Guest Posted July 19, 2015 Report Share Posted July 19, 2015 Though on a side note, the lion's blade strike force is technically unable to field two demi-companies in ITC events until they address it as they did the SM version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakithe Posted July 19, 2015 Report Share Posted July 19, 2015 Why is that? What's the rules against it? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalmer Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 Hello there, 2000 points, aye. Yeah, running the Interrogator-Chaplain as the Ravenwing Strike Force leader as in fluff books the Ravenwing has dedicated Chaplains, Techmarines and Ravenwing-assigned Librarians so I reckon if it's good enough for fluff, it's good enough for friendly gaming. Sammael isn't always going to lead each and every deployment. Plus, with their strike cruisers being equipped for prolonged deployments, when folks get assigned they know they're staying a while. Librarians included. So while I'm waiting for the FAQ (if ever), since there are well-documented examples, albeit in fluff, of different leaders for strategic deployment of the Ravenwing I'll just tell my opponents what's going on. With regards to the tac squads, there's one melta gun in each. Devs are: 4 lascannons in one squad, 4 missile launchers in the other with the flakk upgrades. And with regards to the Force Organization: * Battle Demi-company * Battle Demi-company * Ravenwing support squadron * Ravenwing strike force (1 HQ, 2 Fast Attack) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakithe Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 A DWSF and a RWSF could work. I just wish they would FAQ the HQs already. I'm sure if you asked your opponents if it was ok and explained they would be alright with it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 Why is that? What's the rules against it? Annoying as it is, the raven wing strike force requires the "raven wing" rule on all models in the detachment. Presently, the only HQs with the ravenwing rule are sammy and sableclaw, and you can't even field both in the same army. There is not a rule which allows biker characters, in example, to obtain the ravenwing rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 A DWSF and a RWSF could work. I just wish they would FAQ the HQs already. I'm sure if you asked your opponents if it was ok and explained they would be alright with it Personally, I don't think they should. Just seems like a slippery slope. The formation does work as written. You can meet the required RW HQ within that codex as written. Making an exception because you don't like the choices seems very iffy. If this seems reasonable, can I run the Hammer of Caliban with a LR Achilles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalmer Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 Paxmiles, I obviously don't speak for all players, as that would be silly. If you and I were playing and you're running a Hammer of Caliban with a Land Raider Achilles, I would have no problem with it. Why? Because the Hammer of Caliban has a Land Raider unit in its formation. All the "standard" GW variants are there... I could really give a rip that you're including a "non-standard" one... because at the end of the day it's a fargin' Land Raider. That's just me. If an opponent states that I'm somehow negating the spirit of the game by taking a lesser character instead of the actual Grand Master of the Ravenwing in order to deploy a few Ravenwing units, then I'll do my best to accommodate them and chalk it up to experience, I reckon. But at the same time, I play the game for fun and thus would really be surprised if anyone locally that I game with got their undies in a bunch over it. Again, just my view and I understand that at the tournament level / competitive arenas / anywhere a game matters that much this would not be allowed. Probably why I don't partake. Stay safe, don P.S. I humbly submit that the "Deathwing Strike Force" is no less elite in flavor than the Ravenwing Strike Force... and the HQ that leads the former has to have the "Deathwing" special rule. So Belial, any old Interrogator-Chaplain, Asmodai, any old Librarian, Ezekiel and any old Company Master can lead that force. You know, the Deathwing... the 1st Company. The ones who, with only a few exceptions, all went through the Ravenwing and "promoted" if they wanted. Kinda silly to accept as canon the "rules as written." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 Also, Pax, would you care to hazard a theory as to why the RWSF has 3 available HQ slots if Sammael/Sableclaw is the only available option? Which seems more reasonable, that GW deliberately put out a Detachment that allows up to 3 HQs and then only put one possible HQ for that Detachment in the book, or that they forgot to add the Ravenwing Rule to ICs on Bikes (and/or amend the Detachment restriction to also allow ICs on Bikes)? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakithe Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 That's another issue people have with it. Why even offer more HQ slots on paper if you can't do it? Obviously a typo or huge oversite. For me I always take at least 2 librarians to lead my DWSF. Why? Cuz I love space wizards in awesome armor and I hate running 'special' characters. Special guys seem too gimmicky and everyone takes them...it's just boring after a while. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Huh....Re-reading it. Says "units" in the detachment must have the RW rule (unless dedicated transports), not "Models." So deploy your HQ ICs attached to units within this formation and call it good. Any qualms with this interpretation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 ICs are Units unto themselves, that can Join other Units. The thing here is, you're right about the RAW. But there are a lot of reasons that the RAW just doesn't make sense in this case, so in casual Games, it's a thing that's going to be commonly ignored. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted July 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Lol pax, isn't that the exact opposite of the interpretation everyone was taking in the skyhammer thread? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakithe Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 I haven't heard of that interpretation but that might work. Otherwise I'm sure most people will just ignore the oversight. Battlescribe says librarians aren't allowed but that's battlescribe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakithe Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 What do you guys think about a DWSF with 1xknights, 5xdwt, 2 libby hq, a rwas, and a rwss for 2000pts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Lol pax, isn't that the exact opposite of the interpretation everyone was taking in the skyhammer thread? Don't think so, I think the skyhammer was with the regard to adding ICs to a formation to gain the formation's rules. That skyhammer also had some rules which applied to units and others which applied to models from the formation. Much of the debate was regarding if some models within a unit could ignore their lack of special rules to allow DS charges, by simply being in a unit of MODELs given the right to charge from reserve. ICs are Units unto themselves, that can Join other Units. The thing here is, you're right about the RAW. But there are a lot of reasons that