Let's collect a concise list of issues that need attention. Once we're comfortable that we have everything we can submit it and at least be comforted that they've been notified.
This will include missing keywords, abilities, etc. Please keep debate to a minimum as this should be mostly informational. I'll keep this post updated with additions and we'll try and track when we see items get resolved.
ERRATA
- Astra Militarum, Leman Russ Exterminator : the datasheet has 'Exterminator Autocannon [Rapid Fire 4]', but the armory sheet shows 'Exterminator Autocannon [Sustained Fire 1]'
- Astra Militarum, Infantry Squad: Some wargear are per 10 models, which excludes units with Heavy Weapons teams from taking them twice. Should these be to "1 Guardsmen (2 if the unit has 2 Sergeants)..."?
- Astra Militarum, Death Korps of Krieg: There is no wargear option to add Death Korps Medi-pack to this unit.
- Craftworlds, Corsairs : If you take a Shuriken Rifle you no longer have a melee weapon. Is this inteded?
- Craftworlds, Autarch Skyrunners : If you swap their Laser Lance for a Fusion Gun cannot fight in close combat.
- Craftworlds, Troupe Master : Is the stat line for Harlequin’s special weapon on the Troupe Master data card correct? There currently appears to be no incentive to take it rather than the Troupe Master's blade.
- Craftworlds, Eldar Autarch : why is the character who has walked and mastered all the Aspect Paths - able to only join Guardians, but none of the Aspect units?
- CSM, Rhino : add Firing Deck 2
- Dark Angels, Deathwing Strikemaster : If this model replaces his Storm Bolter and Master Crafted Power Weapon with a Storm Bolter and Storm Shield, he is unable to attack in melee. (Note that the Wolf Guard Battle Leader in Terminator Armour gains a Close Combat Weapon and a Relic Shield as part of the same choice, alleviating this issue)
- Dark Angels, Deathwing Terminator/Terminator Command Squad : Previously a model with a Cyclone Missile Launcher could exchange his Storm Bolter/Power Fist for a pair of Lightning Claws or a Thunder Hammer & Storm Shield. This is no longer the case, potentially invalidating many existing miniatures. Was this intentional, or an oversight? (Note that Wolf Guard Terminators can still do this without restriction)
- Dark Angels, Deathwatch Terminator Squad : Previously a model with a Cyclone Missile Launcher could exchange his Storm Bolter/Power Fist for a pair of Lightning Claws or a Thunder Hammer & Storm Shield. This is no longer the case, potentially invalidating many existing miniatures. Was this intentional, or an oversight? (Note that Wolf Guard Terminators can still do this without restriction)
- Dark Angels, Deathwing Apothecary : is he supposed to be equipped with a Chainfist? The model has a Narthecium.
- Death Guard. Cultists : Their autogins and pistols/CCWs combined together, while vanilla Cultists have autoguns and autopistols as distinct separate options. Are they supposed to be different?
- Death Guard, Lord of Contagion : lacks the wargear option to take the Manreaper and Orb of Desiccation, is this intended?
- Death Guard, Malignant Plaguecaster, Plague Marines, and the Plague Surgeon : plague bolt pistol lacks Pistol
- Death Guard, Biologus Putrifier : should the Injector pistol lack lethal hits?
- Death Guard, Terminator Sorcerer: Putrescent Vitality asks you to select a visible enemy within 18" but the ability affects the DG unit and has nothing to do with the selected enemy unit.
- Death Gaurd, Was the removal of Possessed intentional? If not, what are you supposed to use your (now obsolete) models as?
- Deathwatch, Spectrus Kill Teams : They have the Las Fusil weapon on their data card front, but no option on the datacard back for attached Eliminators to equip the Fusil, just the "default" Bolt Sniper Rifle. Are they Supposed to be able to equip them?
- Deathwatch, Kill Team Veterans with Jump Packs in a Proteus team are equipped with Long Vigil melee weapon, close combat weapon, jump pack. Is this intentional or should the mostly useless close combat weapon actually be a bolt pistol instead like the loadout for the Vanguard Vanguard they are derived from (possibly also with option to switch pistol to shield or special pistols like VV can too)?
- Necrons, Psychomancer : change Nightmare Shroud to add 1 to the Leadership characteristic of enemy units
- Space Marines, Terminator Captain : Storm Bolter/Combi-weapon and Storm Shield can't fight in close combat. Should one of the options have a CCW built in?
- Space Marines, Reivers: If they take a Bolt Carbine they no longer have a close combat weapon. Related to that, there is a close combat weapon listed on their datacard but no way to actually equip it.
- Space Marines, Primaris Captain : The model is unable to have a Plasma Pistol and Master-Crafted Power Weapon. This renders the Primaris Captain model available through the Imperium Magazine series illegal.
- Space Marines, Primaris Captain : Intercessor Bolt Rifles have the [Assault] and [Heavy] keywords. The Primaris Captain's Master Crafted Bolt Rifle does not. Is this intentional?
- Space Marines, Primaris Lieutenant : Intercessor Bolt Rifles have the [Assault] and [Heavy] keywords. The Primaris Lieutenant's Master Crafted Bolt Rifle does not. Is this intentional?
- Space Marines, Primaris Captain in Gravis Armour - Heavy Intercessor Heavy Bolt Rifles have the [Assault] and [Heavy] keywords. The Primaris Captain in Gravis Armour's Master Crafted Heavy Bolt Rifle does not. Is this intentional?
-Space Marines, Assault Squads (with and without JP) : they suffer from the lack of melee weapons if taking a special weapon upgrade.
- Space Wolves, Scouts : Is 1 wound intentional?
- Tau, Missile Pods on Missile Drones are AP-2. Missile Pods everywhere else (even the high yield ones) are AP-1.
- Thousand Sons, Rhino : add Firing Deck 2
- Thousand Sons, Defiler Twin Lascannon : change S to 12
- Thousand Sons, Land Raider Twin Inferno Heavy Bolter : change damage to 2
- World Eaters, Rhino : add Firing Deck 2
FAQ
- When an ability reduces the damage by 1 and it does not specify a minimum can the damage be reduced to 0?
- How do keywords work with attached units? Does a unit of Rubric Marines all count as a Psyker for the purpose of Anti-Psyker? Are some keywords shared where others are not?
- Does Sustained Hits or other abilities from multiple sources stack?
OTHER
- Craftworlds, Is it intentional that an Autarch with a Scorpion Chainsword is strength 5 but a striking scorpion with a Scorpion Chainsword is strength 4?
- Death Guard, Disgustingly Resilient only works in the fight phase, was this intentional?
When possible, you should always ask a question rather than tell them to add something. So the CSM and Thousand Sons Rhino should be "This Rhino does not have Firing Deck 2 like other Rhinos" rather than "Add Firing Deck 2".
Astra Militarum:
Infantry Squad: Some wargear are per 10 models, which excludes units with Heavy Weapons teams from taking them twice. Should these be to "1 Guardsmen (2 if the unit has 2 Sergeants)..."?
Death Korps of Krieg: There is no wargear option to add Death Korps Medi-pack to this unit.
How keywords are supposed to work on Attached units and/or other units in which the models in such units do not share all the same Keywords (example Traitor Enforcer)?
Eldar Corsairs that take a Shuriken Rifle cannot fight in close combat. Autarch Skyrunners that swap their Laser Lance for a Fusion Gun cannot fight in close combat. Missile Pods on Missile Drones are AP-2. Missile Pods everywhere else (even the high yield ones) are AP-1. Defiler TL-Lascannons haven't been updated (still S9, compared to everyone else's S12). - Scratch that. It's been updated, it seems.
Death Guard Cultists have their autogins and pistols/CCWs combined together, while vanilla Cultists have autoguns and autopistols as distinct separate options. Are they supposed to be different?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Terminator Captain with Storm Bolter/Combi-weapon and Storm Shield can't fight in close combat. Should one of the options have a CCW built in?
Terminator Captain with Storm Bolter/Combi-weapon and Storm Shield can't fight in close combat. Should one of the options have a CCW built in?
This is going to happen over and over and over again on multiple datasheets - Since you're limited to one CCW (+ any EXTRA ATTACKS) they'd be best suited sticking a Close Combat Weapon statline on every datasheet just to head these combinations off everywhere.
Myphitic Blight-hulers Tank Hunters ability should effect monsters as well
For the Plague Marines, which of the models count as Bubotic weapons and which as Heavy plague weapons? What do you do with the model equipped with two plague knifes? What do you do with the Plague Champion equipped with both a power fist and the sword?
deathwatch Spectrus Kill Teams have the Las Fusil weapon on their data card front, but no option on the datacard back for attached Eliminators to equip the Fusil, just the "default" Bolt Sniper Rifle. Are they Supposed to be able to equip them?
Is it intentional that an Autarch with a Scorpion Chainsword is strength 5 but a striking scorpion with a Scorpion Chainsword is strength 4?
Is the stat line for Harlequin’s special weapon on the Troupe Master data card correct? There currently appears to be no incentive to take it rather than the Troupe Master's blade.
There are going to be some things that I hope are dealt with in a designer's commentary or glossary. All but 1 of the -1 damage abilities doesn't specifiy "to a minimum of 1".
One more for the "no close combat" pile:
If SM Reivers take a Bolt Carbine they no longer have a close combat weapon. Related to that, there is a close combat weapon listed on their datacard but no way to actually equip it.
Death Guard: Putrescent Vitality on the Terminator Sorcerer just doesn't make sense. It asks you to select a visible enemy within 18" but the ability affects the DG unit and has nothing to do with the selected enemy unit.
Orks: the way it is currently written, the 'Mob Rule' Stratagem does literally nothing. Since it only lasts for your Command Phase, the only Stratagem it can unlock is 'Insane Bravery', and that has no need of it since it's unlocked anyway.
Anyway, I figured I'd throw these into into the ring:
Primaris Captain - The model is unable to have a Plasma Pistol and Master-Crafted Power Weapon. This renders the Primaris Captain model available through the Imperium Magazine series illegal. The Plasma Pistol/Power Fist Primaris Captain was also a Limited Edition miniature, so availability really shouldn't be the issue here.
Primaris Captain - Intercessor Bolt Rifles have the [Assault] and [Heavy] keywords. The Primaris Captain's Master Crafted Bolt Rifle does not. Is this intentional?
Primaris Lieutenant - Intercessor Bolt Rifles have the [Assault] and [Heavy] keywords. The Primaris Lieutenant's Master Crafted Bolt Rifle does not. Is this intentional?
Primaris Captain in Gravis Armour - Heavy Intercessor Heavy Bolt Rifles have the [Assault] and [Heavy] keywords. The Primaris Captain in Gravis Armour's Master Crafted Heavy Bolt Rifle does not. Is this intentional?
Deathwing Strikemaster - If this model replaces his Storm Bolter and Master Crafted Power Weapon with a Storm Bolter and Storm Shield, he is unable to attack in melee. (Note that the Wolf Guard Battle Leader in Terminator Armour gains a Close Combat Weapon and a Relic Shield as part of the same choice, alleviating this issue)
Deathwing Terminator/Terminator Command Squad - Previously a model with a Cyclone Missile Launcher could exchange his Storm Bolter/Power Fist for a pair of Lightning Claws or a Thunder Hammer & Storm Shield. This is no longer the case, potentially invalidating many existing miniatures. Was this intentional, or an oversight? (Note that Wolf Guard Terminators can still do this without restriction)
Deathwatch Terminator Squad - Previously a model with a Cyclone Missile Launcher could exchange his Storm Bolter/Power Fist for a pair of Lightning Claws or a Thunder Hammer & Storm Shield. This is no longer the case, potentially invalidating many existing miniatures. Was this intentional, or an oversight? (Note that Wolf Guard Terminators can still do this without restriction)
Kill Team Veterans with Jump Packs in a Proteus team are equipped with Long Vigil melee weapon, close combat weapon, jump pack. Is this intentional or should the mostly useless close combat weapon actually be a bolt pistol instead like the loadout for the Vanguard Veteran they are derived from (possibly also with option to switch pistol to shield or special pistols like VV can too)?
Craftworlds, Corsairs : If you take a Shuriken Rifle you no longer have a melee weapon. Is this inteded?
- Craftworlds, Autarch Skyrunners : If you swap their Laser Lance for a Fusion Gun cannot fight in close combat.
I'm not going to go through all of them (because its a fairly common error), but I'd suggest standardizing your phrasing for this issue.
.
'Weapon swap X leaves the model/unit without a melee weapon'
In general, leave out any editorializing, rhetorical questions or snark and just provide information.
Just noticed I accidently had Vanguard Vanguard instead of Vanguard Veterans in my original post if you wish to update that next time you end up doing one.
Astra Militarum Ogryn Bodyguards (thanks for the correction, HBMC) can replace their melee weapons with shields and become unable to fight in close combat.
catbarf wrote: Astra Militarum Bullgryns can replace their melee weapons with shields and become unable to fight in close combat.
Wait, seriously???
*checks document*
No, they have a close combat weapon by default. The Ogryn bodyguard however, starts with a Ripper Gun + Knife, and can replace the Ripper Gun with a Grenadier Gauntlet (no melee profile) and the knife with brute or slab shield (no melee profile).
Should Harlequin Troupes and Tempestus Scions taken as Battleline units with their respective warlords increase their OC stat to bring them in line with other basic battleline units (or do they want Harlequin and Militarum Tempestus players to be playing their armies on hard mode)?
Daemons horrors, flamer, exalted flamer, burning chariot cannot use their ranged [PSYCHIC] weapons, because they arent PSYKERS. The blue scribes also dont have PSYKER, cant use their Xirat’p’s Sorcerous Barrages, which has [PSYCHIC].
p5freak wrote: Daemons horrors, flamer, exalted flamer, burning chariot cannot use their ranged [PSYCHIC] weapons, because they arent PSYKERS. The blue scribes also dont have PSYKER, cant use their Xirat’p’s Sorcerous Barrages, which has [PSYCHIC].
is their a rule that says that only PSYKERS can use PSYCHIC weapons?
the -1 damage thing has been covered in the designers commentary. they confirm it cant be reduced below damage 1. thier might be other answers in their, not finished reading it
Since some units get resistance (Eldar Warlocks get invuls) to Psychic weapons, the use of said weapons probably has nothing to do with the attacker being a Psyker.
Psychic weapons just create Psychic effects.
p5freak wrote: Daemons horrors, flamer, exalted flamer, burning chariot cannot use their ranged [PSYCHIC] weapons, because they arent PSYKERS. The blue scribes also dont have PSYKER, cant use their Xirat’p’s Sorcerous Barrages, which has [PSYCHIC].
From the rules commentary:
Psychic Weapons and Abilities: Weapons with [PSYCHIC] in their
profile are known as Psychic weapons. Abilities tagged with the word
'Psychic' are known as Psychic abilities. Generally speaking, Psychic
weapons and abilities are used by Psykers, but the absence of the
Psyker keyword does not prevent a model from using any Psychic
weapons or abilities it has.
Craftworlds, Corsairs : If you take a Shuriken Rifle you no longer have a melee weapon. Is this inteded?
- Craftworlds, Autarch Skyrunners : If you swap their Laser Lance for a Fusion Gun cannot fight in close combat.
I'm not going to go through all of them (because its a fairly common error), but I'd suggest standardizing your phrasing for this issue.
.
'Weapon swap X leaves the model/unit without a melee weapon'
In general, leave out any editorializing, rhetorical questions or snark and just provide information.
Will do - some of these will go away with the commentary and such as well.
usernamesareannoying wrote: did the commentary clarify what happens if you have no weapons to attack with in melee?
Nope. This is an issue that can be fixed via the datasheets in most cases, just by adding in a close combat weapon, or allowing certain units to take the one that's listed on their datacard (hi Reivers!)
usernamesareannoying wrote: did the commentary clarify what happens if you have no weapons to attack with in melee?
This may be in the Day -X FAQ we just got, but if it isn't, presumably it's the same thing that happens in the Shooting Phase if you have no weapons to attack with at range.
Cadian Shock Troops:
-Add Lasgun to Sergeant's list of options.
Kasrkin:
-Add Hotshot Lasgun to Sergeant's list of options.
Tempestor Prime and Tempestor:
-Add Hotshot Lasgun to Sergeant's list of options.
Heavy Weapon Squad:
-Add Vox-Caster to their unit upgrades.
Scions:
-Remove the requirement for a Hotshot Laspistol on the Vox-Caster model
Add Bullgryn Bodyguard option
-Same as Ogryn Bodyguard, just with a 4+ save. Since y'know, it was literally just a paid upgrade in the previous codex that I never even got to play with.
Adeptus Mechanicus
Pteraxii:
-Add options for the basic weapon to the Alpha.
Skitarii Marshal:
-Add Power Sword to their equipment list. It's modeled on the belt.
With all that said, that's the end of my "This makes the unit entries truly match the box contents" errata list.
Wyches' splinter pistols are anti-infantry 4+, while the splinter pistols of all other units are anti-infantry 3+. Clearly a typo.
Also, the phrasing of the Venom's special rule:
At the end of the Fight phase, if there are no models currently embarked within this Transport, you can select one friendly Drukhari Infantry unit that has 6 or fewer models that is wholly within 6" of this Transport (you cannot select a Grotesques unit or a unit that can Fly). Unless that unit is within Engagement Range of one or more enemy units, it can embark within this Transport.
Technically, this would disallow a model or unit from embarking on a Venom that has any models on it even if there is still room for the models wishing to embark (e.g. if a character wants to embark on a Venom that has a 5-man squad on it, it wouldn't be allowed to do so, even though the Venom has a transport capacity of 6).
Kanluwen wrote: Cadian Shock Troops:
-Add Lasgun to Sergeant's list of options.
That's not errata.
LOL - you know he had to.
Of course I did. Because it's put up or shut up time.
Either the box and accompanying upgrade sprues are the baseline for the product or they're not. If you actually build the Cadian Shock Troop Sergeant, 100% as showcased in the instructions? There's an option(pointing right arm) that can match an option from the upgrade frame, zero conversion effort required.
The Kasrkin Sergeant, additionally, is literally billed as having a Hotshot Lasgun option. It's in the KT roster, it's in the instruction manual, but for some reason it was left out of the previous codex.
Kanluwen wrote: Cadian Shock Troops:
-Add Lasgun to Sergeant's list of options.
That's not errata.
LOL - you know he had to.
Of course I did. Because it's put up or shut up time.
Either the box and accompanying upgrade sprues are the baseline for the product or they're not. If you actually build the Cadian Shock Troop Sergeant, 100% as showcased in the instructions? There's an option(pointing right arm) that can match an option from the upgrade frame, zero conversion effort required.
The Kasrkin Sergeant, additionally, is literally billed as having a Hotshot Lasgun option. It's in the KT roster, it's in the instruction manual, but for some reason it was left out of the previous codex.
I agree on this. IF the BOX CONTENT tm is so holy that it is necessary to worship the BOX tm god then yes, Contents of a box should delinate all equipment or none at all.
- When an ability reduces the damage by 1 and it does not specify a minimum can the damage be reduced to 0? No, damage reduction never goes below 1. Damage can be set to 0, though. - How do keywords work with attached units? Does a unit of Rubric Marines all count as a Psyker for the purpose of Anti-Psyker? Are some keywords shared where others are not? Keywords apply to the unit as a whole. Yes, ANTI-PSYKER hits the entire unit if you attach a PSYKER to it. - Does Sustained Hits or other abilities from multiple sources stack? No, use the best one.
