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.

 pretre wrote:

Super Newb wrote:
LOL. Too late, I tracked down the info. Read the Psychic Barrage power. Yeah, that's what I thought. I'll take your silence as an accepted apology. If you prefer to write down your apology then that is cool too. Thanks.

Aha, Well, I was partially correct. My bad.

Psychic Barrage, bah.

]
Brotherhood of Psykers still says that if the unit suffers a Perils only one model takes it. It sounds like we have a rules issue where one says everyone and the other says just one.

And Super Newb, take it down about 7 notches. No one likes someone who acts like a smug ass on the internet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also I posted it up GW DE's Facebook. If they don't have an answer (like that they're fixing it) they'll pass it to the rules guys to do so.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Brotherhood of Psykers still says that if the unit suffers a Perils only one model takes it. It sounds like we have a rules issue where one says everyone and the other says just one.

No, just no. Brotherhood of Psykers is a general big old rulebook rule. The Psychic Barrage rule is more specific. Specific beats general. This is crystal clear. As much as I want psyker henchmen to be better, they aren't.

And Super Newb, take it down about 7 notches. No one likes someone who acts like a smug ass on the internet.

Oh sweet irony. You're the only one who made a personal insult here! I hope your attempt at comedy was intentional. Otherwise, you need to take it down more notches than anyone else.

Super Newb wrote:

And Super Newb, take it down about 7 notches. No one likes someone who acts like a smug ass on the internet.

Oh sweet irony. You're the only one who made a personal insult here! I hope your attempt at comedy was intentional. Otherwise, you need to take it down more notches than anyone else.

He didn't say you were insulting people. He said you were being a smug ass. Which you were. Nothing personal, but it was true. To be fair, I wasn't much better, but don't deny it.

Super Newb wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Pretty sure you are wrong. I play GK and use henchmen psykers for fun. My buddies would have told me that these henchmen were buffed. The INTERNET would have mentioned it by now on all those blogs I read. But I think just a couple of uninformed people are spouting misinformation here by accident. Whether or not they have the brotherhood rule, if they still have their old GK-everyone-suffers-perils rule, that is more specifc and they all die when they suffer perils.

 pretre wrote:

Super Newb wrote:

And Super Newb, take it down about 7 notches. No one likes someone who acts like a smug ass on the internet.

Oh sweet irony. You're the only one who made a personal insult here! I hope your attempt at comedy was intentional. Otherwise, you need to take it down more notches than anyone else.

He didn't say you were insulting people. He said you were being a smug ass.

Not what I meant. He made a direct, personal insult towards me. While also telling me to take it down 7 notches. You see the irony there yes? Calling someone names is at least as bad if not worse than acting smug. Irony.

Fin

Super Newb wrote:
He made a direct, personal insult towards me.

Not to derail too far here, but he wasn't calling you names. He was making a statement of fact.

Either way, I think we've covered this. We can take it to PM if you want to talk about it further.

On topic, I started an Army List thread to talk about my current list fiddling:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/563885.page

Super Newb wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Brotherhood of Psykers still says that if the unit suffers a Perils only one model takes it. It sounds like we have a rules issue where one says everyone and the other says just one.

No, just no. Brotherhood of Psykers is a general big old rulebook rule. The Psychic Barrage rule is more specific. Specific beats general. This is crystal clear. As much as I want psyker henchmen to be better, they aren't.

 pretre wrote:

Super Newb wrote:
He made a direct, personal insult towards me.

Not to derail too far here, but he wasn't calling you names. He was making a statement of fact.

Either way, I think we've covered this. We can take it to PM if you want to talk about it further.

Sorry, that can't be the last word. A personal insult is a personal insult. Whether it is in your opinion factual or not, it is *still* a personal insult and is of course against the rules here. How could it be any other way? Imagine if forums had to fact check to decide if something was an insult or not. If someone called me a fat bastard, would they have to collect evidence on whether or not I am fat and whether or not I am literally a bastard? No. Now we can take this to PM if you somehow disagree with this.

Because you wanted to get the last word? Lol. Good times.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You're confusing an insult with a comment about your behavior. You were behaving poorly and coming off as an ass. I was requesting you tone it down because I assume you aren't actually an ass and don't want to be perceived as one, but you can prove me wrong if you really wish.

Ah ha, so you can call anyone anything, because to you they come off that way, so long as it is secretly implied that you assume the person is not what you are claiming they are.

With logic like that ur unstoppable.

Super Newb, it wasn't meant as an insult and you are reading into it too far if you really think it is one. The fact is I was commenting about the tone of your posts and how it was perceivable and was asking you to take it down a bit because of it. It was never written to attack you, just highlight the issue of the tone of your posts.

 pretre wrote:
Because you wanted to get the last word? Lol. Good times.

