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.

Howdy everyone,

Attached below is the latest version (v3.1) of the Independent National Warhammer 40,000 Tournament FAQ (INAT FAQ), produced primarily for Adepticon 2010.

This updated version now covers the new Space Wolves codex that was released in November.

As always, any questions/rulings that have been altered from the 3.0 version have been denoted as such with a 'plus sign' ( + ) before the question # and have their 'answer text' colored red (just as with the 3.0 version) to make it easy for you to spot what has been changed. We have indeed altered/reversed a few rulings previously made in the 3.0 version of the FAQ based on user feedback, so please make sure you take the time to quickly scan over the whole document to see what has changed.

As noted with the last release of the INAT FAQ, this document no longer contains questions/answers regarding Imperial Armor/Apocalypse as these questions will be covered in a separate appendix document released a few months before Adepticon (the target for this is January or early February at the latest). We also plan to release another updated version of the INAT FAQ before Adepticon in order to cover the forthcoming Tyranid codex release.


Further feedback for future iterations of the FAQ is always welcome and can be done so in this thread or by sending an email to:

adepticon@gmail.com


As always, thanks again to everyone who helped out this process by giving us quality feedback, constructive criticism, or even going as far as to create their own Space Wolves FAQ. We certainly appreciate it!

Hi,

Thanks!

Thanx Yak!

Ouch. Valks count their wings as being hull? That's a little ridiculous. I can see why you ruled that way but... imagine putting Straken in a valk. Now you've got (unless I missed something in the codex) something near a three foot aura of win around your infantry when they counter charge. Oh god, the pain.

Only other thing in there that I disagree with, and for good reason, is the ruling that a space wolves IC on a thunderwolf gets S10 attacks with a thunder hammer/ power fist. As it states straight up that the stat bonuses are 'additions' (as opposed to 'changed to base S5') it ought to follow like the furious charge rules. Regular TWCs I understand, they were printed as being base S5... but this? Eh.

Good job on the other clarifications though, nothing caught my eye as being crazy or non-sequitor.

I can understand why they ruled hammers on TWC IC's being str10... i'm more pissed at GW for doing stupid crap like this than anyone else really.

Eh i always have a problem with the drop pod drifting so the squad inside has to roll and gets the one were the enemy pics, and the pod gets lost how do the guys come in lol do they magically fall from the sky unharmed lol..kinda lame lol

A question on SM Command Squads. The RAW is "You may take one Command Guard squad for every Space Marine Captain in your army". I can see no reference to this being a retinue- must the command squad begin play with the Captain attached? Specifically, if I were to take a Captian on a bike (attached to a SM Bike squad), could I then take a Command Squad on foot (maybe with another HQ attached, such as a Chaplain or Librarian)?

LuigiX wrote:A question on SM Command Squads. The RAW is "You may take one Command Guard squad for every Space Marine Captain in your army". I can see no reference to this being a retinue- must the command squad begin play with the Captain attached? Specifically, if I were to take a Captian on a bike (attached to a SM Bike squad), could I then take a Command Squad on foot (maybe with another HQ attached, such as a Chaplain or Librarian)?

Yeah, this isn't a retinue and its pretty clear in the RAW, but people keep having their mind locked in a pre-5th edition world where two units taken from the same FOC choice means that they're one unit in the game, which is something that just isn't the case.

So yes, you could take a Captain on bike and still select a Command squad on foot...they're two different units that happen to take up the same FOC.

We did answer this same question regarding Farseers and the Warlock unit that is allowed to be taken in the same FOC choice, but only because it is a question that gets brought up over and over again despite the fact that the rules (IMHO) are pretty clear. But we really don't want to get too far into printing the answer to this in every single codex that has two units taken from the same FOC choice.

First I want to say how beneficial your INAT FAQ list is. It helps avoid numerous rules conflicts.

One concern I have is the fast moving scout pre-game move, which effectively allows a unit to make a scout move before the game has started and then claim a cover save. The RAW states the cover save applies to units that had moved in the previous turn. My concern is that it can change the nature of the game substantially when the second player has multiple fast scout units. He can now move and know he will have a cover save on his opponent's first turn. It also raises the issue of what other pre-game moves might reasonably apply. For instance, why cannot tanks pop smoke in preparation for the turn or why cannot vehicles claim a 12 inch move in case they are assaulted on the first turn of the game? Such would also seem just as reasonable! Just my two cents.

Mannahnin wrote:Couldn't stay away?

Nope. Love you guys too much.

Yay welcome back!
( im back too! after my absence )

A question I've seen come up a couple of times is whether or not you can use Send In The Next Wave! if the conscript squad in question is destroyed to the last man and not removed from the table using the first part of the ability. I.e. do destroyed units count as being removed from the table? The issue is semantic, I know, but as someone who played a lot of MTG, I know semantics sometimes rule the world.

There are some great questions raised here, and defining two states of being against each other is frequently associated with contention. I'm especially interested in the line being drawn between skill and luck, and wondering whether the two crossover and what the effects of the places where they meet could be. While there are certainly examples that fall clearly into either camp, it's the middle ground where complications are likely to start to arise, and it will be interesting to see how these situations play out with respect to RMT.