Dread Psycannon

[Tybrus]

Been planning to add a Psy Cannon to my Dread, and found the frag launcher from the BA Dred. The link is below, what does everyone think?

 

 

Some Ebay Fragcannon

 

 

Forgeworld Psycannon

[Cpt. Blood Donator]

I'd let it slide. No questions asked.

[Angelis Mortis]

I'd let it slide. No questions asked.

 

Agreed. However, I would like to point out that the Psycannon for a Dread/Vet. Dread is 20pts. For 5 pts less, you can get an Assault Cannon w/Psybolts which is identical in stats.

[Nian]

I'd let it slide. No questions asked.

 

Agreed. However, I would like to point out that the Psycannon for a Dread/Vet. Dread is 20pts. For 5 pts less, you can get an Assault Cannon w/Psybolts which is identical in stats.

 

 

Yes forgeworlds points cost for psycannons are atrocious, this is what happens to people who inhale resin dust over many years... Should we worry about finecast? Lol

[jeffersonian000]

I had assume when I read the thread title you were asking about the viability of Assault Cannons with Psybolt ammo on Dreadnoughts, with the intent of using either the FW Dreadnought Psycannon arm or the Fragcannon arm to represent. If so, yes! Either is an excellent way to display the AC+PB as a "Psycannon" since the rules are the same in the current Dex.

 

If it’s the FW rules? Mmmmm, no. Avoid those, they are worth the hassle of getting permission to use overpriced, underwhelming rules.

 

SJ

[Angelis Mortis]

I had assume when I read the thread title you were asking about the viability of Assault Cannons with Psybolt ammo on Dreadnoughts, with the intent of using either the FW Dreadnought Psycannon arm or the Fragcannon arm to represent. If so, yes! Either is an excellent way to display the AC+PB as a "Psycannon" since the rules are the same in the current Dex.

 

If it’s the FW rules? Mmmmm, no. Avoid those, they are worth the hassle of getting permission to use overpriced, underwhelming rules.

 

SJ

 

No permission required. Old worn out debate. If somebody is dictating to you what you can have in your army I don't know why your playing them.

[jeffersonian000]

Tournaments?

 

Did I miss an official ruling that all published rules are legal for all 40k games?

 

SJ

[archangelCJ]

you would usually always need permission to use Imperial Armor models in any game, weather playing with friends or at a tournie. especially at a tournie!

besides, you cant have the psycannon in the current rules (as has been previously stated). and i do think it is a great idea using the FW Psycannon as the psybolt ammo AC. i do just like the look of the standard assault cannon though :lol:

[Angelis Mortis]

Tournaments?

 

Did I miss an official ruling that all published rules are legal for all 40k games?

 

SJ

 

And how many regular games do most people play compared to tournys? How many people as a percentage dont ever play tournys? Do we really need to go down this road.?

[Angelis Mortis]

you would usually always need permission to use Imperial Armor models in any game, weather playing with friends or at a tournie. especially at a tournie!

besides, you cant have the psycannon in the current rules (as has been previously stated). and i do think it is a great idea using the FW Psycannon as the psybolt ammo AC. i do just like the look of the standard assault cannon though :)

 

 

No you do not. Theres an entire page in each FW book stating exactly that. In addition, if the FW rules are so "meh" anyways, why would you care? As I said, if I set my FW Veteran Dread or my Domacales on the table and my opponent said "you can't use that" I would reply with "find another opponent". Its that simple. I have no idea where any of you got the idea that you dictate your opponents army. Thats one the most unsportsmanlike things I've ever heard of.

[RedemptionNL]

Against most FW units (which usually are overcosted for what they do), I don't think most people would have issues to play against. The rule of cool prevails here, and the units can be nice for a laugh, or to play something different.

 

But there are certainly enough units in the FW books that could pretty much ruin a regular game of 40k if they were included. Think of the FW Flyer units for example, which a lot of armies have little to no defense against with a regular codex army.

 

At least, if I was looking for a regular friendly game with my 'Nids, I'd certainly look for a different opponent if someone was insisting on bringing titans or flyers into a regular game if I didn't felt like playing them. I never had that situation occur, but would that suddenly make me unsportive if I did?

