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.

Assume a squad of Tyranid gaunts are lurking in cover (lurking gives +1 to cover saves but still allows you to "fire your weapons as normal"), then can the gaunts choose to run? and/or more importantly can they also go to ground when shot at, giving them a 2+ cover save? I've looked through the rulebook and tyranid codex and I cannot find anything preventing this.

I've answered one of my questions.. A tyranid gaunt squad that is lurking cannot run as per the tyranid codex under instinctive behavior (bullet #1). However the question still remains, can they go to ground?

I don't see why not. But then again I don't have the 5th Rulebook or a Tyranid Codex.

Yes.

Yes they can.
2+ cover ftw.

I'd say that they loose lurk, and substitute GTG.

As to running while lurking, absolutely not.

Any rules to back that or just an "I'd say" ?
I cannot find any text that would leave doubt, let alone certainty.

shrug

Mikhaila kind of has a point. Guess it depends on the RAW says about going to ground. You might loose your "lurking" status but does that mean you'd then be able to claim objectives.. by just going to ground. I don't know I can see it both ways, and the arguments for both sides. But, imo (and I'm a nid player so I might be byast here), as the RAW you can do both.

That means that the 5 point spine gaunt now has a 2+ cover save. Take a squad of 12 or more and park them on an objective. The only way your running is if they get close and assault, use flamers or kill enough in a turn to force a morale test (5 ld will make you run most of the time).

i think that RAW lets you do both but it dose seem a bit overpowered ad probably should not be used. unless you want your opponent to crush your minis

The rules for Going to Ground on page 24 of the rulebook don't contradict the Lurking option described on page 28 of Codex: Tyranids.

If a unit goes to ground while lurking, it will get an additional +1 bonus to its cover save, but it will no longer be able to shoot, and can do nothing until its following turn - it will not be able to opt to test to act normally. It will still take Morale tests as normal. Moreover, the unit will not gain an advantage for being in cover if it is assaulted.

So if a Spinegaunt is in 4+ cover, and its unit lurks, and goes to ground, it will have a 2+ cover save - and none against weapons that ignore cover, like incendiary missiles, template weapons, and so on.

But why bother shooting at them when they've effectively been taken out of the game for a turn? Ignore them and destroy the Synapse units so that they'll be highly unlikely to rally and act normally.

Can you the folling turn not lurk and take the test. fossibly fail but move 2d6 towards synapse shoot and hopefully kill something close to the objective

If you are broken, how are you killing anything?

How is this confusing again?


sorry, I miss a lot.

You definitely cannot choose to run with a unit that chose to lurk, nor could you assault with it under any circumstances, because the codex says "If you want to move that brood that turn for any reason, it must take a Leadership test at the start of its movement phase." These are both a form of movement and unless you took the Leadership test could not be performed.

I think Lurking and then Going to Ground is fine, because going to ground means you "can do nothing until the end of [the unit's] following turn" meaning after going to ground you won't get to lurk or take the leadership test.

Nurglitch wrote:The rules for Going to Ground on page 24 of the rulebook don't contradict the Lurking option described on page 28 of Codex: Tyranids.

If a unit goes to ground while lurking, it will get an additional +1 bonus to its cover save, but it will no longer be able to shoot, and can do nothing until its following turn - it will not be able to opt to test to act normally. It will still take Morale tests as normal. Moreover, the unit will not gain an advantage for being in cover if it is assaulted.

So if a Spinegaunt is in 4+ cover, and its unit lurks, and goes to ground, it will have a 2+ cover save - and none against weapons that ignore cover, like incendiary missiles, template weapons, and so on.

But why bother shooting at them when they've effectively been taken out of the game for a turn? Ignore them and destroy the Synapse units so that they'll be highly unlikely to rally and act normally.

Because on the last turn the nid player can choose not to lurk and not to move and the gaunts won't have to take a ld test. They can stay put and claim the objective. (then can still go to ground that turn for a 3+ save)... As per the RAW

aboeckmann:

Incorrect. If the Tyranid unit is subject to Instinctive Behaviour the player only has two choices:

1. Take a Leadership Test. If passed, the unit may move and act normally. If failed, the unit falls back.

2. Lurk. May not move or claim objectives, may shoot, etc.

The Tyranid unit may only claim the objective on the condition that the player both take the Leadership test and pass it.

