In that case I have to say I find it silly that they give for 25 points an Enchanted item what would cost 40 (and two picks, so no go there) in Arcane. The whole item is just not thought out properly.
It's like they've never heard of tech writers or proof reading or something.
Or if/when questions like this come up internally, they just ask the dude who wrote the book who says "well what i meant was XXXX" and they're all "ooooh, ok, makes sense when you, the book author, directly explain what you meant to us in person, print it!"
Maybe they could release the rules online to be ripped up by the internet, as warseer and their ilk are wont to do, but withhold the point costs for the book itself. Would probably never work though.
GW is old school, which is the root of most of their advantages and problems. Though most of my knowledge of the company is now at least five years old or so (last time I was really keyed in was 2004ish) they don't seem much different. GW is ultimately a "good ol' boys" organization, so as a whole, the Studio and exec-types can be extremely, sometimes brutally, pragmatic; think something like a small town repair shop or garage that fights tooth and nail for every dollar, but may make oddly conservative choices at times - that's close to GW's internal culture.
Combine that with what Warhammer started as; not a game, but a tool to sell more miniatures; and the fact that the studio and Warhammer World have an attached bar and it starts to make sense. For the first ten or fifteen years of Warhammer, players were either adults who played in basements and LGS, or kids who played as an end-to-end hobby for a few years until the noticed girls.
As a whole, gamers in general didn't start demanding hyper-concise, streamlined rules until Magic showed up and got popular in the mid-90's; the root of the tournament mentality and well into WFB 4th and 40k 2nd. The expectation was and is that you play like an RPG; make rules up on the fly, or modify them to suit what makes sense. The rules are a supporting element for the hobby, but not absolute.
So between the two, GW didn't start developing with any specific need to support detailed rules as they have no bearing on expectations for play, and they don't see any need to change how they've done things. I'd imagine that as we see a third and fourth generation of designers, we'll see more tournament players show up in the Studio. Which worries me, as I could see WFB going the route of 40k (especially 3rd, which was GW's biggest attempt at catering to the new gamer audience). I'd hate to see so much of the game's character flattened.
The excess models on the sides are not allowed to attack. They just sit there. If you kill some of the dwarfs, the casualty models are removed by pulling those hanging-off-the-side out, so that you dont reduce the number of models that are touching.
Now, when you charge, it is your responsability as a charger to attempt to maximize the number of models in base to base combat. Remember that base-to-base includes those that are touching only at the apex of the corners of their bases. So you'll end up with something like:
XXXXXXXxxx
..^^^^
The capital X's would all be in B2B, and would participate in melee. The small x's would be the models first removed as casualties. If any of the small x models happened to be musicians or standard bearers, then take a large X or a different small x as a casualty and keep the standard/musician in the unit.
If you side charged, you would end up with this:
>
>
>Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
Only 2 of your spider riders would be able to attack, as they are in b2b. Cav models are slightly wider than dwarf infantry models, so the most that can touch, even counting the very tips of the corners, is 2 in this case.
Only one dwarf can counter-attack, but if the dwarf unit takes a casualty, the dwarf that "dies" is the capital X, so no dwarf models may counter attack. More than one casualty can be inflicted by the spider riders, though, even though they only touch 1 dwarf. The cap X is technically the model that "dies" but rather than remove that particular model and then shove the whole unit over to touch the spider riders again, you simply remove a model from the other end of the line.
Posts
"...the bearer may cast this spell as if a level 1 wizard (thought does not count as one)" is hard to write while drunk.
Thing is, GW has always written like this, but it wasn't a huge problem until tournaments legitimized rules lawyering, at least in my experience.
Or if/when questions like this come up internally, they just ask the dude who wrote the book who says "well what i meant was XXXX" and they're all "ooooh, ok, makes sense when you, the book author, directly explain what you meant to us in person, print it!"
Maybe they could release the rules online to be ripped up by the internet, as warseer and their ilk are wont to do, but withhold the point costs for the book itself. Would probably never work though.
GW is a fucking weird company. Take, for example, their tenuous relationship with Army Builder.
Combine that with what Warhammer started as; not a game, but a tool to sell more miniatures; and the fact that the studio and Warhammer World have an attached bar and it starts to make sense. For the first ten or fifteen years of Warhammer, players were either adults who played in basements and LGS, or kids who played as an end-to-end hobby for a few years until the noticed girls.
As a whole, gamers in general didn't start demanding hyper-concise, streamlined rules until Magic showed up and got popular in the mid-90's; the root of the tournament mentality and well into WFB 4th and 40k 2nd. The expectation was and is that you play like an RPG; make rules up on the fly, or modify them to suit what makes sense. The rules are a supporting element for the hobby, but not absolute.
So between the two, GW didn't start developing with any specific need to support detailed rules as they have no bearing on expectations for play, and they don't see any need to change how they've done things. I'd imagine that as we see a third and fourth generation of designers, we'll see more tournament players show up in the Studio. Which worries me, as I could see WFB going the route of 40k (especially 3rd, which was GW's biggest attempt at catering to the new gamer audience). I'd hate to see so much of the game's character flattened.
Word.
I think it's time for a new thread, too.
I don't play much warhammer, more 40k, but man, sometimes you have to make those poor tactical decisions just to make it more epic.
"I don't really need that last, heavily fortified point to win, I could just sit on my current objectives and wait him out?
Wait what? NO. MASS INFANTRY CHARGE WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGHHHH!!"
Not it.
And straight up Inquisitor - sometimes the stupid moves pay off, too.
I had a unit of Spider Riders charge a Dwarf gunline of 1 really long rank.
basically:
xxxxxxxxxxxx
^^^^
How does combat like that work with all those excess models on the side? What if I had charged them from the flank?
Now, when you charge, it is your responsability as a charger to attempt to maximize the number of models in base to base combat. Remember that base-to-base includes those that are touching only at the apex of the corners of their bases. So you'll end up with something like:
XXXXXXXxxx
..^^^^
The capital X's would all be in B2B, and would participate in melee. The small x's would be the models first removed as casualties. If any of the small x models happened to be musicians or standard bearers, then take a large X or a different small x as a casualty and keep the standard/musician in the unit.
If you side charged, you would end up with this:
>
>
>Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
Only 2 of your spider riders would be able to attack, as they are in b2b. Cav models are slightly wider than dwarf infantry models, so the most that can touch, even counting the very tips of the corners, is 2 in this case.
Only one dwarf can counter-attack, but if the dwarf unit takes a casualty, the dwarf that "dies" is the capital X, so no dwarf models may counter attack. More than one casualty can be inflicted by the spider riders, though, even though they only touch 1 dwarf. The cap X is technically the model that "dies" but rather than remove that particular model and then shove the whole unit over to touch the spider riders again, you simply remove a model from the other end of the line.
I hope this is more helpful than confusing.
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=77907