A
armybuilder at yahoogroup
Guest
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
FREE COLLEGE MONEY
CLICK HERE to search
600,000 scholarships!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/47cccB/4m7CAA/ySSFAA/IMSolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, email
armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 19 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
From: "Jimi" <jimi@astronomican.fsworld.co.uk>
2. RE: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
From: "Jonathan Hurley" <silvercat@dreamseeker.org>
3. Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
From: "Shawn Campbell" <shawn@electricstitch.com>
4. Re: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
5. RE: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
From: "Michael Earley" <ace@madbomber.net>
6. Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
From: "Jimi" <jimi@astronomican.fsworld.co.uk>
7. Re: more wish list
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
8. Re: Item #Limits
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
9. looking for the following data.
From: "Discord" <yoda@cox.rr.com>
10. any one have kroot shaper info
From: "Discord" <yoda@cox.rr.com>
11. Re: 2.2a Mysterious Conflict with Windows 98 SE
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
12. New poll for armybuilder
From: armybuilder@yahoogroups.com
13. Re: Major Frustration with Printing ;-)
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
14. RE: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
15. Re: Items cost being rolled up into parent
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
16. RE: looking for the following data.
From: "Steven J Cox" <stevenjcox@cableinet.co.uk>
17. SV: Major Frustration with Printing ;-)
From: "Niels Peter Gibe" <np@tagarno.dk>
18. Re: SV: Major Frustration with Printing ;-)
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
19. SV: SV: Major Frustration with Printing ;-)
From: "Niels Peter Gibe" <np@tagarno.dk>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:43:10 +0100
From: "Jimi" <jimi@astronomican.fsworld.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
> You beat that drum so much.
Its the tune GW likes to beat so I'll join the band and play it too
> Around here, the league I'm in uses the GT
> clarifications, and many people treat them as 'official'.
In the UK, GW stores use official Q&A and clarifications - of the 2 stores I
regularly game in, neither uses the Q&A from GW's website. Of the GW stores
I've been to in the UK (apart from the two I game in) only 1 used the
web-based Q&A and even then they used it very loosely - even GW staff dont
like the web-based Q&A (and thats a fact!!)
> GT is supposed to be exemplary of how the game is played
ROTFLMAO!! Hey...you're funny
> hence the focus on sportsmanship and painting.
No, GTs focus on how much you can brown-nose your opponent so he wont mark
your scores down. You can be the best general in the world but if you win
too easily or upset your opponent, down comes your score.
> Under those circumstances, I think anything
> that's in a GT clarification belongs on the run-of-the-mill tabletop game.
So once an Independent Character takes a retinue/bodyguard/command-squad he
loses the ability to buy IC-only equipment??
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
GW Design Rules - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-dr/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:06:56 -0400
From: "Jonathan Hurley" <silvercat@dreamseeker.org>
Subject: RE: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
> >Jonathan Hurley wrote:
> Jimi wrote:
> > Around here, the league I'm in uses the GT
> > clarifications, and many people treat them as 'official'.
>
> In the UK, GW stores use official Q&A and clarifications - of the
> 2 stores I
> regularly game in, neither uses the Q&A from GW's website. Of the
> GW stores
> I've been to in the UK (apart from the two I game in) only 1 used the
> web-based Q&A and even then they used it very loosely - even GW staff dont
> like the web-based Q&A (and thats a fact!!)
That's your environment.
> > GT is supposed to be exemplary of how the game is played
>
> ROTFLMAO!! Hey...you're funny
I didn't say it was, I said that was what it was supposed to be
> > hence the focus on sportsmanship and painting.
>
> No, GTs focus on how much you can brown-nose your opponent so he wont mark
> your scores down. You can be the best general in the world but if you win
> too easily or upset your opponent, down comes your score.
See my remark above. I've never been to a GT, the stories I've heard make me
cringe. But it is *supposed to be* the showcase of the hobby.
> > Under those circumstances, I think anything
> > that's in a GT clarification belongs on the run-of-the-mill
> tabletop game.
>
> So once an Independent Character takes a
> retinue/bodyguard/command-squad he
> loses the ability to buy IC-only equipment??
