PDA

View Full Version : 8 th ed. Dwarf Gyrocopter Steamgun and partials



Memphrite
02-08-2010, 09:19
Hallo,

when I shot the steam gun which used the drop template, do I still
hit models partially under the template on a roll of 4+ or (in the new 8th edition)are all models which are touched auto hit?

Thanks!

Regards

T10
02-08-2010, 10:04
By the standard rules, template-weapons hit all models that are even partially covered.

-T10

BlackViper
02-08-2010, 10:10
I was building a dwarf army for some upcoming games with friends, I'm going to disagree. Because the rules in the dwarf army book trump the BRB (no matter how old or new) the gyrocopter only hits partials on a 4+, because it says so in it's rules.

Having said that, I haven't double-checked the dwarf FAQ (on the GW rulebook) which may prove me wrong.

Unfortunately our flame cannon is now next to useless.... :-(

limkopi
02-08-2010, 10:41
apparently there is no change in Gyro steam gun rules, but the Flame cannon fires as a Fire-Thrower in the BRB.

totaltyke
02-08-2010, 11:59
In last months White Dwarf, it states that grudge throwers and gyrocopters are improved under the new rules due to the new template rules, so in terms of rules as intended, it should be ok. In a more competitive environment, you'll have to discuss with your opponent.
The main issue I have with the gyrocopter is being unable to fly 20" and still shoot. It's use has seriously diminished in my view...

T10
02-08-2010, 12:39
Well, march-or-shoot means it's going to shoot about half as often as before, but the improved template rules mean it's going to hit score about twice as many hits. It's the same, but different.

-T10

Macmiel
02-08-2010, 17:10
The problem with gyrocopter is that without any clarification in FAQ/errata it is extremely flawed:
1. You cannot flee! with it, since flee! is now ground movement only, which gyrocopter lacks at all.
2. With AB wording it still follows the rules for template partials.
This two problems lowers value of this unit significantly.

T10
02-08-2010, 18:03
Oh, you can still "flee" - you just don't get to move. :) This means the model will simply remain in place if it fails a panic test. And if it's broken in close combat then the dice roll for it's flee move means it can still escape its pursuers, but with-out actually moving... Odd.

-T10

Kneedles
02-08-2010, 19:12
RAW the gyrocopter does not allow partials, but ask your opponent before you play your game. I myself am not taking gyrocopters until we get a rules clarification or a new book.

Stymie Jackson
02-08-2010, 20:11
Wrong on the flee account. The Gyro has swiftstrider rules...so even if it moves on the ground, it still uses swiftstride, it does not stand still.

Doesn't matter if you want to parse it out literally...the Gyro flees and pursues and charges like any other swiftstrider.

The ONLY time this does not apply is if the Gyro is affected by something that doesn't allow flight. A gyro cannot move if it cannot fly. Fleeing 'on the ground' does not constiture not flying.

An eagle does not pursue at Movement 2 (it's ground speed). It pursues 3d6 drops lowest. The gyro is the same.

As for partials...literal reading indicates a Gyro still uses partials. A general understanding of 8th edition is the removal of all partials. So someone could still argue against it as the Army Book trumps BRB and could argue it until it is FAQ'd. However, it only makes sense that the gyro doesn't use partials as NOTHING in game uses partials anymore.

Depends on how big a rules lawyer you want to be. You can make a case the gyro uses partials, but it should be obvious that isn't the intent anymore.

T10
02-08-2010, 22:50
Fleeing 'on the ground' does not constiture not flying.


Wow.

-T10

Stymie Jackson
02-08-2010, 23:42
Flyers still suffer difficult terrain tests for fleeing/pursuing/charging through difficult terrain. They still travel 'along' the ground which is the point of the rule.

"Flyers always move on the ground when attempting to flee or pursue -- there simply is no time for them to take off properly. Note that they still benefit from their Swiftstride rule as they flee and pursue."

So they take difficult terrain tests when fleeing/pursiing. They can still move as per the Swiftstride rule and that gyro can run into a tree.

T10
03-08-2010, 10:11
I think you may be the only person bold enough to claim that a model moving on the ground is still flying.

-T10

Stymie Jackson
03-08-2010, 14:10
The dwarf ain't getting out to push, I'll tell you that.

Haravikk
03-08-2010, 14:19
Personally I don't imagine the gyrocopter as ever truly landing, instead I'm more inclined to believe that it just hovers low enough that enemies can reach it and prevent it from just shooting off into the air at the first sign of trouble. So when it flees or pursues it's still flying but in an awkward fashion close to the ground (perhaps enemies are weighing it down? They're not heavy duty aircraft by any means!)

T10
03-08-2010, 14:22
The dwarf ain't getting out to push, I'll tell you that.

