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.

If that tau k139 is a GMC and a Wraith Knight is a GMC then an Imperial knight should be a GMC with 2++ invul and 2+ fnp because that should feel absolutely no pain.

A creature is a creature and may be classified as monstrous or gargantuan.

Anything else isn't.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
The point I'm trying to make (and I think others) is that the categorization isn't really consistent, nor does it seem to be based on any real amount of fluff consideration.

Nope, it's just based off how many dollies GW wants to sell. They made the Riptide a MC because a walker designation would've made it a poorer unit and thus less models sold.

I think this is a logical distinction we can all agree on.

 Filch wrote:
If that tau k139 is a GMC and a Wraith Knight is a GMC then an Imperial knight should be a GMC with 2++ invul and 2+ fnp because that should feel absolutely no pain.

NO. Re-rollable 2++ should never be allowed.

Tau GC is a mistake. Wraithknight I can accept, but is seriously undercosted as it is now.

Personally, I'd drop the 'vehicle' aspect entirely, and just use toughness and wounds.

You could then add further classifications such as 'living', 'daemon', 'construct etc. for the purposes of rules like melta, haywire, poison and such.

Though, if we come this far, it might be best to drop some of those anyway.

 vipoid wrote:
Personally, I'd drop the 'vehicle' aspect entirely, and just use toughness and wounds.

You could then add further classifications such as 'living', 'daemon', 'construct etc. for the purposes of rules like melta, haywire, poison and such.

Though, if we come this far, it might be best to drop some of those anyway.

Agreed. ^

 vipoid wrote:
Personally, I'd drop the 'vehicle' aspect entirely, and just use toughness and wounds.

You could then add further classifications such as 'living', 'daemon', 'construct etc. for the purposes of rules like melta, haywire, poison and such.

Though, if we come this far, it might be best to drop some of those anyway.

Id rather take it the other way and make EVERYONE use the vehicle system so they cal all feel the pain of taking damage

 Filch wrote:
If that tau k139 is a GMC and a Wraith Knight is a GMC then an Imperial knight should be a GMC with 2++ invul and 2+ fnp because that should feel absolutely no pain.

That would be horrible for the game, and I wouldn't even consider playing an opponent that had one.

As has been said I would say that Ghazghkull deserves to be a Monstrous Creature. But at the same time, what benefits would that give him?

An I4 S10 AP2, MtC, HoW, Relentless (just give him a 2+ armour)

I wouldn't make him a MC though.

Besides super heavy walkers, when was the last time GW released a walker?

Exoskeleton=Armoured infantry
Living being whereby the Exoskeleton is part of them=Monstrous creature
Piloted vehicle suits=Walkers

the most clearly nonsense one is the riptide, it's a walker, it's clearly not biological in any way

 the Signless wrote:
Besides super heavy walkers, when was the last time GW released a walker?

You know i legitimately cant think of the last time they released a new Walker.

Onager?

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Onager?

That ones even in an army i own, i probably forgot because its actually good lol

Big biological things = Monstrous Creatures or Gargantuan Creatures.
Big mechanical things = Walker or Super Heavy Walkers.
Simple, even if GW doesn't seem to be able to grasp it.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
Big biological things = Monstrous Creatures or Gargantuan Creatures.
Big mechanical things = Walker or Super Heavy Walkers.
Simple, even if GW doesn't seem to be able to grasp it.

Im sure they grasp it. its that i dont think they care.

I think it's blurrier than that. An Imperial big walker is very much a machine. A tyranid very much a creature. Tau big suits are probably closer to imperial stuff than nid stuff. Eldar big stuff is closer to nid than Tau are. There is a continuum and no exact place to draw a line. Some machines behave more like organics and may even incorporate organic systems.

How is a machine made of plastic and memory-foam more bug that robot?

Some machines behave more like organics and may even incorporate organic systems.

You mean like a Titan? A Dreadnought?

