Warhammer-Empire.com
The Empire at War ... The Gamers Guild => WHFB The Electors' Forum => Topic started by: Parka on March 22, 2009, 09:19:35 AM
-
Ok so Crystal Ball reveals Dark Elf assassins along with all other hidden objects ect. So my question is the assassin model put in the front rank as the DE book describes for revealing them. Seems to me that he would be as he is revealed, but never using Crystal Ball before I'd like to know how other people play it.
cheers
-
It doesn't state to put the model out. It just requires them to tell you that yes, the assassin IS lurking in there.
-
Without being a rules lawyer it sez any hidden things are revealed, and if an assassin is revealed (DE book) he is placed in the front rank. As far as I see you can't unreveal assassins.
So the way I read it is the Crystal Ball forces the DE player to reveal all assassins within 24" and as far as I see you can't unreveal assassins once they have been revealed.
-
Parka thats taking a it a little far. I mean a simply word change and you would have assassins being "activated" rather then revealed and then get around it.
You tell your opponent that theirs an assassin in the unit but he doesn't have to bring it out into play.
-
Enemy must reveal at any time. So forces the dark elf player to reveal his assassins within 24" once the dark elf player does so he has to place the model.
Fluff wise the wizard should be able to then target the assassin as he can see him
RAW there isn't any ambiguity.
Sorry I don't see it as too far at all after all that's what it sez. I'm not adding any hidden context.
If you want to get all rulesy you do it in the beginning of the DE players turn.
"So you are declaring/telling me that unit has an assassin?" "Well of course I am I have to don't I?" "Yes"
puts assassin in front rank as the assassin rule state.
Unless someone can come up with a better argument I'll be happy to take it onboard, but as it is I think I'm correct. As for changing words around I'm sure we all know that could drastically change every item in the game, and isn't for players to do.
-
This have never occured to me before. I think by RAW you may have an arguement. I'm not 100% sure, I'd have to check the DE book again. However, that said, I really think it is against RAI and that is how I usually play, so in this case I'd be hesitant to do it unless provoked, say the DE player pulled that cheesy assassin/scout 1st turn charge manouver on me.... And that is assuming it is legal, again I have to do some checking.
-
Yea Ineed to wait and get my books in front of me.
-
However, that said, I really think it is against RAI and that is how I usually play.
Me to. I hate loophole lawyering. Someone said in the most broken item thread that they thought the Crystal Ball was broken. Which I thought was a bit much as you can normally take a good guess what items people have especially in tourneys when word of mouth normally tells you anyway.
So I took a look at it again and saw this. I don't think it's that uberhard or anything like sirens song that forces you to flee or charge, but it does seem to force assassins to be placed.
-
Well tbh It would be annoying but not game breaking.
-
Back from work.
"always reveal all the "secrets"" nothing there to indicate putting down the assassin. Implies revealing knowledge of it being there.
"the presense of disguised, hidden or otherwise 'invisible' models and everything else that the player is not normally obliged to disclose to his opponent."
Nothing to actually place the model down, just to tell them it is there.
Anyone remember the Talos? With the rule "Skimmer", which wasn't a Skimmer but had the rule Skimmer but didn't follow the BRB rules for a Skimmer?
-
hehehe
I'm talking to you on steam right now- we should all create a W-E friends group (and *shudders* FB group)
-
:engel:
-
"always reveal all the "secrets"" nothing there to indicate putting down the assassin. Implies revealing knowledge of it being there.
It doesn't "imply" it states clearly Everything must be revealed.
"the presense of disguised, hidden or otherwise 'invisible' models and everything else that the player is not normally obliged to disclose to his opponent." indicates assassin, a revealed assassin is placed in the front rank as the DE rule book states.
-
"the presense of"
Also, you ignored my little thing about Skimmers.
Personally though, this is mostly opinion/rules with me.
We need queek!
-
A clear set off rules would be better :D
-
Shadowlord! Get him!
-
A clear set off rules would be better :D
Play another game...ANY other game.
-
Well apart from 40k, Necromunder hell anything GW have written :-D.
-
Mordhiem was always fun and BFG is great.
-
I've found all GW games to be fun, just need a group of like minded players to set the ambiguous rules. As long as everyone plays my the same rules it's all good.
Never played Mordhiem or BFG. Mordhiem looked great I just never knew anyone who played. Necromunder was great just people would argue for ages over the gaps and getting into stalemates happened a bit too often.
I never really liked the models in BFG, so never played.
-
A clear set off rules would be better :D
Play Checkers and go back to Warseer/TWF!
Your lack of fanboism is disturbing.
Shadowlord! Get him!
