Different weapon rules in 3rd and 4th ed. - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1
    Member Kheldar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    ITALY
    Age
    35
    Posts
    378
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    37 (x1)

    Different weapon rules in 3rd and 4th ed.

    Until the new codex is released players are supposed to continue using the old one, right?

    What happens when the an old codex uses a particular wording to reach a particular effect and such wording has a different meaning in the 4th edition?

    Ok, it's complicated, but I'll give you an example which should explain everything.

    If you consult the Kroot Mercenary codex the kroot hunting rifle has the "sniper rifle" special rule. In the previous edition this rule comprised both the enhanced to hit and to wound rolls AND the pinning rules, which now in 4th edition are considered part of a different rule (i.e. "pinning").

    So

    a) you use the new rules completely, so kroot hunting rifles do not pin anymore?

    or

    b) as the codex is based on 3rd edition, you use that weapon template, so it translates to "sniper rifle" and "pinning"?

    - Just love that maki! -

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Illustrator Extraordinair Adrian MalSeraph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    New York State
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,579
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    192 (x7)

    this is a simple answer.

    Weapons and units with the same name use the same rules.

    The DH codex lists the Assault Cannon as Heavy 3 when its common knowledge that it's Heavy 4. GW FAQ'd that and said that as an assault cannon, it follows the entry in newer codexes.

    Same for units. SoB rhinos don't have the repair rule in the entry, but it's assumed to have it, as all other rhinos have it.

    EDIT: Also, if it mentions that it has the sniper rule, then it is assumed it's a pinning weapon. I'm fairly certain that all snipers are Pinning.

    SM scouts, Eldar Rangers, IG snipers, Ratlings, Sniper Drones etc. etc. All pin.
    Last edited by Adrian MalSeraph; February 9th, 2007 at 16:12.

  4. #3
    Dark Eldar Zealot Wicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Menai Sydney Australia
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,699
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    434 (x8)

    Hi,
    Are you absolutely certain that “weapons and units with the same name use the same rules.”
    If that were so then why don’t specific Codexs just say “refer to the generic entry in the Rule or Wargear book?
    I draw your attention to Kroot splinter rifles and Dark Eldar splinter rifles, both are called “splinter rifles” and both have very different profiles as they are indeed different weapons.
    You just can’t assume that weapons, wargear etc with the same name in different Codexes has exactly the same stats. Each Codex will impart their own flavour on a similar type of weapon.
    I believe that you have to follow the most current set of rules available to you and if GW has a FAQ that is more current than the Codex Release then that’s now gospel and overrides the Codex but if the Codex is the more current then follow that.
    But to say that “If they get it in their army then so should I” is an assumption based on …………?
    Basically if its not current and written for your particular army then you can’t use it.

    So the answer is - a) you use the new rules completely, so kroot hunting rifles do not pin anymore. (Page 32 in the Rule book under sniper weapons with the same information in the Kroot army list.)
    If you can find a later ruling than this then that will be your answer.
    Cheers.
    In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.

  5. #4
    Mathhammer wielder! Prittstift's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Holland
    Age
    32
    Posts
    370
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    28 (x1)

    I'd have to agree with the previous posts. I'd allow it to pin me if the Codex said that it is a "sniper" weapon. Any player woth his salt will allow it anyway.

  6. #5
    Dark Eldar Zealot Wicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Menai Sydney Australia
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,699
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    434 (x8)

    Quote Originally Posted by Prittstift View Post
    I'd have to agree with the previous posts. I'd allow it to pin me if the Codex said that it is a "sniper" weapon. Any player woth his salt will allow it anyway.
    Hi,
    just a quick question, where does it say in the "Current" Rules book or the Kroot Merc Codex that sniper rifles have the pinning ability?
    Cheers.
    In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.

  7. #6
    PP is my master now... Hasten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles (unfortunately)
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,213
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    135 (x4)

    Quote Originally Posted by wickywacky1 View Post
    But to say that “If they get it in their army then so should I” is an assumption based on …………?
    The assumption is based on GW ruling this way in the past. As was mentioned previous (and as I mentioned in the happy little chaos teleporter thread), Daemonhunter gear such as the assault cannon or the teleport homer is not stated as using the updated profiles found in BT or SM codices in any official publication that I've been able to find. Yet, when my friend and I contacted GW rules hotline, they ruled that Daemonhunters do indeed use the updated weapon/vehicle/wargear profiles found in said publications. I know that others have gotten the same result from the GW rules line, which is why over on the Daemonhunters forum, we all take the updated profiles as a given. So there is good reason to assume that, for instance, Chaos teleport homers (which have an identical entry as Daemonhunter teleport homers, which GW ruled use the updated teleport homer rules) should use the updated profile.

    Cheers,

    -H
    Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.
    -George Orwell

    www.drmcninja.com
    If you're intruiged by doctors who are also ninjas, then this is the webcomic for you!

  8. #7
    Dark Eldar Zealot Wicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Menai Sydney Australia
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,699
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    434 (x8)

    Quote Originally Posted by Hasten View Post
    The assumption is based on GW ruling this way in the past. As was mentioned previous (and as I mentioned in the happy little chaos teleporter thread), Daemonhunter gear such as the assault cannon or the teleport homer is not stated as using the updated profiles found in BT or SM codices in any official publication that I've been able to find. Yet, when my friend and I contacted GW rules hotline, they ruled that Daemonhunters do indeed use the updated weapon/vehicle/wargear profiles found in said publications. I know that others have gotten the same result from the GW rules line, which is why over on the Daemonhunters forum, we all take the updated profiles as a given. So there is good reason to assume that, for instance, Chaos teleport homers (which have an identical entry as Daemonhunter teleport homers, which GW ruled use the updated teleport homer rules) should use the updated profile.