Nurglitch wrote:aboeckmann:

Incorrect. If the Tyranid unit is subject to Instinctive Behaviour the player only has two choices:

1. Take a Leadership Test. If passed, the unit may move and act normally. If failed, the unit falls back.

2. Lurk. May not move or claim objectives, may shoot, etc.

The Tyranid unit may only claim the objective on the condition that the player both take the Leadership test and pass it.

No sir, I'm afraid you are incorrect.. http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/216936.page

It's been this way since 4th edition.

INSTINCTIVE BEHAVIOUR, p.28, Codex: Tyranids wrote:If all models in a Tyranid brood begin their movement phase more than 12" away from a Synapse Creature, and that unit is not falling back or already in combat, it will revert to Instinctive Behaviour. Choose each brood in this situation in turn, and apply the following rules:

- If you want to move that brood that turn for any reason, it must take a Leadership test at the start of its Movement phase. If this is failed, the brood will fall back as it had failed a Morale test. If it is passed, the brood may act as normal.

- Alternatively the brood may Lurk. This means it will remain stationary that turn but may fire its weapons as normal. Lurking units that are not Monstrous Creatures add +1 to any cover save they may benefit from. Lurking Tyranids may not claim objectives or hold table quarters.

- Tyranids always fall back towards the nearest Synapse Creature if possible - if there are no Synapse Creatures on the board they will fall back towards the nearest Tyranid table edge.

Then if I am incorrect, please indicate where any such third option is described by the quoted text.

Fact: The text only ever gave two options, take the Leadership test or Lurk.

Edit: Corrected spelling errors in the quoted text.

Nurglitch wrote:

INSTINCTIVE BEHAVIOUR, p.28, Codex: Tyranids wrote:If all models in a Tyranid brood begin their movement phae more than 12" away from a Synapse Creature, and that unit is not falling back or already in combat, it will revert to Instinctive Behaviour. Choose each brook in this situation in turn, and apply the following rules:

- If you want to move that brood that turn for any reason, it must take a Leadership test at the start of its Movement phase. If this is failed, the brood will fall back as it had failed a Morale test. If it is passed, the brood may act as normal.

- Alternatively the brood may Lurk. This means it will remain stationary that turn but may fire its weapons as normal. Lurking units that are not Monstrous Creatures add +1 to any cover save they may benefit from. Lurking Tyranids may not claim objectives or hold table quarters.

- Tyranids always fall back towards the nearest Synapse Creature if possible - if there are no Synapse Creatures on the board they will fall back towards the nearest Tyranid table edge.

Then if I am incorrect, please indicate where any such third option is described by the quoted text.

Fact: The text only ever gave two options, take the Leadership test or Lurk.

You are mixing up RAI with RAW. You can elect not to move and thus avid taking an IB test all together. It sucks I agree and I'd ding sportsmanship if someone used it against me without letting me know ahead of time that was their intent. Reguardless this is off topic of the thread. You can refer to the thread I linked above if you want to discuss this further. I started this thread with the question about lurking and going to cover.

Show me where in the text the rules allow you to elect not to move and not take the Leadership text. Quote it, highlight it, bold it, show me anything in the text that even hints at giving you a third option!

You can't.

It is like the Deff Rolla thread.

The rules state what is possible. If they do not actually state an option, it does not actually exist as legal.

You can claim it, and people can play it however they want. The fact is, however, the text does not leave anything out. Going outside of the text and claiming the rules allow this is in error.

In that IB thread referenced, like the Deff Rolla thread, the side disagreeing with this cannot quote the relevant text from the rule books, as they are not printed. The "RAW" those people quote is RAI. If it is not Written, it is technically impossible to be RAW.

Nurglitch wrote:Show me where in the text the rules allow you to elect not to move and not take the Leadership text. Quote it, highlight it, bold it, show me anything in the text that even hints at giving you a third option!

You can't.

