- Screenshot_20250405_151311_Facebook.jpg (837.85 KiB) Viewed 48669 times
- Screenshot_20250405_151648_Facebook.jpg (748.9 KiB) Viewed 48669 times
Beastmen chariots
Beastmen chariots
Figure I'll just post screencaps. I'm thinking house rules unless someone knows this was published in a GAQ somewhere...
-
Alarantalara
- Posts: 95
- Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2023 12:16 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Beastmen chariots
Someone asked and was told no once by Gav Thorpe: https://6th.whfb.app/faq#may-a-beasts-o ... zeentch-or
I have the suspicion it was a balance/fun issue that GW caught before release. People already complain about the "20" power dice Tzeentch army using 140 point chariots. Being able to swap in the mark of Tzeentch, based on having to use the same costs as the Hordes of Chaos, would let you go to 25 using 12 chariots, reaching the point where you might run out of spells before dice.
I have the suspicion it was a balance/fun issue that GW caught before release. People already complain about the "20" power dice Tzeentch army using 140 point chariots. Being able to swap in the mark of Tzeentch, based on having to use the same costs as the Hordes of Chaos, would let you go to 25 using 12 chariots, reaching the point where you might run out of spells before dice.
Re: Beastmen chariots
It's one of those things where there's conflicting rules statements in the book itself, which is part of the problem.
-
Alarantalara
- Posts: 95
- Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2023 12:16 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Beastmen chariots
I wouldn't say there's conflicting rules statements. I would instead say the text at the start of the "Marks of the Dark Gods" is poorly worded edit of the Hordes of Chaos text and it's otherwise entirely consistent.
It lists characters, chariots, and one unit of bestigors; but omits minotaurs because they don't get free choice of mark. It then says "they can replace...", which would normally refer to everything listed, but can't even when chariots are not considered. Bray-shamans can't take the marks of Khorne or Tzeentch and nobody finds that surprising or exceptional because the Hordes of Chaos book did the same. It also says, "at the cost shown opposite", and there's no one claiming that that means no character can take the mark of Khorne or Tzeentch because they're not on the opposite page but instead below/following that sentence.
Basically, the unit profiles are authoritative on what options can be taken, the mark list exactly matches the costs (though it generalizes to hero and lord instead of excluding bray-shamans from some marks), and there's no definitive indication anywhere that tuskgor chariots can take any mark other than undivided.
The next sentence refers to the marks applying to the character, unit or chariot bearing it, but this isn't conflicting because the undivided mark does exactly that, as would the others if they were allowed.
So the only conflict is an overly broad use of the word they that could have been fixed with more careful writing.
There's also a reference to chariots with other marks in the section on the chaos general and army list organization, but chariots from the hordes of chaos army list need to be accounted for there, so there still isn't a conflict, though it does get even more confusing.
It lists characters, chariots, and one unit of bestigors; but omits minotaurs because they don't get free choice of mark. It then says "they can replace...", which would normally refer to everything listed, but can't even when chariots are not considered. Bray-shamans can't take the marks of Khorne or Tzeentch and nobody finds that surprising or exceptional because the Hordes of Chaos book did the same. It also says, "at the cost shown opposite", and there's no one claiming that that means no character can take the mark of Khorne or Tzeentch because they're not on the opposite page but instead below/following that sentence.
Basically, the unit profiles are authoritative on what options can be taken, the mark list exactly matches the costs (though it generalizes to hero and lord instead of excluding bray-shamans from some marks), and there's no definitive indication anywhere that tuskgor chariots can take any mark other than undivided.
The next sentence refers to the marks applying to the character, unit or chariot bearing it, but this isn't conflicting because the undivided mark does exactly that, as would the others if they were allowed.
So the only conflict is an overly broad use of the word they that could have been fixed with more careful writing.
There's also a reference to chariots with other marks in the section on the chaos general and army list organization, but chariots from the hordes of chaos army list need to be accounted for there, so there still isn't a conflict, though it does get even more confusing.
Re: Beastmen chariots
If it's any consolation my brother is 100% in your camp about this. I just figure given the source I cited I'd lean that way, but Gav was indeed the author of the Hordes book so he shouldn't be discounted out of hand. It could also be he was given a stern talking to for taking the Chaos book too far, and that reflected on his statement.