That sounds more accurate. The model does not move if it cannot fly.

-T10

Urgat
03-08-2010, 14:37
Of course we all know it flees normaly but since we're a bunch of idiots we'll decide that it doesn't move, right? It's exactly like the " the templates wounds the casters/shooters if their based is touched" nonsense. GW should remove those comments about common sense, whatever god who looks after us distributed the last of it ages ago already.

Tykinkuula
03-08-2010, 15:49
whatever god who looks after us distributed the last of it ages ago already.
Problem is not the lack of common sense, but people like those claiming their wizard is not hit by their own purple sun wanting to defy clear rules because it fits their personal definition of "common sense", just like that guy over there insists all his goblins are T10 because it's common sense.
And before you go all "that doesn't have anything to do with each other!";

"Rules clearly indicate your wizard is hit"
"No he doesn't, it's common sense!"

"But the rules say goblins aren't T10!"
"Yes they are, it's common sense!"


I fail to see the difference here.

Urgat
03-08-2010, 16:27
That's because you have no idea what common sense is, obviously.

Yrrdead
03-08-2010, 16:43
That's because you have no idea what common sense is, obviously.

Wait is that the stuff that makes Urgat right and me wrong? I hate that stuff. :cries:

Urgat
03-08-2010, 16:50
Well, the latest faq on templates certainly proved me right over the guys who argued for casters being hit too. Because, you know, I could get that it's not that the rules said the caster was hit too (they don't), they just failed to point out that he wasn't hit because it was, dunno... bloody obvious (if you use common sense, as opposed to what that T10 goblins stuff above is, which is, namely, nonsense)?

And it's amusing, because I know that if GW finds out about that little gem of an immovible gyro, they're going to say it flees and pursues 3D6, but in the meantime, let's be dense, stick our fingers in our ears and sing together:
"dur dur dur! no I'm not listenin'!,
dur dur dur! not what the rules are sayin'!"
I'll leave the thread for the time being, then come back and be an ass when the faq comes, just to post something along the lines of "see? told you".
Yeah, in short, I'm running away, I don't want to face the pointless flak I'm going to get :p

shelfunit.
03-08-2010, 17:37
Well, the latest faq on templates certainly proved me right over the guys who argued for casters being hit too. Because, you know, I could get that it's not that the rules said the caster was hit too (they don't), they just failed to point out that he wasn't hit because it was, dunno... bloody obvious (if you use common sense, as opposed to what that T10 goblins stuff above is, which is, namely, nonsense)?


I still am amazed that after a rules change people think they were "right" about their call. If the rules were unclear, then a simple FAQ would have surficed, but changing the core rules proves nothing. You are indeed correct that now the caster is not hit by the template of the spell they cast, pre-errata, regardless of opinion and "common sense" (which nowadays seems to be a catch-all statement for saying "if the rules say something that contradicts my own personal view of the game then my view is correct regardless") the caster was hit, and no, it was not obvious. Much like the new "to wound" table, it was different to 7th edition, and no one is calling for "common sense" to prevail against 6's wounding regardless of the difference between Str and T...

Malorian
03-08-2010, 17:47
Wait is that the stuff that makes Urgat right and me wrong? I hate that stuff. :cries:

Law of the Internetz: Always assume the other poster has insulted you and your immediate heated reply is required.

Urgat
03-08-2010, 18:03
Since it's not in regard to the gyrocopter matter, I'll allow myself to answer to that:


I still am amazed that after a rules change people think they were "right" about their call.

A rule change, right. Why do you think they felt they needed to "change" the rule, heh? It's because they didn't think people would argue about that, and for them it went w/o saying.

"dramatic voice tone"
They were wrong, of course.

So you're allowed to show all the bad faith in the world, but the thing is you argued for I don't know how many pages that the templates would hit the casters, and people told you that obviously it's going to be faqed, and they were right, and what do you answer to that? That it's not a faq, it's a rule change. But, but, this changes everything!!! Pardon me for the midly amused smile that shows on my face right now. That's right, you're managing to save face on the interwebz, as it seems such things matter to you, I'll grant you, it's a rule change, your RAW was betrayed by RAI and GW :)

By the way, do you know why it was obvious, if you refuse to agree that it's obvious that a dragon won't burn it's own face while breathing fire, and look only at rules, and nothing else but rules? Because when something negative happens to the caster, the shooter, whatever, when he casts, shoots, throws, etc, it is clearly spelled out. Always. It's also always part of a special rule. It is bloody clear. They're not going to leave such an important element of the rule unsaid and open to interpretation, if it ws intended. So I repeat the hated word: it was obvious. A fanatic will die on a double, a canon will misfire, a sorcerer will miscast, a net will entangle the goblin himself. Always, all the time, etc etc. If the intent was for the caster to be hit too by his spell, it would have been spelled out clearly, it would have a line like "please note that since the template touches the caster, he is hit too. Gathering such massive powers is not without its own risks!".