the RAW just doesn't make sense in this case, so in casual Games, it's a thing that's going to be commonly ignored. For starters, I really don't think it's a very impressive formation. So I'm not too worried about ICs joining it. That said, all the rules within are specific to UNITs from the formation, not models. I do not think giving the RW rule to ICs for free is intended, as that rule is really impressive. That 10pt shroud of heroes is definitely not pointed correctly assuming ICs can get free rerolls on cover by simply taking a bike at the normal cost. As for the 3 HQ slots, I really think it could easily just be a goof from GW that you got the 2 optional ones. That seems more likely than getting the RW rule for free simply by taking a motorcycle. Other possibility is that, as mentioned, they intend to further release ICs with the RW rule. As for ICs being units unto themselves, this is only true if they are solo. This is determined in deployment. While attached to another unit, they are not a unit unto themselves. So, you could run sableclaw or sammy solo, OR you could attach an IC to a unit within the formation and with the RW rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Huh....Re-reading it. Says "units" in the detachment must have the RW rule (unless dedicated transports), not "Models." So deploy your HQ ICs attached to units within this formation and call it good. Any qualms with this interpretation? You cannot join a unit until the pre-game phase, after your list has been written. Your list would be illegal until that point even if we assume your interpretation is correct. You can't have an illegal list, even temporarily. Also, Independent Characters are explicitly units. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakithe Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 All the ICs already have the 'deathwing special rule without even taking termy armor. It would be kinda nuts if they just had both rules out of the box...maybe they could get the rule if they take a bike only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Or the other option that I mentioned, that it was supposed to allow Units with the RavenWing Rule and ICs on Bikes, even tho they don't get RavenWing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakithe Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Don't they need the Ravenwing rule to be part of the RWSF? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 My point is that, perhaps, that restriction in the Detachment was supposed to have an additional clause also allowing ICs on Bikes, even tho they don't get Ravenwing. It's another perfectly reasonable way that it could be usable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 You cannot join a unit until the pre-game phase, after your list has been written. Your list would be illegal until that point even if we assume your interpretation is correct. You can't have an illegal list, even temporarily. Also, Independent Characters are explicitly units. Okay, then back to my earlier argument. Works as written, too bad regarding the optional HQ slots. All the ICs already have the 'deathwing special rule without even taking termy armor. It would be kinda nuts if they just had both rules out of the box...maybe they could get the rule if they take a bike only. Dunno if you had the last codex, but the deathwing rule is basically the "inner circle" rule from the old book. It's not exactly a terribly impressive rule, especially in the DA codex, as everything is already stubborn. And, very noteworthy, sammy has the DW rule in all but name, just like he had the inner circle rule in the last codex. The RW rule, on the other hand, is way more impressive. It's not a fair trade even if you were to lose the DW rule on ICs in exchange for the RW. On a side note, what's wrong with Sammy/sableclaw? They aren't exactly weak models in the codex. Both got boosts without any drop in performance and they weren't horrible last edition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakithe Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 My only problem with Sammy is he is a special character and I hate taking them. In this case he is actually a tax since you have to take him for the detachment to work...but oh well back to my DWSF list! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 My only problem with Sammy is he is a special character and I hate taking them. In this case he is actually a tax since you have to take him for the detachment to work...but oh well back to my DWSF list! Wait, the objection is just because he's a special character? Do you refuse to take relics on the same merit? Relics are basically special character items.... If you don't like his name or model, you are welcome to change them. FW even has a SM generic jetbike with plasma cannon option. I made my "sableclaw" with a FW Javelin Land Speeder. Opponents really don't complain (well, not about the model, they often have issues with an AV14 fast vehicle with a 4++...). Anyway, your call regarding your own use of special characters. Seems silly to me, especially if you are regularly facing opponents with special characters. Still, I can respect your player preference. There are 3 ravenwing formations without the RWSF, plus you can field the allied and CAD detachment without having to field special characters. By tax, you mean that the detachment has requirements? By that logic, the RW rule requirement is a tax, the required 2 fast slots are a tax, as well as the required hq. Anyway, you've got two unit options for the RWSF's required HQ slot. You can take Sableclaw, which is an awesome vehicle. Or you can take sammy, who is an awesome IC. They aren't bad options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 P.S. I humbly submit that the "Deathwing Strike Force" is no less elite in flavor than the Ravenwing Strike Force... and the HQ that leads the former has to have the "Deathwing" special rule. So Belial, any old Interrogator-Chaplain, Asmodai, any old Librarian, Ezekiel and any old Company Master can lead that force. You know, the Deathwing... the 1st Company. The ones who, with only a few exceptions, all went through the Ravenwing and "promoted" if they wanted. Kinda silly to accept as canon the "rules as written." I do think it's odd that the DWSF doesn't require models to be in terminator armor. Dunno, maybe GW will FAQ them. I really doubt it, as our last FAQ was January. That said, I really don't think either are particularly strong detachments as written. I mean, you've the DWSF which basically just gives auto-arrive turn 2 to them, and allows a run+shoot move, but only on the turn they arrive from DS. Then the RWSF gives you a single turn of jink in exchange for being unable to shoot for the turn prior. As I see it, the main allure of the DWSF and RWSF is just in slot manipulation, like if you want to field a single dark talon without fielding 3 for the formation or an allied/CAD detachment, of if looking to spam DW knights, RW knights, or command squads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakithe Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 The main thing is I don't being forced to take a special guy just to do something specific. The DWSF allows the use of any HQ which is great. I don't plan on just using the DWSF. Ima toss in a RWAS and a RWSS for 12" bubble and more firepower. I doubt deathwing only would work too well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.