Librarium Online Forums banner

Need advice on interpretation

859 views 20 replies 10 participants last post by  nichodemus10 
#1 ·
Hi Guys

It appears the genestealers are a rare brood that dont state that all modems must be equipped identially. Has anyone kitted out their genestealers non identical and by the rules would you consider this legal?

Im of the opinion of yes, but i would be interested to see other peoples interpreation.

Read first Brood description about vio weapons for genestealers (page 39 and then Gaunts on 40 before replying).

My own justification? Theres nothing there saying that they all need to be identical, and im reading it like "they all have access to any of the below", whereas all the gaunt types specifically state that identical fitout is a must.

What is this leading to?

3 out of 9 feeder tendrils. e.t.c

Dom
 
#4 ·
WYSIWYG is mostly overreated past weapons since must upgrades look like details or flashy bits (grenades on imperial guard - medals on leaders, spikes on a carnifex) and most times your opponent won't know what upgrades do or do not do - though they will pick up quick on what gun to hate most!

I think unless you are heading for tourney play a lot that most people won't mind the models not having perfect WYSIWYG as long as the weapons are right. Just say what upgrades your unit has as you put them onto the board and allow your opponent to read your army list if they ask (as nids we really don't have anything like transport contents to hide anyway). That will be fine for nearly all opponets - heck they manage well enough in Fantasy which has an almost total lack of WYSIYWG
 
#5 ·
WYSIWYG is mostly overreated past weapons since must upgrades look like details or flashy bits (grenades on imperial guard - medals on leaders, spikes on a carnifex) and most times your opponent won't know what upgrades do or do not do - though they will pick up quick on what gun to hate most!

I think unless you are heading for tourney play a lot that most people won't mind the models not having perfect WYSIWYG as long as the weapons are right. Just say what upgrades your unit has as you put them onto the board and allow your opponent to read your army list if they ask (as nids we really don't have anything like transport contents to hide anyway). That will be fine for nearly all opponets - heck they manage well enough in Fantasy which has an almost total lack of WYSIYWG
Yeah, WYSIWYG can be a bit too limiting when it comes to small stuff. With weapons sure, with grenades, glands, etc... why?

I always found it funny that tyranids, the height of genetic engineering, has a big old external gland on his back if he's better at shooting or stronger.

Usually if anyone asks, "your gaunts don't have glands showing", I'll reply, "That's because they're inside, much like your glands." :p

Sure it can be fun to model such things, but I've never seen it as fully required.
 
#13 ·
Side note:

Making gaunts your only scoring / valuable units is arguably not in the spirit of the game, either, but GW went ahead and did that. If they're going to force you to keep them alive and center entire strategies on them, might as well go ahead and use the rules they created to ... yup, keep them alive.
 
#8 ·
Fact is the only way FH will benefit the group as a whole is if the majority has FH...I think. Ugh, that's ugly. If only half the group has grenades or if only some has grenades do the grenades still work??? I know Feeder Tendrils will still provide their bonus but thinking about how the new rules are for what attacking through cover are and Grenades are I think only those models actually equipped with the FH will get the bonus back to their Initiative...maybe. That's gonna be a headache for some judge.

But since Feeder Tendrils specifically state that they work on all within 3" your fine there.
 
#9 ·
If only half the group has grenades or if only some has grenades do the grenades still work???
Yes, but only for each model that actually has them. The grenade or grenade-like effect of any equipment is only ever conferred to the individual model. It has nothing to do with the whole unit.
 
#10 ·
I think you can't mix and match. It is pretty extreme rules lawyering, and trying to argue symantics when it seems the rule should be understood clearly "the whole brood may be equipted with...at the cost listed per model." So you pick a biomorph and apply it to the whole brood and pay the written price per model.

However it would be sweet if you could take just two tendrils and 6 fleshhooks...that would give you 18 attacks on the charge that strike first, so they others probably don't get attacked back.
 
#11 · (Edited)
Nicho Thanks for the input, im going to go out and say now that ive decided that its allowed and Yeah i know what your saying, but you have made an assumption about the meaning. But again i thank you for your input its good to have all sides convince everyone when it comes to that type of query.

Tell me this isnt prime example of what should be going into FAQ's.

YOu can say

1. The whole brood is able to select stuff from the list. Thats great. And apply it however the hell they want.

Or

2. Exactly how you have interpreted it which forces the choices to "the whole" as you describe so the whole brood must make the same choice.

I think i have gone with the example that has less assumption which by itself is enough for me. Then theres that every other brood has the line saying they must be identical and the genestealers dont. In itself not much, but morally supportive.