No because I don't want lurkers to be confused by your nonsensical argument that facts never can be insults. Now. Take. This. To. PMs.

In other words, the world isn't out to get you and not everything said is meant to insult you.

Dudes, just take it somewhere else. This isn't the place to try and see who has a bigger ruler or whatever derogatory term you want to use. Stick to the forum topic or PM them if there was something they said you didn't like. Thanks

Soooo anyways.

Back to thoughts on allied inquisitors, are they worth it? I think Coteaz probably is and i'm working with some interesting ideas for Fortifications with Coteaz and Henchmen.

Also, I need ideas for a Hereticus Jokaero. Servitor?

 pretre wrote:
Soooo anyways.

Back to thoughts on allied inquisitors, are they worth it? I think Coteaz probably is and i'm working with some interesting ideas for Fortifications with Coteaz and Henchmen.

Also, I need ideas for a Hereticus Jokaero. Servitor?

No, there is already Servitors in the unit and that could be confusing. Tech Priests perhaps instead?

Soooo anyways.

Back to thoughts on allied inquisitors, are they worth it? I think Coteaz probably is and i'm working with some interesting ideas for Fortifications with Coteaz and Henchmen.

Also, I need ideas for a Hereticus Jokaero. Servitor?

Yea Coteaz is probably the best thing in the book in my opinion, and I believe him with plasma cannon servitors and a few henchman in a unit make a solid cheap troop, and give immense buffs. Especially if you prescience your plasma cannon servitors, and then someone tries to deep strike near him... I know that is a common tactic but for SoB to use... Gold

The problem I have with counts-as for Jokaero, conceptually, is Jokaero don't even look like they do anything cool.



Something vaguely technical (tech priest probably works) and I'm good to go.

 pretre wrote:

Okay, postive use? Immo spam at high points where you don't get a second FOC. That's where I would see them.

Show me how you'd use Celestians at 2000 points. I'd be interested to see your imagination at work on this. The banner seems an obvious way to beef them up.

 pretre wrote:
Back to thoughts on allied inquisitors, are they worth it? I think Coteaz probably is and i'm working with some interesting ideas for Fortifications with Coteaz and Henchmen.

I think they are worth it but we need to figure out what they're good for. Other than being a Lvl 2 Psyker, the big draw for Coteaz are his hench-grots. I think the hench-grots are huge for the ladies now that our Troops units are back to being useful again.

What I really want is some way to get Prescience on my Dominions. I want to keep the Inquisitors out of the Dom squads to keep them safe, but I don't think that's possible. Even if you have the Liber and scout a BSS unit with two Inqs forward you're still stuck not being able to target the embarked Dominions.

My new current plan is to have the Doms embarked with the Inquisitor and then have him cast Prescience at the beginning of the turn. The ladies disembark, leaving the Inquisitor behind. (Or you could have the Inquisitor disembark behind the Rhino and try to catch him with another unit.) Now he has a chance of not dying and the Dominons can use their AoF to get re-rolls and ignores cover.

It seems like a lot of moving parts but it might be crazy enough to work.

I thought the inquisitor couldn't be embarked in another detachments vehicle

It's debatable they can, but I don't agree myself.

 Jancoran wrote:

 pretre wrote:

Okay, postive use? Immo spam at high points where you don't get a second FOC. That's where I would see them.

Show me how you'd use Celestians at 2000 points. I'd be interested to see your imagination at work on this. The banner seems an obvious way to beef them up.

2500 Point List
Canoness
SCS - HF x4 in TL-MM Immo
Canoness
SCS - HF x3, Sacred Standard in TL-MM Immo
BCC (5) - HF/F in Rhino
BCC (5) - HF/F in Rhino
BCC (5) - HF/F in Rhino
BCC (5) - HF/F in Rhino
BCC (5) - HF/F in Rhino
BCC (5) - HF/F in Rhino
Celestians (5) - HF/F in TL-MM Immo
Celestians (5) - HF/F in TL-MM Immo
Celestians (5) - HF/F in TL-MM Immo
Dominions (5) - Melta x4 in TL-MM Immo
Dominions (5) - Melta x4 in TL-MM Immo
Dominions (5) - Melta x4 in TL-MM Immo
Exorcist
Exorcist
Exorcist

Like I said. Just filling out slots when you run out at high points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yeah, I'm not a fan of ICs riding in other people's vehicles. It is too on the edge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back to Celestians. They are BSS with an improved profile but they aren't scoring. So in every case, you want BSS over Celestians. You can get the improved Leadership for the same cost as Celestians (BSS plus VSS is 70, same as Celestians). The only thing you are gaining is WS 4, +1 A and a mediocre faith act. Now, if you could take them in a squad of 20? That'd be something. The power blob would be ridiculous with Celestians.

