Thunder wolf mounts.

[thade]

You mentioned the Chaos Marks. I read it on another forum that it is interesting to note that Abbadon has a chaos mark, has two thoughneses in his profile, yet he is imune to instant death. (I do not have the book with me but I imadgine it is ethernal warrior?) Anyway, there might be other things that care about thoughnes other than instant death.

 

Yes, he has Eternal Warrior (or some ability which equivalent, i.e. specifically states "Ignores the Instant Death rule.").

 

EDIT: The more I read the rules the more I think I have found the glitch I am looking for.(And I am quite proud of this on that I should realy be doing my universety studies but this is more important kind of way.) Look now: ;)

 

Instant Death exludes wargear that increase the thoughnes caracteristicks. The rules quite many times states the word thoughnes characteristiskcs.

 

Now the wolf adds to his Profile. It never mentions the word characteristsick. The profile determines his characteristiskcs in the game. The instant death rule does not care about it. (And yes I am willing to lay this debate dead if a) we get it confirmed from the tyranid book -if- the wording is correct. Or if ;) we find some other wargear that imrpoves the profile (not characteristick) and that still uses a 1rst(2nd ) thoughnes value. ;)

 

You shouldn't be looking for a "glitch" to clear T5. ;) Semantically that will only serve to discredit your arguments.

 

Characteristics are elements in a profile, so the words are interchangeable. You can't add to a profile without adding to a characteristic, and you can't add to a characteristic without adding to a profile. Note that the word attribute is interchangeable with both of these as well, for the same reasons.

 

The facts remain that Instant Death ignores modifications made to Toughness by Wargear, and Thunderwolf Mounts are Wargear. If we had even one unit example with TWM as Wargear and a Profile characteristic with either T4(5) or T5 we would be done. We do not have this, so we are left to decide how to work with it for now. There are two camps:

 

1. I want T5 on my Wolf Lord because it will allow me to more safely take a Saga that is not Saga of the Bear; i.e. T5 means that S8 weapons will not insta-kill him. Hopefully the FAQ proves me right.

2. I am willing to accept T4(5) on my Wolf Lord because it's less assuming (gives me a bit less) and thus likely more fair, as if T5 is incorrect, I've been sort of cheating this whole time to assume T5, where as if T5 is correct and I've used T4(5), hey! I got a pretty cool upgrade. I'll wait for the FAQ and see what's what.

 

Given no precedents and no definitive rulings, it's always safest to scale back than to scale forward.

 

Still, neither camp is 100% correct without an FAQ to set things straight. Just agree to disagree for now and see what your local club or friends are willing to let you play it as.

[gil galed]

Right off the bat i'd like to put myself in the T5 group and oppose the T4(5) group. I will argue this on three grounds:

 

1. Profile vs Characteristic

2. Thunderwolf Units

3. Chaos Marks

 

1. Perhaps one of the most cogent arguments revolves around the fact that the TWM uses the phrase "Add to profile" as opposed to the regular gives an added 'Whatever'. I always read added to profile as effectively changing the stats before they even hit the field. Infact if you look at the bike entry it specifically says it follows the rules in the BRB, where as the TWM specifically say how it changes the users profile, it doesn't add to it.

 

2. All thunderwolf units are T5, this really does seem to prove that GW expected Lords on Wolfs to be T5

 

3. Chaos marks specifically say that they T increase does not allow you to avoid instant death, I quote

 

"Models with the mark of nurgle gain +1 Toughness. Like the toughness bonus for riding a bike, this mark does not affect the model's toughness in regards to the Instant death rule"

 

while bikes

 

"Increase the toughness characteristic by 1"

 

The former shows that when things like this come up GW specifically say they want it to be 4 (5) if they do indeed want this (look at all the models already with Nurgle gift, they are 4 (5) which shows GW's intent)

 

the latter shows that the wording is very different

 

 

 

Caveat: I do not play nor do I ever intend to play SW, so i feel i'm pretty objective, (although even at T5 my railguns still make them explode)

[Ferro]

What I realy want to know is the wording on the Tyranid upgrade. If it says "profile" then it does not count towards instant death. (Instant death checks for bonuses to thoughnes added after the profile says what characteristicks the unit has.)

 

do anybody have the Tyranid Codex?

 

Tyranids are so filled with special rules, they generally don't assist in understanding other races or game mechanics. However, to satisfy your curiousity: "A creature with a bonded exoskeleton gains +1 Toughness."

 

Instant Death doesn't even apply, as the only creature in the codex which can take a bonded exoskeleton STARTS at Toughness 6.

[Frosty the Pyro]

What I realy want to know is the wording on the Tyranid upgrade. If it says "profile" then it does not count towards instant death. (Instant death checks for bonuses to thoughnes added after the profile says what characteristicks the unit has.)

 

do anybody have the Tyranid Codex?

 

Tyranids are so filled with special rules, they generally don't assist in understanding other races or game mechanics. However, to satisfy your curiousity: "A creature with a bonded exoskeleton gains +1 Toughness."

 

Instant Death doesn't even apply, as the only creature in the codex which can take a bonded exoskeleton STARTS at Toughness 6.

The relivent bit on that though isnt in the bonded exoskeleton part, but at the top of the biomorphs section.

 

"Note that biomorph enhancements that improve a creatures profile (such as adreinal glands) are not modifiers, they simply replace the basic statline."

[thade]

We appreciate your contributions, but I encourage you to read through the post before adding. Your points have all already been addressed. <3

 

1. Perhaps one of the most cogent arguments revolves around the fact that the TWM uses the phrase "Add to profile" as opposed to the regular gives an added 'Whatever'. I always read added to profile as effectively changing the stats before they even hit the field. Infact if you look at the bike entry it specifically says it follows the rules in the BRB, where as the TWM specifically say how it changes the users profile, it doesn't add to it.

 

"Add to profile", "Add to characteristic", and "Add to attribute" are exactly synonymous/interchangeable, as you cannot add to one without adding to all three. You can't draw lines between them based on syntax.

 

2. All thunderwolf units are T5, this really does seem to prove that GW expected Lords on Wolfs to be T5

 

Cannis Wolfborne does not have TWM listed as "Wargear." Neither does Thunderwolf Cav. Thus, neither of them serve as a precedent.

 

3. Chaos marks specifically say that they T increase does not allow you to avoid instant death....

 

Stating that it does not break a rule is for clarification, but not required. If a rule in a codex does not state that it DOES break a rule, then it cannot break a rule. As the Wargear entry for TWM does not say "Ignores Instant Death", then it does not.

[gil galed]

2. All thunderwolf units are T5, this really does seem to prove that GW expected Lords on Wolfs to be T5

 

Cannis Wolfborne does not have TWM listed as "Wargear." Neither does Thunderwolf Cav. Thus, neither of them serve as a precedent.

 

The fact that it isn't wargear doesn't detract from the fact it seems pretty clear marines on wolves should be t5

[Durfast Spiritwolf]

2. All thunderwolf units are T5, this really does seem to prove that GW expected Lords on Wolfs to be T5

 

Cannis Wolfborne does not have TWM listed as "Wargear." Neither does Thunderwolf Cav. Thus, neither of them serve as a precedent.

 

The fact that it isn't wargear doesn't detract from the fact it seems pretty clear marines on wolves should be t5

 

Agreed, they are all space marines on big wolves. So why would one marine and his mount be T5 and another, who is a character and thus likely to be more experienced etc, and his mount be T4(5).

 

So, by common sense, which in the bedrock of precedence, I would state that they could be argued to constitute as a precedent and cannot be dismissed so readily.

 

Regards,

[Niiai]

Page 32 in the Tyranid Codex, the only other place in the warhammer game that you have an effect that increases profile:

 

"Note that biomorph enchancements that improve a creature's profile (sutch as adrenal glands) are not modefiersm they simply replace the basic stat line."

 

An improment to the profile are not modefiers, they simply replace the basic stats line. It is the same thing with TWC and Canis.

 

I do agree that it is not 100%, and it needs FAQ, but if we are gonne err to one side, it realy points to the side that it is a flat 5, and not 4(5).

[Frosty the Pyro]

Page 32 in the Tyranid Codex, the only other place in the warhammer game that you have an effect that increases profile:

 

"Note that biomorph enchancements that improve a creature's profile (sutch as adrenal glands) are not modefiersm they simply replace the basic stat line."

