Opinions new Tyranid 'dex

[Rob S]

lol warseer.

lol 4chan

lol lolis.

[Rurouni Benshin]

lol warseer.

lol 4chan

lol lolis.

It's ok Rob, they did it for the lulz....  Also, why don't you take a seat.  

Anyway, back OT, I think the discussion that Rob posted from the other site made it quite clear how the intended use vs. the interpreted intended use of the creatures ability to ignore cover in certain situations.

Best way to avoid any confusion, like jhobin said, is to ask on a game to game basis, on how your opponent feels about the rule.  In casual game play, I don't think issues will really be, well, an issue.  In tournaments, my guess is that they're going to use the RAW method over RAI, but then again it never hurts to just ask.


Hehe, funny how a little bit of outside information can bring our discussions to such closure.  We should cite other webpages and forums a lot more often. 

[jhobin]

I didn't notice until last night that Zoethropes warp blast was a lance weapon on top of being str10!

[Matt Thomas]

Best way to avoid any confusion, like jhobin said, is to ask on a game to game basis, on how your opponent feels about the rule.  In casual game play, I don't think issues will really be, well, an issue.  In tournaments, my guess is that they're going to use the RAW method over RAI, but then again it never hurts to just ask.

No.
The best way to avoid confusion is to use the rule as it is clearly written.
There are cases where rules are unclear (ex. doom) or where they clearly were not meant to act in a strict RAW manner (ex. Storm lord isn't clearly specified to be a form of hive tyrant). But the hive guard rule CLEARLY is NOT one of these. The rule has one correct interpretation.
So to avoid confusion... use the rule as written.

[Lykosan]

The best way to avoid confusion is to use the rule as it is clearly written.
... where they clearly were not meant to act in a strict RAW manner (ex. Storm lord isn't clearly specified to be a form of hive tyrant). .... So to avoid confusion... use the rule as written.

You contradict yourself there. You say play as RAW, but then you say play RAI. The rule is clearly written the SwarmLord is NOT a Hive Tyrant, he is a SwarmLord, so any psychic powers (Like Leech) do not work to their fullest capacity for him. The power will still go off and hurt whatever it was shot at if the test is passed, but the SwarmLord will not regain any wounds because the power as written (RAW) says the HIVE TYRANT (not SwarmLord RAI) regains the wounds. Just like Paroxysm(sp) when cast by the SwarmLord will never end if you play RAW, because it lasts until the end of the Hive Tyrant's (which the SwarmLord is not) next turn.

Thats just two examples where RAW fails. Some rules are written clearly, some are not, use your head and common sense when you play and a lot less headaches appear, after all this is just a freaking game.

[Achillius]

"The target can only count the benefits of cover they are in or touching if it lies between them and the Hive Guard."

The key word being "only". By this does it mean that if you are not in or touching terrain you do not get a save? Does this over ride all other ways to gain cover i.e. smoke, going fast, etc. By RAW I think it does.

Jeff, running late on this so if we're already at this point, oh well.
 I'm not even sure I follow where you are going with this. The Tyrant guard rules say you have to be touching cover. But smoke launchers "obscure the target" end of story, no mention of cover.
Going fast, again is in regards to shooting so follows those rules, that is counts as obscured. 

Of course vehicles wanting to claim being obscured because of a building or some other cover\terrain feature would now need to be touching it.

It seems clear in the written rules.

Cheers,
Alan

[Achillius]

The best way to avoid confusion is to use the rule as it is clearly written.
... where they clearly were not meant to act in a strict RAW manner (ex. Storm lord isn't clearly specified to be a form of hive tyrant). .... So to avoid confusion... use the rule as written.

You contradict yourself there. You say play as RAW, but then you say play RAI. The rule is clearly written the SwarmLord is NOT a Hive Tyrant, he is a SwarmLord, so any psychic powers (Like Leech) do not work to their fullest capacity for him. The power will still go off and hurt whatever it was shot at if the test is passed, but the SwarmLord will not regain any wounds because the power as written (RAW) says the HIVE TYRANT (not SwarmLord RAI) regains the wounds. Just like Paroxysm(sp) when cast by the SwarmLord will never end if you play RAW, because it lasts until the end of the Hive Tyrant's (which the SwarmLord is not) next turn.

Thats just two examples where RAW fails. Some rules are written clearly, some are not, use your head and common sense when you play and a lot less headaches appear, after all this is just a freaking game.

This one confused me, the description of the swarm lord, names this as the pinnacle  of hive tyrant bioform. Also under tyrant guard it states "a 'Single Hive Tyrant (including swarmlord)..."

