Opinions new Tyranid 'dex

[Matt Thomas]

Doesn't it say in the 'dex that he can take tryrant guard?

If he can take tyrant guard he's a tyrant, right?

You can't make that kind of inference and claim it is RAW. You could easily have a situation where something that was not a hive tyrant could take tyrant guard for some reason.

[Matt Thomas]

Maybe the problem is that GW has failed to take into consideration the pedantic nature of it's player base. I personally believe that the Swarmlord is adequately described as a Hive tyrant in it's description.

Cheers,
Alan

Cute dig Alan. But words have meaning and the rules of the game are the rules of the game. Other manufacturers have shown that they can write rules that are clear, and issue timely FAQ when mistakes are made. There is absolutely no excuse for GW publishing rules like spirit leach or not specifying clearly that something counts as a hive tyrant. This is very VERY basic game design.
You can whine all you want about players not playing the way you like... but the rules are abjectly badly written, and some (like spirit leach) are abjectly unclear or have unclear interactions with other rules. Of course we can 'house rule' them. But that is no excuse for GW dropping the ball.
If GW doesn't want to support players using the rules they should stop writing codexes and just make models for us to use under whatever rules we feel like that day.

[Achillius]

Maybe the problem is that GW has failed to take into consideration the pedantic nature of it's player base. I personally believe that the Swarmlord is adequately described as a Hive tyrant in it's description.

Cheers,
Alan

Cute dig Alan. But words have meaning and the rules of the game are the rules of the game. Other manufacturers have shown that they can write rules that are clear, and issue timely FAQ when mistakes are made. There is absolutely no excuse for GW publishing rules like spirit leach or not specifying clearly that something counts as a hive tyrant. This is very VERY basic game design.
You can whine all you want about players not playing the way you like... but the rules are abjectly badly written, and some (like spirit leach) are abjectly unclear or have unclear interactions with other rules. Of course we can 'house rule' them. But that is no excuse for GW dropping the ball.
If GW doesn't want to support players using the rules they should stop writing codexes and just make models for us to use under whatever rules we feel like that day.

Seriously I'm not trying to be cute, that in fact may be beyond my powers at this stage. But, as I've said before, I feel it's very clear in the description of the swarmlord that it is a Hive Tyrant. I just believe you're overthinking this one.

Sorry,
Alan

[jhobin]

I'm with ya Alan 

seems pretty clear by description he's a tyrant!

[Grimwulfe]

As a neutral party here I read the description of the Swarmlord and I must agree he is a Hive Tyrant

[Lykosan]

Fluff is not rules per RAW, no where in his Wrtten rules does it say he counts as a Hive Tyrant. If fluff were rules all Relic Blades would require 2 hands to use one.

[Achillius]

Fluff is not rules per RAW, no where in his Wrtten rules does it say he counts as a Hive Tyrant. If fluff were rules all Relic Blades would require 2 hands to use one.

You may want to read your that space marine codex again.... Relic blades are two handed, hence no extra attack for addition CCW..

So let me ask another question, are terminators space marines? every other unit mentions the word space marine but not that one...

We're being silly people.

Alan

[Rob S]

Seriously I'm not trying to be cute, that in fact may be beyond my powers at this stage. But, as I've said before, I feel it's very clear in the description of the swarmlord that it is a Hive Tyrant. I just believe you're overthinking this one.

Sorry,
Alan

But the thing is, does it say he's a Hive Tyrant?  If not, then you're reading what you assume (and rightfully so) they intended it to be.  Key word: intended.  If it doesn't say it's a Hive Tyrant, then you read the rule as it was intended to be, which I don't think anybody would disagree with in a friendly or tournament setting.

This game requires reading rules in an RAI form many times, but to say that it's not RAI is a false statement.

