PDA

View Full Version : New FAQ and Archaon



AMWOOD co
12-10-2010, 21:53
Am I mistaken by my interpretation of the killing blow question in the FAQ update that Archaon would thus be immune to killing blow as he doesn't have an infantry component?

theunwantedbeing
12-10-2010, 21:59
He's Monstrous cavalry, so yes, Immune to Killing blow as per the Killing Blow rules on page 72.

Warwizard91
12-10-2010, 23:01
But in the main rulebook FAQ at the bottom of page 6 it would seem to suggest otherwise, or is that only for characters that buy a monster mount?

Lex
13-10-2010, 00:23
But in the main rulebook FAQ at the bottom of page 6 it would seem to suggest otherwise, or is that only for characters that buy a monster mount?

It's only for characters that but for the purchase of a mount would be infantry. Archaon can't be infantry and the reference section of the BRB lists him as Monstrous Cavalry, so no KB for the Lord of Fail Many Times.

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 00:34
Wait, wait, wait. What it actually says is this:

Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted.

"Purchase" is not part of it. He's got a monstrous mount, so he's monstrous cavalry but he'd count as infantry if he didn't have the monstrous mount, by reverse logic of the monstrous cavalry mount rules on page 105. Just because that's not an option doesn't mean that if he magically lost his mount that he wouldn't be Infantry.

decker_cky
13-10-2010, 00:38
Archaon has the unit type Monstrous Cavalry. Nothing classifies Archaon as infantry without his mount.

Lex
13-10-2010, 00:42
Wait, wait, wait. What it actually says is this:

Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted.

"Purchase" is not part of it. He's got a monstrous mount, so he's monstrous cavalry but he'd count as infantry if he didn't have the monstrous mount, by reverse logic of the monstrous cavalry mount rules on page 105. Just because that's not an option doesn't mean that if he magically lost his mount that he wouldn't be Infantry.

How do you know he would be classed as infantry? There is nothing printed anywhere that classed him as infantry. He's kinda ogre sized so he could be monstrous infantry ;) The need to purchase a mount is the only way we know what the models are without the mount. I did not mean it as a requirement.

Ramius4
13-10-2010, 00:45
The need to purchase a mount is the only way we know what the models are without the mount.

Actually the fact that we're not all idiots is pretty much the only way to determine this. Oh... Wait, nevermind :rolleyes:

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 00:50
Archaeon certainly isn't ogre sized! Is there really any doubt that Archaeon "would count as infantry" if on foot? :eyebrows:

Lex
13-10-2010, 00:52
Actually the fact that we're not all idiots is pretty much the only way to determine this. Oh... Wait, nevermind :rolleyes:

Better to have a well-reasoned response than to simply insult others. You want to assume that Archaon is infantry without his mount. What would you base this on? The model? His rules? His fluff?

Lex
13-10-2010, 00:55
Archaeon certainly isn't ogre sized! Is there really any doubt that Archaeon "would count as infantry" if on foot? :eyebrows:

What are you basing this on? And while I meant it as a joke, he may not have the girth of an ogre, his height is pretty close.

Synnister
13-10-2010, 00:56
I think for this you'd have to look at the Bestiary in the BRB and see what Archaon is listed as. If he's listed as Monstrous Cavalry then no KB will not work against him. If he is listed as Infantry and his mount is listed as monstrous beast then yes it would work on him. It's like looking at the Chaos Lord mounted on a Juggy. He's got the infantry unit type and the juggy has monstrous beast so KB works against him. I don't have my roolbook here at work so can't look at how they classify him.

Lex
13-10-2010, 00:57
He's Monstrous Cavalry in the Bestiary. No distinction from his mount.

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 01:08
Gah! Every time GW update the FAQs and explain something reasonably - yes, monstrous cavalry characters can be killing blowed - someone comes along to shout "aha! If I twist the wording, I can get around this ruling!"

Archaon is a chaos lord on a giant freaking horse. We all know he's not a Monstrous Infantry (he's not an ogre) a chariot or any other unit type. He's monstrous cavalry, so infantry + monstrous beast just like every other monstrous cavalry in the game. Shouldn't the question be, what defines him as a monstrous infantry or other unit type other than a standard character if the monstrous cavalry mount is removed as per the rules on p105?

But no, I can't find anything that explicitly defines Archaon as infantry. Obviously he's actually a monster and immune to killing blow. :rolleyes:

Lex
13-10-2010, 01:13
Gah! Every time GW update the FAQs and explain something reasonably - yes, monstrous cavalry characters can be killing blowed - someone comes along to shout "aha! If I twist the wording, I can get around this ruling!"

Archaon is a chaos lord on a giant freaking horse. We all know he's not a Monstrous Infantry (he's not an ogre) a chariot or any other unit type. He's monstrous cavalry, so infantry + monstrous beast just like every other monstrous cavalry in the game. Shouldn't the question be, what defines him as a monstrous infantry or other unit type other than a standard character if the monstrous cavalry mount is removed as per the rules on p105?

But no, I can't find anything that explicitly defines Archaon as infantry. Obviously he's actually a monster and immune to killing blow. :rolleyes:

It's the same kind of GW foolishness that makes Bloodcrushers immune to KB but Skulltaker on juggy isn't. I think they should have just left it without that FAQ on that question.

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 01:18
Hmm... I hadn't considered that. That's indeed also deeply stupid. Doesn't make the Archaeon thing any less dumb.

Lex
13-10-2010, 01:22
Hmm... I hadn't considered that. That's indeed also deeply stupid. Doesn't make the Archaeon thing any less dumb.

I agree with you.

Synnister
13-10-2010, 01:40
Perhaps its a balance thingy. 685 pts gone with 1 6 will make most people cry.

Dark_Mage99
13-10-2010, 01:46
Perhaps its a balance thingy. 685 pts gone with 1 6 will make most people cry.

That's the whole point of killing blow, to kill your opponents good, expensive heroes on the roll of a 6. It always makes people cry!

Of course Archaon can be killing blowed.

What is with people trying to twist meanings and bend rules?

DaemonReign
13-10-2010, 02:21
That's the whole point of killing blow, to kill your opponents good, expensive heroes on the roll of a 6. It always makes people cry!

Of course Archaon can be killing blowed.

What is with people trying to twist meanings and bend rules?

I just gotta second this. With the latest Errata there is no question about this issue.

I can see why they needed to clarify this, too.

Bloodcrushers ought to be Killing Blowable now as well. Anything else would be rather ridiculous. Then again, in the DoC army book it says that the locus of khorne effects "bloodletters and bloodcrushers" (exemplifying how the Locus works for all marks in the book) - where it should specify (of course!) that it is only the Bloodletters actually Riding the Jugger that are subject to Hatred.

Otherwise, by following this logic, I'll be sticking a Herald of Tzeentch in a Flamer unit and have them get 4+ Ward save.

Off topic I know.. There seems to be some sort of fluffy Logic behind the KB-Errata issue anyways.

Lord_Elric
13-10-2010, 02:24
If hes listed as MC in the reference section of the rule book then as per the rules for killing blow it doesnt work on him simple same as killing blow used to effect ogres now u have an entire army let alone character that are immune to killing blow.

sulla
13-10-2010, 02:54
Archaon has the unit type Monstrous Cavalry. Nothing classifies Archaon as infantry without his mount.

So what do you think he would be if he was without his mount. Don't sit on the fence here.

Chris_
13-10-2010, 03:15
It does not matter what we think he would be, the rules and FAQ are very clear in this case.

He is MC, if he was not mounted doesn't apply as he is always mounted and counts as MC.

Other examples are Settra, always mounted but has the typ Inf on a Chariot so can be KB. Tyrion is another example of a SC that can not be KB.

AMWOOD co
13-10-2010, 04:33
I started this on a lark... I didn't think it would get this out of control...

Anyway, the general concensous would seem to be the following two statements.

1. Should Killing Blow work on Archaon? Yes, he's just a man (all be it a really big man).
2. Can Killing Blow work on Archaon? No, by his rules he is not in whole or in part Infantry, Cavalry or War Beast; he's Monstrous Cavalry.

House rule as you see fit.

decker_cky
13-10-2010, 07:03
Perhaps its a balance thingy. 685 pts gone with 1 6 will make most people cry.

1/18 without considering hitting him at 5+ or 6+. He has a 3+ ward.

ninnanuam
13-10-2010, 07:06
Just as an aside to Archaon's size. The archaon on foot model is on a much bigger base than 25mm I think it might be a 40mm...

Im not saying it was GW's intention not to be able to killing blow him but he is significantly bigger than even a chaos lord.

SiNNiX
13-10-2010, 07:08
It does not matter what we think he would be, the rules and FAQ are very clear in this case.

He is MC, if he was not mounted doesn't apply as he is always mounted and counts as MC.

Other examples are Settra, always mounted but has the typ Inf on a Chariot so can be KB. Tyrion is another example of a SC that can not be KB.

What he said. Even using common sense, it is not our place to say what Archaon "would most likely be without his mount." Without a further FAQ, he is permanently Monstrous Cavalry, and thus cannot be subject to Killing Blow.

McBaine
13-10-2010, 09:04
he is permanently Monstrous Cavalry, and thus cannot be subject to Killing Blow.

This rules laywering is silly. A Bretonnian Lord on Pegasus is also monstrous cavalry. By FAQ he is still subject to KB because he would be infantry without his mount.
There was an infantry model for Archaon (and Valten), and he stood on a 25X25 base. Anyone who seriously argues that Archaon would be any other thing as infantry without his mount is simply bending the rules and FAQ to gain an advatage against the intention of the new ruling of the FAQ.

Synnister
13-10-2010, 09:05
What he said. Even using common sense, it is not our place to say what Archaon "would most likely be without his mount." Without a further FAQ, he is permanently Monstrous Cavalry, and thus cannot be subject to Killing Blow.

This is the right interpretation. You can't take him without his mount therefore you can't class him as Infantry therefore he is Monstrous Cav and immune to KB.

ninnanuam
13-10-2010, 10:05
This rules laywering is silly. A Bretonnian Lord on Pegasus is also monstrous cavalry. By FAQ he is still subject to KB because he would be infantry without his mount.
There was an infantry model for Archaon (and Valten), and he stood on a 25X25 base. Anyone who seriously argues that Archaon would be any other thing as infantry without his mount is simply bending the rules and FAQ to gain an advatage against the intention of the new ruling of the FAQ.

Archaon on foot is not on a 25x25 base he is on a significantly bigger base.

Little Joe
13-10-2010, 10:17
This rules laywering is silly. A Bretonnian Lord on Pegasus is also monstrous cavalry. By FAQ he is still subject to KB because he would be infantry without his mount.
There was an infantry model for Archaon (and Valten), and he stood on a 25X25 base. Anyone who seriously argues that Archaon would be any other thing as infantry without his mount is simply bending the rules and FAQ to gain an advatage against the intention of the new ruling of the FAQ.
You cannot get a brettonian lord without mount and he is still classified as infantry in the rulebook, go from this to archaon and he on foot is also infantry.

Archaon on foot is not on a 25x25 base he is on a significantly bigger base.
Yes he is, came with the special games day model (2004?). And we all know you need to use the bases the model came with.;)

Lex
13-10-2010, 14:21
This rules laywering is silly. A Bretonnian Lord on Pegasus is also monstrous cavalry. By FAQ he is still subject to KB because he would be infantry without his mount.
There was an infantry model for Archaon (and Valten), and he stood on a 25X25 base. Anyone who seriously argues that Archaon would be any other thing as infantry without his mount is simply bending the rules and FAQ to gain an advatage against the intention of the new ruling of the FAQ.


This is the right interpretation. You can't take him without his mount therefore you can't class him as Infantry therefore he is Monstrous Cav and immune to KB.

It's not about whether or not you have to take a mount or not. It's about the fact that a Bretonnian Lord is listed as infantry and Archaon is listed as Monstrous Cavalry. This is not rules lawyering. Attempting to reinterpret the language of the rules, FAQ, etc. to have an effect that you believe is the way it SHOULD be done or that you think was the intent of GW is rules lawyering.

Captain Ventris
13-10-2010, 14:35
So what do you think he would be if he was without his mount. Don't sit on the fence here.

Last I checked, which was 1 minute ago, he can't BE without his mount as it only has one wound...you won't be killing Dorghar out from under him so they are killed as one whole model...that model is now a monstrous Cavalry model and thus cannot be affected by killing blow

I think the stretch here is that people are using the "what if he were this instead of this" arguement that simply does not have any meaning or bearing in a game where the rules are defined (albeit by GW standards) but defined none-the-less...

Witchblade
13-10-2010, 15:05
RAW vs RAI anyone...

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 15:44
If hes listed as MC in the reference section of the rule book then as per the rules for killing blow it doesnt work on him simple same as killing blow used to effect ogres now u have an entire army let alone character that are immune to killing blow.
A chaos lord on a daemonic mount is ALSO a monstrous cavalry. But can be killing blowed.


What he said. Even using common sense, it is not our place to say what Archaon "would most likely be without his mount." Without a further FAQ, he is permanently Monstrous Cavalry, and thus cannot be subject to Killing Blow.
:wtf: "Not our place"? Even using common sense he's still patently not Monstrous Infantry, ergo he's just a regular character. Common sense resolves this nicely. As below, there's even a model on foot on a 25mm base.

You can stick to saying he's MC and unkillingblowable but please don't say you're using common sense to reach this conclusion.


Yes he is, came with the special games day model (2004?). And we all know you need to use the bases the model came with.;)
Bingo. (http://www.distantlightminiatures.com/archaon_on_foot.htm)

I personally think it's pretty clear what unit type he is without the steed given that there's an infantry model of the guy.

Trains_Get_Robbed
13-10-2010, 15:56
Wait, so because Archon isn't classified as a infantry model on foot, it therefore prevents him from K.B?. . . :wtf: Really, if that is how someone played it against me, I would definitely take advantage of many of the chessy things available to me. Such as the H.E A.M Transformation of Kadon, attack, transform back before recieveing blows, thus being immune. The FAQs logic is pretty definitive in effect. Sometimes you just have to RAI things for the honor of the game, for your honor, for sportsmanship. Remember WFB is a gentleman's game. *realigns top hat*

Lex
13-10-2010, 16:26
Wait, so because Archon isn't classified as a infantry model on foot, it therefore prevents him from K.B?. . . :wtf: Really, if that is how someone played it against me, I would definitely take advantage of many of the chessy things available to me. Such as the H.E A.M Transformation of Kadon, attack, transform back before recieveing blows, thus being immune. The FAQs logic is pretty definitive in effect. Sometimes you just have to RAI things for the honor of the game, for your honor, for sportsmanship. Remember WFB is a gentleman's game. *realigns top hat*

The OP was about what the rule is. The rule is that he can't be KB'd.

Edit: But to your point, I don't think it's as crucial as the example your giving. How often do you see a WoC army using him in the first place. And even then, how often is whether he is vulnerable or not to a KB going to be critical to the outcome of the game. I see this as one of those things that I just ask my opponent how he wants to play it at the beginning and adjust my tactics against Archaon accordingly.

Lord_Elric
13-10-2010, 16:35
If u cant split your attacks between the character and the mount then they cant be killing blow'd as per monterous cavalry however if u can specificly target the rider on its own it for the most part counts as infantry (sort of) using killing blow against a herald on juggernaut would mean slayer the mount and rider in one single swing.

if the rule was that u can killing blow a character because he counts as infantry if he wasnt mounted (not on a monster or chariot) then there would no reason to create a new rule Heroic killing blow.

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 17:04
Um, Lord_Elric, that's exactly what the FAQ says. If the character would be infantry were not on a monstrous cavalry mount then he's eligible for killing blow.

A chaos lord on a daemonic steed is monstrous cavalry, but as the lord would be infantry if on foot, he's killingblowable. The loophole is that as Archaon is bought with his steed, he's listed flat out as monstrous cavalry and the claim is that his unit type without the steed is "unknowable."

Davo
13-10-2010, 23:07
Having thought about this is some depth whilst reading the thread I think RAI is certainly that KB would work on Archaon.

However, given how explicit the rules and faq are I could certainly have no problem with anybody who took him and said he couldn't be KB'd.

Hopefully this will be faq'd (again) in the near future but I think it is unfair to be calling a player cheesy for trying to implement a rule which needs no lawyering and is in fact written quite plainly.

theunwantedbeing
13-10-2010, 23:29
Common sense says that the FAQ says that killing blow does work on Archaon.
Although RAW says otherwise.

You can KB the Skulltaker when he rides a Juggernaught, you can't KB a bloodcrusher.
Whether the FAQ is helpful or not is upto your own personal opinion.

Lord_Elric
13-10-2010, 23:51
But skull taker when riding a juggernaut would have the unit type monsterous cavalry therfore being immune to killing blow as per killing blows rules why is this so unclear?? i understand it for ridden monsters and chariots as u target the character individualy however characters on monsterous beast mounts are attacked as a whole not individualy

Synnister
14-10-2010, 00:05
But skull taker when riding a juggernaut would have the unit type monsterous cavalry therfore being immune to killing blow as per killing blows rules why is this so unclear?? i understand it for ridden monsters and chariots as u target the character individualy however characters on monsterous beast mounts are attacked as a whole not individualy

Because the new FAQ relating to KB against characters on mounts.


Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasnít mounted.

Basically, no matter what he's mounted on if you could KB him without his mount you can still KB him. I personally don't like the FAQ ruling as it causes silly situations like skulltaker but this is what we're given. As for this thread, there is no dispute what the RAW says on this matter. The only thing being debated is the possibility of house rules and for that play how you and your opponent agree to play :)

Chris_
14-10-2010, 00:20
:wtf: "Not our place"? Even using common sense he's still patently not Monstrous Infantry, ergo he's just a regular character. Common sense resolves this nicely. As below, there's even a model on foot on a 25mm base.

You can stick to saying he's MC and unkillingblowable but please don't say you're using common sense to reach this conclusion.Common sense says that the rules are clear on this, he can not be KB.

If people don't like it and want to house rule it, I would not have a problem at all with that. But for now the rule is what it is.

Lord_Elric
14-10-2010, 00:56
So if a character mounted on a juggernaut for example is killing blowed then your forced to remove the juggernaut too even tho it is immune to killing blow sounds to me like the person who wrote the faq wasnt paying attention when answering this question but meh RAW is RAW i suppose doubt ill personaly play it that way nor will anyone i know thats in the hobby.

Kevlar
14-10-2010, 01:48
Its obviously a misprint or a misinterpretation in the rulebook. Hopefully one which will be errata-ed.

Who else is messed up like this? Tyrion, tictactoe and the Fay?

Chris_
14-10-2010, 02:32
Skarsnik too.

TheKingInYellow
14-10-2010, 03:08
The way I would read it is this:

If you have an infantry model that can purchase a mount that 'upgrades' his unit type Monstrous Cavalry, it does not confer immunity to Killing Blow as the model is still an infantry model at it's base.

Archaon, Tyrion, Tiq-Taq-To, etc have no infantry component to 'upgrade' and thus, cannot be subject to Killing Blow.

Kevlar
14-10-2010, 03:36
The way I would read it is this:

If you have an infantry model that can purchase a mount that 'upgrades' his unit type Monstrous Cavalry, it does not confer immunity to Killing Blow as the model is still an infantry model at it's base.

Archaon, Tyrion, Tiq-Taq-To, etc have no infantry component to 'upgrade' and thus, cannot be subject to Killing Blow.

They were listed that way back when the killing blow immunity was conferred by their mount. With the new KB errata they should no longer be immune. Its obviously an oversight as none of them are monstrous cavalry, only their mount is.

Synnister
14-10-2010, 03:51
They were listed that way back when the killing blow immunity was conferred by their mount. With the new KB errata they should no longer be immune. Its obviously an oversight as none of them are monstrous cavalry, only their mount is.

Actually they are monstrous cavalry since that's what the BRB says they are. To say otherwise is to house rule it.

Lord_Elric
14-10-2010, 03:51
They were listed that way back when the killing blow immunity was conferred by their mount. With the new KB errata they should no longer be immune. Its obviously an oversight as none of them are monstrous cavalry, only their mount is.

Of corse there all monsterouse cavalry there models riding a monsterous beast
the mount on its own is just a monsterous beast they need a rider to be cavalry. personaly if monsterous cavalry wernt ment to be immune to killing blow it wouldnt say they were in the killing blow rules, taking the faq as correct would nulify all the piont of there being monstous cavalry rules as all monsterous cavalry has an "infanty" rider (with the exception of rhinox cav).
monsterous cavalry are immune to killing blow regardless of there rider. therefor a characer riding a monstous beast is also immune as he become unit type MC. the reason monsterous cavalry are immune is because u target the whole model and it would be silly to think that a single strike would slay both the beast and rider.

With regards to the faqs though its not clear and i hope its edited soon i take it a aimed at ridden monsters and chariots where u can target the character alone (thus eliminating the idea of slaying both monster and rider in a single swing)

as the rule in the rule book are already clear regarding monsterous cavalry it seems piontless to let a single faq question cus so much uproar.

Kevlar
14-10-2010, 04:07
personaly if monsterous cavalry wernt ment to be immune to killing blow it wouldnt say they were in the killing blow rules, taking the faq as correct would nulify all the piont of there being monstous cavalry rules as all monsterous cavalry has an "infanty" rider (with the exception of rhinox cav).
monsterous cavalry are immune to killing blow regardless of there rider. therefor a characer riding a monstous beast is also immune as he become unit type MC. the reason monsterous cavalry are immune is because u target the whole model and it would be silly to think that a single strike would slay both the beast and rider.


I don't know if you know this or not, but monstrous cavalry riders are no longer immune to killing blow in the latest faq revisions.

The only reason these few special characters are is due to an oversight of them having incorrect unit types. It didn't really matter before when all MC riders were immune to killing blow, but now it matters.

Little Joe
14-10-2010, 15:29
Skarsnik too.

He is a monstrous beast, so by the book no infantry as it is. Nor cavalry and thus will retain immunity to KB whatever the outcome of this argument.

Lex
14-10-2010, 16:14
An interesting thing I noticed last night to add fuel to the argument of intent. Look in the Bestiary in the BRB for Morathi, who also has a no option mount.

logan054
14-10-2010, 17:57
Archaeon certainly isn't ogre sized! Is there really any doubt that Archaeon "would count as infantry" if on foot? :eyebrows:

As stupid as it, Archoan is immune, his steed dosn't have a type and Archoan is listed as MC, I personally am running out of reasons to use a juggernaught in my WoC army now.

AMWOOD co
14-10-2010, 18:11
Who would have ever thought this little nit-pick rule would get so out of hand? *hand goes up, a quick 'Get down!' is heard as my other hand slaps it down*.

Anyway, I've talked it over with my group and we are house ruling it that he can be taken down with one good chop. Was it a GW oversight? Maybe. Maybe not as he's been immune to Killing Blow until before (Canadian) Thanksgiving.

Our thoughts are as I stated before: he should be able to be taken down but by the rules he can't.

Lord Inquisitor
14-10-2010, 18:17
As stupid as it, Archoan is immune, his steed dosn't have a type and Archoan is listed as MC, I personally am running out of reasons to use a juggernaught in my WoC army now.

The FAQ again.

Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted.

So you're saying that Archaon would count as a monstrous cavalry if he weren't mounted. Right? Even if we came up with some mystical reason why his horse disappeared (I dunno, a scenario special rule or whatever), then he would still have swiftstride, not get LOS!, enter buildings, etc?

I get the argument, really I do (it says MC next to his name, yadda yadda). But the FAQ doesn't actually say "as long as the character has the unit type infantry." It says "as long as the character would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted. If Archaon wasn't mounted, would he count as an infantry model? I should think he would, suggesting that he counts as a monstrous cavalry without the monstrous cavalry mount is absurd. I mean, the FAQ is saying, if he weren't a monstrous cavalry unit type, would he be killingblowable... and everyone is saying "na, he'd still be monstrous cavalry unit type even if you took the monstrous cavalry mount away." I'm still not convinced that this is a logical reading of the FAQ.

If I wanted to get really desperate I could argue that without his mount, Archaon would be an INFANTRY MODEL albeit an infantry model with the unit type Monstrous Cavalry and therefore satisfy the FAQ's criteria, but that's doing what I hate, which is taking a ludicrously over-literal reading of the rules.

EDMM
14-10-2010, 18:34
There is no reason to suspect that Archaon would count as anything if it wasn't mounted.

Sure the model LOOKS LIKE something, but that doesn't mean anything. He could be classified as a Monster or Monstrous Infantry or something unique for all we know.

Anything you assert that he would count as if unmounted is totally made up with no support in the rules whatsoever.

"Well shuckadarn, he looks like he would count as infantry" doesn't count for anything.

logan054
14-10-2010, 18:44
I get the argument, really I do (it says MC next to his name, yadda yadda). But the FAQ doesn't actually say "as long as the character has the unit type infantry." It says "as long as the character would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted.

I was unaware that being a character made you more subject KB, as far as I was aware it was about being classed as infantry, cavalry or warbeast. Archoans classification in the rule book has nothing to do with with unit type of his steed either, it doesn't have one. He is simply classed as monstrous cavalry, he cannot be bought as a infantry model either. Frankly I think the whole FAQ on KB is stupid anyways as suddenly bloodcrushers are not immune to KB (as the bloodletters are infantry), yet again I have even less reason to use a daemonic mount.

I actually can't understand the mind set that lets ASF great weapons for HE slip through but change Daemonic mounts to MC and give them absolutely no benefit over a normal steed, I think my answer as to why archoan is immune to KB uses the same amount of common sense GW applied to the FAQ's in general.

Lord Inquisitor
14-10-2010, 18:45
There is no reason to suspect that Archaon would count as anything if it wasn't mounted.

Sure the model LOOKS LIKE something, but that doesn't mean anything. He could be classified as a Monster or Monstrous Infantry or something unique for all we know.

Anything you assert that he would count as if unmounted is totally made up with no support in the rules whatsoever.

"Well shuckadarn, he looks like he would count as infantry" doesn't count for anything.

