|
Post by topaxygourouni on Nov 24, 2014 10:09:52 GMT
This is not "playing differently", this is cheating. He is trying to pod a proxy hierophant into a proxy pod, ignoring the fact that the hierophant, like all other models, actually has a base, ignoring the fact that even so the pod would never fit under the hierophant, just to place a 1000 pts apocalypse monster in advandategous position in most probably normal level games. Well if this doesn't take the douchebag gold medal, I don't know what does. Before you criticize the obvious severity of the reaction, make sure the action didn't actually justify this. Oh well, my bad. since you say its 'cheating', then by all means.... feel free to destroy hundreds of dollars worth of models... I must have misunderstood the gravity of the situation.... Sho said anything about destroying? If you read carefully you will see me referring to something called "obvious severity of the reaction". Which means that I do not approve of such behaviors. That being said, I do not approve of people altering the game rules to fit their desires either. But you can see all around this thread people calling one guy a dick and childish for wanting to break stuff, but nobody bats an eye about a douchebag who wants to ruin the game. I don't care about how much the models cost, warhammer is a hobby, I don't give GW the money I would otherwise spend to buy food for my kid, and to be honest the guy uses a proxy toy pod and a 50 dollar model. So no "hundrends of dollars worth of models there". We agree though, there is no real gravity on the situation. So it is very easy NOT to be a douchebag in such kind of situations. I guess that's not easy for everyone though.
|
|
|
Post by Yautja on Nov 24, 2014 10:54:48 GMT
OP, go ahead and just try pulling this (please do not swear). I'll break your models right in front of you.
|
|
|
Post by wyliedx on Nov 24, 2014 12:24:01 GMT
again, they're MC's. go read the heading for gargants. it's in the BRB. has nothing to do with anyone trying to rules lawyer or wheedle for advantage. What does their type say? That's the important part.
Patronising Clue: it's not Monstrous Creature.
What other exceptions to this statement are there, where a unit is treated as a type differing to it's actual type on the datasheet?
Since you are too lazy to look it up its page 70 of the BRB. Reading is fundamental to life.
|
|
|
Post by grarik on Nov 24, 2014 13:38:38 GMT
Ok, no need for the attitude wyliedx, I'm pretty sure you're missing his point. Yes, the rule book states that a gargantuan creature is a monstrous creature with extra rules, however it still is a gargantuan creature rather than a monstrous creature in terms of its unit type. That's the crux of this issue, does the reference to monstrous creature simply mean anything that's a monstrous creature, or does it mean the "unit type" monstrous creature. 1 interpretation allows gargantuans to use the tyrannocyte, 1 does not. And it'll probably need an FAQ to truly decide the issue
|
|
|
Post by gingerwerewolf on Nov 24, 2014 14:16:09 GMT
First of all, the idea is rediculous, whether you use official models or not. There are numerous reasons why it is rediculous and to be fair most of them have been said here.
But perhaps, this is an English thing.
Engish, as in the language spoken by people of the British isles has some subtle nuances that people of the British isles use all the time without realising it. This is what has happened here:
Very simply put
Monstrous Creatures have a set of rules. Gargantuan Creatures have a set of rules. Gargantuan Creatures are a subset of Monstrous Creatures, that are uniquely defined. Not All Monstrous Creatures are Gangantuan Creatures.
Therefore there needs to be a defininition, a difference. The Name Difference is exactly that, to allow you to differentiate.
So that rules that apply to Monstrous creatures can be differentiated from GArgantuan Creatures. Otherwise, there would be no Gargantuan Creatures, only Monstrous Creatures with a few extra rules. They would not need the Term "Gargantuan Creature".
Gargantuan Creatures are their own entry and as such they would need to be referred to directly, for the rule to apply.
Take a look at all the Infantry out there - and then all the other types that are just Infantry but with extras.
Bikes are infantry, but with special rules, but can they ride in any Vehicle without special rules that specifically say Bikes? No Jump Infantry are infantry, but even have the name Infantry in their Title, but with special rules, but can they ride in any Vehicle without special rules that specifically say Jump Infantry? No Jet Packs are infantry, but with special rules, but can they ride in any Vehicle without special rules that specifically say Jet Packs? No
And finally, a Monstrous Creature is Infantry remember: But with some special rules...
Do you see what Im doing here?
GW wrote the rules to be easy to learn, so that the same base rules can be expanded, or used as a framework. But those Rules are a Permissive Set, so unless it directly says that you may put Gargantuan Creatures can get inside Tyrannocytes, you may not.
Questions that this also brings up? Can you Put Gargoyes into a Tyrannocyte? Can you put Spore Mines in a Tyrannocyte?
