Jump to content

Razorbacks, Fear the Darkness, Fast Vehicles & Rapid Fire


Redfinger

Recommended Posts

Got in a rather heated debate last night with a fellow BA player over some issues...

 

1. can Fear the Darkness be used from a Razorback, I wasn't sure, no fire point, but he was insistent that it could it was in the FAQ, I don't recall it though.

 

2. Fear of the Darkness is a psychic shooting attack, does that mean he needed to roll to hi the squad using his Ballistic skill?

 

3. Fast vehicles can deploy passengers if the vehicle has moved 12 inches..he was trying to tell me I couldn't.

 

4.He had a Stern Guard that was 20 inches from one of my ASM, he used the AP3 round on them and claimed he got two shots because it was listed as "rapid fire" I told him, and showed him in the book where it said rapid fire is 12 inches, he claimed it was all about how the rule is interpreted, at that point (turn 3) I conceded to him, because he was being a total a$$hole. I am never going to play BA vS. BA again, it was brutal! I'll just bust out my Vanilla Codex next time and proxy guys.....

 

So any feed back on these rules clarifications?

 

Ashton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of the above is explained pretty well in the rulebook and codex, you were just unlucky regarding your opponent.

 

 

fair enough, I dont have my rule book on me at the moment. I am sitting in a hotel room right now and my rule book is at the game store with all my stuff....any chance for someone to break it down for me before I go round 2 this evening?

 

ashton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got in a rather heated debate last night with a fellow BA player over some issues...

 

1. can Fear the Darkness be used from a Razorback, I wasn't sure, no fire point, but he was insistent that it could it was in the FAQ, I don't recall it though.

 

2. Fear of the Darkness is a psychic shooting attack, does that mean he needed to roll to hi the squad using his Ballistic skill?

 

3. Fast vehicles can deploy passengers if the vehicle has moved 12 inches..he was trying to tell me I couldn't.

 

4.He had a Stern Guard that was 20 inches from one of my ASM, he used the AP3 round on them and claimed he got two shots because it was listed as "rapid fire" I told him, and showed him in the book where it said rapid fire is 12 inches, he claimed it was all about how the rule is interpreted, at that point (turn 3) I conceded to him, because he was being a total a$$hole. I am never going to play BA vS. BA again, it was brutal! I'll just bust out my Vanilla Codex next time and proxy guys.....

 

So any feed back on these rules clarifications?

 

Ashton

 

And by unlucky he means that either your opponent doesn't know basic rules of the game or he was trying to cheat.

Bad luck on your part either way.

 

For the rule clarifications (short answers):

1. Psychic shooting attack works as any ranged attac and thus needs a fire point.

2. He uses the BS if the power does not specify that it hits automatic.

3. Any vehicles can deploy troops (fast or non-fast) after having moved 12".

4. Rapid fire always works from 12" as mentioned in the rules. The fact that he said that it was up for interpretation, IMHO, indicates that he was trying to cheat you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Fear of the Darkness is a shooting attack, therefore requires a fire port from inside a vehicle.

 

2. Fear of the Darkness auto hits

 

3. Any transport can have passangers get out at 12 inches of movement, being fast is irrelevant.

 

4. Your opponent was either a cheater, a jerk or unable to understand the rules. Rapid fire is clearly only within 12 inches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. No. The Razorback has no firepoints.

 

2. Fear of the darkness is a shooting attack but it 'hits automatically an enemy unit within 24"'.

 

3. Yes, vehicles can move 12" and troops can disembark, those troops may also fire but cannot assault unless the vehicle has 'assault vehicle' rules.

 

Yeah, normally having a codex and the rulebook at games should remove any doubt but this guy seemed to be intentionally cheating, especially when I read he was trying to push rapid fire out to 20".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. No. The Razorback has no firepoints.

 

2. Fear of the darkness is a shooting attack but it 'hits automatically an enemy unit within 24"'.

 

3. Yes, vehicles can move 12" and troops can disembark, those troops may also fire but cannot assault unless the vehicle has 'assault vehicle' rules.

 

Yeah, normally having a codex and the rulebook at games should remove any doubt but this guy seemed to be intentionally cheating, especially when I read he was trying to push rapid fire out to 20".

 

Let's not forget that the Vengence round have 18" range. What a cheating ass.

 

edit:

 

Might I add, if he had said "it's inte the FAQ" to me, I would have packed up and left. Just like that. He was simply lying, and he knew it himself. Same thing with the rapid fire, that rule is about as vague as running into a brick wall. Don't play that second game. But if you must, be very clear on that you know what he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easy fix to someone trying to tell you something isn't the case in warhammer, when you have a pretty good idea that it is.

 

Basic arguing says if you're making a claim that seems like it isn't common sense, or a simply understood solution, you must provide proof. If he told you that you can rapid fire over 12 inches and you said no you can't and he said it's open to interpenetration then tell him to show you the rule book entry where it's listed and you two can discuss it from there. Same way with any of the other rules. He's making the claims, he needs to prove it.

 

Basically what I'm saying is if he can't show you in the rule book, you're more than within your rights as a sportsman to tell him kindly that he's welcome to forfeit the game if he cannot provide the appropriate rules from their rulebook entry since he's making illegal plays, and thus losing the game automatically. It's NOT unsportsmanlike to call out a cheater, its unsportsmanlike to let them get away with it. Especially in such an obvious situation. Whenever I call out a cheater and tell them lets look it up in the rulebook, the most common response I get is "well lets play it the way you've been playing it then".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hahah, that is ridiculous.. People must be taking things way too seriously to be cheating in the first place, it's just sad feeling the need to cheat, it's a hollow victory if they do win via cheating anyway. I don't undertstand people that lie and cheat, they're only cheating themselves of a proper experience.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.