[jeffersonian000]

Its one thing to use cool models in your army, but its another thing to expect people to want to play against rules that aren't standard. Look at all the complaints that come up with every new codex; doesn't take much to show that using non-standard rules could and would cause issues in a friendly game, making it decidely unfriendly. If you set your army down cross the table from me with all the cool FW models, I'd be okay with with a game or two versus a well done army since all my stuff is painted and WYSIWYG. Even if you further state that you'd like to use some FW experimental rules, I'd be cool with that too, if the rules were on hand for me to look at for clarification. But in a tournament, I'm expecting to face armies from GW codexes, not experimental rule sets, and since I use friendly games to practice my tournament army build, I'd require my opponent to have the rules for his/her army available.

 

Its a simple trust issue. You trust me to play fair, just like I trust you to do the same.

 

SJ

[Angelis Mortis]

Its one thing to use cool models in your army, but its another thing to expect people to want to play against rules that aren't standard.

 

See and this is where your entire argument falls apart. As I stated above, theres an entire page devoted in each FW book stating that the rules are official. Flyers are apocalypse rules, not standard 40k as are Gargantuan and Super Heavies. Those should never be used in a standard 40k game without agreement from your opponent. HOWEVER, that does not blanket everything made by Forge World. Standard 40k models should be and can be used at the owners leisure. If your opponent has an issue with it, find another opponent.

[Something Wycked]

@ the OP: Yes, absolutely it would work. And do it in style, too :devil:

 

No you do not. Theres an entire page in each FW book stating exactly that. In addition, if the FW rules are so "meh" anyways, why would you care? As I said, if I set my FW Veteran Dread or my Domacales on the table and my opponent said "you can't use that" I would reply with "find another opponent". Its that simple. I have no idea where any of you got the idea that you dictate your opponents army. Thats one the most unsportsmanlike things I've ever heard of.

Ahem...

 

Yes, you do. Not everyone's read any FW books, much less all of them. In addition, since the FW rules are so unknown, why would you insist on using them? If you set your FW Veteran Dread or your Damocles on the table and you insisted on being able to use them, I would reply with, "Find another opponent." It's that simple. I have no idea where you got the idea that you can dictate to your opponent the rule set being used, especially when its not the standard and universally accepted rule set. That's one of the most unsportsmanlike things I've ever heard of.

 

:devil:

[jeffersonian000]

Its one thing to use cool models in your army, but its another thing to expect people to want to play against rules that aren't standard.

 

See and this is where your entire argument falls apart.

 

Not sure how my argument fell apart, as I'm not the one trying to force someone else to play by a different set of rules. Good luck with that, though.

 

SJ

[archangelCJ]

If your opponent has an issue with it, find another opponent.

 

it seems that if you where playing against people in this forum, then you have run out of opponents. by all means i love forgeworld models just for the pure awesomeness that they ooze form their bodies. but i always use them as standard models. maybe an example would help.

 

with the previous version of our codex only having the 2 types of land raiders, the "joans theory" made me want to play redeemers. so you could imagine my excitement when i discovered that there was an Imperial Armour redeemer released for us. however, because of the cheesy rules of the "psyck-out Assault Launchers" and the fact it had the incinerators instead of the standard flamestorms (meaning ignores inv save as well as firey awesomness) that i found myself not using it. in fact i never bothered asking to because i didn't think i could justify using rules for something brought in for apoc in a standard game. instead my mates let me use a standard one from the SM codex and that was that.

 

i guess the statement we are trying to make is that "sure... you can use the MODELS... but all those awesome rules you get because they wanted it to be effective in apoc have to go... just pretend it is a similar model from a standard codex that your army was mysteriously able to get you hands on"

 

*shifty eyes, shifty eyes...... lift up upside down newspaper*

[Nian]

Forgive my ignorance, but isn't Forgeworld owned by Games Workshop? If so, anyone who won't play against someone with Forgeworld stuff in my honest opinion can get buggered.

 

I won't play against anyone who has such a narrow mind, your asking for trouble and petty arguments on simple rules.