This is a more reasonable argument, at least from a rules perspective. However, at least for Archaon, GW made an infantry model version of Archaon on a 25mm base. We know categorically that Archaon would count as an infantry model.

logan054
14-10-2010, 18:48
This is a more reasonable argument, at least from a rules perspective. However, at least for Archaon, GW made an infantry model version of Archaon on a 25mm base. We know categorically that Archaon would count as an infantry model.

So I am guessing harry the hammer would be a MI as he was on a rather large base :P

EDMM
14-10-2010, 18:50
The Archaon on foot model was a limited edition model with no rules for a previous edition.

logan054
14-10-2010, 18:54
Well actually he did have rules with the HoC book, his steed used to have 3 wounds and could be killed leaving him on foot, in 7th they fixed this issue and made daemonic mounts actually useful. Come 8th ed and decide to go and make them useless again and FAQ so they lose the only real advantage they had over a normal steed for the additional points cost.

EDMM
14-10-2010, 18:55
Right, but the model was only released in 7th, when he had no rules for being on foot, and none were ever provided in any form, and that's an edition ago.

Lord Inquisitor
14-10-2010, 18:56
I was unaware that being a character made you more subject KB, as far as I was aware it was about being classed as infantry, cavalry or warbeast. Archoans classification in the rule book has nothing to do with with unit type of his steed either, it doesn't have one. He is simply classed as monstrous cavalry, he cannot be bought as a infantry model either. Frankly I think the whole FAQ on KB is stupid anyways as suddenly bloodcrushers are not immune to KB (as the bloodletters are infantry), yet again I have even less reason to use a daemonic mount.

I actually can't understand the mind set that lets ASF great weapons for HE slip through but change Daemonic mounts to MC and give them absolutely no benefit over a normal steed, I think my answer as to why archoan is immune to KB uses the same amount of common sense GW applied to the FAQ's in general.
Actually if you look at the FAQ above, it specifically mentions characters. Hence what unwantedbeing was saying earlier, bloodcrushers aren't killingblowable but a herlad on jugger is.

The obvious next question for the FAQ is ... are regular MCav subject to killing blow?

I get the impression that there wasn't a single person doing the FAQs as they're very variable (e.g. some have removed the weapon restrictions on BSBs in older books and others didn't). The big kicker to MCav is the lack of Look Out Sir! but hey you do get Stomp ... ;)


So I am guessing harry the hammer would be a MI as he was on a rather large base :P
His unit type is entirely and completely unknowable, unguessable and uninferrable as he doesn't have an entry in the back of the rulebook... :p

Incidentally, I googled Harry the Hammer to look at the model again and I got this (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/User:Harry_the_Hammer/MyTemplate)page... :eyebrows:

logan054
14-10-2010, 18:59
Right, but the model was only released in 7th, when he had no rules for being on foot, and none were ever provided in any form, and that's an edition ago.

I am pretty sure it was released while we still had the HoC book, the WoC book was released towards the end of 7th ed

AMWOOD co
14-10-2010, 19:24
I am pretty sure it was released while we still had the HoC book, the WoC book was released towards the end of 7th ed

I believe it was released during the "Storm of Chaos" campaign. Wasn't that late 6th?

logan054
14-10-2010, 19:56
I believe it was released during the "Storm of Chaos" campaign. Wasn't that late 6th?

Yeah thats what I thought but just assumed I was mistaken, it happens


Actually if you look at the FAQ above, it specifically mentions characters. Hence what unwantedbeing was saying earlier, bloodcrushers aren't killingblowable but a herlad on jugger is.

The obvious next question for the FAQ is ... are regular MCav subject to killing blow?

I get the impression that there wasn't a single person doing the FAQs as they're very variable (e.g. some have removed the weapon restrictions on BSBs in older books and others didn't). The big kicker to MCav is the lack of Look Out Sir! but hey you do get Stomp ... ;)

I have read in the rule book that implies that KB work different if you are character, nothing at all, it is purely based on unit type, the FAQ also does not imply characters are treated and different to infantry. All the FAQ does is answer a specific question, now to me while I can see part of the logic behind it. Now personally I don't think Stomp attack (1 ASL attack) outweighs having a twice the frontage and for characters no LoS roll. In the case of a Chaos character I actually gain nothing, I pay more points and get on less chaos knight in combat who would provide much better support than any daemonic steed.



His unit type is entirely and completely unknowable, unguessable and uninferrable as he doesn't have an entry in the back of the rulebook... :p

Incidentally, I googled Harry the Hammer to look at the model again and I got this (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/User:Harry_the_Hammer/MyTemplate)page... :eyebrows:

I bet you made that yourself :p

decker_cky
14-10-2010, 19:58
@Lord Inquisitor: We know he came on whatever base he came on. Base size does not define unit type though. Agree with your group to whatever you want, but if anyone ever argued with you, they'd be the ones in the right.

Also....I'm going to put forward that Archaon would Monstrous Cavalry regardless of his mount. He just happens to be riding Dorghar. His rules agree with me. ;)

On the other hand...Morathii is monstrous cavalry, but by her rules would clearly be infantry without Sulephet.

Lord Inquisitor
14-10-2010, 20:15
On the other hand...Morathii is monstrous cavalry, but by her rules would clearly be infantry without Sulephet.

True. Yay for consistency in the rulebook. :rolleyes:

Lex
14-10-2010, 20:20
True. Yay for consistency in the rulebook. :rolleyes:

I do wonder why the distinction between Morathi and Archaon, Fey, etc.

decker_cky
14-10-2010, 20:46
Obviously because Archaon's such a monster. ;)

AMWOOD co
14-10-2010, 21:09
Fly in the ointment time. Is the interpretation that a character that is mounted on something that can be killed the goal of this FAQ? A character riding on a monster is part of a monster model and pre-Thanksgiving would be unaffected by killing blow. Now he can be.

Would a not so out there interpretaion be that models that cannot be dismounted (ie. Monstrous Cavalry) thus cannot be affected by Killing Blow while those that ride killable mounts (ie. Chariots and Monsters) can be affected by Killing Blow?

Yes, this is another house rule, but one that shifts things in another direction, and it makes the whole thing make a great deal of sense.

Lord_Elric
14-10-2010, 21:25
Fly in the ointment time. Is the interpretation that a character that is mounted on something that can be killed the goal of this FAQ? A character riding on a monster is part of a monster model and pre-Thanksgiving would be unaffected by killing blow. Now he can be.

Would a not so out there interpretaion be that models that cannot be dismounted (ie. Monstrous Cavalry) thus cannot be affected by Killing Blow while those that ride killable mounts (ie. Chariots and Monsters) can be affected by Killing Blow?

Yes, this is another house rule, but one that shifts things in another direction, and it makes the whole thing make a great deal of sense.

Yeh this is exactly how i read it to be honest first time thru it makes alot of sense and is how i belive the rules are intended to be used. unfortuneatly its a badly worded question ans is also just an faq answer not errata so its by no means final.

logan054
14-10-2010, 21:38
Fly in the ointment time. Is the interpretation that a character that is mounted on something that can be killed the goal of this FAQ? A character riding on a monster is part of a monster model and pre-Thanksgiving would be unaffected by killing blow. Now he can be.

Would a not so out there interpretaion be that models that cannot be dismounted (ie. Monstrous Cavalry) thus cannot be affected by Killing Blow while those that ride killable mounts (ie. Chariots and Monsters) can be affected by Killing Blow?

Yes, this is another house rule, but one that shifts things in another direction, and it makes the whole thing make a great deal of sense.

Thats certainly how it should be but I guess GW have sold loads of jugger lords and want to now sell loads of heroes on chaos steeds.

Kevlar
14-10-2010, 21:44
Would a not so out there interpretaion be that models that cannot be dismounted (ie. Monstrous Cavalry) thus cannot be affected by Killing Blow while those that ride killable mounts (ie. Chariots and Monsters) can be affected by Killing Blow?


That is an incorrect interpretation because models that ride monstrous cavalry can all be killing blowed now with the exception of a handful of special characters who were obviously overlooked when the new FAQ was done.

I expect if enough noise is made that they will have their unit type changed to regular infantry and their mount changed to monstrous beast in the next update.

decker_cky
14-10-2010, 21:48
I expect if enough noise is made that they will have their unit type changed to regular infantry and their mount changed to monstrous beast in the next update.

This is GW we're talking about...

"Is Archaon immune to Killing Blow?"
"Yes. He's the Everchosen."

logan054
14-10-2010, 21:57
This is GW we're talking about...

"Is Archaon immune to Killing Blow?"
"Yes. He's the Everchosen."

I think your forgetting something her, GW only ignore things in the chaos book if it isn't a advantage, HoC MoK, WoC Daemonic mounts

Kevlar
14-10-2010, 22:10
This is GW we're talking about...

"Is Archaon immune to Killing Blow?"
"Yes. He's the Everchosen."

Maybe if he was the only one, but they have no special love for tyrion or the fay enchantress, or that lizard guy with the really dumb name.

Lord_Elric
14-10-2010, 22:15
I expect if enough noise is made that they will have their unit type changed to regular infantry and their mount changed to monstrous beast in the next update.

actual in order to solve the problem they need just remove the Monsterous cavalry entry from the killing blow rules however until they do such an errata its one faq question i shall be ignoreing all together but thts just me i guess as i dont use any monsterous cavalry (being DE) i doubt my opponent will argue with me lol

Kevlar
14-10-2010, 22:42
Hey I just noticed, pegasus knights, warhawk riders, and terradon riders are all immune to killing blow too! Guess they are all just as gigantic as Archeron.

Lord_Elric
14-10-2010, 22:52
The faqs would now say otherwise unfortuneatly hence the arguement

logan054
14-10-2010, 22:59
They say otherwise about Archoan or the MC units?

Lord_Elric
14-10-2010, 23:22
they say u can be killing blowed if without the mount (aka the monsterous beast) youd count as infantry,

logan054
14-10-2010, 23:35
The things you mentioned cannot be killing blowed because they are classed as MC regardless of being mounted, Peg knight riders are classed as MC. Perhaps GW will change this, who knows, sadly as things stand characters have just had their options for mount reduced even more.

theunwantedbeing
14-10-2010, 23:42
Simple solution is to alter the FAQ so that you cannot KB a character who is classed as Monstrous Cavalry, a single blow wouldn't be enough to slay the combined model (as they fight as such).

Unlike riding in a chariot/on a monster where the 2 are seperate enough to be attacked individually.

Similarly regular cavalry mounts are small and weak enough to be dealt with/chased off in the even of slaying their rider.

I daresay that's the most useful solution as it requires the least change, plus it makes enough sense.

logan054
14-10-2010, 23:48
I think most people are in agreement that this is how it should be done, I would personally be very happy if the FAQ was changed so it actually worked like this. Like I said I guess it depends if GW is selling enough characters on steeds, atleast with the suggestion you made their is some sort of reason to choose a MB as a mount.

decker_cky
15-10-2010, 00:14
IMO the best solution would be just to change that answer to "No, you can only killing blow against unit type infantry or cavalry. It's nigh impossible getting that killing blow over the bulk of a chariot or monster." Removes all that ambiguity in one step, and it's not like there's an issue with characters on monsters and chariots are overpowered, or killing blow is underpowered.

Chris_
15-10-2010, 00:15
I think the rules for killing blow where fine as they were and this FAQ just screwed them up. I.e. if you are not of the unit type cavalry, inf or warbeast you can't be KB'd. (no matter what you count as when not mounted)

Then again I think it is kinda stupid that KB does nothing extra against bigger stuff, would make sense to me if it caused 1 wound with no armour save against them.

Someone also claimed that Skarsnik is an MB, which is true and he went by unnoticed by the FAQ as he can't be KB. But I just think he was worth mentioning as he is just a goblin next to a huge cave squig, if they let people on a huge beast be KB then they should let him be KB too.

AMWOOD co
15-10-2010, 03:34
Skarsnik is a goblin next to a huge squig with only a 6+ armour save and 6 wounds. He dies like nobody's business. Letting you killing blow him is not a necessity.

Okay, the other interpretation works for most of you? Monstrous Cavalry (ie. Monstrous Beast riders) stay immune to killing blow but Chariot and Monster Riders are not. I'll pass the word on and see what the verdict is.

Chris_
15-10-2010, 03:41
As long as they can't be attacked seperately from their mount (except for normal cav) they should be immune to KB. (this is my opinion, not in line with the ruling in the FAQ)

As for the Skarsnik thing, that was just an example and whether he is easy to kill or not is not really relevant.

AMWOOD co
15-10-2010, 03:49
The FAQ is a little ambiguous. Does it refer to characters that have to option to buy mounts or to characters that can have their mounts removed from under them? If it's the second, Monstrous Cavalry are immune to Killing Blow (justifying that huge cost on Daemon Mounts and Juggernauts a little more). If the first, only special characters, daemons, and ogres are safe.

Lord Inquisitor
15-10-2010, 04:04
What's ambiguous about "mounted character, regardless of what he is mounted on"?

AMWOOD co
15-10-2010, 04:07
...nevermind...

