Librarium Online Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Here is some nice cheese for us Orks to enjoy, and perfectly legal according to the codex !

1- "At the beginning of the ENEMY MOVEMENT PHASE, nominate an enemy vehicle within 2" of the Grabbin' Klaw. On the roll of 4+ that vehicle may not move this turn."

2- "a vehicle with a wreckin' ball causes a strength 9 hit upon one unengaged enemy unit within "2" of the wreckin' ball at the begining of the assault phase on a roll of 4+"


So you can make a truk with a 12 inch long Crane with a Wreckin ball at the end that doesnt need line of sight 8X

Or you can have a battlewagon or looted vehicle with a 12 inch long arm with a claw at its end and watch all those skimmers go SPLAT when you charge them on your turn :party2:

I dont think GW playtested this rules to well... Lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Neat idea, but 'extremities' like arms, wings, or in this case, extend-o-matic wrecking ball cranes, aren't counted for range-checking, measurement, or line-of-sight purposes. This rule is designed to encourage creative modeling and conversions while avoiding any modeling-based rules "workarounds". (i.e. orks with 3-inch arms don't have an effective 9-inch charge range). The 2" range on the Grabba Klaw and Wreckin' Ball would be measured from the nearest point on the body of the vehicle.

Happy Grabba-ing!
-GK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
read the rulling though, from the Codex, it says " 2 inches from the Ball or the Klaw" not the vehicle, if it didnt mention the klaw or Wrekin ball, then yes, it would be like any other measuring distance which is done from the model, not the gun, but in this case it clearly states FROM the ball or the Klaw. Both need some type of crane or device to attach them to the vehicle, so if you wanted, you could make a 10 in long arm with a claw at the end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Im not saying that people would play with me, all im pointing out is how GW made crazy poor play tested rules in the Ork Kodex. And if you show up to a GT with a vehicle with a 12 inch long crane with a claw at the end, they would have to accept you since its perfectly legal according to the Kodex.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,638 Posts
No, they wouldn't. The very best that will happen is they let you play, though not let you use the foot-long wreckin ball, and mark you down based on sportsmanship.

Why do people insist on attempting to abuse the rules, even to the point of circumventing common sense?
:?

*Pats OP on the back*
Congratulations! You are just so slick. You have outsmarted the game, GW, all of LO, and the entire world.
:z

Here, have some rep for being so clever...
 

·
Murder
Joined
·
3,492 Posts
Yeah I'd throw that thing out the window then kick you in the balls and run.
but thats just me.

It clearly states in the rules of the BGB that close combat and even shooting I believe is taken from the point of the base, to stop people making stupid things like this, or having 2 inch long barrels on their space marines.
 

·
RAWR! KROXIGOR!!
Joined
·
1,935 Posts
*Puts on Lawyer's hat* (do Lawyers wear hats?)

Techniquely that Wrecking Ball or Grabbing Klaw is part of the vehicle, this means that if an enemy can see the add on then they are in line of sight. Side and Front armour is also worked out from the add on (leaving you with a very, very large side armour arc if your add on is at the front). Furthermore, as the add on is part of the vehicle you must deploy the add on in the deployment zone.

Advantages for 'crazy add ons' include blocking line of sight alot more, having lots of space to disembark and crazy tank shocks (and the hilarity factor, especially if you model your wrecking ball using a fanatic from fantasy on a stick or a Power Klaw armed Ork in a harness for the Grabbing Klaw).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,023 Posts
Krox, you may wish to check the armour pages again, as faces are based on the HULL, not goodies added to it. So you have a wrecking ball that DOES increase your LOS for being shot at, but nothing to do about extending your side armour length.

Kind of curious to why you folks are jumping the OP, when he clearly has made a valid point.
Is it a rules exploit-yup.
Are min maxed marines -yup.

If you feel that GWs rules should be cannon, or more importantly that your ideas of their INTENT is how we all should play, it's time to take a step out of your sandbox on the beach and realize there's a lot more sand than in your little box.

Saying you'd kick someone in the balls for it is 1-immature 2-uncalled for 3-neg repped for.

Suggesting the idea of putting a fanatic on a stick for the mod is 1-sheer genius 2-probably the most orkie thing I've heard in a while 3-pos repped for

If you don't have anything constructive to add, then feel free to not hit that "submit reply" button.

That said, mentioning that you'd be hard pressed to find another game in your area is a very valid point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psichotykwyrm

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,638 Posts
Kind of curious to why you folks are jumping the OP, when he clearly has made a valid point.
Is it a rules exploit-yup.
Are min maxed marines -yup.
OK, maybe I should apologize for my initial sarcasm. I didn't intend to start a flame against the OP. (Thats why I, in the throes of said sarcasm, gave him positive rep.)