You quoted it yourself... "-If you want to move that brood that turn for any reason, it must take a Leadership test" .. as far as electing not to move.. no where in the rulebook does it say you have to move. You can always elect NOT to move something." Like I said, its RAI vs RAW. I agree with you and if I could write FAQ's I'd clarify this. But that doesn't change the fact that at tournaments you must follow RAW unless in an official Errata.

But like i said before, PLEASE take discussion of IB testing to the other thread I linked you. Lets keep this one on topic. This is the last I'll say on this matter.

Btw, it's probably worth pointing out that Yakface agree'd with the RAW in this matter in the other thread. (He authors the GW FAQ's).

It's perfectly relevant and topical to discuss Instinctive Behaviour where we are concerned with units both Lurking and Going to Ground.

But back to the discussion: So, you're telling me that a quote taken out of context is solid justification for your interpretation that there is a third option presented in the text?

Here's the whole quote, highlighted for your convenience:

"If you want to move that brood that turn for any reason, it must take a Leadership test at the start of its Movement phase. If this is failed, the brood will fall back as it had failed a Morale test. If it is passed, the brood may act as normal."

This isn't RAI vs RAW or any of that silly pseudo-intellectual gibberish that gets tossed around in this forum, this is about reading and interpreting written English.

If you think that the first sentence of that paragraph indicates that the player has a third option beyond taking the Leadership test or Lurking, then you are reading it incorrectly. That paragraph indicates one option, the Leadership test, and the two possible results of taking that option.

It doesn't say: "If that brood will move for any reason, it must take a Leadership test." If it did, then you might be onto something, because then that sentence would be stating a condition for the Leadership test.

But the sentence is not stating a condition for the Leadership test, as those conditions have already been stated in the preceding paragraph: (1) More than 12" away from a Synapse Creature, (2) Not falling back, (3) Already in combat.

Basically, the mistake you're making is reading the sentence as if it stated a condition for a third option for broods obtaining the conditions of Instinctive Behaviour.

As I've mentioned, you're making this mistake, you're misreading, by taking the sentence out of its context. That context is the text which states the conditions of Instinctive behaviour, and indicates options ("Choose each brook in this situation...", "Alternatively the brood may Lurk").

You're taking "If you want to move that brood..." and reading it wrongly as "If that brood will move...". That's reading it backwards, putting the cart before the horse.

On the last turn of the game a unit of Gaunts that could capture an objective, and is subject to the conditions listed in the Instinctive Behaviour, must pass a Leadership test in order to capture the objective.

If the brood lurked on the second last turn of the game and went to ground, it wouldn't even have the option of lurking on the last turn of the game; it can do nothing until the end of its following turn.

Sounds like a bad move to do if you want to capture an objective on turn 5 or 6 of the game.

Nurglitch wrote:But back to the discussion: So, you're telling me that a quote taken out of context is solid justification for your interpretation that there is a third option presented in the text?

I'm not taking anything out of context. I was merely stating the important part that you are not reading correctly. I'm not saying if (brood will move) then (take ld test).. Here is the entire first bullet under IB rules. I've highlighted the parts you need to pay attention to:

"If you want to move that brood that turn for any reason, it must take a Leadership test at the start of its Movement phase. If this is failed, the brood will fall back as it had failed a Morale test. If it is passed, the brood may act as normal."

If (want to move brood) then (take ld test) else (cannot move). Wanting to move a unit is a condition for that leadership test.

Therefore you can do the following: At the beginning of your turn you can state, I do not wish to move this guant unit this turn. This bypasses the need to take a ld test. Now you may not move during your movement phase, run during your shooting phase, assault in the assault phase, or do any other voluntary action that could be deemed movement. You can however, fallback should you fail a morale test (from enemy shooting, etc..) , move in "defenders react" move if you get assaulted, moved by an chaos players lash, or any other move that is involuntary.

The second option (lurking) does not factor in because you took the first option and elected not to move. So you have 3 options just by how its worded. You are correct in that you must choose an option, but incorrect on how many options you have available to you...

Option 1: use first bullet and take a ld test because you do indeed wish to move you units that turn. If you pass this test you can act normally (move, shoot, run, assault, etc) If you fail you fallback.
Option 2: use first bullet and declare that you do not wish to move your units that turn.. no ld test is required. You are not lurking (so don't gain +1 cover), but you can now claim objectives.
Option 3: use the second bullet and declare that you are lurking. You get a +1 cover save but give up the ability to claim objectives.