Synnister
15-10-2010, 04:31
What's ambiguous about "mounted character, regardless of what he is mounted on"?

The problem with clinging to that portion of FAQ bypasses the most important part in the answer which is :

as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasnít mounted.


There is no rule calling for Archaon to be an infantry model. To make him an infantry model is making up a rule which is a house rule.

Alric
15-10-2010, 06:05
Would a not so out there interpretaion be that models that cannot be dismounted (ie. Monstrous Cavalry) thus cannot be affected by Killing Blow while those that ride killable mounts (ie. Chariots and Monsters) can be affected by Killing Blow?

Yes, this is another house rule, but one that shifts things in another direction, and it makes the whole thing make a great deal of sense.

Well according to the BRB there are exceptions to killing blow for MC, so as you say any character on a monstrous mount that can't be dismounted from the mount should qualify for the exception of MC in the BRB. I'm guessing this got FAQ'd for those characters riding monstrous beast or chariots that can be seperated from their mount , like a "ridden monster" or chariot.

I believe if you take the FAQ literally it makes more sense.
Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted.
So it would only apply to a "model" that literally could be dismounted.

For completeness..
Characters riding monstrous beast are treated as troop type monstrous cavalry (MC) and follows the rules for monstrous cavalry. All cavalry rules apply to monstrous cavalry, a cavalry model is treated as a single model - the rider cannot dismount.

honorandglory
15-10-2010, 06:35
You cannot get a brettonian lord without mount and he is still classified as infantry in the rulebook, go from this to archaon and he on foot is also infantry.


Sure you can. You actually have to pay points to mount him on a horse, he does not come on it by default. Although you also have to pay points for him to fight on foot.

Tregar
15-10-2010, 09:15
Someone also claimed that Skarsnik is an MB, which is true and he went by unnoticed by the FAQ as he can't be KB. But I just think he was worth mentioning as he is just a goblin next to a huge cave squig, if they let people on a huge beast be KB then they should let him be KB too.

Don't be so petty. Skarsnik is a special case, and his statline (wounds) represents both him and a big beasty. It's only fair that he can't be killing blowed. But hey it'd be a small price to pay if he was treated as infantry for look out sir as well.

gaarew
15-10-2010, 10:41
You want to assume that Archaon is infantry without his mount. What would you base this on? The model? His rules? His fluff?

The Archaon on foot Gamesday model...

;)

EDIT -

basically, if an INFANTRY model purchases an upgrade to make him anything other than infantry, he can be KB'ed.

If the model already comes mounted, it never has the type INFANTRY, and is therefore immune.

logan054
15-10-2010, 12:33
basically, if an INFANTRY model purchases an upgrade to make him anything other than infantry, he can be KB'ed.

If the model already comes mounted, it never has the type INFANTRY, and is therefore immune.

Which actually makes no sense at all!


Well according to the BRB there are exceptions to killing blow for MC, so as you say any character on a monstrous mount that can't be dismounted from the mount should qualify for the exception of MC in the BRB. I'm guessing this got FAQ'd for those characters riding monstrous beast or chariots that can be targeted seperately and/or be seperated from their mount , like a "ridden monster" or chariot.

I believe if you take the FAQ literally it makes more sense.
Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted.
So it would only apply to a "model" that literally could be dismounted.

For completeness..
Characters riding monstrous beast are treated as troop type monstrous cavalry (MC) and follows the rules for monstrous cavalry. All cavalry rules apply to monstrous cavalry, a cavalry model is treated as a single model - the rider cannot dismount.


Now this actually makes some sort of sense, far more than the what gaarew has posted, perhaps I am just reading this the way I want because I have a cool model I don't want to have totally useless.

Chris_
15-10-2010, 12:41
Don't be so petty. Skarsnik is a special case, and his statline (wounds) represents both him and a big beasty. It's only fair that he can't be killing blowed. But hey it'd be a small price to pay if he was treated as infantry for look out sir as well.And the Lord of End Times, the Everchosen is not a special case? But maybe you are not on the team thinking that Archaon should be able to be KB'd?
I don't think that any MB, MC (no matter if you actually have to buy the mount) and so on should be able to be KB'd. But I honestly can't see the difference of Skarsnik standing next to a monstrous beast and getting protection against KB and the people arguing that Archaon, Tyrion and the Fay should be able to be KB'd.

That special ruling in the FAQ was actually for the worse I think.

Lex
15-10-2010, 12:57
Just imagine if the guy writing the FAQ thought "Not mounted, dismounted, same thing."

logan054
15-10-2010, 12:58
That special ruling in the FAQ was actually for the worse I think.

I don't know, I think SoA still giving great weapons ASF is a close contender

gaarew
15-10-2010, 13:24
Which actually makes no sense at all!


This is GW we are talking about. Regardless of whether it makes sense or not, it is what the FAQ says.

RAW vs RAI. (or common sense)

Chris_
15-10-2010, 13:44
I don't know, I think SoA still giving great weapons ASF is a close contenderDidn't mean that it was the worst FAQ, just that it was essentially a rules change that is bad :p Even though my Tomb Guard are happy :) Especially after munching through lots of Grail Knights today...

logan054
15-10-2010, 14:06
This is GW we are talking about. Regardless of whether it makes sense or not, it is what the FAQ says.

RAW vs RAI. (or common sense)


The funny thing is GW seem to hate rules lawyers when they write the rules but pander to them when they do the FAQ, so yes common sense does seem to go out the window more often than not :( I wish I had the email address for the rules boyz so I could ask exactly why I would take MB over a WB as a mount for a character.


Didn't mean that it was the worst FAQ, just that it was essentially a rules change that is bad :p Even though my Tomb Guard are happy :) Especially after munching through lots of Grail Knights today...

Oh I thought you meant terrible, badly thought out, who let the lunatic run the asylum kinda thing, not that its far from truth mind you :P Yeah I bet TG are happy, my exalted on jugger is looking for a new friend now :(

Lord_Elric
15-10-2010, 14:22
Don't be so petty. Skarsnik is a special case, and his statline (wounds) represents both him and a big beasty. It's only fair that he can't be killing blowed. But hey it'd be a small price to pay if he was treated as infantry for look out sir as well.

ah ha well then by going by your quote "his statline (wounds) represents both him and a big beasty" thats also the piont with monsterous cavalry too and when u mount a character on a MB. so would u argue that if your using the mounts wounds then u cant be killing blowed then would be exactly the same case a skarsnik in my opinion.

Loopstah
15-10-2010, 14:38
Use the following questions to find the answer.

1. "Can the character ever be without their mount?" If yes go to 2, if no go to 4.
2. "Are they now classed as Infantry?" If yes go to 3, if no go to 4.
3. You can KB them while they are mounted.
4. You can't KB them at all, ever. There is no time they will ever be classed as an Infantry model within the rules.

Seriously, a character that can never become an unmounted Infantry model within the rules of the game can never be classed as an unmounted Infantry model in regards to this FAQ.

Lord_Elric
15-10-2010, 14:47
Use the following questions to find the answer.

1. "Can the character ever be without their mount?" If yes go to 2, if no go to 4.
2. "Are they now classed as Infantry?" If yes go to 3, if no go to 4.
3. You can KB them while they are mounted.
4. You can't KB them at all, ever. There is no time they will ever be classed as an Infantry model within the rules.

Seriously, a character that can never become an unmounted Infantry model within the rules of the game can never be classed as an unmounted Infantry model in regards to this FAQ.

ok so if this is the case we just throw away all rules for monsterous cavalry all together for the sake of a single badley written faq question "faqs answer questions about the rules Errata over rights the rules" going by what youve said all monsterous cavalry can be killing blowed despite what is said in the rules for killing blow. Your bloodletter is an infantry model if it wasnt mounted so i can killing blow it and its 5 tonne bad tempered brass rhino hes sat on. Cus once u kill the rider the juggernaut obviuosly stands there doing nothing picking stone out their hoves with their horns. Its a god dam "mount" of corse the bloody models is going to count as infantry if it wasnt mounted every model in the game is going to count as infantry if its not riding anything


"and before anyone trys to be clever im aware of the single case of rhinox cavalry"

Kevlar
15-10-2010, 14:49
Use the following questions to find the answer.

1. "Can the character ever be without their mount?" If yes go to 2, if no go to 4.
2. "Are they now classed as Infantry?" If yes go to 3, if no go to 4.
3. You can KB them while they are mounted.
4. You can't KB them at all, ever. There is no time they will ever be classed as an Infantry model within the rules.

Seriously, a character that can never become an unmounted Infantry model within the rules of the game can never be classed as an unmounted Infantry model in regards to this FAQ.

But that reasoning should also apply to heroes and lords who buy monstrous beasts as mounts since they can never become infantry either. For that matter when can regular cavalry ever become infantry? Your reasoning fails the logic test.

The only solution is they can all be killing blowed or none can. It needs an errata one way or the other. They are all the exact same troop type.

gaarew
15-10-2010, 15:05
They are all the exact same troop type.

But the distinction is whether or not they were something else before they became Monstrous Cavalry.

Little Joe
15-10-2010, 15:33
Sure you can. You actually have to pay points to mount him on a horse, he does not come on it by default. Although you also have to pay points for him to fight on foot.

The bretonnian lord comes on foot and has some mounted upgrade options, but if you do not take the monster/MC you must mount him on a horse (armybook p.66). This goes for a paladin as well by the way.

True, Skarsnik is also a case of a character being what he is with, although nobody would argue him by himself not being infantry. Comparrisons can be made as he shares the wounds with gnobla. But he follows different (stupid) rules from there on, and will die faster than a heartbeat because of it.

Tregar
15-10-2010, 15:54
And the Lord of End Times, the Everchosen is not a special case? But maybe you are not on the team thinking that Archaon should be able to be KB'd?
I don't think that any MB, MC (no matter if you actually have to buy the mount) and so on should be able to be KB'd. But I honestly can't see the difference of Skarsnik standing next to a monstrous beast and getting protection against KB and the people arguing that Archaon, Tyrion and the Fay should be able to be KB'd.

That special ruling in the FAQ was actually for the worse I think.

The FAQ ruling was a very poor one that I hope gets reversed, as it also has lots of poor consequences. However it seems extremely cynical to whine that others who still retain their immunity to KB should also be subject to a stupid FAQ ruling and lose it as well.

DivineVisitor
15-10-2010, 15:54
Im not really all that bothered by it. Would make up for not getting any 'Look Out Sir' rolls when i blast a cannonball at their face anyway.

As things stand Archaon, Tyrion, The Fey, Tiktaq'to are all currently immune to KB as they are all Monstrous Cav, their mounts have no unit type and it's the characters that make them Monstrous... apparently.

logan054
15-10-2010, 16:11
Im not really all that bothered by it. Would make up for not getting any 'Look Out Sir' rolls when i blast a cannonball at their face anyway.

To be fair its not like you actually have to kill that many models to stop me getting a LoS roll anyways, being immune to KB does give you some reason to actually use one over a normal horse. Sadly it seems the terrible models or the highly over priced ones seem to get the best rules. Essential you buy something because it looks cool you use it a few times and you quickly get the feeling you have a rather nice looking paper weight :(


ok so if this is the case we just throw away all rules for monsterous cavalry all together for the sake of a single badley written faq question "faqs answer questions about the rules Errata over rights the rules" going by what youve said all monsterous cavalry can be killing blowed despite what is said in the rules for killing blow.

Throw them away! you get stomp attacks! 1 auto hit that is ASL which chances are you wont get now because you get KB anyways, thats is some seriously good rules writing wouldn't you say!

Synnister
15-10-2010, 18:09
ok so if this is the case we just throw away all rules for monsterous cavalry all together for the sake of a single badley written faq question "faqs answer questions about the rules Errata over rights the rules" going by what youve said all monsterous cavalry can be killing blowed despite what is said in the rules for killing blow. Your bloodletter is an infantry model if it wasnt mounted so i can killing blow it and its 5 tonne bad tempered brass rhino hes sat on. Cus once u kill the rider the juggernaut obviuosly stands there doing nothing picking stone out their hoves with their horns. Its a god dam "mount" of corse the bloody models is going to count as infantry if it wasnt mounted every model in the game is going to count as infantry if its not riding anything


"and before anyone trys to be clever im aware of the single case of rhinox cavalry"

At what point does 'all' monstrous cavalry become characters? A bloodletter on a juggy is not a character. It's a Monstrous cavalry model thus immune to killing blow. If you buy a juggy for your herald, because he is a character 1st and an infantry model 2nd, he fulfills the requirements of the FAQ allowing him to be killing blowed.

Archaon is never classed as a Infantry unit type in the Bestiary section of the BRB. Do you people not even look at the rules or just argue because you're mad at the ruling? No where in any rule book errata or anything that can even remotely be used as a scrap of rule does it say that archaon is an Infantry model. No where. To say otherwise is making up rules that are supported by no official rule in the game. If you want to see an example of a special character that would be subject to this FAQ, look at Morathi. She is classed as Infantry and her mount is classed as a Monstrous Beast. And she is subject to the killing blow special rule per the FAQ.

