Reclusiarc versus Libby w/ Unleash Rage

[Dingareth]

And most players play with the rules in that book we forked $20 out for. If you don't want to, you should probably get your opponent's consent to make up your own.

[Black Memories]

Personally for an HQ choice I prefer Librarian's over reclusiarchs. Maybe it's just the situations I seem to get into (and not the choice itself) when I take them but they seem to consistently under perform, even when paired with the death company. If i use a chaplain now it's Lemartes, and he is far and away the best chaplain in the game. Gets the benefits of Death company rerolls on the charge, untargettable character, furious charge, and the monstrous based in. 6. Unreal.

 

I use a Lib in term armor with a storm shield as a buffer for my assault terminator squad in my LRC. That is the squad absolutely no one wants to deal with in tournaments, and it's largely in part to the librarian that's by and large resistant to all those 3 d6 rolls with his storm shield (I'll take my chances rolling the 2 invulns for unleashed rage). The best roll for a basic librarian in the BA army, in my opinion anyways, is in this kind of super-kill-squad support role. Otherwise I just feel like they're too counterable by too many armies being a basic assault squad buffer like some lists use them as.

[igotsmeakabob!!]

What he said.

 

MOST people operate the power phase by phase. MOST people would consider it pretty weak sportsmanship to make it a game-long power.

+1

RAI vs. RAW, depends on how your group plays. My group let me use my Vindicators with a blast before the FAQ came out... cuz it was pretty obvious that they should have it.

The SS power should only be phase by phase, but by RAW it's permanent.

[SamaNagol]

Doesn't really bother me either way how you resolve Sword of Sanguinius for fun games, but if I go to a tournament, I am casting that badboy once and running round with a S10 Force Weapon the rest of the game. Sorry.

[Mezkh]

Doesn't really bother me either way how you resolve Sword of Sanguinius for fun games, but if I go to a tournament, I am casting that badboy once and running round with a S10 Force Weapon the rest of the game. Sorry.

 

Well the TO's rule is law at tournaments. RAW is irrelevant.

[SamaNagol]

I meant GW tourney's

[JamesI]

I meant GW tourney's

Have any of the big tournaments given an official ruling on this? (Well as official as they can be without being in an official FAQ)

 

I can't see GW meaning Sword to last all game. Just too darn powerful then.

[shatter]

Neither can I. It's insanely potent once cast.

It's totally in conflict with their often stated 'keeping it simple' policy. The convention in this case is well established that unless specifically stated otherwise, powers are phase or turn long at most. While this particular power doesn't say turn or phase, neither does it say game long. One cannot simply ignore the convention and pick the most favorable duration supposedly possible. It only creates further problems. eg Does a libby get to use his FW in subsequent turns? 'Keeping it simple'? No way.

 

I would call someone that used it as such a cheat to their face and laugh at their cowardice. Especially someone that spent so much time on the internet and chose to fly in the face of popular opinion despite being well aware of the 'keeping it simple' policy. (re 'Nid FAQ on Doom'. Last time I saw it.)

[SamaNagol]

Every other power on the page has a CLEAR restriction on the time it remains in play. EVERY.SINGLE.ONE.

 

In your opinion it shouldn't last forever, but according to the professionals who wrote the book and are paid a fine wage to ensure things are balanced it has no duration limit. It is just cast. However every single other power they included a clear and simple caveat to indicate when it ceases to affect play.

 

Why are you so sure you are mire right than the words published by the author?

 

And why do you feel the need to belittle those who play to the rules as they are given to us? That is rather childish and insecure. Mocking others because their opinion differs to your own is school yard abtics

[shatter]

I'm not mocking, just saying what I think and how I'd behave in person. Seriously.

If someone wants to play the rule by that interpretation, they'll have to accept that people like me will be unhappy about it. This is quite relevant to at least the OP I think.

