| Welcome to The Chamber of the Everchosen. We hope you enjoy your visit! Here at COTEC we are all about the Warriors of Chaos in Warhammer Fantasy Battle. Tactics to help you slaughter your opponent on the tabletop, through to galleries on how to build your next Warshrine. Its all covered... and growing! We are a forum for gamers and hobbyist alike and again would like to welcome you to a fun, friendly, warm place and hope to see you again! Join our legion! Takes less than a minute and gives you access to everything! If you're already a member please log in to your account by entering the correct runes and words of power: |
| Khorne lord on juggy; is he viable??? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 27 2010, 08:47 PM (1,984 Views) | |
| Lungboy | Jul 31 2010, 12:59 AM Post #31 |
|
Warrior of the Chamber
|
p104: "Therefore, if a character is riding a mount with a single Wound, he is riding a cavalry mount. If a character has a cavalry mount, the whole model is treated as having the troop type 'cavalry' and follows all the rules for both characters and cavalry models." |
![]() |
|
| Kormak | Jul 31 2010, 01:20 AM Post #32 |
|
High Executioner of Khorne
|
Who knows, completion, copy pasted the DoC stats, maybe its designed with the next Mortal book, who really knows, we could all list a million reasons of speculation as to why GW does anything. |
![]() |
|
| Godless-Mimicry | Jul 31 2010, 02:21 AM Post #33 |
|
No' 9
![]()
|
It doesn't say 1 wound mounts become cavalry, it says cavalry mounts have one wound and so definitively speaking a hero on a one wound mount is cavalry. This is horribly worded and a stupid inclusion, and I can see the ambiguity, but it doesn't say they become cavalry. I think it is a fair assumption that since WoC is the only army (that I can recall) that has none cavalry mounts with a single wound, that when writing that paragraph that Mr. Ward simply forgot that there are a few exceptions to the norm. Of course this isn't a great argument to put forward in an in-game dispute, but it needs to be said. I agree Kormak, waiting for the FAQ to be updated is the best bet, in fact, as a Chaos community might we be on the money to try and put the question of Chaos mount types to GW ourselves? |
![]() |
|
| Kormak | Jul 31 2010, 02:38 AM Post #34 |
|
High Executioner of Khorne
|
personally i think its this simple, Mr Kelly hates chaos, plain and simple :( |
![]() |
|
| Godless-Mimicry | Jul 31 2010, 04:10 AM Post #35 |
|
No' 9
![]()
|
What's Phil Kelly got to do with the RBRB? |
![]() |
|
| Kormak | Jul 31 2010, 05:58 AM Post #36 |
|
High Executioner of Khorne
|
I thought he had a hand in its creation, i bet he had a hand in the steed rules! |
![]() |
|
| Godless-Mimicry | Jul 31 2010, 06:37 AM Post #37 |
|
No' 9
![]()
|
Nope, all Phil Kelly did was write all the background sections; only Alessio and Matt Ward had any doing in the rules side of things. |
![]() |
|
| Dracos | Jul 31 2010, 10:36 AM Post #38 |
|
The Chosen
|
I'll probably regret asking Where in the heck can you find a Palanquin or a Dreadnought other than as a mount? I know BRB switches are a pain, but this is ridiculous. Someone back at GW HQ needs to pull their head out their arse and find someone with a ounce of common sense and get this crap straightned out. I play with a Juggie and the damn thing obviously is a monstrous cavalry model. Sucks for me boohoo :rock: |
![]() |
|
| Kormak | Jul 31 2010, 06:19 PM Post #39 |
|
High Executioner of Khorne
|
It says at the back of the BRB, it has everything listed, all i can say is i really hope they dont decide to FAQ/Errata it a MC, i spent alot of time converting and painting mine for 8th ed and i want to use it. With the new army selection rules you know your always going to see two cannons in a army with access to them, templates dont really concern me as much simple because it just has to scatter a few inches and it ant going to be doing a whole lot. |
![]() |
|
| Urdokadin | Aug 1 2010, 01:11 PM Post #40 |
|
The bringer of pestilent rages.
|
Hrmm, looking at the BRB FAQ i'm wondering if we still can still benefit from having the juggie push us negative since they faqed it, so we could still have a 1+ AS even after being hit by higher str attacks? Page 43 – Saving Throws Change the third paragraph to “Note that a save of any kind can never be better than 1+. This does not prevent a model having items or special rules that would take the save even lower, it simply caps the saving throw at 1+. Also, remember that a roll of 1 is always a failure.” |
![]() |
|
| Unuhexium | Aug 1 2010, 02:59 PM Post #41 |
|
The Chosen
|
What it seems to imply is that you can still take items that improve your armour in addition to other effects, such as Charmed Shield and Dragonhelm. Otherwise we'd have people arguing that you cannot take Charmed Shield or Dragonhelm because your Sv is already 1+. |
![]() |
|
| Kormak | Aug 1 2010, 06:02 PM Post #42 |
|
High Executioner of Khorne
|
My take is you can have items that improive you save past a 1+ however the actual save is capped at a 1+ |
![]() |
|
| Godless-Mimicry | Aug 1 2010, 07:25 PM Post #43 |
|
No' 9
![]()
|
Essentially that clarification is there for two reasons; one of these has been covered by Unuhexium. The other by my reckoning is to clarify you can have these items incase one gets destroyed, or a mount gets killed. |
![]() |
|
| Lungboy | Aug 1 2010, 10:05 PM Post #44 |
|
Warrior of the Chamber
|
Indeed. Str modifiers will work from 1+ though, so if you essentially have a -1 save and get hit with a str4 attack, you will be at 2+, not still at 1+. If it worked as Urdokadin suggests, then there would be no point in even mentioning the cap as it would be doing nothing at all. |
![]() |
|
| Godless-Mimicry | Aug 2 2010, 01:06 AM Post #45 |
|
No' 9
![]()
|
I agree with you here. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Tactics · Next Topic » |








4:59 PM Jul 11