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.

yukishiro1 wrote:
GW uses the words "additional" and "extra" frequently in these circumstances without actually meaning "you can only do this if you have one already." Extra relic strats, for example. Literally read, in a combined list, these arguably wouldn't allow you to take a relic from a book that your warlord isn't from. But AFAIK everyone plays it that you can.

I would say it's the same for the kustom jobs unless there's a FAQ that says otherwise.

I absolutely believe RAI you can circumvent it.

Relic is a bad example, though. Because you can get a relic for free by nominating your warlord. Arguably, you can't take additional relics without choosing your warlord.. not that you wouldn't.

Jidmah wrote:
If you have 0 jobs and you take an additional job, you have 1 job.

Page 76 is rather clear on that the stratagem is an alternative way of gaining Kustom Jobs, so there is no need to assume such a narrow interpretation.

I agree on RAI.

Its grammatically incoherent, which is why I've seen some people argue this is the RAW interpretation.

So like if I'm a server at a restaurant, and they are on their drink order without having ordered any, these phrases make sense:

"Would you like some cocktails?" "Would you like some water?"

These phrases don't make sense:

"Would you like some additional water?" "Would you like some extra cocktails?"

It only makes once they have ordered a drink in the first place.

But like I said, I am certain they did not intend this interpretation... just that grammatically by how they phrased it, you need to get a Kustom Job in the first place in order to get ADDITIONAL ones. Which unfortunately, is the Mek Shop.

I will not be playing this way. Just be prepared to have rules lawyers fight you.

Well good thing page 76 is official GW rule as well. That gives you specific permission for the "or"

I think that in a vacuum you can´t, from my limited understanding of English language. However GW sucks at writing rules and we can all agree on that.

This seems like the same level of rules pedantry as "you can't actually fire assault weapons if you advance".

Agree. There is no need to interpret the language more stricktly than the authors themselves.
There is absolutely no reason to believe it works this way.

That said, I'm a software developer and half my job is writing or reading specifications. "foo should add an additional field/line/object/whatever" is something that is used A LOT and it absolutely never, ever is interpreted in a way that it should not work unless another element is already present.

Tulun is correct that, semantically speaking, going from 0 to 1 isn't an additional of anything as that requires some sort of quantity to begin with. In regards to whether or not we're allowed to use kustom jobs without the mek shop the answer seems to be yes, so unless GW sees fit to screw us over for no reason in the errata (please don't) then our big meks should be plenty busy in the near future.

Do people think that footslogging ES dreads might work if we're giving them the pistons BTW? That'd give them a 10" move and statistically speaking real solid advance rolls as well. If KFFs will indeed start working in CC then they're actually somewhat tanky (if hard keep within that bubble). I'm just eager to try them out agains since one of the big issues they had (in my experience) was being bogged down by chaff, now there's a strat to help counter that.. Maybe even break out the waaagh banner nob to run alongside them?

tulun wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
GW uses the words "additional" and "extra" frequently in these circumstances without actually meaning "you can only do this if you have one already." Extra relic strats, for example. Literally read, in a combined list, these arguably wouldn't allow you to take a relic from a book that your warlord isn't from. But AFAIK everyone plays it that you can.

I would say it's the same for the kustom jobs unless there's a FAQ that says otherwise.

I absolutely believe RAI you can circumvent it.

Relic is a bad example, though. Because you can get a relic for free by nominating your warlord. Arguably, you can't take additional relics without choosing your warlord.. not that you wouldn't.

My point was you have a list with, say, Craftworlds and Harlequins. Your Farseer is the warlord. This gives you one free relic from the Craftworlds list. But you can also spend 1cp/3cp to take "extra" relics from the Harlequin list. You don't have any Harlequin relics yet, so if you want to read things super strictly, you don't have any relics from the book so you can't take any "extra" ones from that book either. Yes, you already have a relic, but not a relic from that book/list.

But nobody plays that way. Everyone assumes by "extra" or "additional" they simply mean "one more than you would otherwise get ," not "one more than you you would otherwise get but only if you already had at least one."

Mad Hatter: Would you like a little more tea?
Alice: Well, I haven't had any yet, so I can't very well take more.
March Hare: Ah, you mean you can't very well take less.
Mad Hatter: Yes. You can always take more than nothing.
― Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland

Well if Alice and Wonderland says so.....

In all seriousness the rule is clear - strat allows you to take an additional Kustom job. 1 is an additional over 0. End of discussion, surely?

At least until BCB gets involved

 Jidmah wrote:
At least until BCB gets involved

Do not speak about he who should not be named, lest he appear.

Got a hand on the beast as an Ebook, not preferred but eh. It's awesome that 55pts is the confirmed cost of the mek. Wonderfully cheap regardless of the KFF changes.

It seems quite unlikely that's intended. But who knows, this is GW.

We'll get an FAQ soon enough, it'd be very weird for us to have 2 distinctly different rulings for the same wargear, so they'll have to decide which version they're sticking with.

RE: FAQ make sure to email your questions to 40kFAQ@gwplc.com so they can hopefully be addressed. I just sent one through asking if Ghaz is affected by Great Waaagh! (as his old model was) and if the new KFF rules apply to other KFF's.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Well if Alice and Wonderland says so.....

In all seriousness the rule is clear - strat allows you to take an additional Kustom job. 1 is an additional over 0. End of discussion, surely?

The intention of the rule is clear, which is enough for me.

I sort of wish the game could be played RAW, but given GW's penchant for mistakes and long turn around times (months sometimes), 40k is probably unplayable RAW.

Hell, my friends and I ignore certain rules we think are dumb all the time. I can see the tiniest tip of your spear above a wall, so I can shoot the whole unit? Yeah, fuq dat.

That's not nearly as dumb as being able to shoot at someone because the tip of your 10 foot tall banner can see them.

A bit off the Gaz path, but still on a general topic … what advice would you give to someone wanting to run Blood Axes? Any particular go-to units that play well with the 18" gain cover rule? Anything that meshes well with the redeployment Warlord trait?

Wakshaani wrote:
what advice would you give to someone wanting to run Blood Axes?

Don't?

Ba-dum-tss.

But seriously, nothing in the ork army really benefits from the cover save; everything that does benefit is much better as some other kulture instead, namely deathskulls. The other half of the kulture is the more interesting bit, and theoretically works well on anything that is powerful both in melee and shooting or anything that is good in shooting that can survive a round of melee...but that's not much in the ork army either. And it's so rare that combats even last long enough to do it...and if they do, you usually can't do it anyway because if combat is lasting that long it's probably because of a wrap and trap.

The deffkilla has that weird strat that lets you fall back and then do 1d3 mortal wounds when you fall back, so I guess in theory you could use that...but again, it's so rare that the trike will actually stay in combat long enough to do that. 90% of the time it'll either be dead or whatever it charged will be dead or fall back.

One good advice - think about the clan again

Wakshaani wrote:
A bit off the Gaz path, but still on a general topic … what advice would you give to someone wanting to run Blood Axes? Any particular go-to units that play well with the 18" gain cover rule? Anything that meshes well with the redeployment Warlord trait?

The best units that can take advantage of blood axes right now are mainly stuff like megatrakk skrapjets or supa skorcha big trakks and units in trukks that want to shoot from their transports since they can all benefit from not being able to be locked in combat for shooting.

For bloodaxes someone had the idea a couple of pages back to use them for the new power, which is really good due to unlimited range. I think the idea was to deny overwatch on something and then encircle it with a bunch of deffkoptas. If the target can't move out of combat and the opponent can't kill all of them then you've kept your koptas safe and you're free to do a bunch of other gak with them, such as tagging multiple other units. Assuming that the original target actually has good overwatch you can simply leave one kopta in CC with it while the rest of your army charges it.

In that sense I think Blood Axes work. In any other sense it's tough to see the appeal.. I guess if you want to kommando spam with Snikrot there might be some play there as well.

tulun wrote:

nfe wrote:

tulun wrote:
RAW, you can’t even take kustom jobs without a workshop. The copy writers gak the bed here lol.

The bit about them in Ways of the Ork explicitly states that you can.

Is this a community post? It doesn't supersede the rules in the codex, if so.

I totally think they *can* do it, by the by, and that was fully their intention, but RAW they screwed up.

Basically, they need to start releasing digital copies only they can update on the fly.

SotB p68.

On pages 76-77 you will find new rules
for Kustom Jobs. These are new upgrades
available for various ORK VEHICLE units
in your army, courtesy of the genius
and experimentation of Ork Meks.
These rules can be used with a MEKBOY
WORKSHOP or by using the Kustom Job
Stratagem found on page 72.


That is clear enough.Page 68.

Also, related to the subject of kustom jobs. Da Boomer has 2d6 shots, I've seen it referred to as having 3d6 shots in several places, including here. Not sure how that started but looking in the book now it's clearly 2d6. Hopefully that makes the argument stronger that it works with the periscope though as it's simply a killkannon with +12" range and persicope otherwise.