Do people think in general that having rhinos for basic sister squads is better than immolators?

toocool61 wrote:
Do people think in general that having rhinos for basic sister squads is better than immolators?

I do. You don't want to sacrifice your scoring when you can just shoot out the hatch.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Super Newb wrote:
Brotherhood of Psykers is a general big old rulebook rule. The Psychic Barrage rule is more specific. Specific beats general. This is crystal clear. As much as I want psyker henchmen to be better, they aren't.

Rulebook doesn't say "specific trumps general" (seriously there are VERY specific ways things work here and what we have is a rules loop when you look at RAW, one changes all the Perils to one, the other turns that into all and there isn't a real conflict in how it can work, it just needs to be clarified on which they want the end result to be) and with the way the book was mostly copied and pasted this may be a legitimate mistake seeing as they changed the Psyker entry. Assuming it's intention isn't the same as it being intentional

1) The smart money is on legitimate mistake as this new codex is basically Codex: Cut and Paste But Mixing it All Up So It Looks Different. Lol
2) Brotherhood of Psykers is a general rule, and it seems to me the very very specific rule, found only in one (?) psychic power would trump that rule, be an exception to the rule, as it were.

Either way, IF I take Codex:Inquisition as there is no way I am going to claim only one dude dies when perils happens. When in doubt, don't take the benefit, that's what I say.

 pretre wrote:

toocool61 wrote:
Do people think in general that having rhinos for basic sister squads is better than immolators?

I do. You don't want to sacrifice your scoring when you can just shoot out the hatch.

Yeah, I absolutely agree. Having played a few games, I think I am definitely sold on basic Sisters in Rhinos rather than Immos. 10 strong BSSs died easily when they jumped out of their rides to do anything, and 5 ladies go splat even faster. Given you only really need to shoot 2 ladies anyways (the 2 special weapons), going back to Rhinos has been far better (for my playstyle at least).

Just so!

 pretre wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yeah, I'm not a fan of ICs riding in other people's vehicles. It is too on the edge.

I REALLY do not want this to turn into a YMDC thread, but how is this even considered possible? Please PM me if it is likely to derail this thread, but... really


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thanks pretre

Super Newb wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Super Newb wrote:
Brotherhood of Psykers is a general big old rulebook rule. The Psychic Barrage rule is more specific. Specific beats general. This is crystal clear. As much as I want psyker henchmen to be better, they aren't.

Rulebook doesn't say "specific trumps general" (seriously there are VERY specific ways things work here and what we have is a rules loop when you look at RAW, one changes all the Perils to one, the other turns that into all and there isn't a real conflict in how it can work, it just needs to be clarified on which they want the end result to be) and with the way the book was mostly copied and pasted this may be a legitimate mistake seeing as they changed the Psyker entry. Assuming it's intention isn't the same as it being intentional

1) The smart money is on legitimate mistake as this new codex is basically Codex: Cut and Paste But Mixing it All Up So It Looks Different. Lol
2) Brotherhood of Psykers is a general rule, and it seems to me the very very specific rule, found only in one (?) psychic power would trump that rule, be an exception to the rule, as it were.

Either way, IF I take Codex:Inquisition as there is no way I am going to claim only one dude dies when perils happens. When in doubt, don't take the benefit, that's what I say.

It's mostly copy and paste because the book shares so much with C:GK that there wasn't a lot of room to change things around. Some things were changed, but most of those can be done via errata (Brotherhood of Psykers for instance) or where done to try and force some differences in regardless.

The rulebook actually says nothing about "general vs specific" but talks about things that specifically contradict. The thing is you can apply these rules in either order and run in circles because neither fully contradicts things (unlike, say, how Markerlights overrule the Snap Fire rule for Overwatch).

I'm not running Psykers at the moment, but I'm willing to bet it's going to get an update.

In my opinion inquisitors are VERY worth it for AS. Having C:I and C: AS almost feels like having C: WH again. Inquisition fills in so many holes in the AS codex.

Sisters have no fliers; inquisitors have it covered.
Sisters have no psykers; inquisitors have it covered.
Sisters have limited access to plasma; inquisitors have it covered.
Sisters have NO access to Las; inquisitors have it covered.
Sisters have no assault vehicles; inquisitors have it covered.
Sisters assault squads are kind of bad; inquisitors have it covered.
Sisters vehicles are all pretty frail; inquisitors have it covered.
Sisters scoring units are pricey; inquisitors have it covered.

The two codices just synergize so well, and with the insanely low cost, I'd say an inquisitorial detachment is a no-brainer for just about any AS force.