?! That's weird. I hadn't noticed that before. Pardon me while I go find a
brick wall to beat someone against. I'd dearly love to hear the reasoning
behind that. Especially since the last time I had bothered to check up that
particular ruling, it was the other way. Oi. <at a loss for words>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:31:06 -0700
From: "Shawn Campbell" <shawn@electricstitch.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
> ?! That's weird. I hadn't noticed that before. Pardon me while I go find a
> brick wall to beat someone against. I'd dearly love to hear the reasoning
> behind that. Especially since the last time I had bothered to check up
that
> particular ruling, it was the other way. Oi. <at a loss for words>
Your right. It was one way in 2000, but the 2001 versions of the Studio Q&A
say no IC wargear for characters w/ retinues.
The ruling is based on the phrase "...is an Independant Character unless
accompanied by..." or something like that... you'd have to look up the codex
as mine's not nearby.
It was explained to me originally that characters that *could* be IC's could
take IC wargear... but now they are reading the rules more strictly.
I think the Studio originally intended for all IC's to take IC wargear
regardless of retinues, but the codex was poorly edited and this is the
results. Same goes for ATSKNF.
-Shawn
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:38:35 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
One fine day in the middle of the night, Michael Earley
<ace@madbomber.net> got up to write:
>OK--I've got a teak (ammunition). That tweak is selectable multiple times
>via "zrng:0-999". HOWEVER, according to the inquisitor rulebook, the cost
>is the same regardless of whether you take 1 of the items or 50 of them.
'zcst:single' should work, I think.
--
'Not Colin' McAlister | License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:04:45 -0400
From: "Michael Earley" <ace@madbomber.net>
Subject: RE: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
sadly, zcst:single references the ITEM'S count, not the tweak's count. Or
at least that's what it says. And when I tried it, it didn't work...
> One fine day in the middle of the night, Michael Earley
> <ace@madbomber.net> got up to write:
>
> >OK--I've got a teak (ammunition). That tweak is selectable
> multiple times
> >via "zrng:0-999". HOWEVER, according to the inquisitor
> rulebook, the cost
> >is the same regardless of whether you take 1 of the items or
> 50 of them.
>
> 'zcst:single' should work, I think.
>
>
FREE COLLEGE MONEY
CLICK HERE to search
600,000 scholarships!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/47cccB/4m7CAA/ySSFAA/IMSolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, email
armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 19 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
From: "Jimi" <jimi@astronomican.fsworld.co.uk>
2. RE: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
From: "Jonathan Hurley" <silvercat@dreamseeker.org>
3. Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
From: "Shawn Campbell" <shawn@electricstitch.com>
4. Re: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
5. RE: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
From: "Michael Earley" <ace@madbomber.net>
6. Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
From: "Jimi" <jimi@astronomican.fsworld.co.uk>
7. Re: more wish list
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
8. Re: Item #Limits
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
9. looking for the following data.
From: "Discord" <yoda@cox.rr.com>
10. any one have kroot shaper info
From: "Discord" <yoda@cox.rr.com>
11. Re: 2.2a Mysterious Conflict with Windows 98 SE
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
12. New poll for armybuilder
From: armybuilder@yahoogroups.com
13. Re: Major Frustration with Printing ;-)
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
14. RE: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
15. Re: Items cost being rolled up into parent
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
16. RE: looking for the following data.
From: "Steven J Cox" <stevenjcox@cableinet.co.uk>
17. SV: Major Frustration with Printing ;-)
From: "Niels Peter Gibe" <np@tagarno.dk>
18. Re: SV: Major Frustration with Printing ;-)
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
19. SV: SV: Major Frustration with Printing ;-)
From: "Niels Peter Gibe" <np@tagarno.dk>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:43:10 +0100
From: "Jimi" <jimi@astronomican.fsworld.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
> You beat that drum so much.
Its the tune GW likes to beat so I'll join the band and play it too
> Around here, the league I'm in uses the GT
> clarifications, and many people treat them as 'official'.
In the UK, GW stores use official Q&A and clarifications - of the 2 stores I
regularly game in, neither uses the Q&A from GW's website. Of the GW stores
I've been to in the UK (apart from the two I game in) only 1 used the
web-based Q&A and even then they used it very loosely - even GW staff dont
like the web-based Q&A (and thats a fact!!)