All of these are addressed in the commentary. Answers added in bold.
Space Wolves detachment specifically calls out PRIMARIS APOTHECARY as an excluded keyword, presumably due to the (missing) role of the (missing) Wolf Priest (which, until recently, was a Chaplain/Apothecary hybrid).
However, the Apothecary Biologis doesn't have that keyword - is it intentional that Space Wolves can now field some form of Apothecary in their armies?
(Side note - is the Apothecary in the Command Squad really the only way to get a Proper Marine Apothecary now? Sheesh.)
H.B.M.C. wrote: Yeah that "Whole unit is now a psyker" thing is going to sting.
The "Psychic" ability literally does nothing except:
1. Make you vulnerable to anti-psyker attacks.
2. Make some people less vulnerable to your attacks.
Far as I can tell, it's always a negative (or does literally nothing).
Yeah. Psyker is... bad.
But if [Precision] kicked things over to the character before the wounds step, [anti-psyker] (and [anti-character]) wouldn't somehow magically do collateral damage to normals.
It feels like they came up with a solution that sort of worked and stopped looking. Just decreed that this was how it had to be now.
-----
OK. The Rules Commentary document (otherwise saved to my computer as 40k Rules 10th: More Rules) clears up a few more things.
Rounding: buried deep on page 17, under modifiers
MODIFIERS
Modifiers are rules that change a numerical value from one value to
another. This can include the result of a dice roll, the characteristics
of a model, and more. This section details how to apply modifiers in
your games. In all cases:
1. All modifiers are cumulative.
2. If a rule instructs you to change or replace one characteristic with
a specified value, change the relevant characteristic to the new
value before applying any modifiers that apply from other rules (if
any) to the new value.
3. You must then apply division modifiers before applying
multiplication modifiers, before applying addition and then
subtraction modifiers.
4. Round any fractions up after applying all modifiers.
So... always round up. I guess. Except determining groups of 5 for blast, because that specifically says down.
Also, (holy feth) the Avatar (and other models with damage reduction) are even more better.
Modifying a Damage Characteristic and
Devastating Wounds
Some rules modify the Damage characteristic of an attack that has
the [DEVASTATING WOUNDS] ability.
■ When a rule modifies an attack’s Damage characteristic, if that
attacks scores a Critical Wound, the Damage characteristic is
modified before the damage is applied as mortal wounds.
You do indeed halve the damage characteristic before its converted into MW.
Not sure why this isn't part of the rules for damage or mortal wounds, but its hiding on page 18 of 'more rules.'
Dysartes wrote: (Side note - is the Apothecary in the Command Squad really the only way to get a Proper Marine Apothecary now? Sheesh.)
Far as I can remember, the Command Squad box is the only way to get a First Born Apothecary, therefore, as everything is sprue-based options and box-based organisation, he can only therefore be in a Command Squad.
I thing they actually did a good job putting all the technical details in the Commentary (should be rules glossary) to keep the Core Rules flowing in a useful manner. Imagine if these 18 page of more rule were integrated into the Core Rules. There would be no flow at all.
alextroy wrote: I thing they actually did a good job putting all the technical details in the Commentary (should be rules glossary) to keep the Core Rules flowing in a useful manner. Imagine if these 18 page of more rule were integrated into the Core Rules. There would be no flow at all.
Much of it, yes, I'd agree.
But there is a frankly silly amount of 'and here's how it really works' in this document.
The fact that 'always round up,' rerolls and order of operations for modifiers isn't in the Core Rules is asinine.
And then there's a lot of this stuff:
Full Wounds Remaining: A model has its full wounds remaining
if it has the same number of wounds remaining as its
Wounds characteristic
Lord Damocles wrote: Is the Deathwing Apothecary supposed to be equipped with a Chainfist? The model has a Narthecium...
I believe that was intentional as they locked the Ancient into a power fist I think they're forcing a split there.
The difference is that the Ancient model can actually have a Power Fist. The Apothecary can't have a Chainfist on the model, as he has to have the Narthecium/Reductor arm. Whoever wrote the Dark Angel rules just doesn't know that the chainblade on the Narthecium isn't a Chainfist. The Grey Knight Apothecary doesn't have a Chainfist, but has the exact same apparatus on his arm (same with the power armoured versions).
On the subject of Apothecaries; Is it correct that the Grey Knight Apothecary is only an upgrade for a Brotherhood Terminator Squad, and/but not for a Paladin Squad? Traditionally he's been attached to Paladins...
Another Tau Errata:
Smart Missile Systems have 3 different attack values.
4 shots for long strike,
3 shots for Hammerheads, Broadsides, Skyrays, and Riptides
2 shots for Devilfish
Psyker makes the whole unit psyker
Character makes the whole unit character
Epic hero makes the whole unit epic hero
I'm still not clear on how a leader character giving character to their bodyguard works.
In the attached units rules it says you cannot target a character in an attached unit. If everything is a character then you wouldn't be able to target either unit?
Dysartes wrote: (Side note - is the Apothecary in the Command Squad really the only way to get a Proper Marine Apothecary now? Sheesh.)
Far as I can remember, the Command Squad box is the only way to get a First Born Apothecary, therefore, as everything is sprue-based options and box-based organisation, he can only therefore be in a Command Squad.
Besides ebaying for the old metals, yeah. The command box is the only thing I know of. It's maddening that they limited that unit in the way that they did, too, forcing the characters in there and leaving space for only two veterans. Strange how they give those Veterans each access to Heavy Weapons though.
Psyker makes the whole unit psyker
Character makes the whole unit character
Epic hero makes the whole unit epic hero
I'm still not clear on how a leader character giving character to their bodyguard works.
In the attached units rules it says you cannot target a character in an attached unit. If everything is a character then you wouldn't be able to target either unit?
Unit vs Model - the unit as a whole has CHARACTER because of the attached leader making it a CHARACTER unit, but the wound allocation rules are specifically about models with CHARACTER, which the bodyguard do not have. Nothing says the CHARACTER keyword (or any keywords for that matter) are transfered to models in the same unit just because the unit as a whole has them.
Psyker makes the whole unit psyker
Character makes the whole unit character
Epic hero makes the whole unit epic hero
I'm still not clear on how a leader character giving character to their bodyguard works.
In the attached units rules it says you cannot target a character in an attached unit. If everything is a character then you wouldn't be able to target either unit?
Unit vs Model - the unit as a whole has CHARACTER because of the attached leader making it a CHARACTER unit, but the wound allocation rules are specifically about models with CHARACTER, which the bodyguard do not have. Nothing says the CHARACTER keyword (or any keywords for that matter) are transfered to models in the same unit just because the unit as a whole has them.
Psyker makes the whole unit psyker
Character makes the whole unit character
Epic hero makes the whole unit epic hero
I'm still not clear on how a leader character giving character to their bodyguard works.
In the attached units rules it says you cannot target a character in an attached unit. If everything is a character then you wouldn't be able to target either unit?
Unit vs Model - the unit as a whole has CHARACTER because of the attached leader making it a CHARACTER unit, but the wound allocation rules are specifically about models with CHARACTER, which the bodyguard do not have. Nothing says the CHARACTER keyword (or any keywords for that matter) are transfered to models in the same unit just because the unit as a whole has them.
That's quite a confusing distinction, though
But one they've had fairly often. And in this case a distinction without a difference. You target the unit when you make attacks. Which triggers the Anti-X
Dysartes wrote: (Side note - is the Apothecary in the Command Squad really the only way to get a Proper Marine Apothecary now? Sheesh.)
Far as I can remember, the Command Squad box is the only way to get a First Born Apothecary, therefore, as everything is sprue-based options and box-based organisation, he can only therefore be in a Command Squad.
Besides ebaying for the old metals, yeah. The command box is the only thing I know of. It's maddening that they limited that unit in the way that they did, too, forcing the characters in there and leaving space for only two veterans. Strange how they give those Veterans each access to Heavy Weapons though.
What's even funnier about that, is that the kit has an extra set of kneeling veteran legs, meaning you can build one more guy than the box indicates, arguably the only 40k kit with extra legs.
However, if we're going off box restrictions, then:
-1 Deathwatch veteran sergeant may exchange their close combat weapon for a xenophase blade
-1 deathwatch veteran may take two long-vigil melee weapons
-Proteus Kill Team Deathwatch veterans with jump packs may swap their Close Combat Weapon (Because they come with a CCW and the LVMW) for a Bolt Pistol, Plasma pistol, Flamer pistol or Grav pistol.
-Proteus Kill Team deathwatch veteran sergeant may exchange their LVMW otCCW for a Xenophase Blade
-Proteus Kill teams may take up to: 0-5 Deathwatch Veterans with jump packs, 0-5 Deathwatch veterans in terminator armor, 0-3 (or ideally 0-5) deathwatch veterans on bike
-Fortis Kill teams may take up to: 0-5 Kill team intercessors with Plasma Incinerators, 0-5 Kill Team Intercessors with heavy bolt pistols, 0-3 Kill team Outriders
-Indomitor Kill teams may take up to: 0-3 Kill Team Heavy Intercessors with power fists, 0-3 Kill Team Heavy Intercessors with melta rifles, 0-3 Kill Team Heavy Intercessors with jump packs
-Spectrus kill teams may take up to: 0-3 Kill Team Infiltrators with bolt sniper rifles, 0-3 Kill Team Infiltrators with jump packs, 0-5 Kill Team Infiltrators with occulus bolt carbines, 0-5 Kill Team Infiltrators with combat knives
-Spectus kill team Kill team infiltrators with bolt sniper rifles may exchange their bolt sniper rifles for a Las Fusil.
-1 Spectrus Kill team Kill team Infiltrators with Occulus bolt carbine may take one haywire Mine
-A Spectrus Kill team unit that includes 1 or more Kill Team infiltrators with combat knives may take 1 grapnel launcher.