I am checking the web for his address but damn, Parka seems to be hard to find...
-
So your arguement is that a Wizard with a Crystal Ball goes. "Oh my, Jeppers! Theres a nasty little Assassin over in that unit. Boys boys be careful!" Which obviously causes the Assassin to immediatly be aware that he has been foiled, throw off his cloak and jump into the front rank because they can obviously tell which one he is.
Think about it logically. Don't be silly. Just because you know theres a terrorist in Iraq doesn't mean they are going to wave a bomb around shouting "Cooee!!".
Mogsam.
-
So your arguement is that a Wizard with a Crystal Ball goes. "Oh my, Jeppers! Theres a nasty little Assassin over in that unit. Boys boys be careful!" Which obviously causes the Assassin to immediatly be aware that he has been foiled, throw off his cloak and jump into the front rank because they can obviously tell which one he is.
It's pretty clear you never bothered reading my argument, and what you said isn't worth the 0and1s it's written in.
As I've said come up with an argument and I'll gladly listen.
@ Shadowlord warseer gives me a headache and as to my lack of fanboism :P.
-
This would actually make the crystal ball worth bringing! :icon_lol:
Looking forward to your final result of this debate
-
This would actually make the crystal ball worth bringing! :icon_lol:
Looking forward to your final result of this debate
The crystal ball is ALWAYS worth taking these days. Unless of course its open list...
However, if you would use this trick to force the assassin out just because ppl come to that consensus then you prolly wouldn't mind using the crystal ball to measure distances. It's perfectly leagal and you can do it. Put him with a guess weapon. The ball says you can use it at literally "any time" as opposed to the begging of a phase or turn or something. That means that you can "search for secrets" right before the cannon the crystal ball is with fires. Make sure you measure though so you aren't cheating your opponent by asking for units that are out of range...
You can even ask during a specific unit's move. For example, a unit of shades starts its move outside of the 24" bubble, they move their 10" and end their move outside of the 24" bubble. BUT during the move they barely pass within the 24" bubble, you can halt their move, and ask what is in the unit. Turns out there's an assassin there! Hey, maybe you'll even get to force him to be revealed!
This is all against the spirit of the game of course, but it is completely legal. And "revealing" the assassin with the ball is against the spirit also, but maybe it will be legal. What I'm saying is that if you like the idea of forcing an assassin out with RAW, you'll love the auto-measure anything within 24" application of the GPS satalite...erm I mean Crystal Ball...
-
@ Shadowlord warseer gives me a headache and as to my lack of fanboism :P.
My mod days of evil is approaching and guess who's gonna roast first!
As for the CB, I am more "know but still do not see" camp.
-
So your arguement is that a Wizard with a Crystal Ball goes. "Oh my, Jeppers! Theres a nasty little Assassin over in that unit. Boys boys be careful!" Which obviously causes the Assassin to immediatly be aware that he has been foiled, throw off his cloak and jump into the front rank because they can obviously tell which one he is.
It's pretty clear you never bothered reading my argument, and what you said isn't worth the 0and1s it's written in.
As I've said come up with an argument and I'll gladly listen.
@ Shadowlord warseer gives me a headache and as to my lack of fanboism :P.
I did come up with an arguement. That you shouldn't abuse the rules. Your arguement was irrellevant because you're attempting to do something silly by interpreting the rules in a way that lets you "cheat". The rules imply that he has to tell you what is in the unit, i.e that there is an assassin with x weapon. He has thus revealed to you what he has. He doesn't have to put the guy in the front rank. If you used it on a Skaven character who was leading from the rear then he wouldn't move forward so you could get a better look at his magic weapon. Better? Used another rule as reference and everything.
The Crystal Ball tells you that theres an assassin in there. As the Wizard can't pick out specific models (unless hes a goblin shamen which he isn't) it doesn't matter that the Wizard would know which guy it is. The people shooting at him wouldn't have a bloody clue which one he is. Warhammer becomes alot less fun when people ignore logic.
Mogsam.
-
McKnight PLEASE! What your suggesting with measuring is cheating. Please don't paint me with your brush.
If you play empire and cant estimate ranges you're playing the wrong army in the first place.
I'm as happy to be wrong as right, I'd just like to see as much reason as I've given.
@ Shadowlord You want to roast me! Yikes sorry I don't swing that way :P
-
I did come up with an arguement. That you shouldn't abuse the rules. Your arguement was irrellevant because you're attempting to do something silly by interpreting the rules in a way that lets you "cheat". The rules imply that he has to tell you what is in the unit, i.e that there is an assassin with x weapon. He has thus revealed to you what he has. He doesn't have to put the guy in the front rank. If you used it on a Skaven character who was leading from the rear then he wouldn't move forward so you could get a better look at his magic weapon. Better? Used another rule as reference and everything.
