Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Has everyone seen these and I'm late? Interesting rulings.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=1000018&pIndex=1&aId=3400019&start=2

Yeah stealth rule changes. :(

Some of those rules are just weird.

Just saw them now thanks to you.

Much appreciated!

Wow, just checked the ork one. Glad they specified that KFF thing.

-cgmckenzie

jbunny wrote:Yeah stealth rule changes. :(

Some of those rules are just weird.

What changed in stealth? I can't see them for want of work filter.

What changed in stealth? I can't see them for want of work filter.

Now you don't get a 6+ in he open no more D-:

It is nice to see the KFF worked out.

Yeah they answered the Boarding Plank/Walker debate.

Walkers, yes you can be hit by Boarding Plank, and No you can't strike back.

daedalus wrote:

jbunny wrote:Yeah stealth rule changes. :(

Some of those rules are just weird.

What changed in stealth? I can't see them for want of work filter.

Not Stealth the USR, but they quitely make new FAQ's and people happen to stumble on them.

THe first ruling in the main page is interesting:

"Q: When two special rules or effects contradict each
other how is this resolved? A: Roll off using ‘The Most Important Rule!’."

Main discussion being had here.

I find the "large oval base" rulings quite interesting.

jbunny wrote:

daedalus wrote:

jbunny wrote:Yeah stealth rule changes. :(

Some of those rules are just weird.

What changed in stealth? I can't see them for want of work filter.

Not Stealth the USR, but they quitely make new FAQ's and people happen to stumble on them.

The Stealth USR also got clarified/changed: you must be in cover to benefit.

Homer

It's too bad this thread got locked before the righteous 4+ brothers could take a victory lap around the vanquished 5+ infidels.


That thread makes me wonder if someone at GWS does monitor forums like these looking for legitimately unclear rules (such as the KFF one) for improvements. If so, maybe the Kareen! argument could be next (though I think that one is less in dispute... but that's a different thread).

Ouze wrote:

That thread makes me wonder if someone at GWS does monitor forums like these looking for legitimately unclear rules (such as the KFF one) for improvements. If so, maybe the Kareen! argument could be next (though I think that one is less in dispute... but that's a different thread).

Well, if that were the case, it took them, what, two years to make the ruling?

Wow the new oval base faqs make me happy. Surround base and wreck vehicle? All embarked units destroyed.

deleted

Ouze wrote:

That thread makes me wonder if someone at GWS does monitor forums like these looking for legitimately unclear rules (such as the KFF one) for improvements. If so, maybe the Kareen! argument could be next (though I think that one is less in dispute... but that's a different thread).

Seems the new rulebook FAQ covered anything to do with Ramshackle, I think.

Games Workshop Rulebook FAQ wrote:Q: Do any upgrades or special rules a vehicle has cease
to work once it is destroyed? (p61)
A: Yes. For example if a Land Raider Crusader is
destroyed by ramming an enemy vehicle, its embarked
passengers would not be able to launch an assault in
the ensuing Assault phase as they would no longer
benefit from its Assault Vehicle special rule.

What was the deal with ramshakle?

And do you think the flyers can now have part of their hull outside the table top since it seemingly doesn't count. This would matter for my SR deepstriking too.

That's the thing, ramshackle is how it gets destroyed. The main debate on it is whether it can kareen! after immobilised but I think the first new FAQ answers that. Simply roll off and keep playing.

-cgmckenzie

cgmckenzie wrote:That's the thing, ramshackle is how it gets destroyed. The main debate on it is whether it can kareen! after immobilised but I think the first new FAQ answers that. Simply roll off and keep playing.

-cgmckenzie

Oh god! Ha! I've never had that happen. That would be funny. Yeah I'd say it's immobilized. I swear some things are really not that difficult to solve. Sheeesh.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Q: Can a unit of Tankbustas choose to Run in the Shooting phase if there is a vehicle in line of sight but out of range of their weapons? (p42)
A: No.

Oh crap, surely they mean after you have measured. So you can't run closer to try to get into assault/shooting range if you see a vehicle? That's kinda silly I think.

