PDA

View Full Version : What is the most argued about new necron rule?



rocdocta
06-12-2011, 05:51
So we are a month into the necron codex. What do you consider to be the most debated special rule/ wargear etc for necrons?

damn was supposed to be a poll... fail.

Arandmoor
06-12-2011, 06:20
The viability of anything with "Triarch" in the name. The praetorians got a bad rep when some dumbass made a copy-paste error on the GW website and gave them Lychguard stats, and everyone got their panties in a twist over their A1 vs. 40ppm price tag.

The stalker has a bad rep because it's not a dread. According to some people it needs one more gun, a DCCW, and shouldn't pay points for the targeting relay.

As for rules...their rules are really well written actually. The vast majority of the rules QQ is people looking for loopholes that don't exist except in their fantasies.

rocdocta
06-12-2011, 06:43
The viability of anything with "Triarch" in the name. The praetorians got a bad rep when some dumbass made a copy-paste error on the GW website and gave them Lychguard stats, and everyone got their panties in a twist over their A1 vs. 40ppm price tag.

The stalker has a bad rep because it's not a dread. According to some people it needs one more gun, a DCCW, and shouldn't pay points for the targeting relay.

As for rules...their rules are really well written actually. The vast majority of the rules QQ is people looking for loopholes that don't exist except in their fantasies.

you know i was thinking that too. often it seems to be skewed into lawyering.

The bearded one
06-12-2011, 09:48
entropic attacks vs feel no pain I guess.

Blink
06-12-2011, 10:20
The viability of anything with "Triarch" in the name. The praetorians got a bad rep when some dumbass made a copy-paste error on the GW website and gave them Lychguard stats, and everyone got their panties in a twist over their A1 vs. 40ppm price tag.

That "some dumbass" got it from the playtesting codex... which is where he got almost all of the other accurate information. They changed it to A1 between that and the actual codex. They probably did that to provide a larger distinction between the two units in the Elite slot.

They are still statistically bad at combat though. Pejoratively speaking about people not liking that does not change that fact.


The stalker has a bad rep because it's not a dread. According to some people it needs one more gun, a DCCW, and shouldn't pay points for the targeting relay.

It is very costly and pretty fragile for what little it is worth with no transport options for it... Which leaves your expensive model with one mid ranged weapon slogging across the board. That especially hurts in the 1/3 of games you're playing with it board edging in Dawn of War.

But yeah, the rules themselves are pretty clear – no huge rules and wording debates worth caring about. Just some loophole scavenging here or there.

blackcherry
06-12-2011, 11:10
The rules seem pretty tight actually. Though there are some phrases or sentences that have been written poorly, and I can see people wanting to exploit that, the main body of rules are solid.

Probably the most controversial thing has been fluff instead of rules. Though when has this ever been any different :p

The bearded one
06-12-2011, 11:37
That "some dumbass" got it from the playtesting codex... which is where he got almost all of the other accurate information.

I believe he isn't referring to the rumours but the fact that on the actual GW website where you can see the profile of a model on it's own page, that triarchs had the same stats as a lychguard: 2 attacks.

Blink
06-12-2011, 11:44
I believe he isn't referring to the rumours but the fact that on the actual GW website where you can see the profile of a model on it's own page, that triarchs had the same stats as a lychguard: 2 attacks.

Yeah, that probably came from the same playtest codex for the people who posted it on the site. It really does seem like a last minute decision to nerf the attacks.

The bearded one
06-12-2011, 11:52
luckily they got... erhm.. they got..uhh

..what did they get in return?

Chaos Undecided
06-12-2011, 11:55
Judging by forum posts I say its the does my codex/weapon/psychic power rule trump the new we'll be back queries.

Personally I find the rule interactions between re-animation protocols and everliving a little "weird" especially concerning joined lords/crypteks but its probably just something I need to play more game to get used to it.

Blink
06-12-2011, 11:58
luckily they got... erhm.. they got..uhh

..what did they get in return?

The opportunity to be buffed as close combat beasts when the Wraiths get nerfed to crap tier in the next codex ;)

LonelyPath
06-12-2011, 12:27
entropic attacks vs feel no pain I guess.

I think that's the worst offender, but if people took time to read the rules properly it wouldn't be so much of a issue. Or, at least that's how i see it ;)

madden
06-12-2011, 14:27
Chrono and stormlords night fight/lightning rolls,
Entropic v FNP,
Scarabs and squadrons,
Mindshackles v character (in unit hits himself or unit and on own does he hit himself or stand there acting stupid?).

Thanatos_elNyx
06-12-2011, 14:29
The Crypteks and their equipment is a really badly written rule that could easily have been written to be understood without ambiguity.

loveless
06-12-2011, 14:50
Entropic v. FNP gets my vote. It's cumbersome at best and downright confusing at worst - it also seems to be one of those issues where people have already dug their heels in on their position and don't wish to move until GW puts it in writing.

