Give me your bugs!

I shall get that sorted.

So, I posted a big post on this thread a couple of days ago, it said that it would have to be verified by a moderator before it gets posted (It had a large quote in it), how long does this process usually last?

Arijharn said:

So, I posted a big post on this thread a couple of days ago, it said that it would have to be verified by a moderator before it gets posted (It had a large quote in it), how long does this process usually last?

Click to expand...

Not long.

Well, on the oft chance it never gets approved, I was talking to HobbyService Australia via a couple of emails about that whole Vermin Lord thing. While I realise that it wont be the word-of-god until (if ever) it gets put in an Errata, they thought it would be legal for (truly massive) Skaven forces to have multiple Vermin Lord's within an army list simply because of the reasons I listed above (I.e., the Doom Glaive isn't a choice as all Vermin Lord's have them, and Vermin Lord's aren't marked as being unique). The example I was given was that a Vermin Lord is much like a default Chaos Knight, i.e., they all have magic weapons of the same type too and following that, isn't it the same as Grey Seer's that all come equipped with Warpstone Tokens?

Because I think it was the massive quote thing I supplied which meant that it hasn't been approved yet, if people are interested in reading the email, I'm more than happy to forward it to interested parties. Like I said though; it isn't the word-of-god, but I think it's the next best thing.

EDIT: HobbyService didn't supply the Warptoken's as an example; I just thought about it. Warptokens aren't completely analogous I know because they're specifically mentioned as not counting towards the Arcane allowance, but they are still magical items, and all Grey Seer's have access to it by default.

Arijharn said:

EDIT: HobbyService didn't supply the Warptoken's as an example; I just thought about it. Warptokens aren't completely analogous I know because they're specifically mentioned as not counting towards the Arcane allowance, but they are still magical items, and all Grey Seer's have access to it by default.

Click to expand...

^ this.... keep in mind that no matter how mcuh you might like/ want something, here at the Army builder data files we use the GW rules as written because they arte the ones used by most Gamers following the GW gameset.

Thus, even though we may or may not agree the GW rules msut still be applied. Therefore once again the Vermin Lord as Written is unique due to various rule violations until otherwise FaQ / EWrrata'd by an official GW release.

Thank You, and this matter is now at rest.

How is the matter at rest? Saying that they're 'unique' is against those same rules you're touting because Vermin Lords aren't unique. Isn't that a bit... hypocritical?

Like I said; if you or anyone else is doubting I'm telling the truth, I'm more than happy to forward the email. I would just post it, but apparently the post where I did was eaten by the forum gremlins (or Trolls).

I thought that by using the Warptokens and Grey Seer's as an example I'd illustrate my point. You can have multiple Grey Seer's in your army list for example; there's no 'unique' rules about them (for example; you can only ever field one Warlord Queek) and yet, all Grey Seer's come equipped with this magical item. It's only the magic item inside the magic item list that says they don't count towards arcane items, should we therefore declare in hindsight that you can't choose Warptokens for a Grey Seer?

Either way; it still doesn't dispel the example that HobbyService themselves supplied: All Chaos Knights have magic weapons and yet you can still choose multiple Chaos Knights.

Choas Knights: Wuote from Army Book page 48
"Ensorcelled Weapons count as magical weapons...."
I.E. They are not magical weapons but they count as magical (such as vs ethreal undead units).

Thus they do not have magical weapons but rather have weapons that count as magical -of which there is a differance.

--

As for the Skaven issue you keep bringing up...


Skaven Army Book, Entry for Vermin Lord, Top of paragraph: "Magic Item"

Warhammer Rulebook, page 500: "Magic Items are considered to be unique..."

Unfortunetly we must code the RaW over RaI


I ask that if you wish to have a disscussion about it please sart a new thread as this will help the data file authorers keep track of bugs. Thank you.

Just to chip in, I did read carefully, and I looked at rulebooks and FAQs to find any possible loophole. But there is none. It may be frustrating, but the files stay as they are until GW gives an official response. Of course, how you choose to play it at home is your own affair.

Found one: all WoC list a flat 6+ Ward when you try to combine the Mark of Tzeentch with a shield, which is of course wrong. It does this even on cavalry, who shouldn't be interacting with the Parry rules at all. And it completely overwrites any other ward save. So a wee bit irritating for a Tzeentch player.






