What counts as a daemon? - Page 3 - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
40k Rules Discussion Post any Warhammer 40k rules queries and discussions here.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #21 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-01-11, 11:53 PM
Senior Member
 
TimberWolfA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 165
Reputation: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramoro View Post
We did not fix those rules, you simply did not and apparently do not know how they work. Feel free to start a new thread about them though and you will be told the same thing. On any forum, I recommended warseer if you disagree with our reasoning.

Again i'm not trying to start an argument, but I don't think you'll get many different answers. (Except on Warseer)
Apparently that's a very raw nerve for you. I was trying to lean into it slow because I do indeed already know the 'right' answers and have come to agree with you and I really don't want to offend. Your response is unnecessarily hostile. If we had to change the wording of Impaler Cannon to make it do what we're confident that it does, then we 'fixed' it. That is exactly what we did, so really, how is this different?

RUSS!
TimberWolfA is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-03-11, 04:34 PM
Senior Member
 
Aramoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,314
Reputation: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimberWolfA View Post
Apparently that's a very raw nerve for you. I was trying to lean into it slow because I do indeed already know the 'right' answers and have come to agree with you and I really don't want to offend. Your response is unnecessarily hostile. If we had to change the wording of Impaler Cannon to make it do what we're confident that it does, then we 'fixed' it. That is exactly what we did, so really, how is this different?
Oh please that is not even close to a hostile response.

People ask questions on the forums about the rules. I give them, to the best of my ability, the RAW answer to it. They can then do whatever they feel like with that information, ignore it, play it, play some RAI however they feel. I do not 'fix' the rules to make weaker codexs better or sway in favour of one codex or another based on power as you suggested. Ultimately no one is making a final determination on here, just providing answers which you are free to agree with or disagree with as you choose. Impaler Cannon is childishly simple to understand so I have no idea how it went that far in the first place. But as I said if you think that I am trying to 'fix' the rule to benifit one codex or another feel free to ignore me.

I could not care less how you play this, RAI then probably they should be Daemons. But they're not so do with that information what you will.

Aramoro

"Violence isn't the answer, I just like getting it wrong on purpose"

Sally Forth! - My Gaming Blog
Aramoro is offline  
post #23 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-04-11, 09:25 PM
Senior Member
 
Maidel's Avatar
Maidel's Flag is: England
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,857
Reputation: 1
Default

Hi

I might have missed something, but my codex only says 'any daemon or pysker' and 'have the prefered enemy (daemons) special rule.

Therefore surely RAW says that anything called 'daemon' or has a 'daemon' special rule are affected by this? I might have missed something.

When you look at the 'prefered enemy' rule in the rule book it doesnt mention anything about the bit in ( ) having to relate to a special rule.

To prevent any 'misunderstandings' if I post IN ORANGE then I am joking.
Thank you
Maidel is offline  
 
post #24 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-04-11, 10:27 PM
Senior Member
 
LukeValantine's Avatar
LukeValantine's Flag is: Canada
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Regina, Sask, Canada
Posts: 4,277
Reputation: 21
Default

God damn it people RaW is clear on this, until a errata is released CMS's daemons, and the avatar are not considered daemon (just like last edd). In a friendly game I would allow it, but the fact stands regardless of fluff, and common sense only crap in the CD codex are counted as daemons for the GK's.

Also on another note I am glad they are, for the following reasons. CSM's are an aging army with one good generic HQ (DP's), and a bunch of random overpriced crap that is daemonic (Which no one would ever take if they were made worse by GK special rules). Also Eldar are in a similar boat with the avatar not really that big of a deal anymore, yet would he would be made infinitely worse if GK's get bonuses against it.

Ever thought that maybe they deliberately made these armies exceptions? After all GK's are hardly weak, and giving them a leg up on to ailing armies would border on the incompetent. Mind you both codex are in for a revamp in the next 2 years so they could just make all these units have the Daemons special rule, hence saving them the potential time of righting a unneeded errata.

In closing RaW trumps idiotic RaI no matter how sound the RaI logic is.


Medusa: "I'm a witch, its my job to blaspheme against Gods."

Two Slaanesh daemons on the first go...hmm I guess the fates have spoken emperors children here I come
LukeValantine is offline  
post #25 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-04-11, 10:58 PM
Senior Member
 
Aramoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,314
Reputation: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maidel View Post
Hi

I might have missed something, but my codex only says 'any daemon or pysker' and 'have the prefered enemy (daemons) special rule.

Therefore surely RAW says that anything called 'daemon' or has a 'daemon' special rule are affected by this? I might have missed something.

When you look at the 'prefered enemy' rule in the rule book it doesnt mention anything about the bit in ( ) having to relate to a special rule.
This is what I was talking about earlier in this thread, theres no rule to say something IS what it is called. That's why they had to say for Epidemius that a Plauge Bearer of Nurgle is a nurgle unit.

Aramoro

"Violence isn't the answer, I just like getting it wrong on purpose"

Sally Forth! - My Gaming Blog
Aramoro is offline  
post #26 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-04-11, 11:07 PM
Senior Member
 
Maidel's Avatar
Maidel's Flag is: England
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,857
Reputation: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramoro View Post
This is what I was talking about earlier in this thread, theres no rule to say something IS what it is called. That's why they had to say for Epidemius that a Plauge Bearer of Nurgle is a nurgle unit.
Ah right. So, currently RAW is unclear because nothing is a deamon?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LukeValantine View Post
God damn it people RaW is clear on this, until a errata is released CMS's daemons, and the avatar are not considered daemon (just like last edd). In a friendly game I would allow it, but the fact stands regardless of fluff, and common sense only crap in the CD codex are counted as daemons for the GK's.
Im not disagreeing with you - but Im just interrested as to where this comes from, because I cant find that RAW.

To prevent any 'misunderstandings' if I post IN ORANGE then I am joking.
Thank you
Maidel is offline  
post #27 of 27 (permalink) Old 04-05-11, 01:42 AM
Senior Member
 
TimberWolfA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 165
Reputation: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramoro View Post
...But as I said if you think that I am trying to 'fix' the rule to benifit one codex or another feel free to ignore me...
Sigh.

You read too much into my use of the word 'fix', probably because of our earlier encounters. When I use the word 'fix' I mean it in it's most literal and basest definition: in this case that definition is, "to take something which is broken and alter it such as to return it to an earlier state of function."

Thus taking a rule that does little or nothing and returning to its intended state of function.

RUSS!
TimberWolfA is offline  
Reply

  Lower Navigation
Go Back   Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums > Warhammer 40K > 40k Rules Discussion

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome