Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Hive Tyrant
Joined
·
401 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Ok I have 2 questions:

So what's the deal with the Waagh! special rule and 5th edition?

The Ork codex was released during 4th edition so the rules make perfect sense for 4th edition.

However the problem comes with 5th edition the Fleet special rule was changed so that you no longer roll a D6 to see how far you move. Now we do that through running, so that Waagh! only grants fleet special rule in it's current form correct?

So here's the big problem...Ghazghkull Thraka's special rule says you always count as rolling a 6 for the Waagh! movement during his special Waagh!

How does that translate to 5th edition?

By RAW my interpretation is that this is one of those cases where the new rulebook made an ability/upgrade pointless. Since you don't roll a D6 for fleet anymore and RUN is not at all mentioned in the entry.

I am a new Ork player, I'd like to point out and that was my interpretation of the rules for him. Meaning I still have to roll a D6 for run even if using Ghazghkull's Waagh!, However today I played versus an Ork player that was actually using Ghazghkull and I was playing space marines. And he called upon his special waagh! and claimed that he gets to make his normal move in the movement phase, and then move another automatic 6" in the shooting phase + assault me as normal.

And we had an hour long debate on this. Because I stress that nowhere does it say that Ghazghkull gets a 6" RUN move automatically. And everyone at the store debated that this is how it worked in 4th edition which I admit makes PERFECT sense 'in 4th edition' but not in 5th.

So really im sure this must have come up before and if not enlighten me because in the end we just rolled off to solve the problem 1-2 my way, 3-6 his way. He won the roll and subsequently the game as I was NOT counting on Ghazghkull to have a 6" move in the shooting phase from an automatic RUN that is never mentioned in his entry.

We also checked the FAQ and there's no mention of this. So either GW believes the rule is crystal clear or they assume everyone will play by RAI, including new Ork players like myself.

The second question is how long does Ghazghkull's Waagh! last. Originally from reading his entry I thought 'all following player turn' meant that once you use his waagh everyone has fleet until the game ends. Or does this imply that it is only for the entirety of that 1 turn?
 

·
Hive Fleet Pandora
Joined
·
5,068 Posts
Another case of GW dropping the ball when writing its FAQ's. The intent is obvious that they're supposed to roll for the run and then be able to assault. The wording is bad as it doesn't take into consideration the new rules changes. You can look at it 2 ways:

1) Because fleet has changed between versions, with the new fleet rules, there is nothing to roll because rolling for distance is done during running, which has nothing to do with assault (fleet).

2) Codex trumps Basic Rulebook (BRB). The codex says that they have fleet. The codex also says that the unit has to roll when making this "Waaagh! movement". The FAQ also has a rule in answer to "Are saves allowed against wounds caused by rolling a ‘1’ for the ‘Waaagh!’ fleet roll?" Thus, Waagh! is not only just fleet, it also includes the movement leading up to the fleet. As this is coming from the codex, it should be followed over and above that of the rulebook. By following this interpretation, your opponent is right in claiming Ghazghkull runs 6" and then assaults 6".

This is all very similar to the Grey Knights Nemesis Force Weapon controversy. In 5th, Force Weapons cause Instant Death where Eternal Warriors are immune. However, the DH codex doesn't say that their Force Weapons causes "Instant Death". It just kills outright. GW never bothered to FAQ DH force weapons and NFW so playing by RAW and Codex > BRB, their NFW kills even Eternal Warriors and such, though most non-DH and Witchhunter players will most likely disagree.

Personally I believe #2 should take precedent over #1 as it is written in their codex and that hasn't been changed via FAQ/Erratas. Thus even if the rules for fleet has changed, you should still follow the codex over the rulebook. But this is definitely something that should be discussed at the beginning of the game and decided upon mutually instead of during the game when he actually does it. Likewise, I always tell my opponent about my Grey Knight Grandmaster's NFW killing outright before we start play, and if he's cool, he'll usually say yes as it won't be a surprise to him when it happens.

The answer to your 2nd question is 2 player turns, yours and then your opponents. If it was for the rest of the game, it would say something like "will last for the rest of the game." It'll be pretty scary to fight a Ghazghkull with an Inv 2+ for the entire game almost.
 

·
Scourge Lord
Joined
·
1,638 Posts
The rule for Fleet still mentions that the unit runs in order to use it, so Fleet still refers to a rolled distance for moving. This rolled distance is always 6" for Thraka's Prophet of the Waaagh! special rule.
 