I fail to see how one can compare the gearing/tooling up of Space Marines to a ludicrous modelling scheme/abuse. They are definitely not in the same ballpark, though maybe the same sport (or more appropriately, "unsport"). Trying to gain an advantage through conversions is a far cry worse than optimizing a squad through slightly less than admirable means.

In fact, the items in the General Rulebook FAQ regarding vehicles and LoS/range were written to address the potential conversion issue. They clearly do not want anyone to be advantaged OR disadvantaged by doing conversions. I believe that's called a "precedent"...

That being said, go ahead and keep arguing RAW for it.. Please do so. That way it will more likely make its way into the future Orks FAQ. Then those of us who dislike shenanigans will only have to reference said FAQ, instead of wasting valuable time arguing.

Thats right. "I'm calling shenanigans."

(P.S.--- Please, please, please don't make this a RAW discussion. I know just as well as you do the exact wording of the rule, and this is not what this is about at all. Modelling a foot-long wrecking ball is just as immature as threatening to kick someone in the balls, regardless if it is right or wrong.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: tarzen

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
I think that the new ork codex is just riddled with problems. Maybe that's come up already in another post, but whatever. I'm sure when writing the codex they didn't mean for it to be away from the klaw or wreker ball. They probably meant from the vehicle. There's just loads of typos. Such as in the description is says that the Dakkaguns for the bikes are S 5 AP 5 assault 3 but in the summary of the whole book it says they're S 5 AP 4 Assault 2. There's just tons of small little details like this all over the codex that mess it up. And maybe I'm just blind on this one, but it's bothering me. It says you can gives orks a cybork body for +5 points. Where does it say what a cybork body does?
 

·
Nox
Joined
·
1,705 Posts
Its somewhere in Grotsniks entry, in either the army list, or his codex page. I think, dont hold me to it :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
165 Posts
About the cybork body, it's described at the start of the codex section under armours along with 'evy armour and Mega-Armour.

I hadn't seen the dakka guns problem yet. Which is correct?

Back to the original point, I realise that an argument for leality of the idea could be made and as said please keep making it so it can be erratered all the sooner. However there have been comments about conversions and model sizes before and it's always worked from the model propper not funny extensions, best summed up by the previous comment about 3"arms not giving a 9" charge!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,023 Posts
Back to the original point, I realise that an argument for leality of the idea could be made and as said please keep making it so it can be erratered all the sooner. However there have been comments about conversions and model sizes before and it's always worked from the model propper not funny extensions, best summed up by the previous comment about 3"arms not giving a 9" charge!
Range is from and to the vehicle is measured from hull, but in this case Iit specifies from the WB.

Guns on models are clearly covered under measuring RANGE, which this particular items does not fall into.

But yes, hopefully GW will address it by 6th edition (oh, did I skip one in there, probably not with GW's errata).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Well... if someone showed up with a 12" grabbing klaw I'd dropkick him of my fourth floor balcony... BUT if you play an opponent who insists your wagon can't grab his Leman Russ because the grabbing klaw is on the other end of the vehicle, by all means grab the 12" klaw out of the bag...

On a side note, make it telescopic... that way it can either be 1" or 72" long... problem with LoS solved :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
353 Posts
LOL telescopic is awesome! Yeah GW messed the wording on this up. Then again runtherds can waaagh but grots can't. If everyone models fair and plays fair, then the RAW aren't such an issue.

If I ever use a klaw or wrecking ball I am using a power klaw/fanatic. Thats just awesome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
ok yeah, I see the cybork body things. Though I think it's poorly placed and only even once. It should be somewhere else, specifically with the painboyz. Either way, I feel this new codex was very poorly edited.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
ok yeah, I see the cybork body things. Though I think it's poorly placed and only even once. It should be somewhere else, specifically with the painboyz. Either way, I feel this new codex was very poorly edited.
I have to disagree with that. I think Armour subsection in wargear section is the place I'd look for it the first thing. Also there's a page number for armour section in contents too so just a glimbse there and you'll find it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
165 Posts
I guess I land somewhere inbetween on my opinion of the codex layout. Whilst I've had no trouble finding things I miss having a full summary section and instead having to flick to so many different pages through the book to get detailed rules!
 

·
Murder
Joined
·
3,492 Posts
Saying you'd kick someone in the balls for it is 1-immature 2-uncalled for 3-neg repped for.

If you don't have anything constructive to add, then feel free to not hit that "submit reply" button.
I believe I did have something constructive to add, I'm only new to this game, I haven't read the rules a billion times yet but I thought it was correct, I just think you have a bit of a high horse.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top