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.

May a landraider target 2 units, one with the reguar crew and one with the machine spirit?

Yes.

Posted By Antonin on 02/27/2007 1:29 PM
Yes.

In the old SM codex it did. Not in the new one. You can no longer target two different squads with the machine spirit. It allows you to fire one more weapon than normally allowed at BS2 even if its stunned or shaken and has moved no more than 6", as well as moving forward up to maximum speed even if its stunned.

Ah, see I'm working from the Chaos Codex. I'll defer to AM.

Posted By Antonin on 02/27/2007 3:10 PM
Ah, see I'm working from the Chaos Codex. I'll defer to AM.

Dont trust them Chaos fellas, they are decietful.  On a serious note though, the Infernal Device in the CSM still works as described, which is the way the old POMS worked. This would mean Chaos LR would still be able to target a differnt target. Until they reprint it or FAQ it, then we have to live with it I guess.

Quick extra question: can you use Power of the Machine Spirit to both move 6 in forward and fire one gun when suffering a Vehicle Stunned result?

There's nothing in the rule to imply that you can only do one or the other.

Posted By Mr. Bombadidaloo on 02/27/2007 8:27 PM
Quick extra question: can you use Power of the Machine Spirit to both move 6 in forward and fire one gun when suffering a Vehicle Stunned result?

The way I read you can. I believe thats what Imriel was saying too.

Agreed.

The LR helios from the 2nd IA book says in it's special rule description that the machine spirit can target an different target. If I use a Helios in a marine army which rule takes precedent? The all encompassing machine spirit rule from the codex or the Specific Machine spirit rule from the Helios description?

Posted By Tellerium on 03/02/2007 10:13 AM
The LR helios from the 2nd IA book says in it's special rule description that the machine spirit can target an different target. If I use a Helios in a marine army which rule takes precedent? The all encompassing machine spirit rule from the codex or the Specific Machine spirit rule from the Helios description?

Well, back when GW had its forums on its own site, they had a FAQ from the idget that wrote the SM codex and he said that "a land raider is a land raider is a land raider" meaning that the new POTMS would be used, However, since those forums are gone now, there is nothing written that says otherwise so if you go by RAW then you follow what it says in its unit entry in IA.

Remember tho that IA books are not legal in tournies and "should" only be used with opponents permission

Posted By The Drop Zone on 03/02/2007 9:14 PM
Remember tho that IA books are not legal in tournies and "should" only be used with opponents permission

That would be true if not for the fact that IA2 has an entire page (pg 7) devoted to why you "dont" need your opponents permission to use FW rules/models. Also, as far as tournies are concerned, its totally up to the organizers which rules you can use.

Except that as GW has said in the past that only the rule book, codecii, and CA articles are official, the IA2 book doesn't have the right to claim to be official, no matter how much it says otherwise.

Posted By Imriel on 03/04/2007 11:47 AM
Except that as GW has said in the past that only the rule book, codecii, and CA articles are official, the IA2 book doesn't have the right to claim to be official, no matter how much it says otherwise.

Quote your source then. As it stands, I quoted mine, now lets see yours. No source = here-say.

 

BTW- If you read pg7 of IA2, it says that they used to say you couldn't use them in the past. That means now you can.

They are legal in tournaments as long as the tournament organizer says that they are.

And perhaps you can find where GW has given Forgeworld the authority to make their rules legal whenever they want.  Just because they said so does not make it so.

Posted By Ghaz on 03/04/2007 1:34 PM

And perhaps you can find where GW has given Forgeworld the authority to make their rules legal whenever they want.  Just because they said so does not make it so.

FW is owned by GW, hence FW is GW. Thats like saying "Mom said no so I'm gonna ask Dad".

So? That still doesn't give them the right to announce that you can use there rules whenever. Does GW's janitor have the authority to make rules as well? After all, he works for GW.

Unless the Design Studio says that you can use the rules without your opponent's permission then it's just hot air.

Posted By Ghaz on 03/04/2007 4:19 PM
So? That still doesn't give them the right to announce that you can use there rules whenever. Does GW's janitor have the authority to make rules as well? After all, he works for GW.

Unless the Design Studio says that you can use the rules without your opponent's permission then it's just hot air.

If the janitor is on the design team then yeah he would. Regardless, comparing the janitor to FW is ridiculous quite frankly. You can argue all you want, but I have it in black and white and you don't. So until you come up with a black and white quote, you opinion is just that. Your opinion.

Posted By Ghaz on 03/04/2007 4:19 PM
So? That still doesn't give them the right to announce that you can use there rules whenever. Does GW's janitor have the authority to make rules as well? After all, he works for GW.

Unless the Design Studio says that you can use the rules without your opponent's permission then it's just hot air.

This argument again?

Ghaz, how does anyone know what books are produced by the Design Studio TM? The rulebook and codices sure don't say they are.

The Imperial Armor books are produced with the Games Workshop logo and they have rules for Warhammer 40,000. Without any other information given anywhere, why would anyone assume otherwise?

The distinction you claim is something not publicized anywhere where gamers can see it. While you may know who is currently part of the Design Studio and what books they produce, most everyone else in the world isn't privvy to these secret classifications, so why would they be expected to know the difference?

No, you don't have it in 'black and white' because once again Forgeworld is not in charge of Warhammer 40,000 and it is not their division's responsibility to decide what is 'legal' or what is not. All you have is proof that Forgeworld overstepped the bounds of their authority.

All you have is Forgeworld's 'opinion'. What I have is fact.

If they know what Forgeworld is in the first place, then it's very likely that they know what Forgeworld is and what it is not.

