PDA

View Full Version : Great Weapons on Chariots



Yehoshua
23-01-2008, 14:48
Apologies if this has been addressed previously; I searched for "great weapon chariot" and got no hits.

Do units equipped with great weapons riding as part of a chariot model or using a chariot as a mount get +1 (as mounted) or +2 (as infantry) to their strength?

Army builder v2 seems to think they get +2, but that may just be a limitation of the program.

Thanks

Milgram
23-01-2008, 14:52
the character is 'mounted on a chariot'. I think that should be the term in the english brb and the ab's.

theunwantedbeing
23-01-2008, 14:53
*yells at the tope of his voice, and then some*
Buy the damned rulebook!!!!

*sigh*
In the current 7th edition rulebook it is very clear how great weapons work while mounted.
Armybuilder is for building armies, not to be a rulebook.....get the rulebook please.

Milgram
23-01-2008, 15:03
uhm... get firefox or another browser that enables you to read posts. :) no one is talking about 'work while mounted' but about 'work while mounted on a chariot'.

as my brb is NOT in english, I may only guess what it exactly reads there.

(and the only ab I do posess in english does not support chariots...)

Soul of Iron
23-01-2008, 15:22
...Do units equipped with great weapons riding as part of a chariot model or using a chariot as a mount get +1 (as mounted) or +2 (as infantry) to their strength?...

I don't know what you are getting at Milgram, but his questions seems very clear to me and theunwantedbeing's response was valid. Harsh, but valid.

The answer to his question is very clear in the BRB. Relying on AB to get his rules is setting him up for failure.

EvC
23-01-2008, 15:55
Plus when I searched "great weapon chariot" in the rules forum, the two first topics both asked and answered this question.

Course I can excuse people thinking Chariots might allow great-weapons to get +2S, given that GW have (falsely) said so quite a bit lately.

Yade
23-01-2008, 16:43
NM I found it

Nurgling Chieftain
23-01-2008, 16:49
The rulebook specifically lists chariots as an example of a mounted unit for the purposes of weapon effects. So, GW's are only +1 Str and spears get +1 Str on the charge. Note that to argue that GW's get +2 Str is to also argue that spears do not get any Str bonus on the charge!

Yade
23-01-2008, 16:51
The rulebook specifically lists chariots as an example of a mounted unit for the purposes of weapon effects. So, GW's are only +1 Str and spears get +1 Str on the charge. Note that to argue that GW's get +2 Str is to also argue that spears do not get any Str bonus on the charge!

Where does is specifically state this?

theunwantedbeing
23-01-2008, 17:06
If great weapons give +2 strength while mounted
Mounted = infantry
So spears while mounted would follow the infantry rules, so give no strength bonus when charging.

Borthcollective
23-01-2008, 17:09
Page 56 Spears (Mounted) gives Chariot Riders, Cavalry, and Monster Riders as the example of who gains the +1 bonus for spear strength.

EvC
23-01-2008, 18:11
Yup... so many places in the rulebook that will tell you that a Chariot counts as mounted, if only people can be bothered to look...

logan054
23-01-2008, 18:17
I think GW beed to start making seats on the chariots to help with the confusion, its nothing to do with the rules, its all about the fact the model stands up.

Festus
23-01-2008, 19:13
Guys, come on, it is on p.55 of the BRB, last paragraph, and this whole thread is bound to become pointless if you start reading there - even in the German version (which I myself use).

Festus

T10
23-01-2008, 22:26
That would be the last lies on that page. Oops! I meant "lines".

-T10

TheDarkDaff
23-01-2008, 22:35
That would be the last lies on that page. Oops! I meant "lines".

-T10

I'm glad you are having fun with my poor spelling.

Really only Characters and White Lion Chariots are affected by this and well the High Elves have ASF and GW want people to give their Characters a Magic Weapon so why not give it a whirl.

Yehoshua
24-01-2008, 07:31
Soul of Iron and theunwantedbeing:

I posed a question in a very polite form, and you replied with scorn and vitriol. You presumed, incorrectly, that I do not own a BRB. I did not "rely" on AB to get my rules; I clearly questioned AB's result in my post. I shouldn't have to defend my confusion to avoid being flamed in the forum dedicated to answering "Fantasy rules questions."

To know the right answer to this question requires one to read a heading other than that pertaining to the relevant weapon and extrapolate to the correct answer. Furthermore, a room full of players didn't know the answer to this one at my local shop.

So to the two* of you, the attitude is uncalled for. If you don't want to be helpful, don't answer.

*Sorry Festus

T10
24-01-2008, 07:49
I'm glad you are having fun with my poor spelling.


It *is* the best spelling mistake I've seen. If nothing else, it's a good reminder not to take the rules too seriously. :)

-T10

Festus
24-01-2008, 08:02
Soul of Iron, Festus, and especially theunwantedbeing:

I posed a question in a very polite form, and you replied with scorn and vitriol. You presumed, incorrectly, that I do not own a BRB. I did not "rely" on AB to get my rules; I clearly questioned AB's result in my post. I shouldn't have to defend my confusion to avoid being flamed in the forum dedicated to answering "Fantasy rules questions."
Can you possibly tell me what was so *flamimg* in my posttelling you where to find the relevant quote?
Or is it just random ungratefulness?

Well anyway, you made one special list of mine... :(

Yehoshua
24-01-2008, 08:54
My mistake, Festus; I thought you were being flippant, but I was wrong.

Sorry about that.

Milgram
24-01-2008, 09:44
It *is* the best spelling mistake I've seen. If nothing else, it's a good reminder not to take the rules too seriously. :)

-T10

true that :)

and soul of iron: uhm... no, I'm not going to appologize for anything i said above. because - I was right. you and the other one were wrong. thank you for your attendance.

Dendo Star
24-01-2008, 10:09
As I often say, this is yet again another case of the writer of the High Elf book not knowing his game's own rules. It is a very big problem he has!

TheDarkDaff
25-01-2008, 03:56
As I often say, this is yet again another case of the writer of the High Elf book not knowing his game's own rules. It is a very big problem he has!

It isn't just Mr Troke that has problems with the rules. Alessio Cavatore is just as bad (and he is in charge of writing the rules).

Treant
26-01-2008, 13:22
Just a note on AB2, the str of the lion chariot crew is shown correctly at str 5. This was fixed in some smaller update packages a month ago or more and is now available on the new wfbv7v008 datafile that was released yesterday.

it's here (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/anarchistica/files/WFBv7v008.ab) if you don't get the mailing