Librarium Online Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 73 Posts

·
LO's Shadow Captain
Joined
·
12,783 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just to clear this up for people who might choose to hijack some other threads in debate:

Destroyers and Heavy Destroyers do NOT receive the Toughness bonus for being a Jetbike. Here's why:

Necrons Codex said:
[Heavy] Destroyers count as Jetbikes for movement purposes.
As far as I'm concerned, Toughness bonuses do not fall under "movement purposes."

To find out how a Jetbike moves, please check the core rulebook.

They don't get the Toughness bonus, and I hope this will stop some sprouting debates..



Librarium | Online | Forums
 

·
Too Sexy For My Whirlwind
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
Just so you know I completely agree with you. But FYI the people who are going on about them having 6 toughness actually are getting it right from the core rulebook. In the back of the core rulebook it specifically lists destroyers as Jetbikes, not just moves as jetbikes.

Now anyone not out to cheat the system knows that the destroyers bonus toughness is already included in their statline, but those who just can't seem to win without breaking some rules will protest that they do get 6 toughness and GW has just magically missed this in their statline and hid the details in the back of the core rulebook for these special individuals to find.

I any case, thanks for the support, but short of GW showing up on these peoples doorstep and personally handing them a note that says that destroyers only have 5 toughness I don't think this will be put to rest.
 

·
LO's Shadow Captain
Joined
·
12,783 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I am of the opinion that the codex will overrule the rulebook in this case. They count as Jetbikes for the movement purposes, that's all. Apparently, that's enough for the GW people to count them as Jetbikes in the back of the rulebook - but, that doesn't mean people can go around adding bonuses to them which are obviously not applicable.



Librarium | Online | Forums
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,919 Posts
Well there's another important to back this up.

In cases where the +1 toughness is applied, it is usually shown in the description, with the unmodified T in brackets. Look at SM bikers for a case in point, and the lengthy explanation in the Tau Codex why they haven't included such statistics in the profile in that case (Improved Characteristics). Destroyers have neither, just a plain T value, and the description that they move as Jetbikes.

Anyone who tried to seriously claim otherwise with against me would just get hit with their codex.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Hi guys,

just thought I'd say that destoyers are immortals, not regular warriors fused to a destroyer body. It says so in the book. This should mean that the extra thoughness is not included in the stats. But I do agree that it's only for movement penalties, although I think GW could have beeen a bit clearer about it. (like with the scarab entree, where it says they don't get the extra toughness)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,907 Posts
They are not Immortals with Destroy Bodies. Similarily, Guardian Jetbikes are not Guardians on Jetbikes, Jetbike Warlocks are not Warlocks on Jetbikes, and Reavers are not Wyches on Jetbikes. Sound like unrelated issues? Not quite. In each of those examples properties of what would be considered the base unit are changed in a way that would not otherwise be possible just by putting them on a bike. Guardians, for example, have a 5+ save, but Guardian Jetbikes have a 3+ save. The Jetbike itself does not provide such a save, as is evident in its entry in the Eldar armoury. It is a fundamental difference in the unit. Of course, this case deals with Toughness and not armour saves. However, the same basic principle applies: they are two entirely different units, regardless of what the fluff says.
 

·
Too Sexy For My Whirlwind
Joined
·
1,148 Posts
In cases where the +1 toughness is applied, it is usually shown in the description, with the unmodified T in brackets. Look at SM bikers for a case in point, and the lengthy explanation in the Tau Codex why they haven't included such statistics in the profile in that case (Improved Characteristics). Destroyers have neither, just a plain T value, and the description that they move as Jetbikes.
Not exactly sure who's side of this your on...but just in case your on the side proposing that they get T6:
The reason that its not included in their profile is because their Toughness is fully modiefied(as mentioned), Thus they don't need to put anything in brackets because they are not insta-killed by strength 8. And in the Destroyer body entry in the armory it mentions that destroyer body's add in te +1 T and it counts for insta-kills, thus more back-up for me. Believe me, you can email GW...their is no way under any circumstances that they would make fast attack units that have a wbb T6. Its just not true, you guys are cheating if you use them as T6.

