Obsidian armor vs armor of khorne

[Finnigan2004]

You see, I saw two different things and contradictory things about banners in the FAQ:

1. That they are magic items in all respects.

2. That they have the caveats from pg. 92 (one of which is that they are not magic items, therefore... ).

First off, how do you manage that in one sentence. Second off, to me, that would indicate that those spells might effect them (if they are in all respects magic items). I'd have trouble telling an opponent otherwise if he hit my battle banner (the few times I use one) with Law of Gold or Vaul's Unmaking. Think you could submit it to Direwolf Gary? Pretty please .

[gjnoronh]

It's on the list but the general rule from GW is the army book takes precedence over FAQ's

Errata take precedence over army books.

This convoluted sentence is an FAQ therefore I think the book takes precedence.

Why that sentence was written in that way I have NO idea. . .

But we were just talking about it on the direwolf FAQ this morning. . .

[shadow]

It would be nice for GW to clarify, can we double? are they affected?

[MahlichtheEverchanging]

I'd have to say that banners ARE affected - Daemonic Icons (p.96) are listed separately from Daemonic Gifts (p.92), and it's only Gifts that are immune.

So it seems they CAN nobble your standard ...

[The Dark Lord]

Which leads us back to the part where they say they use the rules on page 92...

[MahlichtheEverchanging]

Only if Icons count as Gifts. If they don't, then the caveats about Gifts not being affected is irrelevant. And before anyone states that the caveats ARE that Gifts aren't affected, the FAQ regarding Icons points to page 92, thereforetheyr'e also immune, the caveats about being stolen/affected aren't the only ones - there's also the one about allowing multiple copies of a Gift, where multiple copies of magic items aren't allowed. - and THAT's the caveat referred to in the FAQ.

Btw, just how 'official' ARE FAQs - do the designers write them, or Customer Service, or who?

Anyway ......
I can argue this both ways :

Icons ARE Gifts and are therefore immune -
1/ Page 81 includes banners as Gifts,
2/ the FAQ says they have the same caveats as Gifts

and

Icons are NOT Gifts so they aren't immune -
1/ Icons are listed separately from Gifts
2/ Army books take precedence over FAQs. The answer in the FAQ is thus ignored.
3/ Try telling another player your banners aren't vulnerable even though they're no more expensive than his ......
4/ The caveat reagrding Icons is that multiple copies are allowed, NOT them being immune to being 'stolen'/affected by hostile magic.

I admit 3 is weak, but I pretty much gurantee you'll hear it from someone at least once.

I'd say that, in the interests of fairness, we have to accept that having magic banners that are invulnerable, even though they don't cost any more than those of other armies, will NOT go down well. So, given that the issue is unclear, either we agree before the match what the situation is, or we smile, if a little forcedly, and accept that our banners are affected - but Gifts are immune.

Of course, there'a always Greywolf's FAQ to go by :

http://www.geocities.com/mi_whplayers/7th_faqs/doc_faq.txt

although given he's only got the same rulebooks as us, and we can't sort it out between us, that may not be accepted by other players ....


I'm playing Devil's (or Daemon's) Advocate here - it seems there's no conclusive answer either way. I guess that, until GW sort this out, it's up to each of us to find a solution. Personally, I'll agree to my banners being vulnerable if it's what it takes to continue getting games ......

This post has been edited by MahlichtheEverchanging on Aug 23 2009, 07:13 AM

[gjnoronh]

That's the direwolf FAQ not greywolf.

It's put together by an group of players from the direwolf warhammer newsgroup (including me)

The Direwolf team has a little bit of communication directly with Alessio but the answers are purely ours - they are just to establish some suggested rules particularly for GT's. But it's up to gaming groups or tournament organizers to decide what works.

I think the specific rules for negating the banners are the least of your worries if folks are unhappy about playing your DoC - greater daemons, flamers, flesh hound blocks are more common issues.

[MahlichtheEverchanging]

Whoops - sorry about that!

Anyway, true, those things are more an issue - but at least the rules are actually unambiguous.

[Fulgrim's-Chosen]

most places / people I've seen have played it that Icons are like Gifts in that you can take more than one in an Army (unlike normal magic items) and that they are unaffected by things that affect "magic items" - normally.

It actually is fairly intuitive, going from the FAQ (even though stupidly worded) or the wording in the book.


If you want to say that the Icons COULD be affected by Vaul's Unmaking, for instance, then you would have to say that it's "effectively" a Magic Item. But if you said that, then you wouldn't be able to say you could take "more than one in an Army" - - - except that the Daemons CAN take more than one, etc.

This implies that the Icon is NOT a "Magic Item" - but something else entirely...something special // unique amongst Warhammer Armies, just like Daemonic Gifts themselves.


And if it's NOT a Magic Item, then a spell/item/effect that is designed to target "Magic Items" specifically, would not / should not work on them (Icons).


* terrible wording by GW in the FAQ answer leads one to conclude they are telling you one thing - then over-ruling that statement with a fresh one, in the same answer. It's very, very, dumb the way they did it. On a positive note, they continued - I can't recall which FAQ it's in, to say that Beast Cowers // Collar of Zorga thingy, etc - can't be used on Greater Daemons, which was nice. I remember DeckerCKY used to argue that it could/should be able to work on them for a while back when the book first came out. *