[Inquisitor Fox]

Before this thread degenerates into hordes of nastiness that I don't want to deal with, let me issue a general reminder to be excellent to one another ;)

 

There are two camps to Forge World models. Many seem to take the view that "It's all good, bring whatever you want and let's play a game." Then there are some who chose to limit themselves to just what is in the Codices, similarly to those that chose not to play Planet Strike, City Fight, or Apocalypse. While personally I am firmly in the first camp and have never had a single problem finding a pickup game in the two local GW Stores even when asking to use things like Forge World rules for points values of my Inquisition armies, or the fact that IA2 let me have autocannons and heavy stubbers on my Chimeras, I do understand the point that some people would not wish to employ "optional rules, even if they're published by our official subsidiary."

 

Forge World's statement of implied consent isn't something to be taken really literally. When I play a game I open it like something like this:

 

"Hey, you wanna play a game?"

"Yeah sure"

"Alright.. I'm using the Forge World IA2 rules for my vehicles, it lets me take an autocannon for X points on my Chimeras and have a heavy stubber instead of a storm bolter, is that alright?"

"Yeah that's fine"

(game continues)

 

By saying yes they want to continue the game, the fellow is agreeing to the Forge World rules. It is polite to go over anything like that when showing your army list to your opponent and making sure they understand what each of the units and models are. It's a matter of courtesy. The opponent has the right to say "Nah, I'd rather you just used what was in the Codex." It is my own personal advice for you to have two army lists when going for pickup games in new areas... one assuming they're cool with your Forge World bling-bling, and one assuming they want you to stick to the Codex. This is the same issue really with the following exchange:

 

"Hey you want to play a Planet Strike game?"

"Nah, I don't have the rules or lists for it.. how about City Fight?"

"Nah.. my army blows in terrain... normal game?"

"Sure, that's cool. How many points?"

 

This is the way it is, and it shall always be until everything is in a single set of books. It's the same for every RPG or board game ever with expansion packs. Not everyone will have, or want, to use every expansion available.

 

That being said... in the case of a psycannon... an assault cannon with psybolt ammunition is curiously possessing the same statline. Ergo.. just tell them that's what it is if they're trying to have an issue ;)

[number6]

To expound just a bit on INP...

 

ForgeWorld rules are expensive and problematic to obtain. I for one don't own any FW despite all the years I've played because, frankly, I just don't want to pay for it. So I am not actually familiar with many FW rules and units, and don't know how they work. I admit to not really enjoying having brand new units sprung at me like that! :) In tournaments I run, FW is strictly forbidden. For friendly games, I'm usually game. But I always feel bad for making my opponent laboriously explain the FW stuff in his army that I just don't understand and may never have seen before. :(

 

And sometimes, FW rules are just plain broken. I forget the name of it, but there's a drop pod that allows the dread inside to assault right after deep strike. Hello? BROKEN! :P Even guys I game with who bought the kit for it think this is broken and don't actually use the rules for it.

 

And this has been my experience with a lot of FW rules. They're either WAY overpowered or, sometimes WAY overpriced for what they do.

 

Another example of a unit that is WAY overpowered is the land raider with the thunderfire cannon and super special armour that is immune to melta AND lance special rules. Take just a couple of these things, and what can most armies do about it? I sure hope you're not playing Eldar or Dark Eldar! ;) Seriously, that one tank totally bones two entire armies. How fair is that?

 

An example of WAY overpriced (because of its underpowered nature): Tau XV9s and heavy gun drones. Cool units, but way too expensive in points for what they do. Unless you want the cool models, you're better off sticking with the Tau codex only.

 

Anyway, these are the issues I have.

 

* Expensive and limited in availability.

* Unbalanced rules.

 

FW makes awesome models, but their rules? Not so much. There are exceptions: INP's Inquisition examples are all fine, for instance. But they're also not "new". They're either just copying rules that already exist elsewhere in core GW products and are just passing them onto existing codexes that GW isn't bothereing to update, or they're really stupid simple updates. I mean, it's pretty easy to calculate a fair cost for a heavy stubber or autocannon upgrade on chimeras, yes? ;) I don't trust FW to get rules fair for anything beyond that. They have a terrible track record so far.

 

YMMV, of course. I just want to point out that I think there are several legitimate reasons for people to be wary of FW. People like me aren't just being jerks. :lol: There really are game balance issues at stake that can be important, depending on the kind of game you wish to play.