PDA

View Full Version : Legal Noble Combo



Fulgrim's Gimp
30-08-2005, 21:48
Is this a legal combo ? Noble with twilight spear,light armour, helm of the hunt,elven steed and wild rider kindred ?

samw
30-08-2005, 22:06
Aha! As I read it no. A Wild Rider is not allowed any armour except mundane or magical light armour according to the book. The Helm of the Hunt is armour so therefore not allowed. Yes this sucks and makes no sense but thems the rules.

Fulgrim's Gimp
30-08-2005, 22:25
Cheers, that's what I suspected. I'll probably go for the Dawnspear as the magic item instead.

Tarax
31-08-2005, 14:29
I'd say yes, you could use it. I would read it as that the Noble can't have a shield. He could replace his normal Light Armour with Magical Light Armour, but I see no reason why he couldn't take a Magical Helm.

Almost forgot, he wouldn't be able to take the Enchanted Shield, of course.

samw
02-09-2005, 01:13
No. If GW meant "he cannot take a shield" they would have put that. Until an FAQ ammends it no armour other than mundane/magical light armour is permissable

Xavier
02-09-2005, 17:30
"The character carries a spear and wears light armour. They may not choose any additional weapons or armour, though they may choose a magic spear or a suit of magic light armour to replace the respective item if they wish."

I think, by choose additional weapons and armour they mean the mundane versions of it, but then one could argue you could then by an enchanted shield. It'll just be a case of interpritation till the FAQ gets released.

Festus
02-09-2005, 20:21
Hi

There is a FAQ in print that disallows the use of a magic shield if you are not able to buy a mundane one.

And helmets are a special matter, I suppose, as noone has any helmets in his normal mundane options, so they are permissable as soon as any armour might be taken IMHO.

And Xavier -

does this above happen to be a real quote? If so GW really gets sloppy, as the grammar is faulty concerning the numerus of the sentences.

Greetings
FEstus

Xavier
03-09-2005, 14:35
Its me copying from the book, ill double check incase ive put in my own punctuation....

Nope, that is an EXACT quote of the first paragraph in the wild rider rules.

Cenyu
03-09-2005, 14:43
does this above happen to be a real quote? If so GW really gets sloppy, as the grammar is faulty concerning the numerus of the sentences.


Donīt wanna start a discussiona bout grammar but as far as I know if the sex of something remains unknown or indefinite and in the further sentence it is referred to this "something", continuing with "they" is legitimate.


Apart from that, GW have been veeery sloppy with the Wood Elf army book.

Xavier
03-09-2005, 14:48
Apart from that, GW have been veeery sloppy with the Wood Elf army book.


Im not so sure about that, Ive only noticed a couple of spelling errors, and while my grammar is rather.. bad I haven't noticed anything to bad on that front either.

The Judge
03-09-2005, 18:39
Oh come on...

Anyway, if my opponent was taking this combo, I would allow him too, as most of the Wild Riders have helmets, and it is the Helm of the HUNT, and they are the front of the Wild Hunt, so it even fits in the fluff. I think really it's there to stop the Elves taking a shield and getting an almost repectable armour save....

Crazy Harborc
03-09-2005, 19:18
I do agree on the Helm of the Hunt. Why else would it be a magic armour choice in the Woodie's armybook? As far as a shield............it's not the same as light armour. Light armour is listed seperately . Said another way, shields are not automaticly included when light armour is selected as an optional addition.

As already mentioned, no taking a magic armour choice, weapon choice, etc. if you can't have a mundane/none magic version. we had a couple of gamers here try THAT one too.

Festus
03-09-2005, 22:24
Hi

Donīt wanna start a discussiona bout grammar but as far as I know if the sex of something remains unknown or indefinite and in the further sentence it is referred to this "something", continuing with "they" is legitimate.


Apart from that, GW have been veeery sloppy with the Wood Elf army book.

The first sentence reads: *The character* as a subject, the second uses the personal pronoun *they* for *the character*, opposed to *he*/*she* or *it*, which would have been right.

But I see, GW got even more sloppy this time around ;)

Greetings
FEstus