Carnifexes scything talons

[brianb9999]

Hey all, it’s been awhile since I’ve rolled out the nids, so just wanted to make sure…when I buy “2x carnifex scything talons” and the profile for “carnifex scything talon” (not plural) says +1 attack, I get 2 extra attacks for having a pair, correct? So for a generic fex with cannon and 2x talons, it’s getting 7 attacks on the charge (4 base, 2 talons, 1 blistering assault)?

[infornography]

You got it.
It is worth noting that the same is not true of boneswords on Warriors because the extra attack comes specifically from Dual Boneswords rather than each individual bonesword.
It can be slightly confusing the way sometimes GW has rules for a pair of arms and sometimes for each individual arm. I'd rather each arm be treated separately every time and rules for multiples be covered in the abilities of the weapon.
For the scything talons though, you got it right.

[mattblowers]

Mar 9, 2023 15:15:26 GMT infornography said:

It can be slightly confusing the way sometimes GW has rules for a pair of arms and sometimes for each individual arm.

Slightly? I do not think that word means what you think it means.

'COVID was "slightly" impactful to daily life' makes more sense than using it to describe the level of my confusion with current 40K rules.

[purestrain]

People keep saying GW rules are convoluted, but I'm not seeing anything of the sort as long as you follow all the rules lied out for you

[mattblowers]

Mar 9, 2023 18:18:56 GMT purestrain said:

People keep saying GW rules are convoluted, but I'm not seeing anything of the sort as long as you follow all the rules lied out for you

So rules laid out over multiple books with points changes and FAQs on the day of delivery with add ons and addendums in campaign books doesn't fit convoluted for you?

Step away for 6 months and try to get back in and see what we are talking about.

[No One]

mattblowers said:

So rules laid out over multiple books with points changes and FAQs on the day of delivery with add ons and addendums in campaign books doesn't fit convoluted for you?

You really don't want GW to not make changes. Like, that's really stupid. So please don't complain about that (now, the lack of good digitisation, sure. But at that point waha ).

Campaign books/sups...uhh...basically all of them are illegal, and most of the rest are bad. Outside of marines, who've had theirs for many years now to the point where they're basically just more armies, you're probably never going to run into any of them. Bloody Rose sup and I guess some people play the Necron destroyer AoR, or the Coven AoR if they like suffering. Maybe we get some new things of relevance in Arks books, but so far that's a 'Vashtorr lol', and by the next one most of the current stuff will be illegal. Personally, since new Codex I think I've had 3 people outside marines play more than just straight Codex into me.

Or 10th, 10th is also an option, which...who knows but rumours look messy.

[mattblowers]

Mar 16, 2023 4:46:50 GMT No One said:

You really don't want GW to not make changes. Like, that's really stupid. So please don't complain about that (now, the lack of good digitisation, sure. But at that point waha ).

Ignoring the current state and pretending that all is OK seems more problematic to me than pointing out why the rules are hard to grasp if you step away for a minute. And, no, it's not stupid to say so. (Nice gaslighting attempt though.)

I think changes are good and necessary. They used to sell digital codexes. They were awesome on the iPad as they auto updated with changes. The point is, you can buy a codex on day one of the release and chances are pretty good that you can't make a legal list with the information printed in it. The points will likely be off and wording on significant rules may have changed. New AM codex is a great example.

Look at the Harlequins from the Aeldari codex. You step away for a couple of years, decide to get back in it then find out that the army has changed so drastically from the new book codex you just walked out of a GW store with it might as well be from another edition.

This hasn't always been the case. Yes, we have had major rules bloat before (7th edition being the worst I can recall), and yes GW has a history of delivering a broken mechanic and then going radio silent for long periods of time. But is this better? It's like a spouse that used to stay home, get drunk and beat his wife. Now he goes to the clubs and sleeps around, seldom coming home. The wife complains about this and the reply is, "What?! Would you rather a husband that stays home and beats you?" I would argue that both are terrible husbands. The earlier poor behavior doesn't make the new behavior exemplary.

