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.

So there is a points cost in the Craftworld Eldar list for a Forceshield, presumably for Wraithblades who do have the option in their wargear to swap their Ghostswords for Ghost axe and Force shield

However the Autarch datasheets do no list Forceshield as wargear, but instead is an Ability.
So do Autarchs need to pay the same points as Wraithblades would?

My thinking is no because it is an ability, not wargear.

-

I agree with your assessment. If it's not wargear, don't count it. There are plenty of instances where a piece of pointed 7th edition wargear is now just a unit/model ability.

Thanks. It's just odd that one unit pays for it as wargear, yet another just has it as an ability

It's probably exactly so that the Autarch doesn't pay for it. They included a generic invuln in the points cost of the model, but then named it something fluffy and Eldar.

 Galef wrote:
Thanks. It's just odd that one unit pays for it as wargear, yet another just has it as an ability

While I think that 8th Edition is a major improvement over 7th, there are still lots of weird inconsistencies. This is one of them. Another is how some wargear is 0 points while others are more.

As an example...

A Necron Warrior is 12 points and his Guass Flayer is 0 points. Necron Warriors always come with Guass Flayers.
A Necron Immortal is 8 points and can choose either a Guass Blaster for 9 or whatever the other weapon option is, also 9.

It creates a weird situation where at first glance, the Immortal looks cheaper. I don't see any reason you couldn't, for example, say that the Warriors are, I don't know... 6 points and the Guass Flayer is 6. Same outcome, but more intuitive. As it stands, some units get wargear upgrades "for free" because the cost is 0.

 Kriswall wrote:

While I think that 8th Edition is a major improvement over 7th, there are still lots of weird inconsistencies. This is one of them. Another is how some wargear is 0 points while others are more.

As an example...

A Necron Warrior is 12 points and his Guass Flayer is 0 points. Necron Warriors always come with Guass Flayers.
A Necron Immortal is 8 points and can choose either a Guass Blaster for 9 or whatever the other weapon option is, also 9.

It creates a weird situation where at first glance, the Immortal looks cheaper. I don't see any reason you couldn't, for example, say that the Warriors are, I don't know... 6 points and the Guass Flayer is 6. Same outcome, but more intuitive. As it stands, some units get wargear upgrades "for free" because the cost is 0.

Generally they've made upgrades cost 0 where that obviously won't throw off anything else, because it's just easier for everyone if the price you see next to the model is all-inclusive. Necron Warriors are the only unit in the index that can take gauss flayers, and that's the only thing they can pick, so there's no reason not to build the price into the models' base cost.

Meanwhile, Tomb Blades can take the same two guns that Immortals have access to, and in addition can take particle beamers, so the price of the Immortals' guns has to be balanced with the price of the particle beamer. The particle beamer costs 10 points, so you'd think that they could have just made the Immortals' guns cost 0 and the particle beamer cost 1, but Canoptek Spyders can simply add up to two particle beamers on top of all their other wargear. So particle beamers have to be priced as an optional upgrade to Spyders, which fixes the price of the gauss blaster and tesla carbine so that the Tomb Blades have a balanced choice to make among the three, which means that Immortals' real price has to be broken up between the naked models and their fixed-price guns.

I'm not sure what's intuitive about or what the point would be of trying to cost all weapons in accordance with some measure of their offensive power, especially given the effect that would necessarily have on naked per-model costs. And I just don't think it's going to be in general possible to give everything naked per-model prices that are basically representative of their upgraded costs given some of the extremes in the game.

No, I get it. Clearly they're only pricing wargear when it's optional. If a model has no upgrade options at all, it's 'base wargear' is almost always priced at zero (unless it happens to be an optional upgrade for another unit).

I've just seen a lot of people who are confused when the index says wargear cost isn't included, but then they look up the wargear and the cost is zero. For all intents and purposes, the wargear cost IS included for something like a Necron Warrior.

I think the key isn't thinking that a weapon is optional for a certain model, but if it is optional for ANY model, it gets a points cost.

