Logo
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:41 am



Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Magic Items for Khaine 
Author Message
Slave on the Altar
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 6:24 pm
Posts: 2
Finally made an account after just viewing for a while and I want to say this board is absolutely fantastic! But to the question I have
I was wondering if using one of the new army list from End Times: Khaine, can you use magic items from the Dark/High/Wood Elves army books? My friend who plays tomb kings is telling me that I am not allowed to use them in a combined army list since the army book says that the items have to be used in their respective army. Thank you everyone in advance!


Tue Dec 09, 2014 6:30 pm
Profile
Killed by Khorne
Killed by Khorne
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:51 pm
Posts: 2799
Location: Hinterlands of Khuresh; The Lost City of the Angels
Amadeus Brozart wrote:
Finally made an account after just viewing for a while and I want to say this board is absolutely fantastic!


Merci!

Amadeus Brozart wrote:
I was wondering if using one of the new army list from End Times: Khaine, can you use magic items from the Dark/High/Wood Elves army books? My friend who plays tomb kings is telling me that I am not allowed to use them in a combined army list since the army book says that the items have to be used in their respective army. Thank you everyone in advance!


I don't actually have the book so I couldn't tell you.

I'd imagine you can use them, but only for specific races i.e. you cant give HE magic items to a DE and vice versa (though common items are for everyone, but cannot be duplicated)

_________________
OldHammer Advanced Ruleset
- Adding Tactical Depth to Your Favourite Tabletop Wargame


Tue Dec 09, 2014 6:59 pm
Profile
Dragon Lord
Dragon Lord
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:42 pm
Posts: 9664
Location: Designing new breeds of Dragons
Units in the comvined armies are allowed the selection of upgrades they are allowed in their own books. There is nk distinction, Khaine doesn't list any unit profiles at all so there is nothing to go by other than the respective army books.

_________________
7th edition army book:
Games Played: 213
Games Won: 114 (54%)
Games Drawn: 33 (15%)
Games Lost: 66 (31%)

8th Edition army book W/D/L:
Druchii: 36/4/16


Tue Dec 09, 2014 7:56 pm
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8563
Location: Hag Graef
Welcome Amadeus Brozart to D.net! :)

Amadeus Brozart wrote:
I was wondering if using one of the new army list from End Times: Khaine, can you use magic items from the Dark/High/Wood Elves army books? My friend who plays tomb kings is telling me that I am not allowed to use them in a combined army list since the army book says that the items have to be used in their respective army. Thank you everyone in advance!
That's a very clever question.
The relevant rules are p.20 of ET:K2 and don't mention any specific, except that technically, the chosen army is no longer an army of DE, HE or WE.
Proof: special rules of DE, HE and WE are all ignored, and instead you use the special rules of Aestyrion, Phoenix King's or Eternity King's osts.
As the magic objects are available only for DE (or HE, or WE) and the elven osts are not any of these, rulewise your friend is perfectly right.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:50 pm
Profile
Slave (off the Altar)

Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2014 6:31 pm
Posts: 21
I'd say you're beating a dead horse, but it's been beaten so thoroughly I can't say it's a horse anymore.

It had been argued for weeks on a bunch of forums when the Undead one came out, and it seems to be considered ambiguous by naysayers. Mostly it's an argument about what the word "options" means. TK players especially (nothing against you, I play TK too) like to hate on faction items, seemingly to maintain some reason to play non-Legion factions so that they can maintain indepence from "GW's undead poster child."

I personally play with TKs able to take TK stuff, VCs able to take VC stuff, and will do the same for elves. Everyone in my play group is fine with it and if my FLGS organizes a tourney it'll be ruled that way. If I were you though I'd play the popular ruling in your area, and avoid conflict until GW consolidates their feces and FAQs it. If you go to a tourney they will specify, and if they don't feel free.


Tue Dec 09, 2014 10:35 pm
Profile
Slave on the Altar
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 6:24 pm
Posts: 2
Thanks everyone! I'm going to see what my friend says about this before we play our 4000 point game. Should be fun bringing Malekith and his new wife to the field against Karl Franz and some dwarf allies.


Wed Dec 10, 2014 12:05 am
Profile
Dragon Lord
Dragon Lord
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:42 pm
Posts: 9664
Location: Designing new breeds of Dragons
Read carefully through a description if Imrik (who happens to carry a magic item normally available to high elves) to understand what writers have meant.

