Jump to content

question on character equipment options


spu00sed

Recommended Posts

I’ve just been rereading Betrayal and it seems that the options in it are far more restricted than I first thought.

 

We all know that squads are restricted in what they can take (only bolters in tactical, special weapon squads all taking the same weapon and so on).

 

However having gone over the list I have noticed that the wording is slightly different to what I had expected to read (and thus with my super cool make it up as I go along dyslexia and use of Boolean logic, or means both) and read it differently.

 

Centurion and Praetor

May replace bolt pistol or chainsword

 

Codex Space Marine Captain

May replace boltpistol and/or chainsword.

 

This means a heresy HQ can only take one special weapon where as a 40K HQ can take two

 

For example

 

HH era bolt pistol and power weapon or plasma pistol and chain sword

 

Modern era both the power sword and the plasma pistol.

 

Legion tactical squad sergeant

May only replace his bolter

 

So he cannot take a power weapon and a plasma pistol, or power fist and a combi-weapon

 

Again the modern era sergeant can get two special weapons.

 

I hope I am reading this wrong, otherwise both my tactical sergeants are illegal in HH era play

 

 

Any help?

You missed out one word, got the book in front of me and it says:

 

A Legion Praetor may exchange either their bolt pistol or chainsword/combat blade for one of the following:

 

So he can choose to replace his bolt pistol or chainsword or both, at least from the way I'm reading it.

CUV thanks for the correction, now we only need to fix the tactical sergeant option

 

Lucien Eilam my dyslexia means I will often miss a part of a sentence, or even a page, and not notice.

 

In this case I originally read it as and/or, then as or. In my rereading I missed the word "either" a few words before, not expecting it.

 

As for miss reading it as the logical OR, I blame my father. We spent many a dinner annoying my step mother when she would ask us if we would want one desert OR another. We would both answer “both of them”.

 

I can now only see or as the logical statement, and I always want two deserts.

Lucien Eilam my dyslexia means I will often miss a part of a sentence, or even a page, and not notice.

 

I'm agreeing with you, mate, not Uriel. Unless Alan Bligh's a former programmer or mathematician, he probably didn't mean it as logical OR. It could well be an oversight (I think there's a similar one in the Blood Angels Codex), but based on that quotation you can only give them one special weapon.

 

Like, if a waiter said to you "it's served with either baked potato or chips", you wouldn't assume you could have both, would you?

spu00sed, I initially read "may replace either XXX or XXX" as he can replace only one of them. So replace either the bolt pistol OR the chainsword but NOT both.

 

But now I think it's just listing what each thing can be swapped for. So pistol or sword and be swapped for anything on the list (power sword, plasma pistol, etc). Or both together can be swapped for lightning claws, etc.

 

I don't think there are any limits of how many items can be swapped, just what they can swapped for. That's how I'm going to run it anyway, unless clarification is given for an alternative.

Unless a FAQ comes out you have to play the rule as it's written and if the wording is either x or y that means only one can be swapped. My HH force is currently an unpainted Angron mini and the Betrayal book on order but when I get my Imperial Fists force done I certainly wouldn't allow an opponent to play with two special weapons based on the that wording. I think you'll find most other players will take a similar line so unless you are going to play all your games against a friend and you both agree via house rules to ignore that provision and bearing in mind WYSIWYG I would be very cautious about modelling a HH commander with two special weapons.

how is it worded to then allow a pair of lightning claws? is their like, another separate option to replace both for claws, or just a pair of claws option in the list, that would be cool, drop bp for pair of claws, keep bolter?

 

who cares, so i can't have a fist and weapon? was i going to? no. can't have a PP on my characters. i've never taken on that wasn't on a special character, most over-priced piece of gear in the book probably.

 

and i still think it's just poor writing, not intended. if it were intended i think they would have made a point of stating so since it is so out of left field to have that be the rule.

Unless a FAQ comes out you have to play the rule as it's written and if the wording is either x or y that means only one can be swapped. My HH force is currently an unpainted Angron mini and the Betrayal book on order but when I get my Imperial Fists force done I certainly wouldn't allow an opponent to play with two special weapons based on the that wording. I think you'll find most other players will take a similar line so unless you are going to play all your games against a friend and you both agree via house rules to ignore that provision and bearing in mind WYSIWYG I would be very cautious about modelling a HH commander with two special weapons.

 

Fair do. That was certainly my initial reading of it but I'm not experienced with deciphering the exact meaning of the words.

 

A pair of lightning claws may be swapped for bolt pistol AND chainsword. A bolter may be taken on top of this (but can you use it with a pair of claws?).

 

Regarding WYSIWYG, am I right in thinking that chain/blade bayonets count as 'combat blades'? I think I read it somewhere but would you be expected to buy combat blades for all you tacticals if they had bayonets? Although I probably will only ever play with friends I'd like to do the army as WYSIWYG.

Regarding WYSIWYG, am I right in thinking that chain/blade bayonets count as 'combat blades'? I think I read it somewhere but would you be expected to buy combat blades for all you tacticals if they had bayonets? Although I probably will only ever play with friends I'd like to do the army as WYSIWYG.

 

My general rule for WYSIWYG is if a character has something on paper it must be visible on the model, so my Chaplain has his Crozius in one hand and an orks head in other so to comply with WYSIWYG he's got Plasma Pistol clamped to his thigh. However for minor things like grenades I think you get away with having the item visible on the model but not have it "in game", I have 26 CC Templars, 11 with Grenades modelled on and 15 without. If I choose to play with grenades then I generally pick they ones with Grenades first and beef up the squad with non-grenade models and just say they've already thrown them. If I don't buy grenades I pick the models without grenades first and hope my opponent doesn't care that 2 or 3 marines actually have grenades modelled, no one has complained so far. As for combat blades I definitely think chain bayonets count as combat blades and would be okay with a unit that has them on paper to be modelled with bayonets rather than a separate blade. If you don't want your unit to have combat blades on paper I think it would be okay if less than half the force has bayonets modelled, if all of them did you might get some raised eyebrows.

I'd say it could be either 1 or both swapped for one weapon from the list. Ie could get a power weapon + plasma pistol, but couldn't get 2x plasma pistols, etc

 

The wording is the same for the Centurion entry, but weirdly not for the Command Squad entry. Here it says:

"any member of the Legion command squad may exchange their chainsword/combat blade or bolt pistol for one of the following" without the word either.

 

Suspect we'd need confirmation from FW either way to be sure.

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.