PDA

View Full Version : armed to teef BSB?



metro_gnome
15-09-2006, 16:20
so does a Blorc BSB lose the armed to the teef rule?
or can he use it the way a normal Blorc standard bearer would?

another Blorc character question...
if he has the amulet of protectyness and his armor save is better than the one he would be stealing must he use the lesser save?

Griefbringer
15-09-2006, 16:32
Ahem, isn't the book itself still three weeks away from the release date? Meaning that very few here have actually read it.

Gekiganger
15-09-2006, 16:34
I think they can still use ATT while using a standard (Not 100% but pretty sure). Not sure about when stealing saves though.

metro_gnome
15-09-2006, 16:38
Ahem, isn't the book itself still three weeks away from the release date? Meaning that very few here have actually read it.
should this be moved to rumors then?

I think they can still use ATT while using a standard (Not 100% but pretty sure). Not sure about when stealing saves though.
these are my thoughts aswell... including the "not sure" part ;)

Milgram
15-09-2006, 16:39
well... allthough we have no exact wording for the protectyness thingie yet (does it only works for the model that first wounded you or for any model that passes the roll to wound?), it will be interesting whether you get some special ward saves - like the bretonnian one - or not.

Griefbringer
15-09-2006, 16:42
should this be moved to rumors then?

Well, might be a more suitable location - there somebody might have actually seen a preview version of the book.

Though for actually getting a factual answer, rumours forum is of rather restricted use, since for every useful post there will be four dozen people sending their wishlists, random thoughts and the latest news they heard from local redshirts' neighbour's dog.

Dosadi
15-09-2006, 17:11
There is nothing in thw wording for Blorc BSB that says they loose Armed to da teef. So we can assume they still get to use it. This would make the Blorc BSB the only one in the game who could use a Great Weapon or 2 choppas. Guess I know what I'll be using for my BSB.
The Amulet of Protecyness gives you the same armour and ward save as the model that caused the wound. This could backfire as you might get wounded by something that doesn't have a save at all. There is nothing in the wording that would let you take your own save if it was better. But this may be something that is assumed?
My regular dwarf opponent fields a Lord with a 1+ re-rollable save and a 4+ ward. I can't wait to use this against him.

Dosadi

metro_gnome
15-09-2006, 22:27
yeah that Blorc BSB is looking pretty sweet...
the only competition i see is a goblin BSB with the spider banner...
poisoned stikkas... Wheeeee!

Avian
16-09-2006, 11:02
yeah that Blorc BSB is looking pretty sweet...
the only competition i see is a goblin BSB with the spider banner...
poisoned stikkas... Wheeeee!
Do you really want to pay 80+ points just to poison a handful of shortbows? :wtf:


Other than that, there is nothing in the O&G book that stops a BOBSB from being armed to da teef, provided he does not take a magical weapon and there is nothing in the BSB rules in the rulebook that stops a BSB from using two weapons if he can lay his hands on them.

metro_gnome
16-09-2006, 13:28
as opposed to paying 110 for my BSB with no banner at all?
the thought had crossed my mind...

any insight on the amulet question?

Avian
16-09-2006, 19:32
What about it?

He counts as having the same armour and ward save as the model that is causing the wound, so if the attacker has a crappy (or no) save, then so does he. I've read the finished version and if there was some note there saying that he could chose to use his own if this was better then it was written in very small print! :p

metro_gnome
17-09-2006, 01:11
thats unfortunate...
well thanx for the info guyz...

nagash42
18-09-2006, 05:56
which is why gobbos will love the amulet hehe and orcs not so much.

vorac
19-09-2006, 10:09
if they make the blbsb so great i can't wait to see what they do with the VC bsb because i have never seen a single VC player use one including me and i have the Wight and Blooddragon models, these new orc and goblin rules also make me wish i hadn't sold my orc army last year:(

Unwise
20-09-2006, 01:16
I think that this will come down to the wording in the special rules.

<I just re-read this and it sounds sarcastic which I really did not intend it to be, don't really have the time to fix it though, sorry>

Does armed to the teef just mean that the model is equipped with 2handed+2weapons+shield etc? If so, why would that imply that you get to use them when you could not normally? Being equipped with something does not mean you grow an extra arm and can use a 2hander and a banner. I think it would have to be a very interestingly worded rule in order for us to abandon the standard rules regarding banners.

The HE swordmaster rule means a model is automatically equipped with a 2hander. I think it would be an extreme stretch to let him use a banner and that at the same time. Despite the fact he can have both swordmaster and BSB abilities.

As for the amulet, it will come down the the wording of the item. If it says 'may' use the enemies AS then you have a choice. Otherwise you don't.

Kotobuki
20-09-2006, 01:37
The question though, is where in the rules does it state a BSB cannot carry a shield, or a two handed weapon?

metro_gnome
20-09-2006, 01:42
well there is nothing that prevents a regular Blorc Standard bearer from using his armed to the teef rule...
or even a unit Standard with normal GW... so why prevent the character?
surely the regular stick boy doesn't have a third arm either... so this is not a legitmate reason for anything...

the mechanic that prevented a characters from purchasing the 2 hws (or gw, or shield) is in the individual BSB entry...
the problem is that the equiptment upgrade comes standard on the blorc...
and if the BSB entry does not remove it... he may use it as he sees fit...