So you can choose option 3 on turns 1-4 and then take option 2 on turn 5,6,7.

Yes, you are taking that sentence of Instinctive Behaviour out of its proper context, and I am showing you how it is correctly read.

You are, in fact, saying that we should read: "If you want to move that brood that turn for any reason, it must take a Leadership test at the start of its Movement phase" to mean "If (brood will move) then (take ld test) else (cannot move)" because you reach the conclusion that a player can choose that the unit will not move, and thus neither takes the Leadership test to act normally nor Lurks, but can claim objectives.

That is because, as you say, you are reading "Wanting to move a unit [as] a condition for that leadership test." Wanting to move a unit is the same thing as choosing whether a unit will move.

But reading that as allowing you two choices, the choice to either move or not, and then the choice to either take the Leadership test or Lurk, is incorrect because the context prior to that sentence already provides the conditions for a single choice:

"If all models in a Tyranid brood begin their movement phase more than 12" away from a Synapse Creature, and that unit is not falling back or already in combat, it will revert to Instinctive Behaviour. Choose each brood in this situation in turn, and apply the following rules:"

Choosing whether a unit will move depends on its ability to act normally, and that requires a Leadership test as indicated by:

"If [the Leadership test] is passed, the brood may act as normal."

There are only two options available to such a brood:

1. Try to act normally (move, capture objectives, etc).

2. Lurk

There is no third option.

It seems you are misreading the sentence structure and ignoring the tense of the grammar stating the logic. Because you are ignoring the future tense of the "If you want to move that brood..." phrase, you're interpreting it literally on the basis of superficial resemblance to a conditional statement. You're mistaking the antecedent of the conditional for the consequent, simply because it is superficially ordered that way.

The context shows that this superficial resemblance is not the actual structure of the rule being expressed, since it describes the deep logical structure rather than a superficial turn of phrase. The rule being expressed has the structure:

If [[all models in a Tyranid brood begin their movement phase more than 12" away from a Synapse Creature] or [that unit is not falling back] or [already in combat]], then [either [if [Leadership test], then [either [pass and act normally] or [fail and fall back]], or [if [Lurk], then [no shoot, +1 cover save, cannot capture objectives]].

Here's a handy set of notes for helping you code English: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/courses/log/transtip.htm

Edit: Spelling...

Simply put, aboeckman, you're wrong. Nids are one of my armies, and there are only two options to a unit out of synapse, test or lurk. Try to twist it all you want, it's been this way since 4th and ain't gonna change unless they FAQ it or a new codex changes it.

And thanks for posting the link, I was going to post it as well, since most of us on that thread disagree with you.

While I agree with the prevailing sentiment. I can understand the opposite view.

The issue is if the bullet points replace all of the options, or if they just add to the standard options. I believe they are meant to replace all of the options, but I can see how he (and Yakface) read it as just adding to the standard options.

The key word in IB seems to be "alternatively"... the Ld test and lurking are the only two actions available to a brood out of synapse. Either you want to be able to act normally, in which case you take the Ld test, or you take the alternative, which is to lurk.

The key word to me was "must" relating to must follow the rules for IB.

Then they are listed.

The fact that the unit MUST follow the rules for IB but instead choose to follow an unwritten rule that is "always allowed" despite the inherent flaw in that sentiment. The only unts "always allowed" to do anything have that stated. In text.

"Alternatively" means that if you do not choose to move you are then lurking, not "you could lurk if you want or use a third option never described in these rules". It says you "may lurk" because the only other thing you may do is move, thus requiring a test.

This is *not* an 'unwritten rule'

The base rules, the ones in the BRB, allow for a unit to move, or to stay still. Those are the rules, they are written, and the apply to all units.

Then the Nid codex says that some units will need to follow the IB rules.
It is not totally clear whether the IB rules totally replace the already allowed options, or if they are simply in addition to them.
I believe the 'alternately' indicates that they are totally replaced. But it is far from conclusive.