PDA

View Full Version : Slughtermaster and magical shield



ce13
04-09-2011, 17:45
Since slaughtermasters can take ironfists and ironfists count as a shield does that mean that they can take magical shields? As far as I know the restriction for what magic items one can take is that if they can take a mundane version then they can take a magical one. The counter argument would be that they could take magical ironfists not magical shields as ironfists only "works in exactly the same way as a shield" but not not actually shields (and as their are no magical ironfists they can't take that either). Thoughts anyone?

The Satyr
04-09-2011, 17:51
Read the 1st page of the magic items section of the rule book. You can take magic armor if the wizard has the option to take armor, including light armor and shields

So yes they can take magic armor because they can take Iron fists

Scalebug
04-09-2011, 18:08
By the letter, yes, you can have magical armour. Wizards can wear any magic armour if they have any options for non-magical armour, it doesn't have to be of the same "type" (and in addition, there are a few magic armour item that specifically is allowed to be worn by Wizards, but those are explicitly noted so in their own descriptions, and are the exceptions, not the rule). Getting a "shield" through purchasing a weapon that doubles as one is still an option for armour.


Although, just an educated guess, but I wouldn't be surprised if a FAQ later says No to it, and that their Iron Fist is not opening for them to take magic armour...

Reasoning:
The basic premise has always been that Wizards don't wear armour. Those that do are clearly noted as able to, and being the exemptions from the norm. Eg. Chaos Sorcerers, Blood Dragon Vampires.
The whole thing feels a little bit back door around a rule, you are able to buy a weapon, that happens to be a piece of armour as well, and this gives you acess to other armour?
If the intention for Slaughtermasters were to be able to be armoured, why not give them the options all out, ie non magic armour as an option to start with, more than this sort-of armour the Iron fist is?
Model driven game system, and the Slaughermaster models do not wear much armour, do they?


...but until (possibly) then, suit up your Butchers or Slaughermasters all you want. (I probably wouldn't embark on a major conversion endevour armouring a butcher though, until it is cleared up.)

Loopstah
04-09-2011, 18:22
If the Ironfist adds +1 to the armour save of the model then unless they are riding it, it's clearly armour.

However I do agree with the opinion GW will probably FAQ it to not allow Slaughtermasters and Butchers to wear armour, but until then I'd allow an Ogre player to put them in armour if they played me.

Scammel
04-09-2011, 18:53
The whole thing feels a little bit back door around a rule, you are able to buy a weapon, that happens to be a piece of armour as well, and this gives you access to other armour

The ironfist is now just a shield that can be used to parry when mounted, it's not a weapon in any respects.

Scalebug
04-09-2011, 19:01
Ah, OK, thought it was still the additional hand weapon that could be used as a shield, have not looked at the Ogre book yet.

In that case, it should be no issue at all.

Nedar
05-09-2011, 14:12
Indeed...Ironfist is a shield, and only a shield. The only special thing it has is allowing Mournfang Cavalry to benefit from a parry save, even though they are mounted.

This is fully intended, and I doubt it will be FAQed away.

There is plenty of armor plates in the mournfang sprues to make your butchers and slaughtermasters look armored anyway :P

Peregijn
05-09-2011, 16:30
i thought that ironfists where bought from the weapon options? witch would indicate to me that they are weapons. doesnt mater what there special rules say. an ironfist is a weapon, not an armor.
so in my opinion: no butchers/slaughtermasters can not wear magic armor.

(i dont have the book myself but a friend om mine does, so i am not sure if the iron fist is a weapon or a armor)

Mr_Rose
05-09-2011, 16:44
What are these "weapon options" you just made up? Units have options in a list. Some of the items on that list are weapons, some are armour, and some are neither; like Trappers or mounts.

As has been mentioned several times already, Ironfists are Shields with a special rule that allows them to be used fully while mounted; that is all.

Lord Inquisitor
05-09-2011, 16:50
Yes, RAW allows them to take any magic armour.

I suspect we'll see some grumbling about fully-armoured butchers though.