How many Tyranid Warriors fit into a Pod? 9 as thats the max size of the unit? But what about their Very Buly Rule? Shouldnt it be that since a Tyranid Warrior is worth 3 normal infantry, it would only be 6?
Can you join a Tyranid Prime to the Unit and then pod the lot?
TLDR A subset with its own name, is still in its own set and should be referred to directly, otherwise the Infantry rule would cover bikes, beasts and everything.
|
|
|
Post by Yautja on Nov 24, 2014 14:22:02 GMT
Questions that this also brings up? Can you Put Gargoyes into a Tyrannocyte? Yes. Can you put Spore Mines in a Tyrannocyte? YesHow many Tyranid Warriors fit into a Pod? 9 as thats the max size of the unit? But what about their Very Buly Rule? Shouldnt it be that since a Tyranid Warrior is worth 3 normal infantry, it would only be 6? Correct, 6 is the cap.Can you join a Tyranid Prime to the Unit and then pod the lot? Yes, but then you'd then only be able to fit 5 Warriors.TLDR A subset with its own name, is still in its own set and should be referred to directly, otherwise the Infantry rule would cover bikes, beasts and everything. Answers in blue
|
|
|
Post by gingerwerewolf on Nov 24, 2014 14:25:09 GMT
Questions that this also brings up? Can you Put Gargoyes into a Tyrannocyte? Yes. Can you put Spore Mines in a Tyrannocyte? YesHow many Tyranid Warriors fit into a Pod? 9 as thats the max size of the unit? But what about their Very Buly Rule? Shouldnt it be that since a Tyranid Warrior is worth 3 normal infantry, it would only be 6? Correct, 6 is the cap.Can you join a Tyranid Prime to the Unit and then pod the lot? Yes, but then you'd then only be able to fit 5 Warriors.Answers in blue I figured as much - thanks for the clarity!
|
|
|
Post by Osedaxx on Nov 24, 2014 14:40:23 GMT
Guys...
Guys...
Guys?
Let's all take a breather and give each other a six limbed hug. This whole thing feels a lot like the bullied scrawny kid in high school that got all ripped in his 20s and feel like he should go on a windmill punching spree on all those that picked on him. Just because there are arguments (pretty valid ones I feel) doesn't mean we should (also pretty valid).
I wouldn't like it if someone dropped a Hierophant next to me, since it's a pretty douchie move. Hell I don't even think a Hierodule is a nice thing to do. No one likes playing against Serpent Spam or the Flying Circus, so why would we try and do the same back?
Let's just stick to fielding 4 flyrants, deepstriking Tyrannofex's, Barbed Hierodules, 15 point troops, and Malanthrope k? Cus you know. Winning and stuff.
|
|
|
Post by rogueaccount on Nov 24, 2014 14:50:07 GMT
...but nobody bats an eye about a douchebag who wants to ruin the game. I think you may be blowing this out of proportion here. I'm pretty sure the OP isnt trying to ruin the game. I'm also pretty sure he's stated that he's doing it for giggles...if his opponent takes it so very seriously then they're free to not play him. I'd play him with a drop podded GMC, though as stated the tyrannocyte cant fit under the hierophant. In regards to the abusive language pervasive in this thread, there's really no need for it. This group is better than that. If someone takes the things said on this forum that personally, they really need to step away and re-evaluate their priorities in life.
|
|
|
Post by Hive Fleet Ragnorok on Nov 24, 2014 15:04:47 GMT
The way I see it, Gargantuan Creatures are clearly a subset of Monstrous Creature, per that page that has been quoted umpteen times.
To me, it's very similar to how a "Flying Monstrous Creature" is for all intents and purposes, a Monstrous Creature, with a few extra special rules.
Yes, there has been a slight name change - however the rules very clearly state that for 99% of purposes, *it is a monstrous creature*.
That is the logic that I follow, and why I would have absolutely no issue with podding a GC (because, rules-wise, they are MC's, and MC's are allowed in Pods). If you do not follow this same train of logic, then... that's about all there is to say on the subject. At this point both sides are just repeating their claims and not budging. It happens, and it's a game of plastic toy soldiers... let's try to minimize the death threat's and just be okay with each other.
All that said, it still stands that a standard Heirophant can not physically be placed completely within 6" of the Pod. Key word Standard. If your opponent agrees to let you use a smaller base (for all purposes), then sure, it's possible - although it would be beyond common courtesy to inform your opponent that this is made specifically possible by his (or her) agreement only, and is not normally the case.
Even with that... is it a good idea? I'm going to have to go with no. The only GC I think benefits from a Pod (and benefits heavily) is the Scythed Heirodule. Anything else has some incredibly solid long-ranged firing and high movement that you're otherwise ignoring for T1 (let's assume that if you're paying close to 1100 points for this one unit, we're throwing in the tools to "make sure" it comes in on T2). You can already get probably 80% of places you want to be (by turn 3 charge-time) starting on foot... plus the shooting you have. And there's always that 1-in-a-very-large-number chance that it doesn't hit board til T3. Sadness.