-A Spectrus Kill Team unit that includes 5 kill team infiltrators with combat knives, it may buy Reiver Grav-chutes for the unit.
Honestly, the ability to give them these absurd movement abilities might actually make me want to field a spectrus team.
- When an ability reduces the damage by 1 and it does not specify a minimum can the damage be reduced to 0?
- How do keywords work with attached units? Does a unit of Rubric Marines all count as a Psyker for the purpose of Anti-Psyker? Are some keywords shared where others are not?
- Does Sustained Hits or other abilities from multiple sources stack?
These three FAQ questions are covered by the Rules Commentary document and therefore do not need to be sent to GW.
To add to the list:
Aeldari Storm Guardians: Models that take a Flamer or Fusion Guns have no Melee Weapon.
Psyker makes the whole unit psyker
Character makes the whole unit character
Epic hero makes the whole unit epic hero
I'm still not clear on how a leader character giving character to their bodyguard works.
In the attached units rules it says you cannot target a character in an attached unit. If everything is a character then you wouldn't be able to target either unit?
Unit vs Model - the unit as a whole has CHARACTER because of the attached leader making it a CHARACTER unit, but the wound allocation rules are specifically about models with CHARACTER, which the bodyguard do not have. Nothing says the CHARACTER keyword (or any keywords for that matter) are transfered to models in the same unit just because the unit as a whole has them.
That's quite a confusing distinction, though
But one they've had fairly often. And in this case a distinction without a difference. You target the unit when you make attacks. Which triggers the Anti-X
Ok so the wraithlord that has a spiritseer join it is now a character unit of one model and thus cannot be targeted. Because as one model it has all the unit's keywords.
Psyker makes the whole unit psyker
Character makes the whole unit character
Epic hero makes the whole unit epic hero
I'm still not clear on how a leader character giving character to their bodyguard works.
In the attached units rules it says you cannot target a character in an attached unit. If everything is a character then you wouldn't be able to target either unit?
Unit vs Model - the unit as a whole has CHARACTER because of the attached leader making it a CHARACTER unit, but the wound allocation rules are specifically about models with CHARACTER, which the bodyguard do not have. Nothing says the CHARACTER keyword (or any keywords for that matter) are transfered to models in the same unit just because the unit as a whole has them.
That's quite a confusing distinction, though
But one they've had fairly often. And in this case a distinction without a difference. You target the unit when you make attacks. Which triggers the Anti-X
Ok so the wraithlord that has a spiritseer join it is now a character unit of one model and thus cannot be targeted. Because as one model it has all the unit's keywords.
Except there's nothing in the rules that stops you from targetting a unit with the CHARACTER keyword, just allocating a wound to a model with the CHARACTER keyword.
The unit as a collective has the keyword, but the Wraithlord individually does not.
Some Character units have ‘Leader’ listed on their datasheets. Such Character units are known as Leaders, and the units they can lead – known as their Bodyguard units – are listed on their datasheet.
Attacks cannot be allocated to Character models in Attached units.
According to the rules pdf a unit has the character rule and is also a model with the character rule.
If it wasn't then a character model wouldn't individually have the rule in the first place.
Ergo, by granting Character to the unit they join that unit is also now a character in an attached unit.
The same logic that makes the whole unit psykers applies here. You can't have it both ways.
Psyker makes the whole unit psyker
Character makes the whole unit character
Epic hero makes the whole unit epic hero
I'm still not clear on how a leader character giving character to their bodyguard works.
In the attached units rules it says you cannot target a character in an attached unit. If everything is a character then you wouldn't be able to target either unit?
Unit vs Model - the unit as a whole has CHARACTER because of the attached leader making it a CHARACTER unit, but the wound allocation rules are specifically about models with CHARACTER, which the bodyguard do not have. Nothing says the CHARACTER keyword (or any keywords for that matter) are transfered to models in the same unit just because the unit as a whole has them.
That's quite a confusing distinction, though
But one they've had fairly often. And in this case a distinction without a difference. You target the unit when you make attacks. Which triggers the Anti-X
Ok so the wraithlord that has a spiritseer join it is now a character unit of one model and thus cannot be targeted. Because as one model it has all the unit's keywords.
Well I was thinking the Anti-X abilites - CHARACTER has a mechanics issue - but they knew this was an issue that's why they wrote a specific exemption into Stealth requiring all models to have it.
Psyker makes the whole unit psyker
Character makes the whole unit character
Epic hero makes the whole unit epic hero
I'm still not clear on how a leader character giving character to their bodyguard works.
In the attached units rules it says you cannot target a character in an attached unit. If everything is a character then you wouldn't be able to target either unit?
Unit vs Model - the unit as a whole has CHARACTER because of the attached leader making it a CHARACTER unit, but the wound allocation rules are specifically about models with CHARACTER, which the bodyguard do not have. Nothing says the CHARACTER keyword (or any keywords for that matter) are transfered to models in the same unit just because the unit as a whole has them.
That's quite a confusing distinction, though
But one they've had fairly often. And in this case a distinction without a difference. You target the unit when you make attacks. Which triggers the Anti-X
Ok so the wraithlord that has a spiritseer join it is now a character unit of one model and thus cannot be targeted. Because as one model it has all the unit's keywords.
Are you getting the rules secondhand, or what?
First, that would be a two model unit. 1+1 = 2.
Second, nothing prevents attacks against a unit with a character, whether its a single character or multiple characters in a unit of 20 models.
The exception is an unattached character with [lone operative]and the attacker is more than 12" away)
During an attack resolution, you
1) roll to hit. The character keyword doesn't matter here.
2) roll to wound (_always_ against the Bodyguard (ie, non-leader) unit).
3) successful wounds are then allocated, always to the bodyguard unit unless the attack has [precision] AND the character is visible to the attacker. Without [precision], it is not possible to assign wounds to Leaders until the bodyguard unit is entirely dead. Even if the defending player wants to, it is not an option.
If the attack has [precision] the attacker can choose to assign the wound to a visible character.
4) saves now happen (unlike wounds, saves are based on the model the attack was allocated to).
5) damage is now applied.
Even with batch rolling, nothing touches the character until the bodyguard unit is dead, unless the attacker can and does assign [precision] attacks.
Some Character units have ‘Leader’ listed on their datasheets. Such Character units are known as Leaders, and the units they can lead – known as their Bodyguard units – are listed on their datasheet.
Attacks cannot be allocated to Character models in Attached units.
According to the rules pdf a unit has the character rule and is also a model with the character rule.
If it wasn't then a character model wouldn't individually have the rule in the first place.
Ergo, by granting Character to the unit they join that unit is also now a character in an attached unit.
The same logic that makes the whole unit psykers applies here. You can't have it both ways.
Read the basic attack sequence again. Anti-X doesn't matter until the wounds step. It does nothing to prevent attacks. It just changes the number at which you score a critical wound.
Wounds are still assigned to the Bodyguard unit, regardless of what you think the character keyword is doing (see the Leader ability on page 39)
One quick one. Eldar waveserpent has 4 shots for its twin star cannon, and twin linked. If going by every other twin linked weapon it can take, that should be just 2 shots.
3) successful wounds are then allocated, always to the bodyguard unit unless the attack has [precision] AND the character is visible to the attacker. Without [precision], it is not possible to assign wounds to Leaders until the bodyguard unit is entirely dead. Even if the defending player wants to, it is not an option.
If the attack has [precision] the attacker can choose to assign the wound to a visible character.
This always makes me laugh when looking at Belial's retribution style rule, or Calgar's 4++ as long as at least one Victrix is still alive.
Some Character units have ‘Leader’ listed on their datasheets. Such Character units are known as Leaders, and the units they can lead – known as their Bodyguard units – are listed on their datasheet.
Attacks cannot be allocated to Character models in Attached units.
According to the rules pdf a unit has the character rule and is also a model with the character rule.
Where does that say that?
I assume you think it says that in what you quoted, but it doesn't.
Those are separate statements - there's no connecting statement that says all models in a bodyguard unit joined by a Character all gain the Character keyword, just that their unit is now a Character unit (though technically it doesn't say that there explicitly either, that's clarified in the Rules Commentary).
Again, different levels of interaction - the Unit level and the Model level.
On the unit level (which is where the targeting rules interact) - the combined Leader-Bodyguard unit has the Character keyword. Nothing generally stops you from targetting a Character unit.
On the model level (which is where the wound allocating rules interact - only the models that have the Character keyword individually (generally just the Leader(s) that joined, though Imperial Guard have a few oddities iirc) have the keyword - it is not gained by the rest of the models individually just for being in the same unit because nothing says keywords transfer on the model level, only on the unit level.
3) successful wounds are then allocated, always to the bodyguard unit unless the attack has [precision] AND the character is visible to the attacker. Without [precision], it is not possible to assign wounds to Leaders until the bodyguard unit is entirely dead. Even if the defending player wants to, it is not an option.
If the attack has [precision] the attacker can choose to assign the wound to a visible character.
This always makes me laugh when looking at Belial's retribution style rule, or Calgar's 4++ as long as at least one Victrix is still alive.
Well, given how often precision turns up (every blood sniper squad can fire entire volleys at characters as long as they can see a piece of the model, and tyranids can just make it a thing that happens for the entire army on crits), Calgar will actually get use out of the rule. Belial's is less useful, but can still happen. You just don't want to assign low damage melee attacks to him unless you have to.
3) successful wounds are then allocated, always to the bodyguard unit unless the attack has [precision] AND the character is visible to the attacker. Without [precision], it is not possible to assign wounds to Leaders until the bodyguard unit is entirely dead. Even if the defending player wants to, it is not an option.
If the attack has [precision] the attacker can choose to assign the wound to a visible character.
This always makes me laugh when looking at Belial's retribution style rule, or Calgar's 4++ as long as at least one Victrix is still alive.
