Fang of Morkai

[Ullr Direfang]

ok so i was talking to a 13th company play who said he always used the Fang of Morkai, now more then ever. in 5th ed i thought it useless because there is no more -1Ld because of shooting. he said that units with a wolf priest with the FoM didn't have to take moral checks from shooting at all now. this didn't sound right to me, so i figure i would ask before my weekly call to the GW for clarifications.

 

UD

[Wolf89]

Well it seems somewhat odd that a 13th company player would use a FoM considering the best place to put him is with a pack of wulfen or a squad with MotW where with wulfen they move subject to animal rage "must move" and MotW makes the units ignore morale tests.

 

Putting this aside, the FoM is used as a Reductor (see C:SM) and if you refer to the codex that was out at the time when we had our C:SW out the way a reductor was used was simple, you get +1 VP for each slain space marine at the end of the battle.

 

If you go look into the current one the Reductor was used in conjunction with the Narthecium which allows you to re-roll the first failed armor save per turn, yadda yadda, reductor you can ignore casualties for taking moral tests, blah blah blah, etc. The problem with this is that it's used as a combined piece of wargear, some take it as separate (since there is a clear break in the paragraph where it clearly gives the description of each) others say it's in our favor and since it's a combined point system we either A: buy both to get both, or B: buy one get both.

 

If you look into the most recent C:SM (out what October 4th? 8? something?) the apothecary now confers feel no pain as well as ignoring morale saves (< I think, or it's either re-roll I don't have it in front of me and I didn't bother looking at it that closely because I don't plan on using the command squad). So people are trying to say they get feel no pain now from healing potions and balms, which is wrong because no where does it say to refer to C:SM for HP&B but since FoM does, they're trying to get it from that if not get the morale save thing.

 

This one is up for discussion I've got some work to do. ^_^

[Vassakov]

Reductors do not exist in C:SM 5th Ed. Sorry, but the FoM is now totally reduntant.

[WolfLordLars]

I was under the impression that Reductors DO exist in the C:SM 5th ed. They were just combined with other wargear.

 

This probably calls for a house rule. I will have to read the description to make a judgement call on this one. Hopefully they cover it in the FAQ.

[Commissar Volker]

I'll carry on using the rules for the old wargear seeing as all Codex rules trump the main rulebook until we get a new codex of our own. I never play competitions so its no bother to me. If people whine and tell me I cant use them, i just wont play against them and they wont have the pleasure of beating me. Simple.

[WolfLordLars]

I'll carry on using the rules for the old wargear seeing as all Codex rules trump the main rulebook until we get a new codex of our own. I never play competitions so its no bother to me. If people whine and tell me I cant use them, i just wont play against them and they wont have the pleasure of beating me. Simple.

 

Where did you read that? That the codex trumps the main rules.

 

Would be handy to see in print. I have yet to find it.

[kanaellars]

I cant put finger to it right now, but I do know that is the case.

 

The codex word is law. Thats why DAs, BAs, and BTs are getting screwed on the new Storm Shields but we wolves are laughing to the bank.

[Vassakov]

Reductors do not exist in the new C:SM. It is just Narcarthium. SS, DP and tanks are all fair game, though.

[Wolf89]

I never said they still existed, I just mentioned that it's now "combined" with the narthecium for the past few codecies (sp?) now.

 

If you want to use the "correct" rules for FoM then I suggest using the Summary in the back of the codex Space Wolves where it clearly states "+1 victory point per slain Space Wolf if bearer of Fang is alive at end of battle."

 

This is the way it's been used until 2004 when the Space Marine codex came out that combined the reductor with the narthecium but not giving solo point costs, just 25 points to upgrade a model in a command squad to an apothecary.

 

In the older codex (pre 2004 (1998 release)) the Reductor was separate and cost 5 points, (same as FoM from C:SW).

 

The Narthecium was 25 points as was Healing Potions and Balms (these two worked exactly the same however there was no connection made official and no reference from C:SW to look into C:SM for the wording).