As for a putative FAQ, I suspect one of the following:
- Butchers can take any magic armour (RAW)
- Butchers can take any magic shield (would make sense)
- Butchers cannot take magic armour (adding a specific exception)

Scalebug
05-09-2011, 23:21
And as a side note, Skrag the Slagtherer, in his first incarnation, was wearing pretty much full plate...

http://www.solegends.com/citWDAds/citwd1986/images/WD798607p50C23Ogres-01_03.jpg

(Although he wasn't a Butcher back then... :p)

Mercules
06-09-2011, 13:47
i thought that ironfists where bought from the weapon options?

The Ironfist is not included in the "Special Ogre Weapons" list but is an entry outside that list. So I doubt it is a "weapon". It also states it follows all the rules for a shield.

Tzeentch Lover
07-09-2011, 04:51
Why is everyone freaking out anyway? It's not like WoC where sorcerers add to their already fairly decent +4 chaos armor and get pretty decent mounts too. Or Vamps who can get barded mounts or Heavy Armor on top of the magic armor.

All it really does is opens up a few more options for the butcher/slaughtermaster.

AMWOOD co
07-09-2011, 06:32
All it really does is opens up a few more options for the butcher/slaughtermaster.

Yeah, like a 4+ armour, 4+ ward, WS 10 Lvl 4 wizard with 5 attacks (he's got 4 on profile, right?) and 5 wounds at T5. Nothing to worry about.

Really, it's just a matter of determining IF it's possible. My buddy and I were surprised and he was quite happy at the realization. I think I'll be having to reroll wounds against Slaughtermasters for the forseeable future.

Scammel
07-09-2011, 07:14
Yeah, like a 4+ armour, 4+ ward, WS 10 Lvl 4 wizard with 5 attacks (he's got 4 on profile, right?) and 5 wounds at T5. Nothing to worry about.

For just shy of 400pts, you're absolutely right, there's nothing to worry about.

cptcosmic
07-09-2011, 08:20
By the letter, yes, you can have magical armour. Wizards can wear any magic armour if they have any options for non-magical armour, it doesn't have to be of the same "type" (and in addition, there are a few magic armour item that specifically is allowed to be worn by Wizards, but those are explicitly noted so in their own descriptions, and are the exceptions, not the rule). Getting a "shield" through purchasing a weapon that doubles as one is still an option for armour.

according to your logic the HE archmage can buy magic armor cause he can buy a barded steed.

Lord Zarkov
07-09-2011, 09:38
according to your logic the HE archmage can buy magic armor cause he can buy a barded steed.
No, because barding is not "an option for 'normal' armour, such as light armour, or a shield" as per p500.

And Ironfist is a shield, so come under p500 and allows the Slaughtermaster to take magic armour.

cptcosmic
07-09-2011, 10:20
No, because barding is not "an option for 'normal' armour, such as light armour, or a shield" as per p500.

And Ironfist is a shield, so come under p500 and allows the Slaughtermaster to take magic armour.
1. he said any type
2. ironfist is not a shield. it counts as a shield
3. "such as" or "example given" means the same. please show me the line where the book state that barding is not normal armor.

:p

Lord Zarkov
07-09-2011, 10:45
1. he said any type
2. ironfist is not a shield. it counts as a shield
3. please show me the line where the book state that barding is not normal armor

:p
1) he said the 'type' of magic armour you buy doesn't have to be the same 'type' as the mundane armour you can take, which is true a/p p500.
2) Ironfist 'counts as' a shield, therefore it follows all the rules for shields, therefore the option for it grants access to magic armour as per a shield.
3) Show me where it says it does? Permissive ruleset after all.
Rather than appearing in the part of the rulebook on saves and types of armour (p43), barding appears on p83 in the cavalry section, as an upgrade for a mount. It certainly isn't normal armour worn by a character.

cptcosmic
07-09-2011, 10:55
sorry but you are funny, your arguments do not work well :rolleyes:

he said:

Wizards can wear any magic armour if they have any options for non-magical armour, it doesn't have to be of the same "type"
thus: armor of caledor is not the same type of armor as barding thus according to his logic my archmage can buy armor of caledor.


