PDA

View Full Version : Real rules?



Elblanco
22-04-2009, 19:21
So I was at my local GW the other day, playing a game against my girlfriend. It was Dwarfs against Lizardmen, and besides the fact that I got beaten really badly, we were told two rules that I think are total BS, but were supported by a GW employee.

1. having a hand weapon and shield not only gives you the +1 armor from the shield, but an extra +1 for having hand weapon and shield. The Rulebook does not say this anywhere!

2. When in close combat, you take casualties from the back, BUT it counts as taking them from the front, so you lose attacks until the next turn, when the models technically fill in the empty parts of the rank. The book only says that you take them from the back, to make it easier to remove casualties, but that they still fill in, nothing about it taking a turn.

Is it just me or are these house rules? I would be ok with them if they were, but trying to pass them as rules suported by the rulebook? AND a GW employee? That just doesn't seem right to me.

hardygun
22-04-2009, 19:27
The first is an actual rule. The sword and board bonus only applies to enemies to your front in close combat and you have to be a model on foot to get the bonus. It should be described in the weapons section of the BRB.

The second should also be a real rule, but I'm working from memory at the moment so I'm a little fuzzy on where it's described in the BRB. Should be in the combat section under casualties.

Lord Zarkov
22-04-2009, 19:33
They're both real rules.
No 1) BRB p56: Hand Weapons => Fighting with a hand weapon and shield (infantry)

No 2) BRB p36: "Removing Casulties", second paragraph.

Milgram
22-04-2009, 20:32
yeah, something supported by the rulebook AND the GW employee... that doesn't sound fine. normally the GW employees contradict the rulebook where ever they can. :)

Elblanco
22-04-2009, 21:00
yeah, something supported by the rulebook AND the GW employee... that doesn't sound fine. normally the GW employees contradict the rulebook where ever they can. :)

lol, I just had to ask, because I couldn't find them anywhere, and they just don't seem too fair, well the front rank thing seems fine, but the hand weapon and shield thing just seems unfair.

Ultimate Life Form
22-04-2009, 21:10
What I find unpleasant is the fact that you end every single one of your sentences with "the BRB does nowhere say so" while in fact it does.:eyebrows:

This is not a politics forum. Maybe you could just ask the GW employee next time where he got his knowledge from before claiming things that just arenīt right?

theunwantedbeing
22-04-2009, 21:17
Maybe you could just ask the GW employee next time where he got his knowledge from before claiming things that just arenīt right?

Yes, ask where they got the rules first.
Then get them to prove it.
GW staff in my experience dont know the rules properly.

1. Page 56 of the rulebook, under hand weapon and sheild.
2. Page 36

Fully supported by the rules and yes, seems utterly brutal if you've been playing it differently.

Fellblade
22-04-2009, 23:00
GW staff in my experience dont know the rules properly.
That's been my experience too, but if they're called out on that they'll invite you to leave the store.

I recall one time in particular with the Steam Tank where the staff member told the player, "Pick a number between 1-6 and roll a die. If you roll the number you picked, the tank takes 1 damage and can't do anything. Otherwise, you get your remains wounds in steam points for this turn," and later on, "When a steam tank moves into a piece of terrain, the entire piece of terrain is removed."

Griefbringer
22-04-2009, 23:27
and they just don't seem too fair, well the front rank thing seems fine, but the hand weapon and shield thing just seems unfair.

Unfair? Most of the armies have plentiful access to shields, and every model more or less automatically comes with a hand weapon.

WLBjork
23-04-2009, 03:51
but the hand weapon and shield thing just seems unfair.

Before they introduced this rule, nobody bothered with HW&S if they had anything else, e.g. Spear and Shield as the HW&S was ultimately a disadvantage.

Initially the rules were slightly different, and it was often percieved as overpowered, but the current rules don't seem to generate quite the same number of complaints.

Staurikosaurus
24-04-2009, 04:23
I recall one time in particular with the Steam Tank where the staff member told the player, "Pick a number between 1-6 and roll a die. If you roll the number you picked, the tank takes 1 damage and can't do anything. Otherwise, you get your remains wounds in steam points for this turn," and later on, "When a steam tank moves into a piece of terrain, the entire piece of terrain is removed."

That is usually a staff member's way of telling a player within the store to read their damn army book. Not to mention that there are open copies of every rulebook on the shelf. Walk over and check it yourself. :rolleyes:

Fellblade
24-04-2009, 15:10
Actually, it was instructions during a game rather than idle conversation.

slasher
24-04-2009, 15:20
sounds a bit like the old rules for the STank but mixed up -IIRC you rolled 2D6 and compared it to the structure points left when generating steam points (you used the steam points to do any thing - like moving, fights and shooting) but if you rolled over the structure points you took damage.

Von Wibble
25-04-2009, 17:23
Before they introduced this rule, nobody bothered with HW&S if they had anything else, e.g. Spear and Shield as the HW&S was ultimately a disadvantage.

.

They did at least pay points for the extra spear/halberd though. Now skaven clanrats pay points to make themselves weaker.:wtf:

sirbone
26-04-2009, 13:19
Is the hand weapon and shield rule known as 'parrying'?

Spirit
26-04-2009, 13:45
Is the hand weapon and shield rule known as 'parrying'?

Not in the rulebook, but that is a good way to think about it. As long as you don't get into the mind set of "but 2 hand weapons would parry as well!"

Griefbringer
26-04-2009, 14:36
In Mordheim, there is an actual rule called Parry, for use with swords and/or bucklers. Which works quite differently to the WHFB HW+shield rule.

So there is some potential for confusion for people who have got used to calling the HW+shield rule as parry rule when trying to play Mordheim.

Ultimate Life Form
26-04-2009, 14:51
In Mordheim, there is an actual rule called Parry, for use with swords and/or bucklers. Which works quite differently to the WHFB HW+shield rule.

So there is some potential for confusion for people who have got used to calling the HW+shield rule as parry rule when trying to play Mordheim.

With Mordheim rules, there is so much confusion going on that this one hardly matters.

Spirit
27-04-2009, 16:28
In Mordheim, there is an actual rule called Parry, for use with swords and/or bucklers. Which works quite differently to the WHFB HW+shield rule.

So there is some potential for confusion for people who have got used to calling the HW+shield rule as parry rule when trying to play Mordheim.

In Mordheim, heavy armour slows your movement, most undead can never march and vampires are not wizards but i never find these rules being confused with the WHFB equivalents. :/

Keller
27-04-2009, 16:59
Not in the rulebook, but that is a good way to think about it. As long as you don't get into the mind set of "but 2 hand weapons would parry as well!"

If I recall correctly, the HW+S bonus was refered to as parrying in 6th edition. Not that it matters, but I think it was.