[EDIT: Oh, and the entire list is devoid of Stomp/Thunderstomp. (Though interestingly enough, the warshrine does mention that it DOESN'T get it.)]

Yobtar said:

What he said.

The unique rules for magic items dictate how many Verminlords you can bring. Until it is FAQ'd or the subject of an errata the AB file is correct.

Click to expand...

I have stolen this from another discussion forum, but, with respect to Vermin Lord and their Doom Glaives "Magic items that come as equipment can have multiples. Like weeping blades on your death runners, things catchers on your master moulders, plague censers on your priests, warlock augmented weapon on your engineers, etc."

I concur with Yobtar, until GW launches a FAQ otherwise Magic Items are unique reguardless of our thoughts otherwise.

Grey Seer said:

I have stolen this from another discussion forum, but, with respect to Vermin Lord and their Doom Glaives "Magic items that come as equipment can have multiples. Like weeping blades on your death runners, things catchers on your master moulders, plague censers on your priests, warlock augmented weapon on your engineers, etc."

Click to expand...

The examples you listed have been clarified in FAQs from GW.

Yobtar said:

The examples you listed have been clarified in FAQs from GW.

Click to expand...

I think that's his point.

A Doom Glaive isn't a choice like electing to take an Ogre Blade, it's a default setting for a creature that isn't a unique one of a kind creature. The only limiting factor about the Vermin Lord is that it's freaking expensive.

It's an innate ability really because of this. I mean, your system says that you could only take one Hierotitan due to it's items Icon of Ptra and Scales of Usirian (which have both bound magic spells) despite the fact that a Hierotitan also isn't a unique choice, and neither can you elect to not have that equipment. If you say however that those can't count as neither are listed as 'magic items' (despite the Bound Spells section saying in the very first sentence that they're magic items) then I think you're being arguably as 'selective' with applying rules as what I think you're saying to me.

Why is it listed as a magic item or weapon then? Because it's affected by items/abilities that affect magic items, like the Khorne Daemonic Gift Obsidian Armour, not because it's some crazy loophole.

Having said that though; I'll leave the matter to rest now regardless though, because it's pretty clear that neither side will persuade the other, and I don't think it's conductive for the purposes of the board and the spirit of this thread anymore (which is why I tried to make another thread, but apparently any quote that's large enough (or maybe I stuffed up my quote tags) aren't approved by moderators).

I'm more than happy to continue the conversation in PM though and try to argue my position of why I think it's legal.

The Spell "Curse of the Midnight Wind" in the lore of Heavens currently says "friendly units within 12" " but should say "enemy units."

In the Vampire Counts army book, the Necromancer's first spell is free, with successive spells costing points.

src: pg. 90

'Magic: A Necromancer is a Lvl 1 Wizard and knows one Necromancy spell.'

Options - Upgrade:
'Per extra Necromancy spell'

Also: Necromancer's can't wear armour (ie., can't take Magical Armor)

Arijharn said:

In the Vampire Counts army book, the Necromancer's first spell is free, with successive spells costing points.

src: pg. 90

'Magic: A Necromancer is a Lvl 1 Wizard and knows one Necromancy spell.'

Options - Upgrade:
'Per extra Necromancy spell'

Click to expand...

This part is working correctly. When you choose the Necromaner he coems at the normal points cost of 55 points. Then you select the 1st spell you which to purchase which is free. All additional spells cost 15 points.

Arijharn said:

Also: Necromancer's can't wear armour (ie., can't take Magical Armor)

Click to expand...

Thank you for pointing this out. You are correct. Only models with the Vampire rule are excluded from this (page 85 VC rulebook). I will update the VC file and submit it over the course of the weekend.

Ah cheers, is there any chance that this could be changed to clear up the confusion (i.e., people like me! ) within the Army Builder itself, or is this beyond the Data File author's capacity to change? (i.e., you aren't given the scripting ability to do so?)

When you're updating the armour and necromancers bit, don't forget to leave in the exception for the one armour that expressly says necromancers can take it.

Mr_Rose said:

When you're updating the armour and necromancers bit, don't forget to leave in the exception for the one armour that expressly says necromancers can take it.

Click to expand...

ty for the reminder. I actually forgot about the nightshroud's exception.