Posted By Ghaz on 03/04/2007 4:43 PM

No, you don't have it in 'black and white' because once again Forgeworld is not in charge of Warhammer 40,000 and it is not their division's responsibility to decide what is 'legal' or what is not. All you have is proof that Forgeworld overstepped the bounds of their authority.

All you have is Forgeworld's 'opinion'. What I have is fact.

Where do you get off deciding who inside of Games Workshop decides what is official or not?

As far as I know there is only one thing: Games Workshop makes Warhammer 40,000.

Where do you come off deciding that a rulebook produced by Games Workshop isn't a rulebook produced by Games Workshop?

There is nothing anywhere declaring that Forgeworld isn't official!

Somebody gave the greenlight to the Imperial Armor books to be published with the Games Workshop logo. Whoever did that made the decision that the Forgeworld books are Games Workshop products.

Honestly, what is your fact? Where is your fact? You keep claiming that Forgeworld is somehow not official yet there is no evidence of that fact.

You also claim that some divisions of the company are somehow more official than others, again without any fact to back up that claim.

I have the Games Workshop logo on all my Imperial Armor books. That is a fact. I have a statement inside IA2 stating that the rules are as official as any other rules. That is a fact.


That Forgeworld is not "the design studio" is not a fact you can prove. And even if you could, you still wouldn't have any proof that any rules produced outside the "design studio" (but still within Games Workshop) can't be official.

                             

 

  FW is not GW huh? Odd, the book says otherwise.

Again, it does not matter what the Forgeworld book says. Forgeworld is not the Design Studio is it? No. Find me one person in the Design Studio who's willing to say that the Forgeworld rules can be used at any time without your opponent's permission. I don't care who it is, be it Phil Kelly, Andy Hoare, Graham McNeil or even Gav Thorpe or Jervis Johnson. Even Rick Priestly will do.

It doesn't matter in the least if GW published the book or not. It matters if the Desgin Studio says is legal or not and so far every single time they've been asked this question they've not answered. Why is that? Showing a picture of the side of the Imperial Armour book means nothing. Nobody ever said that GW didn't print it, just that Forgeworld overstepped their bounds on when and where it can be used.

Posted By Ghaz on 03/04/2007 8:24 PM
Again, it does not matter what the Forgeworld book says. Forgeworld is not the Design Studio is it? No. Find me one person in the Design Studio who's willing to say that the Forgeworld rules can be used at any time without your opponent's permission. I don't care who it is, be it Phil Kelly, Andy Hoare, Graham McNeil or even Gav Thorpe or Jervis Johnson. Even Rick Priestly will do.

It doesn't matter in the least if GW published the book or not. It matters if the Desgin Studio says is legal or not and so far every single time they've been asked this question they've not answered. Why is that? Showing a picture of the side of the Imperial Armour book means nothing. Nobody ever said that GW didn't print it, just that Forgeworld overstepped their bounds on when and where it can be used.

I would disagree. You are missing a huge point. NONE (I can use bold caps as well as the next person) of the codices say they come from the design studio. They do say they come from GW.

So, if a FW person helps write a codex does that mean the rules he wrote aren't official because he is not part of the "design studio", or does a temporary secondment count to make the rules official.

Anyway, who cares - your argument doesn't mean anything in the real world of gaming. If it is a pick up game you decide if you want to play against them regardless of whether or not they are offically legal. Personally, if the rules look fun, why not? Some people refuse to play against certain codex armies even though they are legal - you have the right, it is you time so you spend it wisely.

Also, if a tournement says they are legal they are legal, so either way this is a particular moot arguing point - though it is fun to see it raise its little head every now and again.

Except that you're missing the fact that they're authored by members of the studio and don't have the name of another division of GW on them.

So far no one has answered my question. Where has a member of the Design Studio ever answered the question and when asked why do they always seem to avoid the question. You can go on and on about what the Forgeworld book says, but that still does not answer the question as to if they have the right to decide the rules for the game without the studio's input.

Posted By Ghaz on 03/04/2007 10:25 PM

So far no one has answered my question. Where has a member of the Design Studio ever answered the question and when asked why do they always seem to avoid the question. You can go on and on about what the Forgeworld book says, but that still does not answer the question as to if they have the right to decide the rules for the game without the studio's input.

We can't answer your question because there is absolutely no possible answer.

Nobody knows exactly who is in the mythical "design studio" you speak of.

More importantly, where is there any documentation stating that the only division of Games Workshop that can put out rules for 40k is a super-secret design studio that is completely unpublicized?


So Ghaz, I'll give you a member of the "design studio":  Warwick Kinrade. He wrote all the rules for Imperial Armor and he is part of the design studio. Can you prove that I'm wrong?


So again:

I have a games workshop book (IA), written by a member of the design studio (I claim: Warwick Kinrade) that says it is as legal as any other set of 40k rules (IA2).

Can you prove me wrong with any sort of factual documentation? If not, you need to let this go, because you have no leg to stand on (argument-wise).

Ghaz... Yakface...and everyone else who is desperately way the *insert 4 letter word* off topic, let's get on track please.

So loyalist Landraiders can't split shots via PoMS, but chaos Landraiders can? Cool.

If a PotMS equiped vehicle tank shocks a unit, and a model from that unit (after passing its test) chooses to death or glory and gets a stunned result on that vehicle, does the model that death or gloried survive?

I assume yes, but I thought I'd ask anyways.


EDIT: Whoooo, and I totally didn't read up to page 3 when I posted this

Posted By Sazzlefrats on 03/05/2007 10:34 AM
Ghaz... Yakface...and everyone else who is desperately way the *insert 4 letter word* off topic, let's get on track please.

So loyalist Landraiders can't split shots via PoMS, but chaos Landraiders can? Cool.

You know, if you had read the thread start to finish you would know that its not off topic. :|