Praetor Armored Assault Launcher

[generalripphook]

Where are the rules for this?

[AbusePuppy]

Imperial Armor 1: 2nd Edition has the most recent set of rules.

 

In short summary, it's a 14/13/12 superheavy vehicle with 6HP. It comes with two HBs, which can be swapped for HF, AC, or Las and its main missile launcher, which has three fire modes- all of them are twin-linked, one is S8/AP3 large blast two shots, one is S6/AP4 massive blast ignores cover, and one is S8/AP3 skyfire interceptor

[Guest]

Really lacking rules despite how awesome the model is. Even worse if playing ITC, where you are capped on super heavies, as it's clearly designed to exist in settings where you have multiple super heavies.

[AbusePuppy]

"Clearly designed." Which is to say, written in an edition where superheavies weren't even allowed in non-Apocalypse games.

[Guest]

"Clearly designed." Which is to say, written in an edition where superheavies weren't even allowed in non-Apocalypse games.

Kinda.

 

Written in an edition where FW was something you'd ask your opponent permission to bring, but wasn't inherently apocalypse. Apocalypse was more about the Stratagems, apocalypse specific formations, and additional rules designed solely for large scale casual games to be playing in a relatively short period (a weekend).

 

FW has always been more about campaign play, and about fleshing out the 40k setting. I mean look at some of their vehicles. Redundancy with the normal 40k rules, and many vehicles/upgrades that are mostly useless to the game, but offer better flavor to the setting.

 

A lot of the older FW stuff is considerably less potent than the current 40k LoWs and such.

[AbusePuppy]

Sure. But the Praetor is (and was) a superheavy vehicle, and at the time of its printing there was no legal way to use a superheavy vehicle in a non-Apocalypse game of 40K, so the idea that it was "clearly designed" to be used with multiple superheavies is utterly absurd.

[Guest]

Sure. But the Praetor is (and was) a superheavy vehicle, and at the time of its printing there was no legal way to use a superheavy vehicle in a non-Apocalypse game of 40K, so the idea that it was "clearly designed" to be used with multiple superheavies is utterly absurd.

You are mistaken, superheavies were allowed in normal 40k well before apocalypse, just with opponent's permission. I recall a game in early 4th where a player showed up with an armourcast baneblade and a reaver titan and proceded to challenge all the players at the Bridgetown Hobbies game night. It was very fun.

 

As for "legal" I think you are thinking about ITC-type events too much. 40k is, and was, a very much "ask your opponent" type ruleset, rather than ever being any sort of "set in stone" rules. That is the very reason groups like the ITC, and Adepticon before them, created their own FAQs and rules to make 40k able to function in an environment which did not require the opponent's consent prior to each battle.

[AbusePuppy]

Let me put it this way: there were no official rules for using them in standard 40K play. They had points values, but could not be part of a normal FoC.

 

You can- and have always been able to- do anything you want with your  minis. Call Space Marines Str10? Sure, if you wanna. Assume that 1s always pass and 6s always fail? Sure, no one can stop you. If you and your opponent are amenable, you can play the game any way you want. But that's not how the game's rules work, even if GW wants to pretend they are. An ordination to follow- or not to follow- the rules cannot itself be part of the rules because that simply doesn't work, either from a formal logic or lay understanding of things.