Well, given how often precision turns up (every blood sniper squad can fire entire volleys at characters as long as they can see a piece of the model, and tyranids can just make it a thing that happens for the entire army on crits), Calgar will actually get use out of the rule. Belial's is less useful, but can still happen. You just don't want to assign low damage melee attacks to him unless you have to.
They have to be able to see a piece of Calgar specifically, and Belial especially... pretty much requiring a Precision Melee attack being assigned to him. Neither of these abilities are really under the controlling player's control.
Hopefully this explains the logic of what I'm saying better.
TLDR: a unit of one model with character grants character to the model in it, therefore unit keywords apply to models. You can't both protect a character from attacks with the character keyword and deny the attached unit is also all character models. There are no rules that say that only in the instance of a single model do its keywords apply to the model and the unit.
When you get to the allocation step:
If an attack successfully wounds the target unit, the player
controlling the target unit allocates that attack to one model in
the target unit, as follows.
This applies to a character unit of one model if it is alone and unattached. You assign the attack to that model (ie a farseer or a captain). The unit has character so either the model does too, so it can't have an attack assigned, or it doesn't so it can.
However if that model is a leader:
Some Character units have ‘Leader’ listed on their
datasheets. Such Character units are known as
Leaders, and the units they can lead – known as their
Bodyguard units – are listed on their datasheet.
it cannot have an attack allocated to it while attached:
Each time an attack sucessfully wounds an Attached
unit, that attack cannot be allocated to a Character
model in that unit, even if that Character model
has lost one or more wounds or has already had
attacks allocated to it this phase.
leader units add their keywords to their bodyguard unit as per
KEYWORDS
■ If a rule specifies that it applies to a model/unit with a Keyword, it
only applies to a model/unit with that keyword on its datasheet.
■ If a rule specifies that it applies to ‘non-Keyword’ models/units,
it only applies to models/units that do not have that keyword. For
example, if a rule applies to non-Vehicle units, it only applies to
units that do not have the Vehicle keyword.
■ Some units can contain models that have different keywords. While
this is the case, such a unit is considered to have all of the keywords
of all of its models, and so is affected by any rule that applies to
units with any of those keywords. Remember that attacks are made
against units, not models.
The leader rule affects the character keyword, which is now applied to the whole unit (and it specifies unit/model in the quote above).
So, a character keyword unit with the leader ability is added to another unit. All their keywords are considered combined.
When you get to the assign attacks stage, you cannot assign attacks to models with the character keyword. The rules say that a captain is a unit, with the character keyword. So he is both a model and a unit with the character keyword. They are used interchangeably throughout the leader rule.
see this quote from the leader rule:
Some Character units have ‘Leader’ listed on their
datasheets. Such Character units are known as
Leaders, and the units they can lead – known as their
Bodyguard units – are listed on their datasheet.
A character is considered a unit, so either it cant be a model with the character keyword, or a unit with keywords is also models with keywords.
So, when you attach a character keyword model, they give character to the unit and therefore the models in that unit.
And you cannot assign an attack to a model with the character keyword.
That seems logically parsimonious to me. I don't think it's what they intend, but that's what I read.
They also said that MW get divided before you apply them, which is not how the attack sequence works.
They also said that MW get divided before you apply them, which is not how the attack sequence works.
Well, no. Its how the Mortal Wounds rule works. Its an exception. When the rules call out an exception, you use that instead.
For the character stuff, you're reading selectively and piecemeal. Its really straightforward if you read it all.
You've carved it up into so many snippets its no wonder you can't make sense of it.
They also said that MW get divided before you apply them, which is not how the attack sequence works.
Well, no. Its how the Mortal Wounds rule works. Its an exception. When the rules call out an exception, you use that instead.
For the character stuff, you're reading selectively and piecemeal. Its really straightforward if you read it all.
You've carved it up into so many snippets its no wonder you can't make sense of it.
to sum it up, the game clearly shows that a unit's keywords also apply to the models in the unit.
TLDR: a unit of one model with character grants character to the model in it, therefore unit keywords apply to models. You can't both protect a character from attacks with the character keyword and deny the attached unit is also all character models. There are no rules that say that only in the instance of a single model do its keywords apply to the model and the unit.
Hellebore wrote: They also said that MW get divided before you apply them, which is not how the attack sequence works.
Where does it say this, specifically?
Page 18 of the rules commentary doc:
Modifying a Damage Characteristic and Devastating Wounds Some rules modify the Damage characteristic of an attack that has the [DEVASTATING WOUNDS] ability.
■ When a rule modifies an attack’s Damage characteristic, if that attacks scores a Critical Wound, the Damage characteristic is modified before the damage is applied as mortal wounds.
KEYWORDS
■ If a rule specifies that it applies to a model/unit with a Keyword, it
only applies to a model/unit with that keyword on its datasheet.
■ If a rule specifies that it applies to ‘non-Keyword’ models/units,
it only applies to models/units that do not have that keyword. For
example, if a rule applies to non-Vehicle units, it only applies to
units that do not have the Vehicle keyword.
■ Some units can contain models that have different keywords. While
this is the case, such a unit is considered to have all of the keywords
of all of its models, and so is affected by any rule that applies to
units with any of those keywords. Remember that attacks are made
against units, not models.
The leader rule affects the character keyword, which is now applied to the whole unit (and it specifies unit/model in the quote above).
So, a character keyword unit with the leader ability is added to another unit. All their keywords are considered combined.
When you get to the assign attacks stage, you cannot assign attacks to models with the character keyword. The rules say that a captain is a unit, with the character keyword. So he is both a model and a unit with the character keyword. They are used interchangeably throughout the leader rule.
see this quote from the leader rule:
So when Captain Ahab Joins Squad White Whale, they Form Super Squad Moby Dick which has INFANTRY, CHARACTER, TACTICAL SQUAD, YADDA, YADDA YADDA keywords - the Tactical Squad MODELS do NOT have the Character Keyword. But it doesn't matter because by the time that difference would matter, its already too late. So your Anti-Character 2+ wounds the ever loving crap out of Super Squad Moby Dick even though you're using the Tactical Squads White Whale's Toughness and they're not technically a character (or psychic, or a vehicle, or what have you). Given that they're trying to reduce lethality, it would be such an easy and smart move to release a FAQ that even though Super Squad Moby Dick has the Character keyword, because you're using the Toughness of Tactical Squad White Whale, you also use only the keywords of Tactical Squad White Whale to trigger the ups and downs.
Modifications are in red
Each time an attack scores a hit against a target unit, make a
Wound roll for that attack by rolling one D6 to see if that attack
successfully wounds the target unit. The result required is
determined by comparing the attack’s Strength (S) characteristic
with the target’s Toughness (T) and keywords characteristics, as shown below
While a Bodyguard unit contains a Leader, it is
known as an Attached unit and, with the exception
of rules that are triggered when units are destroyed
(pg 12), it is treated as a single unit for all rules
purposes. Each time an attack targets an Attached
unit, until the attacking unit has resolved all of its
attacks, you must use the Toughness characteristic and keywords of
the Bodyguard models in that unit, even if a Leader
in that unit has a different Toughness characteristic and/or keywords.
You probably need to tweak PRECISION as well so they can get or avoid the unit keywords when sniping
Some units can contain models that have different keywords. While
this is the case, such a unit is considered to have all of the keywords
of all of its models, and so is affected by any rule that applies to
units with any of those keywords. Remember that attacks are made
against units, not models.
the character keyword is considered one of the unit's keywords as the character model has it and applies it to the rest of them.
What this is clearly, is that they want psyker units to make their bodyguards psyker and that's it.
It would probably have been simpler for them to say:
leader units in attached units do not combine their keywords except if it is the psyker keyword.
Hellebore wrote: The challenge is that as per the commentary doc:
Some units can contain models that have different keywords. While
this is the case, such a unit is considered to have all of the keywords
of all of its models, and so is affected by any rule that applies to
units with any of those keywords. Remember that attacks are made
against units, not models.
the character keyword is considered one of the unit's keywords as the character model has it and applies it to the rest of them.
What this is clearly, is that they want psyker units to make their bodyguards psyker and that's it.
It would probably have been simpler for them to say:
leader units in attached units do not combine their keywords except if it is the psyker keyword.
There's no other reason for it.
I'd say even that's not a reason for it. The Cortosis Ore Sword doesn't slice through storm troopers just because they're standing next to Darth Vader.
It is an overall rule that could have a results due to any of the keywords that the Attached unit possesses. Psycher is the most common instance of this, but there are others. Have your Winged Tyranid Prime lead either type of Tyranid Warriors units then the Attached Unit has the Fly keyword and is thus a valid target of Anti-Fly weapons.
Psyker makes the whole unit psyker
Character makes the whole unit character
Epic hero makes the whole unit epic hero
I'm still not clear on how a leader character giving character to their bodyguard works.
In the attached units rules it says you cannot target a character in an attached unit. If everything is a character then you wouldn't be able to target either unit?
Unit vs Model - the unit as a whole has CHARACTER because of the attached leader making it a CHARACTER unit, but the wound allocation rules are specifically about models with CHARACTER, which the bodyguard do not have. Nothing says the CHARACTER keyword (or any keywords for that matter) are transfered to models in the same unit just because the unit as a whole has them.
That's quite a confusing distinction, though
But one they've had fairly often. And in this case a distinction without a difference. You target the unit when you make attacks. Which triggers the Anti-X
Ok so the wraithlord that has a spiritseer join it is now a character unit of one model and thus cannot be targeted. Because as one model it has all the unit's keywords.
No. You allocate to wraithlord like to tacticals lea by captain.
Unit is 2 models. Wraithlord and spiit seer.
And unit has all keywords but all models don't have. Wraithlord misses character.
Some Character units have ‘Leader’ listed on their datasheets. Such Character units are known as Leaders, and the units they can lead – known as their Bodyguard units – are listed on their datasheet.