That seems pretty clear that a swarlord is indeed a Hive Tyrant...


Cheers,
Alan

[Logan007]

The best way to avoid confusion is to use the rule as it is clearly written.
... where they clearly were not meant to act in a strict RAW manner (ex. Storm lord isn't clearly specified to be a form of hive tyrant). .... So to avoid confusion... use the rule as written.

You contradict yourself there. You say play as RAW, but then you say play RAI. The rule is clearly written the SwarmLord is NOT a Hive Tyrant, he is a SwarmLord, so any psychic powers (Like Leech) do not work to their fullest capacity for him. The power will still go off and hurt whatever it was shot at if the test is passed, but the SwarmLord will not regain any wounds because the power as written (RAW) says the HIVE TYRANT (not SwarmLord RAI) regains the wounds. Just like Paroxysm(sp) when cast by the SwarmLord will never end if you play RAW, because it lasts until the end of the Hive Tyrant's (which the SwarmLord is not) next turn.

Thats just two examples where RAW fails. Some rules are written clearly, some are not, use your head and common sense when you play and a lot less headaches appear, after all this is just a freaking game.

This one confused me, the description of the swarm lord, names this as the pinnacle  of hive tyrant bioform. Also under tyrant guard it states "a 'Single Hive Tyrant (including swarmlord)..."

That seems pretty clear that a swarlord is indeed a Hive Tyrant...


Cheers,
Alan

The very next sentence after "pinnacle of hive tyrant bioform" says that the swarmlord "is to a hive tyrant what a hive tyrant is to a termagant". Guess Termagants are hive tyrants too

As for the tyrant guard entry, the parenthesis indicates that this is a special inclusion, otherwise they needn't have even mentioned it.

On the other hand, RAI, my opionion is that the swarmlord is obviously a hive tyrant

but by RAW, it doesn't seem to be so, not that I can think of any rule in which this distinction becomes important.

[Logan007]

Umm, besides the ones that Steve Riley mentioned I mean

[jhobin]

I publicaly admit that I was wrong    I was thinking they would get there save but wanted to see if there was away around it I was not doing it to be cheesy just interested to see if it would apply. I think I posted I was wrong about 2 pages ago when I found a ruling on a credable source I use for rule question.

You guys are worse than my wife! 

[Matt Thomas]

You contradict yourself there. You say play as RAW, but then you say play RAI. The rule is clearly written the SwarmLord is NOT a Hive Tyrant...

I disagree. In the case of the swarm lord there is clearly confusion as he is specifically given powers that are listed as "hive tyrant" powers. Yes they refer to "hive tyrant" within them as well but there is clearly at BEST confusion over wither he should get the benefits of powers he is specifically given.

In the case of the hive guard the rule is very clear. No confusion at all.

If the RAW is clear.. then it is clear. If it is unclear or self contradictory... then you are required to make a call.

[Matt Thomas]

Umm, besides the ones that Steve Riley mentioned I mean

You mean basically every single one of it's psychic powers?

It is a big deal if you decide not to count the swarm lord as a hive tyrant. It drastically alters the powers.
GW consistently failed to mention that the special characters in the book were X type of creature. So the same/similar problems exist for the others as well. Just a completely retarded unbelievably easy to catch mistake that applies to every codex... so SOP for GW.

[Logan007]

Umm, besides the ones that Steve Riley mentioned I mean

You mean basically every single one of it's psychic powers?

It is a big deal if you decide not to count the swarm lord as a hive tyrant. It drastically alters the powers.
GW consistently failed to mention that the special characters in the book were X type of creature. So the same/similar problems exist for the others as well. Just a completely retarded unbelievably easy to catch mistake that applies to every codex... so SOP for GW.

I completely agree that it's a big deal. Nevertheless, many times RAW leads us to these (silly) kinds of conclusions.

[Achillius]

Umm, besides the ones that Steve Riley mentioned I mean

You mean basically every single one of it's psychic powers?

It is a big deal if you decide not to count the swarm lord as a hive tyrant. It drastically alters the powers.
GW consistently failed to mention that the special characters in the book were X type of creature. So the same/similar problems exist for the others as well. Just a completely retarded unbelievably easy to catch mistake that applies to every codex... so SOP for GW.

Maybe the problem is that GW has failed to take into consideration the pedantic nature of it's player base. I personally believe that the Swarmlord is adequately described as a Hive tyrant in it's description.

I will play it as such and allow all others to play it as such. That would of course change if GW release something to say it is not.

Cheers,
Alan

[jhobin]

Doesn't it say in the 'dex that he can take tryrant guard?

If he can take tyrant guard he's a tyrant, right?