This is why Dire Avengers have to pay 7ppm for their Avenger catapult, even though it is their basic wargear. But it is an optional piece for an Autarch. Since he needs to pay for it, DAs do too, but have their base ppm lowered (although not enough in their case)

So for a Necron Warrior, it doesn't pay extra for the Flayer because it is included in the cost of every model that takes it (Warriors, Ghost arks, etc). But for Immortals, there are several other units that also take Blasters or Tesla Carbines at extra cost, so those weapons need points.

It takes some getting used to, but I like it.

-

 Galef wrote:
I think the key isn't thinking that a weapon is optional for a certain model, but if it is optional for ANY model, it gets a points cost.

This is why Dire Avengers have to pay 7ppm for their Avenger catapult, even though it is their basic wargear. But it is an optional piece for an Autarch. Since he needs to pay for it, DAs do too, but have their base ppm lowered (although not enough in their case)

So for a Necron Warrior, it doesn't pay extra for the Flayer because it is included in the cost of every model that takes it (Warriors, Ghost arks, etc). But for Immortals, there are several other units that also take Blasters or Tesla Carbines at extra cost, so those weapons need points.

It takes some getting used to, but I like it.

-

Totally makes sense to me... but it's inconsistent. It would be generally better and easier for everyone to understand if every model has a points cost AND every piece of wargear had a points cost. Having SOME models not have to pay for upgrades and SOME upgrades not having a points cost (zero) needlessly confuses the list building process.

I had no issue with 7th Edition list building, but we had people confused by how to properly build a list through the life of the edition. Arguments about the difference between an allied detachment and an Allied Detachment persisted LONG past 7th's drop date. I think this points inconsistency is going to be similar. I've seen way too many people absolutely convinced that you can subtract starting wargear cost from upgraded wargear despite the rules being clear that you don't.

I totally get that. Here's another weird one: Daemons with Icons or Instruments.

With the exception of Daemon Princes, all Daemon points costs are "wargear included"
Yet there is a separate box for the points cost for Icons and Instruments. So since it says points include wargear and units can take icons and Instruments, Imma just ignore that box (not really)

-

 Kriswall wrote:

Totally makes sense to me... but it's inconsistent. It would be generally better and easier for everyone to understand if every model has a points cost AND every piece of wargear had a points cost. Having SOME models not have to pay for upgrades and SOME upgrades not having a points cost (zero) needlessly confuses the list building process.

I had no issue with 7th Edition list building, but we had people confused by how to properly build a list through the life of the edition. Arguments about the difference between an allied detachment and an Allied Detachment persisted LONG past 7th's drop date. I think this points inconsistency is going to be similar. I've seen way too many people absolutely convinced that you can subtract starting wargear cost from upgraded wargear despite the rules being clear that you don't.

I feel like it's going to be annoying and confusing no matter how you split the costs up. If bolters have a non-zero cost then maybe that makes it more likely that people think that you can subtract base wargear from upgrades -- why else would you give bolters a cost? It's just that the way GW chose to do this, while more convenient for them in that they can release a page or two of updated points for each faction, is really confusing and cumbersome for players. This is just obviously worse than saying that the unit with this weapon costs such-and-such per model and one model in five can replace this weapon with that weapon for +X points.

Probably a much better compromise would have been to do the points in a highly condensed, rules-less section that just gives explicit point costs for various substitutions. You can still refer to things like a "Heavy Weapons list" instead of listing all the options right there for sets of options that lots of units have access to at the same prices. Immortals can switch to the other gun for 0 points, Tomb Blades can switch to the other gun for 0 points or the third gun for +1 point, and Spyders can add up to 2 of the third gun for 10 points each or whatever. You probably need four or five pages instead of one or two for each faction, but this is just hugely easier on the players.

I believe Autarch does pay the points. While it's listed under special abilities, so do Banshee Masks and Mandiblasters, but they are listed as a wargear as well, even if their cost is 0.

By RAW you sum up base points with wargear points model is equipped with. He is equipped with shield so pays the price for it.

 Shadenuat wrote:
I believe Autarch does pay the points. While it's listed under special abilities, so do Banshee Masks and Mandiblasters, but they are listed as a wargear as well, even if their cost is 0.

By RAW you sum up base points with warger points model is equipped with. He is equipped with shield so pays the price for it.

First, he has mandiblasters or a banshee mask as wargear options.

