Pretty sure there's a restriction on that. It would make TAGs useful at tournaments, so it's been banned in the latest ITS.
Eeeeyup. Though I threatened to shove his Land Raider where it'd take a proctologist to remove it instead. I admit, I did also withdraw from that tournament, I was way too pissed off to be civil to anyone else after that.
Okay, out of morbid fascination what was this future explorer of exotic butt plugs suggestion for what should happen with the dice if they're not rolled, just pick a result?
In my experience such issues are easily solved with metal dice. And a quick reminder, how aerodynamically they behave over short distances. Across the table for example.
Now it sounds like the only thing that can save us from bad guys with dice are good guys with dice, and I hope nobody will take that seriously :P
I think I'll save it for Texas, where it's a legal defense to claim Fighting Words, or so and so needed killing. A true jury of my peers would not convict! :)
I'd love to see a book next year that cleans up hacking. Maybe make it like multi where all attacks have the same profile they just use different "ammo" and you get to choose if you want your target to be isolated, immobilized, dead, targeted or possessed. Some of those being target dependant obviously. Then give the vairous hacking devices differnt buffs, like killer always ignores firewall and/or is always breaker. Guard and prothieon are also good targets. Honestly, guard isn't really a deterent for assaults, and you don't really need a deterrent to avoid CC in a shooting game. Just replace all instances of guard with electric pulse and bake in some perks for the pet, like toughness or strength or even movements speed whe you've got something that looks mountable like andromeda. Protheion should just be "when this models deals damage in CC to a model with W, ..." and then give the model an appropriate level of MA(3+). And just for the sake of clarity, total immunity should have all of the ammos it ignores listed, not just "non-exotic" ammo. THey can update total immunity if they want to add a new ammo it can ignore.
Or just make all ammo type's "normal"? Might make for some fun interactions with E/M weapons, but that's the life of a werewolf.
Anyone thought about the new NCO rule? It allows a non-LT model to use the LT order. BUT if the NCO model is in a fire team, it can spend the order while being the leader of the fire team. And then we have TACTICAL SENSE that gives a model an extra irregular order. BUT you can not convert it with command tokens and if the model is the leader of a link team... Then he can use the irregular order to lead the fire team. So 2 new skills that really messes with how orders are spent. How many times do you purple will try to use the LT order on the LT in a fire team? And use irregular orders on fire teams... Might be they just should have changed how LT orders and irregular orders works, and then said that a NCO can use the LT order and the tactical sense gives the model an additional irregular order. And they could use the same for datatrackers with extra "irregular" orders...
I can't agree with this more. CB started taking steps towards more technical use of rules, such as including tags/keywords like "attack," removing some confusing names such as "zero visibility smoke," and adding more precise sequences to the steps in resolving attack/orders. But they haven't always followed through or consistently used their own conventions, and sometimes their writing is not clear. For instance there is significant debate as to whether models with limited camo and mimitism (hecklers/caterans) benefit from both abilities at once. Limited camo (skill) and mimitism both have negative feed back, limited camo lets you deploy as a camo marker. Are you still using limited camo after deployment and are now in camo marker state (the state has no NFB)? Can you pair the surprise shot and mimitism? Jammers are technical weapons, so RAW they follow all the normal BS mods, camo, cover, etc. Nothing in the weapon traits, such as no LoF alter that. Its not how jamers ever worked, nor how anyone played it because of intent. Fortunately it has at least been addressed in a FAQ, but it took years for the rule to accuratetly say what it did. Or there are instances when FAQs don't even make sense. Such as when CB originally answered wether models in a null state in close combat were still engaged or not. The origninal answer was something akin to "the player chooses." Which player? When, at any point in time? Then there is the issue with nested skills. Nesting skills like steath and valor into martial arts saves print space/clutter on infinity army/army print outs, but for new players, they'll forget all the time. It certainly is a barrier that doesn't need to be there. Anyway I applaud the steps CB has taken to improve the rules clarity over the years, I played under N2 which was harder, and I love the game. I am however unsatisfied with the state of the rules as is, and would love even more clarity. That doesn't mean longer rules or more rules, it just means better written rules.
They are simple in them selves. I will have no problem with how they work. But do the differences between how a LT uses a LT order and how a NCO uses a LT order add to the game? I think this is more a new rule because a few lists (IA & OS) needed more orders be available for links. So they tack on new rules that add "unnecessary" details so that it's not going to change balance for the other armies that already exists. And thus the nr of rules and complexity increases... And a lot of newer player will have problems with the distinctions. Increasing the complexity incrementally doesn't trouble the veterans, the problem is the new players.
So for TA to use in a fireteam i need the guy with TA to be the team leader. Is it legal to only make him the team leader with the order generated by TA? Or does he have to be team leader before i activate the team?
I think they really do add to the game. Not least because they let a more elite army feel like one on the table, and not have a bunch of 4-8pt bots underfoot to generate orders. They also make the army more fragile, as losing someone with Tactical Awareness costs you two orders. As far as I can tell, you can declare the TacA model the Team Leader when spending that TacA order, you do NOT need to declare the TacA model Team Leader the order before.
@Section9 I think it would be a lot better if they said that you can spend the LT order in a fire team if the "spender" is the leader. Changing the general rule. Then NCO only needs to be: This model may spend the LT order. (Now having a LT in fire team is a better idea generally and NCO in fire teams works great. NCO still pairs greatly with LT lvl2.) TA: This model gains an "ordinary" irregular order. It can not be used in a fireteam but it can be converted with command tokens as usual. Give this skill to models that don't operate primary in fire teams. Also make the datatracker irregular order an "ordinary" irregular order. I'm not opposed to the new rules. I'm opposed to the small differentiations that will cause a lot of misunderstandings. Fire teams are complex enough as it is. But this rules also breaks a quite fundamental rule of the game. Each model generates 1 order. (LT generates another personal order (should really be an "ordinary" irregular order) and impetuous gives you an order you can't control). TAGs are quite elite and don't generate extra orders. This feels more like bandaid because quantity vs quality doesn't really work...