"an option for 'normal' armour, such as light armour, or a shield"
according to your logic and your quote, heavy armor is not normal armor because it is not listed here as an example under "such as" which is the same as "example given", while we all know that heavy armor is normal armor. please show me the definition of "normal armor" in the book. if barding is not normal, what is it then? an aberration?

Loopstah
07-09-2011, 11:01
sorry but you are funny, your arguments do not work well :rolleyes:

he said:

thus: armor of caledor is not the same type of armor as barding thus according to his logic my archmage can buy armor of caledor.

No, your Archmages horse could buy the Armour of Caledor but as it doesn't have the option of purchasing magic items it can't.

cptcosmic
07-09-2011, 11:10
No, your Archmages horse could buy the Armour of Caledor but as it doesn't have the option of purchasing magic items it can't.
no because the archmage buys the upgrade of barded steed, the horse buys nothing. the armor belongs to the archmage because he gets the steed. also archmage on horse counts as single model and gets the armor save. it is also interesting that you ignore the rest of pretty much everything :rolleyes:

Lord Zarkov
07-09-2011, 11:12
sorry but you are funny, lack of logic ftw :rolleyes:

he said:

thus: armor of caledor is not the same type of armor as barding thus according to his logic my archmage can buy armor of caledor.at you call "his logic" just happens to follow the quite explicit wording in the rulebook :rolleyes:
However the Archmage does not have an option to wear armour, his horse has an option to wear barding, but he does not.

You could I guess make an argument for a theoretical wizard-horse with a magic item allowance being able to buy magic armour (since barding counts as 'armour of its own' for a mount (p83)), but if said theoretical wizard-horse was ridden by another wizard that other wizard would still not be allowed magic armour, as the barding belongs to the horse and not the rider.



according to your logic and your quote, heavy armor is not normal armor because it is not listed here as an example under "such as" which is the same as "example given", while we all know that heavy armor is normal armor. please show me the definition of "normal armor" in the book. if barding is not normal, what is it then? an aberration?
P43 lists some more examples of 'normal' armour - the defining features are that they all provide a base save (rather than improving an existing save like barding does) and are all worn by warriors rather than mounts (unlike barding). They're also all called '*something* armour' (like Full Plate Armour, which is not on the list of examples, but, again, unlike barding).

Ninja'd - Edit so as not to double post

no because the archmage buys the upgrade of barded steed, the horse buys nothing. the armor belongs to the archmage because he gets the steed. also archmage on horse counts as single model and gets the armor save. it is also interesting that you ignore the rest of pretty much everything :rolleyes:
p83 states that the barding belongs to the horse and not the rider. The rider still cannot wear armour, and so cannot buy magic armour.

cptcosmic
07-09-2011, 11:24
However the Archmage does not have an option to wear armour, his horse has an option to wear barding, but he does not.

where does the BRB state that the mage has to be able to wear it by himself? he only needs the option to buy it. the archmages buys the upgrade, not the horse. also the steed has no option to buy anything, it already comes with its full equipment :p




P43 lists some more examples

yes examples, there is no definite rule for "normal armor". btw shield also improves armor save just like barding.




p83 states that the barding belongs to the horse and not the rider.
actually it states that barding belongs to the mount. this only really applies if the mount is monster where you can seperately attack the mount. the rider and horse counts as one model. anything that belongs to the horse also belongs to the rider

Lord Zarkov
07-09-2011, 11:33
yes examples, there is no definite rule for "normal armor": btw shield also improves armor save just like barding.
Examples which have a large array of things in common that they do not share with barding. And all of which are called '*Something* Armour'.
Yes a shield does not fit this definition, but shields are called out separately to "'normal' armour" on p500 as something that allows wizards to take magic armour


where does the BRB state that the mage has to be able to wear it by himself? he only needs the option to buy it. the archmages buys the upgrade, not the horse. also the steed has no option to buy anything, it arleady comes with its full equipment
The BRB rules relating to wizards and magic armour use the word 'wear' no less than three times. :p

cptcosmic
07-09-2011, 11:35
The BRB rules relating to wizards and magic armour use the word 'wear' no less than three times. :p
too bad that the horse and wizard count as one model, thus it also belongs to the wizard too.

