   
Made in gb
Swift Swooping Hawk





England, Sunderland, Hetton-Le-Hole

In a very simple way I would boil it down to restrictions and permissions.

Ordnance says you cannot fire any additional weapons. This is a restriction. Multi-trackers say you may fire an additional weapon. This is a permission. So the restriction trumps permission as the permission is not specific and does not say "even when firing ordnance".

That's just a very quick summary of what I think.

But, yes time to close in my mind 12 pages of the same arguments make it rather clear that this is going no where.

 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

 redkeyboard wrote:
In a very simple way I would boil it down to restrictions and permissions.

Ordnance says you cannot fire any additional weapons. This is a restriction. Multi-trackers say you may fire an additional weapon. This is a permission. So the restriction trumps permission as the permission is not specific and does not say "even when firing ordnance".

That's just a very quick summary of what I think.

But, yes time to close in my mind 12 pages of the same arguments make it rather clear that this is going no where.


This is how I view it as well, and how our gaming group has been playing it.

   
Made in us
Lieutenant General





Florence, KY

From page 48 of the Warhammer 40,000 6th edition rulebook:

SHOOTING
Monstrous creatures can fire up to two of their weapons each shooting phase - they must of course, fire both of them at the same target.

That is the rule that the multi-tracker conflicts with and is modified by. The number of weapons that a monstrous creature may fire. Not the rule that says a non-vehicle model may not fire another weapon if it fires an ordnance weapon.

'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents
cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable
defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'

- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty
Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
 
   
Made in au
Been Around the Block






Actually i just stumbled upon this in the BRB page 7 bottom right corner:
"On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and the one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence."

So that should mean it can fire the Ordnance weapon and use the MT to shoot the other weapon.

   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Buffalo, NY

 bluedestiny wrote:
Actually i just stumbled upon this in the BRB page 7 bottom right corner:
"On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and the one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence."

So that should mean it can fire the Ordnance weapon and use the MT to shoot the other weapon.



As yakface said:

 yakface wrote:
So please, please, please do not parrot the terms: 'codex > rulebook' and 'advanced > basic' without understanding that these concepts are not absolute. They ONLY apply when the rules between two sources actually contradict, not when one is a permission and the other is a restriction.

Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia 
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw




Stephens City, VA

 bluedestiny wrote:
Actually i just stumbled upon this in the BRB page 7 bottom right corner:
"On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and the one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex always takes precedence."

So that should mean it can fire the Ordnance weapon and use the MT to shoot the other weapon.



You know those moments in movies where the dude steps on the rake and smacks himself in the face. Yea, that happened.

I know 12+ pages are just about too many to read to post, but you really need to have a basis on what's been said/covered.

   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut






Specific > General isn't listed on page 7. It is however how the entire rulebook is built. Each section starts out with general rules for a topic, be that infantry, vehicles, shooting or whatever. Then follow the more specific rules for different cases.

How many weapons can an infantry unit fire?

Infanty in general can shoot one weapon per shooting phase. Monsterous Creatures specifically can shoot two weapons.

Specific rules branch off from general rules and modify things to make them work in different situations, without writing a complete list of things a unit can and cannot do from scratch each time. That makes a BRB that can still be lifted possible, but it also gives rise to misunderstandings such as this thread. Further, the rules are organized in a logical tree structure. They are split up in sections and branch off, with each individual rule having a place somewhere in that structure. IMHO what is happening in this thread is that someone looked at a leaf from the general shooting branch and is bending it over to the ordnance branch, hellbent on making it fit there. There are rules that touch different sections, but they explicitly state so.

Which restrictions apply to firing ordnance weapons?

Ordnance type weapons have specific rules, those affecting infantry listed in the weapons section with several times "that are not vehicles" used to limit the application and a short mention of ordnance weapons in the general vehicle rules section. These rules are by and large restrictions that prohibit units firing ordnance weapons from doing things they would normally be permitted to do.

Examples:
- A model that isn't a vehicle cannot fire an ordnance weapon if it has moved in the previous movement phase.
- A model that isn't a vehicle firing an ordnance wepaon cannot - due to the massive recoil - fire any other weapon system or attack afterwards.


Clearly, a generic infantry model is stuck here, but more specifically, the Riptide is a monsterous creature which grant the special rule Relentless, which lifts the ordnance restriction against movement and attacking when using ordnance weapons. Note that it does this by specifically referencing the general ordance rule. Yay for monsterous creatures special rules!

What does Tau accessory special rule do?

The special rule grants the option to shoot an additional weapon system. Quite handy for the Tau suits! Unlike vehicles, the suits are stuck with the single weapon they can fire, unless they happen to benefit from the special rules. Suit units use many different weapon systems, most of which are not ordnance type. Clearly the accessory offers a benefit for most suits.
However, the accesorry rule does not mention, modify, reference or affect the restrictions applicable to all ordnance weapons specifically, which do apply to the Riptide.

- A Marine can fire one weapon. General rule.
-- A Riptide can fire two weapons (yay MC special powers!) - or fire one (1) ordnance type weapon (boo for ordnance weapon type special rules).
--- A Riptide with the accessory can fire three weapons (yay for MC special powers with Tau sugar on top) - or fire one (1) ordnance type weapon (boo for ordnance weapon type special rules).

The rules at play come from two branches, the general shooting rules and the weapon type rules.

General shooting rules:
- Infantry can fire one weapon.
-- Monsterous Creature type infantry can fire two weapons.
--- Tau units with the accessory can fire one more weapon.

Weapon type rules
- Ordnance weapons have a bunch of restrictions
-- Monsterous Creatures can ignore some of the restrictions via the Relentless rule.

Wishful thinking and trying to make this "additional weapon" rule from the shooting rule branch somehow fit into the ordnance branch is why this thread is so long.
The Codex Tau special rule for the accessory does not modify the ordnance special rules, therefore page 7 thumping and codex > BRB spam are misleading.

   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Buffalo, NY

 Stephanius wrote:
Specific > General isn't listed on page 7.


Not as such, no. However, specific & general is another way of saying advanced & basic, which is on page 7.

Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Happyjew wrote:
 Stephanius wrote:
Specific > General isn't listed on page 7.


Not as such, no. However, specific & general is another way of saying advanced & basic, which is on page 7.


Great, but not my actual point.

The Tau special/advanced rule is an exception to the general shooting and monsterous chreatures rules.
It doesn't reference, contradict or lift the restrictions on ordnance weapons.

   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Buffalo, NY

Oh I agree. Just because one grants permission and the other puts in a restriction does not mean there is a conflict.

The only time permission overrides restriction is when the restriction in question is specifically called out.

Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: