PDA

View Full Version : about the pendant of khaeleth



Windir83
30-01-2010, 01:29
does it fail its' ward on a 1 since it says in the rulebook that ward saves always fail on a 1? meaning it fails on a 1 and a 6 for str5+ attacks?

enyoss
30-01-2010, 01:34
This always stirs up a good argument.

I would say rules as written, it fails on a 1 and a 6. Rules as intended, it only fails on a 6. It's certainly priced for the RAW interpretation!

Now, get ready for it...


:D

mmckeddie
30-01-2010, 01:54
In the Dark Elf FAQ this question was answered, it does not fail on a 1.

Kalandros
30-01-2010, 01:54
If you play with FAQs, it never fails on a 1.
If you play without FAQs, it fails on a 1 as well as a 6 and whatever inbetween that doesnt match the Strength of the attack.

Windir83
30-01-2010, 02:37
thanks

but you HAVE to play with faq's no? they're basically updated rules or rules made clear aren't they?

Nurgling Chieftain
30-01-2010, 02:46
You can play however you and your opponent agree to play. You're just unlikely to convince a Dark Elf player using that pendant to agree to play without said FAQ!

enyoss
30-01-2010, 03:30
In the Dark Elf FAQ this question was answered, it does not fail on a 1.

Cool, I didn't realize that. Accepted wisdom is that the FAQ stands, so that makes everything nice and easy... arguments averted :).

Lord of Skulls
30-01-2010, 06:11
Actually, GW themselves point out that the FAQ's are "soft rules" and should only be used if the main rules are unclear. So since this question is easily answerable by RAW, the FAQ should not be used.

Only the Errata are "hard rules" that have to be used, and only they can change the rules in the BRB or army books.

nzdarkelf
30-01-2010, 07:39
The using of RAW to validate the non use of FAQ's when and where it suits (Cause I bet thats what you do 'Skulls) is gamesmanship and a violation of The Most Important Rule, p3 BRB. If one is going to apply RAW to this then The Most Important Rule must be used before any other.

Ultimate Life Form
30-01-2010, 07:39
Actually, GW themselves point out that the FAQ's are "soft rules" and should only be used if the main rules are unclear. So since this question is easily answerable by RAW, the FAQ should not be used.

Only the Errata are "hard rules" that have to be used, and only they can change the rules in the BRB or army books.

In addition, if we have a look at the Lizardmen FAQ, these things can actually make the game unplayable due to answers that are not only illogical but also directly contradict not only the BRB's RAW (like in the Pendant's case) but also other answers in the very same FAQ. :rolleyes:

I would rather not use those, but the Skaven book is so messed up that it's already literally unplayable without a FAQ. Will they manage screwing it up even more? Really looking forward to this...

Nurgling Chieftain
30-01-2010, 07:50
I take exception to the assertion that the Pendant FAQ contradicts RaW. The Pendant's "always fail on a 6" is very clearly a replacement of the normal "always fail on a 1", given the Pendant's nature as a reverse (roll-equal-or-under rather than or-over) ward save.

If you cannot take an obvious replacement or exception to the usual rules as such, then the number of rules which break is really quite vast - virtually every specific special rule is an exception to something, and only very rarely do they explicitly state that it is such.

Ultimate Life Form
30-01-2010, 07:56
Well, I can't really see how 'fails on y' would somehow intrinsically replace 'fails on x', but as always it's pointless arguing GW rules and logic.

TheDarkDaff
30-01-2010, 08:00
The arguement that a 1 fails isn't even RAW unless someone can prove to me how a 1 is higher than 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6. The BRB even tells us that the magic rules overrule the normal game rules if their is a conflict (which there is in this case).

narrativium
30-01-2010, 08:21
Indeed. If the strength of the attack is 1 or higher, a roll of a 1 will pass.

It's not that overpowered an item. Cause enough hits and something will get through, or kill everything else in the army instead. Or win on combat resolution.

WLBjork
30-01-2010, 08:28
I take exception to the assertion that the Pendant FAQ contradicts RaW. The Pendant's "always fail on a 6" is very clearly a replacement of the normal "always fail on a 1", given the Pendant's nature as a reverse (roll-equal-or-under rather than or-over) ward save.

I'd disagree with that precise statement.

I would say that it was pretty darn clear that the RAI was that the "always fail on a 6" over-rode "always fail on a 1". Just wish they had either said it originally or errata'd it to make it clear.

Nurgling Chieftain
30-01-2010, 08:31
If you're not satisfied with "pretty darn clear" GW rulesets may not be for you. :cool:

theunwantedbeing
30-01-2010, 13:00
They should have made the item be "roll under the strength of the hit".

sulla
30-01-2010, 18:06
They should have made the item be "roll under the strength of the hit".Agreed. Saving 50% of s4 is more than reasonable and if it still punishes high strength characters, shame on you for bringing them vs my soft little elves...:D:p;)

WLBjork
31-01-2010, 08:02
If you're not satisfied with "pretty darn clear" GW rulesets may not be for you. :cool:

This is GW we're talking about.

You know, where you have a clear rule or example - then the Q&A is released which completely contradicts it, which immdiately results in :wtf: :eyebrows: (aww, no "banging head into wall" smiley).

TheDarkDaff
31-01-2010, 09:37
This is GW we're talking about.

You know, where you have a clear rule or example - then the Q&A is released which completely contradicts it, which immdiately results in :wtf: :eyebrows: (aww, no "banging head into wall" smiley).

Which they haven't done in this case. The Pendant is very simple and can be broken down into 3 parts:

1) Any roll of a 1 for a Ward Save fails (general rules)

2) Any roll equal to or under the strength of an attack is saved (Magic Iten rules)

3) In cases of contradiction, the special rule of a magic item takes precedence over normal game rules (pg 120 BRB)

1 & 2 directly contradict so we go to 3 which means the Pendant wins by straight RAW. It isn't even slightly ambiguous unless you are deliberately misreading rules or don't understand that 1 is "lower than or equal too" any other number you can roll on a standard dice.

nzdarkelf
31-01-2010, 21:52
Very good DarkDaff. Best argument yet. Fancy using RAW to stop the stupidity of RAW. Excellent.

Can't wait for 8th ed, and the abandonment of RAW - which is a WHFB 7th ed thing.

Lord Malorne
31-01-2010, 22:12
If you play with FAQs, it never fails on a 1.
If you play without FAQs, it fails on a 1 as well as a 6 and whatever inbetween that doesnt match the Strength of the attack.

Exactly the right anwser.


thanks

but you HAVE to play with faq's no? they're basically updated rules or rules made clear aren't they?

Only if the FAQ is present, and then only if both players agree to use a FAQ, they are not so official as to become mandatory, our club decided to use them if they are present and people agree, that is a club ruling.

Windir83
31-01-2010, 22:36
well in the case of the pendant it seems silly to me not to use the faq since it very simply states that the fails on 6 replaces fails on 1:)

TheDarkDaff
31-01-2010, 23:16
Exactly the right anwser.

If you read my post above you will see why that response was incredibly wrong. To prove it lets do a simple word substitution in the rules for the pendant. Lets put in "1" in the place of strength of the attack so the rule would read

Any roll equal to or less than 1

try strength 2

Any roll equal to or less than 2

In this case 2 is equal to 2 and 1 is less than 2 so both are saved hits.