 

I don't mock, tease or browbeat people. I'd laugh at them in this case because I find the interpretation sad more than anything and the laughter would be quite mirthless, I assure you.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I have asked all the TOs where I play how they would rule it. They all said you must cast it every phase, it doesn't go off once and that's it. I could be a dick about it and get all RAW in their face but I don't that would help. It's not a big deal to me and if I am playing a pickup game versus another BA army with a Sword Libby I'd ask my opponent to roll for it each phase. It's obvious to me it's an oversight on the part of the games developer. I can't think of any other psychic power you roll for one time then it always remains in play... So yeah it was most likely just an oversight. It's just too silly to make a big deal out of it.

 

0b :)

[Chairman_woo]

The RAI is pretty blatantly obvious I'd say, and RAW is not conclusive at best (the fact the rules dont support the counter to your position does not mean it supports yours by default).

You'd be asked not very politeley to leave if you tried something as transparantly beardy as this in every playgroup I've ever had contact with anyway. And I know a few guy's who would essentailly write you off as a "delusional and hopelessly ego driven" person (actuall quote) to boot (I dont like to let these things get personal myself but those people are definitely out there and they dont forget easily I can tell you).

 

This isent really the place to get into a RAW/RAI Dialetic again (been argued to death elsewhere) but I will say that it would be foolish to factor it into a discusiion of Libbys vs Reclusiarchs unless you play in a very limited playgroup that all see things that way (good luck with that). I suspect most players you come across (that I come across anyway) would not treat you favorably at best if you tried it (be prepared to have an arguement on a very regular basis).

 

As for GW tournies, if the judges are ruleing that sang-sword last the whole game then please put me in touch with them, cause I really really want some of whatever they have been smoking :)

[SamaNagol]

Laughing in someone's face =mocking.

 

Saying it is 'blatantly obvious' = an assumption. An assumption you are making which in contradictory to every other entry in the psychic power listing for BA.

 

If it is the intention of Matt Ward that it will be cast and only last for the duration of one assault phase, it isn't very difficult to write that.

[Whitefireinferno]

I would play it as a cast each turn style BUT how ever if somebody was to call me a "delusional and hopelessly ego driven" person or Laugh in my face ovr a game of Wardolly's I would have to ask if they enjoy having a Broken Nose because I really do not take kindly to crap like that and TBH being banned from somewhere for something like that is fair and just in my books oh and everbody remember I live in NZ the nation of heavy drinkers this sort of thing happens.

[Mezkh]

Laughing in someone's face =mocking.

 

Saying it is 'blatantly obvious' = an assumption. An assumption you are making which in contradictory to every other entry in the psychic power listing for BA.

 

If it is the intention of Matt Ward that it will be cast and only last for the duration of one assault phase, it isn't very difficult to write that.

 

It's not difficult, however it's a well-founded assumption that it is indeed an error of omittance due to aforementioned reasons.

 

It seems a very strange thing to hang your hat on. As discussed, almost every TO would overrule you if you tried it at a tournament, and it's going to antagonize most of your opponents in all other games. So the vast majority of the time it won't even come up.

 

It's interesting in a discussion from a 'haha funny RAW' perspective, akin to a wraithlord having no eyes and thus not being able to draw LOS to a target. But really that is as far as it goes.

[Brother Mojonir]

Whitefireinferno, I feel what your saying man, but even we are becoming pretty politically correct in regards to violent offending (3 strikes legislation etc.). In saying that, I would never laugh at another player for interpreting the game differently to myself, nor would I take too kindly to being laughed at.

 

Regarding the OT, I think it is worth factoring in that the Sang Sword removes the need to bring a PF/TH, more relevant with RAS where it means the Sgt can take a PW which is more useful in situations in which you would use Unleashed Rage.

[SamaNagol]

It is NOTHING like 'having a discussion about a Wraithlord having no eyes'

 

Don't be ridiculous

[Mezkh]

It is NOTHING like 'having a discussion about a Wraithlord having no eyes'

 

Don't be ridiculous

 

Why "NOTHING' like it" ?

 

Because both are examples of 'funny RAW'.

 

Sorry, far from being ridiculous. Don't get so worked up.

 

Here is another example of silly RAW then. Reclusiarchs have Honour of the Chapter and Liturgies of Blood, but cannot use them, as these abilities only affect 'Chaplains'