Kotobuki
20-09-2006, 01:55
Exactly. If that is his standard equipment, then he has it available to him. If it's available to him, he can indeed use it as he sees fit.

There is nothing that I can find in the BSB section, or the characters section of the rulebook to say that you'd not be able to do so.

Unwise
20-09-2006, 02:07
I don't have the book here atm. In the BSB rules, does it say that the standard takes one hand to use, and therefore...blah blah? Can someone with the book handy quote that passage?

If the BSB rules simply say that you cannot purchse additional equipment, but makes no mention as to why etc, then I guess one could ignore the logic behind it and let a BSB use a 2hander. I am not sure that the fact I could chose to kit out my character in such a way as to make one of this rules unusable would make me do that though.

The normal standards can use 2handers etc for playability reasons, same with the musicians. It would make the game really unwieldy if units have 2 guys in the front rank using different weapons to the rest. I always just imagine that the guys behind the standard bearer step in front of him to fight and defend him.

P.S. If there was no mention of the fact that a BSB takes one hand to use, or that you could only use 1handed items, could we give BSB 2handed magic weapons? (assuming they had no magic banner etc)

Kotobuki
20-09-2006, 04:20
Unwise, I'd dare say yes.

The only specific restiction in the rulebook I can find about who can take what magic items is for arcane items and for armour (the relevent one). "A character that is not allowed to wear ordinary armour may not be given magic armour/helms... A character that is not allowed to carry ordinary shields may not be given magic shields..."

Since there is no specific restiction on weapons, and your BSB is allowed to buy magic weapons, I'd certainly say that he's allowed to have and use a magical two handed weapon.

Avian
20-09-2006, 09:10
I don't have the book here atm. In the BSB rules, does it say that the standard takes one hand to use, and therefore...blah blah? Can someone with the book handy quote that passage?
There is no such rule anywhere. If a BSB can lay his hands on something, he can use it. Thus if there was a Hero somewhere that started with a shield and could be upgraded to a BSB with no note saying that he lost the shield, he could use said shield.

Unwise
21-09-2006, 01:17
Thanks for looking that up folks. I think that this is a good reason to convert non-standard bearer models into BSBs. You could go for the asian style con on the back. Attaching a long pole to the characters back.

On a side note, why did people in 6th edition not buy their BSBs enchanted shields or 2handed weapons? Was there a rule that does not exist now, or was it just not the done thing?

metro_gnome
21-09-2006, 01:55
do you read army books at all?
both shields and additional hand weapons were removed as upgrade choices when the BSB upgrade was chosen...
as there was no mundane shield option... there was no magical shield option...
likewise with the magical additional hand weapons...tho i can think of very few examples of these anyway...

Kotobuki
21-09-2006, 04:23
If you have a magic weapon, you can't use any other weapons. Therefor, you cant get a +1 attack if you have a magic weapon, even if it says to treat it as a hand weapon. And, not being able to have a magic [item] because you can't have a mundane one applies ONLY to items in the Armor category.

Unwise
21-09-2006, 07:03
Oops my reply above was not clear (I thought I had edited it), I was refering to 2handed magical weapons in 6th edition.

Kotobuki
21-09-2006, 15:50
You know, I'm not entirely sure about the 2 handed magical weapons in 6th. But, at this point, it's all rather moot. Ya know?

Atrahasis
21-09-2006, 16:34
There was a ruling (not a rule) in 6th that said BSBs could not use anything that required the use of the second hand (shields, GWs, halberds, AHWs).

That ruling expired with 6th and in 7th a BSB can use whatever he can lay his hands on, including maghical 2-handed weapons.

Also, kotobuki, if a magic weapon says to treat it as a hand weapon, then that is what you should do, including granting the bonus +1 attack when used in conjunction with another hand weapon.

Kotobuki
21-09-2006, 16:42
"A character that has a magic close combat weapon cannot use any other close combat weapons, although it can carry a shield as normal."

So, I suppose if it says specifically that you can use it in conjunction for +1 attack... otherwise, (since there is no specific exemption) would not the blanket rules for magic weapons be in effect?

If it says to use it as a hand weapon, you can, however, use it in conjunction with a shield (mundane or magical) for an added +1 armor save in CC.

Atrahasis
21-09-2006, 16:58
You treat it as a hand weapon, which does not have the limitation you quote.

metro_gnome
21-09-2006, 17:05
but it is still a magic weapon... so it does have the limitations quoted...
in short it is both...

Atrahasis
21-09-2006, 17:12
It is a magic weapon, but it is treated as a hand weapon. So while it is one, it uses the rules for the other.

It is certainly not both.

metro_gnome
21-09-2006, 17:17
then does it not damage ethereals then?
please...
it is both... an follows the restrictons on additional hand weapons...
which are not relative to hand weapon rules anyway...

Kotobuki
21-09-2006, 17:20
Since the BASIC RULE for Magic Weapons explicitly forbids the use of Mundane Weapons while you have a Magic Weapon, you cannot ignore that rule without being told to.

A magic weapon may say that it is treated as a close combat weapon. It does not say, however, that it can be used IN ADDITION to another close combat weapon. Since you have not been told to ignore the fact that you can't use it in addition to a Mundane Weapon, you cannot get a +1 attack.