It's actually not a stretch to read that all options available to choices take from each respective book are also available to choices taken from any of the Khaine armies.
proof: et:khaine doesn't have any rules for any units other than new special characters so i guess RAW they have no stats? Not so.

_________________
7th edition army book:
Games Played: 213
Games Won: 114 (54%)
Games Drawn: 33 (15%)
Games Lost: 66 (31%)

8th Edition army book W/D/L:
Druchii: 36/4/16


Wed Dec 10, 2014 5:54 am
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8563
Location: Hag Graef
Dalamar wrote:
Read carefully through a description if Imrik (who happens to carry a magic item normally available to high elves) to understand what writers have meant.
Imrik rule says: "No other character in your army can have the Star Lance Magic Weapon from WH:HE".
It means that the writer considered that this was a possibility.
However, note that technically, an ET:K army with Imrik could be used in an alliance system with a HE army, and that opportunity could be the reason for that specific rule.
It does not necessarily mean that other HE lords in an ET army could access WH:HE magic objects.
But it goes broadly in the right direction of suggesting that each component of an ET:K army comes along with its own magic objects.

With this complementary information in mind,
RAW, magic objects in ET:K are undoubtly limited to BRB common magic objects,
but there is high suspicion that RAI, each component of an ET:K army comes along with the magic objects specific to its Elven kingdom.

-=-=-
Dalamar wrote:
et:khaine doesn't have any rules for any units other than new special characters so i guess RAW they have no stats? Not so.
This is clear.
ET:K p.20: Units come along with their profiles, costs, equipments, options and special rules (note: special rules are modified).

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:22 am
Profile
Dragon Lord
Dragon Lord
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:42 pm
Posts: 9664
Location: Designing new breeds of Dragons
Not quite since an alliance would be a second army and actually allowed to take the Starlance.

And you quoted exactly the line i needed ;)

profiles, costs, equipments, options and special rules

What are magic items if not options? If my dreadlord can take up to 100 points of magic items from BRB or the dark elf army book then i see nothing in ET:Khaine (or any of the previous end times books which use the same wording) preventing me from utilizing all of those options.

_________________
7th edition army book:
Games Played: 213
Games Won: 114 (54%)
Games Drawn: 33 (15%)
Games Lost: 66 (31%)

8th Edition army book W/D/L:
Druchii: 36/4/16


Wed Dec 10, 2014 7:57 pm
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8563
Location: Hag Graef
Dalamar wrote:
What are magic items if not options? If my dreadlord can take up to 100 points of magic items from BRB or the dark elf army book then i see nothing in ET:Khaine (or any of the previous end times books which use the same wording) preventing me from utilizing all of those options.
This is not how it goes.
Your dreadlord can take up to 100 points of magic items, period.

What allows him to get access to DE magic items is DE AB p.62-63, "The Black Armoury", with the rule telling:
"On the following pages are magic items available to Dark Elf armies. These can be taken in addition to any of the magic items listed in the Warhammer rulebook."
However, ET:K does not extend this rule explicitely to ET:K osts.

From this rule, you can read that they are available to DE armies, not specifically to DE entries, even if ultimately DE armies are made of DE entries.
Unfortunately, ET:K osts are not DE armies. ET:K osts are not even made of parts of DE armies.
ET:K osts are made of DE entries, including profiles, costs, equipments, options and special rules.
And the option specifies "can take magic objects up to 100 pts", without telling from where comes the magic object.


Dalamar wrote:
Not quite since an alliance would be a second army and actually allowed to take the Starlance.
This might more relevant. Let's see.
Imrik rule says: "No other character in your army can have the Star Lance Magic Weapon from WH:HE".
There's a general principle that a rule must serve a purpose. This general principle, however, is weakened by the presence of exceptions (e.g. "Sea Creature", p.75, which serves no purpose).
Still, assuming it was a relevant principle, the obvious purpose of that rule implies that without the rule, HE noblemen would have access to HE AB magic items. Therefore they must have access to other HE AB items. Therefore army items must remain available to their respective army entries.

Overall, that's not a very strong proof, but it should be enough of an indication about the RAI.