Sit back down! How is asking a question cheating? LOL imply IT states YOU MUST reveal. And a reveal assassin is placed.
If I end up being wrong big whoop, if I end up being right the same amount of whoop.
The Crystal Ball tells you that theres an assassin in there. As the Wizard can't pick out specific models (unless hes a goblin shamen which he isn't)
Mogsam.
Shows what you know haven't you heard of law of metal?
-
McKnight PLEASE! What your suggesting with measuring is cheating. Please don't paint me with your brush.
If you play empire and cant estimate ranges you're playing the wrong army in the first place.
I'm as happy to be wrong as right, I'd just like to see as much reason as I've given.
@ Shadowlord You want to roast me! Yikes sorry I don't swing that way :P
That wasnt me :-P
I have no problems meassuring
-
Sit back down! How is asking a question cheating? LOL imply IT states YOU MUST reveal. And a reveal assassin is placed.
If I end up being wrong big whoop, if I end up being right the same amount of whoop.
Shows what you know haven't you heard of law of metal?
I'm going to ignore your attempts to be patronising for the sake of not getting this post removed. If you ever tried this/all the other loopholes you'd be sucking the fun out of a game.
Mogsam.
-
If you really want to get into the exact wording, the crystal ball says the enemy has to reveal all secrets and then goes on the explain that one secret that must be revealed is the pressence of the assassin. That's not actually the same as revealing the assassin himself. So if you're going by RAW, i think he'd stay hidden.
-
If you really want to get into the exact wording, the crystal ball says the enemy has to reveal all secrets and then goes on the explain that one secret that must be revealed is the pressence of the assassin. That's not actually the same as revealing the assassin himself. So if you're going by RAW, i think he'd stay hidden.
I don't know who you are but I love you. Figuratively, litterally would be immoral.
Mogsam.
-
I don't know who you are but I love you. Figuratively, litterally would be immoral.
Mogsam.
Why immoral? Because you already have a significant other and you disapporve of adultery? Or because you assume that the other poster was of the same gender as yourself? Just curious.
On topic, I too am very happy that Vesrian made that point, it seems clear.
-
If you really want to get into the exact wording, the crystal ball says the enemy has to reveal all secrets and then goes on the explain that one secret that must be revealed is the pressence of the assassin. That's not actually the same as revealing the assassin himself. So if you're going by RAW, i think he'd stay hidden.
Cheers good post
-
I don't know who you are but I love you. Figuratively, litterally would be immoral.
Mogsam.
Why immoral? Because you already have a significant other and you disapporve of adultery? Or because you assume that the other poster was of the same gender as yourself? Just curious.
On topic, I too am very happy that Vesrian made that point, it seems clear.
Because i'm pretty sure it'd qualify as rape?
Mogsam.
-
@ Mogasm, lol good answer. That would be rather immoral. Carry on.
-
If you really want to get into the exact wording, the crystal ball says the enemy has to reveal all secrets and then goes on the explain that one secret that must be revealed is the pressence of the assassin. That's not actually the same as revealing the assassin himself. So if you're going by RAW, i think he'd stay hidden.
Cheers good post
I already made this point with the Dark eldar Talos Skimmer.
Damn you people suck at I donno, reading posts :engel:
(All in jest. But I did pretty much say it with Skimmer, near the top of page 1, it's a hilarious case of two rules being named the same/having the same/near same wording, but clearly not having the same ingame effects)
Edit: Having looked back, it was vague, and vesrian put it crystal clear. :::cheers:::
Shadowlord! Get him!
I am checking the web for his address but damn, Parka seems to be hard to find...
On the case.
-
Edit: Having looked back, it was vague, and vesrian put it crystal clear. :::cheers:::
The difference is that i used italics :-D
Nothing makes a point clearer than using italics - a typeface that's been scientifically proven harder to read. :wink:
-
And being harder to read (yes, nice irony there :biggriin:), it must be right!
-
I don't see how the measuring is cheating, you use the item, measure 24" as that is the range and you know know where 24" is. It's a fricken crystal ball, it allows the wizard to divine all sorts of information and apparently 24" away is one of them.
-
It's not cheating. It's the use whilst attached to a guessing weapon that is considered about as sportsmanlike as kicking someone when they're down, nicking their wallet, then taking shots at the paramedics when they arrive with a shotgun.
