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.

wizerdree wrote:i didn't see this on the updated list and i don't think got errata but:

Ghazghkull's waaaugh effect that makes fleet an auto six doesn't work in 5th since everyone runs in the shooting phase. Fleet simply allows you to assault after running.

there is no mention of a fleet roll in either Waaagh nor Ghazkull's prophet of the Waaagh. it says you automatically countas rolling a 6 for the Waaagh movement; and waaagh grants fleet but those are separate sentences.

Waaagh and Prophet of the Waaagh are written well.

there is no mention of a fleet roll in either Waaagh nor Ghazkull's prophet of the Waaagh. it says you automatically countas rolling a 6 for the Waaagh movement; and waaagh grants fleet but those are separate sentences.

Waaagh and Prophet of the Waaagh are written well.

What is WAAAGH movement? Waaagh movement is not defined anywhere so it still has no effect...

Kommissar Kel wrote:

wizerdree wrote:i didn't see this on the updated list and i don't think got errata but:

Ghazghkull's waaaugh effect that makes fleet an auto six doesn't work in 5th since everyone runs in the shooting phase. Fleet simply allows you to assault after running.

there is no mention of a fleet roll in either Waaagh nor Ghazkull's prophet of the Waaagh. it says you automatically countas rolling a 6 for the Waaagh movement; and waaagh grants fleet but those are separate sentences.

Waaagh and Prophet of the Waaagh are written well.

LMFAO. Tell me good sir, what is a Waaagh! Movement then?

Eldar Plasma Grenades do nothing! As the Codex never says what they are!

(I think, I cant find them in my Elfdar codex, so I might have just missed them)

Gwar! wrote:Eldar Plasma Grenades do nothing! As the Codex never says what they are!

(I think, I cant find them in my Elfdar codex, so I might have just missed them)

They're assault grenades, look at the "Assault grenades" entry in the main rulebook-they're given as an example.

(I missed them on the first look through the Space fairy codex too .)

they're given as an example, but draw a diagram, some assault grenades are plasma, but not all plasma grenades are assault.

If Xs are a subset of Ys, it should be "all Xs are Ys, but not all Ys are Xs".

Gwar is, I believe, of the opinion that what are listed in the Eldar codex as plasma grenades are not necessarily identical to what are listed in the rulebook as plasma grenades, and this why they're unusable.

Wolf Scouts cannot scout (and hence cannot outflank or use the OBEL rule) - they have the Scout USR, but there is no such thing. There is, however, a scouts USR.
(Or was it the other way around?)

Bran Dawri wrote:Wolf Scouts cannot scout (and hence cannot outflank or use the OBEL rule) - they have the Scout USR, but there is no such thing. There is, however, a scouts USR.
(Or was it the other way around?)

Nope, that's right

They can Outflank however as they have Infiltrate

Wasn't there some crap with impassible terrain?

Like: you can deploy in one (there are no rules about deploying?) but then I guess you can't move at all.

If pivoting on the spot doesn't count as moving so they can pivot into impassible terrain?
[I could be wrong on both cases]

Macok wrote:Wasn't there some crap with impassible terrain?

Like: you can deploy in one (there are no rules about deploying?) but then I guess you can't move at all.

If pivoting on the spot doesn't count as moving so they can pivot into impassible terrain?
[I could be wrong on both cases]

There are no deployment rules ... there in lies the problem

Updated AGAIN, still going strong....!

And with the additional instruction to take your RAW arguments onto other threads pleas, otherwise this one goes OT.....

Thanks!

Oh. How about this one:
Dire Avengers' Bladestorm doesn't have any drawbacks? You can't shoot in the "subsequent shooting phase" [Eldar Codex p.30] but it's your enemy's so no harm done..

WRONG.

Klawz wrote:The Tyranid physic power dominion doesn't do anything, as there is nothing called "synapse range".

Erm... What?

Page 33, Codex Tyranids: Synapse Creatures and Tyranid units that are within 12" of a Synapse Creature are said to be within synapse range.

Page 62, Codex Tyranids: If successful, the Tervigon's synapse range is increased to 18" until the beginning of the next friendly turn.

Thus, if Dominion is Sucsessful, models within 18" of the Tervigon are said to be within synapse range.

And I know the RaW arguments are supposed to go elsewhere, but I just wanted to point out that this is wrong.

Gwar! wrote:

Klawz wrote:The Tyranid physic power dominion doesn't do anything, as there is nothing called "synapse range".

Erm... What?

Page 33, Codex Tyranids: Synapse Creatures and Tyranid units that are within 12" of a Synapse Creature are said to be within synapse range.

Page 62, Codex Tyranids: If successful, the Tervigon's synapse range is increased to 18" until the beginning of the next friendly turn.

Thus, if Dominion is Sucsessful, models within 18" of the Tervigon are said to be within synapse range.

And I know the RaW arguments are supposed to go elsewhere, but I just wanted to point out that this is wrong.

>.< Sorry.

Klawz wrote:Sorry.

Not a problem, being shown up is how we learn

Gwar! wrote:

Klawz wrote:The Tyranid physic power dominion doesn't do anything, as there is nothing called "synapse range".

Erm... What?