 

An improment to the profile are not modefiers, they simply replace the basic stats line. It is the same thing with TWC and Canis.

 

I do agree that it is not 100%, and it needs FAQ, but if we are gonne err to one side, it realy points to the side that it is a flat 5, and not 4(5).

 

 

Biomorphs have that note because that is NOT the standard, and it is very important due to the way nid ranged weapons work. The nid arguement if anything goes against wolves being flat 5. But then again biomorphs are NOT wargear, they are biomorphs. Bikes improve the profile, marks improve the profile, lots of things improve profiles, and all of them are modifiers. Tyranids are the exception, thats pretty much their thing, they are the exception for just about everything.

[Niiai]

If loads of tings improve profiles, can you find an example of that? :-) Other then Thunder Wolfs?

 

A lott of things has "these wargears are included in there profile, like a mark of nurge, when it lists the unit relay quickly in the units entry" how ever, you do not find any other warhear that ads to the profile, only characteristicks, or just unamed.

[thade]

2. All thunderwolf units are T5, this really does seem to prove that GW expected Lords on Wolfs to be T5

 

Cannis Wolfborne does not have TWM listed as "Wargear." Neither does Thunderwolf Cav. Thus, neither of them serve as a precedent.

 

The fact that it isn't wargear doesn't detract from the fact it seems pretty clear marines on wolves should be t5

 

Agreed, they are all space marines on big wolves. So why would one marine and his mount be T5 and another, who is a character and thus likely to be more experienced etc, and his mount be T4(5).

 

So, by common sense, which in the bedrock of precedence, I would state that they could be argued to constitute as a precedent and cannot be dismissed so readily.

 

Regards,

 

By "common sense", I presume you mean RAI. I agree that, by RAI, likely it's the case that they are T5.

 

By RAW, they are not. And I'm under the impression that in the Official Rules forum we go by RAW. No?

 

Don't get me wrong. I want T5 from a TWM more than you all (given that I really, really, really want two or more Wolf Lords mounted up rampaging around the field with my Wolf Guard army), but I'm approaching this the way I always do: once I exhaust all roads of proof otherwise, he's clearly T5. Until then, he's T4(5), as it's more fair to assume less power than more power.

[Durfast Spiritwolf]

By "common sense", I presume you mean RAI. I agree that, by RAI, likely it's the case that they are T5.

 

By RAW, they are not. And I'm under the impression that in the Official Rules forum we go by RAW. No?

 

Don't get me wrong. I want T5 from a TWM more than you all (given that I really, really, really want two or more Wolf Lords mounted up rampaging around the field with my Wolf Guard army), but I'm approaching this the way I always do: once I exhaust all roads of proof otherwise, he's clearly T5. Until then, he's T4(5), as it's more fair to assume less power than more power.

 

Even with RAW the argument for T5 is strong (as per above). Moreover RAW doesn't say that it confers T4(5) either, the supporting evidence for this is weak and we have Canis and TWC as a reference for an alternate reading. This later cannot be just written off just because one is optional war gear and the other comes with the figure as standard.

[thade]

Even with RAW the argument for T5 is strong (as per above). Moreover RAW doesn't say that it confers T4(5) either, the supporting evidence for this is weak and we have Canis and TWC as a reference for an alternate reading. This later cannot be just written off just because one is optional war gear and the other

b]comes with the figure as standard[/b].

 

(bold face mine)

 

No, it is not the case that it's optional wargear versus wargear that "comes with the figure as standard." Cannis and the Thunderwolf Calvary do not have TWM listed as Wargear. Thus, it is not in their Wargear. For them it is not Wargear. That's the problem. If either of those two examples had TWM listed under their Wargear, this would be a done deal. Without it there, they do not serve as a RAW precedent, only as a RAI precedent.

 

Sure, RAW doesn't say that it confers a T4(5), but it doesn't say confers a T5 flat either. There are examples for either side, as have been provided throughout both of the threads that were devoted to this topic.

[Durfast Spiritwolf]

Even with RAW the argument for T5 is strong (as per above). Moreover RAW doesn't say that it confers T4(5) either, the supporting evidence for this is weak and we have Canis and TWC as a reference for an alternate reading. This later cannot be just written off just because one is optional war gear and the other

b]comes with the figure as standard[/b].