 

Given the circumstances I'd suggest staying away from this forgotten piece of wargear for now to prevent any difficulties. If you want to still use it, I'd suggest using the summary in C:SW for the use. If you want a more "up to date ruling" then I'd suggest looking at the new C:SM, reading what it says word for word, posting it here and those long in the fang will be more able to help come to a universal decision.

 

-edit-

After re-looking at the entry for FoM, there is an interesting note to make that the Fang of Morkai isn't in italics, (italics would mean you'd refer to Codes: Space Marines for a full description). The only spot it says "see Codex: Space Marines" is in the Space Wolves Wargear section on the next page by the Armoury.

 

It would be helpful to note also that the Wargear page says "The rules below describe how the specialized equipment used by the Space Wolves works in the game. Any items not listed here function exactly as described in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook or Codex: Space Marines. Any wargear chosen must be represented on the model".

 

Having quoted this, and the fact that the FoM is indeed on this page, I'd have to put my vote in for using the old rules for a reductor which is +1 VP per space wolf slain at the end of the game...etc.

[Vassakov]

I never said they still existed, I just mentioned that it's now "combined" with the narthecium for the past few codecies (sp?) now.

 

If you want to use the "correct" rules for FoM then I suggest using the Summary in the back of the codex Space Wolves where it clearly states "+1 victory point per slain Space Wolf if bearer of Fang is alive at end of battle."

 

This is the way it's been used until 2004 when the Space Marine codex came out that combined the reductor with the narthecium but not giving solo point costs, just 25 points to upgrade a model in a command squad to an apothecary.

 

In the older codex (pre 2004 (1998 release)) the Reductor was separate and cost 5 points, (same as FoM from C:SW).

 

The Narthecium was 25 points as was Healing Potions and Balms (these two worked exactly the same however there was no connection made official and no reference from C:SW to look into C:SM for the wording).

 

Given the circumstances I'd suggest staying away from this forgotten piece of wargear for now to prevent any difficulties. If you want to still use it, I'd suggest using the summary in C:SW for the use. If you want a more "up to date ruling" then I'd suggest looking at the new C:SM, reading what it says word for word, posting it here and those long in the fang will be more able to help come to a universal decision.

 

-edit-

After re-looking at the entry for FoM, there is an interesting note to make that the Fang of Morkai isn't in italics, (italics would mean you'd refer to Codes: Space Marines for a full description). The only spot it says "see Codex: Space Marines" is in the Space Wolves Wargear section on the next page by the Armoury.

 

It would be helpful to note also that the Wargear page says "The rules below describe how the specialized equipment used by the Space Wolves works in the game. Any items not listed here function exactly as described in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook or Codex: Space Marines. Any wargear chosen must be represented on the model".

 

Having quoted this, and the fact that the FoM is indeed on this page, I'd have to put my vote in for using the old rules for a reductor which is +1 VP per space wolf slain at the end of the game...etc.

 

This is all well and good, but VP's now mean very little. It's KP's now. So this is a forgotten, and redundent piece of gear. Avoid.

[Wolf89]

This is all well and good, but VP's now mean very little. It's KP's now. So this is a forgotten, and redundent piece of gear. Avoid.

 

As I too have said, best to leave this thing alone, it's next to worthless.

 

VP's are still used, but only in cases of ties, which are very rare, and for the most part with the FoM you're lucky to get 20-25 VP's which if you're that close in the first place it's not that big of a deal.

 

*BEWARE OF THE FANG OF MORKAI*

[Olmstedtr]

on the first page of universal rules in the rule book it says that the codex rule trumps the rule in the USR unless its faq.

 

for instance 13th company can still deploy everyone at the begining of battle as the eye of terror codex says so.

 

however if an army has the rule scout see rule book then they have to follow the rule book.

[Wolf89]

on the first page of universal rules in the rule book it says that the codex rule trumps the rule in the USR unless its faq.

 

for instance 13th company can still deploy everyone at the begining of battle as the eye of terror codex says so.

