Jump to content

Land Raiders in 5th


chrisc86

Recommended Posts

Alright Mates heres the skinny.

From the Deamonhunters FAQ

 

"A Grey Knight Land Raider or Land Raider

Crusader has the following special rules:

Machine Spirit: A Land Raider or Land Raider

Crusader can fire one more weapon than would

normally be permitted. In addition, this weapon

can be fired at a different target unit to any other

weapons, subject to the normal rules for

shooting. Therefore, a weapon that has moved at

combat speed can fire two weapons, and a Land

Raider that has either moved at cruising speed, or

has suffered a ‘Crew Stunned’ or ‘Crew Shaken’

result can fire a single weapon.

Assault Vehicle: Models disembarking from any

access point on the Land Raider can launch an

assault on the turn they do so."

 

So are all Land Raiders like this now? That would be Freakin awesome.

Let me know Gurus.

Link to comment
https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/141593-land-raiders-in-5th/
Share on other sites

Check out the Games Workshop UK site:

Using its Machine Spirit it can engage two enemy tanks each turn so, as well as absorbing the enemy firepower, it can significantly reduce it as well!

Found in the UK site, Space Marine section, "Space Marine Tank Tactics"

GW UK Tank Tactics

Check out the Games Workshop UK site:
Using its Machine Spirit it can engage two enemy tanks each turn so, as well as absorbing the enemy firepower, it can significantly reduce it as well!

Found in the UK site, Space Marine section, "Space Marine Tank Tactics"

GW UK Tank Tactics

 

Two reasons that 'argument' wont work.

 

1) That's not a rule in a rulebook or codex. It's not even a rule. That's *just* a note on possible tactics.

 

2) That tactica was written, IIRC, still during 3E (at best durring the initial 3.5E -> 4E chang-over). Things worked differently then than they do now, drastically. Wargear and upgrades have changed in how they work. Right now you use whatever is in *your* codex and that's it, unless an FAQ comes out to spread it out amongst other similar armies.

well its grey knights specific so no basically.

 

but it sort of functions like power of the machine spirit which the grey knights land raiders didnt used to have. and the assault vehicle thing is a given for any land raider.

the assault ramp thing is wonderfully obvious, but in the case of codex loyalist and templars, by RAW, it is no longer "open topped" with regard to assaulting after disembarkation. the rule for that was in the 4th ed. BBB and did not make it into the C:SM, C:BT, nor C:WH 5th ed FAQ. DH (via FAQ)/DA/BA/CSM codicies have a specific entry in the list or special rule "assault vehicle" (which is not in the BBB so can't really apply to the above groups). For now, at least, codex marine, WH, and BT armies don't have assault ramps in the 4th ed. way, though I would think that most friendly games would ignore this oversight until the fix (at least for codex marines) in september/october.

 

new rules, same old GW...

Im sorry but how could GW be so stupid as to give that to grey knights and not to everyone else especially when they just made a faq for everyone else too. Why why why?

 

:cuss :pinch: <_<

 

Also i was just wondering about Potms. I play black templar and i use crap load of LR.

Im sorry but how could GW be so stupid as to give that to grey knights and not to everyone else especially when they just made a faq for everyone else too. Why why why?

 

Game balance.

 

Points equalizer

 

To make the model sell beter

 

To make their one tank last longer

 

Becouse they want to play god

 

Any and all these reaosons plus more could be the answer - but the end result is its grey knights only

Im sorry but how could GW be so stupid as to give that to grey knights and not to everyone else especially when they just made a faq for everyone else too. Why why why?

 

Game balance.

 

Points equalizer

 

To make the model sell beter

 

To make their one tank last longer

 

Becouse they want to play god

 

Any and all these reaosons plus more could be the answer - but the end result is its grey knights only

You left off the important possibility of error. GW could intend all POTMS to work this way, but forgot to tell us. Of course, if this is the case, hopefully they fix it soon.

It bears mentioning, they did not 'give' it to GKs. That is the rule as it's already written in the Daemon Hunters Codex, they didn't change or upgrade it. The change in the FAQ is that it now comes as standard kit on the LR, doesn't have to be bought.
It bears mentioning, they did not 'give' it to GKs. That is the rule as it's already written in the Daemon Hunters Codex, they didn't change or upgrade it. The change in the FAQ is that it now comes as standard kit on the LR, doesn't have to be bought.

not in my version of the dex, POTMS and Assault ramps/Assault vehicle special rule aren't mentioned in the book at all (not in the army list entries for transports, GKLR/C, or the vehicle upgrades) though there are known to be at least 2 printings so YMMV.

 

Personally, my beef is with the assault ramp/vehicle rules (who needs a BS 2 robogunner?). DA/BA and CSM have it (dex), GK were given it (but, specifically only GKLR/Cs by FAQ, not dedicated LR transports for troops, Inq's w/ retinues, etc...), but C:SM/BT only have a "front assault ramp" with no special rules given or inferrable (because RAW is so unyielding like that).

New FAQ on UK site (can't check US at work) states that C:SM LR/Cs get Assault vehicle rule - assaults may be launched from any access point. this is similar to the BA codex, IIR. now only BT, SW(?), WH and DH (non grey knight) LRs are left without assualt ramps.

 

oh, and there are still at least 2 versions of PoTMS floating around...

The DH FAQ potms applies to grey knight land raiders only and yes its at bs 4 since bs 2 is not mentioned. The UK and US DH codex doesnt have potms listed but the french one does. As for the difference i believe the GK potms will be in the new marine codex and the older version will be used for inquisition forces. Although the GW could faq it to bs2, i hope they dont.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.