-
Ok, let's get to the real reason I see lurking behind these posts. If the assassin is forced to be revealed ie placed in the front rank withing distance of the Crystal ball, then you've done two nasty things. You have revealed the Assassin and placed him out, AND you've also pre-measured the distance so your HLR handgunner sitting next to you can pick him off.
I don't see any reason for the Empire player to insist the Assassin is 'revealed' rather than declared via rules lawyering is so that he can then be targetted by magick and/or the HLR's. Either way, seems a bit cheap to me. If I was the DE player, I doubt you'd get in a second game with me.
-
The crystall ball is one of the empires best items! Half the battle is knowing your enemy!
I would play it as the assassin is revealed - ie - you place the model down.
As already stated the wizard goes "Theres a nasty assassing in that unit" - then marksman with the HLR goes "alright, hes mine BANG". Just as similar as a wizard saying "Theres the other wizard with all the dispell scrolls" - then the marksman with his HLR foes "alright, hes mine BANG". Surely thats the idea of the item?
Surely saying that a DE player would hate it is a bit odd tbh. Its good there is a weapon against things like that. Would you call it bad if, say for example, a dwarf player got all his characters with flaming weapons just so the Hyrda cant get a regen save? To me, that seems like a viable tactic to fight off an foe/model. IMO, the crystall ball is just the same kind of weapon to reveal stuff like assassins.
-
I would play it as the assassin is revealed - ie - you place the model down.
Only if you win the roll off with the DE player.
As already stated the wizard goes "Theres a nasty assassing in that unit" - then marksman with the HLR goes "alright, hes mine BANG". Just as similar as a wizard saying "Theres the other wizard with all the dispell scrolls" - then the marksman with his HLR foes "alright, hes mine BANG". Surely thats the idea of the item?
Now you're claiming knowledge by intent. That's a no go area.
I can just say "Surely the idea of the item is to give you an idea of the magic items he has, and knowledge of where they are?"
And best thing is.
"Sniper, that unit has an assassin!"
"Which one is the assassin?!"
"The one which looks like the rest of them!"
Before you go "but what about combat? Why bother revealing if he looks like any of them?"
Well, I guess the large circle of dead bodies, and beyond that a "keeping a respectful and fearful distance" bunch of Delves from the one doing ninja flips and throwing Str7 shurikens and knifing down combat lords, makes someone stand out from the crowd, and once he's start doing that crazy shit, everyone watches takes note, aims, and prays he shoots that Delf down before he gets to him.
(Plus if he wasn't revealed in combat either, I'd love that. Invisible and Invincible lord of awesome who adds insane amounts of ASF attacks to his unit! Or he'd be utterly useless as he'd never be revealed, ever!)
Disclaimer: Seriously, you'll at -best- get the Delf player to agree to a roll off, at worst, he'll call you a cheater and not play. Unless he really does like being walked over when it comes to any form of rules disagreement.
Edit: Unless you are a Dark Elf player, then I weep for my kin.
Just post another post, don't edit yours to respond to mine :biggriin:
Anyway, viable tactic and bending the rules deliberately/loop hole rules lawyering are different things. And this smacks of it to me.
-
You could just ask where to find me and if you promise to buy me a beer I'll tell ya :D
I don't see how using the Crystal Ball to reveal Dark Elf assassins is cheating or rules lawyering if that is how it is written (maybe it is, maybe it isn't) and a dark elf throwing throwing Str7 shurikens isn't.
Seems to me before GW faqed it the same could have be said to the guy who asked about the rending stars and manbane combo. I'd also like to add that since that the Faq's are no longer classed as rules I still have the right to say to the DE player that it doesn't and call him a cheat for asking.
-
Excellent, you're both swines with no sportsmanship who want to be gamey. :biggriin:
Until they FAQ it of course.
On the Manbane and str7 throwing stars. That was a travesty. Gav Thorpe said it would max at str6, then the next day the FAQ said 7, was a bit annoying. Oh well.
-
I think Parka is reading too much into the verb "reveal" here. Besides, the subject of the verb in the crystal ball is the "secrets" not the assasin itself.
Phil
-
To me, it seems like it would be possible if you went strictly by the wording of the rules that the assassin would be revealed. I never thought of that, because to me it always seemed like a device that just informed the wizard that something was there, but not necessarily everything about it. Revealing the presence, to me, implies simple knowledge of something's existence. "Hmm, my crystal ball is showing me something...an assassin, hiding somewhere in that unit of spears!" That sort of thing, and that's going by my understanding of the RAW. I never got the impression it showed him the specifics, just that it was there, like a nebulous sort of knowledge.
-
Well, revealing in CC would be different though, as then there's the possibility of allocating etc during the actual CC.