Just a suggestion: maybe GW should try playtesting. Needing to release codex adjustments on the day of release shows incompetence. Many smaller companies with a much smaller budget do a far superior job of releasing relevant new books for a gaming system that aren't borked on day one. It's not like I am a newbie just trying to get into the game. I think I'm a fairly veteran player that used to play at a fairly high level and this current state is rather demotivating to try to get a grasp and jump back in. So I continue to sit on the sideline. Make of it what you will.

[trashcan01]

While I couldn't agree more on the playtesting, are we discussing about the general rules or the game balance? Yes, there are playtesting issues about leaks, tester feedback and many others, but there are no excuses for a company as big as GW.

Core rules are kind of fine I guess. Codices have loads of issues. Both with their content and general balance.

- read at your own risk-
To be honest, what surprised me since day one is that community didn't make some sort of unofficial balanced codices through the editions (maybe cuz of copyright issues? dunno)
Something like "SFO:Grimhammer" Mod for Warhammer:Total War and Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War 2 "Elite" mod.

[Snaekhar Venomblood]

Mar 16, 2023 14:36:08 GMT trashcan01 said:

While I couldn't agree more on the playtesting, are we discussing about the general rules or the game balance? Yes, there are playtesting issues about leaks, tester feedback and many others, but there are no excuses for a company as big as GW.

Core rules are kind of fine I guess. Codices have loads of issues. Both with their content and general balance.

- read at your own risk-
To be honest, what surprised me since day one is that community didn't make some sort of unofficial balanced codices through the editions (maybe cuz of copyright issues? dunno)
Something like "SFO:Grimhammer" Mod for Warhammer:Total War and Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War 2 "Elite" mod.

Fan-made balanced 'Community Edition' codices would be a fun thing to add to the forum. I'd be up for writing 5th and 6th Edition ones - indeed I already am writing some for additional fan-made Xenos factions 

[mattblowers]

Mar 16, 2023 14:36:08 GMT trashcan01 said:

- read at your own risk-
To be honest, what surprised me since day one is that community didn't make some sort of unofficial balanced codices through the editions (maybe cuz of copyright issues? dunno)
Something like "SFO:Grimhammer" Mod for Warhammer:Total War and Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War 2 "Elite" mod.

It's called One Page Rules.

Years ago ITC saved 40K tournament scene. The game was unplayable and unworkable outside of beer and pretzels. Now 40K has adopted the changes and took them over from ITC. Of course, they've made it convoluted, but hey. Take Wahapedia: works like a charm. GW 40K app? Unusable. At least the last time I checked.

[trashcan01]

^
Thank you VERY MUCH for that info.
I've always thought of OPR as some small scale competition to GW, as such I never gave it any attention. Didn't even know you can use the minis from 40k. Wow!
I'll check it out for sure!

[mattblowers]

Mar 16, 2023 19:06:00 GMT trashcan01 said:

^
Thank you VERY MUCH for that info.
I've always thought of OPR as some small scale competition to GW, as such I never gave it any attention. Didn't even know you can use the minis from 40k. Wow!
I'll check it out for sure!

The rules are fun and quick. Ironically as they have tried to flesh out the game it has gone beyond 1 page, but so it goes. I also love that they are miniature agnostic, if you have a 3D printer you can print your own models and have them look as customized as you like and no one will bat an eye.

[infornography]

Way back in 5th ed, I briefly toyed with the idea of starting up a website dedicated to a fan edition of 40k including fan codecies and a system of community voting for balance and playtesting forums.

Main reason I never did (beyond just getting lazy) is I was concerned I would put a ton of effort in and GW would hit me with a Cease and Desist letter.
That was around the point where they were suing childrens' books for using the term Space Marine to describe a cartoon cat.

I still think it would be a cool idea, but it would take a ton of effort to build the website, and then the community, and the whole endeavor would run the risk of GW ire.