Page 33, Codex Tyranids: Synapse Creatures and Tyranid units that are within 12" of a Synapse Creature are said to be within synapse range.

Page 62, Codex Tyranids: If successful, the Tervigon's synapse range is increased to 18" until the beginning of the next friendly turn.

Thus, if Dominion is Sucsessful, models within 18" of the Tervigon are said to be within synapse range.

And I know the RaW arguments are supposed to go elsewhere, but I just wanted to point out that this is wrong.

Well then! You slipped up too 'units', 'units', 'models' (Nit-picky but isn't that what we all love. Or was there a reason?)

ChrisCP wrote:Well then! You slipped up too 'units', 'units', 'models' (Nit-picky but isn't that what we all love. Or was there a reason?)

Nope, you are right, it was a typo, it should have been units

forkbanger said:

How you deploy is not in the rulebook

Yes and no. It tells you who deploys and when, but I get the distinct feeling that's not what you mean. If you mean that it does not specifically say "A model is deployed when the player removes it from their army transport device of choice and places it on the gaming surface," then no, how you deploy is not in the rulebook. And by that reasoning, neither is how you roll a d6.

ArbiterIan said:

That one about starting the game is really bugging me. I'm sure someone had a reading of RAW which meant that there was no way to actually START a game.....

I'm working from the AoBR book here, so it may be different in the BRB, but there's no way to actually start an Annihilation mission. Reading through Seize Ground and Capture & Control, you're referred to the Deploy Forces section, each of which specifically states "Start the game!" (exclamation mark is an exact quote ). Annihilation simply describes the situation and gives victory conditions without ever telling you to deploy, therefore never telling you to start the game.
Or, using forkbanger's reasoning, at no point does the book ever say "Starting the game involves one player beginning their turn by using their models to represent a progression through the movement, shooting, and assault phases of the game as outlined herein." But that may be pushing it!

But then again we are wargamers and thus not retards . . . so kinda know how to do these things . . . but where's the fun in that? GW should fully explain everything. Then maybe there would be less arguments about things . . . or maybe more . . . and more FAQs . . . and more fun RAW . . . GW DO IT!!! =D

Oshova

Deep Striking is broken.

Since Deep Strike scattering forces you to move a model after you have placed it on the board that many inches in the given direction, you can not scatter over impassable terrain or other models.

You joined four days ago, I assume that's because you picked up the game that long ago, please re-read your rule book, specifically about the part including mishaps and also the very start of this thread.

If I'm mistaken in my stance towards you I do so apologise.

Edits: wrong post dammit.

You joined four days ago, I assume that's because you picked up the game that long ago, please re-read your rule book, specifically about the part including mishaps and also the very start of this thread.

Mishap only tells you what to do if you scatter over impassible terrain or other models. If you read the RAW that the scatter and initial placement is part of the movement (i.e. you are in the Mawloc isn't allowed to target enemy units camp) then this would never happen as you are forced to stop 1" away from the enemy and before you reach the impassible terrain hence never triggering mishap.

"If any of the models in a deep striking unit cannot be deployed because they would land off the table, in impassable terrain, on top of a friendly model,or on top or within 1" of an enemy model, something has gone wrong. The controlling player must roll on the deep strike Mishap table and apply the results. "

One makes the conclusion "if they would" so one doesn't actually need to move the model into the terrain, it would be forced to others wise by the specific "If a scatter occurs, roll 2D6 to see how many inches the model moves away from the intended position." it might be worth nothing then that RAW the scatter die must be rolled separately to the 2D6.

ChrisCP wrote:One makes the conclusion "if they would" so one doesn't actually need to move the model into the terrain, it would be forced to others wise by the specific "If a scatter occurs, roll 2D6 to see how many inches the model moves away from the intended position." it might be worth nothing then that RAW the scatter die must be rolled separately to the 2D6.

But RAW they would not, as the model 'moves'. You can't move into impassable terrain, friendly units, or within 1" of enemy units.

Yes the can't - but they would if they could - so you do this instead...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
'Would' doesn't constitute 'does' it's being used in conditional sentences to express a possibility. One the technically is possible because of the forced movement created by a scatter when deepstriking.

ChrisCP wrote:Yes the can't - but they would if they could - so you do this instead...

'Would' doesn't constitute 'does' it's being used in conditional sentences to express a possibility. One the technically is possible because of the forced movement created by a scatter when deepstriking.

Forced movement does not ignore terrain effects. If it did, then they could potentially scatter into such terrain. Since it does not, they cannot and would not.

Would but they can't as I was trying to say before I went off on the tangent - would can be used even in situations when something is not possible "They would come if they had the fare." but they can't because they are poor today (lol) vis-à-vis 'they would move into impassable terrain but they can't because of the rules, we also have a rule telling us what to do when this happens' your understanding of the English involved is leading to this confusion.

In other words "If their compulsion is to do X. Then replace this action with another."

The would ony applies to eth cannot deploy because of impassible terrain/landing on other models. Only scatteriong onto eth models wouldn't fulfill this if statement as you would be forced to stop before you reached them.

Using this reading (i'm not saying it is definitely correct) only large DSing units would possibly mishap as the unit stops 1" from the enemy or at the edge of impassible and then only if there is a full ring of models to deploy would any not be able to deploy as described in the mishap section.