As for getting bogged, the 'phant has a nice protection against that in its.. Incubation Chamber? I think is what it's called. The 20-strong transport capacity (which is actually 20... so huzzah, Brood of Carnifexen!!). Have a nasty target running your way that would hold you down for a few assault phases? Just unload 20 Genestealers and let them deal with it.
|
|
|
Post by xtztxtxz on Nov 24, 2014 15:22:33 GMT
Please, please don't be that guy. No. Just say no to this please. *edit* Going to regret this, should keep my mouth shut but here I go. The rules say no, you can't drop pod a Gargantuan Creature. Our pods (forget what they are called) can transport 20 gaunts or 1 MC. There is no reference that it can transport GC. Yes GC=MC but the pod can't transport MC because it doesn't say they can. Simple as that. If you can prove otherwise than the GC=MC just no. Please for heaven sakes we don't need another 27+page thread arguing about how a rule should work. The Tyranid Hive is getting a bad name now because of how members are interpreting the rules. We don't need another one now. For the Hive sakes, please stop. Quoting this forever
|
|
|
Post by Mauler on Nov 24, 2014 15:25:55 GMT
Ok, no need for the attitude wyliedx, I'm pretty sure you're missing his point. Yes, the rule book states that a gargantuan creature is a monstrous creature with extra rules, however it still is a gargantuan creature rather than a monstrous creature in terms of its unit type. That's the crux of this issue, does the reference to monstrous creature simply mean anything that's a monstrous creature, or does it mean the "unit type" monstrous creature. 1 interpretation allows gargantuans to use the tyrannocyte, 1 does not. And it'll probably need an FAQ to truly decide the issue Spot-on and thank you.
|
|
|
Post by overhive on Nov 24, 2014 16:28:30 GMT
The way I see it, Gargantuan Creatures are clearly a subset of Monstrous Creature, per that page that has been quoted umpteen times. To me, it's very similar to how a "Flying Monstrous Creature" is for all intents and purposes, a Monstrous Creature, with a few extra special rules. Yes, there has been a slight name change - however the rules very clearly state that for 99% of purposes, *it is a monstrous creature*. That is the logic that I follow, and why I would have absolutely no issue with podding a GC (because, rules-wise, they are MC's, and MC's are allowed in Pods). If you do not follow this same train of logic, then... that's about all there is to say on the subject. At this point both sides are just repeating their claims and not budging. It happens, and it's a game of plastic toy soldiers... let's try to minimize the death threat's and just be okay with each other. All that said, it still stands that a standard Heirophant can not physically be placed completely within 6" of the Pod. Key word Standard. If your opponent agrees to let you use a smaller base (for all purposes), then sure, it's possible - although it would be beyond common courtesy to inform your opponent that this is made specifically possible by his (or her) agreement only, and is not normally the case. Even with that... is it a good idea? I'm going to have to go with no. The only GC I think benefits from a Pod (and benefits heavily) is the Scythed Heirodule. Anything else has some incredibly solid long-ranged firing and high movement that you're otherwise ignoring for T1 (let's assume that if you're paying close to 1100 points for this one unit, we're throwing in the tools to "make sure" it comes in on T2). You can already get probably 80% of places you want to be (by turn 3 charge-time) starting on foot... plus the shooting you have. And there's always that 1-in-a-very-large-number chance that it doesn't hit board til T3. Sadness. As for getting bogged, the 'phant has a nice protection against that in its.. Incubation Chamber? I think is what it's called. The 20-strong transport capacity (which is actually 20... so huzzah, Brood of Carnifexen!!). Have a nasty target running your way that would hold you down for a few assault phases? Just unload 20 Genestealers and let them deal with it. Only one fex as monstrous creatures count as 20 for transport capacity
|
|
|
Post by nameless on Nov 24, 2014 16:37:05 GMT
I would suggest checking the rules for tyrannocyte again.
The tyrannocyte does not say it can only transport specific unit types, it tells you how many slots a unit type uses. This is were a lot of you are getting mixed up.
When we look at a GC, we see it is a MC with more rules. Therefore, everything not included in the extra rules defaults back to the rules for MCs. So, when we look for the transport space for a GC, there are no rules there, we default back to an MC which does list the limit as 20 slots.
If the tyrannocyte stated that it could only carry infantry and MCs unit types, then there would be a better basis for not allowing it. As it is, this limitation does not exist.
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Nov 24, 2014 17:05:46 GMT
Reading is hard tho guys
|
|