 

however if an army has the rule scout see rule book then they have to follow the rule book.

 

How does this help with the question? No one's said that you use the rulebook for any ruling (the wargear isn't even in there).

 

I'm confused about your post and a few extra words explaining would be helpful. :)

[WolfLordLars]

I asked.

 

Like I said, I will wait to see the new C:SM before commenting. Sometimes, folks miss things.

[Brother SRM]

I read through the marine dex, and there is no more reductor. The apothecary only has a Narthecium - it doesn't even say Narthecium/reductor like in the Dark Angels codex.

Is kind of a shame, makes Wolf Priests slightly less viable.

[Wolf89]

I read through the marine dex, and there is no more reductor. The apothecary only has a Narthecium - it doesn't even say Narthecium/reductor like in the Dark Angels codex.

Is kind of a shame, makes Wolf Priests slightly less viable.

 

Not really, a Wolf Priest isn't meant to be the apothecary, they're meant to be the "chaplain" of sorts, but even then we don't get such luxuries as litanies of hate.

 

The Wolf Priest is still a cheap HQ to get that already comes packaged with useful goodies (4+ invuln, power weapon, etc.) so I see him still very viable. Not getting much use out of a 5 point piece of wargear doesn't effect me at all. Not getting feel no pain also doesn't matter much since my unit will be in combat so fast it won't get much use if any at all.

 

EX: A recent 1750 game against foot sloggin' orks saw my 13 BC's with a wolf lord and wolf priest receiving the ork charge of a grot squad and 20 boyz saw me winning combat and the boyz fleeing... I lost one guy, to a power claw...

 

I'm still playing around with the Idea in my head for a wolf priest in TDA with a 9-man WGBG with either 3 AC's, 3 CML's or a combination of both just foot sloggin' across the field laying down a mass of fire, using HP&B's...

[Olmstedtr]

I'll carry on using the rules for the old wargear seeing as all Codex rules trump the main rulebook until we get a new codex of our own. I never play competitions so its no bother to me. If people whine and tell me I cant use them, i just wont play against them and they wont have the pleasure of beating me. Simple.

 

Where did you read that? That the codex trumps the main rules.

 

Would be handy to see in print. I have yet to find it.

 

 

my last post answered lars' question as to where it says that codex trumps the rule book

[WolfLordLars]

on the first page of universal rules in the rule book it says that the codex rule trumps the rule in the USR unless its faq.

 

for instance 13th company can still deploy everyone at the begining of battle as the eye of terror codex says so.

 

however if an army has the rule scout see rule book then they have to follow the rule book.

 

Thats all well and good for Universal Special Rules... but that doesnt mean the codex trumps the rules with other things. Wargear, for example. Not sure what thread it was, but someone was going on about how our AC's would be heavy 3 except for the 'check the rulebook' bit, which is rubbish. AC's got changed, and it affected EVERY Marine army with one. Just like if Power Fists suddenly lost their 'strike last' bit, we would benefit as well.

 

If it says to treat a piece of wargear as X, and X got changed between 3rd ed and 5th ed, we use the most current. If it says to do Y (like, HP&:), then you do Y.

 

If you want to keep using 3rd ed rules for your wargear in your games, thats fine.. but please dont try to pass it off as 'the way it should be'. It isnt. Our codex is not an 'end all, be all' codex like the DA. Until we get a stand-alone, I will refer to C:SM for anything that is not clearly spelled out in our codex.

[the jeske]

Until we get a stand-alone, I will refer to C:SM for anything that is not clearly spelled out in our codex.

how much pts do you pay for power fists and power weapons for both your units and IC ?

[Wolf89]

I think I clearly stated what can and cannot be used via the C:SM... whatever is in italics you refer to C:SM... simple as that, if it's not in italics, then don't bother looking it up in the C:SM.

[Spacefrisian]

Thats all well and good for Universal Special Rules... but that doesnt mean the codex trumps the rules with other things. Wargear, for example. Not sure what thread it was, but someone was going on about how our AC's would be heavy 3 except for the 'check the rulebook' bit, which is rubbish. AC's got changed, and it affected EVERY Marine army with one. Just like if Power Fists suddenly lost their 'strike last' bit, we would benefit as well.

 

Yeah some wise nose Nid player teased me with the fact that our assault cannons were heavy 3 until i put the codex in front of him and pointed towards the * additional rules in rulebook thing. Now i was the last one laughing.

[Megalodon]

Thats all well and good for Universal Special Rules... but that doesnt mean the codex trumps the rules with other things. Wargear, for example. Not sure what thread it was, but someone was going on about how our AC's would be heavy 3 except for the 'check the rulebook' bit, which is rubbish. AC's got changed, and it affected EVERY Marine army with one. Just like if Power Fists suddenly lost their 'strike last' bit, we would benefit as well.

 

Yeah some wise nose Nid player teased me with the fact that our assault cannons were heavy 3 until i put the codex in front of him and pointed towards the * additional rules in rulebook thing. Now i was the last one laughing.

If he'd kept arguing I would have just plunked down a ton of SW don't get hot plasma weapons furry! I've found even the most pendant of rules lawyers backs down when faced with tons of no risk plasma. :lol: ;)

[WolfLordLars]

I use the points cost from C:SW. That much is clear. Thats what we pay for it. As for what it does, I refer to C:SM. EVERYTHING in our armory, save what is covered in the page right after ours (NOT that little reference sheet int he back, that is for REFERENCE... for 3rd ed to boot) works the way it does in C:SM.

 

This is just odd to me. In over 4 years of playing Space Wolves, through three editions, this is the first time anyone has ever mentioned that they use the reference sheet in the back of C:SW as the RAW. All through 4th I referred to C:SM for all of my weapons that were in there (PW, PF, guns, etc). It is a reference sheet. It is there... for reference... for the 3rd edition of the rules. In a week or so, it references a book that is now two editions older than what is played. It is not like the DA codex, where theirs is a stand-alone (and I would argue that they dont get the upgraded gear if I dont see it in print).

 

The exception to the armory, to me, would be the vehicle upgrades... for every vehicle that you must take from C:SM (which is everything but our Ven Dread and LRE). The entry in the vehicle in C:SM says to take wargear from C:SM, which includes such gems as Power of the Machine spirit, etc. If the FAQ says to take C:SM vehicles at their cost and use our armory for them, I will.. but until I see it written, I am going to be following it as its written. C:SW says take vehicle from C:SM, C:SM says to use C:SM armory for vehicle. Seems simple to me.

 

Who would think a company as big as GW cant hire someone to spend the 20 minutes necessary to write a complete FAQ which covers these things?

[Grey Mage]

Alright, I have something to add... because I respectfully disagree. I think the FoM is infact the N+R of the Codex SM.

 

While in the armory it does say that those peices of wargear that are in italics are to be looked up in the Codex SM, youll note that all of the items there also have the same name as in Codex SM. There are several peices of wargear however that have different names but identical effects to other peices of wargear- for instance the runic staff and runic armor. As the abilities for psychic hoods have changed over the books, so has that of the runic staff.

 

It seems logical then that the Fang of Morkai, referencing a peice of SM wargear, would in fact count as said wargear.

 

*spreads hands* Ive ran it by my local tourney official, and hes looked it over- says he think the points cost absurdly cheap, but the attachment is obvious as HPaB doesnt work like the Narthecium and Reductor at all, and so isnt related. It also doesnt reference anything in Codex SM.

[Wolf89]

*spreads hands* Ive ran it by my local tourney official, and hes looked it over- says he think the points cost absurdly cheap, but the attachment is obvious as HPaB doesnt work like the Narthecium and Reductor at all, and so isnt related. It also doesnt reference anything in Codex SM.

 

If your tournament organizer allows it then go for it, it is extremely cheap and if they let you use it that way then I'd field it every list no matter what.

 

More power to you my friend, now make us proud and really put the hurt on with some WGBL's with ac's! :D