Ouze wrote:It's too bad this thread got locked before the righteous 4+ brothers could take a victory lap around the vanquished 5+ infidels.

I think I explained quite enough in previous threads why I think the 4+ is silly, but at least it's a solid ruling one way or the other finally.

Q: When two special rules or effects contradict each
other how is this resolved? (p2)
A: Roll off using ‘The Most Important Rule!’

Well that takes half the fun out of the you make the call threads. Vindicare rifle versus living metal has finally been FAQ'd.....

JBW wrote:What was the deal with ramshakle?

And do you think the flyers can now have part of their hull outside the table top since it seemingly doesn't count. This would matter for my SR deepstriking too.

Why doesn't it count? The new FAQ even points out that the wings are a part of the hull.

Oh, well it doesn't count for terrain, nor does it count for being over friendly or enemy models. That's really all I got on that. So what makes me think that it counts if it is over the end of the world?

insaniak wrote:

Ouze wrote:It's too bad this thread got locked before the righteous 4+ brothers could take a victory lap around the vanquished 5+ infidels.

I think I explained quite enough in previous threads why I think the 4+ is silly, but at least it's a solid ruling one way or the other finally.

agreed. it was vauge and while i read it as 4+ i could see how some were thinking 5+ good to see a difinitive ruling for sure!

JBW wrote: So what makes me think that it counts if it is over the end of the world?

Well, the wings part of the hull. We know that because of the FAQ. If any part of the hull isn't on the board, then the vehicle didn't completely get onto the board. If the wings are off the board, the Valkyrie or Stormraven is not completely on the board. To say otherwise is blatantly false. And the answer from the FAQ:

Games Workshop Rulebook FAQ wrote:Q: What happens when a unit arrives from reserves but
is unable to completely move onto the board? (p94)
A: The unit is destroyed and removed from play.

puma713 wrote:Well, the wings part of the hull. We know that because of the FAQ. If any part of the hull isn't on the board, then the vehicle didn't completely get onto the board. If the wings are off the board, the Valkyrie or Stormraven is not completely on the board. To say otherwise is blatantly false. And the answer from the FAQ:

Games Workshop Rulebook FAQ wrote:Q: What happens when a unit arrives from reserves but
is unable to completely move onto the board? (p94)
A: The unit is destroyed and removed from play.

Aren't the wings and the hull always off the board?

And the FAQ you referenced doesn't really define what does or doesn't count as the unit. So you could interpret that the Flyer is completely on the board via previous definitions of using the base to determine complete.

JBW wrote:Aren't the wings and the hull always off the board?

So Valkyries and Stormravens cannot be used. You heard it here first!

Q: When two special rules or effects contradict each other how is this resolved? (p2)
A: Roll off using ‘The Most Important Rule!’.

So, when that reserve modifying Eldar guy and the reserve modifying Tyranid bug are being played, do you just roll it off and the highest gets their effect?

puma713 wrote:

Ouze wrote:

That thread makes me wonder if someone at GWS does monitor forums like these looking for legitimately unclear rules (such as the KFF one) for improvements. If so, maybe the Kareen! argument could be next (though I think that one is less in dispute... but that's a different thread).

Seems the new rulebook FAQ covered anything to do with Ramshackle, I think.

Games Workshop Rulebook FAQ wrote:Q: Do any upgrades or special rules a vehicle has cease
to work once it is destroyed? (p61)
A: Yes. For example if a Land Raider Crusader is
destroyed by ramming an enemy vehicle, its embarked
passengers would not be able to launch an assault in
the ensuing Assault phase as they would no longer
benefit from its Assault Vehicle special rule.

Ah, now I get it.
Ramshackle is never applied after the trukk is destroyed. The trukk is destroyed by ramshackle. FAQ doesn't do nothing to the Kareen situation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JBW wrote:

Q: When two special rules or effects contradict each other how is this resolved? (p2)
A: Roll off using ‘The Most Important Rule!’.

So, when that reserve modifying Eldar guy and the reserve modifying Tyranid bug are being played, do you just roll it off and the highest gets their effect?

They don't conflict, you can apply both without any problem.