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.

Okay, I'll try to explain the scenario in which this question came up.

Nightbringer Etheric Tempest states:

"Any enemy units with a model within 6" and which doesn't consist entirely of models the unmodified Strength 4 or more must move 2D6" directly away from Nightbringer as if it was falling back."
pg 29 Necron codex

Tyranid Synapse states:

"Any Tyranid broods with a model within 12" of a Synapse Creature never fall back and ..."
pg 28 Tyranid Codex

Does a creature under synapse move away from the Nightbringer. The big debate is the "as if it was falling back."

Can the Tyranids be pushed?

Nightbringer does not make them fall back. It makes them "move 2D6" directly away from Nightbringer as if it was falling back". They are not falling back, they will not need to try and regroup (because they are not falling back). They just make a move using the rules and stipulations for falling back (i.e. Direct to table edge [or synapse in case of nids], can be trapped etc).

That's the answer I was hoping for. It answers many more questions that came up afterwards.

Thanks much, you guys rock.

nerdvanastore wrote:That's the answer I was hoping for. It answers many more questions that came up afterwards.

Thanks much, you guys rock.

Glad to help! Don't worry though, I have a feeling someone will argue the opposite and we will devolve into a 9 page flamefest of epic lulz!

Gwar! and everything he stands for is wrong and clearly if you're moving "as if" falling back then if one were to read that as translated into the Pushtu 40k rulebook, then Swahili, and then translated back to English you would see there is no difference between "as if" and "exactly as". I think Gwar! should keep his RAI isolated to relevant threads.

Thor665 wrote:Gwar! and everything he stands for is wrong and clearly if you're moving "as if" falling back then if one were to read that as translated into the Pushtu 40k rulebook, then Swahili, and then translated back to English you would see there is no difference between "as if" and "exactly as". I think Gwar! should keep his RAI isolated to relevant threads.

I like it

A moment . . .

Since the NB specifies "as if falling back", that would imply that Synapse, and the rules for the lack thereof would apply.

I have rarely played where this matters, and so I have not read critically about the interaction of rules. . . but I do not see a reason to think NB is more specific than IB.

That said, it may vary whether a Tyranid is within Synapse range (as Fearless and Brood Telepathy has workarounds).

Perhaps this is an entirely irrelevant post. . .

More later!

You make a fall back move when you fail a morale test, and Tyranids have immunity to this. But the implication is that what the Necrons make you do is mov 2d6, and then for the move you're following the rules for falling back because the move is "as if" falling back.

By dint of the "as if" it proves that what you're not doing is actually falling back. You're making a move that follows the rules for falling back.

Thor665 wrote:
By dint of the "as if" it proves that what you're not doing is actually falling back. You're making a move that follows the rules for falling back.

"As if" could also mean that you are to perform a fall back move, which Tyranids under synapse don't have to do, because they are fearless and don't ever fall back. Their synapse rule prevents them from falling back.

whitedragon wrote:

Thor665 wrote:
By dint of the "as if" it proves that what you're not doing is actually falling back. You're making a move that follows the rules for falling back.

"As if" could also mean that you are to perform a fall back move, which Tyranids under synapse don't have to do, because they are fearless and don't ever fall back. Their synapse rule prevents them from falling back.

1) Most Tyranids are not fearless. Synapse does not give Tyranids the fearless ability. It makes them auto pass every test. It is the exact same thing as fearless but it is a different ability. There are actually a few 40k situations where this comes into play. Also, synapse trumps fearless. ex: If a fex is within synapse he uses the rules of synapse and not the fearless rules. Game wise treat them as the same ability until something specifically calls for fearless units.
2) Tyranid fall back rules: Tyranids fall back to the nearest synapse creature and stop when they are within synapse range and auto rally the next turn. If there is no synapse creature in game then they move towards their table edge. That is how their fall back works.
3) The Necron ability states that they move 2d6 as if falling back. What does this mean? It means that the unit makes a 2d6 move according to its fall back rules and then behaves as if nothing had ever happened afterwords. For all intensive purposes it is the ATSKNF ability. The unit will fall back using the normal fall back rules and then auto rally regardless of its unit strength. Now if the unit can't fall back it will not be destroyed because the unit can only be destroyed by the fall back rule. The unit is using the movement direction aspect of the fall back rule not the entire rule. If it was using the actual fall back rule then any Tyranid unit within synapse would be instantly destroyed because it can not move. The fall back rule states that if a model falling back can not move it's full movement then it is destroyed. Again, Tyranids within synapse can not make a fall back move of any kind.
4) What this means for Tyranids. Tyranids within synapse will not move at all. The way the codex is worded there is literally no direction for a Tyranid model to fall back while within synapse. Tyranids within synapse do not fall back in any way. They just do not move. A synapse creature is in synapse. If the unit is outside synapse then see 1).
5) For clarification when I say anything like "Tyranids in synapse" I mean that if one model of the unit is within synapse then they entire unit counts as being within synapse. This is how it is specifically stated in the Tyranid codex.

nerdvanastore wrote:Does a creature under synapse move away from the Nightbringer. The big debate is the "as if it was falling back."

Can the Tyranids be pushed?

This is probably the reason CSM Lash is worded as ordinary movement. To avoid questions like this.

Far as I know people used to play this worked on Fearless units - it may be "as if" falling back but they're actually being forced to move, hence the Strength limit. Same way Deceive seems to work even on Fearless units, according to the latest FAQ at least.

Besides, any Necron player who lessens his Phase-out number by paying a huge chunk of points for a C'Tan deserves a break. ;-)

The issue I see is less of a tyranid issue and more of an outdated necron codex issue. When you make a fall back move in 5th edition, you do it in a particular way.

The nightbringer says you must move directly away from the nightbringer. Moving directly away and moving as if you are falling back are not compatible--a fall back move in 5th ed will most likely NOT be directly away from the nightbringer, especially if the nightbringer is surrounded.

Thus, rather than say that the nightbringer does not work at all in 5th edition, I would remove the 'as if falling back' part of the rule as a holdover from 3rd edition. Its easy enough for me to just move 2d6 inches directly away, stopping at things like the board edge and other models, rather than try and figure out if the nightbringer actually destroys such models by applying 5th ed fall back rules to a 3rd ed 'as if falling back' clause.

DevianID wrote:I would remove the 'as if falling back' part of the rule as a holdover from 3rd edition.

I'm guessing for the authority to do this you're referring to the BGB FAQ, which says:

"Q. If my Codex includes some options (or other rules) that seem to have no effect in the new edition (like the Thornback biomorph ...), are you going to publish an errata to change them to something else that does work?

A. No, if an option (or a rule) clearly has no effect, like in the case of the example above, it simply does nothing."

This "as if falling back" language is not a rule that "clearly has no effect" in 5th edition. Falling back is still part of the 5th edition rules (unlike the use of model counts in CC as part of combat resolution) so the language "as if falling back" cannot simply be ignored as a holdover.

This FAQ entry is not carte blanche to run around ignoring every bit of every rule that functions differently in the new edition.

-GK

GiantKiller wrote:This FAQ entry is not carte blanche to run around ignoring every bit of every rule that functions differently in the new edition.

I agree. That is "The Most Important Rule"s job