Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)
So I have a Deathwing army that I painted up under 3rd edition rules. I
was wondering if the 4th edition rules will still allow me to field a
death wing army.
Basically it is 3 termie squads with 5 terms each one close quarters
one storm bolters and one support squad with cyclones and assualt
cannons. 2 old rogue trader dreads with plasma cannon and a term
captain and chaplain or librarian depending.
So can this army still be fielded in 4th edition should I bother
updating my rules. I have not in the past had an oppurtunity to play
but would like to check out the local gaming shop for some games. Also
I am not keen on investing a great sum of money on new figs.
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)
BEM wrote on 15 Sep 2005 08:30:34 -0700:
> So I have a Deathwing army that I painted up under 3rd edition rules. I
> was wondering if the 4th edition rules will still allow me to field a
> death wing army.
> Basically it is 3 termie squads with 5 terms each one close quarters
> one storm bolters and one support squad with cyclones and assualt
> cannons. 2 old rogue trader dreads with plasma cannon and a term
> captain and chaplain or librarian depending.
> So can this army still be fielded in 4th edition should I bother
> updating my rules. I have not in the past had an oppurtunity to play
> but would like to check out the local gaming shop for some games. Also
> I am not keen on investing a great sum of money on new figs.
So long as you're not mixing ass cannons and cyclones with lightning
claws/thunder hammers in the same squads, yes.
Get the DA FAQ, it's clear enough - you use the Terminator squads from the
4th ed Space Marine Codex instead of the ones in the DA codex for the
Deathwing units. DW terminators got cheaper too. And plasma cannons on
dreadnoughts are still legal, but not as useful as they once were.
If you've got the 1st printing of the DA Codex you'll also need the DA
Update PDF with the changes from the 1st to 2nd printing as these aren't
included in the FAQ. It's a bit of a mess needing 3 or 4 codexes/pdfs, but
it's all we DA players have.
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)
In article <1126817045.468182.71230@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>, BEM,
brady.maxwell@gmail.com Varfed out the following in Timo speak...
> Well I found the FAQ you mention and am much happier now. I just need
> to find some place to play now.
If you look on the GW (UK) site in their 'Chapter Approved' section you
should be able to find both the FAQ and the codex updates that Spack
mentioned. You can try the US site as well, but it's a lot more clunky
when it comes to finding stuff.
Myr
--
RGMW has always been brutally honest. It's probably why we're
considered the scum of the GW gaming community.
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)
Between saving the world and having a spot of tea BEM said
> Well I found the FAQ you mention and am much happier now. I just need
> to find some place to play now.
Just a nitpick Brady. Reply to the person you're actually talking with or
you'll cause confusion. I didn't mention a FAQ, Spack did. Just because
you're using Google Groups and it all looks like one big web forum, it
doesn't mean it does for everyone. Proper news readers show threaded
views, not a large linear view.
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)
BEM wrote:
> I thought I replied correctly.
>
> >
correctly includes leaving the previous text showing as in this example.
In particularly long threads people may sometimes remove or <snip> part
of the text that the poster is referring to.
So the easy way is to hit reply to the message you are replying to (I
think this works OK in Google) put you cursor at the end of the message
or the first blank line. Hit enter and start typing your reply.
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)
Between saving the world and having a spot of tea said
>> I thought I replied correctly.
>
> Dont worry about it. Robert Singers is a control freak/knob head.
This BEM, is what we in Usenet call a kook. Google it if you want to see
more of its bad behaviour. Kooks differ from Troll in that they tend to
fixate on particular people or behaviour. This one thinks I dominate this
news group with some form of mind control.
--
Rob Singers
RGMW FAQ Maintainer. See it @ http://www.rgmw.org Foemina Erit Ruina Tua
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)
Robert Singers wrote:
> Between saving the world and having a spot of tea said
>
> >> I thought I replied correctly.
> >
> > Dont worry about it. Robert Singers is a control freak/knob head.
>
> This BEM, is what we in Usenet call a kook. Google it if you want to see
> more of its bad behaviour. Kooks differ from Troll in that they tend to
> fixate on particular people or behaviour. This one thinks I dominate this
> news group with some form of mind control.
>
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)
"Brad Hann" <luntacarsus@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:MPG.1da1bbf25350b9a2989688@news.iprimus.com.au...
>> This one thinks I dominate this
>> news group with some form of mind control.
>
> Mind control? Don't be absurd. Everybody knows these aren't the droids
> we're looking for.
My tinfoil beanie put a stop to Rob's evil BWAIN POWERZ (tm) !!!
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.