PDA

View Full Version : rules by pete haines, no drop pods for BT



sumdain
10-05-2005, 23:28
these are " unofficial " rules posted by pete haines on the GW forums. the most shocking of which are black templers shouldn't be using drop pods

http://us.games-workshop.com/membership/eshare.pl?do=ShowArticle&BoardID=4&ID=3940417

Ouroboros
11-05-2005, 03:22
This'll probably change as soon as their codex comes out.

mostholycerebus
11-05-2005, 03:34
This'll probably change as soon as their codex comes out.

A couple of BT players have said this, and i'm wondering, why? Up till now we all assumed they could use DP's, they have been using DP's and it would have been simplicity itself for Pete to say "sure, BT use DP's". But obviously for some reason GW now feels that BT won't be using dropods. This at a time when the new codex is being developed. So, if anything, this indicates to me that GW development has come to the conclusion that BT no longer use dropods.

Ass Goblin
11-05-2005, 03:43
How do they get down then. Thunderhawks? Not the smartest thing for an assult chapter to use, drop pods are better for armies like BT as they get into combat quicker.

sumdain
11-05-2005, 03:54
i agree it doesn't make sense for black templers to not use drop pods since they are a fleet based chapter. but if the new codex was going to allow them to use drop pods then pete probaly would have said " sure let em use drop pods ".

since this list is unofficial at this time i am thinking its to prep templer players to get ready to rework their lists and soften the blow the codex will make when it is released. lets face it black templers have enough good things going for them without the use of drop pods.

Ouroboros
11-05-2005, 06:44
It'll probably change in the dex since from the way I read it Haines just ruled on a technicality. As the rules stand now there's technically nothing that explicitly states that BTs can use the new drop pod rules.

Now I don't think it makes much sense either given that the BT supposedly have one of the biggest space fleets of all the chapters; however 40k has been on a downward slide toward a "letter of the rules" tournament mentality and away from justification through common sense or background material like this for many years.

Karhedron
11-05-2005, 07:43
I am rather hoping that this is rules lawyering and not an indication of what they plan to do to Templars in the codex. I don't play BTs but I really can't see it making much sense for them to be denied Drop Pods.

I agree with Ouroboros that this kind of depressing rules lawyering seems to be on the increase. I am sure somewhere back in 2nd edition the idea of the game was to have fun! :(

Berynius
11-05-2005, 08:02
I agree, t seem more to be a interpetation of the standing rules (codex Armagedon) than a indication of that the Black Templars lack Drop pods in the new codex.

I don't think that it is rule lawyering, if it clearly states in the codex that BT can not take Drop pods, they can't use them regardless of whats in the current codex SM as it does not supercede the BT codex list, and as he states the only way to change that would be in a pdf. update of the list.

lord_blackfang
11-05-2005, 08:13
since this list is unofficial at this time i am thinking its to prep templer players to get ready to rework their lists and soften the blow the codex will make when it is released.

No no no. You've got it all backwards.

Pete said it so that BT players would ditch the DP idea and buy a ******** of Rhinos and Land Raiders.

Then in the Codex, BT's only transport will be DPs, no Rhinos or LRs, so they'll have to re-work their army again and buy new stuff.

Lion El Jason
11-05-2005, 09:10
The reason they can't is that its not in their codex. GW has started having this policy of not changing codexes with FAQs because not everyone gets the FAQ. I dont think this can be taken as any indication of the codex rules.

Astromarine
11-05-2005, 11:36
Guys, look at the wording Pete used: he mentioned BTs, and clarified: "as in Codex: Armageddon". To me, this means "if you even THINK of trying to use this rule to lawyer after the BT codex will come out, I'll kill you".

The BT codex will be the first one of the "special" marine armies that will be completely and totally independent of C:SM. As they all come out, the need for these rulings on how C:SM interacts with the mini-dex will be gone. It is probably the very reason why they decided to do the full dexes. (don't get me started on twits trying to use Dark Angels with traits)

The BTs may or may not use drop pods when the book comes out. If they don't, they will probably get some bonus somewhere else for balancing. Relax and wait. But whether they do ornot will have nothing to do with this FAQ. The devs have said that all they want to do with the FAQ is try to make the best logical ruling possible with the existing codexes exactly as written, without making any changes.

Pravus
11-05-2005, 12:21
Never mind that - what about "I have to fire at the maximum rate" business? Anyway, it does seem a bit mental that BT can't have drop pods - I suppose it could be justified by specific chapter traits but I guess we'll have to wait for the codex.

I HAVE to fire my plasma gun twice? Maybe I should get some more melta guns ...

Sojourner
11-05-2005, 12:28
What a load of rubbish. Why on earth would a fleet based assault chapter not use drop pods when they're available?