 

(bold face mine)

 

No, it is not the case that it's optional wargear versus wargear that "comes with the figure as standard." Cannis and the Thunderwolf Calvary do not have TWM listed as Wargear. Thus, it is not in their Wargear. For them it is not Wargear. That's the problem. If either of those two examples had TWM listed under their Wargear, this would be a done deal. Without it there, they do not serve as a RAW precedent, only as a RAI precedent.

 

Sure, RAW doesn't say that it confers a T4(5), but it doesn't say confers a T5 flat either. There are examples for either side, as have been provided throughout both of the threads that were devoted to this topic.

 

I'm sure that you didn't mean to misunderstand me but I didn't say that the Thunderwolf came with Canis or TWC as wargear, I said that the other (wolf) came with the figure. Thus the rest of your argument in that paragraph is built on sand. The devil is in the detail ;)

 

Moreover, I disagree that the fact that it is not wargear makes them irrelevant in accordance with RAW. Thus, I agree that RAW there is no definitive answer so we have to go with the only evidence there is - TWC and Canis.

[thade]

I'm sure that you didn't mean to misunderstand me but I didn't say that the Thunderwolf came with Canis or TWC as wargear, I said that the other (wolf) came with the figure. Thus the rest of your argument in that paragraph is built on sand. The devil is in the detail :cuss

 

I don't mean to misunderstand you, but clearly I do. What is the difference between "the other (wolf)" and "Thunderwolf Mount"? If they are different, then Cannis and TWC don't have TWM at all and well, they're not precedents. If they are the same, then Cannis and TWC have TWM...but not listed under their Wargear...so they don't have TWM for purposes of RAW.

 

If they don't have TWM (which they don't in both cases), then they cannot serve as precedents for TWM = T5. That's not sand, my man. Them's the brakes.

 

Moreover, I disagree that the fact that it is not wargear makes them irrelevant in accordance with RAW.

 

Again, BRB states that Wargear modifications to Toughness are not proof against Instant Death. The BRB further says that in these instances, Toughness will be written as T4(5). People assert that since Cannis and TWC do not have T4(5), that the TWM is T5 and we are done. However, since Cannis and TWC are not written as having TWM as Wargear, then they do not serve as precedents, thus we have no precedent. Since Cannis and TWC cannot serve as precedents, they are irrelevant so far as RAW is concerned. RAI is a different story. Clearly you interpret them to have Thunderwolf Mounts, in which case they do serve as precedents, and we are done: the TWM bestows a flat T5.

 

Traditionally when a Codex has a rule that breaks/supercedes as BRB rule, it states so specifically. The TWM rules do not do this. Thus, since we have no counter examples in the Wolf Dex, seems to me that we're stuck with T4(5).

 

Summary:

RAI = T5

RAW = T4(5)

 

Arguing RAW vs RAI seems like an exercise in futility to me, so I think this is my last post in this thread. I've contributed all I can and I don't think people are reading half of what I type anyway. =P

[Durfast Spiritwolf]

I don't mean to misunderstand you, but clearly I do. What is the difference between "the other (wolf)" and "Thunderwolf Mount"? If they are different, then Cannis and TWC don't have TWM at all and well, they're not precedents. If they are the same, then Cannis and TWC have TWM...but not listed under their Wargear...so they don't have TWM for purposes of RAW.

 

If they don't have TWM (which they don't in both cases), then they cannot serve as precedents for TWM = T5. That's not sand, my man. Them's the brakes.

 

For a character the mount is purchased as war gear, for Canis and TWC they are an inherent part of the model and appears on the baseline stats. That is why they can serve as an indicator - I believe.

 

Again, BRB states that Wargear modifications to Toughness are not proof against Instant Death. The BRB further says that in these instances, Toughness will be written as T4(5). People assert that since Cannis and TWC do not have T4(5), that the TWM is T5 and we are done. However, since Cannis and TWC are not written as having TWM as Wargear, then they do not serve as precedents, thus we have no precedent. Since Cannis and TWC cannot serve as precedents, they are irrelevant so far as RAW is concerned. RAI is a different story. Clearly you interpret them to have Thunderwolf Mounts, in which case they do serve as precedents, and we are done: the TWM bestows a flat T5.