Second, his abilities of the same name are conditional. "Banshee Mask: A model with a banshee mask..." and "Mandiblasters: If this model has mandiblasters..." Compare to "Forceshield: This model has a 4+ invulnerable save".

He does not have a piece of wargear called "forceshield" by default, nor does he have the option to take one. He just has an ability called "forceshield" which has this effect, always and no matter what he's equipped with.

Same problem is the Twin Boltgun on Space Marine bikes. There is no alternative for this weapon on any bike but it costs 2 points. But if you bring any character with a bike or an bike squad you get the total points for the model on the bike without wargear. Why not add 2 to every bike model cost and leave the twin boltgun on 0 points.

Scout Bikes come with Twin Boltguns that can be exchanged for Astartes Grenade Launchers. They therefore are not always armed on all bikes that can have them.

Okay, I forgot the Scout Bikers. : )

These wargear rules are straight confusing, and I really wish they could figure out a way to have unit costs cover the equipment they bring. For example, a squad of five Militarum Tempestus isn't 45 pts, it's 50 pts total because of the Hot Shot lasguns and laspistol. Was excited about cheap Taurox Primes before finding out their costs nearly double with just the baseline wargear. I see why they did it this route but this should really be stated more clearly so it's not overlooked. Was this kind of stuff in 7th Ed.?

My theory is that GW only put in points for "competitive play" but since they have always wanted casual play, they made Matched play difficult on purpose.
GW wants you to use Power Levels, but didn't want the outcry that happened when AoS was first released with no points at all.

 The Airman wrote:
These wargear rules are straight confusing, and I really wish they could figure out a way to have unit costs cover the equipment they bring. For example, a squad of five Militarum Tempestus isn't 45 pts, it's 50 pts total because of the Hot Shot lasguns and laspistol. Was excited about cheap Taurox Primes before finding out their costs nearly double with just the baseline wargear. I see why they did it this route but this should really be stated more clearly so it's not overlooked. Was this kind of stuff in 7th Ed.?

It is sucky, but I think once we get used to it, or start using any sort of automated list-building program (army builder, battlescribe and presumably one that GW is producing), it will likely be pretty easy/painless.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Shadenuat wrote:
I believe Autarch does pay the points. While it's listed under special abilities, so do Banshee Masks and Mandiblasters, but they are listed as a wargear as well, even if their cost is 0.

By RAW you sum up base points with warger points model is equipped with. He is equipped with shield so pays the price for it.

First, he has mandiblasters or a banshee mask as wargear options.

Second, his abilities of the same name are conditional. "Banshee Mask: A model with a banshee mask..." and "Mandiblasters: If this model has mandiblasters..." Compare to "Forceshield: This model has a 4+ invulnerable save".

He does not have a piece of wargear called "forceshield" by default, nor does he have the option to take one. He just has an ability called "forceshield" which has this effect, always and no matter what he's equipped with.

On previous edition the Autarch was the only Eldar unit with access to a force shield as basic and built in gear. Notice Marine captains also get a free skill called *iron halo* to represent similar wargear who was always built in the model cost (Hemlock Spiritstones too or the Crux terminatus in units with Terminator armor to represent their old invul save)

I'd say yes, they do have to pay for a force shield. Other units like Wraithblades also include the force shield rule description on their data slate but this only applies to the ones with axes, so I'd say that doesn't mean the Autarch gets a free shield.

Plus, th Autarch entry in the Craftworlds points section explicitly says that's it's points excluding war gear.

 yakface wrote:

 The Airman wrote:
These wargear rules are straight confusing, and I really wish they could figure out a way to have unit costs cover the equipment they bring. For example, a squad of five Militarum Tempestus isn't 45 pts, it's 50 pts total because of the Hot Shot lasguns and laspistol. Was excited about cheap Taurox Primes before finding out their costs nearly double with just the baseline wargear. I see why they did it this route but this should really be stated more clearly so it's not overlooked. Was this kind of stuff in 7th Ed.?

It is sucky, but I think once we get used to it, or start using any sort of automated list-building program (army builder, battlescribe and presumably one that GW is producing), it will likely be pretty easy/painless.

Unless GW decide to C&D any competitors.