Stupid.

lord_blackfang
11-05-2005, 12:44
What a load of rubbish. Why on earth would a fleet based assault chapter not use drop pods when they're available?

Stupid.

Maybe because then they'd again be the only chapter with 2nd turn charges?
(2nd BT turn drop in, 2nd opponent turn get shot, fail morale and charge them. Who needs balance, they're one of the Big Four!! :rolleyes: )

anarchistica
17-05-2005, 00:44
4. If you are at 25" and tried to shoot a plasmagun, do you have to roll to see if you overheat?

A: No - it's a miss. No need to roll more dice. (updated)

5. Are you required to fire twice with rapid fire weapons if within 12". This should not matter with most rapid fire weapons, but becomes critically important with plasma. If I must rapid fire, I have to roll twice overheating on a 1 or 2. Many times people have declared that they are shooting only once.

A: You may choose not to fire with weapons at all but if you fire them they must fire at their maximum rate for the range. Troops in action are a bit less calculating than their controlling players might like.
P18 says that individual models can choose not to shoot.
Heh, this is pretty funny. Imagine a conversation between 2 Space Marines:

*Paul the Plasmagunner is spraying the area with his plasmagun, apparently oblivious to the danger.*

Mike the Veteran Sergeant: "Erm Paul, you might want to not do that, those things overheat you know."

Paul the Plasmagunner: "I'll be fine. These bloody guns are sentient, didn't you know? They only overheat if i can actually hit something."

Mike the Veteran Sergeant: "Woa, spooky. That's like the machinespirit and stuff, right?"

Paul the Plasmagunner: "I guess so."

-Five minutes later, in battle.-

Mike the Veteran Sergeant: "Paul, quick! Shoot that Grot over there, i just accidently crushed my bolt pistol when i tried to reload it. Damn Powerfist!"

*Paul the Plasmagunner aims and sprays the area*

Mike the Veteran Sergeant: "Paul, stop shooting, it's dead, it only took one shot!"

Paul the Plasmagunner: "Must kill! Raaaaaaah!"

Mike the Veteran Sergeant: "You're a 200 year old genetically modified ber-elite soldier who has fought hundreds of battles, surely you must be able to restrain your enthusiasm!"

Paul the Plasmagunner: "I can't, it's stronger than myself! Raaah!"

*Plasmagun overheats, killing Paul*

Mike the Veteran Sergeant: "Noooo! How could this've happened? Who will soap my back now?!"

Pete the Evil Plasmagun: "Har har!"

:D

Cypher
17-05-2005, 13:47
Ahem yeah...

My thoughts is that the new Templars will have a traite-style system whereby there are a number of options available to them which reflect the different combat styles of each Crusade: which makes sense given that each of them essentially operates independently.

Id also point out that a trip in a drop pod would more than likely kill a Neophyte.

Odin
17-05-2005, 14:03
don't get me started on twits trying to use Dark Angels with traits

Oooh! Sounds like fun. Bang out of order, but fun nonetheless.

The plasma gun thing has me somewhat confused - I always thought there was no need for it to overheat on a 1 or 2 - if you fire twice you run double the risk of overheating anyway. You might just get away with it in Power Armour, but Imperial Guardsmen must be suicidal to use a Plasma Gun (Love the short story Anarchistica!).

As for BTs - I'm not aware of a fluff reason for them not to be allowed Drop Pods, but we only have 6 months to wait before we find out. Dunno why they get their own Codex anyway, they're not even a 1st founding chapter! ;)

Chris
17-05-2005, 21:35
As for BTs - I'm not aware of a fluff reason for them not to be allowed Drop Pods, but we only have 6 months to wait before we find out. Dunno why they get their own Codex anyway, they're not even a 1st founding chapter! ;)

Actually it annoys me greatly that they couldn't make the alternate SM lists redundant with the trait system. I'm sure something akin to the flexibility of the Guard Doctrine system would have been able to cover most, if not all, of the funky speciality SM lists out there

t-tauri
17-05-2005, 21:46
As for BTs - I'm not aware of a fluff reason for them not to be allowed Drop Pods, but we only have 6 months to wait before we find out. Dunno why they get their own Codex anyway, they're not even a 1st founding chapter! ;)
If I remember what I read of Crusade for Armageddon before I tried to claw my own brain out at the sheer awfulness of it then the BTs in that including the Dread use drop pods. Or did I just dream that? I only got halfway through Crusade so I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

It would be stupid for a fleet based chapter not to be allowed drop pods, but you never know. ;)
I think that ruling is just to maintain consistency with the Armageddon codex in GW's new FAQs can't contradict the codex mode.