 

Traditionally when a Codex has a rule that breaks/supercedes as BRB rule, it states so specifically. The TWM rules do not do this. Thus, since we have no counter examples in the Wolf Dex, seems to me that we're stuck with T4(5).

 

Summary:

RAI = T5

RAW = T4(5)

 

Arguing RAW vs RAI seems like an exercise in futility to me, so I think this is my last post in this thread. I've contributed all I can and I don't think people are reading half of what I type anyway. =P

 

A codex overrides the BRB, but that is irrelevant in this case due to the precedence I suggest is set by Canis and TWC. I understand that you disagree and, as this lies at the root of the discussion, it is not something that we can do much about until the FAQ. It has been pleasant reading your posts and I do understand why you take the stance you do.

 

Kind regards,

[thade]

For a character the mount is purchased as war gear, for Canis and TWC they are an inherent part of the model and appears on the baseline stats. That is why they can serve as an indicator - I believe.

 

This is something you interpret, hence my saying (repeatedly) that this argument is rooted in RAI. It would only be rooted in RAW if it was written that they have TWM under their Wargear.

 

This very point has been addressed many times over the course of two threads. We need something new to cement the T5; this isn't enough.

 

It's nothing personal, certainly not your fault...I'm just frustrated that we've locked ourselves in circles and I see no way out of it.

[Iron_Chaos_Brute]

This is a rules as written argument. Precedene has nothing to do with it becaus of the frequency with which GW conradicts themselves. RAI has n place in trying to determine what he rule actually says.

 

My $.02

[Niiai]

Haha...I should never have made this discusion.

 

Anyway, can anybody fine another instance when there is an icrease to the profile instead of characteristsikcs? The thunderwolf mounths seem to do this. And are in fact the only one who do it, and that is why it is a flat 5. (Until somebody finds another wargear that ads to profile, witch acording to some here, there aparantly are bucketsfull of. The increase to base profile, not characteristick is why it is a flat 5.)

[thade]

Anyway, can anybody fine another instance when there is an icrease to the profile instead of characteristsikcs? (sic)

 

Haven't we addressed this path already? Drawing a distinction between an increase to a characteristic and an alteration to a profile seems like a moot point to me, as they are the same thing. You can't increase a characteristic without altering a profile, and you can't alter a profile without increasing (or decreasing) a characteristic. Arguing over semantics is (I hope) not the path to victory here. In fact, I think I've made this very point before.

 

I'm going to give this a few hours then read over the entire thread again. Maybe we all should. :D

[JamesI]

Haha...I should never have made this discusion.

 

Anyway, can anybody fine another instance when there is an icrease to the profile instead of characteristsikcs? The thunderwolf mounths seem to do this. And are in fact the only one who do it, and that is why it is a flat 5. (Until somebody finds another wargear that ads to profile, witch acording to some here, there aparantly are bucketsfull of. The increase to base profile, not characteristick is why it is a flat 5.)

Nids have increase to profile, but they specifically state it. Destroyer bodies for Necrons, but again it specifically states it applies to Instant Death issues. Demons with chariots/mounts but new profiles are provided and they're immune to instant death anyway.

 

Personally, RAW, it is 4(5). Wargear does not apply for instant death unless it specifically overrides that (like in Destroyer Bodies).

 

RAI (which as always is an opinion as everyone sees RAI different) its a pure 5.

 

I hope a FAQ solves this very soon.

[Veldrik]

Finally got my arse in gear and contact GW.

 

You can ring their HQ on http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/customer...e/contactUs.jsp

pick england if you want UK.

 

Anyways, I spoke to someone called Matt who was able to help with space wolves.

 

What I got was that:

Regarding Thunderwolf Cavalry and Thunderwolf mount base sizes

all are 60mm

reason: GW rules are that you use the models that exist as the basis - and since Canis is the only model at current, that is what we have to use as a base size for the model including base size (which means I need to buy/make more bases now, and need something bigger than my gobbo wolves to rep a wolf as big as canis')

 

Regarding Thunderwolf mount profile

The Infantry Character becomes a new unit with the following stats: +1st, +1t, +1a, cavalry, rending.

reason: These are character upgrades which are permanent to the character. It is comparable to giving a bloke terminator armour - it becomes a new model with new stats.