Attacks cannot be allocated to Character models in Attached units.
According to the rules pdf a unit has the character rule and is also a model with the character rule.
If it wasn't then a character model wouldn't individually have the rule in the first place.
Ergo, by granting Character to the unit they join that unit is also now a character in an attached unit.
The same logic that makes the whole unit psykers applies here. You can't have it both ways.
No. Unit gains keywords. Models don't.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hellebore wrote: Hopefully this explains the logic of what I'm saying better.
TLDR: a unit of one model with character grants character to the model in it, therefore unit keywords apply to models. You can't both protect a character from attacks with the character keyword and deny the attached unit is also all character models. There are no rules that say that only in the instance of a single model do its keywords apply to the model and the unit.
Wrong wrong wrong.
Unit is given keywords. Models not.
You have unit of 2 where unit has character keyword but only 1 model has
They also said that MW get divided before you apply them, which is not how the attack sequence works.
Well, no. Its how the Mortal Wounds rule works. Its an exception. When the rules call out an exception, you use that instead.
For the character stuff, you're reading selectively and piecemeal. Its really straightforward if you read it all.
You've carved it up into so many snippets its no wonder you can't make sense of it.
to sum it up, the game clearly shows that a unit's keywords also apply to the models in the unit.
TLDR: a unit of one model with character grants character to the model in it, therefore unit keywords apply to models. You can't both protect a character from attacks with the character keyword and deny the attached unit is also all character models. There are no rules that say that only in the instance of a single model do its keywords apply to the model and the unit.
To sum it up you are cheating. Unit gets keywords, modelp don't.
Spiritseer has character. Wraithlord hasn't. Combined unit of 2 models has character but wraithlord still hasn't.
Therefore a character unit of 1 model can be allocated attacks as it is a model and doesn't have the character keyword.
You can't have it both ways.
Well a character unit of 1 model is just the character, and has the keyword, and can be allocated attacks because they're not being a LEADER which is where the "can't be allocated" comes from.
Therefore a character unit of 1 model can be allocated attacks as it is a model and doesn't have the character keyword.
You can't have it both ways.
Well a character unit of 1 model is just the character, and has the keyword, and can be allocated attacks because they're not being a LEADER which is where the "can't be allocated" comes from.
There are no rules that state that a unit of 1 model functions differently than a unit of more than 1.
You can't have it both ways.
The rules say you can't assign attacks to a model with the character keyword in an attached unit.
By your argument, a marine captain unit has character, but the model of the marine captain does not.
Therefore, in an attached unit it can be assigned attacks because it specifies models with character can't be allocated.
It says it clearly in the leader rules - the MODEL must have the character keyword in order to not be attackable.
But by your argument, only the unit has the keyword not the model.
Therefore a character unit of 1 model can be allocated attacks as it is a model and doesn't have the character keyword.
You can't have it both ways.
Well a character unit of 1 model is just the character, and has the keyword, and can be allocated attacks because they're not being a LEADER which is where the "can't be allocated" comes from.
There are no rules that state that a unit of 1 model functions differently than a unit of more than 1.
You can't have it both ways.
No, but there is a rule that states the character-wound allocation mechanic you're referring to only applies when the character is leading a unit.
Each time an attack sucessfully wounds an Attached
unit, that attack cannot be allocated to a Character
model in that unit, even if that Character model
The Captain model has the Character keyword because the Captain datasheet says he does.
Page 37 of the Core Rules: "Each unit has a datasheet that lists the characteristics, wargear, abilities and keywords of its models. This section presents a summary of these elements and how they relate to playing the game."
So the keywords on a Datasheet are for the individual models in the unit. This can be seen to even great effect with a unit like Saint Celestine, which first lists all the keyword shared by all models in the datasheet's unit (Celestine and the Geminae) and then lists the additional keywords Celestine herself has.
Celestine is a Character while the Geminae are not, which gives the cool interaction of being able to sacrifice Geminae even when the unit is attached as a Leader.
Which won't apply if the leader model can't have the character keyword (because its unit has it).
This the crux of my argument.
If a unit has keywords and not models, then a leader unit of 1 model doesn't technically have the character keyword, because it's the unit that has it.
If as I argue models DO have keywords, then it means any unit attached with a leader ALSO gains character on each model.
The argument is that there is no distinction between units based on model count.
So if a 1 model unit gives keywords to the model, then a multi model unit also gives keywords to its models.
Either all models use their unit keywords or none do.
Until there is a rule that provides a special exception for 1 model character units, all units are treated identically.
The leader rule only cares about model keywords.
So either models have keywords or they don't. But if they don't then character units of 1 model don't have keywords.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Matt.Kingsley wrote: The Captain model has the Character keyword because the Captain datasheet says he does.
Page 37 of the Core Rules: "Each unit has a datasheet that lists the characteristics, wargear, abilities and keywords of its models.
This section presents a summary of these elements and how they relate to playing the game."
So the keywords on a Datasheet are for the individual models in the unit. This can be seen to even great effect with a unit like Saint Celestine, which first lists all the keyword shared by all models in the datasheet's unit (Celestine and the Geminae) and then lists the additional keywords Celestine herself has.
Celestine is a Character while the Geminae are not, which gives the cool interaction of being able to sacrifice Geminae even when the unit is attached as a Leader.
Great, so when character is granted to models in an attached unit, none can be assigned attacks.
Where the heck are you getting that "models don't have keywords" from?
Models have keywords Units have the keywords of all models in the unit
That's the relationship. Again, page 37 of the Core Rules specifically says "Each unit has a datasheet that lists the characteristics, wargear, abilities and keywords of its models. This section presents a summary of these elements and how they relate to playing the game."
Datahsheets tell you what keywords models have. This in turn defines what keywords the unit has because units have the keywords of all models in it. This does not mean that all models in a unit have all keywords of the units though as the reverse is not true.
TARGETING is against units WOUND ALLOCATING is against models How is this so difficult for you?
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Where the heck are you getting that "models don't have keywords" from?
Models have keywords
Units have the keywords of all models in the unit
That's the relationship. Again, page 37 of the Core Rules specifically says "Each unit has a datasheet that lists the characteristics, wargear, abilities and keywords of its models.
This section presents a summary of these elements and how they relate to playing the game."
Datahsheets tell you what keywords models have. This in turn defines what keywords the unit has because units have the keywords of all models in it. This does not mean that all models in a unit have all keywords of the units though as the reverse is not true.
TARGETING is against units
WOUND ALLOCATING is against models
How is this so difficult for you?
I agree with you. Others have been trying to argue that models don't have keywords because if they do then combing them in attached units creates really stupid interactions.
Look at the leader rule. Look at the keyword commentary where it says that attached models combine their keywords with the bodyguard unit.
It is very clear as I've described multiple times, that this means bodyguard units can't be assigned attacks.
Attacks cannot be assigned to models in attached units with the character keyword. Attaching a character to a bodyguard unit gives them the character keyword. Therefore as character models in an ATTACHED unit, they cannot have attacks assigned to them.
Your evidence only supports my position more as there is a clear rule that says models have the keywords of.the unit.
This is the unfortunate consequence of combining keywords.
Hellebore wrote: Which won't apply if the leader model can't have the character keyword (because its unit has it).
This the crux of my argument.
If a unit has keywords and not models, then a leader unit of 1 model doesn't technically have the character keyword, because it's the unit that has it.
If as I argue models DO have keywords, then it means any unit attached with a leader ALSO gains character on each model.
Nobody says models don't have keywords. They're saying when a character joins a unit, the combined unit has the keywords of all the subcomponent units, however the models themselves do not get the keywords of the other subcomponent units - most of us are also saying that's a distinction without a difference in multiple stupid ways - because attacks target the unit (and their keywords) and not the models which can cause some rather silly interactions.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Where the heck are you getting that "models don't have keywords" from?
Models have keywords Units have the keywords of all models in the unit
That's the relationship. Again, page 37 of the Core Rules specifically says "Each unit has a datasheet that lists the characteristics, wargear, abilities and keywords of its models. This section presents a summary of these elements and how they relate to playing the game."
Datahsheets tell you what keywords models have. This in turn defines what keywords the unit has because units have the keywords of all models in it. This does not mean that all models in a unit have all keywords of the units though as the reverse is not true.
TARGETING is against units WOUND ALLOCATING is against models How is this so difficult for you?
I agree with you. Others have been trying to argue that models don't have keywords because if they do then combing them in attached units creates really stupid interactions.
Look at the leader rule. Look at the keyword commentary where it says that attached models combine their keywords with the bodyguard unit.
It is very clear as I've described multiple times, that this means bodyguard units can't be assigned attacks.
Attacks cannot be assigned to models in attached units with the character keyword. Attaching a character to a bodyguard unit gives them the character keyword. Therefore as character models in an ATTACHED unit, they cannot have attacks assigned to them.
Your evidence only supports my position more as there is a clear rule that says models have the keywords of.the unit.
This is the unfortunate consequence of combining keywords.
No, models do not have the keywords of the unit, the unit has the keywords of the models. It's a very distinct difference. The abstract collective known as the unit has the Character keyword, but only the individual model(s) that were already Characters to begin with have the Character keyword in that unit.
Once you've done that, take a look at the Platoon Command Squad or Cadian Command Squad datasheets, as well as page 7 of the Rules Commentary.
If every model in the unit got the Character keyword due to keyword sharing, there'd be no need to specify that only the Officer model in each unit gets the keyword.
What you keep failing to grasp - and keep flailing about - is that there is a difference here between unit and model when it comes to keyword inheritance and interactions.
Let me spoiler this quote from the Rules Commentary...
Spoiler:
■ Some units can contain models that have different keywords. While this is the case, such a unit is considered to have all of the keywords of all of its models, and so is affected by any rule that applies to units with any of those keywords. Remember that attacks are made against units, not models.