-=-=-

This said, my assessment is now:
RAW, it remains not authorized to use army book specific magic items for ET:K armies.
RAI, there is one strong indication that these magic items should remain accessible to the respective army book entries.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:57 pm
Profile
Dragon Lord
Dragon Lord
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 6:42 pm
Posts: 9664
Location: Designing new breeds of Dragons
If you want to take it that way, then explain how ET armies can take *any* magic items.

ET books are not Warhammer Armies books. Magic items section of the BRB only ever refers to Warhammer Armies books and models selected from Warhammer Armies' books having access to them.

So I guess: ET = we ran out of magic items?

_________________
7th edition army book:
Games Played: 213
Games Won: 114 (54%)
Games Drawn: 33 (15%)
Games Lost: 66 (31%)

8th Edition army book W/D/L:
Druchii: 36/4/16


Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:11 pm
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8563
Location: Hag Graef
Thank you for the calm discussion.
In rules discussions, it is paramount to understand what rules say exactly, not what we imagine they say.

Dalamar wrote:
Magic items section of the BRB only ever refers to Warhammer Armies books and to "Here" [this section].
There are clearly two different lists mentioned in BRB p.500: army books items and BRB items.


1. Army books magic items.
BRB p.500 wrote:
Each Warhammer Armies book describes in detail the many different kinds of magic item that each army can use.
Dalamar wrote:
ET books are not Warhammer Armies books.
So we agree that IAW RAW, ET:K armies are not entitled to use a WH army book magic object.


2. BRB magic items.
Dalamar wrote:
explain how ET armies can take *any* magic items.
BRB p.500 wrote:
Here we shall examine the magic items that are commonly used by all races.
We can certainly agree that ET:K armies are included among "all races".


3. Which model in an army may access to the armie's magic items?
Dalamar wrote:
... models selected from Warhammer Armies' books an army list having access to them.
BRB p.500 wrote:
Where a model has the option of choosing one or more magic items, it will be clearly stated in his army list entry....
BRB does not require a model to be part of a WH AB, but to be part of an army list.
ET:K p.20 specifically mentions that Elven Hosts are Army Lists, which entries are listed p.21 to 23, referring to DE/HE/WE entries.

The BRB description leaves no ambiguity.
Models are part of an army list. If the model's entry in its army list allows magic items, it can choose magic items accessible to the army.
All armies have access to BRB items (unless restricted by a special rule such as for Dwarfs).
Armies which have a dedicated army book can use additionally other magic items.
In addition, the army list could include some special entries with specific magit items (as ET:K p.26-38).


4. Conclusion.
All armies have access to BRB magic items.
In order to have access to a WH AB magic items, an "army" must belong to the relevant AB.
Models within an army may take a magic item if its entry from the army list mentions it.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Thu Dec 11, 2014 7:25 am
Profile
Slave (off the Altar)

Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:36 am
Posts: 13
Location: NM, USA
You've convince me that on a RAW basis, list specific items are disallowed. My two cent opinion is that, on a ROI basis, GW intends that you can take, say, dark elf list specific magic items for dark elves taken in a ET: K Hosts army. My two cent reason for believing this is that, GW has a tendency to remind you when you can't do stuff that seems pretty obvious. In other words, they'd have the line, "remember, DE characters do not have access to DE items in a Host army", or some such. Let me put it another way: I don't think they're smart enough to leave such an important distinction to such subtlies as distinctions between lists and armies. If they didn't want you taking magic items from the various books, I think they would've come out and said it.

_________________
"Tripping the Darkness Fantastic"


Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:55 am
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8563
Location: Hag Graef
Sure.
You bring good arguments. However you only select the arguments in favor of your position.
A fair RAI discussion should first list all reasonable possibilities.
Next, all arguments in favour of each possibility should be brought forwards.
Then, and only then, if one position emerges consensually as much more likely than RAW, it is time to consider that there was a flaw in RAW.

Let's list possible RAI:
RAI1 = RAW = ET:K armies are limited to common magic objects.
RAI2 = Each unit can take magic objects coming from the army book to which they belong.
RAI3 = ET:K armies can select freely from DE/HE/WE magic objects and give them to any eligible unit - except Host of Aestyrion limited to DE/HE magic objects.
RAI4 = ET:K armies can select freely from DE/HE/WE magic objects and give them to any eligible unit.