I think we're playing a lot of semantic games with the word 'reveal' however.
An argument can be made if you play hardball on this to reveal the assassin and force him to be placed. It may be correct, but it ain't right.
-
Heh, I've been reading through this thread idley and a thought just occurred to me. The entire point of this debate is to find if reveal=reveal, yes? (Aside of course from PhillyT's excellent point.) So, does anyone have a copy of the DE and Empire books in another language? Are both uses of 'reveal' translated the same or differently? If different, it could indicate that they are not meant to be the same. Otherwise, we're no worse off than before.
Of course personally, I find the whole debate to be rather silly.
-
DP
problem then is "are the translations correct?"
-
The thing is, debates like this have two firmly entrenched sides who spit bullets at the other side, until God comes along and says "FAQ sup".
Bit like WW1 but without the awesome ending.
-
The thing is, debates like this have two firmly entrenched sides...
Is there anyone on the side that the crystal ball does make the assassin appear?
-
No idea, I haven't even paid attention. :engel:
Edit: markw seems to be.
Parka I'm not sure on atm, yo Parka, whats your opinion on it? I know you're lurking, watching, with that rat/mouse avatar.
-
No idea, I haven't even paid attention. :engel:
Well I wasn't paying attention either, that's why i had to ask. :eusa_wall:
Hopefully someone who has been paying attention will come by and enlighten us.
I do think it'd be useful to know if there actually are two sides to this debate. If everyone's already in agreement, it's a bit of a pointless debate, even by warhammer debate standards
-
How many people were on the side of a treeman being able to stand and shoot 360 degrees?
-
Up until the FAQ? Only a few idiots as far as I recall. Idiots no-one took seriously. :engel:
-
Up until the FAQ? Only a few idiots as far as I recall. Idiots no-one took seriously. :engel:
Why?
He has a 360 degree line of site for his shooting atack, he is allowed to stand and shoot, I don't get where the issue lies...
-
I hate treemen...
-
There are plenty of examples of faq's going the way that no one expected them to. A wizard not being able to see himself or the unit he is in, a bow that allows you to reroll misses with sprite abilities.
I quote
"Does Asyendi's bane allow the bearer to reroll shooting attacks provided by sources other than the bow?
Yes The wording is clear, if not intentional"
PhillyT was kinda right I am reading a lot into the word reveal, too much I'm not sure of.
-
So who of you is imitating Limahl?
-
Up until the FAQ? Only a few idiots as far as I recall. Idiots no-one took seriously. :engel:
Why?
He has a 360 degree line of site for his shooting atack, he is allowed to stand and shoot, I don't get where the issue lies...
That's just how I naturally refer to Wood Elf players :engel:
-
Up until the FAQ? Only a few idiots as far as I recall. Idiots no-one took seriously. :engel:
Why?
He has a 360 degree line of site for his shooting atack, he is allowed to stand and shoot, I don't get where the issue lies...
That's just how I naturally refer to Wood Elf players :engel:
Oh burn ::heretic:: you peaceloving chaos conundrum
-
If only I were a wood elf and so easily frightened.
This is getting OT fast, lets stop :icon_mrgreen:
-
Anyway, viable tactic and bending the rules deliberately/loop hole rules lawyering are different things. And this smacks of it to me.
I dont quite understand why you would say such a thing, without really knowing who you are talking too. I for one and never a person to play as a "rules lawyer" or find loop holes to win a game of soldiers.
If there is ambeguity within the wording of the rules, which seems to me like there is, then thats not my (or "pro-place Delf assassin team") fault its GW, surely?
I think there are arguments for and against this situation and I could easily moan about the str7+ throwing stars but Im not. Its in the rules and I have to "deal with it". Ive always seen the CP as viable tactic against assasins (sakven too :P).
As for the comment made by MrDwhitey about "how the HLR targets the specfic model" - the wizard could easily say "the second on the left". But I guess that debate/convo could go over a long period of time :P
Thing is, I dont want to get into an argument about it as, like I said before, I think both sides have valid points. But its my personal opinon that I think the assassin should be placed, as the item allows the empire player to know everything in a 24" area. However, I do believe that if it was FAQ'ed, but wouldnt be in my favour.
-
Never know markw, it might be in your favour.
I wasn't specifically targetting you with that comment. It was the whole thing in general. IF there is severe vagueness in the rules, I mostly pretty much play it as -worse for me-. That's just who I am, unless it's an obvious one which is only vague due to some utterly ridiculous jumping through hoops whilst chasing ambulances.
