[dakari-mane]

In Codex:CSM in the armoury section it says that a chaos lord may take upto 150pts from the armoury of which 100 maybe daemonic gifts & a lt may take upto 75pts of which 50 maybe gifts.

Then in the chaos FAQ for no reason at all it goes & says a whopping massive load of things dont count towards their wargear limit.

WTF? Its quite clear in the codex that you get 150/75pts worth of stuff. It doesnt need clarification. But all of a sudden GW release a FAQ that allows models to have no upper points limit "I'll have a million minor psychic powers please!".

Ooooooh that makes me mad. Nobbers!!!!! :evil:

 

[uberschveinen]

Actually, the problem here is you seem to be convinced that putting anywhere near that many points into a signle unit is some sort of advantage, rather than pointsfilling or poor listmanship.

 

[dakari-mane]

Actually, the problem here is you seem to be convinced that putting anywhere near that many points into a signle unit is some sort of advantage, rather than pointsfilling or poor listmanship.

No the problem I have is what they release an FAQ that directly contravenes what is written on the codex.
I am well aware that excessive spending in your HQ slots is an idiotic move (for non-scoring IC's & the like).

 

[uberschveinen]

They aren't contradicting it as you say. If they were doing what you say they're doing, they'd've written "no option in Codex: Chaos Space Marines counts against any total wargear limit". Instead what they have is a few items that don't count under the rules, which are entirely finite. They allow you to spend lots of points on a Lord, but they do not contradict what is written in the sense you say they do.

 

[anathema]

Anyone seen Dan's goat? Someone appears to have it!

 

[dakari-mane]

They allow you to spend lots of points on a Lord, but they do not contradict what is written in the sense you say they do.

But they do.
Codex: May spend upto 150pts from the armoury - every option is listed in the armoury.
FAQ: These things (which are listed in the armoury) dont count towards the wargear limit.

Which is a contradiction. Unless "Wargear limit" & "upto 150pts from the armoury" are 2 seperate things.

 

[dakari-mane]

Anyone seen Dan's goat? Someone appears to have it!

Meh I was bored. I figured it would give me something to do :wink:

 

[MarzM]

I've played against his Flobba Dobb Marines of doom, and i've seen his socks! thats bad enough! I Don't want to know about his pets! lol


MarzM :mrgreen:

 

[dakari-mane]

I've played against his Flobba Dobb Marines of doom, and i've seen his socks! thats bad enough! I Don't want to know about his pets! lol


MarzM :mrgreen:

Flobba Dobb Marines of doom FTW!!!!! :mrgreen:

 

[The Wraithlord]

From what the rumours say you may not have to worry about this problem much longer as there is supposedly a new update to the codex coming out this year.

 

[uberschveinen]

Alright, I'll present it in another manner.

Take murder. If you are brought to trial and have actually killed a person, you will be found guilty. However, if you have killed a person in self-defense or defense of another, while insane, while in the armed forces of a country under the rules of engagement, or while acting autonomously, it doesn't count. This is one case, and it has exeptions. These exceptions did not originally exist when the laws were first drafted, but rather, were crafted as neccesary when the circumstances warranted it.

Games Workshop is not the only entity to include exceptions to rules after the finalisation of the initial rule. You yourself have probably done it dozens of times, in games, competitions, and the like. They are entirely neccesary, and complaining about them, especially when they don't do anything to hurt the game, is counterproductive.

 

[jigplums]

While it is true that just because something is written in the codex/rulebook etc doesn't mean it has been set in stone and therefore cannot be changed. However gw's own newly adopted RAW policy should at least be applied to there own FAQ's if they expect to be taken seriously with regards to there rulings and policies.

Faq's are supposed to clear up any rules that are unclear or situations that are not covered in the main rules and codex's. They should not overwrite exsisting rules.