If you guys want to play that Monstrous Cavalry is immune to Killing Blow regardless of rider, then you are making up a house rule and are fine to do so. However, arguing about house rules in the rules forum is pointless.

logan054
15-10-2010, 19:00
At what point does 'all' monstrous cavalry become characters? A bloodletter on a juggy is not a character. It's a Monstrous cavalry model thus immune to killing blow. If you buy a juggy for your herald, because he is a character 1st and an infantry model 2nd, he fulfills the requirements of the FAQ allowing him to be killing blowed.

At what point in the rule book does it state characters are treated different to other models in regards to killing blow? I can't find a page, can you. The FAQ actually makes no sense, also their has been errata to the KB rules to suggest otherwise, their has apparently been a frequently asked question.


If you guys want to play that Monstrous Cavalry is immune to Killing Blow regardless of rider, then you are making up a house rule and are fine to do so. However, arguing about house rules in the rules forum is pointless.

I think its guy rather than guys and to be fair a lot of people are trying to figure out why they have changed KB and made MC even more of a pointless upgrade for a character.

Synnister
15-10-2010, 19:49
Disagreeing and not wanting to follow a FAQ or a rule is a house rule. Do I personally want to follow the FAQ, no. It makes no sense at all and since it's not an Errata, it is optional. However, most official settings do treat FAQs as non-optional. Like it or not, you will most likely have to deal with this ruling if you intend on playing in tournaments.

And I would agree that characters on a Monstrous Beast is indeed pointless.

AMWOOD co
15-10-2010, 19:58
A character on a monstrous beast isn't pointless as he will still gain swifstride, stomp, a possible increase in wounds and any other rules associated with the beast (Giant Eagle High Elf Noble with Reaver Bow for example).

Now, the whole arguement is entirely over Monstrous Cavalry as we all agree that characters on chariots and monsters, who before would not have been targets for killing blow, are covered by the FAQ. Also, killiing blow itself already covers cavalry, infantry and war beast models, so no need for discussion there.

I like Alric's disection of the quote, but the only flaw in it is his use of "wasn't mounted". He uses this to mean "dismounted" rather than "not mounted". I could swing either way and will likely use dismounted for house rules if my group agrees, but I think the literal interpretation favours characters who are Infantry mounted on Monstrous Beasts being able to be affected by Killing Blow. I don't like it, but getting more is a little bit of a stretch.

Lord Inquisitor
15-10-2010, 20:05
There seems to be a lot of whining about this FAQ. I mean, it certainly makes characters mounted on monstrous cavalry and suchlike less good, but really, what were you expecting the answer to be?

In 7th, Killing Blow affected characters on chariots, monsters and what would now be considered monstrous beasts. Including Archaon. But then the 7th ed rules were extremely clear on this front. (And Allessio wrote generally very clear rules.)

The 8th ed rules were simple but begged the question as to characters - were they really immune to killing blow as they changed unit type when mounted? Rather strange especially with chariots and monsters where the character can be picked out.

So, yeah, I'm sure it was a frequently asked question, even though the 8th ed rules were clear - along the lines of "is this really what you meant?" and there have been quite a few of these sort of questions in 8th (the old "did you really mean steadfast to ignore all Ld modifiers or just those from combat, because that's what it says" was a common question early on before it was errata'd).

And the answer was "whoops, no, we meant for Killing Blow to work the way it's always worked" and people are talking about the nerf to monstrous cavalry? They've taken away the perk that you didn't have before, hardly a nerf. The intent of the FAQ is pretty clear, at least for ridden monsters, etc., as you can single out the (infantry) rider. MC is a bit of a grey area and immediately begs the question if MC characters can be killingblowed, what about regular MC? Something of a can of worms.

The death knell for MC mounts for characters was the change in the look out sir! rules. I don't think Killing Blow makes a whole lot of difference (not like that many units have it, it's pretty rare to get a character KB'd). Some monstrous cav mounts are still worthwhile for the stomp and the fact that many of them actually can increase the character's wounds (sorry, WoC players, that doesn't include you).

Lord_Elric
15-10-2010, 20:38
At what point does 'all' monstrous cavalry become characters? A bloodletter on a juggy is not a character. It's a Monstrous cavalry model thus immune to killing blow. If you buy a juggy for your herald, because he is a character 1st and an infantry model 2nd, he fulfills the requirements of the FAQ allowing him to be killing blowed.

Archaon is never classed as a Infantry unit type in the Bestiary section of the BRB. Do you people not even look at the rules or just argue because you're mad at the ruling? No where in any rule book errata or anything that can even remotely be used as a scrap of rule does it say that archaon is an Infantry model. No where. To say otherwise is making up rules that are supported by no official rule in the game. If you want to see an example of a special character that would be subject to this FAQ, look at Morathi. She is classed as Infantry and her mount is classed as a Monstrous Beast. And she is subject to the killing blow special rule per the FAQ.

If you guys want to play that Monstrous Cavalry is immune to Killing Blow regardless of rider, then you are making up a house rule and are fine to do so. However, arguing about house rules in the rules forum is pointless.

so cus a blood letter comes already on a juggy then the poncy little bloodletter get kb immunity yet his boss the herald does not and your argueing that tht makes sense "sigh"

im a DE played and i use executioners im usual on the end of monstous cavalry and using killing blow (usualy boosting corsairs with a cauldron too) and im arguing this ruleing is Ballistic skill (salutes the guy who first said this i loved it lol) i see no reason why they shouldnt nor does anyone i play games with or at all 3 GW store i go into (merry hil, wolvo, birmingham) so as far as this matter goes im sorted "toodles"

logan054
15-10-2010, 22:28
There seems to be a lot of whining about this FAQ. I mean, it certainly makes characters mounted on monstrous cavalry and suchlike less good, but really, what were you expecting the answer to be?

It isn't as simply as that, for WoC at least it actually removes a whole load of mount options, I was expecting to actually have a reason to use the model, sadly it looks cool only lasts a few games.


The 8th ed rules were simple but begged the question as to characters - were they really immune to killing blow as they changed unit type when mounted? Rather strange especially with chariots and monsters where the character can be picked out.

I can't see how the rules even suggested a character followed to separated rules in regards to KB than units, can you please so me something within the KB rules that makes any such indication. The only reason any such thought has entered someone's head is because "that's how it worked in 7th".

I certainly agree that is strange in the case of a chariot or a large monster but before ant FAQ the one things that separates them from MC is that they are not treated as a single model.

xxRavenxx
15-10-2010, 22:55
I think what is baffling, is that a random mook cannot be picked out from his mount and killed, causing it to run off and leave the battle, but a character can.

Why can "Herald Balthazar" be slain off his juggernaught due to a hefty blow, but "Bob the lesser demon" be too damn tough to kill?

Synnister
15-10-2010, 23:40
so cus a blood letter comes already on a juggy then the poncy little bloodletter get kb immunity yet his boss the herald does not and your argueing that tht makes sense "sigh"


At no point did I ever argue that this ruling makes sense "sigh". Do you even read posts that people make or just randomly post nonsense? I've stated at least 3 times in this thread that it is a silly ruling. However silly you or I think it is, it is the rules we have to deal with. Do you understand the difference? I'll spell it out for you ... The ruling makes no sense whatsoever. But the current rules means exactly what you wrote. And since this is a rule debate then I will argue for the rules to be played as they are written with rulings from the FAQ holding as much authority as an errata since most tourneys do that as well. If you want it to be different feel free to come up with whatever house rule you want to. You don't need mine nor anyone else's permission. You need to come to an understanding with your opponent.

Alric
16-10-2010, 03:54
But that reasoning should also apply to heroes and lords who buy monstrous beasts as mounts since they can never become infantry either. For that matter when can regular cavalry ever become infantry? Your reasoning fails the logic test.

The only solution is they can all be killing blowed or none can. It needs an errata one way or the other. They are all the exact same troop type.


But the distinction is whether or not they were something else before they became Monstrous Cavalry.


The FAQ ruling was a very poor one that I hope gets reversed, as it also has lots of poor consequences. However it seems extremely cynical to whine that others who still retain their immunity to KB should also be subject to a stupid FAQ ruling and lose it as well.


Disagreeing and not wanting to follow a FAQ or a rule is a house rule. Do I personally want to follow the FAQ, no. It makes no sense at all and since it's not an Errata, it is optional. However, most official settings do treat FAQs as non-optional. Like it or not, you will most likely have to deal with this ruling if you intend on playing in tournaments.

And I would agree that characters on a Monstrous Beast is indeed pointless.



The FAQ ...
Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted.

This does not apply Archaon , at all , or any other troop type MC.

The rules for characters on monstrous beast state that characters riding monstrous beast are treated as troop type monstrous cavalry (MC) and follows the rules for monstrous cavalry. All cavalry rules apply to monstrous cavalry, a cavalry model is treated as a single model - the rider cannot dismount.

The rules for killing blow clearly state that killing blow does not affect MC.

The FAQ is for characters in chariots and on ridden monsters where they can be dismounted.

Chris_
16-10-2010, 04:00
The FAQ ...
Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasnít mounted.

This does not apply Archaon , at all , or any other troop type MC.

The rules for characters on monstrous beast state that characters riding monstrous beast are treated as troop type monstrous cavalry (MC) and follows the rules for monstrous cavalry. All cavalry rules apply to monstrous cavalry, a cavalry model is treated as a single model - the rider cannot dismount.

The rules for killing blow clearly state that killing blow does not affect MC.

The FAQ is for characters in chariots and on ridden monsters where they can be dismounted or targeted seperately.
Players using characters in chariots have been using the exemption for chariots vs. killing blow for the characters which is not correct.A character in a chariot or on a ridden monster can not dismount voluntarily.

This FAQ clearly spells out if "he wasn't mounted", i.e. if you did not buy a mount for him. So a character that you use points to buy a MC or MB mount can be KB.

Alric
16-10-2010, 04:06
A character in a chariot or on a ridden monster can not dismount voluntarily.

This FAQ clearly spells out if "he wasn't mounted", i.e. if you did not buy a mount for him. So a character that you use points to buy a MC or MB mount can be KB.

A character on a chariot or monster can be dismounted. There is no condition in the faq if it has to be voluntary the word voluntary is not in the faq, so forget that arguement now.

Chris_
16-10-2010, 04:09
A character on a chariot or monster can be targeted seperately. A character on a chariot or monster can be dismounted. There is no condition in the faq if it has to be voluntary the word voluntary is not in the faq, so forget that arguement now.There is also nothing in the FAQ about him have to be able to dismount in the game, which is what your argument's foundation... Read through the thread, the implications of this FAQ have alreday been discussed.

Alric
16-10-2010, 04:15
There is also nothing in the FAQ about him have to be able to dismount in the game, which is what your argument's foundation... Read through the thread, the implications of this FAQ have alreday been discussed.

"if it wasn't mounted" ei: if dismounted = if was not mounted
If the character is troop type infantry "IF it wasn't mounted" then the FAQ applies.

Synnister
16-10-2010, 04:25
The FAQ ...
Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasnít mounted.

This does not apply Archaon , at all , or any other troop type MC.

The rules for characters on monstrous beast state that characters riding monstrous beast are treated as troop type monstrous cavalry (MC) and follows the rules for monstrous cavalry. All cavalry rules apply to monstrous cavalry, a cavalry model is treated as a single model - the rider cannot dismount.

The rules for killing blow clearly state that killing blow does not affect MC.

The FAQ is for characters in chariots and on ridden monsters where they can be dismounted or targeted seperately.
Players using characters in chariots have been using the exemption for chariots vs. killing blow for the characters which is not correct.

This FAQ says regardless of mount. Therefore if they are Infantry before the mount then they are susceptible to killing blow.

Chris_
16-10-2010, 04:32
No its not. If the character is troop type infantry "IF it wasn't mounted" then the FAQ applies. So even if your character is in a chariot it can be targted seperately and is affected by killing blow.And even if bought a Jugger for your Chaos Lord it would be Infantry if it wasn't mounted so is therefore susceptible to KB (per the new FAQ). And just to be clear, a character on a chariot or a ridden monster is also able to be KB'd, I haven't said they couldn't, that was you putting words in my mouth.

Alric
16-10-2010, 04:37
This FAQ says regardless of mount. Therefore if they are Infantry before the mount then they are susceptible to killing blow.

Its not "they" it's "model" ...The FAQ is specifying a model.

The BRB
The rules for characters on monstrous beast state that characters riding monstrous beast are treated as troop type monstrous cavalry (MC) and follows the rules for monstrous cavalry. All cavalry rules apply to monstrous cavalry, a cavalry model is treated as a single model - the rider cannot dismount.

A character on a MB is a MC model , those characters that start the game as MC model cannot change to an infantry model. Some characters in a chariot or on a ridden beast can be an infantry model and that is what the FAQ is addressing.


And even if bought a Jugger for your Chaos Lord it would be Infantry if it wasn't mounted so is therefore susceptible to KB (per the new FAQ). And just to be clear, a character on a chariot or a ridden monster is also able to be KB'd, I haven't said they couldn't, that was you putting words in my mouth.

No, a player with a character on a juggernaut starts the game as a MC model and it stays a MC model through the entire game it cannot be an infantry model. A character in a chariot can be an infantry model.

The FAQ specifies "model"
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasnít mounted.

The BRB states thats troops type MC are not afftected by killing blow.

Chris_
16-10-2010, 05:03
No, a player with a character on a juggernaut starts the game as a MC model and it stays a MC model through the entire game it cannot be an infantry model. A character in a chariot can be an infantry model.
The BRB states thats troops type MC are not afftected by killing blow.


Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasnít mounted.

You where right before this piece of FAQ. The question asks that no matter what the character is mounted on, i.e. Cavalry, Monstrous Cavalry, Monstrous Beast, Chariot, Monster and so on, can he be KB'd.
And the answer says YES, if the character would count as an infantry if it wasn't mounted. That means, with the example of Chaos Lord on a jugger, that by your reasoning a Chaos Lord without a mount would not be of the troop type infantry. There is no support in there for the character having to be able to be "unhorsed" during the game, it just says in clear language that if you didn't take the mount you took, and he would be infantry then, YES you can KB the character regardless of what the mount you actually took was.

Alric
16-10-2010, 05:08
You where right before this piece of FAQ. The question asks that no matter what the character is mounted on, i.e. Cavalry, Monstrous Cavalry, Monstrous Beast, Chariot, Monster and so on, can he be KB'd.
And the answer says YES, if the character would count as an infantry if it wasn't mounted. That means, with the example of Chaos Lord on a jugger, that by your reasoning a Chaos Lord without a mount would not be of the troop type infantry. There is no support in there for the character having to be able to be "unhorsed" during the game, it just says in clear language that if you didn't take the mount you took, and he would be infantry then, YES you can KB the character regardless of what the mount you actually took was.

The FAQ specifies "model"
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasnít mounted.


A player with a character on a juggernaut starts the game as a MC model and it stays a MC model through the entire game it cannot be an infantry model. A character in a chariot can be an infantry model.


The BRB states thats troops type MC are not afftected by killing blow.

Chris_
16-10-2010, 05:10
You where right before this piece of FAQ. The question asks that no matter what the character is mounted on, i.e. Cavalry, Monstrous Cavalry, Monstrous Beast, Chariot, Monster and so on, can he be KB'd.
And the answer says YES, if the character would count as an infantry if it wasn't mounted. That means, with the example of Chaos Lord on a jugger, that by your reasoning a Chaos Lord without a mount would not be of the troop type infantry. There is no support in there for the character having to be able to be "unhorsed" during the game, it just says in clear language that if you didn't take the mount you took, and he would be infantry then, YES you can KB the character regardless of what the mount you actually took was.

Please read the yellow text again.

Alric
16-10-2010, 05:23
Please read the yellow text again.

Please read the FAQ word Model

The FAQ specifies "model"
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted.

The FAQ is worded as specifying "model", its based on the whether the character in question would be a infantry model if it wasn't mounted.

A player with a character on a juggernaut starts the game as a MC model and it stays a MC model through the entire game it cannot be an infantry model. A character in a chariot can be an infantry model.

Chris_
16-10-2010, 05:26
Please read the FAQ word Model

The FAQ specifies "model"
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted.

The FAQ is worded as specifying "model", its based on the whether the character in question would be a infantry model if it wasn't mounted.

A player with a character on a juggernaut starts the game as a MC model and it stays a MC model through the entire game it cannot be an infantry model. A character in a chariot can be an infantry model.So you are saying that a Character model that is mounted on a MC model, would not be an infantry model if it was not mounted on the MC model? Seriously... :wtf:

A Chaos Lord on a Jugger is a MC model, but if the Chaos Lord model was not mounted on the Jugger model (which is the situation the FAQ clearly is speaking about) it would be an infantry model. Simple and stupid, I don't agree with the FAQ but as it is written now, that is still the case.

Alric
16-10-2010, 05:42
So you are saying that a Character model that is mounted on a MC model, would not be an infantry model if it was not mounted on the MC model? Seriously... :wtf:

:wtf: seriously ?

The character is what it is before the game starts. Archaon or any other character thats is troop type MC , stays MC , period.

The FAQ specifies that it only applies to those characters "that would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted". Archaon or any other MC model cannot ever be an "infantry model" , a character in a chariot can be an "infantry model".

Chris_
16-10-2010, 05:48
:wtf: seriously ?

The character is what it is before the game starts. Archaon or any other character thats is troop type MC , stays MC , period.

The FAQ specifies that it only applies to those characters "that would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted". Archaon or any other MC model cannot ever be an "infantry model" , a character in a chariot can be an "infantry model".Yes, Archaon, Tyrion and the Fay are exceptions to this as there is no rules for what they are when not mounted, they are simply always MC.

What I have been saying all the time though is the examples with a Chaos Lord on a Jugger, Chieftain on a Bonebreaker and so on where you actually are an Infantry Model when not mounted are NOT immune, your reasoning that they can't be "not mounted" has no relation whatsoever to the argument. I have repeated all of this SEVERAL times already. If you agree to this then we are fine, but if not you need to re-read the FAQ and this thread from the beginning again. This has already been resolved.

A chaos lord model on a juggernaught model is a MC, but IF IT WASN'T MOUNTED what is the character then? There is nothing in the FAQ supporting that it has to be able to be an infantry model for the purposes of that specific game.

Alric
16-10-2010, 05:57
A Chaos Lord on a Jugger is a MC model, but if the Chaos Lord model was not mounted on the Jugger model (which is the situation the FAQ clearly is speaking about) it would be an infantry model. Simple and stupid, I don't agree with the FAQ but as it is written now, that is still the case.

No the character cannot be both an infantry model and a MC model , it can only be one or the other. Which the character is depends on what the player fielded when the game starts. If the player starts the game with the character without a mount the character is an infantry model, if the player starts the game with the character on a monstrous beast its a MC model , it's one or the other.

If a player fields a character model in a chariot or on a ridden monster it "would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted." - as per the faq.

Alric
16-10-2010, 06:10
A chaos lord model on a juggernaught model is a MC, but IF IT WASN'T MOUNTED what is the character then? There is nothing in the FAQ supporting that it has to be able to be an infantry model for the purposes of that specific game.

Yes there is something its the the FAQ. The FAQ specifies "as long as the character would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted". A character on a ridden mount or on a chariot could count as an infantry model if they were not mounted.

Characters that start the game as MC stay MC models , and cannot ever be an infantry model.

gaarew
16-10-2010, 06:36
Archaon, Fey, etc all come with mount included in base cost, therefore are immune to KB.

Chaos Lord, Skaven Warlord etc, are infantry, but can be mounted, which means they can be KB'ed.

What the FAQ says is, were the character not actually on said beast, if their type would be Infantry, then thay can be Killing Blow'ed. (paraphrased)

Alric
16-10-2010, 06:41
Archaon, Fey, etc all come with mount included in base cost, therefore are immune to KB.

Chaos Lord, Skaven Warlord etc, are infantry, but can be mounted, which means they can be KB'ed.

What the FAQ says is, were the character not actually on said beast, if their type would be Infantry, then thay can be Killing Blow'ed. (paraphrased)

No the character cannot be both an infantry model and a MC model , it can only be one or the other. Which the character is depends on what the player fielded when the game starts. If the player starts the game with the character without a mount the character is an infantry model, if the player starts the game with the character on a monstrous beast its a MC model , it's one or the other.

What the FAQ is referring to is if a player fields a character model in a chariot or on a ridden monster it "would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted." - as per the faq.

Chris_
16-10-2010, 06:54
No the character cannot be both an infantry model and a MC model , it can only be one or the other.This is 100% correct! So what is the character when it isn't mounted on a MC mount? (which is what the FAQ mentions) That's right, an Infantry model.

A character mounted on an MC mount is an MC model, the FAQ talks about what the character would be if he WAS NOT mounted on the MC mount. Doesn't matter that he wouldn't be anything else in that specific game. It would have made a difference if they ruled it that a character that can be attacked seperately from its mount (like Chariot models and Monster models) would be able to be KB'd, but now both these (that are Infantry models if they were not mounted on their Chariot or Ridden monster) and MC are susceptible to KB.

Alric
16-10-2010, 07:15
A character mounted on an MC mount is an MC model, the FAQ talks about what the character would be if he WAS NOT mounted on the MC mount. Doesn't matter that he wouldn't be anything else in that specific game. It would have made a difference if they ruled it that a character that can be attacked seperately from its mount (like Chariot models and Monster models) would be able to be KB'd, but now both these (that are Infantry models if they were not mounted on their Chariot or Ridden monster) and MC are susceptible to KB.

Wrong there is no such thing as a MC mount. MC (monstrous cavalry) is a troop type. The troop type MC is not affected by killing blow.
The character cannot be both an infantry model and a MC model , it can only be one or the other. Which troop type the character is depends on what the player fields when the game starts. If the player starts the game with the character without a mount the character is troop type infantry and fields an infantry model, if the player starts the game with the character on a monstrous beast its troop type MC and fields a MC model , it's one or the other.


The troops types "Chariot" and "Monster" are not affected by killing blow either , BUT a character mounted on a chariot or mounted on a monster is affected by killing blow. This is the reason for the faq. Players have been using the rules under killing blow for chariots and monsters to avoid kiling blow for their characters, because under the rules for killing blow chariots and monsters are unaffected. Unlike with MC , players were mis-using the rules under killing blow by ignoring the rules for characters on chariots and monsters and the character model " would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted "

Chris_
16-10-2010, 07:46
Wrong there is no such thing as a MC mount. MC (monstrous cavalry) is a troop type. The troop type MC is not affected by killing blow. Pg. 104, BRB "Character Mounts" say you are wrong ;)


The troops types "Chariot" and "Monster" are not affected by killing blow either , BUT a character mounted on a chariot or mounted on a monster is affected by killing blow.Obviously we are only talking characters mounted on something as that is what the FAQ is regarding. If you want to talk about something else, please open a thread for that. I've never said that Chariots or Monsters in general are subject to KB, nor have I said that Characters with Chariot or Monster mounts are not subject to KB. ;)


This is the reason for the faq. Players have been using the rules under killing blow for chariots and monsters to avoid kiling blow for their characters, because under the rules for killing blow chariots and monsters are unaffected. Unlike with MC , players were mis-using the rules under killing blow by ignoring the rules for characters on chariots and monsters where it states the character can be targted seperatly and the character model " would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted "The problem is that maybe this is what the FAQ meant to correct, but it is not the outcome of the FAQ. Sadly they failed again to get it right. ;)

Alric
16-10-2010, 08:04
Obviously we are only talking characters mounted on something as that is what the FAQ is regarding. If you want to talk about something else, please open a thread for that. I've never said that Chariots or Monsters in general are subject to KB, nor have I said that Characters with Chariot or Monster mounts are not subject to KB.

The problem is that maybe this is what the FAQ meant to correct, but it is not the outcome of the FAQ. Sadly they failed again to get it right

Troop types - pages 80 thru 87, including Monstrous Cavalry.

Page 105 BRB...
.. a character will have the option to ride a monstous beast. In this case the whole model is treated as having troop type 'monstrous cavalry' ..

Monstrous Cavalry IS a troop type.

It's clear what the FAQ meant to correct since all the rules for MC , Chariots , Ridden Monsters , and Killing Blow are clear. This is why its a faq and not an errata , it would take an errata to change the troop type of characters on monstrous beast from MC to infantry, but for a clarification as to which rules take precedences over the other as with the chariots and ridden monsters , only a faq would be neccessary.

Its a shame that their are people that claim to play the WFB game have such trouble reading the rules or seem intent on misconstruing them.

gaarew
16-10-2010, 08:17
What the FAQ is referring to is if a player fields a character model in a chariot or on a ridden monster it "would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted." - as per the faq.

I didn't say they were both. Why do you class the allocation of type at game start? If a chaos lord is on foot he is infantry. If he is on a Jugger, he is Monstrous Cavalry. However, were he not on the Jugger for any reason, including rules disputes, then he would be Infantry.

The FAQ makes no mention of Ridden Monster or Chariot. Only that were a model Infantry if it was not mounted, then it can be KB'ed.

You interpret that however you like, as far as I am concerned, it means if you have a roughly man-sized model, that, comes as infantry in the army list, but has been given any sort of mount to change their troop type from infantry, then they can be killing blowed. The current type is irrelevant, based on what the type is in the army book.





Its a shame that their are people that claim to play the WFB game have such trouble reading the rules or seem intent on misconstruing them.

Indeed.

Chris_
16-10-2010, 08:32
Troop types - pages 80 thru 87, including Monstrous Cavalry.

Page 105 BRB...
.. a character will have the option to ride a monstous beast. In this case the whole model is treated as having troop type 'monstrous cavalry' ..

Monstrous Cavalry IS a troop type.

It's clear what the FAQ meant to correct since all the rules for MC , Chariots , Ridden Monsters , and Killing Blow are clear. This is why its a faq and not an errata , it would take an errata to change the troop type of characters on monstrous beast from MC to infantry, but for a clarification as to which rules take precedences over the other as with the chariots and ridden monsters , only a faq would be neccessary.

