Jump to content

Dark Angel Servitor Errata


BassWave

Recommended Posts

I don't know if the rest of you have noticed but it was not fixed in the recent FAQ. Techmarines and command squads can be taken for every HQ choice you take, but other techmarines and command squads do not count. Nothing wrong here. However, servitors are an HQ choice and there are no stipulations against using them to unlock more command squads and techmarines. This could potentially lead to having multiple techmarines and command squads by just taking a servitor for every techmarine that is unlocked...

 

Nothing in the codex that I have read bars the servitors from being used in this way. Just thought I'd bring this up for all of you gathering errata to point out for the next FAQ.

 

Link to comment
https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/270196-dark-angel-servitor-errata/
Share on other sites

Yeah I agree, they are usually under a techmarine's options and are treated like wargear but here they aren't. However under the command squad entries techmarines don't allow you to take PA command squads, servitors do, but the other two are only unlocked, respectively, by HQ's that can take TDA or a bike. Just a pity that command squads can never be scoring units otherwise you could run all three sacred standards and cheese it right up. Although you could squeeze in some tac squads to do the scoring! 

Since neither the tech marine neither his servitors take up an HQ slot NEITHER can have a command squad. It is a stretching of the rules to think otherwise IMHO like the arguement of the flyers gun counting as a bolter for the banners salvo.

They are still an HQ choice.

Which doesnt take a slot and cannot be named a Warlord. As it is right now (without a FAQ) it might be considered legal. But who honestly believes that when the guys who make the rules and FAQs will allow it? It is like stealing a candy and say that you didnt because nobody seen you do it...Come on people common sense, let it rule for once, just once

 

They are still an HQ choice.

Which doesnt take a slot and cannot be named a Warlord. As it is right now (without a FAQ) it might be considered legal. But who honestly believes that when the guys who make the rules and FAQs will allow it? It is like stealing a candy and say that you didnt because nobody seen you do it...Come on people common sense, let it rule for once, just once

 

I agree that it is wrong and that the presentation in the army list was an oversight. But I bet this gets FAQ'd and the hurricane bolters are judged legitimate! After all I only see limited and expensive applications for the SoD combined with dark talon's/LRC's anyway.

I agree that it is wrong and that the presentation in the army list was an oversight. But I bet this gets FAQ'd and the hurricane bolters are judged legitimate! After all I only see limited and expensive applications for the SoD combined with dark talon's/LRC's anyway.

 

 

For what it's worth, I think that Hurricane Bolters are legitimate targets for the Standard of Devastation as they are specified to be a set of three twin-linked Boltguns...  But I think the comment about the Nephilim's weapon was regarding the school of thought that the Avenger Mega-Bolter should also be made Salvo 2/4, as it is a "Bolter", along with Storm Bolters, Bolt Pistols, Heavy Bolters, and the Vulcan Mega-Bolter... :) 

Reading through these answers - I'd be wary about calling people 'cheats' when they are in fact following what's is currently permitted. So let's cut that kind of remark out.

 

 

I would say that if a player is deliberately pretending not to see what is totally obvious then they are trying to cheat. The only way anyone could claim they thought this was how the rules were supposed to be interpreted is to lie about it, and if you are lying about how you think the rules were intended to be interpreted then you are, to all intents and purposes, cheating.

 

What is cheating if not being dishonest with your opponent for an in game advantage?

I am not saying that it is right nor that I would do it, just that it is legal as of now. No matter how you cut it.

I think it should be FAQ'ed as it doesn't make sense just like the Techmarine on a bike unlocking a RWCS, doesn't make sense with all the other Command Squads. There are a few things that don't make sense even after the FAQ. Why did they change the line in the DWCS for the Champion to how they did? It leaves it open for for interpretation to being any DW Terrminator in the army, kinda like the RWCS does for a Black knight. It should have been left alone and added an * at the end if it was meant as only one per army, which is how I am thinking it is intended. but that's another issue. RAW and RAI both can be debatable, even RAI can be debatable by the reader....

 

Plus there are still a few things that need further clarification but I am not going into that as i don't want another thread getting locked.

Even, if we accept that it is an intented, whats the purpose of it? What does an army list stand to gain by having multiple command squads?

The only thing I can think of is if you wanted multiple banners e.g. a RWCS with a banner and a PA Command Squad with a Standard of Devastation in the backfield.

The most useful single combo I can think of is having a PA Command Squad in a vehicle with Fortitide supporting a Deathwing army where the DW Squad has the DW banner... Or where a DW Command squad is the hammer against a Tactical Squad Devastation Banner firebase anvil.

 

Conversely, in a Fast-Attack-Saturated Ravenwing army, it might be nice to have 3-man Black Knight Squads (aka naked command squads) unlocked by Biker Techmarines.

 

On the other hand,

 

Even, if we accept that it is an intented, whats the purpose of it? What does an army list stand to gain by having multiple command squads?

The only thing I can think of is if you wanted multiple banners e.g. a RWCS with a banner and a PA Command Squad with a Standard of Devastation in the backfield.

 

Take Azrael and be done with that I guess?

 

 

Even, if we accept that it is an intented, whats the purpose of it? What does an army list stand to gain by having multiple command squads?

The only thing I can think of is if you wanted multiple banners e.g. a RWCS with a banner and a PA Command Squad with a Standard of Devastation in the backfield.

 

Take Azrael and be done with that I guess?

Yep, I can't really see the need for multiple Command squads.....I can never find enough points to include all of the hard-hitting units, let alone the "optional" ones! :)

 

The only thing I can think of is if you wanted multiple banners e.g. a

 

 

Even, if we accept that it is an intented, whats the purpose of it? What does an army list stand to gain by having multiple command squads?

The only thing I can think of is if you wanted multiple banners e.g. a RWCS with a banner and a PA Command Squad with a Standard of Devastation in the backfield.

 

 

or RWCS with RW Banner and a PA Command Squad with Devastation in a LRC ohhh 24 TL shots every turn due to PoMS and throw in a Techmarine with harness so you can repair that LRC on a 4+.

 

Just a shame you cant get a tech marine 3 servitors and the banner in the LRC as that would repair on 2 plus.

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.