TANKMAGE GOGO! :angel:

PS: would be fun to play a lvl 4 mage with fat armor and beast lore buffs or a proper Dragon Mage that does not die to bows.

Lord Zarkov
07-09-2011, 11:45
too bad that the horse and wizard count as one model, thus it also belongs to the wizard too.
Not necessarily, that's like saying the horse should get +2 S on the charge if the rider is carrying a lance.
Or the rider should get any of the horses special rules and vice versa. (Clearly not the case)

TANKMAGE GOGO!

PS: would be fun to play a lvl 4 mage with fat armor and beast lore buffs.
And that's still assuming that the option to have a barded mount counts as the option to have "'normal' armour", which is far from clearly the case (and in fact reasonably clearly not the case).

cptcosmic
07-09-2011, 11:57
Not necessarily, that's like saying the horse should get +2 S on the charge if the rider is carrying a lance.
Or the rider should get any of the horses special rules and vice versa. (Clearly not the case)

the horse cannot use the weapon of the rider because the rider already uses it :p and actually the rider uses the horses rules all the time (higher movement, armor and so on) and the horse has his own "handweapons".

I can go even further: if the horse does not benefit from the riders special rules and vice versa then why do the rules-lawyer claim that frenzied chaos knights horse get an extra attack despite the fact that the rules state the model get an extra attack not attackS.

Lord Zarkov
07-09-2011, 12:15
the horse cannot use the weapon of the rider because the rider already uses it :p and actually the rider uses the horses rules all the time (higher movement, armor and so on) and the horse has his own "handweapons".

Unless otherwise noted, special rules that apply to the mount do not apply to the rider, and vice versa
Very clear.

Also cavalry explicitly use the armour save of the rider ("Cavalry Armour Saves", p83), with a bonus of one for being mounted and a bonus of one if it is barded. If the mount in it's warbeast form wore extra super dooper armour of 1+ save the cavalry model would still only get +2 to its save for being a barded steed.


I can go even further: if the horse does not benefit from the riders special rules and vice versa then why do the rules-lawyer claim that frenzied chaos knights horse get an extra attack despite the fact that the rules state the model get an extra attack not attackS.
Because they're idiots.
In the previous edition the horses gained Frenzy because psychology explicitly transferred. In the current edition it does not, so the horses do not gain an extra attack (p82 is very clear in this regard).

cptcosmic
07-09-2011, 12:34
Because they're idiots.

that is what I said too and I received got "Warning Level: 10" :rolleyes:

nevertheless I agree that the archmage cannot buy magic armor I was just trolling a bit :) but it would be still awesome if I could play a proper Dragon Mage with full armor and Star Dragon.

Mercules
07-09-2011, 12:41
that is what I said too and I received got "Warning Level: 10" :rolleyes:

nevertheless I agree that the archmage cannot buy magic armor I was just trolling a bit :) but it would be still awesome if I could play a proper Dragon Mage with full armor and Star Dragon.

So if you are done flinging feces to derail the thread... did you have an actual argument as to why you believe Ogre wizards may or may not gain access to Magical Armor with the option to buy an Ironfist?

Leogun_91
07-09-2011, 14:01
if barding is not normal, what is it then? an aberration?Well I don't know what it is but putting clothing on yer horses aint normal.:)

where does the BRB state that the mage has to be able to wear it by himself? he only needs the option to buy it. the archmages buys the upgrade, not the horse. also the steed has no option to buy anything, it already comes with its full equipment :pYes the horse comes with its full equipment, the mage can chose to either buy a barded elven steed or an elven steed, the barding is not an upgrade he can chose to buy, he is forced to buy a barded steed. A Bretonnian damsel however buys the barding as an upgrade for her steed. That logic would allow a damsel to wear magic armour but not a mage (the mage buys a horse with barding not first a horse and then barding). But the rules are quite clear that the rider doesn't count as wearing armor just because he's riding a barded steed.