 

Regarding bikes having (4)5.

This is specific to bikes:

reason: this is a throw back from earlier editions, and is specifc, as per rulebook, to bike models, and any model that specifically states such behaviour.

 

MotW

Mark of the Wolfen is a permanent change, same as thunderwolf mounts. Even if carrying another weapon that relies on the attack profile for striking, such as power weapons, thunder hammers etc, MotW must always be used. the only exception is grenades as these replace the attack profile when used.

reason: it's not a weapon, and is a character upgrade.

 

That's what I got, so for me that means no more thunderhammers on my lone wolves with motw and I need to replace my 50mm bases with 60mm bases.

 

If you don't like what GW said, that doesn't matter, because you can play it how you want - thats why we have house rules :)

[Frosty the Pyro]

Haha...I should never have made this discusion.

 

Anyway, can anybody fine another instance when there is an icrease to the profile instead of characteristsikcs? The thunderwolf mounths seem to do this. And are in fact the only one who do it, and that is why it is a flat 5. (Until somebody finds another wargear that ads to profile, witch acording to some here, there aparantly are bucketsfull of. The increase to base profile, not characteristick is why it is a flat 5.)

 

A profile is a list of a models characteristics. That is its definition. Taking that into acount it would it would seam the only reason the word profile would be used is in when in reference to more than one characteristic. Regardless there is no magic diference in the words profile and characteristic. There is one argument for 5T flat, and thats that similar models have T5. The argument against is the rulebook says wargear bonuses dont count toward instant death, and that EVERYTHING ELSE that does count toward instant death specificly says so.

 

 

On the fluff side though, it makes more sense to be 4(5), riding on the back a wolf isnt going to make a krak missle melt your face any less. (yeah deamons do a compete profile replacement, but when have deamons made sense?)

[thade]

Finally got my arse in gear and contact GW.

 

You can ring their HQ on http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/customer...e/contactUs.jsp

pick england if you want UK.

 

Anyways, I spoke to someone called Matt who was able to help with space wolves.

 

What I got was that:

Regarding Thunderwolf Cavalry and Thunderwolf mount base sizes

all are 60mm

reason: GW rules are that you use the models that exist as the basis - and since Canis is the only model at current, that is what we have to use as a base size for the model including base size (which means I need to buy/make more bases now, and need something bigger than my gobbo wolves to rep a wolf as big as canis')

 

Regarding Thunderwolf mount profile

The Infantry Character becomes a new unit with the following stats: +1st, +1t, +1a, cavalry, rending.

reason: These are character upgrades which are permanent to the character. It is comparable to giving a bloke terminator armour - it becomes a new model with new stats.

 

Regarding bikes having (4)5.

This is specific to bikes:

reason: this is a throw back from earlier editions, and is specifc, as per rulebook, to bike models, and any model that specifically states such behaviour.

 

MotW

Mark of the Wolfen is a permanent change, same as thunderwolf mounts. Even if carrying another weapon that relies on the attack profile for striking, such as power weapons, thunder hammers etc, MotW must always be used. the only exception is grenades as these replace the attack profile when used.

reason: it's not a weapon, and is a character upgrade.

 

That's what I got, so for me that means no more thunderhammers on my lone wolves with motw and I need to replace my 50mm bases with 60mm bases.

 

If you don't like what GW said, that doesn't matter, because you can play it how you want - thats why we have house rules :rolleyes:

 

I hate to say it, but calling GW is no better for resolving rules disputes then batting them around here. =(

 

The reason is that if you call three different times over the course of a week, you are likely to get three different people, and not unlikely to get three entirely different answers. There is no definitive answer, and apparently they don't take notes/communicate with one another about these answers. They answer them off the cuff, probably as a sideline to some other task that they're working on.

[Veldrik]

yup I know that, ever sicne they got rid of the motroll rulez boyz.

 

 

however its a hell of a lot better than any of us are doing on this website full of lay people :lol:

 

If it's the guy who they've assigned to answering rulse questions over the phone, thats still better than any of us.

 

If there are 10 different guys with different responses, the best we can do is take reponse of whomever answers the most frequently.

 

Either way it beats the hell out of any bodies opinion in this thread.