Yes, it may be GW's fault, but that doesn't mean we need to tear down that Wall Reagan style, which I know is hyperbole, as this is the internet, I'm pretty sure most people, after rigorously arguing over this issue online will happily roll for it ingame. I generally just play it worse for me, and quite often, the other side, if they/I have a rule which might affect me badly, will be generous towards me aswell. If not, I'm not bothered.
If someone seriously asked me to debate it though, I'd be happy to, in my limited knowledge (which involves none of the designers intent).
Edit: Forgot the important bit :icon_mrgreen:, I hope I haven't annoyed you, sorry if I have.
-
No, you havent annoyed me at all - the amount of times I've seen people post of forums who argue till there red in the face and not at all constructive - does! :P You clearly arnt like that!
You sould like alot like me - playing rules as "Worse for me" - thats what I do, thats why i think it would get FAQ'ed against me :P *5*.
The idea of the Crystall ball is great, but it definately need refining.
-
Don't worry, I am stubborn on dispelling remains in play spells :icon_mrgreen:
-
If someone seriously asked me to debate it though, I'd be happy to, in my limited knowledge (which involves none of the designers intent).
I'm going to quote this again
"Does Asyendi's bane allow the bearer to reroll shooting attacks provided by sources other than the bow?
Yes The wording is clear, if not intentional"
Directly against the designers intent!
-
I don't know the rules for the items involved, or the full story behind that one.
I do believe that the people who FAQ it aren't always, and probably often aren't the people who wrote it. That or it's a grouping of people including the designer, and they vote on it.
Pretty sure it's not a conspiracy to trick people, just maybe different people set the final rule.
-
I was like :-o when I read that one. I often think that's the case, but to actually say it was :eusa_wall:
-
Also, it may not have been "directly against intent", it could just be an oversight/something not thought of, and they decided to go RAW in the FAQ. Or not RAW, as I've said, I don't know the rules for the stuff involved.
-
10pt bow that allows you to reroll miss hits with non magic arrows, if you miss the 2nd time you hit yourself. It's normally given to the welf BSB so he can fire the HoD.
-
that sounds like a the empire sword that allows the user to reroll to wound. It doesnt specfically say only with the sword tho... (im sure this has recently been discussed tho)
-
Looking at the Crystal Ball reading, it really does just say the secrets of the unit.
Additionally, Assasins can only be revealed at the beginning of his turn or during a close combat phase. While the crystal ball can ask him to tell you if an assasin is present, he doesn't have to put him in a rank until he choses. He is only revealing its existence, not using his voluntary reveal as dictated by the DE book.
Looking at both, it looks pretty clear that any attempt to claim the ball forces a reveal is total rule lawyering which bends sementics and exploits the use of verbs which don't even pertain to the items in question. Again, the crystal ball says it reveals "secrets" nothing else.
Phil
-
Talos Skimmer! Raaargh!
-
that sounds like a the empire sword that allows the user to reroll to wound. It doesnt specfically say only with the sword tho... (im sure this has recently been discussed tho)
Yikes using the crapy bow faq ruling that would be an evil item to give to a wizard
-
Looking at the Crystal Ball reading, it really does just say the secrets of the unit.
Additionally, Assasins can only be revealed at the beginning of his turn or during a close combat phase. While the crystal ball can ask him to tell you if an assasin is present, he doesn't have to put him in a rank until he choses. He is only revealing its existence, not using his voluntary reveal as dictated by the DE book.
Looking at both, it looks pretty clear that any attempt to claim the ball forces a reveal is total rule lawyering which bends sementics and exploits the use of verbs which don't even pertain to the items in question. Again, the crystal ball says it reveals "secrets" nothing else.
Phil
To me the verb reveal is pretty clear.
What kind of rules lawyering gives the DE assassin str7? The way I read it, it's clear that it's max str is 6.
-
There is also an actual FAQ for that.
Looking at it, by the way it's written, it mostly depends on which way round it's applied.
-
Yeah when I read it I thought it would be the other way, much the same as the word reveal having two meaning :P
The Talos Skimmer paradox :P
-
The main thing, and why I agree it should be str6, is that the man who was mainly behind the book said so.
I love the Talos Skimmer rule.
-
Looks like he got it wrong then :biggriin: If the guy who wrote it and knew what he intended it to be got it wrong there seems little hope for us to get it right :(.
Given the choice of whom to follow I'd go with the Direwolf faqs over the GW any day.
-
Not to ride the verb too hard Parka, but the Reveal verb in the Empire book is referring to the 'secrets' not the assasin itself. It requires that the players reveal the "presence of disguised, hidden or otherwise 'invisible' models" not the actual models themselves.