> GT is supposed to be exemplary of how the game is played
ROTFLMAO!! Hey...you're funny
> hence the focus on sportsmanship and painting.
No, GTs focus on how much you can brown-nose your opponent so he wont mark
your scores down. You can be the best general in the world but if you win
too easily or upset your opponent, down comes your score.
> Under those circumstances, I think anything
> that's in a GT clarification belongs on the run-of-the-mill tabletop game.
So once an Independent Character takes a retinue/bodyguard/command-squad he
loses the ability to buy IC-only equipment??
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
GW Design Rules - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-dr/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 13:06:56 -0400
From: "Jonathan Hurley" <silvercat@dreamseeker.org>
Subject: RE: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
> >Jonathan Hurley wrote:
> Jimi wrote:
> > Around here, the league I'm in uses the GT
> > clarifications, and many people treat them as 'official'.
>
> In the UK, GW stores use official Q&A and clarifications - of the
> 2 stores I
> regularly game in, neither uses the Q&A from GW's website. Of the
> GW stores
> I've been to in the UK (apart from the two I game in) only 1 used the
> web-based Q&A and even then they used it very loosely - even GW staff dont
> like the web-based Q&A (and thats a fact!!)
That's your environment.
> > GT is supposed to be exemplary of how the game is played
>
> ROTFLMAO!! Hey...you're funny
I didn't say it was, I said that was what it was supposed to be
> > hence the focus on sportsmanship and painting.
>
> No, GTs focus on how much you can brown-nose your opponent so he wont mark
> your scores down. You can be the best general in the world but if you win
> too easily or upset your opponent, down comes your score.
See my remark above. I've never been to a GT, the stories I've heard make me
cringe. But it is *supposed to be* the showcase of the hobby.
> > Under those circumstances, I think anything
> > that's in a GT clarification belongs on the run-of-the-mill
> tabletop game.
>
> So once an Independent Character takes a
> retinue/bodyguard/command-squad he
> loses the ability to buy IC-only equipment??
?! That's weird. I hadn't noticed that before. Pardon me while I go find a
brick wall to beat someone against. I'd dearly love to hear the reasoning
behind that. Especially since the last time I had bothered to check up that
particular ruling, it was the other way. Oi. <at a loss for words>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 10:31:06 -0700
From: "Shawn Campbell" <shawn@electricstitch.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [40k] Bikes and 2 CC Weapons
> ?! That's weird. I hadn't noticed that before. Pardon me while I go find a
> brick wall to beat someone against. I'd dearly love to hear the reasoning
> behind that. Especially since the last time I had bothered to check up
that
> particular ruling, it was the other way. Oi. <at a loss for words>
Your right. It was one way in 2000, but the 2001 versions of the Studio Q&A
say no IC wargear for characters w/ retinues.
The ruling is based on the phrase "...is an Independant Character unless
accompanied by..." or something like that... you'd have to look up the codex
as mine's not nearby.
It was explained to me originally that characters that *could* be IC's could
take IC wargear... but now they are reading the rules more strictly.
I think the Studio originally intended for all IC's to take IC wargear
regardless of retinues, but the codex was poorly edited and this is the
results. Same goes for ATSKNF.
-Shawn
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 19:38:35 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
One fine day in the middle of the night, Michael Earley
<ace@madbomber.net> got up to write:
>OK--I've got a teak (ammunition). That tweak is selectable multiple times
>via "zrng:0-999". HOWEVER, according to the inquisitor rulebook, the cost
>is the same regardless of whether you take 1 of the items or 50 of them.
'zcst:single' should work, I think.
--
'Not Colin' McAlister | License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 16:04:45 -0400
From: "Michael Earley" <ace@madbomber.net>
Subject: RE: Tweaks, fixed cost for zrng items
sadly, zcst:single references the ITEM'S count, not the tweak's count. Or
at least that's what it says. And when I tried it, it didn't work...
> One fine day in the middle of the night, Michael Earley
> <ace@madbomber.net> got up to write:
>
> >OK--I've got a teak (ammunition). That tweak is selectable
> multiple times
> >via "zrng:0-999". HOWEVER, according to the inquisitor
> rulebook, the cost
> >is the same regardless of whether you take 1 of the items or
> 50 of them.
>
> 'zcst:single' should work, I think.
>
>