RAI3/4 is favoured by some powergamers.
RAI2 is instinctly favoured by most gamers, because of gaming habits.
RAI1 is not intuitive and is expected to be favoured only by Elven Hosts opponents, who are not likely to be found discussing in this forum.
We cannot tell for sure which possible RAI is intended by GW.

You have brought arguments in favour of RAI2.
Please consider that the very same arguments can be brought in favour of RAI3 or even RAI4.

Now, I would like you to consider how GW dealt with special rules.
GW took care to rephrase fully such special rules as "Hekarti Blessing", "Murderous Prowess" and a few other ones.
However, the new wording is sometimes the exact same as in the original army books.
Can you explain why "Hekarti's Blessing" was rephrased, when the only units to get it belong to the DE AB (indeed, new Malekith has lost that rule?
The only reason I can find is that "Hekarti Blessing" and "Murerous Prowess", defined in DE AB p.34, are valid only for DE armies, because DE AB says so.
Someone in GW realized that if an Elven Host was to use Hekarti Blessing, they could not use the DE definition because it would not have been valid.

Special rules are valid only for an army, not for a entry coming from that AB,
in the same way, magic objects are valid only for the army made with their army book, because the rule defining them says so.

Overall, even with several arguments pointing at RAI2, there are also several arguments pointing at RAI1.
I don't feel that RAI2 gets enough convincing arguments to FAQ it as the "right" one.

But feel free to play RAI2 as a house rule, as long as your opponent agrees.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:05 am
Profile
PhD in Dark Magic
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 11:54 am
Posts: 592
Location: The depths of the Black Library
Calisson wrote:
Now, I would like you to consider how GW dealt with special rules.
GW took care to rephrase fully such special rules as "Hekarti's Blessing", "Murderous Prowess" and a few other ones.
However, the new wording is sometimes the exact same as in the original army books.
Can you explain why "Hekarti's Blessing" was rephrased, when the only units to get it belong to the DE AB (indeed, new Malekith has lost that rule?


The same position could be argued in relation to Valour of Ages, Fireborn, Arrows of Isha and Lileath's Blessing (in respect of HE models) and for Blessing of the Ancients and Forest Spirit (in respect of WE models).

I would suggest that the rules were restated in the one place for ease of reference, rather than forcing players to constantly refer to multiple army books simply to confirm how their army works. The analogy with magic item selection is not necessarily appropriate.

What I find very strange is that "Hekarti's Blessing" is listed as an Army Special Rule for the Host of the Phoenix King, despite there being no models in that army list which actually have that rule. Phoenix King Malekith and Wood Elf Spellweavers are the only models in that army with access to the Lore of Dark Magic, but Spellweavers have Blessing of the Ancients instead.

Should this be interpreted to mean that it was accidentally omitted from Malekith's rule set, or that it was mistakenly included in the Host of the Phoenix King's army special rules (the short-list of rules being word-for-word identical to the list in the Host of the Eternity King's army special rules)? These conclusions are mutually exclusive, but are equally well-founded. They cannot both be right.

Calisson wrote:
The only reason I can find is that "Hekarti's Blessing" and "Murderous Prowess", defined in DE AB p.34, are valid only for DE armies, because DE AB says so.
Someone in GW realized that if an Elven Host was to use Hekarti's Blessing, they could not use the DE definition because it would not have been valid.


In the End Times: Khaine book, under "Elven Host Army Special Rules" in the section titled "The Elven Hosts", there is an entry which states (emphasis in original):

"The army special rules from Warhammer: Dark Elves, Warhammer: High Elves and Warhammer: Wood Elves are not used. Instead, units in an Elven Host use the special rules as described below that Host's army list. Note that several of these have been modified from the original version in their army book to better reflect the different nature of battles during the End Times, and therefore they should be read carefully by all players, especially those who have used the original versions of the rules."

There is a similar entry in the Undead Legions and Legions of Chaos entries in End Times: Nagash and End Times: Glottkin. Again, I suggest that the restatement of particular rules is for coherence and ease of reference, rather than a lawyerly attention to detail in drafting and awareness of how a rule or line of text might be interpreted. With no disrespect meant to them, GW books are written by authors whose principal qualifications are that they are gamers, not professional draftspeople.

_________________
"The wrath of a good man is not to be feared. They have too many rules."

"Good men don't need rules. Today is not a good time to find out why I have so many."


Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:52 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 15 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software