The bearded one
06-12-2011, 15:03
The Crypteks and their equipment is a really badly written rule that could easily have been written to be understood without ambiguity.

What is the badly written part exactly?

"here's a list of stuff you can take. Just no duplicates!"

Blink
06-12-2011, 15:07
He is probably referring to the fact that they exchange their weapons for ones listed in the cryptek's wargear section... which is a bit of a work-around of the no duplicates rule.

Thanatos_elNyx
06-12-2011, 15:24
Yeah as Blink states, they could have simply put an asterisk next to all the "one per Royal Court" equipment and said "* One per Royal Court".
There would be a lot less confusion than the current rule which has some people thinking they can't take the signature items more than once.

The bearded one
06-12-2011, 15:31
It hasn't confused me yet. Am I a genius?

Thanatos_elNyx
06-12-2011, 15:36
That would imply genius can't be confused and I assure you it can (though not from personal experience) :p

The bearded one
06-12-2011, 15:38
A genius is not as easily confused as ye, semi-illiterate lowly gamer-plebs! :)

Nurgling Chieftain
06-12-2011, 17:31
Ever-living. Right now it seems like an almost entirely pointless rule. Due to reasoning that seems more like an easter egg than a planned consequence, in the normal situation where a small unit is wiped out in shooting or close combat, it does nothing except have a counter sit around briefly before being automatically removed anyway.

Lord Damocles
06-12-2011, 17:37
Ever-living. Right now it seems like an almost entirely pointless rule.
It lets single models (Overlords etc.) get back up.

It also stops Crypteks/Lords in squads becomming pretty much invincible without wiping the whole unit.


I can't really see what people find all that confusing about it really.

Chimera
06-12-2011, 17:40
Joining the 'Actually they're pretty good' crowd.

Particularly when looked at in comparison to the old set of Necron rules. Any time you saw Necrons on the table... "We'll Be Back" rules argument in 4.. 3.. 2..

stroller
06-12-2011, 17:43
Pass. Haven't had one yet.

Nurgling Chieftain
06-12-2011, 20:41
It lets single models (Overlords etc.) get back up.That's all it does, and yet that's not really what they wrote. In practice, how often is that going to happen? Everliving models will generally be joined to units, and units will generally be destroyed as units rather than one at a time. (Well, there are command barges, so that's one thing.)

Also, what's so magical about having an ally destroyed next to you that makes it impossible for the Everliving model to get back up? There's a lord and a warrior. Kill the warrior, then the lord, and the lord can get back up. Kill the lord, then the warrior, and they're both gone forever. What's up with that?


It also stops Crypteks/Lords in squads becomming pretty much invincible without wiping the whole unit.I don't know what you're talking about, here.


I can't really see what people find all that confusing about it really.It doesn't do what it seems like it was written to do, and the way it's written doesn't make much sense if it merely does what it says it does.

Ace Rimmer
06-12-2011, 20:52
Interesting, I don't see a distinction between the above event's. Character's do not count for Reanimation protocol purposes (pg29). They should roll for ever-living regardless of the unit surviving or not, hence why they get an EL counter, not an RP counters, as RP doesn't get rolled for wipes units. You then roll for EL and return the successful models. The only point I don't see as clear is for the court if the unit got swept. I assume once the first model to make its EL roll is placed and the rest would go in coherency, but it doesn't specifiy that.

Lord Damocles
06-12-2011, 21:07
I don't know what you're talking about, here.
Say you have a Cryptek attached to five Warriors.
The unit takes five wounds. One Warrior and the Cryptek go down.
Without Ever-Living, you'd just roll 2 Reanimation protocols, and if you passed one, then you could choose to stand up the Cryptek instead of the Warrior.
With Ever-Living, you have to roll seperately for the Cryptek (ironicly making him more likely to cark it, but still :shifty:)

Phazael
06-12-2011, 21:13
The main issues as I see them:

Monolith- Can something emerge the turn it arrives from Deepstrike or not?

Trazyn- Does he do the surragate roll after Everliving or does he never get to use his everliving rule? Do his sweeps bennefit from the Empathic Destroyer if he is mounted on a Command Barge?

Royal Court- What is exactly considered unique gear options and what are the effects of having two such units in the same army? How do they interact with the Ghost Arcs special abilities? Does a dead lord waiting to roll for Everliving bennifit from res orbs or even confer that bennefit to other members of his unit?

Quantumn Shielding- How does this rule interact with the Lance rule?

Entropic Strike Timing- Do you check for AV reduction before making armor pen rolls, ie can scarabs nerf the AV of a vehicle and then resolve their attacks against the vehicles at the lowered AV in the same initiative step?

Aside from that, the rules are fairly tight, if bland and overcosted.

Rated_lexxx
06-12-2011, 21:35
I think its RP vs Remove from game. Do they still get RP btw can someone tell me what entropic is

It does seem to be a lot of talk about but I don't know what it does.