Its a shame that their are people that claim to play the WFB game have such trouble reading the rules or seem intent on misconstruing them.You clearly have no idea what I've been talking about all the time... :eyebrows:

Walgis
16-10-2010, 09:38
:wtf:
ae you really that dum?
that means oldblood on carny cant be KB but oh wait yes he can!!!

if the model has a merged profile that is you can only specificaly atack the hole model (wich is MC) you cant KB. but if you can select a part of it a rider he is not a MC because you target not a hole model (eg warmachines (you target a hole model not the handler it self so the machine cannot be KB) (and for future yes it has separate characteristiks for shooting and CC but thats not the point)) you target the one dude ho is riding the horse monster or something else. and that rider for his self is infantry not MC because he is not merged with his horse they are to separate things and when they are combined thay are MC but the rider is infantry (for most of the time) and the mount is the mount.

NixonAsADaemonPrince
16-10-2010, 10:40
Troop types - pages 80 thru 87, including Monstrous Cavalry.

Page 105 BRB...
.. a character will have the option to ride a monstous beast. In this case the whole model is treated as having troop type 'monstrous cavalry' ..

Monstrous Cavalry IS a troop type.

It's clear what the FAQ meant to correct since all the rules for MC , Chariots , Ridden Monsters , and Killing Blow are clear. This is why its a faq and not an errata , it would take an errata to change the troop type of characters on monstrous beast from MC to infantry, but for a clarification as to which rules take precedences over the other as with the chariots and ridden monsters , only a faq would be neccessary.

Its a shame that their are people that claim to play the WFB game have such trouble reading the rules or seem intent on misconstruing them.

You're definitely right Alric.

If you look under the Killing Blow rules, it says:
"Killing Blow is only effective against infantry, cavalry and war beasts-all other creatures are considered either too large to be felled by a single blow (monsters, monstrous infantry/cavalry/beasts, chariots and so on) or too numerous for a well-placed strike to slay them all (Swarms)."

There has been no Errata to change that. Monstrous Cavalry are still immune to killing blow. This includes when an Infantry character is mounted on a Monstrous Beast, as the entire Unit Type changes to Monstrous Cavalry, and the BRB tells us that MC cannot be KB'd.

Now if we look at the new FAQ, it says:
"Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an Infantry model if it wasn't mounted."

Where does that say to ignore the rules in the BRB that MC cannot be KB'd? Nowhere. Now before you say where does it say to ignore the fact that chariots and monsters cannot be KB'd, and that characters mounted on these count as the same Unit Type, an Infantry character on these can still be dismounted, and thus can be KB'd without contradicting those rules, as you would only be KB'ing a model with the Unit Type Infantry (if he wasn't mounted, like if his mount is killed which can actually happen in a game unlike with MC) which is what the FAQ is all about.

While I know that this is definitely not the most straightforward, this interpretation only bends some rules, requiring you to have a step of faith, while the other interpretation, that characters mounted on Monstrous Beasts and thus Monstous Cavalry can be KB'd, breaks the rules and thus is incorrect.

Don't think I'm getting at all annoyed about any of this, I'm just trying to work it out for myself as well as anyone else. My take on it anyway ;).

Chris_
16-10-2010, 10:45
I want to agree too, but that is not what I read. GW is also notorious for making FAQs that work like errata. And it is not "dismounted", it is if the character wasn't mounted at all that you are supposed to compare with according to the FAQ.

Alric
16-10-2010, 11:37
I didn't say they were both. Why do you class the allocation of type at game start? If a chaos lord is on foot he is infantry. If he is on a Jugger, he is Monstrous Cavalry. However, were he not on the Jugger for any reason, including rules disputes, then he would be Infantry.

The FAQ makes no mention of Ridden Monster or Chariot. Only that were a model Infantry if it was not mounted, then it can be KB'ed.

You interpret that however you like, as far as I am concerned, it means if you have a roughly man-sized model, that, comes as infantry in the army list, but has been given any sort of mount to change their troop type from infantry, then they can be killing blowed. The current type is irrelevant, based on what the type is in the army book.

No the character cannot be both an infantry model and a MC model , it can only be one or the other. Which the character is depends on what the player fielded when the game starts. If the player starts the game with the character without a mount the character is an infantry model, if the player starts the game with the character on a monstrous beast its a MC model , it's one or the other.

The FAQ specifies "infantry model"
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it wasn’t mounted.

The FAQ is worded as specifying "infantry model", its based on the whether the character in question would be a infantry model if it wasn't mounted.
A character on a juggernaut starts the game as troop type MC and as a MC model and it remains a troop type MC and a MC model through the entire game it cannot be troop type infantry or an infantry model so it could never satisfy the condition as an infantry model. But a character on a chariot or on a ridden monster can be targetd seperately and can be dismounted and "would be an infantry model if it wasn't mounted'"

Characters riding monstrous beast are treated as troop type monstrous cavalry (MC) and follows the rules for monstrous cavalry. All cavalry rules apply to monstrous cavalry, a cavalry model is treated as a single model - the rider cannot dismount.

The troops types "Chariot" and "Monster" are not affected by killing blow either. This is the reason for the faq. Players have been using the rules under killing blow for chariots and monsters to avoid kiling blow for their characters, because under the rules for killing blow chariots and monsters are unaffected. Unlike with MC , players were mis-using the rules under killing blow by ignoring the rules for characters on chariots and monsters where the character model " would count as an infantry model if it wasn't mounted "

It's clear that the FAQ meant to clarify that the rules for characters on chariots and ridden monsters take precedences over the rules for killing blow vs. chariots and monsters , which is why its only a faq.

Since all the rules for MC , Chariots , Ridden Monsters , and Killing Blow are clear it would take an errata to change the troop type of characters on monstrous beast from MC to Infantry, as it would involve a change of the current troop type designation.

As others have stated there is no reason that a character that is troop type "monstrous cavalry" would be treated any differently than any other "monstrous cavalry" troop type vs. killing blow.

If you want to see an arguement heres how it would go..
Players A states hes using killing blow vs. your MC character , player B says no you can't hes troop type MC , player A says that his interpretation of the faq says he can , player B says he wrong and that the acurate interpretation of the faq is it pertains to characters on chariots and monsters not MC , player A says no it doesnt, player B yes it does and also points out that the BRB states on page 72 that MC is not affected by killing blow and that the faq is not a rule and that player A is not interpreting the faq correctly.
Given that the faq can be interpreted as to pertain to those characters on chariots or monsters and not MC , and that player A's interpretation would conflict and be inconsistent with other MC troops types then the rules on page 72 of the BRB for killing blow and MC stand as written in the BRB.

logan054
16-10-2010, 11:46
I want to agree too, but that is not what I read. GW is also notorious for making FAQs that work like errata. And it is not "dismounted", it is if the character wasn't mounted at all that you are supposed to compare with according to the FAQ.


Each update is split into three sections: Errata, Amendments, and Frequently Asked Questions. The Errata corrects any mistakes in the book, while the Amendments bring the book up to date with the latest version of the rules. The Frequently Asked Questions (or FAQ) section answers commonly asked questions about the rules. Although you can mark corrections directly in your army book, this is by no means necessary Ė just keep a copy of the update with your army book.

I think a lot of you are confusing a errata with a FAQ, they are very different things, a errata changes rules, a FAQ clears up rules which are unclear. Are the rules for characters on MC unclear in regards to KB? No they are not, why are you a applying a answer to a situation that is not unclear in the first place. GW are not notorious for any such thing, people are the ones who read the things and twist them to their advantage.

gaarew
16-10-2010, 11:54
OK, OK, Alric...

What would a Chaos Lord count as if he wasn't mounted?

NixonAsADaemonPrince
16-10-2010, 12:04
OK, OK, Alric...

What would a Chaos Lord count as if he wasn't mounted?

This question is wrong (no offence intended, just pointing it out) as a Chaos Lord is Infantry when on foot, then buys a mount (Juggernaut) which changes his Unit Type to MC. When mounted on a Juggernaut, he isn't anything else apart from MC. When mounted on a Juggernaut, he can't be anything else apart from MC.

Maybe think of it like this:

Chaos Lord on foot: Infantry

Chaos Lord buys a Juggernaut=Juggernaut Chaos Lord: Monstrous Cavalry

He isn't a Chaos Lord on foot mounted on a Juggernaut (which would be the case if he was mounted on a chariot or monster) he is a Juggernaut Chaos Lord, with the unit type Monstrous Cavalry.

Hope this helps :).

logan054
16-10-2010, 12:05
Whats wrong with you people, you want things to make any sense! you play warhammer! :p

NixonAsADaemonPrince
16-10-2010, 12:10
Whats wrong with you people, you want things to make any sense! you play warhammer! :p

Extremely good point. We all know the way it is reasonable to be played (I hope anyway; most of us seem to in agreement) discuss with your opponent before the battle or with all the member of your local club, and obviously at tournaments its not up to you, you'll just have to play it whichever way they rule it, its not exactly like its a common situation anyway. Hopefully GW will clarify it soon.

gaarew
16-10-2010, 12:20
This question is wrong (no offence intended, just pointing it out) as a Chaos Lord is Infantry when on foot, then buys a mount (Juggernaut) which changes his Unit Type to MC. When mounted on a Juggernaut, he isn't anything else apart from MC. When mounted on a Juggernaut, he can't be anything else apart from MC.

Maybe think of it like this:

Chaos Lord on foot: Infantry

Chaos Lord buys a Juggernaut=Juggernaut Chaos Lord: Monstrous Cavalry

He isn't a Chaos Lord on foot mounted on a Juggernaut (which would be the case if he was mounted on a chariot or monster) he is a Juggernaut Chaos Lord, with the unit type Monstrous Cavalry.

Hope this helps :).

No offence taken, and I get what you are saying.

I am not trying to claim the Lord on Jugger isn't Monstrous Cavalry. But, were he not on the Jugger, he would be Infantry. As in, a Chaos Lord is Infantry. I am not talking about taking the mount away from him.

logan054
16-10-2010, 12:26
No offence taken, and I get what you are saying.

I am not trying to claim the Lord on Jugger isn't Monstrous Cavalry. But, were he not on the Jugger, he would be Infantry. As in, a Chaos Lord is Infantry. I am not talking about taking the mount away from him.

Dude, even I can see what you trying to do, you get him to say "he's infantry" and you scream "well in the FAQ its states he can be KB", sadly this ignores the fact that a FAQ is different to a errata, it also defeats the whole point of making all these different troop types.

I can't even see how the KB got into the FAQ, who the hell was confused by the rules?

NixonAsADaemonPrince
16-10-2010, 12:32
I can't even see how the KB got into the FAQ, who the hell was confused by the rules?

The problem was that the BRB specifically says that the whole model counts as a having the Unit Type Chariot when a character is mounted on a chariot, and the same with monsters. The rules for KB say that chariots and monsters can't be KB'd, so that makes chariot and monster riding characters immune to KB. Thus confusion. Sadly GW have now just made it more confusing with a badly worded FAQ, damn them :shifty:.

Alric
16-10-2010, 12:36
Whats wrong with you people, you want things to make any sense! you play warhammer! :p


Extremely good point. We all know the way it is reasonable to be played (I hope anyway; most of us seem to in agreement) discuss with your opponent before the battle or with all the member of your local club, and obviously at tournaments its not up to you, you'll just have to play it whichever way they rule it, its not exactly like its a common situation anyway. Hopefully GW will clarify it soon.


No offence taken, and I get what you are saying.

I am not trying to claim the Lord on Jugger isn't Monstrous Cavalry. But, were he not on the Jugger, he would be Infantry. As in, a Chaos Lord is Infantry. I am not talking about taking the mount away from him.

The biggest problem I have with the MC FAQ interpretaion is that it requires changing the "Troop type" after that game has started from MC at one point to Infantry at another, and that it also conflicts with the rules for other MC troop types.
I wouldnt allow an interpretation of a FAQ that changes a troop type after the game has started and one that only affects one model and not all models of the same troop type.

The interpretation that the FAQ pertains to characters on chariots and monsters does not change troop type after the game has started. This is what the FAQ was directed towards.

Oh I forgot to mention that the rules on page 72 of the BRB are clear as to how and when KB is effective.

Little Joe
16-10-2010, 12:40
You're definitely right Alric.
Where does that say to ignore the rules in the BRB that MC cannot be KB'd? Nowhere. Now before you say where does it say to ignore the fact that chariots and monsters cannot be KB'd, and that characters mounted on these count as the same Unit Type, an Infantry character on these can still be dismounted, and thus can be KB'd without contradicting those rules, as you would only be KB'ing a model with the Unit Type Infantry (if he wasn't mounted, like if his mount is killed which can actually happen in a game unlike with MC) which is what the FAQ is all about.

While I know that this is definitely not the most straightforward, this interpretation only bends some rules, requiring you to have a step of faith, while the other interpretation, that characters mounted on Monstrous Beasts and thus Monstous Cavalry can be KB'd, breaks the rules and thus is incorrect.
I think a lot of us read this wrong as you point out. It is a FAQ and not an errata. A better wording of it would have been nice, reducing the possible implications.


Whats wrong with you people, you want things to make any sense! you play warhammer! :p
Yes I do, as clear as a cristal ! Made from murky water.;)

So it all makes sense again. No KB against MC, also for upgraded characters. All Exceptions taken care off, as none exist any longer.

