How is this played? As I read it, you cannot attack anything skinks unless the skink model is not in contact with a kroxigor model. So the only times you can actually attack a skink are when, A: The skink is not in base contact with a kroxigor or B: when there is a special rule that specifically targets a model in base contact with the attacker (there for the kroxigor is not in base contact and cannot be targeted). How does everyone else play it? Is it as simple as it sounds? Seems like some of these rules get power gamed more often than they should.
I read the rule in this way: You can only attack the kroxigor if "his" skink is in btb with the enemy. Meaning that's the only time you can strike the kroxigor, but you can still choose to attack the skink. The "only" says that it's the only way to attack the kroxigor, not that the krox is the only possible target. Same word can have different meanings depending on the context.
It's basically just a measure to make sure that people can actually hit the kroxigors, unlike our last book where it was prohibitet due to the cross-over from 7th BRB to 8th BRB with our AB being a 7th edition book. There's nothing shady about that. So play it like the front rank of your opponents unit can hit the kroxigors (when they're in a mixed unit).
I concur with Pinktaco above. Please note that the qualification of the rule are only met by opposing models that are in base contact with a skink that, in turn, are in base contact with a kroxigor. Opposing supporting attacks do not meet this qualification through the skink and may only attack the kroxigor if the front model is in base contact with the kroxigor himself. I would point you to Questions #30 & #31 here: http://www.lustria-online.com/threads/lizardmen-8th-ed-faq.13582/
As discussed in the link in the post just above, this rule is poorly written and equally subject to 2 different interpretations. There is no right or wrong here, although I think most people play the rule as permissive rather than mandatory.
Because it is seemingly impossible for me to resist the topic - Oh look! You mean there are other rules out there that make it so that people have to treat their supporting attacks differently? Say it ain't so!
I think there is. People want to go through loop-holes in order to gain (even small) advantages. If they didn't want kroxies to be hit they could've just written "kroxigors cannot be hit while in a unit with skinks". They specifically wrote it the way they did because it's obviously overpowered against heavily armoured units. It's unfortunate that they didn't fool-proof it even more, but I'm sure people would find a way regardless. Then again.. That's just the way I see it. People also argue that Piranha Blade grants the Slann and his spells specific attributes in which case I simply just shakes my head.
I was not addressing the issue of whether Krox can be targeted by supporting attacks. The real gray area in the rule is whether an enemy model is required to attack a Krox or whether it has a choice to attack skinks instead.
Absolutely. The existing wording is ambiguous and until a clarification is provided by an Errata or FAQ, it will remain an outstanding issue.
It really is impressive, in a completely negative way, just how stubbornly GW has stayed away from offering support for their Warhammer rules products. It's almost like the read the interwebz and have decided that as long as people keep asking for FAQs they are going to refuse to give them - just like a petulant little child. There are legitimate issues like this one, issues that can have actual impact of purchasing decisions (to say nothing of list configuration with existing collections), that GW has ignored for longer than any responsible company should.
There really is no excuse for such poor service in my opinion. Their models continue to get more and more expensive, and their literature becomes more elaborate and costly, but they offer nothing in return. If i didn't love my Lizards and Elves so much, and have put an immeasurable amount of time into the modelling and painting, then I might be more aggressive and/or look elsewhere. Probably not. Ha.
Exactly. Although I think most people play it that there is an option, that's not based on the rules which can be interpreted either way.
You guys must not have read the GW Annual Report: "Games Workshop's strategy is to make the best fantasy miniatures in the world and sell them globally at a profit, and it intends doing so forever." "Our market is a niche market made up of people who want to collect our miniatures. They tend to be male, middle-class, discerning teenagers and adults. We do no demographic research, we have no focus groups, we do not ask the market what it wants. These things are otiose in a niche" They don't ask what we want. They tell us what we want. And we want miniatures. Why do you keep talking about rules? You're all miniature collectors. Collecting miniatures doesn't require any rules! Kirby actually lists out all the elements of their business model: - Vertically integrated. They design, manuafacture and distribute their models. - They sell to third party retailers under closely controller terms and conditions - They publish 2 magazines - Their stores attract a lot of attention (and are "cheap" to run. He mentions that 3 times) - Their market is a niche market (as quoted above) - They control the business centrally In his 6 page letter he never mentions "rules" or "game design" once. As far as the business of Games Workshop is concerned, the Games might as well not exist. Their business is only miniatures, and their customers are people who buy miniatures. It's unfortunate, but they do not draw a line between *good rules* and *selling miniatures*. It's funny, because he says: "Because no one seems able to grasp the essential simplicity of what we do there has always been the search for the Achilles heel, the one thing that Kirby and his cronies have overlooked. These are legion. I run through the list from time to time when someone says that computer games will be the death of us – they are so much more realistic now! – again. This year it is 3-D printing. Pretty soon everyone will be printing their own miniatures and where will we be then, eh?" Which is an interesting straw man. Maybe I'm one of those people that doesn't "grasp the essential simplicity" of what they do. I agree that 3D printing isn't going to be what does them in. But I do think someone making and maintaining a competitive rule set and supporting the community of players with events and tournaments will see GW fall to obscurity. Without their rules & fluff, GW just makes really expensive models. Source: http://investor.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/2013-14-Press-statement-final-website.pdf
I'm going to read that report shortly... Meanwhile. How, then, are we to make the blind see what is right in front of them? Is there something worthwhile we can do as a community? If they truly don't give a rats arse (skaven pun intended) about the gaming side of things, surely the wider community (oe: all these race specific web forums) can band together some how and make the ones with ears listen? EDIT: Ok, I read the report. I am disappointed. I understand the a public company needs to impress its investors, but having no regard for the consumers is appauling. It almost makes me want to move to the UK and get a job there so I can start making some sorely needed changes.
I imagine that the board would be interested in resume's... It's probably worth a crack anyway, just to see how long it takes to get the "Sorry but the position has been filled" email... haha