It seems the rules would allow a butcher of Slaughtermaster to wear armor (considering the nature of ogre kitchens I'd believe that's the sensible thing to do anyways).

Tregar
07-09-2011, 14:35
I agree with the argument that Ogre Butchers can, as per the current rules, wear magic armour. The absolutely atrocious argument put forth by cptcosmic only makes me despair for the arguments it could cause in game. I truly hope I never, ever encounter someone claiming that a Wizard is wearing barding, which is stupid, wrong, and wouldn't stop an Ogre equipped with an Ironfist from having magic armour even if it was true...

In case anyone wants to take the argument even further, when you buy a cavalry model a lance, perhaps the mount gets to use it too! Where's the suicide smiley?

Lord Inquisitor
07-09-2011, 14:45
The exact text is...

"The only exception to [MAGICAL INTERFERENCE] is when a Wizard has armour as art of his standard equipment or an option for 'normal' armour, such as light armour, or a shield."

That's pretty explicit that if you have an option for a shield, then you can wear magical armour.

As for barding

"if the mount has barding (i.e. armour of its own), the rider's armour save is increased by two points"

That's pretty clear that the barding is indeed armour of the mount, not the rider.

cptcosmic
07-09-2011, 15:30
The absolutely atrocious argument put forth by cptcosmic
I am sorry, I have almost 40 degree centigrade at work, my mind melted and turned on trollmode. of course you are right :cool:

Tregar
07-09-2011, 19:28
Haha, well, we'll just wait for the FAQ. GW are the ultimate trolls! :D

Arnizipal
10-09-2011, 19:42
that is what I said too and I received got "Warning Level: 10" :rolleyes:

nevertheless I agree that the archmage cannot buy magic armor I was just trolling a bit :) but it would be still awesome if I could play a proper Dragon Mage with full armor and Star Dragon.
What you said (and what gained you warning points) was quite a bit worse that calling people idiots.
And please don't troll threads as it's a good way to get more warning points...

Arnizipal,

++ The Warseer Moderation Team ++

Harwammer
11-09-2011, 10:27
Because they're idiots.Too harsh.


In the previous edition the horses gained Frenzy because psychology explicitly transferred. In the current edition it does not, so the horses do not gain an extra attack (p82 is very clear in this regard).


I can go even further: if the horse does not benefit from the riders special rules and vice versa then why do the rules-lawyer claim that frenzied chaos knights horse get an extra attack despite the fact that the rules state the model get an extra attack not attackS.

The problem is the Frenzy rules don't sufficiently cover every situation in which the rule can occur. Cptcosmic your interpretation of a model getting an extra attack NOT extra attacks doesn't work for chariots with more than one frenzied rider (beastmen chariots that roll insane primal fury). Lord Zarkov, your rational (nor the rules) don't cover when an entire multipart model (rather than just part of one) has the frenzy rule.

When possible I think its better to look at the rules simply~ ironfist=shield-> magic armour unlocked. Barding=just horsey armour-> no magic armour. In this case I think looking into the details any further just produces artifacts rather than any written in rules. That said Slaughtermasters wearing magic armour may too be an unintended artefact.

I guess both issues could use an FAQ or errata.

narrativium
11-09-2011, 13:28
The rules for the ironfist are crystal clear. The item works like a shield, and the bearer gains all the benefits of a shield, even when mounted - such benefits inclusive of access to magical armour. That's how it works, in writing, as of this time.

Whether it's intentional or not is another issue entirely. It seems contradictory to established lore on Butchers, and previous definitions of an ironfist as a weapon, so it makes as much sense as Firebellies joining units of Yhetees, but this is how it works in the game now.