PDA

View Full Version : Fantatics Scatter



Jakk
16-11-2006, 05:49
Wanted to know what you guys who are more experienced when it comes to rules than I am. As a NG player, I use fanatics as sensibly as possible. What I am wondering is how to deal with their movement after they are released. The OG AB says to roll 2D6 + Scatter do determine where the fanatics go in the direction determined by the arrow on the dice. Does this mean they always scatter (using the small cross-hair's arrow when the dice turns 'HIT') or do you get to choose what direction they go if the dice comes up 'HIT' as it is described on page 23 in US White Dwarf 321 (The 'Orctober' issue)?

Festus
16-11-2006, 06:16
Hi

They will always *scatter* ie. move in a random direction

Festus

Jakk
16-11-2006, 07:11
OK. That's nice.


It is feasible that it is not listed in the army book that the fanatics must always scatter. It seems in most cases rules authors will specify if a must always scatter, especially on models where such rules would matter the most.

It's is also feasible that they accidentally left this new rule out concerning the fanatic's additional movement. For a much anticipated armybook, the production seemed rushed and equivocal. The new armybook's text is riddled with grammatical and spelling errors and the rules themselves have quite a few inconstancies.

It would also seem odd that one of the co-authors of the new Orcs and Goblin armybook contradict himself in an article about the changes he made to the book from the last edition right after it had been released.

Therefore, between what the author said in the White Dwarf article (which is definite) and what is written in the armybook (which as you would have it is equivocal) then it would seem that the sensible thing to do is to follow the detail concerning fanatic's scatter in US WD 321.

Griefbringer
16-11-2006, 08:00
Army book is a primary rules source.

White Dwarf articles are not usually rules sources, and sometimes (especially with battle reports) contain errors when it comes to rules.

So the proper interpretation (especially as per RAW) would be to go by the army book and ignore the designer's notes.

T10
16-11-2006, 09:05
Therefore, between what the author said in the White Dwarf article (which is definite) and what is written in the armybook (which as you would have it is equivocal) then it would seem that the sensible thing to do is to follow the detail concerning fanatic's scatter in US WD 321.

Sorry, guvvner, but we are but simple folk. Are you saying that you wish to chose the direction the Fanatic moves if you roll a "Hit"?

-T10

squiggoth
16-11-2006, 09:37
If you look closely at the "Hit" glyph on the scatter dice you'll notice a little arrow above the I in "Hit", which is used for occassions such as this one. :)

As for the WD article - those articles are written far in advance of publication, and articles about new army books (including Battle Reports) are always written when the books are in the final stages of being playtested. Rest assured that the "choose direction when rolling a Hit"-rule was playtested and found not good enough to be included in the final rules for Fanatics.
If you gt more familiar with the rules, you'll laugh at the nonsense that WD articles spout every now and then. ;)

Jakk
16-11-2006, 16:28
Well that sucks if you can call this an "improvement" over the old rules. At least with the old rules you could shoot at your own fanatics and they ignored armor completely.

Mephistofeles
16-11-2006, 18:01
They were far to good. Seriously. Now they are a bit tones down, which is good. They were supposed to be a "dirty trick", not your "main Tactic". I recently faced a Goblin Army with 30 fanatics...Not a fun game...

T10
17-11-2006, 07:27
For me, at least, it means taking one or two fanatics per Night Goblin unit instead of three and start looking for ways to get another unit of Night Goblins into the army!

-T10

Gorbad Ironclaw
17-11-2006, 07:43
White Dwarf Battlke reports can't be used as rules sources, at all. There are quite frequintlky errors in them, and they also often(especial;ly with new armies) play games with rule sets that might not be the finished version. So it's indeed possible that the rule existed at the time of the battle report, buit was then removed for the final printing.

WLBjork
18-11-2006, 00:17
Were all those typos intentional Gorbad?

Either way, I agree that WD is not 100% reliable when it comes to the rules (but as Jervis says in this months Standard Bearer, it's more important to have a fun game than to get the rules 100% correct.)