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.

Here's some funky wording:

Moritat Consuls and Destroyer Units cannot be used in a Salamanders Legion primary detachment.

Does this mean I can't use Vindicator Laser Destroyers? Or would this be limited to Destroyer Squads only?

(I've been pretty sold on Vindicator Laser Destroyers, but I don't want to buy them if I can't use them).

.. you can'tuse legion destroyer units. You can use laser destroyers

Captyn_Bob wrote:
.. legion destroyer units. Not laser destroyers

That's what I thought...but unit can be such a broad term...I was wondering why it didn't say "Legion Destroyer Squads".

Herecomesyourman wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
.. legion destroyer units. Not laser destroyers

That's what I thought...but unit can be such a broad term...I was wondering why it didn't say "Legion Destroyer Squads".

It probably should, for clarity, but I don't think it's that much of a stretch to read "Destroyer units" as "Legion Destroyer Squads" and not "Vindicator Siege Tank Squadrons/Legion Rapier Batteries that have purchased an upgrade that has the word 'destroyer' in its name". The rules don't call "Legion Heavy Support Squads that have purchased lascannons" "Lascannon squads".

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Herecomesyourman wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
.. legion destroyer units. Not laser destroyers

That's what I thought...but unit can be such a broad term...I was wondering why it didn't say "Legion Destroyer Squads".

It probably should, for clarity, but I don't think it's that much of a stretch to read "Destroyer units" as "Legion Destroyer Squads" and not "Vindicator Siege Tank Squadrons/Legion Rapier Batteries that have purchased an upgrade that has the word 'destroyer' in its name". The rules don't call "Legion Heavy Support Squads that have purchased lascannons" "Lascannon squads".

What GW/Forgeworld need is a pro editor. Someone who works for a publishing house who can emphasize better wording. I totally agree that this is common sense as to how this should be interpreted, but the reason I went for 30K over 40K to start was better rules clarification, more balanced games, more thought put into missions, etc.

I keep thinking they really skimp in this one dept.

Herecomesyourman wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Herecomesyourman wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
.. legion destroyer units. Not laser destroyers

That's what I thought...but unit can be such a broad term...I was wondering why it didn't say "Legion Destroyer Squads".

It probably should, for clarity, but I don't think it's that much of a stretch to read "Destroyer units" as "Legion Destroyer Squads" and not "Vindicator Siege Tank Squadrons/Legion Rapier Batteries that have purchased an upgrade that has the word 'destroyer' in its name". The rules don't call "Legion Heavy Support Squads that have purchased lascannons" "Lascannon squads".

What GW/Forgeworld need is a pro editor. Someone who works for a publishing house who can emphasize better wording. I totally agree that this is common sense as to how this should be interpreted, but the reason I went for 30K over 40K to start was better rules clarification, more balanced games, more thought put into missions, etc.

I keep thinking they really skimp in this one dept.

The bolded has never been a FW strong point.

Also you are the only person I have heard of that has had issue with the clarification of what counts as a Destroyer Unit. There is only one unit in the Legions that actually has Destroyer as its name.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

Herecomesyourman wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Herecomesyourman wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
.. legion destroyer units. Not laser destroyers

That's what I thought...but unit can be such a broad term...I was wondering why it didn't say "Legion Destroyer Squads".

It probably should, for clarity, but I don't think it's that much of a stretch to read "Destroyer units" as "Legion Destroyer Squads" and not "Vindicator Siege Tank Squadrons/Legion Rapier Batteries that have purchased an upgrade that has the word 'destroyer' in its name". The rules don't call "Legion Heavy Support Squads that have purchased lascannons" "Lascannon squads".

What GW/Forgeworld need is a pro editor. Someone who works for a publishing house who can emphasize better wording. I totally agree that this is common sense as to how this should be interpreted, but the reason I went for 30K over 40K to start was better rules clarification, more balanced games, more thought put into missions, etc.

I keep thinking they really skimp in this one dept.

The bolded has never been a FW strong point.

Also you are the only person I have heard of that has had issue with the clarification of what counts as a Destroyer Unit. There is only one unit in the Legions that actually has Destroyer as its name.

Actually brought it up because a friend who is starting a World Eaters force pointed it out in an email since we're pooling to buy some Forgeworld stuff.

my GF works in publishing as an agent, so hearing about how "repetitive language needs to be consistent" is a regular dinner conversation around here...hence my griping (sincerely I am sorry for that! It's instinctive at this point.)

Herecomesyourman wrote:


Actually brought it up because a friend who is starting a World Eaters force pointed it out in an email since we're pooling to buy some Forgeworld stuff.

my GF works in publishing as an agent, so hearing about how "repetitive language needs to be consistent" is a regular dinner conversation around here...hence my griping (sincerely I am sorry for that! It's instinctive at this point.)

Ah, its still the only case I have heard of it being brought up. Well she'd go bonkers with FW and GW where they (at least FW) switch between Furious Charge and Furious Assault near constantly.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

Herecomesyourman wrote:


Actually brought it up because a friend who is starting a World Eaters force pointed it out in an email since we're pooling to buy some Forgeworld stuff.

my GF works in publishing as an agent, so hearing about how "repetitive language needs to be consistent" is a regular dinner conversation around here...hence my griping (sincerely I am sorry for that! It's instinctive at this point.)

Ah, its still the only case I have heard of it being brought up. Well she'd go bonkers with FW and GW where they (at least FW) switch between Furious Charge and Furious Assault near constantly.

Pfft! No kidding!!!