Saturday, November 10, 2012

More Blog Wars 4 Updates

Thought I'd answer a couple of questions that have arisen this week. Before I do let me remind you that tickets will still be available until midnight next Saturday. This is also the deadline for army list submission.

Maelstrom Games Collapse
As you may be reading across the internet, Maelstrom Games has gone under. I wanted to get a post up pretty quickly to prevent any concerns that Blog Wars 4 won't be going ahead. It is my understanding that whilst the retail arm of the business is going into liquidation, the Eye of the Storm venue is still trading normally.

I want to reassure everyone coming to BW4 that their money is safe. If I'm forced to cancel the event because it turns out the venue is closing then everyone will get their ticket price back. Therefore if you're having doubts about coming along because of the Maelstrom drama then rest assured that you won't be taking a risk in buying a ticket!

One final point on this. I've yet to clarify whether the venue still has a store attached to it. If it does then I'll check if participants still get the 15% tournament discount. I think it's more likely that the shop has gone but I'll let you know what I can find out. The other thing of course is that the prizes are in the form of Maelstrom Games vouchers at the moment. I am, of course, going to change this but wanted to know if people would prefer an actual physical prize (i.e. a box of miniatures, scenery etc) or some monetary equivalent.

Special Characters in Allies
I've had a couple of people asking me to change the ruling about the Special Character having to come from the Primary Detachment. As ever with these things I'm open to suggestions but I wanted to just explain my thinking on this before I let people debate about what I should do.

First of all I have no problem with an allied detachment containing a special character as long as the "commander" is in the primary detachment. I can't see an issue with armies having more than one SC regardless of where they are in the list but I intended for the "commander" to be from the primary detachment. It just makes sense to me that the leader of the force would be from the main codex.

My concern with SCs in allied detachments was that people would simply take a cheap troop unit in order to field a strong SC from another codex. For example a 5-man BA assault squad or scouts to allow Mephiston to be taken. The reason I'm not a fan of this is I think it detracts from the feel of the army when done in this way. However, I appreciate that this isn't the only reason people might want an allied SC.

I know a couple of people have written their lists around an allied SC and I apologise for not being clearer about it in the initial rules. Do people have any strong objection to me allowing the "commander" SC to be in the allied detachment? Does it matter if this is the only SC in the army? Frankly I don't think it'll make that much difference and of course I'll see all the army lists and be able to clarify things.

So it's up to you guys. If people aren't really fussed then I'll just let people take their "commander" SC wherever they like in the army! As ever I appreciate your feedback.

5 comments:

  1. I know that this may allow certain powerful characters to be taken that either directly (Meph) or indirectly (Epidemius) buff the overall army...I personally have no issue with it.

    I do however agree with Alex that the whole idea of a Commander in the scenarios is to represent the principal codex character to be a true leader and seriously influential individual on the tabletop.. I do think some effort should be made to keep a SC in the Primary in some way..

    Obviously I am but one voice.. but I know I speak for all the Sons of Sanguinius when I say: "Bring it!"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hopefully the venue doesn't burn to the ground as the hordes of unhappy customers march on it with pitch forks and burning torches held high!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello all, I am one of the players who is asking to use an allied sc, epidemious. I have been working on the list since 6th edition and allies were introduced to 40k, I understand the fear sc not been characterful but that is not the case in my situation( epidemius + plaguebearers + plaguemarines and no other mark but nurgle), I am also more than happy to use my chaos lord as acting commander and have epidemius keeping notes on h is progress to report back to pappa nurgle, if that does not sit well with you, then I will just have to add typhous to the list. Thanks
    Also good to know the sons of saguinius got my back :-)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi guys, I played a game at Maunsfeld Games yesterday (this is what the Eye of the Storm/Maelstrom Games venue is now to be called) and there is NO CHANGE! the bar is still there (phew) the gaming venue upstairs is the same and the shop is still there too vand, just o reassure you that really NOTHING has changed, I lost my game too.

    As for SC's, I have no strong preference either. I do understand and agree that 'fluff-wise' it's nicer for the SC to come from the main force but if it precludes interesting builds (ie no Plague Zombies in a CSM allied force) then I think the rules can be relaxed!

    As an aside, I'll be posting up my Squat Guard army (no allies, pure Squat!) on the Claws & Fists blogs in the next day or so.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Glad to hear the venue is still running, at least there won't be the need to relocate.
    For SCs in allies, I don't have a particular objection to it, although I can totally see how it will be gamed. I'll likely be having an SC in both main and allied detachments, so I'm happy either way.

    ReplyDelete

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...