Steel Angel Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 The vote was open all. There was a post here. 1 no range D 2 nerf range D 3 normal range D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 The vote was open all. There was a post here. 1 no range D 2 nerf range D 3 normal range D There wasn't a No option Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Angel Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 My mistake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 My mistake It would have been a good option. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 There wasn't a No option See, with those choices, I would have voted for a "modified D table." The modifications decided upon strike me as rather extreme and seem to be entirely directed at a single book's D weapons. You didn't vote on the modifications, which are what I'm taking issue with. You merely were given the choice to modify the D table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 See, with those choices, I would have voted for a "modified D table." The modifications decided upon strike me as rather extreme and seem to be entirely directed at a single book's D weapons. That is abbreviated. The poll had the full text of the modified table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 That is abbreviated. The poll had the full text of the modified table. I see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 That is abbreviated. The poll had the full text of the modified table. Still, with the choices provided, it wasn't really a question. 1: Allow ITC to pick without voter imput 2: Use BRB D weapon rules, which are broken as hell in the new Eldar codex 3: Use a horribly crippled D weapon table, which makes all non-eldar D weapons useless and barely nerfs the eldar over their last codex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Angel Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 On the plus side i think jet bikes didnt get nerfed. And allowed 3 detachments now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 On the plus side i think jet bikes didnt get nerfed. And allowed 3 detachments now And no CTA allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 And no CTA allies. Why were these so broken? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Why were these so broken? I don't know that they were, but... https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2015/05/08/itc-2015-mid-season-update-poll-results-are-in/ Same result as before. Most gamers in the ITC simply do not like the fluff breaking nature of CtA allies. I happen to agree, personally, although I voted yes to them under the condition of the next question, which we will get to. While this is a game, the fluff of the game is the coolest part of it, IMO. The aesthetics of the game and the story of the game are really important to creating a sense of immersion in it. Most ITC participants would prefer to not violate that fluff, it would appear.Note: Does this mean your CtA army will never be allowed in an ITC style tournament? No, local events can break this rule if their community wants to, and at our bigger tournaments we also offer unrestricted events (namely our Friendly events) to those that enjoy this style of play. We won’t be seeing them in Championships format events, though, for the time being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Oh, and does the ban on CTA allies prevent summoning daemons if the summoned units would be CTA allies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Oh, and does the ban on CTA allies prevent summoning daemons if the summoned units would be CTA allies? It wasn't part of the poll so I wouldn't imagine anything changed. Especially true since summoned units aren't allies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 It wasn't part of the poll so I wouldn't imagine anything changed. Especially true since summoned units aren't allies. The Allegiance levels still apply. They are specifically from the Chaos Daemons faction. If you read the "Allies" section on page 126, you'll note that the entire section regards units in the army, not in the detachment. Summoned units of daemons can cause OOE tests for Orks other non-chaos units that summon them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 How this impacts the ITC is a separate question, but summoned daemons are subject to the ally rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 How this impacts the ITC is a separate question, but summon daemons are subject to the ally rules. That's true, but the ITC ruling specifically applies to army construction, as opposed to the more general alliance levels. You cannot have an army list that contains any models with a Come the Apocalypse relationship with each other, but it's possible to end up with such over the course of the game due to the use of Conjuration powers or occasional other shenanigans. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfestedKerrigan Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 or occasional other shenanigans. Such as? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fluger Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Such as? I like taking models from my enemy's casualty pile and recycling them into my force as ongoing reserves. There's no rule against this that I can find and recycling is good for the environment anyway. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestRider Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Such as? Such as whatever GW drops next week :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von hammer Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 The ruling on summoning demons as CtA is vague. Though it's not specifically in the writing, Reece has mentioned he is "happy not to see this again" on several occasions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skkipper Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Nothing in FAQ says you cannot summon demons even if they are CTA so if you can get the powers you can summon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Such as? Since the update of Orks to 7E, the only one I can think of immediately is Aet'tar'mgn'blph'letters, the Tzeentch mega-daemon guy from Forge World, but looking at his actual rules I guess his thing doesn't work that way, so I'm not aware of any other ways to do so now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 15, 2015 Report Share Posted May 15, 2015 The ruling on summoning demons as CtA is vague. Though it's not specifically in the writing, Reece has mentioned he is "happy not to see this again" on several occasions. It is. As per the Conjuration rules, specifically the sub-section regarding "conjuring daemons" on page 27, it specifies that the units are from codex: chaos daemons. In detachments, specifically the sub-section regarding Factions, page 118, we have units from codex: chaos daemons clearly defined as part of the Chaos Daemons Faction. And to the Allies section, specifically in the "levels of alliance" on page 126, we have it discussed the "levels of alliance between units that have different Factions within the same army." Rules are extremely clear that models can be CTA within the same army. The confusion is related to detachments, of which the summoned daemons are not part of a particular detachment, but remain in the army. Many of the detachments require mono-faction detachments, so players often consider the ally levels to be related to each detachment, rather than each unit within the army. On a side note, the SM legacies of glory include one "Shrouded Providence" which allows a SM vehicle to be considered an ally of convenience to all units within the same army, including the SM from it's own detachment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galahad911 Posted May 15, 2015 Report Share Posted May 15, 2015 Again, guys, the ban on CtA is only in relation to army list construction. Summon whatever you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.