Re: Marneus Calgar/2xPower Fists 5th ed

[chromedog]

Don't forget, that he's probably the ONLY SM that will get +1 attack for his powerfists.

[Angelwing]

Don't forget, that he's probably the ONLY SM that will get +1 attack for his powerfists.

Not quite. A buddy of mine has an old rogue trader metal marine with two powerfists. This is finally the time to actually equip him with them!

[LordMalekTheRedKnight]

A buddy of mine has an old rogue trader metal marine with two powerfists. This is finally the time to actually equip him with them!

yeah, but i dont expect this option to last into the new codex.

come to think of it, once all the codex books have been redone, i expect Calgar to be the only model in the game to get +1A for 2xFists.

~ tim

[Ben]

Why would they spell out that you need two PF, or two TH to get an extra attack if they were not planning on making that an option?

[LordMalekTheRedKnight]

Why would they spell out that you need two PF, or two TH to get an extra attack if they were not planning on making that an option?

well if they had left it out altogether - with the intention of making it a "Calgar only" rule in the 5th ed SM codex - then no-one would have gotten it in the meanwhile (not even Calgar).

looking at all the "5th ed style" Codex books (Eldar onwards), does anyone have the option of taking 2 Fists?

~ Tim

[mattjgilbert]

According to this month's White Dwarf, the Space Marine codex will be the FIRST to have been written with the 5th ed rules in mind.

Do we believe that?

[LordMalekTheRedKnight]

According to this month's White Dwarf, the Space Marine codex will be the FIRST to have been written with the 5th ed rules in mind.

maybe its the first to be written with the finished copy of the 5th ed rules in mind (i.e. the other "5th ed style" books were written with the half-finished playtest version of the 5th ed rules in mind).

thats why some rules make sense in 5th (Ghaz getting charge bonuses despite being SAP) while others dont (Mega Armoured Nobs getting Frags despite never being able to choose not to use their Power Fists).

apparantly they were secretly working on 5th ed when they wrote CoD...
(might explain why 4th ed LOS rules didnt work without houserules that made them almost exactly like the 5th ed ones )

~ Tim

[killmaimburn]

Do we believe that?

Of course we do..I expect to see powerfists return to 15points each so only chaos and those who choose to stick with lots of special rules pay 25 points for the double nerf.Traits and FOC warping equipment will be there in some form (whether it be through an HQ or through a unit customisation)after all the 'joy and glory'that some people had at the chaos purge.
I've already writ large in the sky that this will be the first codex I run straight out and buy in XXyears.. because I need a new chaos codex and cutting off their spikes will do me.

[LordMalekTheRedKnight]

Traits and FOC warping equipment will be there in some form (whether it be through an HQ or through a unit customisation)

this worries me a little (as a now unrepresented) CP player. i want to make small patrols that meant to be part of a bigger force, but i wont (if rumours are true) be able to do so without actually taking the HQ that defines the force.

for example, i cant do a RW patrol without the MoTRW, even though he wouldnt be part of every patrol.

Traits were good as they worked at every level.

this will be the first codex I run straight out and buy in XXyears

i will be reserving my copy.

~ Tim

[mattjgilbert]

So if CP is no longer "official", make up some unofficial rules which allow you to field the force you want to

I suspect it'll return in some form in a supplement or WD or something.

[LordMalekTheRedKnight]

So if CP is no longer "official", make up some unofficial rules which allow you to field the force you want to

I suspect it'll return in some form in a supplement or WD or something.

well the problem started towards the tail end of 4th (the example i gave was from C: DA), with special rules being linked to named characters. its not so much caused by CP being unsupported, just that without CP there in their minds there is no reason for them not to link rules to HQs in this way (as they assume every army will have at least one HQ).

i suppose i could houserule for a Patrol to count as part of a larger force without needing to include the character that defines that force (which i could have done if i actually wanted to field a RW Patrol, for example), but if the benefits of the special rules are balanced by the cost/drawbacks of their associated HQ, then this might not be fair. and with CP no longer in the current rulebook, im going to have enough issues with it in 5th ed without pushing my luck by adding my own houserules too.

i cannot wait for it to be released as a supplement.

~ Tim

[mattjgilbert]

You know... you could start playing "normal" games

[LordMalekTheRedKnight]

You know... you could start playing "normal" games

careful, youl start sounding like KMB.

~ Tim

[mattjgilbert]

the guy from up north?

[killmaimburn]

I think following this link clicking skip add and then open..so that your audio player starts up adequetly reflects my opinion on the matter
http://www.fortunecity.com/banners/inte ... 8_de~1.wav