Next question: Why should I be able to KB a character on a monster as long as he rides it and is not a infantry model as such? This would contradict the rules as well, he does not (but could) count as infantry when mounted. Page 105 of the rulebook declares his unit type as monster.

I think the FAQ as a whole is breaking a lot of rules and can be safely ignored. I suppose they meant when no longer mounted or so.

Very murky water...:shifty:

logan054
16-10-2010, 12:45
The problem was that the BRB specifically says that the whole model counts as a having the Unit Type Chariot when a character is mounted on a chariot, and the same with monsters. The rules for KB say that chariots and monsters can't be KB'd, so that makes chariot and monster riding characters immune to KB. Thus confusion. Sadly GW have now just made it more confusing with a badly worded FAQ, damn them :shifty:.

I agree that is a slightly odd situation which certainly did need a FAQ, but this goes back what I said before, you can't blindly apply to the FAQ to every situation, you only apply to ones that actually don't cause confusion.


Oh I forgot to mention that the rules on page 72 of the BRB are clear as to how and when KB is effective.

It's ok, I have mentioned it several times now and people seem to think the FAQ is a errata rather a actual FAQ

Little Joe
16-10-2010, 12:46
I think I found a agreable solution. Change the word is to was in the Question and reversely in the answer, and it no longer breaks rules and the sky is blue again

Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he was mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it isnít mounted.

logan054
16-10-2010, 12:56
Thats would make characters one horses immune to KB using the same logic used here to make characters on MB not immune to KB!

Little Joe
16-10-2010, 13:01
No as cavalry is subject to KB.

Lord_Elric
16-10-2010, 13:09
I think I found a agreable solution. Change the word is to was in the Question and reversely in the answer, and it no longer breaks rules and the sky is blue again

Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he was mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
model if it isnít mounted.

:yes::yes::yes:

logan054
16-10-2010, 13:59
No as cavalry is subject to KB.

Yes I know it is, please read my post properly, I said by same logic displayed in this topic that a character on a steed wouldn't be immune to KB because lets face it, every takes everything written to a extreme, use FAQ to override rules rather than use them as what they are.

Little Joe
16-10-2010, 14:15
OK, Sorry.

I think the new wording is quite clear. To be a was refrring to mounted, it had to have some kind of mount in a ingame situation. Therefore the was in the answer needs to be an is to point out very clear, that the mount is removed from play.
This FAQ no longer applies to any kind of mount you cannot lose during the game (monstrous cavalry and normal cavalry).
It also excludes ogers characters as they are monstrous infantry after losing a mount, although the rules for these are not official yet.

Tregar
16-10-2010, 14:19
So, to be clear, what are we saying? Let's take a Chaos Lord, and mount him on some stuff...
On foot - KB
On horse - KB
On Disc - KB
On Jugger - no KB
On Manticore - KB
Is that right?

logan054
16-10-2010, 14:32
I agree it is pretty clearly worded but I have played a few rules lawyers in my time so I know how they would at that twist that.

@Tregar - yeah that is what he is saying, it just doesn't make that a infantry troop choice riding a MB is immune to KB but a character riding a MB isn't.

Little Joe
16-10-2010, 14:37
To be clear, let's take a Chaos Lord, and mount him on some stuff...
On foot - KB also after dismounting him
On horse - KB
On Disc - no KB as a disk is a monstrous beast, making him MC
On Jugger - no KB
On Manticore - no KB at first, KB after dismounting him
same goes for the other available monsters and the chariot.

freddieyu
16-10-2010, 15:00
Well, if you think about Archaon is THE super bad guy who is supposed to be able to command greater daemons..maybe his classification as MC isn't an oversight after all....as fluffwise I believe it would really take a Heroic Killing Blow to knock him down to his butt in 1 blow...

Chris_
16-10-2010, 15:17
I think a lot of you are confusing a errata with a FAQ, they are very different things, a errata changes rules, a FAQ clears up rules which are unclear. Are the rules for characters on MC unclear in regards to KB? No they are not, why are you a applying a answer to a situation that is not unclear in the first place. GW are not notorious for any such thing, people are the ones who read the things and twist them to their advantage.Actually, many FAQs should really be an errata. I don't need a lecture on FAQ vs Errata. I know what they mean and stand for and have read quite a lot of them. There is a difference and sometimes GW does not follow this. They are notorious for writing ambiguous answer that can be interpreted in many ways too.

Tregar
16-10-2010, 17:27
To be clear, let's take a Chaos Lord, and mount him on some stuff...
On foot - KB also after dismounting him
On horse - KB
On Disc - no KB as a disk is a monstrous beast, making him MC
On Jugger - no KB
On Manticore - no KB at first, KB after dismounting him
same goes for the other available monsters and the chariot.

Disc is a Warbeast, i.e. they're cavalry...

So what you're saying, is KB for infantry/cavalry characters, and infantry characters if dismounted from a big beastie. Seems reasonable.

logan054
16-10-2010, 19:05
Actually, many FAQs should really be an errata. I don't need a lecture on FAQ vs Errata. I know what they mean and stand for and have read quite a lot of them. There is a difference and sometimes GW does not follow this. They are notorious for writing ambiguous answer that can be interpreted in many ways too.

They are notorious for writing rules that can be interpreted many ways as well, with this in mind is is hardly surprising that the FAQ's are done in a similar way. Which FAQ's should be a errata? such as the KB, should this be a errata? do you feel it should be a errata because you agree with the FAQ answer or for simplicity sake?

Lord_Elric
16-10-2010, 19:43
I wouldnt say their notorious for writing the rules that way its more there players are notorious for interpeting the rules in ways they hadnt though of. It would be almost impossible for GW to write a rule book in such a way that noone could find any kind of loophoole of anykind or a abusable wording

considering GW make the most expansive range of miniatures for wargaming haveing absolutly everythin match up is an impossibility to have even a hope of pulling it off theyd have to release every new army book at the same time as the rulebook.

wilsongrahams
16-10-2010, 20:15
Was I the only one whom has just read through all 9 pages and realised that both 'sides' of the argument have been saying the same thing different ways? Nobody has tried to claim that a Chaos Lord not mounted, is anything but an Infantry model - that's like saying a High Elf Prince without Heavy Armour, a Shield, and Great Weapon, is just a High Elf Prince.

The FAQ was trying to point out that not all characters that can be mounted on some form of monstrous mount, monster or chariot are Infantry to begin with - I can't think of one that isn't right now, but imagine a Griffon deciding to ride a Chariot - if it was attacked seperately from the chariot (assume it's a character not an upgrade here) then it would count as a monster and so would not be Infantry. That was the reason for the wording on the FAQ, and as pointed out many times, the FAQ is a general answer for all types of mount you can purchase and what mount you buy then may add it's own special rules, as in the case with monstrous cavalry being immune to killing blow.

Chris_
17-10-2010, 00:44
They are notorious for writing rules that can be interpreted many ways as well, with this in mind is is hardly surprising that the FAQ's are done in a similar way. Which FAQ's should be a errata? such as the KB, should this be a errata? do you feel it should be a errata because you agree with the FAQ answer or for simplicity sake?For example the Level 0 Wizard is still a Wizard but can't cast spells. In the Magic Phase it clearly says Wizards are Lvl 1-4. The adding of generated PD/DD, when that is played out (maybe they will re-write all these items in future books to streamline and that's why they don't want to put this in the actual rules). The new "FAQ" that Breath Weapons (CC version) and Stomp are now "Unusual Attacks" and not "Close Combat Attacks" which they where before. There is a lot of examples...

But seriously if someone wants to play with Alric's interpretation I have nothing against that! The FAQ is just very badly worded if they intended it as Alric said they might have better just state that if you can attack the rider separately from its mount (Chariot and Ridden Monster) and it would count as Infantry when dismounted you can KB it, or something similar. This way is just confusing it even more, I never played that you can't KB something on a monster/chariot before the FAQ. (i.e. the rider)

Skawolf
17-10-2010, 06:05
Just as an aside to Archaon's size. The archaon on foot model is on a much bigger base than 25mm I think it might be a 40mm...

Im not saying it was GW's intention not to be able to killing blow him but he is significantly bigger than even a chaos lord.

This is false, the model came with a 25mm base, I got three of them at gamesday '04

logan054
17-10-2010, 12:34
But seriously if someone wants to play with Alric's interpretation I have nothing against that! The FAQ is just very badly worded if they intended it as Alric said they might have better just state that if you can attack the rider separately from its mount (Chariot and Ridden Monster) and it would count as Infantry when dismounted you can KB it, or something similar. This way is just confusing it even more, I never played that you can't KB something on a monster/chariot before the FAQ. (i.e. the rider)

I find it rather confusing that you can KB heroes that are MC, this then means you can KB units that are MC as their is nothing to suggest that you treat units differently to characters for KB. I would have never played it couldn't KB a character on a monster or chariot, I would have certainly played it so you can't KB a character who is MC (it is infact the only reason I can see to use one over a standard steed).

AMWOOD co
17-10-2010, 13:01
Don't get tied down in thoughts about this being a Chaos only issue. This will affect Empire, Chaos (Warrios and Daemons), All Elves, maybe Lizardmen (are Terradons Monstous Beasts?), Bretonians, Greenskins, Skaven, and maybe Vampire (do they have a Monstrous Beast do ride?). Most of these armies have reasons to take a Monstrous Beast for a characters mount other than issues of +1 vs. +2 armour (elves and men gaining fly for example). To be honest, I wonder why these mounts cost so much when they didn't give a different unit type.

logan054
17-10-2010, 13:47
Well it dosnt effect some of the those in the same way and in fact would still be subject to KB by Elric's interpretation.

Woodies - Great eagle, great stag, unicorn are all multi-wound creatures, they are however suffering from the age of their book, I imagine when they redo the books those will be 1 wound creatures.

Daemons - Well I actually think its stupid matter how you look it, either Heralds can be KB and crushers cant, they can both be KB and thus make MC much less useful for them (stomp and 2 supporting attacks), units with KB actually gain from this so really they gain more than they lose out of this.

Vampire Counts - Don't have any MC, they have either WB or MO, they would actually gain from this, GG & BK

Empire - Not effected really, being immune to KB doesn't effect the cannons, No MC I can see in the list

HE - Much like WE, they have two MC, Tyrion (isn't effected by KB no matter how you look at it) and a great eagle which is a multi-wound MB anyway so no matter if you use Elric's or not it still wouldn't make its rider immune to KB.

So really the only armies that are really effected by this I can see are WoC and DoC, DE are in the same boat as other elves really, in fairness I think their multi-wound MB should be single wound ones like WoC.

Chris_
17-10-2010, 15:27
Well it dosnt effect some of the those in the same way and in fact would still be subject to KB by Elric's interpretation.

Woodies - Great eagle, great stag, unicorn are all multi-wound creatures, they are however suffering from the age of their book, I imagine when they redo the books those will be 1 wound creatures.

Daemons - Well I actually think its stupid matter how you look it, either Heralds can be KB and crushers cant, they can both be KB and thus make MC much less useful for them (stomp and 2 supporting attacks), units with KB actually gain from this so really they gain more than they lose out of this.

Vampire Counts - Don't have any MC, they have either WB or MO, they would actually gain from this, GG & BK

Empire - Not effected really, being immune to KB doesn't effect the cannons, No MC I can see in the list

HE - Much like WE, they have two MC, Tyrion (isn't effected by KB no matter how you look at it) and a great eagle which is a multi-wound MB anyway so no matter if you use Elric's or not it still wouldn't make its rider immune to KB.

So really the only armies that are really effected by this I can see are WoC and DoC, DE are in the same boat as other elves really, in fairness I think their multi-wound MB should be single wound ones like WoC.A character riding an MB will be MC no matter how many wounds the ridden MB has. He will, with Alric's interpretation, thus be immune to KB. (which is the way I think RAI is)

logan054
17-10-2010, 20:54
I believe if you take the FAQ literally it makes more sense.
Q: Does Killing Blow work against a mounted character regardless
of what he is mounted on? (p72)
A: Yes, as long as the character would count as an infantry
"model" if it wasn’t mounted.
So it would only apply to a "model" that literally could be dismounted.

I believe that is what he said, it is actually nothing to do with being MC, it's actually to do with if your character can be dismounted during the game, as I recall in the newer books on the non flying MB they redid some of them to be single wound creatures to prevent their steeds being killed from under them in combat and slowing the unit down, I think a disc of Tzeentch is the only exception (off the top of my head) to this.

Chris_
17-10-2010, 23:57
I believe that is what he said, it is actually nothing to do with being MC, it's actually to do with if your character can be dismounted during the game, as I recall in the newer books on the non flying MB they redid some of them to be single wound creatures to prevent their steeds being killed from under them in combat and slowing the unit down, I think a disc of Tzeentch is the only exception (off the top of my head) to this.Ah, ok. In your last post it sounded like there was some difference ruleswise depending on the ridden MB had 1 or several wounds.

logan054
18-10-2010, 00:49
My bad, I don't always explain my thoughts properly which usually leads to confusion