Example: An Attached unit contains a Leader model with the Psyker keyword. While that Leader is part of that unit, the entire unit is considered to have the Psyker keyword. If that unit is attacked by a weapon with the [ANTI-PSYKER 4+] ability, any unmodified Wound roll of 4+ made against that unit scores a Critical Wound, even if the attack itself is not allocated to that Leader model.
■ If a rule only applies to models with a specific keyword, then it instead only applies to models in such a unit that have the correct keyword.
Emphasis mine
When a Leader is attached to a unit, the overall unit has a pool of all keywords from both the Leader and the attached unit. This is why Anti-Character, for example, will trigger for everybody, or why Kastellans suddenly become vulnerable to Anti-Infantry weapons.
However, the bit you keep quoting from the Leader ability about wound assignment says this:
Each time an attack sucessfully wounds an Attached unit, that attack cannot be allocated to a Character model in that unit, even if that Character model has lost one or more wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase.
Note the emphasis on Attached unit vs. Character model - if the model does not come with the Character keyword, it doth not matter for Wound Allocation purposes if the whole unit does.
Does Ghazghkull Thraka take up 18 slots in a transport, or 19? The battlewagon states he takes up 18 slots, but is this inclusive of Makari, or does Makari take up a slot of his own?
Voss wrote:Ghaz takes up 18, Makari takes up 1.
He's still a model (rather than a token), and that honestly doesn't really need to be clarified in a FAQ.
His card says the unit composition is 1 Ghaz, 1 Makari.
Tsagualsa wrote:
Voss wrote: Ghaz takes up 18, Makari takes up 1.
He's still a model, and that honestly doesn't really need to be clarified in a FAQ.
His card says the unit composition is 1 Ghaz, 1 Makari.
I'd agree, Makari has his own profile and since he's not mentioned on the list of things that take more than one space, he'd default to taking up one.
This is the way I was interpreting it, but there's an argument that it says "Ghaz takes up 18 slots" and Makari is included as part of the Ghaz card, as opposed to it being "Ghaz and Makari", thus Ghaz and Makari only take up 18 slots total.
So it would be the argument as whether the 18 slots refers to the "Ghaz unit" or the "Ghaz model".
I personally think it refers to the models, so Ghaz takes up 19 slots, including Makari, but it would be nice to have the clarification.
Oddly enough, the rule is it can carry 1 Ghazghkull Thraka. However, Ghazghkull Thraka and Markari have the exact same keywords including Ghazghkull Thraka.
RAW is a Ghazghkull Thraka unit that includes Ghazghkull Thraka and Markari cannot fit into any of the transports because a Ghazghkull Thraka unit contains 2 Ghazghkull Thraka models that both take 18 spaces.
This is a ludicrous result and is obviously unintended. However, it is also rather silly that he take the space of 18 models considering how heavily they nerfed him compared to 9th Edition. Even if you rule that both Ghazghkull Thraka and Markari together take 18 space, that means he can only have 1 Meganob bodyguard with him if he embarks into a vehicle.
I am pretty sure the -1 damage thing has been resolved as it does not reduce below one in the designer commentary, so not sure if you want to remove that from the beginning of this post. Auspex Tactics has pointed this out.
Also a unit has a key word but one model in that unit can also have a separate key word that does not apply to the rest of the unit, i.e. look at rubric marines who do not have the psychic key work only the aspiring sorcerer does. That point seems really really clear.
xeen wrote: Also a unit has a key word but one model in that unit can also have a separate key word that does not apply to the rest of the unit, i.e. look at rubric marines who do not have the psychic key work only the aspiring sorcerer does. That point seems really really clear.
The unit has the keyword for purposes which apply at the unit level - and Psyker is even used as the example, IIRC, with a unit being targeted with an Anti-Psyker weapon - but individual Rubrics within the unit won't if an effect is looking at the model level.
alextroy wrote: Oddly enough, the rule is it can carry 1 Ghazghkull Thraka. However, Ghazghkull Thraka and Markari have the exact same keywords including Ghazghkull Thraka.
RAW is a Ghazghkull Thraka unit that includes Ghazghkull Thraka and Markari cannot fit into any of the transports because a Ghazghkull Thraka unit contains 2 Ghazghkull Thraka models that both take 18 spaces.
This is a ludicrous result and is obviously unintended. However, it is also rather silly that he take the space of 18 models considering how heavily they nerfed him compared to 9th Edition. Even if you rule that both Ghazghkull Thraka and Markari together take 18 space, that means he can only have 1 Meganob bodyguard with him if he embarks into a vehicle.
I’d argue that the unit Ghazghkull Thraka takes up 18 slots. The Battlewagon datacard specifies “Ork infantry models” but doesn’t specify model when referring to Ghaz, so I infer that as referring to the unit of the same name.
xeen wrote: Also a unit has a key word but one model in that unit can also have a separate key word that does not apply to the rest of the unit, i.e. look at rubric marines who do not have the psychic key work only the aspiring sorcerer does. That point seems really really clear.
The unit has the keyword for purposes which apply at the unit level - and Psyker is even used as the example, IIRC, with a unit being targeted with an Anti-Psyker weapon - but individual Rubrics within the unit won't if an effect is looking at the model level.
alextroy wrote: Oddly enough, the rule is it can carry 1 Ghazghkull Thraka. However, Ghazghkull Thraka and Markari have the exact same keywords including Ghazghkull Thraka.
RAW is a Ghazghkull Thraka unit that includes Ghazghkull Thraka and Markari cannot fit into any of the transports because a Ghazghkull Thraka unit contains 2 Ghazghkull Thraka models that both take 18 spaces.
This is a ludicrous result and is obviously unintended. However, it is also rather silly that he take the space of 18 models considering how heavily they nerfed him compared to 9th Edition. Even if you rule that both Ghazghkull Thraka and Markari together take 18 space, that means he can only have 1 Meganob bodyguard with him if he embarks into a vehicle.
I’d argue that the unit Ghazghkull Thraka takes up 18 slots. The Battlewagon datacard specifies “Ork infantry models” but doesn’t specify model when referring to Ghaz, so I infer that as referring to the unit of the same name.
If it said Ghazghkull Thraka unit, I would agree. But they said 1 Ghazghkull Thraka. That being said, I wouldn't expect anyone to play it the way it is written.
Daed, can we add the Taurox Prime Frag Missile profile being S8 to the list, please?
It's hilarious, don't get me wrong, but it's also a fairly obvious typo.
Also, for Space Marines - given a Multi-Melta is defined on the Armory card as a S9 weapon, is it intended that the Gladiator Valiant features S10 Multi-Melta?
Imperial Guard - Heavy Weapon Teams (inc. Veteran HWTs, if it matters) - Count as two models when it comes to fitting in a transport, but not for 1-per-10-models upgrades. In the case of a 10 man Infantry Squad, that means the classic 2nd ed loadouts - with a HWT and a special weapon - are all invalid. Is this intentional, or an oversight?
Leagues of Votann model only. In your Command phase, you can select one objective marker your opponent controls. Until the end of the phase, while an enemy unit is within range of that objective marker, it counts as having one more Judgement token than it actually has (to a maximum of 2).
It begins and ends in your command phase. Currently, it does nothing at all.
Its rather important if it lasts until the end of your turn or the end of the battle round (though that has the potential to suck if you go second). Best case, it should last until the start of your next command phase.
Dysartes wrote: Imperial Guard - Heavy Weapon Teams (inc. Veteran HWTs, if it matters) - Count as two models when it comes to fitting in a transport, but not for 1-per-10-models upgrades. In the case of a 10 man Infantry Squad, that means the classic 2nd ed loadouts - with a HWT and a special weapon - are all invalid. Is this intentional, or an oversight?
It, and the missing voxcaster upgrade, are obviously oversights.
The problem with bad armies, is that in face of how good the good ones are, it is hard to decide what is an oversight or a miss print and what isn't. Sometimes not even that.
does the fact that the weapon table is identical for a Grand Master and a regular Dreadknight, mean that it is a copy paste error or did GW really think that GK masters should have worse stats, then other marine Lt?
This one was pointed out in YMDC, but a Gretchen unit is toughness 5 in melee, and that seems like it can’t be intentional, so might be a prime candidate for a day 1 errata.
Dysartes wrote: Imperial Guard - Heavy Weapon Teams (inc. Veteran HWTs, if it matters) - Count as two models when it comes to fitting in a transport, but not for 1-per-10-models upgrades. In the case of a 10 man Infantry Squad, that means the classic 2nd ed loadouts - with a HWT and a special weapon - are all invalid. Is this intentional, or an oversight?
It, and the missing voxcaster upgrade, are obviously oversights.
I just downloaded the new Warhammer The App with included Battle Forge List Builder.
It allows you to add Incursors one at a time. Same with Blade Guard Veterans and ablative Devastators. Storm Raven Gunships are 255 in the PDF download, 265 in the App.
I'm thinking we're actually meant to be able to take 5.6.7.8.9. or 10 etc and the 5 Models, 10 Models in the MFM is just poor wording. I figure that's at least slightly more likely than GW putting out yet another buggy and worthless army builder. Of course, there isn't a PC version on the Windows Apps Store that you can use to build on the big screen then send to OneDrive/etc on the small screen for a trip to the game board so it's going to be easy to be wrong on that one.
The Thunderhawk has a points cost but not a datasheet. As does the Astraeus which suggests they'll be the only two Forge World models not moved to Legends as they're the only two in a Red Text Forge World Point Values section.
Breton wrote: I just downloaded the new Warhammer The App with included Battle Forge List Builder.
It allows you to add Incursors one at a time. Same with Blade Guard Veterans and ablative Devastators. Storm Raven Gunships are 255 in the PDF download, 265 in the App.