So yeah, ok, the rules for the gyrocopter are going to be "changed" if that pleases you, the result is going to be the same :D


Feel free to reply whatever you want now, the template deal has been dealt with by GW in a satisfactory way, and I won't bother replying because...
"dur dur dur! I ain't listenin'!"

Stymie Jackson
03-08-2010, 18:08
Much like the Strength in Numbers arguments:

"But the rules say unmodified leadership!"

So GW faq'd it to be what should have always been clear...rats do get SIN as well as steadfast, not one or the other. It should have been clear, but people wanted to parse every single word and act like a contract lawyer.

Anyone seriously trying to argue the Gyro cannot make flee/pursue movement is in the same situation. You are over parsing the rules and I'd bet a goblin's **** you will be wrong.

Zinch
03-08-2010, 18:09
I think you may be the only person bold enough to claim that a model moving on the ground is still flying.

-T10

Don't take this as personal, but I'm upset of people reading SO literaly in their benefit a ruleset so bad written.

The flying rules say literaly: "Flyers always move on the ground when attempting to flee or pursue- there simply is no time to take off properly"

Do you think an eagle will fold its wings and start walking to flee? No, what this rule means is that it will be trying to gain altittude while fleeing, so it is affected by terrain and other units in its path.

Also, just after the rule quoted, it states that flying units "still benefit from their Swifstride rule as they pursue or flee". So there's no doubt in my book.

Other issue is the partial hits of the template that is not so clear. I'll ask your opponent before a battle but I hope a FAQ/errata will clear it soon.

Urgat
03-08-2010, 18:12
Don't take this as personal, but I'm upset of people reading SO literaly in their benefit a ruleset so bad written.


Fail. Never use the "to your own benefit" or such thing, because the one you're arguing with will always happen to play with that army or something like that.

Anyway, I expect GW to clarify that "move on the ground" just means that they can be caught by units that don't fly, and fly low enough to catch said units. Because that's what they meant, of course.

Zinch
03-08-2010, 18:18
Fail. Never use the "to your own benefit" or such thing, because the one you're arguing with will always happen to play with that army or something like that.


Well, I know this is a usual thing, but in this case I play Dwarfs... ;)

Urgat
03-08-2010, 18:25
But that wouldn't, say, prevent T10 to say "hah, but I'm a dwarf player, that screws me too", for exemple :)

shelfunit.
03-08-2010, 18:42
A rule change, right. Why do you think they felt they needed to "change" the rule, heh? It's because they didn't think people would argue about that, and for them it went w/o saying.

"dramatic voice tone"
They were wrong, of course.

So you're allowed to show all the bad faith in the world, but the thing is you argued for I don't know how many pages that the templates would hit the casters, and people told you that obviously it's going to be faqed, and they were right, and what do you answer to that? That it's not a faq, it's a rule change. But, but, this changes everything!!! Pardon me for the midly amused smile that shows on my face right now. That's right, you're managing to save face on the interwebz, as it seems such things matter to you, I'll grant you, it's a rule change, your RAW was betrayed by RAI and GW :)

I have no problem with the rule change, the old rules or the new ones, just peoples attitudes in how they argued against it. Pre-errata the rules were perfectly clear, after they are too, for me the issue became people who were arguing "because it was like that last edition" and claiming the untouchable right of "common sense".



By the way, do you know why it was obvious? Because when something negative happens to the caster, the shooter, whatever, when he casts, shoots, throws, etc, it is clearly spelled out. Always. It's also always part of a special rule. It is bloody clear. They're not going to leave such an important element of the rule unsaid and open to interpretation, if it ws intended. So I repeat the hated word: it was obvious. A fanatic will die on a double, a canon will misfire, a sorcerer will miscast, a net will entangle the goblin himself. Always, all the time, etc etc. If the intent was for the caster to be hit too by his spell, it would have been spelled out clearly, it would have a line like "please note that since the template touches the caster, he is hit too.

I'll put this in normal font so you can read it again more easily, hopefully ruefully. Under the previous template rules it was also spelt out, like your
bloody clear other examples, touching meant being affected by. Couldn't be clearer.




So yeah, ok, the rules for the gyrocopter are going to be "changed" if that pleases you, the result is going to be the same :D


Feel free to reply whatever you want now, the template deal has been dealt with by GW in a satisfactory way, and I won't bother replying because...
"dur dur dur! I ain't listenin'!"

Hopefully the g-copter rules will change, as most seem to agree here, they are poorly converted from 7th to 8th, and it does need changing. I completely agree the template situation is cleared up satisfactorally.

T10
03-08-2010, 20:06
But that wouldn't, say, prevent T10 to say "hah, but I'm a dwarf player, that screws me too", for exemple :)

I actually do have a Dwarf army and I have a Gyrocopter, shocking as that may seem.

And until the Gyrocopter rules are changed (or the rules for fleeing units are changed) it's going to remain grounded and not move while fleeing.

-T10

Kneedles
03-08-2010, 20:33
I think the lesson from everything about the gyrocopter is that the GW staff members responsible for the faqs being released did a rush job on at least the dwarf one.

The gyrocopter is a unit entry from two editions ago, maybe giving it a new entry like the Anvil of Doom or Cauldron of Blood would have been helpful.

Some other of the "unique" unit type units could have used a new entry as well, instead of line after line of faq (I'm looking at you, skaven.)

Malorian
03-08-2010, 20:44
Never thought about it not being able to flee before, but then again I don't care.

Given the new redirecting the charge rules it's place as a redirecter is pretty much gone.

Just zip behind the enemy and steam away. If you are being charged you did something wrong.

Urgat
03-08-2010, 20:48
I think the lesson from everything about the gyrocopter is that the GW staff members responsible for the faqs being released did a rush job on at least the dwarf one.

No, the lesson is that they're only humans and that they can't think of everything.

Kneedles
03-08-2010, 21:13
Page 38 - Artillery Master
Change to "Artillery Master......In addition one war machine that is within 3" of a master engineer receives the following benefits:

*A Bolt Thrower may use his BS.
*A grudge thrower may re-roll the artillery dice.
*A cannon inflicts D6 wounds instead of D3 wounds.

This, partly combined with them not leaving the flame cannon alone and not clarifying the gyrocopter enough, made me rather furious when I got the first faq.


Anyone seriously trying to argue the Gyro cannot make flee/pursue movement is in the same situation. You are over parsing the rules and I'd bet a goblin's **** you will be wrong.

@ Stymie Jackson: I hope that I am wrong, and that they give an explicit clarification on gyrocopter movement. But right now based on the army book entry I don't believe the rules allow it to flee. I would want it to flee but if an opponent argued that it could not I would honestly have to agree with him.

Stymie Jackson
03-08-2010, 21:17
I'm not arguing that the rules are pretty buggered and need FAQ love. I disagree with T10's interpretation but I do agree that I'm not using it except in the most friendly of matches.

It's been out of my pickup list because I don't want to hear the bitching about partials and fleeing. It makes no sense that the gyro is stuck as the only template with partials and cannot flee/pursue when they SPECIFICALLY add swiftstride to it's rules and forgot to amend out the mention of partials that ALL 6th edition rulebooks have. People who haven't been playing GW games for two decades rather spend more time analyzing the exact wording in the rules than understand GW has ALWAYS had buggered rules, and you should decide on what makes sense logically, not literally.

What, no Man O' War players here?

Like those who argued about SIN, or that template spells hit the mage, or that you can shoot 4" above the tabletop to effectively ignore any terrain, or you could challenge characters in a war machine.

Sure, read stuff literally and come to those conclusions. Take what is effectively playing with dolls and turn it into Law And Order: Criminal Nerds

But so far no takers on the Goblin's **** bet? Anyone wanna raise me Black Orcs conjones?

Kneedles
03-08-2010, 21:37
I guess that, being dwarf generals, we can just grumble about the inadequacies of Wizard Lords, /Skirmishers and Cavalry, /Nurgle Demons and that they aren't as brave, /well made, /scary as they used to be.

@allmyownbattles
31-07-2013, 23:27
Well, march-or-shoot means it's going to shoot about half as often as before, but the improved template rules mean it's going to hit score about twice as many hits. It's the same, but different.

-T10

Surely the gyrocopter can still shoot after marching? The pilot doesn't have to shoulder the gun, it just sits out in front of him the whole time.

bigbiggles
01-08-2013, 06:26
I think you may be the only person bold enough to claim that a model moving on the ground is still flying.

-T10


He just flys really close, runs down the enemy with his rotor blades

theunwantedbeing
01-08-2013, 11:08
Surely the gyrocopter can still shoot after marching? The pilot doesn't have to shoulder the gun, it just sits out in front of him the whole time.

Nope, it can't shoot when marching as it doesn't have an exception to the normal rules.
The FAQ (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3180065a_Dwarfs_v1.6_APRIL13.pdf) covers this.

Also where are people getting that the steam gun doesn't roll for partials anymore?

T10
01-08-2013, 12:52
Wishful thinking.

Also: Happy birthday, Thread!

-T10