Edit: But perhaps the flavor text suggests that extra range is all that we're really getting out of it? "Da Boomer can reach even more targets than a killkannon" Not sure it that's a metric that should be at all considered though..

PiñaColada wrote:
Also, related to the subject of kustom jobs. Da Boomer has 2d6 shots, I've seen it referred to as having 3d6 shots in several places, including here. Not sure how that started but looking in the book now it's clearly 2d6. Hopefully that makes the argument stronger that it works with the periscope though as it's simply a killkannon with +12" range and persicope otherwise.

Edit: But perhaps the flavor text suggests that extra range is all that we're really getting out of it? "Da Boomer can reach even more targets than a killkannon" Not sure it that's a metric that should be at all considered though..

100% certain you can double shoot for a total 4d6. Ok boomer ?

Wagons of all sorts have very good upgrades, this one they won’t feth up with a faq

We unfortunately need a faq to convince everyone anyway so...

tulun wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Well if Alice and Wonderland says so.....

In all seriousness the rule is clear - strat allows you to take an additional Kustom job. 1 is an additional over 0. End of discussion, surely?

The intention of the rule is clear, which is enough for me.

I sort of wish the game could be played RAW, but given GW's penchant for mistakes and long turn around times (months sometimes), 40k is probably unplayable RAW.

Hell, my friends and I ignore certain rules we think are dumb all the time. I can see the tiniest tip of your spear above a wall, so I can shoot the whole unit? Yeah, fuq dat.

The is a huge difference between un-intuitive rules and unclear rules. 8th edition has a ton of rules which are unintuitive, like the morkanaut not being able to fight the marine sitting on a box in front of it.
Unclear rules are those which have multiple valid interpretations. Any interpretation that contradicts another rule or brakes the game or results in a rule not doing anything is automatically not a valid interpretation. Insisting on RAW in those cases is just a waste of everyone's time.
An example of an unclear rule would be the kustom job/periscope interaction, as both shooting twice (Vigilus FAQ for the LRBT relic) and not shooting twice(not on the periscope list) are valid outcomes.
In this case we have the dictionary interpretation of "additional" directly contradicting pg. 68 and while pg. 76 clearly describes shops and the stratagem as two different ways of getting jobs. Therefore, interpreting "additional" on the stratagem as "you already have to have one" is clearly not a valid way to read the rule.
This has absolutely nothing to do with "Rules As Intended". With only one valid interpretation on how to obtain kustom jobs, there is absolutely no need to guess the designer's intention.

addnid wrote:

PiñaColada wrote:
Also, related to the subject of kustom jobs. Da Boomer has 2d6 shots, I've seen it referred to as having 3d6 shots in several places, including here. Not sure how that started but looking in the book now it's clearly 2d6. Hopefully that makes the argument stronger that it works with the periscope though as it's simply a killkannon with +12" range and persicope otherwise.

Edit: But perhaps the flavor text suggests that extra range is all that we're really getting out of it? "Da Boomer can reach even more targets than a killkannon" Not sure it that's a metric that should be at all considered though..

100% certain you can double shoot for a total 4d6. Ok boomer ?

Wagons of all sorts have very good upgrades, this one they won’t feth up with a faq

We unfortunately need a faq to convince everyone anyway so...

I agree. In case you need to convince someone, point them to the Vigilus Defiant FAQ:
Q: Does the Hammer of Sunderance Relic count as a turret
weapon for the purposes of Grinding Advance?
A: Yes.
The interaction between the specialist detachment's relic and grinding advances is exactly the same as between kustom jobs and periscope.

Well if I were to play any casual games between now and the errata I don't imagine there would be any problems telling my opponent that the weapon double shooting is RAI but for any more serious games it'll be nice to have it clarified. When people said it was 3d6 shots I thought to myself that maybe 6d6 shots would've been too good, but there's not much argument for that now IMO.

I imagine it's a moot point for most people anyways seeing as not that many people will be putting in any games at all in the foreseeable future I'd wager.

Is it really RAI, or was the intention to have a named killkannon with additional range and the option to move faster (no need to move less then halve range for the periscope rule)? Of course that would completely invalidate the gunwagon.

Would love to have a 4d6 killkannon or the super Zzap gun. On the later: do you roll for strength before or after choosing a target? To me the wording suggests you can roll first and then choose a target. With 2 shots for the gunwagon it actually might be a good investment; giving you two chances for that nice 9+.

I just read the translation of PA into Spanish and couldn't help noticing that the kustom gun for the Gorkanaut overwatchs at 5+ as the rule says to add one each time the gun shoots.

Could anyone confirm that it reads the same way in English?