 Bhazakhain wrote:
I'd say yes, they do have to pay for a force shield. Other units like Wraithblades also include the force shield rule description on their data slate but this only applies to the ones with axes, so I'd say that doesn't mean the Autarch gets a free shield.

Plus, th Autarch entry in the Craftworlds points section explicitly says that's it's points excluding war gear.

I do believe the Autarch has a forceshield at no additional cost. Based on the wording of the following unit entries.

Autarch data card:
An Autarch is a single model armed with a shuriken pistol and sunburst grenades.
WARGEAR:
This model may take either a banshee mask or mandiblasters
This model may replace its shuriken pistol with a fusion pistol.
This model may take up to two weapons from the Autarch Weapons list.
ABILITIES:
Ancient doom, BatteFocus (pg10)
(...)
Forcesheild: This model has a 4+ invulnerable save.

The forceshield is listed as an ability, not a wargear choice for the Autarch and is thus not purchased

To back this up, the entry for Mandiblasters in the same ability box says, "If this model has mandiblasters, ..."

We also have no way to purchase abilities, only wargear, as per the index. "Simply add together the points cost of all your models and the wargear they are equipped with to determine your army's total points value"


Where as on the Wraithblade unit card:
Each model is armed with ghostswords.

WARGEAR:
The entire unit may replace their ghostswords with ghostaxes and forceshields.
Abilities:
Forceshield: A model equipped with a forceshield has a 4+ invulnerable save.

The forceshield is listed as wargear and needs to be purchased for wraithblades.

It's very similar to Librarians and psychic hoods. Rune priests have to buy it, vanilla librarians have it by default.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 yakface wrote:

 The Airman wrote:
These wargear rules are straight confusing, and I really wish they could figure out a way to have unit costs cover the equipment they bring. For example, a squad of five Militarum Tempestus isn't 45 pts, it's 50 pts total because of the Hot Shot lasguns and laspistol. Was excited about cheap Taurox Primes before finding out their costs nearly double with just the baseline wargear. I see why they did it this route but this should really be stated more clearly so it's not overlooked. Was this kind of stuff in 7th Ed.?

It is sucky, but I think once we get used to it, or start using any sort of automated list-building program (army builder, battlescribe and presumably one that GW is producing), it will likely be pretty easy/painless.

Unless GW decide to C&D any competitors.

The closed down site actually listed the cited reasons for the C&D; he was basically asking for it plastering the GW logo and tons of stolen art.

Other 3rd parties are goung to be fine because even after GW releases their amrylister, the other proframs predate any copyright that they may attempt.

You could produce an interactive army builder tomorrow and be safe as long as you are not straight up stealing art and images from GW.

As many have said, the wargear/base unit cost is confusing.

But the real Solution. would be to list all the points cost ON THE UNIT CARD: Then you can calculate ON THE UNIT CARD how much your unit will cost. Then they could have had the unit cost in the front page be what they have by default. So you get a quick overview.

Lichtbringer wrote:
But the real Solution. would be to list all the points cost ON THE UNIT CARD: Then you can calculate ON THE UNIT CARD how much your unit will cost. Then they could have had the unit cost in the front page be what they have by default. So you get a quick overview.

While I agree that would have been nice, GW intentionally avoided this to create the future possibility to update the points on the single army list points page.

To their credit, this keeps the unit entries looking clean and prevents over-duplication of print.
They do, of course, copy the weapon profiles on every unit entry, but that too serves a purpose as it means you don't have to keep flipping through pages during the game.
Everything you need to know about X unit during the game is on X units page. Points are a pregame thing, so those are not needed on the unit entry

At least that is what I think GW was going for.

-

Lichtbringer wrote:
As many have said, the wargear/base unit cost is confusing.

But the real Solution. would be to list all the points cost ON THE UNIT CARD: Then you can calculate ON THE UNIT CARD how much your unit will cost. Then they could have had the unit cost in the front page be what they have by default. So you get a quick overview.

It was an explicit, conscious design choice not to. They state as such. It allows fir an easy (annual) update to points

I say he doesn't need to pay for it.

If it's not listed as a wargear it's not a piece of wargear. An effect can have the same name as a piece of wargear or even named the same as a unit but it doesn't make them equal.

Now if they issue an errata that adds the force shield as a piece of wargear to the autarch's entry, then it's a different story.