generalripphook Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Does anyone have a copy of the white dwarf that has rules on creating creatures/plants and animals? It would be quite old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 I may have a scan of it on my other computer. I'll check when I get over there tonight. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalripphook Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Also....could I bring an army of these to OFCC? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 I seem to have ditched it at some point, but Google turned up a copy: http://www.advancedtautactica.com/resource/CreatureFeatureGenerator.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalripphook Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Thanks a million! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Also....could I bring an army of these to OFCC? Given the recent ruling by Pretre (http://www.ordofanaticus.com/index.php?/topic/24783-gerantius-is-he-still-playable-with-the-new-codex/page-2), they should be legal for unbound armies, unless TO says no, of course. That said, if you surprised me with these in casual play, I would probably quit. I you asked ahead of time, I would probably be fine with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Given the recent ruling by Pretre (http://www.ordofanaticus.com/index.php?/topic/24783-gerantius-is-he-still-playable-with-the-new-codex/page-2), they should be legal for unbound armies, unless TO says no, of course. That said, if you surprised me with these in casual play, I would probably quit. I you asked ahead of time, I would probably be fine with it. lols that I can make rulings. And these are a bit old for that kind of thing. These are from 4 editions ago and aren't even a codex/dataslate/formation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Also....could I bring an army of these to OFCC? You'd need to ask Joel. My gut is no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 And these are a bit old for that kind of thing. These are from 4 editions ago and aren't even a codex/dataslate/formation. True, but they are unbound legal and they don't specify rules from a book that no longer exists. And I am just poking at you, no harm intended. Just seemed very much related to that other thread. Main issue I'm seeing when reading the rules is that they are considerably weaker than modern creatures of similar profiles, especially given that they are squads of 1 (meaning no ICs and plenty of KP). If you want to see codex creep, this is solid evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 True, but they are unbound legal Citation needed. and they don't specify rules from a book that no longer exists. I'd have to go back, but I don't think this was my complete reasoning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Citation needed. I'd have to go back, but I don't think this was my complete reasoning. You should go back and re-read. As for Citation, if the outdated WD entries are still legal, assuming rules still make sense, as you argued in the other thread, then they should qualify as "whichever units from your collection you want." That is the requirement for Unbound armies on page 117. Not exactly strict limitations in unbound armies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Angel Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Squad of one doesn't matter for ICs now. Only MCs and vehicles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Squad of one doesn't matter for ICs now. Only MCs and vehicles. Huh....interesting. I keep forgetting the little changes they made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Anyway, I personally think that the outdated WD entries are outdated and not viable for play without a special exception made by the TO (or the opponent in casual play). I'm not really sure why this is an unreasonable approach, as it's the same approach that's been being used for quite some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 You should go back and re-read. I'll try to go find it. As for Citation, if the outdated WD entries are still legal, assuming rules still make sense, as you argued in the other thread, then they should qualify as "whichever units from your collection you want." That is the requirement for Unbound armies on page 117. Not exactly strict limitations in unbound armies. That's Circular. It's only Unbound Legal if the outdated WD entry is still legal? Also, nothing in that PDF is a unit. It is a set of rules for making units, which Unbound is silent about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalripphook Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 I was just writing lists and thought...huh wouldnt it be cool to play an army that was a catachan forces combined with the actual death world fighting. It also gives a cool excuse to make a bunch of deadly looking terrain/monsters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Anyway, I personally think that the outdated WD entries are outdated and not viable for play without a special exception made by the TO (or the opponent in casual play). I'm not really sure why this is an unreasonable approach, as it's the same approach that's been being used for quite some time. What makes an entry outdated? Gerantius and Adamantine Lance are both legal dataslates/formations that direct you to a published codex. Their rules still work and there doesn't appear to be any issues. This creature creator uses rules from four editions ago and does not appear to be compatible without a lot of changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalripphook Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 A few of the abilities are unusable because of rule changes but there are still a lot that work. Some are just unusable because they are too much paper work. Personally I feel like that is how tyranids should work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 You should go back and re-read. It is a case by case thing. Iyanden clearly was invalidated. Gerantius and adamantine lance were not. This is much the same thing that happens with FW rules whenever a new book comes out. Hmm. It looks like I said nothing even close to what you said "and they don't specify rules from a book that no longer exists." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 That's Circular. It's only Unbound Legal if the outdated WD entry is still legal? Also, nothing in that PDF is a unit. It is a set of rules for making units, which Unbound is silent about. Not circular, but close. I don't think outdated WD entries are legal at all. If they are legal, then going by the logic presented in that other thread, these should be unbound legal. As for the PDF, it is a set of rules for unconventional creatures and flora. Y Unbound doesn't care where the units come from, just that they are in your collection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Not circular, but close. I don't think outdated WD entries are legal at all. If they are legal, then going by the logic presented in that other thread, these should be unbound legal. As for the PDF, it is a set of rules for unconventional creatures and flora. Y Unbound doesn't care where the units come from, just that they are in your collection. Your'e the one adding Outdated as a descriptor where it doesn't apply. Gerantius and such aren't outdated. They are current dataslates referring to active codexes and active rulesets. Iyanden is a supplement book referring to an outdated codex. The creature creator is a WD article referring to an outdated ruleset. See the difference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Your'e the one adding Outdated as a descriptor where it doesn't apply. Gerantius and such aren't outdated. They are current dataslates referring to active codexes and active rulesets. Iyanden is a supplement book referring to an outdated codex. The creature creator is a WD article referring to an outdated ruleset. See the difference? So, where in the Creature Creator does it refer to an outdated ruleset? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalripphook Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Would it be usable at something like the OFCC if someone posted their builds/their list on the forum before hand and brought a sheet with each different creatures unit entry as reference guides for their opponents. I am not thinking about bringing it this OFCC but more for the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 So, where in the Creature Creator does it refer to an outdated ruleset? Creature moves as if equipped with a jump pack 4 Fleet of Foot Old version of Hit and Run No Pain gives Inv Save instead of FNP etc, so on. It is chock full of references to 3rd edition versions of rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Citation needed. I've already done it. It's page 117. The only requirement for an unbound army is that they are units within your collection. If you model a creature using these rules, then it is in your collection. 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.