Case 2. Would be just like saying in cases where you have (2 models may be equipped with either flamer/plas/melta(, or the space marine termi entry 2 models can have assault cannon flamer e.t.c replace 2 with all and you have the same logic. You can still apply rule 1 or 2 as per our discussion above, and force them to take the same wep or not.

Regardless of its useful (because poor and good choice exist in both situations). Theres been loose wording like this in every list, and i ask are the designers keeping this in mind when they make units expensive/inexpensive? Because they can have diversity or not?

Im very pleased with the wording of the 5th edition because of this, you will notice that, model and unit are used alot more strictly that the cluster that was anything previous when you had to guess the meaning between a unit, a model, an invidual (does that include tanks)? Almost every rule was written with a different description of UNIT (as a whole) or Unit (within the unit as a singular). I only hope that the really tight wording makes it through to the next few codexes so that these situations dont even come up.

My $0.02
 
#12 ·
It only works if you and your opponent agree on it. Personally I see the wording on the stealers to be pretty close to that of the warriors, which it's accepted they must have the same biomorphs.

Both say "brood". The brood may choose biomorphs paying the points listed per model in the brood. It doesn't say "each model may choose biomorphs" it says the whole brood.

The warrior entry goes on to say each "warrior" may then choose two weapon biomorphs. Note: warrior=single model, Brood=whole unit.

No where in the genestealer entry does it say each model may choose. Page 39 of the 4th edition nid codex under bio-weapons.
 
#14 ·
Honestly you can read it either way. The main thing is to check with your opponents first before making a list based around that. Have two lists before a game or tournament and talk to people before picking one. I can see how you read it that way but until an FAQ comes out on it that's just going to be a question of interpretation, which is between you and your opponents to agree.
 
#18 ·
Stealers are infinitely more fragile scoring units than gaunts, as you get (at cheapest) over 3 gaunt wounds for every stealer wound, if your stealers are not upgraded. You're not going to capture objectives with stealers unless your opponent is hideously bad.

That being said, yeah, it's rather r'tarded to make intentional cannon fodder meaningfully scoring.
 
#19 ·
I have to ask why people keep thinking this cover save is cheesy. I don't quite see the logic behind it being broken because really every other army can use the cover save mechanism. They could do the same thing with their Necron Warriors or their Space Marines. How does it make it cheesy when we do it? Because we suddenly have a save that the rules have given us? I would just find it interesting for someone who thinks it's cheesy to explain their point of veiw if they can. I'm rather fond of debates. Especially intelligent ones, which is what the ones out here seem to be.
 
#21 ·
I think the big comment cheese, really relates to win at all costs as opposed to win with the spirit of the rules/fluff. When I play with my friends we figure out the competetiveness of each game before we set up our lists. As such I always ask permission to use more the 4 monsterous creatures in 1500 points (5 in 2000), because I don't think it is balanced. I think using a unit to cover a unit that it is covering isn't really in the spirit of the rules and is allowed. If we are playing a cut throat game, I think it is a legit play, but in a friendly game I choose not to do it (unless they start to set models up that way).

That said if you are playing in a tournament environment I think you are in the competitive arena and should play within the rules; but you should also feel free to bring your best list (even if it is cheesy), and use your best tactics especially if you think your opponent is going to use his or her best tactics.

Back on to topic, Dom it seems like you are saying they are getting better at using model vs. unit, but in this case you are ignoring that they use "whole brood" instead of each stealer.

Next if you re-read all of the other entries it never says that biomorphs have to be the same for either warriors or Gaunts. It says each brood must take them at the points listed per model (in the exact same way the stealers is stated). Then there is a period. Then it starts talking about weapon symbiots: with warriors saying they must take two and they can differe between broods; with gaunts saying they must be equipted identically. Now if I just freed your concience of equipting all of your models in all of your units differently then I am very sorry because it seems that is not what the rules are saying to me.

I think the big message though should be if the rules say you can do something you can do it. If the rules does not say you can do something then you cannot do it. And it does not say that you can equipt each stealer differently, it just never mentions that you can't. Well it never says that you can't drop an assault cannon on a devastator for 20 points, so I seems you think they can do that too.
 
#20 ·
I think their big beef is using multiple units of gaunts to "screen" each-other, thereby giving all units the cover save. It's more of a "this is what I think you should do" as opposed to a "this is what the rules say I can do" debate.

Honestly if the game tells me I can only use my troops to capture objective, I'm going to do everything I can to use my troops to capture objectives. Sure it's not "tyranid fluff" to keep your gaunts hidden behind a wall to protect that pretty oil drum, but it's what the game rules say I must do.

I had a similar situation in 4th edition where my opponents hated that I could use cover. (Keep in mind that my opponents normally fielded units that had 3+ and 2+ armor saves.) They once advocated to me to play on a board without any terrain because it gave me an unfair advantage. *shrug*
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top