Teetengee Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Unbound: They even suggest an army of flyers, but RAW there seem to be some issues with this. First problem(s), Henchmen squads without inquisitors and the related Zombies without Typhus. These units cannot be taken in any FOC selection without their unlock via another model. This seems to violate the spirit of unbound by creating prerequisite models. Second problem: They suggest an all flyers list. I cannot find the exact quote right now, but the brb says that if at the end of any game turn you have no models on board you lose. All flyers is by necessity all reserve which means empty first turn. So while the list is technically legal, it is also an autolose. Are my analyses accurate or have I missed something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarl of Wulfen Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Start a flyer in ready to take on a landing pad, then its on the board at the start of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GodEmperorOfMankind Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 As to the first problem: "These units cannot be taken in any FOC selection" You're not using ANY FOC at all, so not a problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 But does that mean I can use models that don't have rules anymore, if so do I use the old rules. The reason I ask is because part of the costs of these models (zombies, henchmen) is included in their requisite models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarl of Wulfen Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 If you are running zombies and henchmen, why wouldn't you have an inquisitor or typhus. As far as models that don't have rules anymore, I'm assuming you are playing a friendly game with people you know, and you can house rule something. If you are playing a pick up game at a store against a random person that wanted to play unbound, I'd say no, you can't use them, as there are no rules for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam13n Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 In theory, unbound opens a lot of doors. Some of them lead to lists where you'll auto-lose (all flyers and no landing pad(s)), but others can make for some pretty fun games. I see no issue with Zombies and Henchmen. If you have the appropriate models, they are allowed by the definition of unbound - using whatever models in your collection you so desire to make up your army. All requirements are removed. (You could even say they are Zombies taken from the Crimson Slaughter supplement to give them all Fear in addition to their standard rules...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 @Dam13n, that was how my local group has decided to play it (and I agree with that sentiment) I was just curious as to RAW what should be done about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam13n Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Page 117 even has that statement in bold text... It's whatever models in your collection you wish to use. You'll be bound by the Allies matrix in terms of how they interact on the table, but beyond that... RAW is clear... any unit in your collection = any unit in your collection, simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 But the rules on bold text at the begining say that bold text is only generally true, caveats exist (although usually in the written area). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 The number of Henchmen unit you can take is limited by the number of Inquisitors you take. (Edit: This has nothing to do with FoC slots) This is a *Codex* restriction and not a *Detachment* restriciton, so by RAW, Unbound does nothing to alliviate this. In an Unbound army, you could always take 50 Inquisitors for 50 Henchmen units. But you can't take that 51st unit. Outside of Coteaz of course. RAI, use whatever you want. But GW are *BAD* at writing rules that work. For each Inquisitor in your army you may also include a unit of 3-12 Henchmen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 You are placing restrictions where the rules have none. Any unit means any unit. Doesn't matter if they are honor guard, command squads, dedicated transports, henchmen, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 There is nothing that allows you to ignore this Codex rule. It's the same for Codexes that restrict things like access to Servitors based on the number of Techmarines you take. Or Space Marine Honour Guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 I agree to disagree. If it's a unit, it's a unit. The rule book makes no other distinctions or requires an allowance for exceptions to that rule. I'm with you on upgrades and wargear. But even Grimauldus' Cenobyte Servitors and Techmarine servitors are described as a unit. If you want to bring an entire army of servitors, I say more power to ya! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Currently, Death Company are 0-1 unless you purchase Astorath. Do you feel unbound removes this restriction? Similarly, do you feel unbound would allow for an army of Avatars? Or Vindicares, etc? But does that mean I can use models that don't have rules anymore, if so do I use the old rules. The reason I ask is because part of the costs of these models (zombies, henchmen) is included in their requisite models. Anything without current rules cannot be used. Otherwise unbound would allow for armies of Squats... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonaides Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Nothing wrong with an all-flyer army. Play unbound apocalypse and half your reserves turn up on turn 1... or was the 'unwritten' complaint actually:gw have written rules that allow me to be an idiot and i dont know how i'll ever survive or play a game again! It's always been possible to make an auto lose army, did you ever notice that theres nothing in the rules that actually forces you to move or attack the enemy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Currently, Death Company are 0-1 unless you purchase Astorath. Do you feel unbound removes this restriction? Similarly, do you feel unbound would allow for an army of Avatars? Or Vindicares, etc? Nope to all. Nothing removes the 'unique' restriction. Or any Codex restirctions onthe number of units allowed. The whole "Ignore Detachment Restrictions" currently has no effect. As an Unbound army uses *no* detachment (Combined Arms, Allied, Inquisitorial, etc), for it to ignroe any Restriction said Detachment might have. While I think we can all agree on the RAI, mostly. The RAI surrounding things like Unique units (and really, there could be a case made for multiple Eldar craftworlds getting together and all sending thier individual Avatars off to fight...) is a total grey area. Are you allowed to use the 4 Marneus Calagar minis you've bought and painted over the last year together? Use any mini you have!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Neither of the two I listed are classed as unique; DC have a 0-1 restriction (that is wavered in the Apocalypse rules) and Avatars are one per detachment ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Avatar isn't Unqiue? Death Company would still be 0-1 choice. And if the Avatar is not unique, but per detachment, then it would depend. If Eldar were the Primary, then they form a single Detachment, and therefore you could have only one Avatar in an Unbound army. If Eldar were not the Primary, then they belong to no detachment, so potentially, you couldn't use a single one... Or you could use an unlimited amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Gentlemanloser, where in the unbound rules does it say that you must abide by codex restrictions on taking units? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Codex > BRB Where is the BRB rule that tells you you can ignore Codex restrictions on which units you are allowed to take? (It's not the Unbound rule of ignoring Detachment restrictions, as that is a totally seperate, and BRB, thing - Edit: As in it's a Defined Section in the BRB and a specific Item. The Detachments in the BRB all have Detachment Restrictions. It's these that Unbound ignores) Edit2: "Bring any mini you want" also isn't a rule. Otherwise, for a 2k Unbound game, I'll bring 15 Knights. And not be bound by the points limit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Cohort Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 And this thread perfectly illustrates how bad GW is at writing rules. They can't even write a rule that states that you can bring whatever you want properly. Though my interpretation (without having directly read the 7th ed rulebook) is that unbound is meant to be field whatever you want regardless of any normal restrictions other than unique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Codex is only > than BRB when there is a conflict in the rule. Unbound creates no conflicts. Any unit in your collection, in nice bold black letters, means "Any" "Unit" "In" "Your" "Collection". If my collection has 10 different units of henchmen and only 2 inquisitors, then what is the point of a rule that UNBINDS restrictions that would prevent me from taking such a list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Raeven, so you agree then that "Any. Unit. In. My. Collection." lets me bring 10,000 points worth of units to a 2,000 point game? Becuase that one guidline (it's not even a rule...) in the BRB allows me to ignore *every other rule* in the game about which minis I can field? Rather than the no FoC and no Detachment Restirctions it's currently written to ignore? If you're more reaosnable, and don't think that "any mini" actually allows us to ignore every and all rules in 40k. Then *Codex* restricitons (the highest level of rules in the game) must still apply. Even if the BRB *specifically* told us to ignore Codex restricitons (which it doesn't, and you will not be able to show), that would in turn be Over rulled by the Codex itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raeven Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Gee, i didnt realize there was a point limit in the codex'. Like I said before. I agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Gee, i didnt realize there was a point limit in the codex'. Pretty sure it's one of the rules in the BRB. Agreeing to the point limit you're going to play. I'll check to see if it actually exists when I get home form work (and it isn't just some unwritten agreement). I take it you're agreeing that once the Points Limit has been agreed, you can't then ignore it becuase you want to bring every mini in your collection? (So there are rules that limit what minis you can bring in an Unbound list, is the whole point) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.