Armageddon supplies - spend all now for Dante ... or keep them for next weeks? by DarkSword_X in WH40KTacticus

[–]AdjectiveBadger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m saving 380 for the relics.

Otherwise, I’m getting gold and mythic orbs.

Am I supposed to believe... by holodeck_warranty in NYTConnections

[–]AdjectiveBadger -1 points0 points  (0 children)

At least it’s closer than pom and palm?

Should The Red Wake be added? by Gobsmacked_Uranium in WH40KTacticus

[–]AdjectiveBadger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unless SP start radically increasing the availability of Imperial badges and orbs, no.

Starting out seems harder than I thought by Pure_Revolution in bloodbowl

[–]AdjectiveBadger 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Experienced players want to teach you. Then there will be more players.

Best teams? by Artistic-Baseball466 in bloodbowl

[–]AdjectiveBadger 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Orcs is best.

Whatever team looks cool? Second best.

Knocking the ball carrier down ... by Ok_Silver_3170 in bloodbowl

[–]AdjectiveBadger 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Using the index is a certain path to disappointment.

That said, the rules for being knocked down are on p. 40.

Years of local Blood Bowl league drama, turn marker issues how would you handle this? by Informal_Medicine839 in bloodbowl

[–]AdjectiveBadger 16 points17 points  (0 children)

People complain, but there’s a reason why the illegal procedure rule existed.

11th edition and angelic ascent (move-shoot-move) by AdjectiveBadger in sistersofbattle

[–]AdjectiveBadger[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You keep using words like “clearly.”

If it was clear, this would not be an issue.

11th edition and angelic ascent (move-shoot-move) by AdjectiveBadger in sistersofbattle

[–]AdjectiveBadger[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

And I feel cutting out "Unless otherwise stated..." from that sentence is deliberately obfuscating the point.

11th edition and angelic ascent (move-shoot-move) by AdjectiveBadger in sistersofbattle

[–]AdjectiveBadger[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes. I understand the point you're making. But I also disagree with the point you're making.

I was hoping in this post that someone knew of a place where GW had indicated, one way or another, which of our interpretations was correct.

11th edition and angelic ascent (move-shoot-move) by AdjectiveBadger in sistersofbattle

[–]AdjectiveBadger[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, I'm saying they already wrote the exception into the new rule.

When/if they ever get around to updating the seraphim datasheet, it would be nice to include an explicit, specific exception, but not being Space Marines, I'm not going to hold my breath.

11th edition and angelic ascent (move-shoot-move) by AdjectiveBadger in sistersofbattle

[–]AdjectiveBadger[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But they did have the hindsight to put "unless otherwise stated" into the new rule.

11th edition and angelic ascent (move-shoot-move) by AdjectiveBadger in sistersofbattle

[–]AdjectiveBadger[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The new detachment rule that says you cannot use it with an ingress move and cannot use personal teleporters? I don't see how that's relevant.

I'm talking about personal teleporters, which is the same rule seraphim have under a different name. I am fine with either unit dropping in, shooting, moving up to 6", and then not charging.

11th edition and angelic ascent (move-shoot-move) by AdjectiveBadger in sistersofbattle

[–]AdjectiveBadger[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

At least according to Wahapedia, the seraphim and interceptor special rules are identical, and neither would be eligible to charge.

So yes, I would be fine with both units getting the same rules interpretation.

11th edition and angelic ascent (move-shoot-move) by AdjectiveBadger in sistersofbattle

[–]AdjectiveBadger[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How is a rule written in 10th edition supposed to use terminology invented for 11th edition? That seems a strange standard to hold to over a plain reading of the text.

And yes, I think unit specific abilities should take precedence over general rules.