If you were trying to support our arguments them i'm sorry for the lengthy re-explanation.

just thought I'd say that destoyers are immortals, not regular warriors fused to a destroyer body. It says so in the book. This should mean that the extra thoughness is not included in the stats.
It says that in a fluff entry, which has no effect whatsoever on gameplay. Anyone who lets the fluff entries determine unit statlines is being really noobish. The game itself and fluff are supposed to remain separate. GW made rules to go with these models, the backround they give them is irrelevant to gameplay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,919 Posts
Addoran said:
Destroyers have neither, just a plain T value, and the description that they move as Jetbikes.

Anyone who tried to seriously claim otherwise with against me would just get hit with their codex.
Hmm, I must be doing something wrong if people are confused to what side I'm on.

I was making the point that if Immortals had extra jetbike toughness, they would be T6(5).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
953 Posts
A bike only offers extra T when purchased as wargear. If the model comes wth it as standard equipment then the bonus T would already be included in their profile. This is why the Lord gains +1T when he purchases a destroyer body as wargear. There are tons of examples of this in almost every army so I don't see where the confusion is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
The Destroyer including in specifications +1T. A Destroyer moving like Jetbike and from this movement geting everything, but not from the Jetbike. If a movement like Jetbike making +1T, the destroyer get it.
 

·
LO's Shadow Captain
Joined
·
12,783 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Saulius said:
The Destroyer including in specifications +1T. A Destroyer moving like Jetbike and from this movement geting everything, but not from the Jetbike. If a movement like Jetbike making +1T, the destroyer get it.
Not sure what you're saying here...

But, Destroyers move like Jetbikes. They are not Jetbikes, so they do not get the additional Toughness.



Librarium | Online | Forums
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
Lost Nemesis said:
Not sure what you're saying here...

But, Destroyers move like Jetbikes. They are not Jetbikes, so they do not get the additional Toughness.
Im using 3-th edition rulebook.
1. On page 88 you can find the info "SKIMMERS MOVING FAST" , this about glancing hits;
2. On page 90 you can find the info "HITS" ...skimmers can only ever be hit on a 6...;
3. On page 94 "ELDAR JET BIKES" ... combine the utility of bikes with the best aspects of skimmers.

The Destroyers do not get any extra toughnes, just plus one because of the destroyer body. But the skimmer ability, that everything can hit only on 6, if the destroyer moving, is awesome, as well the ability to move 12" and fire with weapons. I think that NECRON destroyers with gaus weapons are best skimmers in the game.
The Necron Destroyer Lord have a Toughness 6
The Necron Destroyer have a Toughness 5
Hau
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,907 Posts
Saulius said:
Im using 3-th edition rulebook.
Why?
3. On page 94 "ELDAR JET BIKES" ... combine the utility of bikes with the best aspects of skimmers.
That's fluff. The next sentence describes the rules for how Eldar Jet Bikes work. They do not gain the benefits of skimmers except those that happen to be similar as specifically described in the rules.

It's irrelevant either way, though, since the current official rules are in the 4th Edition rulebook.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,919 Posts
Oh dear....let's keep this simple.

Once upon a time there was something called Destroyers.

They moved like jetbikes, but were neither jetbikes nor were they skimmers.
They were T5.
You hit them normally and not only on a 6.

And they all lived happily ever after.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
The End:sleep:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
And thats that.
Addoran summed it all up for everyone.

Grats to LostNemesis for posting this topic, now if only the noobs at my store could read this...:glare:

HPA
 

·
LO's Shadow Captain
Joined
·
12,783 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
High Priest Avion said:
And thats that.
Addoran summed it all up for everyone.

Grats to LostNemesis for posting this topic, now if only the noobs at my store could read this...:glare:

HPA
I could have sworn it's already been summed up several times already, but people need repetition, it seems.

Thanks for that, Addoran.



Librarium | Online | Forums
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
You see, the point of Jetbikes is that there is more of a chance of hitting the actual bike (or platform in the Destroyer`s case) then the mount. Because there is a chance of hitting the platform, this is represented by the +1 T (I`m not entierly sure about this though). In any case, it would have said that Destroyers do not get the bonus in the codex like Scarabs. So I believe that they do get the +1 T. Also, if you give the Necron Lord Destroyer Body, then it gets +1 also. So therefore the Destroyers/ H Destroyers should get the +1 T.
 
1 - 20 of 73 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top