·
Hive Tyrant
Joined
·
401 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I completely have to agree with non-DH witch hunter players. Probably because i am one of them. If you want to play by RAI and say that Ghazghkull's Waagh counts as RUNNING and then assaulting. Then it is CLEARLY intended that Nemesis Force Weapons will cause instant death as almost everything else that has come out that 'killed outright' has been edited to cause instant death. And that is the 'intended' purpose

I think you are using rules to your personal advantage by choosing when to use RAI over RAW like that. Which I find to be wrong. In any case

I posted this on many sites and apparently the consensus seems to be (or at least the great majority of people believe) that Fleet = RUN + Assault, and thus Ghazghkull gets an automatic 6" RUN during his waagh that lasts 1 turn. So he AND the entire Ork army gets an 18" assault range GUARANTEED for 1 turn.

Links to the threads with people's opinion on the issue:
Astronomican

The Waagh
- The Waagh's Unofficial Ork FAQ

DakkaDakka

Heresy-Online

IG Message Board

Ammobunker

Librarium Online

Warseer

Tau Online
 

·
Hive Fleet Pandora
Joined
·
5,068 Posts
I completely have to agree with non-DH witch hunter players. Probably because i am one of them. If you want to play by RAI and say that Ghazghkull's Waagh counts as RUNNING and then assaulting. Then it is CLEARLY intended that Nemesis Force Weapons will cause instant death as almost everything else that has come out that 'killed outright' has been edited to cause instant death. And that is the 'intended' purpose
You're right, it is probably intended that the NFW should cause Instant Death and you can houserule it as such, but because by RAW, it doesn't. You can check out the who debacle here http://www.librarium-online.com/forums/daemonhunters/157669-nemesis-force-weapons.html

I posted this on many sites and apparently the consensus seems to be (or at least the great majority of people believe) that Fleet = RUN + Assault, and thus Ghazghkull gets an automatic 6" RUN during his waagh that lasts 1 turn. So he AND the entire Ork army gets an 18" assault range GUARANTEED for 1 turn.
That is my intepretation #2, which I stated should take precedent.
 

·
Hive Tyrant
Joined
·
401 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Yeah but don't you see the conflict with judging it the way you are judging it?

You say you 'kill outright' because by RAW it doesnt say instant death.

Then shouldn't you ALWAYS keep that logic?

Thus Ghazghkull should NOT get movement in the shooting phase as by RAW it does not allow him to RUN. Only to fleet and fleet is only used during the assault phase.

I think consistency is important
 

·
Hive Fleet Pandora
Joined
·
5,068 Posts
You are saying Waagh! = fleet. If it was just fleet, there is no need for "if a unit rolls a 1 when making this Waaagh! movement." (p. 31) The part also about the Orks fighting before they get to the enemy would also not apply. But because these are all a part of the Waagh!, the consensus by most people is that Waagh! = movement + fleet.
 

·
Scourge Lord
Joined
·
1,638 Posts
What I've found is that when rules would become useless, RAI should become the proper interpretation in order to keep the game working properly as much as is possible. When someone finds an exploit that doesn't break the game based on RAW (as with DH force weapons), I see that as a "good for them" situation. It's a slight bonus, not a major flaw, and that's the difference.
 

·
Hive Tyrant
Joined
·
401 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
You just used the word 'exploit' to describe that and you see nothing wrong with that?

How does instant killing something that should not be instant killed NOT seem very wrong to you?

How is this not a major game breaker?

This is pure bias on your side. There is absolutely NO fairness in that argument.

Things should be measured with the same ruler otherwise your just bending things to your benefit.
 

·
Fun guy from Yuggoth
Joined
·
772 Posts
Akaiyou:
Are you trying to say that DH should not get the benefit of an outdated codex - their force weapons, in this case - but should still get all the penalties, such as the inferior Assault Cannon? I'm all for playing with force weapons as instant death causing IF the rest of the codex is similarly modernized. But it's not fair to go down that road for all the things that benefit them but just say "tough luck" for the ones that hurt them.

EDIT: Also, I believe K-R plays Dark Eldar, so I'm not sure which 'side' you're referring to.
 

·
Scourge Lord
Joined
·
1,638 Posts
DH are supposed to be powerful and their force weapon is an incredibly expensive upgrade, so no, I don't have a problem with it getting a bonus. Ultimately, it's up to each player to decide where he comes down on that for friendly games, but for tournaments the judge is going to take a look at the rules in Codex: DH and rule in favor of the DH player. The wording actually reads as if it were intended to gain that benefit. It's just that the codex is old that people want to dismiss the wording, but without an errata, there's no reason to do that.
 

·
Hive Tyrant
Joined
·
401 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
I'm saying to hold the same judgement across the board. And not nitpick the benefits that you want only.
 

·
Hive Fleet Pandora
Joined
·
5,068 Posts
So guess there's no confusion now. Just as everyone said...
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top