Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
21 - 29 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,851 Posts
If you want to argue RAW:

The codex entry states that the Herald's unit type changes from Infantry to Jetbike, and the rulebook states that the +1 Toughness is granted to bike riders:

"Bike riders benefit from the protection offered by their bike, ...". (Emphasis added.)

Compare the description of the chariot:

"... and changes [the herald's] unit type from Infantry to Jetbike." (Pronoun substitution and emphasis added.)

The RAW argument fails because the rules don't specify either a) that the chariot is a bike or a jetbike (so that the herald is a bike rider) or b) state that the herald is riding a bike. Instead, the Herald is simply a Jetbike as per the unit type designation, and follows all of the rules specified for Jetbikes.

Summary: Heralds on Chariots of Tzeentch are Jetbike models who are not riding bikes, so therefore do not get an additional +1 toughness for being Bike riders.
As I said earlier, this is the oversight in the rules.
That is a very poorly written passage, it doesn't really provide you with the specific information you need to play the rule with any certainty about what it means.
Since it's under the unit type, and makes no reference to wargear, or excluding models which don't actually 'ride' their bike, it's safe to assume that it's just a stupid way of saying "Bikes get +1T".


If you want to pull that, then an examples should be brought up.

The Turbo Boosters USR states that "Any model mounted on a bike" may boost; ok then, what you're saying is that Necron Destroyers and Scarabs can't Turbo Boost, because they aren't MOUNTED on a bike.

What you've done is mixed fluff with rules, and unfortunately the rule did that; it's a stupid mistake made by GW, I'm sure they intended it to mean any Bike unit, not Bike rider.


Anyway, I'd say that the Herald is, in fact, riding a bike, thankyou very much.

And your summary is ridiculous, once again mixing rules and fluff to make an absurd conclusion; he either is or he isn't, there's no halfway point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
The problem is, it gives you the new profile. He's T4.

What you're saying is that the Bike bonus isn't included in a profile. So Space Marine Bikes/Attack bikes should be 4(6).

Now you might say that it's included in the Bikes profile because they have that wargear by default.

BUT, the Tzeentch Chariot profile is a profile for a Herald with a Chariot, you never use that profile without having the Chariot of Tzeentch wargear. So in that respect is identical to the Space Marine Bike profile, being in that they both include the T bonus from being bikes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
You're either saying that he's actually T3(4), or that he's not getting the Toughness bonus for being a bike, without any rule specifically stating that.
Show me where it says the Space Marine Bike profile incorporates the bike bonus. Both profiles incorporate all stat modifiers applicable to them.

Let me put it this way. He gets a T bonus. This could very well be in replacement of the normal T modifier of bikes. Who knows? What we do know is that any Herald of Tzeentch with a Chariot gets the exact profile given in the Codex, which gives T4.
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
OK, try to keep things calm guys.. you are both getting a little heated.

I agree with WLS... and I play daemons and use Tzeench chariots (and screamers) a lot. They are both T4, which since they are a daemon is identical to T3(4) in every way (so if I was writing the dex I wouldnt have bothered with T3(4) either).

Two Simple reasons for this:
1- It gives you the new profile for the chariot... having an extra +1T is huge, and wouldn't have been left out of the codex (it would have mentioned it somewhere). Every other codex that gets +1T from a bike of some kind makes mention of the bonus T either directly or indirectly through example of other units.
2- EVERY unit in the BRB that comes with a bike/jetbike as standard equipment has the bonus T in their profile. They aren't even all written in the form Tx(y); necrons, DE and daemons don't use that style. DE and necrons were too early for it, while necrons and daemons have reasons not to use it.

If I am to be even partially convinced that the Tzeentch chariot gets an extra +1T bonus then you'll have to go out and find at least 1 unit entry for something with a bike/jetbike which gets a bonus from it without having it on their profile.
The only examples of people getting the +1T bonus is charcters taking bike upgrades... which is irrelevant to the herald since you get a whole new statline instead.

I find this argument very annoying: just like the people who think that scarab swarms get +2 cover save since they have all the rules for swarms individually and then have swarms as well: Its just bad writing, live with it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
596 Posts
As I said earlier, this is the oversight in the rules.
That is a very poorly written passage, it doesn't really provide you with the specific information you need to play the rule with any certainty about what it means.
You cannot claim to be arguing RAW and then dismiss the statement as "poorly written". If you continue to do so, the only reasonable thing to do is to dismiss your continued attempts to argue in this manner as trolling.

Either argue about the rules AS WRITTEN or concede that your argument is wrong.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,562 Posts
The description of the upgrade lists a series of changes to the stats and the change of unit type then goes on to say "Its modified profile will then be as follows:" and gives a profile including T4.

Therefore after any applicable toughness increase (including one from a change of unit type) the Codex (which overrules the BRB in case of conflict) says T4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,851 Posts
The description of the upgrade lists a series of changes to the stats and the change of unit type then goes on to say "Its modified profile will then be as follows:" and gives a profile including T4.

Therefore after any applicable toughness increase (including one from a change of unit type) the Codex (which overrules the BRB in case of conflict) says T4.
Ultimately yeah, I'm convinced now that that was the intention, and that GW just really suck at releasing clear rules, and suck even more at correcting their mistakes.

So, I'm going to stop this, because whether or not I'm right doesn't really matter :)
 
21 - 29 of 29 Posts
Top