Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
How far does a talos move? because it says skimmer in the special rules of it, but it is classed as a monstrous creature, a friend of mine made a new DE army costing him about £300, only to find out soon after that his army fell to pieces because he thought the talos moved 12" when another person said it moved 6", They still havnt agreed with each other so does anyone know FOR SURE :laugh::biggrin:
 

·
Porn King!!!
Joined
·
8,137 Posts
6" movement for a Talos. The only skimmer benefits it gets is that it can go over any terrain without a roll but otherwise treat it as a monstrous creature.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Page 264 of the BGB lists the talos as a monstrous creature. Nothing in its description says it moves any faster than normal so it moves 6".
In the original DE FAQ it was noted that the choice of the word skimmer was confusing, and it should be thought of as a "hoverer".
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,988 Posts
Yep. GW thinks that replacing a term with some kind of rules attached to it with a term with no rules at all will clear things up.

Anything to avoid actually telling us what the damn thing does, 8 years after the codex came out.

What we do know is that merely being a "skimmer" does not affect the distance the talos, or anything else, moves. Monoliths are skimmers, so are wave serpents with star engines. Being a skimmer affects how a model moves, not how far.

There is nothing to suggest that a Talos goes over 6", so it goes 6".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
@ Someguy : hmmmm do I detect a hint of anti gw bitterness?
As far as "hoverer" having no rules, surely thats what the explanation of talos movement in its army list entry is for.

RANT ON/ Back in the day it wasnt uncommon for units to have similarly named special rules with different effects - grotesques FNP vs Chaos (was the death co. special rule called FNP back then?) Somehow, the majority of people seemed to understand they were different things.
No idea where I'm going with this, just got my ranty head on...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,988 Posts
Ok here's a better explanation of why this bugs me.

They come up with a thing that doesn't exist anywhere else. A monstrous creature skimmer, for example. It doesn't occur to them that there might be some snags with this that need to be ironed out. It would be fine if they just told us exactly what a hoverer was right from the start, and maybe made it a USR to apply to stuff like Tau drones as well, but that isn't what they do. Without the update we would have Talos floating above terrain unable to enter it, and a faq is required to clarify that attacks against it in CC don't always require a 6 to hit.

We do now know how the talos works but the irritating thing is that GW never realised that there would be a problem. Worse, they very often reply to questions with something like "well obviously it works like this..." when it's not obvious at all, and it's their fault that it isn't clear.

Of course Lash of submission is the most recent example of this. Hey, let's give people an ability they have never had before, moving enemy units, and let's have all the rules in one short paragraph. Let's not bother clarifying whether the models in the unit all have to go the same direction, move the full distance, go in straight lines and so on. Actually let's not even consider how players might use the power to scope or range snipe characters and special weps, to bunch units for blasts, to set them up for assaults with their hidden power fist out of the way, or whatever. I'm sure this won't cause any arguments at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
i second the rant on GW being vague. my group ussually tries for "what would common sense say". although GW makes that hard some times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
821 Posts
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top