Arandmoor
06-12-2011, 21:46
Entropic v. FNP gets my vote. It's cumbersome at best and downright confusing at worst - it also seems to be one of those issues where people have already dug their heels in on their position and don't wish to move until GW puts it in writing.

No, there's no "position" to be had for ES vs. FNP. It's just people who want ES to negate FNP when it clearly does not.

FNP is negated by attacks that ignore armor.
ES does not ignore armor. It removes it. Completely different thing.

These are the same people that say orks with SV- shouldn't get FNP against any kind of CC attack because they have no armor save to take so, obviously, their guardsmen are negating the non-existent armor saves with their zero-special-rule-stat-only CC.

Blink
06-12-2011, 21:57
Joining the 'Actually they're pretty good' crowd.

Particularly when looked at in comparison to the old set of Necron rules. Any time you saw Necrons on the table... "We'll Be Back" rules argument in 4.. 3.. 2..

To be fair, the old rules for We'll Be Back were written just fine... Granted a small amount of Necron players tried to pull crap they shouldn't and botch the rules for advantage, but shame on them.

loveless
06-12-2011, 22:00
No, there's no "position" to be had for ES vs. FNP. It's just people who want ES to negate FNP when it clearly does not.


Er...the argument I heard on Entropic v. FNP was:

"If an Entropic Wound is not saved by Armour but is saved by Feel No Pain, does that model lose its Armour Save in subsequent rounds?"

I'd honestly not considered Entropic removing FNP, and I wouldn't play it as such.

Blink
06-12-2011, 22:02
No, there's no "position" to be had for ES vs. FNP. It's just people who want ES to negate FNP when it clearly does not.

FNP is negated by attacks that ignore armor.
ES does not ignore armor. It removes it. Completely different thing.

Eh? I'm pretty sure people are arguing whether or not ES works if a models fails its armor save and makes its Feel No Pain... Not that it negates FNP.

Rated_lexxx
06-12-2011, 23:25
wow after looking at entropic I don't know why there is such a argument. It's not preventing a armor save, you just don't have a armor save.

Blink
07-12-2011, 02:42
Which are you talking about, Rated_lexxx? Arandmoor's came-out-of-nowhere argument, or the one about whether ES works if a model fails its armor save but makes its feel no pain?

Geep
07-12-2011, 03:30
I think, in most cases, RAI is pretty clear in the Necron book. The main issues I see are: The issues with Trazyn (as stated above)
Lance vs Quantum Shielding (I know how I'd play it, but I can see both sides arguments)
How does Writhing Worldscape interact with a Tremor Stave?
How does a vehicle deal with an Initiative test (another case where I have a clear opinion, but can see arguments)?
How many models are hit by the Death Ray (although RAI seems clear the wording is ambiguous)?
The Entropic Strike/ Feel No Pain issue (Does the model still lose the save, I don't see how anyone argues the 'denies FNP')

I was also confused for a while about the word jumble that is Cryptek options. Initially I thought that meant you could only ever have one type of Cryptek per court. Now I agree with the genral consensus that you can mix and match, but that is really poorly written.

TheGreatDalmuti
07-12-2011, 03:46
Everliving (huge fail by RAW, it becomes a liability so often)
Feel no pain vs Entropic (But the problem exists with pinning also so it should have been addressed earlier)
Vehicle Squadrons vs Entropic (No RAW)
Vehicle initiative tests (No RAW)
Stupid line in Master of storm that doesnt let you use night fight at all after you fail a roll. (RAI can be seen a few lines down but it says what it says)

Arandmoor
07-12-2011, 04:01
Er...the argument I heard on Entropic v. FNP was:

"If an Entropic Wound is not saved by Armour but is saved by Feel No Pain, does that model lose its Armour Save in subsequent rounds?"


Yes they do. Both FNP and ES trigger from the same event: the model suffers an unsaved wound. You take your FNP roll at the same time you lose your armor save.

Again...just people trying to game the system for a loophole. It's obviously not RAI based on both rules' fluff descriptions, and making a successful FNP avoid ES requires "creative interpretation" when you take exact wording into account.

Arandmoor
07-12-2011, 04:04
Which are you talking about, Rated_lexxx? Arandmoor's came-out-of-nowhere argument, or the one about whether ES works if a model fails its armor save but makes its feel no pain?

Prolly mine. Out-of-nowhere is what I get for posting during my breaks at work.

wyvirn
07-12-2011, 04:15
Again...just people trying to game the system for a loophole. It's obviously not RAI based on both rules' fluff descriptions, and making a successful FNP avoid ES requires "creative interpretation" when you take exact wording into account.

Not really. It come down to ignoring the wound or ignoring the wound and its effects. :shifty: And it's not just relevant to ES, but also pinning, vulnerable to blasts, etc. ES just highlighted an underlying issue. The issue has already been debated into deadlock on the rules forum, reaching 13 pages I think. So that would be the most debated rule IMO.