What I'm saying is that if something has significant organic components and/or behaves like an organic it makes sense to classify it as a creature rather than machine, but figuring out where to draw that line is tricky. Titans and dreadnoughts seem very clunky and machine like. Wraith_______ seem more organic in construction and movement. Tau stuff I would say is closer to mechanical, but still has a more organic feel than imperium stuff.

I think the reason the Tau suits are MCs is because they're closer to a suit of power armour than they are a walker like the Imp Guard's Sentinels which look nothing like the pilot.

So yea, the suits for the Tau and others are an extension of the pilot, not really a walker like Superman's Justice Jogger, look it up D: !

Ghazghkull Mag Uruk Thraka


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tinkrr wrote:
I think the reason the Tau suits are MCs is because they're closer to a suit of power armour than they are a walker like the Imp Guard's Sentinels which look nothing like the pilot.

So yea, the suits for the Tau and others are an extension of the pilot, not really a walker like Superman's Justice Jogger, look it up D: !

The reason Tau suits are MCs is because MCs have better rules => they sell better.

If they are unable to craft a system where one isn't drastically superior (MC/GMC) than they should just switch everything to a T based system.

It was one of the things I immediately liked about WMH's approach. Everything uses Def and Armor. squishy things seem squishy and armored behemoths seem really tough.

Helbrutes should be a MC. They are distinguished from their loyalist counterparts by actually becoming one with the walker. I like that Dreadnoughts are walkers. They can't feel what happens to their armor the way a Helbrute can. Still,Dreadnoughts should come with immunity to Crew Stunned and possibly an Invulnerable Save, since they are so well protected and short of destroying the Dreadnought body, they can and will keep trying to kill you. Helbrutes should have FNP to go with their MC, since they are so crazed that it should be downright impossible to keep one down.

I don't have problems with Tau having MC and GC since their pilots are wired directly in. There should be a hard limit on the number of weapons a GC can fire though. Same goes for the Wraithknight. The Wraithknight is statically bound to the pilot, it is their new body. Still should have some limitations to what they can do since it doesn't have the subsystems that would allow the body to fire all its weapons.

As a few others have said, it should depend on how a unit moves. If its movements are clunky and mechanical, it is a walker. If its movements are fluid and graceful, it's a monstrous creature. By which logic Nemesis Dreadknights should probably be walkers, but Tau suits are okay being creatures (except probably the new giant FW one), and probably Eldar ones as well. Soul Grinders are kind of iffy, but I would lean toward making them a MC. By this logic, Maulerfiends should probably be MCs as well, as a clunky machine shouldn't have the Fleet special rule.

Gwaihirsbrother wrote:
To me it seems like it is about how they move in a way. Things classified as creatures tend to have more fluid movement compared to things classified as vehicles.

The Maulerfiend is a vehicle and its movement is just as fluid as a creature.

Really with GW there's no reason for one being an MC over one being a walker except $$$.


If a Riptide deserves to be an MC, so does a Maulerfiend, Forgefiend, Heldrake, Soulgrider and arguably Defilers and Helbrutes.

Hundreds upon hundreds of guardsmen standing on each others shoulders.

Penitent Engines for Sisters of Battle.

If Riptides and Dreadknights count...

However, that's mainly because I can't imagine any other Sisters of Battle unit that could be a Monstrous Creature. Maybe a Living Saint if they made them larger and more powerful like a magical angelic being of the Emperor's wrath instead of human-sized beings who go squish at the first graze from an Autocannon. (and upped the points cost accordingly)

 the Signless wrote:
Besides super heavy walkers, when was the last time GW released a walker?

Morkanaut/Gorkanaut.

Of course your all forgiven for completely forgetting these two walkers because you never see them on the table because they SUCK that bad.

PS: That was 7th edition

I felt like this was gonna be another "cry about tau things" thread when i clicked it, i was not wrong. Aren't there enough of these right now?

would like to request a single stickied thread to contain the multitudes of butthurt so i don't have to search the whole GD forum and can just go to one place for my entertainment.