I'm thinking we're actually meant to be able to take 5.6.7.8.9. or 10 etc and the 5 Models, 10 Models in the MFM is just poor wording. I figure that's at least slightly more likely than GW putting out yet another buggy and worthless army builder. Of course, there isn't a PC version on the Windows Apps Store that you can use to build on the big screen then send to OneDrive/etc on the small screen for a trip to the game board so it's going to be easy to be wrong on that one.
Does it increase the cost individually for each model you add? Technically you can have a unit of 7 Incursors if you want, you just pay for 10, so the app would need to allow you to add individual models for that (stupid) reason.
Breton wrote: I just downloaded the new Warhammer The App with included Battle Forge List Builder.
It allows you to add Incursors one at a time. Same with Blade Guard Veterans and ablative Devastators. Storm Raven Gunships are 255 in the PDF download, 265 in the App.
I'm thinking we're actually meant to be able to take 5.6.7.8.9. or 10 etc and the 5 Models, 10 Models in the MFM is just poor wording. I figure that's at least slightly more likely than GW putting out yet another buggy and worthless army builder. Of course, there isn't a PC version on the Windows Apps Store that you can use to build on the big screen then send to OneDrive/etc on the small screen for a trip to the game board so it's going to be easy to be wrong on that one.
You run into issues with this with units like Ork Boys who would be 8.5 points per model.
This could all just be a "what's the quickest and easiest way we can sort out all these datasheets" scenario though, and maybe they all get adjusted for adding individuals with the codexes.
Necrons
Ghost Ark needs Firing Points.
Transcendent C'tan is the only C'tan without RP Praetorians have no purpose at their price point, no leader interaction.
Ditto Ophydians.
Not really a FAQ issue, but I do wish Deathmarks could still use something like Aetheric Interception.
Lord Damocles wrote: Is the War Dog Stalker supposed to have the CHARACTER keyword?
Yea, I believe this is to allow for an all war dog army.
I will update the main post this weekend. There's a few requests I've seen that are pretty wishlisty so I'll list those out, but they'll be separate section.
Canis Wolfborne. His model has a pistol. He's historically had a bolt pistol. His datasheet gives the stats for a bolt pistol. He's NOT listed as having a bolt pistol.
Stormblade: It has a hull heavy bolter they forgot to put on its datasheet.
The Relic Contemptor Dreadnought has two Heavy Plasma Cannons as its default armament, yet the profiles for these weapons are listed no where in the document.
crazysaneman wrote: Necrons
Ghost Ark needs Firing Points.
Transcendent C'tan is the only C'tan without RP Praetorians have no purpose at their price point, no leader interaction.
Ditto Ophydians.
Not really a FAQ issue, but I do wish Deathmarks could still use something like Aetheric Interception.
I think we now call that Rapid Ingress stratagem. Would be nice if they could use it at 0 CP.
crazysaneman wrote: Necrons
Ghost Ark needs Firing Points.
Transcendent C'tan is the only C'tan without RP Praetorians have no purpose at their price point, no leader interaction.
Ditto Ophydians.
Not really a FAQ issue, but I do wish Deathmarks could still use something like Aetheric Interception.
None of those are really a FAQ issue.
The ghost ark isn't a gun platform for a unit, its a repair station/transport.
The transcendent c'tan is modelled more as unleashed energy, rather than a fully bound shard. (though its attacks and fluff don't match up at all. Its punching and shooting with basically powerfists or thunderhammers, not 'tearing reality asunder'
Points issues are going to be a process, rather than a quick fix of a typo or oversight.
Need to add to original OP (think it was missed when I posted it)
Wave serpent lists twin linked star cannon as 4 attacks. Base starcannon is 2 shots and all other twin linked weapons on platform have same number of shots as their singular version.
bullyboy wrote: Need to add to original OP (think it was missed when I posted it)
Wave serpent lists twin linked star cannon as 4 attacks. Base starcannon is 2 shots and all other twin linked weapons on platform have same number of shots as their singular version.
That may be intentional - the Big Gun on tanks that would have been TL in that way has been given double shots and Twin Linked - the Godhammer Lascannon sponsons on the Land Raider for example. It may be intentional simply because it's the "Big Gun".
Then wouldn't other similar guns also have double shots? And I'm not even talking Predator Annihilators or Macharius Vanqishers - just other weapon options in the Wave Serpent entey.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Then wouldn't other similar guns also have double shots? And I'm not even talking Predator Annihilators or Macharius Vanqishers - just other weapon options in the Wave Serpent entey.
Maybe, maybe not. As near as I can reverse engineer its based on S and "Big Gun" capacity.
I'm not sure why the Starcannon is but the Bright Lance is not. The Bright Lance would have been more consistent but its possible they did it for the Starcannon for being more iconic (to them).
Y'Vahra and R'Varna both have weapon/battlesuit support systems listed on their datasheet with no way to take them. XV9s are completely missing from both legends and the new IA.
So on the subject of Leader’s sharing their Keywords, the rules for Fly say they get the benefit if the Unit has the Keyword. Does this mean a Technomancer with their Canoptek Cloak joining a unit of Warriors gives them all Fly?
Anyone bring up the issue with "Anti-fly" yet? Anything with the fly keyword is instantly destroyed by certain units with "Anti-fly" instead of "anti-aircraft".
I'll have to reread which gun but it's a space marine anti aircraft one.
Edit:
It's the Skyspear missle launcher on the Hunter.
It's got anti-fly 3+ with devastating wounds. It also hits monsters and vehicles on 2+.
So basically you shoot at anything with the fly keyword and it you deal D6+2 mortal wounds.
Edit #2: it's also heavy so it's getting +1 to hit when standing still.
Uptonius wrote: Anyone bring up the issue with "Anti-fly" yet? Anything with the fly keyword is instantly destroyed by certain units with "Anti-fly" instead of "anti-aircraft".
I'll have to reread which gun but it's a space marine anti aircraft one.
Edit:
It's the Skyspear missle launcher on the Hunter.
It's got anti-fly 3+ with devastating wounds. It also hits monsters and vehicles on 2+.
So basically you shoot at anything with the fly keyword and it you deal D6+2 mortal wounds.
Edit #2: it's also heavy so it's getting +1 to hit when standing still.
I wish whoever wrote that had been writing the rules for the Skyray. It doesn't get Anti-Fly, or Devastating Wounds, or Heavy on its Missile Rack.
In fact, the only Anti- anything in the whole Tau index is Anti-Vehicle 4+ on the Pathfinder semi-auto grenade launcher when firing EMP, which is a single attack at BS4+, with S3, AP0 that deals 1 damage and has Devastating Wounds, and Anti-Vehicle 4+ on a Kroot weapon which has 3 attacks at BS5+ S7 AP-1 D1 that has Heavy and Devastating Wounds.
AduroT wrote: So on the subject of Leader’s sharing their Keywords, the rules for Fly say they get the benefit if the Unit has the Keyword. Does this mean a Technomancer with their Canoptek Cloak joining a unit of Warriors gives them all Fly?
They can be shot as if they fly. But they can't move as if they fly.
The models themselves do not fly, so they are susceptible to Desperate Escape Tests, Terrain, Enemy models, can't charge aircraft, etc. in other words they get all the drawbacks but none of the benefits.
crazysaneman wrote: Necrons
Ghost Ark needs Firing Points.
Transcendent C'tan is the only C'tan without RP Praetorians have no purpose at their price point, no leader interaction.
Ditto Ophydians.
Not really a FAQ issue, but I do wish Deathmarks could still use something like Aetheric Interception.
None of those are really a FAQ issue.
The ghost ark isn't a gun platform for a unit, its a repair station/transport.
The transcendent c'tan is modelled more as unleashed energy, rather than a fully bound shard. (though its attacks and fluff don't match up at all. Its punching and shooting with basically powerfists or thunderhammers, not 'tearing reality asunder'
Points issues are going to be a process, rather than a quick fix of a typo or oversight.
Rhino isn't a gun platform for a unit either, its a troop transport, yet it has two firing points. The Ghost Ark used to allow the models within it to shoot out. Much like the Rhino did.
Doesn't matter how the Transcendent C'tan is modeled. The Obelisk is what houses the Transcendant C'tan shard, when it gets out or is released it becomes its own model. Doesn't change the fact that it's still a C'tan, and C'tan's apparently now get Reanimation Protocols. In the lore, all C'tans are housed in similar units until released, the only difference is the others have a name, and the TC is generic.
This thread is for FAQ/Errata. Exactly where issues like this belong. They need to be errata'd with a points fix/utility fix. The Ghost Ark and C'tan issues need FAQ'd.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Then wouldn't other similar guns also have double shots? And I'm not even talking Predator Annihilators or Macharius Vanqishers - just other weapon options in the Wave Serpent entey.
Maybe, maybe not. As near as I can reverse engineer its based on S and "Big Gun" capacity.
I'm not sure why the Starcannon is but the Bright Lance is not. The Bright Lance would have been more consistent but its possible they did it for the Starcannon for being more iconic (to them).
I don’t think there is anyway it’s intentional. The serpent can take twin linked of any of the following:
Shurican cannon, scatter laser, missile launcher, bright lance and starcannon. All of those weapons have the same shots as single version with twin linked rule, except the starcannon. Has to be an error.
I don’t think there is anyway it’s intentional. The serpent can take twin linked of any of the following:
Shurican cannon, scatter laser, missile launcher, bright lance and starcannon. All of those weapons have the same shots as single version with twin linked rule, except the starcannon. Has to be an error.
Yeah I would have doubled the Bright Lance to 2 shots and left the Starcannon at base. Consistency would have too.
Beastmaster - the Beastmaster himself lacks the WYCH CULT keyword.
Talos - by default is equipped with 2 macro-scalpels, but the 2nd one does nothing (cf. a Helbrute, who gains TWIN-LINKED when equipped with 2 Helbrute fists). Is this intentional?
Twin splinter rifle - 1 shot on a Razorwing Jetfighter, 2 shots on a Venom (otherwise identical). Is this intentional?