[jhobin]

Since the new thing is referencing other site's I throw my hat in;

http://www.adepticon.org/wpfiles/inat/INATFAQv3.2.pdf

"PG 95 +TYR.56H.01 - Q:All of the Swarmlord's psychic powers are written as working for a 'Hive Tyrant'. Is he considered a 'Hive Tyrant'?
A:A Super Version of a Hive Tyrant, but yes {clarification}."

basically, he's a tyrant  

[Rob S]

Since the new thing is referencing other site's I throw my hat in;

http://www.adepticon.org/wpfiles/inat/INATFAQv3.2.pdf

"PG 95 +TYR.56H.01 - Q:All of the Swarmlord's psychic powers are written as working for a 'Hive Tyrant'. Is he considered a 'Hive Tyrant'?
A:A Super Version of a Hive Tyrant, but yes {clarification}."

So, basically suck it up he's a tyrant 

I never said he wasn't, in fact I agreed he was.

You're quoting an independent (though professional) FAQ that's saying the Swarmlord is a Hive Tyrant, and telling me that's GW's official written rule?

Summary: Yes he should be a Hive Tyrant.  Yes that's what GW intended it to be.  No it's not the rule that's written, it's the rule that any logical person would figure out was under the rules as intended type of situation.

[Achillius]

Seriously I'm not trying to be cute, that in fact may be beyond my powers at this stage. But, as I've said before, I feel it's very clear in the description of the swarmlord that it is a Hive Tyrant. I just believe you're overthinking this one.

Sorry,
Alan

But the thing is, does it say he's a Hive Tyrant?  If not, then you're reading what you assume (and rightfully so) they intended it to be.  Key word: intended.  If it doesn't say it's a Hive Tyrant, then you read the rule as it was intended to be, which I don't think anybody would disagree with in a friendly or tournament setting.

This game requires reading rules in an RAI form many times, but to say that it's not RAI is a false statement.

Yes it does.

[Rob S]

Seriously I'm not trying to be cute, that in fact may be beyond my powers at this stage. But, as I've said before, I feel it's very clear in the description of the swarmlord that it is a Hive Tyrant. I just believe you're overthinking this one.

Sorry,
Alan

But the thing is, does it say he's a Hive Tyrant?  If not, then you're reading what you assume (and rightfully so) they intended it to be.  Key word: intended.  If it doesn't say it's a Hive Tyrant, then you read the rule as it was intended to be, which I don't think anybody would disagree with in a friendly or tournament setting.

This game requires reading rules in an RAI form many times, but to say that it's not RAI is a false statement.

Yes it does.

Does it?  I haven't been looking at one, I've just noticed the general consensus is that it doesn't... clearly, at least.

[Lady GaGa]

Well this about to be a flame war...

[Rob S]

Well this about to be a flame war...

I'm surprised it hasn't been locked yet. :p

I'm just really baffled by the "GW intended for this to be a Hive Tyrant, even though they don't specifically say it.  Thus, it's not Rules-as-Intended" ideas going on here.

[Matt Thomas]

Seriously I'm not trying to be cute, that in fact may be beyond my powers at this stage. But, as I've said before, I feel it's very clear in the description of the swarmlord that it is a Hive Tyrant. I just believe you're overthinking this one.

Sorry,
Alan

But the thing is, does it say he's a Hive Tyrant?  If not, then you're reading what you assume (and rightfully so) they intended it to be.  Key word: intended.  If it doesn't say it's a Hive Tyrant, then you read the rule as it was intended to be, which I don't think anybody would disagree with in a friendly or tournament setting.

This game requires reading rules in an RAI form many times, but to say that it's not RAI is a false statement.

Well put Rob.

Alan. I am in no way claiming that ANYONE in their right mind would play him as anything but a hive tyrant even at a tournament. The issue I have is that GW had every chance to make the codex clear... and FAILED. Then when they issue poorly worded rules... they don't issue FAQ fast enough (or at all).
Spirit leach is a good example of something that might actually be played differently depending upon the players... EVERYBODY knows this by now... so do we have a GW official FAQ?