    Cheers,

    -H
    Hi.
    let me get this straight, you are basing all of this on a past telephone call to GW asking about Daemonhunters and they translated the answer from the Black Templar or Space Marine Codexes and now you are applying this to Chaos. And the original posts example highlighted Kroot?
    I am sorry, you have really lost me on this one. You win as I give up.
    Cheers.
    In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.

  9. #8
    PP is my master now... Hasten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles (unfortunately)
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,213
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    135 (x4)

    Quote Originally Posted by wickywacky1 View Post
    Hi.
    let me get this straight, you are basing all of this on a past telephone call to GW asking about Daemonhunters and they translated the answer from the Black Templar or Space Marine Codexes and now you are applying this to Chaos. And the original posts example highlighted Kroot?
    I am sorry, you have really lost me on this one. You win as I give up.
    Cheers.
    Well look, the Daemonhunter gear was just an example of equipment written under 3rd edition rules, much like the Kroot Hunting Rifles, and the question is how they function under 4th edition rules. My response was that based on repeated rulings from GW, items from 3rd ed. generally function in the same manner as items written under 4th ed. So, for instance, the Daemonhunter gear defaults to the most recent copy released. This has been supported by GW on many occasions, and I have personal experience to back this up, to boot :yes:!

    With regards to the Kroot Hunting Rifles: they're Sniper weapons, which included Pinning under the old ruleset. Under current rules, Sniper and Pinning are two separate rules, yet every other weapon with the old Sniper ability that has been released since the rules changed now includes Pinning as well. So, yes, we need to use our reasoning abilities a bit, but it's not much of a stretch to apply this trend to the Kroot's version of the sniper rifle.

    I wish they answered rules questions via e-mail so that we wouldn't have to say "Well they told me so," but that's what we have to deal with. Well, that, and our common sense. And, I think we can all agree that common sense says that the Kroot Hunting Rifles should still confer the benefits that their more recently released analogs do. This case is especially easy, methinks, since the abilities in question haven't changed, they've just been separated into two abilities instead of one.

    Well, that's my opinion anyways. Feel free to take it or leave it.

    -H

    *edit*
    Ah, just to clarify, my previous post was a response to your question. You'd asked why Adrian MalSeraph was making the assumption that Daemonhunters should get to use the updated weapon profiles released under 4th ed. That's why I meantioned GW's ruling via their rules help line.
    *end edit*
    Last edited by Hasten; February 13th, 2007 at 17:55.
    Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.
    -George Orwell

    www.drmcninja.com
    If you're intruiged by doctors who are also ninjas, then this is the webcomic for you!

  10. #9
    PP is my master now... Hasten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles (unfortunately)
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,213
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    135 (x4)

    Quote Originally Posted by wickywacky1 View Post
    Basically if its not current and written for your particular army then you can’t use it.
    One point of interest is that, while it seems like this should be the way it works, GW has ruled otherwise via the aformentioned rules line in the past. I agree that this would make our lives simpler, but for one reason or other (most likely publication and distribution problems, I'd guess) they've decided not to do it this way.

    Quote Originally Posted by wickywacky1 View Post
    If that were so then why don’t specific Codexs just say “refer to the generic entry in the Rule or Wargear book?
    You know, I've had the same thought in the past. It would be one heck of a lot simpler if they would stick a "current armoury" page on their website. They'd need one for the Imperium, and one for each xenos species, but it seems like it'd take one person a day or two to whip something up. Plus, it would give them more ability to fine-tune different codices without releasing an entirely new edition. The Eldar, for instance, could have had their previously "useless" weapons given slight boosts. This would have been a very cheap (economically) way for GW to address the... over-abundance of Starcannons before this most recent codex changed things around. I'm honestly not very sure why they haven't done something like this. Let me go see if they have a suggestion line... =)

    -H
    Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.
    -George Orwell

    www.drmcninja.com
    If you're intruiged by doctors who are also ninjas, then this is the webcomic for you!

  11. #10
    Advocatus Diaboli Rork's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Prowling LO, looking for fresh meat.
    Posts
    4,571
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    476 (x8)

    Quote Originally Posted by Hasten View Post
    You know, I've had the same thought in the past. It would be one heck of a lot simpler if they would stick a "current armoury" page on their website. They'd need one for the Imperium, and one for each xenos species, but it seems like it'd take one person a day or two to whip something up. Plus, it would give them more ability to fine-tune different codices without releasing an entirely new edition. The Eldar, for instance, could have had their previously "useless" weapons given slight boosts. This would have been a very cheap (economically) way for GW to address the... over-abundance of Starcannons before this most recent codex changed things around. I'm honestly not very sure why they haven't done something like this. Let me go see if they have a suggestion line... =)
    That would have solved more problems than it solved, however.

    For GW, it would not be good business sense. Child A goes into GW and buys an army, codex etc. only to find out the first time he uses it that Weapon X has been changed. Child A is now getting the feeling he is being cheated. Rightly or wrongly, the codex should be a one-stop shop and stay reasonably consistent over its lifetime (Hence why GW is doing no more revisions, just clarifications).

    Secondly, it would solve nothing. While some weapons were "useless" in the old Codex: Eldar, it wasn't just the weapons that were the issue - half the units in the book were below bar, primarily due to an exceptional cost for a small return. You confuse the cause with the effect - mass use of starcannons wasn't strictly the cause of the Eldar codex being "broken" but it was the effect.

    You don't put a sticking plaster on a gaping wound .


    Having an army and not owning a rulebook is like owning a car with no steering wheel.

    Quote Originally Posted by amishcellphone
    <3 rork. He does all the arguing so I don't have to.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts