Space Wolf TDA army...

[Skalver]

Unfortunate choice of words...

 

Another "counts as":

 

"Okay, you. Tactical squad. Line up and count to 10."

 

"1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10."

 

"Now you. Wolf Guard. You line up and count to 10."

 

"1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10."

 

"Hey! That Wolf Guard counts as troops!"

 

Got to love the English language. So beatifully imprecise! A favorite of lawyers and judges!

 

Cheers.

 

p.s. In the interest of "more fun," my vote is to treat this as an unfortunate wording that shouldn't keep all-terminator wolf guard armies off the table. And that's from someone who runs Pedro/Crimson Fists and wishes that his Sternguard could be taken as troops, but knows why not. Hehe.

 

While you are wrong with your example it does illustrate the mistake a lot of people are making. It comes down to the difference between "as" and "like". In your example the Wolf Guard don't count AS troops because they are not troops. They do however count LIKE troops in that they count in the exact same manner. To count AS troops they have to BE troops.

 

A lot of people are trying to use the fact that AS and LIKE are often used interchangably and argue that COUNT AS - which would mean they are troops - means COUNT LIKE which would mean they behave like troops but are not troops.

 

The english languages grammer is not vague and non specific. Just a lot of people have a really poor understanding of its subtleties.

[SamaNagol]

It does not say for which purposes they count as Troops. It just says they count as Troops. And when you build an army your force organisation must include 1 HQ and 2 Troops. Seeing as Wolf Guard count as troops, you do not need to take anything other than Wolf Guard units should you so wish. It is not vague at all.

 

And aside from that, Logan Grimnar is advertised in the catalogue as 'allowing you to take armies entirely of Wolf Guard'..... So from GW themselves I think it is pretty clear.

[Vash113]

Hmm... the wording may be ambiguous but as I read it, Wolf Guard "counts-as" Troops but this does not mean they change FOC slot. I'd lean towards a no in that regard. However it would also seem that you can't take more than 30 of them at maximum. They may "counts-as" Troops but that implies they are still what they are but count as something else, it does not specify a change in FOC slot position.

 

Now this is important because as I read this... you cannot take just all Wolf Guard. Because Wolf Guard do not become a Troops choice. They "counts-as" Troops, granting them all the same rules and abilities, however it does not say they can be taken as a Troops choice or their position in the FOC chart changes. Because you must include 2 Troops choices as mandatory in an army, and Wolf Guard are not a Troops choice, but merely count-as one on the tabletop, then your still going to have to take along some Grey Hunters and/or Blood Claws.

 

This is specifically not the same as the Deathwing who may be "treated as a Troops choice as well as an Elites choice." Belial's rules specifically grant a change in FOC position, Logan's rule does not.

 

So to take an all Wolf Guard Terminator Army, you're gonna need to prove that "counts-as" also implies a change in FOC position. Or it will need to be FAQ'd. Right now I don't see how the wording can be proven either way. You can mess around with "counts-as" all you like and it's grammatical and denotative meaning all you like but it's still far too ambiguous, particularly compared to the wording in the Dark Angels codex. I would like to think that if GW really intended 100% Space Wolf Terminator armies they would have made the wording clearer. But maybe I'm just giving them too much credit and that's not the case, but it's deffinitely not as solid as some people think.

[Ulrickthegrey]

Hmm... the wording may be ambiguous but as I read it, Wolf Guard "counts-as" Troops but this does not mean they change FOC slot. I'd lean towards a no in that regard. However it would also seem that you can't take more than 30 of them at maximum. They may "counts-as" Troops but that implies they are still what they are but count as something else, it does not specify a change in FOC slot position.

 

Now this is important because as I read this... you cannot take just all Wolf Guard. Because Wolf Guard do not become a Troops choice. They "counts-as" Troops, granting them all the same rules and abilities, however it does not say they can be taken as a Troops choice or their position in the FOC chart changes. Because you must include 2 Troops choices as mandatory in an army, and Wolf Guard are not a Troops choice, but merely count-as one on the tabletop, then your still going to have to take along some Grey Hunters and/or Blood Claws.

 

This is specifically not the same as the Deathwing who may be "treated as a Troops choice as well as an Elites choice." Belial's rules specifically grant a change in FOC position, Logan's rule does not.

 

So to take an all Wolf Guard Terminator Army, you're gonna need to prove that "counts-as" also implies a change in FOC position. Or it will need to be FAQ'd. Right now I don't see how the wording can be proven either way. You can mess around with "counts-as" all you like and it's grammatical and denotative meaning all you like but it's still far too ambiguous, particularly compared to the wording in the Dark Angels codex. I would like to think that if GW really intended 100% Space Wolf Terminator armies they would have made the wording clearer. But maybe I'm just giving them too much credit and that's not the case, but it's deffinitely not as solid as some people think.

The more I read the codex, that was the opinion I gained, but time will tell. Perhaps when they update the army builder we will know.

[Nightrunner]

Someone already posted this earlier in the thread, but the fact someone else disregarded it so swiftly made me just have to post again.

 

The GW sales leaflet - you know, the thing that they use to tell their staff and others about the product - specifically says that "Wolf Guard are Troops in an army led by Logan Grimnar, making it possible to build an army of Space Wolves in Terminator armour."

 

Yes, it isn't a rulebook fact.

 

It isn't an FAQ.

 

However, its pretty clear; to have an army in terminator armour, you need troops in terminator armour. As i also read, im sure the WD article on SW's will mention this little ability somewhat. So there we go.

 

I'm always amazed at the degree to which people will argue these things, but in regards to the OP, you can have all termie armies if you want them.

 

NR :D

[saphius]

Conversations like this are what's ruining the game of Warhammer. We are all very critical of GW, and at times they are very deserving. But at some point you just have to draw line.

 

What do you expect them to write? How specific, about every single rule, do you want them to be in every codex? People say rules lawyers and people that pick apart the wording to gain an advantage... I disagree. We are all being rules lawyers requiring so much specificity about every subtle thing in the books. If they worded everything in all the rules in all the books to cover every angle, all the time, the books would be wordy, even more confusing, and protract from the atmosphere, spirit, and ultimately, the fun of the game.

 

'Counts as troops' 'Acts as troops' 'Seem as troops' 'Preform like troops' 'Become troops but are only troops depending on who you play and how much they want to let you play an army that is actually not as good as and army you could have run otherwise'

 

I think that all units that change to troops should just have this in their rules...

 

'Count as troops, except it doesn't say you can score specifically, but in the rulebook it's pretty self evident that all troops score unless otherwise stated, or some other extenuating circumstance, but nonetheless they are troops that can score if it wasn't already clear, but it also doesn't say that you can be taken as a troops choice, but we assumed that anyone smarter than a cupcake would know that 'Counts as' actually meant 'Counts as' so to avoid further ambiguity you can select them as a troops choice as well as them, as discussed previously, being counted as scoring units... Total Gits.'

[Durfast Spiritwolf]

I'm not looking for an argument here, but if the use of language in this case is a "grey area," that is to say that 'counts as troops' can be understood as

• [1] giving WG troop status in-game
  or
  [2] treating them as troops for all purposes including FOC
  

how can a literal reading not support it?

 

I was merely being polite and giving people with alternative viewpoints some room for manoeuvre.

 

It's what you do when you realise that an discussion is not going anywhere but want to maintain a cordial atmosphere.

 

:whistling:

[Brother Landrain]

What do you expect them to write? How specific, about every single rule, do you want them to be in every codex? People say rules lawyers and people that pick apart the wording to gain an advantage... I disagree. We are all being rules lawyers requiring so much specificity about every subtle thing in the books. If they worded everything in all the rules in all the books to cover every angle, all the time, the books would be wordy, even more confusing, and protract from the atmosphere, spirit, and ultimately, the fun of the game.

 

Sorry, but I 100% completely disagree..

 

Asking a company that produces a Game with rules, that purports to be a tournament level playing system.. to be consistent and clear..

 

It is not wrong.

 

It is not demanding..

 

It is not absurd..

 

It is completely justifiable.

 

Any Game made in todays enviornment that was as inconsistent and obtuse as GW's would fail.

 

And it should fail...

 

GW is living off of the good will of people who feel they have too much time and blood sweat and tears invested in GW product to quit.

 

If only they cared as much about the game, as they do about selling models...

[Decoy]

So can we agree that currently, it's ambiguous at best, and downright screwed up at worst, and we'll wait on the Codex before jumping to any conclusions? I think it's reasonably safe to say that we can, at the very least, take 30 Wolf Guard, and that's a great way to start. Convert up 30 Wolf Guard, make 'em exactly as Wolfy as they should be, and if we get more? GREAT! If not, we have 30 models, primed and ready to go.

[Decoy]

Sorry, but I 100% completely disagree..

 

Asking a company that produces a Game with rules, that purports to be a tournament level playing system.. to be consistent and clear..

 

It is not wrong.

 

It is not demanding..

 

It is not absurd..

 

It is completely justifiable.

 

Any Game made in todays enviornment that was as inconsistent and obtuse as GW's would fail.

 

And it should fail...

 

GW is living off of the good will of people who feel they have too much time and blood sweat and tears invested in GW product to quit.

 

If only they cared as much about the game, as they do about selling models...

 

 

Quoted for truth. The average Magic: The Gathering rulebook runs anywhere from 300-600 pages. Where Gee-Dub falls short is in -continual- application of the rules. In a world of RAW for tournaments, sometimes, we need to sit back and analyze what the RAW means. That's what we're doing, and not a few armies hang in the balance, specifically those DA wanting to go Wolves.

 

These sorts of conversations are a necessity, albeit an undesired (I presume) one.

[Skalver]

It does not say for which purposes they count as Troops. It just says they count as Troops. And when you build an army your force organisation must include 1 HQ and 2 Troops. Seeing as Wolf Guard count as troops, you do not need to take anything other than Wolf Guard units should you so wish. It is not vague at all.

 

And aside from that, Logan Grimnar is advertised in the catalogue as 'allowing you to take armies entirely of Wolf Guard'..... So from GW themselves I think it is pretty clear.

 

Presumably "count as troops" means count as troops for all purposes. If there were exceptions where they do not count as troops they would, presumably, be listed.

 

I am curious as to why anyone would assume there are exceptions where they don't count as troops.

[Brother Hadafix]

Given how much Logan is going to cost, I would go with the advertising and say that "Count As" puts them in the "Troops" FOC.

 

Also given the cost of Logan, a DW list is going to out number it no matter what.

[Vassakov]

Ok, I'll state where I am. Troops, for all practical reasons means 4 key points:

 

1. They can score for objectives purposes (unless specifically stated, for example Tyranid Rippers)

 

2. They take up a Troops slot on the FoC.

 

3. At least 2 must be selected for a legal army list.

 

4. Up to 2 choices may be deployed in a Night Fighting mission.

 

Now, if someone can show me how any of those 4 are more valid for "counts as" under the rules, I'd love to hear it. The only possible interpretation I can see is 2, but not 3. After all, if it counts as troops for Scoring and Deployment, where would it not count?

[NovaScotius]

Someone already posted this earlier in the thread, but the fact someone else disregarded it so swiftly made me just have to post again.

 

The GW sales leaflet - you know, the thing that they use to tell their staff and others about the product - specifically says that "Wolf Guard are Troops in an army led by Logan Grimnar, making it possible to build an army of Space Wolves in Terminator armour."

 

Yes, it isn't a rulebook fact.

 

It isn't an FAQ.

 

However, its pretty clear; to have an army in terminator armour, you need troops in terminator armour. As i also read, im sure the WD article on SW's will mention this little ability somewhat. So there we go.

 

I'm always amazed at the degree to which people will argue these things, but in regards to the OP, you can have all termie armies if you want them.

 

NR <_<

 

I think this was the intention behind the rules, but it just was not written clearly enough. I'm fairly sure that for now people will have the play Wolf Guard as scoring non-troops choices, as the rules seem to imply, though they are ambiguous; but in the future, a FAQ will change it over to being able to have a complete TDA army.

[Hergrmir]

Given how much Logan is going to cost, I would go with the advertising and say that "Count As" puts them in the "Troops" FOC.

 

Also given the cost of Logan, a DW list is going to out number it no matter what.

 

Depends how much you wanted powerfists - I'd actually prefer mostly power weapons, so I could see saving 30-40 points a squad. Come 2000 points games and I think you might see the Wolves with more numbers.

 

I think this was the intention behind the rules, but it just was not written clearly enough. I'm fairly sure that for now people will have the play Wolf Guard as scoring non-troops choices, as the rules seem to imply, though they are ambiguous; but in the future, a FAQ will change it over to being able to have a complete TDA army.

 

It seems to me the not-troops choice side would have to argued harder - but then, I'm sure it looks the opposite from the other side. Given that, I think it's just going to have be a discussion at clubs or stores or between friends until it's FAQ'd one way or the other.

[eyeslikethunder]

I cant believe this being discussed

 

there are two choices in the Space wolf army that can have have "count as rules", Wolves and Wolf guard both gained by taking an SC

 

Now wolves have an additional rule which means they cant be scoring units.

1)If "count as" does not bestow scoring status why do they need a special rule to remove it.

2)If "count as" does not bestow troops FOC spot what exactly does it do for the wolves? after all it they dont score so if you cant have more of them it has no effect.

 

 

So "count as" logically bestows both FOC and scoring

[Corpse.]

"Counts as troops"

 

Two ways. Either its like sternguard with pedro, and they count as scoring. Or they are actually troop choices. Since counting as a force orginization slot instead of counting as scoring, I firmly believe they become troops to be taken as troops and be treated as one of the 2-6 standard troop choices.

[Ronin_eX]

"Counts as troops"

 

Two ways. Either its like sternguard with pedro, and they count as scoring. Or they are actually troop choices. Since counting as a force orginization slot instead of counting as scoring, I firmly believe they become troops to be taken as troops and be treated as one of the 2-6 standard troop choices.

 

But it can't be like Pedro because his entry says "count as scoring units" thus the second one is corrent because the precedent for things to count as scoring alone is that they tell you it counts as scoring, not as troops. Thus your hunch is the correct one.

[Wolf Lord Durgann]

I don't understand why people continue to argue this. Why would GW advertise that you can run an all terminator army if you couldn't?

 

Honestly... for this debate to continue is pointless. I don't understand why any Space Wolves player would not want the ability to do this. I also do not wish to understand. I CAN do it. I've wanted to do it for awhile now. And I will do it. If that means I cannot play against the few nay-sayers here... so be it. But can we please just drop this?

[Grey Mage]

I honestly can't see how this made it past page one unless people are being wilfully obtuse about it.

 

Watch the tone, Angel. You may be using our rules, but you're in the Fang, and us Wolves taking this from an analytical perspective, while you have a vested interest in an all-TDA army.

 

Also, since when has Gee-Dub been logical about anything?

 

EDIT FOR SPACING.

 

EDIT-EDIT:

 

Evidently, there was a bit of a scuffle on Dakka about just this very thing, although not from the Wolves perspective. It appears that there are several instances where things that "Count as" (using that exact wording), troops do -not- score Evidently, the Ork, Tau and Eldar codices also have such things, which are selected as troops choices, but are not scoring units.

 

Definitely waiting for G-dub on this one.

 

The Eldar Codex has one unit that can be taken as a troops choice under specific circumstances- the Wraithgaurd. And as Infantry they are most definitely scoring.

 

Sadly thats the thing- you count as scoring IF you were selected as a Troops Choice AND you happen to be Infantry AND dont have a special rule stopping you from being scoring.

 

Orks have only one unit I know of that would fall under these circumstances- The Deff Dread you can take if you have a Big Mek HQ.

 

Because, IIRC and unless someone can give me a page number saying otherwise- bikes are scoring when taken from the troops selection.

[SamaNagol]

Nob Bikes are most definitely scoring. Marine Bikes are scoring. Deathwing Terminators are scoring when you take Belial. The list goes on.

 

It's really a non argument.

[jedipenguin]

All this debate over the wording and interpretation of a rule in a codex that has no even been released yet....

 

Makes me kinda glad I steer well clear of tourneys tbh.

[Brother Amarel]

Makes me kinda glad I steer well clear of tourneys tbh.

The rules are more precise at tourneys - this problem arises at club level.

 

For me, personally - as there are no specific exclusions in the core text - I take it to be that Wolf Guard 'count as' troops both in the FOC and on the table (which excludes them from being taken as Elite (which prevents issues over which WG units are scoring and which aren't)).

[Grey Mage]

Sorry, but I 100% completely disagree..

 

Asking a company that produces a Game with rules, that purports to be a tournament level playing system.. to be consistent and clear..

 

It is not wrong.

 

It is not demanding..

 

It is not absurd..

 

It is completely justifiable.

 

Any Game made in todays enviornment that was as inconsistent and obtuse as GW's would fail.

 

And it should fail...

 

GW is living off of the good will of people who feel they have too much time and blood sweat and tears invested in GW product to quit.

 

If only they cared as much about the game, as they do about selling models...

 

 

Quoted for truth. The average Magic: The Gathering rulebook runs anywhere from 300-600 pages. Where Gee-Dub falls short is in -continual- application of the rules. In a world of RAW for tournaments, sometimes, we need to sit back and analyze what the RAW means. That's what we're doing, and not a few armies hang in the balance, specifically those DA wanting to go Wolves.

 

These sorts of conversations are a necessity, albeit an undesired (I presume) one.

 

Its because the average 40k player is, supposedly, more laid back and interested in the fun of the game over the sheer kill-ability and unabashed powermongering of friday night magic.

 

Supposedly.

 

@Landrain. Why are you playing 40k then? If its so horrid, and you dislike it so much, and you believe so strongly it shouldnt exist... why are you even here talking about it? Because you come off as rather emo, and Im trying to find a substance to your statements.

[SamaNagol]

The average 40k 'customer' is a 12 year old who has birthday money to spend. That's why.