This is silly, like Ahab and his white whale. Like spiking steam tanks. Are assasins really that much of a pain that you are fabricating a means of forcing them to appear?
Phil
-
Sorry I didn't realize that the word changed meaning when it is used in the same context but in a different book silly me.
"It requires that the players reveal the "presence of disguised, hidden or otherwise 'invisible' models" not the actual models themselves." Isn't that contradictory?
How am I fabricating a means? The means is there whether a GW faq would say yes or no is as I have proved is 50/50
As I've said before I don't really care either way.
Why is it so much of a pain for an already overpowered army that contains items that go against the writers intentions to be forced to reveal it's assassins?
-
Sorry I didn't realize that the word changed meaning when it is used in the same context but in a different book silly me.
"It requires that the players reveal the "presence of disguised, hidden or otherwise 'invisible' models" not the actual models themselves." Isn't that contradictory?
Not really, since the DE player is "revealing" (ie telling his Empire opponent) the information of that unit he would otherwise not have to tell his opponent. Actually putting the Assassin on the table doesn't fit go with the process of letting your opponent know hidden information on the unit.
-
You could only come to the conclusion of popping the assassins by misreading the actual sentence. It says reveals the presence of.... not reveals the models themselves. In addition it finishes with "..everything else that the player is not normally obliged to disclose to his opponent." So reveal clearly has the meaning of disclosing knowledge, consistent with revealing the presence of. No game effect other than knowledge imparted to players is mentioned.
Does the DE book say that once an opponent has any kind of knowledge where an assassin is it's revealed in game? Does it specify that? If so, you've got a case, if not, forget it.
-
Exactly, and if the possibility of the Assassin being revealed to be brought onto the table through the Crystal Ball, Im pretty sure there would be a mention of it in the DE army book. Isn't there a few other magic items also that do the same as the crystal ball (dwarves come to mind, for some reason)?
-
Parka, you fail in not understanding that the word "reveal" is used differently in these two separate places. DE "reveal" which consists of multiple actions isn't the samething as revealing a part of your written list to your opponent. By insisting on this one word you are just stubborn. Words have many meanings and by common sense it is clear that these revalations should be read differently.
EDIT: So basicly crystall ball makes opponent reveal stuff outside the game, in real life. DE reveal is a function inside the game, an ability. Do not mix those.
-
I think there are arguments for and against this situation and I could easily moan about the str7+ throwing stars but Im not. Its in the rules and I have to "deal with it". Ive always seen the CP as viable tactic against assasins
I hate that people took this as strength 7 throwing stars when obviously it is meant for combat only (and I play dark elves), but apparently it has been faq'ed and I am wrong.
-
I think there are arguments for and against this situation and I could easily moan about the str7+ throwing stars but Im not. Its in the rules and I have to "deal with it". Ive always seen the CP as viable tactic against assasins
I hate that people took this as strength 7 throwing stars when obviously it is meant for combat only (and I play dark elves), but apparently it has been faq'ed and I am wrong.
I hate it too. Its ridiculous. Hell, S6 throwing stars is still ridiculous - if anything it should be max S4 and have increased armour / scaly skin penetration - you cannot tell me that a throwing star can be thrown as hard as a steam tank hull. It is ridiculous.
-
Well as far as the rules go, it should be a S5 throwing star, but people look for loopholes then whine untill their loop hole gets faqed as right.
-
Why is it so much of a pain for an already overpowered army that contains items that go against the writers intentions to be forced to reveal it's assassins?
Come on bud, it is't an overpowered army. It is a very good army which is very well balanced. Are there some things about it which are irritating? Sure. But that doesn't mean you need to stoop to rule exploits to try and even a precieved imbalance.
Phil
-
:-o
I wouldn't exploit the rules if I did ever take the Crystal Ball say in a tourney I'd ask the TO and go with what they said. In friendlies I do my best to avoid WAAC players not become one. More than likely I'd be spending the points on something else, even if the orb forced assassins out.
Are there some things about DE which are irritating? I haven't faced the new DE's yet, but I am yet to find anything in an army that have to face irritating, surprising sure. The O&G list irritates me, but that's only when I play them myself.
edit sorry I think skaven being the only army to be able to shoot into combat is irritating, if a blorc boss is willing to kill his own orcs why would he give to hoots about goblins snotling or orcs outside of his own unit.
-
I was going to respond but I saw this:
(http://g.imagehost.org/0254/uhuh.jpg)
-
So DE are overpowered yet you have never played against them Parka?
Oh boy...
Phil
-
What so now I can't read?
You can play against someone who isn't that good and doesn't know how to build a strong list and think an army weak, until you meet someone who knows how to get the best out of an army.
You can search the net and read how army are doing around the world. I've never played vs Mr Ironbrow, but I know he is as hard as nails and I've never been bitten by a shark, but I know its not very for me.
-
You need to look at how DE are doing now that they aren't new. At first they had thenew army thing going and people had some trouble. The army is very good, but not tier 1
Phil
-
I agree with you that they will have problems VS DoC and VC just like any army that isn't ItP.
Lizardmen might out pace them in the tier standings because of their strong list and cold blooded rule, but I'm yet to see the results for that.
-
I have played plent of DE games and players. They are very good, but certainly not overpowered or unbalanced.
Phil
-
At first they had thenew army thing going and people had some trouble.
And that's the hilarious thing, VC are no longer "the new army" yet we're still at the stage where many VC players are -still- saying "Oh, you just need to learn how to beat us". It should say something about that army. DoC too.
Can't wait to see how lizardmen rank after a few months, as all my local lizardmen players hate the new book. :icon_mrgreen:
Edit:
I have played plent of DE games and players. They are very good, but certainly not overpowered or unbalanced.
Phil
I used my DE under the new book for the second time versus Vampire Counts. He called me cheesy for taking a single Hydra. :biggriin:
-
Hydra's are cheese :P Na but they are way too ubergood not to have in any list. Is there any bad choices in the DE list?
-
Corsairs are pretty pointless. Witchelves are bunk against many armies. Executioners are ok, but aren't good enough to be used over, or even with Black Guard (though I personally will use them).
Hydras are undercosted. No argument there. Simple business I felt, so I'm not bothered.
-
Yeah GW's trick of make it cheap sell more models, got to hate profits being involved in army book creation :(.
Aren't Executioners only ok and Corsairs pointless because the other choices are better?
-
Corsairs are weirdly overcosted in my opinion within the book itself. Warriors are cheaper and better for Static CR, as the extra attack from Corsairs is still only str3.
Executioners are as I said, good but Blackguard are just too much better. If you're thinking "I might get some Execs to help my BG", you might aswell go "I'll have two units of BG". I'm not going to, I want Execs as I love the models.
-
I'm talking to you on steam right now- we should all create a W-E friends group (and *shudders* FB group)
There already is a W-E.com Facebook group.
-
And no way am I joining that. I never use FB, and some of my pictures are frankly embarassing/frightening.
-
I'm playing in a league right now which is starting at tiny points values. I started off using Dark Riders because I thought their manouvarability would work wonderfully, but they had no hitting power and everyone seems to be taking blocks so I ditched them and started using Black Guard this last week as we are up to 500pts. They have done well against everything except Bretonnia. Even they were unable to take a charge from 2 knight units and survive.
But in all the games I have played as Dark Elves I have felt like I have a very balanced book. Even though hatred is now a dirty word amongst all my opponents, I certainly don't win every game, probably 50/50 so far.
Course, I am not running a hydra...
-
FAcebook is lss objectionable than Steam.
Hydras are underpriced by 50 points. Is that a reason to bleed cheese on the table? Certainly not. Despite the issues with underpointedness, the army does fine and offers a PILE of T3 low AS models to reap ridiculous points on. Honestly, they certainly aren't lacking in things to butcher. I love fighting elves.
Phil
-
I love making Elves fight Elves :icon_mrgreen:
Treason of Tzeentch. Ah, how he cried it was beardy/cheesy/horrible/broken when I cast it twice in one turn on a unit of 25 white lions.
-
I can confirm the ability of ranks of elves to die in droves at the merest hint of a change in wind direction.
I can also confirm that whilst having a billion shots per turn from repeating crossbows is nice, they hardly ever manage to wound a thing.
Unless it is another elf. :roll:
-
I find repeaters to be ace actually. The AP really makes them work well.
Phil
-
I just tend to find that more often than not I am hitting on 6s or if I am really unlucky, 7s. Maybe it's just the unfortunate fact that a lot of the armies I am taking on right now are either heavily armoured (Bretonnia, WoC) or full of skirmishers (Wood Elves, Lizards). The armour piercing is tasty though against some of the troops, can't argue with that. :icon_biggrin:
-
Up until the FAQ? Only a few idiots as far as I recall. Idiots no-one took seriously. :engel:
Why?
He has a 360 degree line of site for his shooting atack, he is allowed to stand and shoot, I don't get where the issue lies...
Fast Cav has 360 line of sight for shooting too, but can only S&S units charging into their front arc.
Also, put me in the camp of reveals the presence, not the model.
Ogres have a similar item, the Rock Eye.