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.

There are two effects

First effect of the aura is to continuously check that there is a techmarine within 6".

If there isn't a further effect is triggered namely the gun is removed.

If both units are under the rule is disabled on the gun so no effect.

If just the techmarine then the aura cannot locate it during the first check and the second effect occurs as its not been disabled.

If just the gun the check occurs and locates the techmarine (although if it didn't the second effect would be disabled.)

Only the area of the aura within 6" of the aircraft has no effect.

This would have to be wrong in order for you to be right and so far you have not supplied any evidence supporting your position just an assertion that you are right which yoinwould have done by now had you a case.

Madjob wrote:
There was no requirement for proximity to friendlies, your character could be standing alone in an empty field in full view, but so long as your opponent couldn't get closer to them than any of your other units, they couldn't target them.

Oh yeah, you're right! That is pretty cool actually, thematically my group has always hated the rule.

Octovol wrote:

Madjob wrote:
There was no requirement for proximity to friendlies, your character could be standing alone in an empty field in full view, but so long as your opponent couldn't get closer to them than any of your other units, they couldn't target them.

Oh yeah, you're right! That is pretty cool actually, thematically my group has always hated the rule.

Yeah its largely a buff for our castle lists but will negatively effect the third untargetable enginseer sitting alone on an objective.

I don't think the copter would kill the gun. The gun just states "is there a gunner within 6 inches, if not the gun dies." Aura ability or no, the gunner is physically still within 6" of the gun. Yes the auras are shut down and I would agree he could not fire it, but saying that the gun dies because it's an aura for what is really more of a check just seems asinine. Don't get me wrong, I hate TFC with a passion, but this doesn't seem right that you can pay a CP and just remove it for flying close.

Not even on just a RAI basis but a RAW one, aura or no, the gun only requires a check to see if a model is physically within 6". It is not an aura ability giving the gunner a boost, it's merely a check to see if it's there. The copter does not remove the gunner, it does not physically push away the gunner, it merely removes the effect of aura abilities. So even if you're arguing that it shuts down the aura affect of the gunner to keep the gun alive... You've now argued that the rule is null and void because your copter nullifies the aura that if there is no gunner within 6, the model dies and it has no effect. After all, you're arguing ALL effects of the aura are shut down. By pure RAW with that line of thinking, you could kill the tecmarine and if the gun was still within range of the copter using the strat, it wouldn't actually need to be removed because the aura is null and void now.

Either way this argument feels moot to be totally honest, I cannot see any TO looking at that in an event and going "oh yeah the gun is dead, easy". It just comes across as incredibly TFG behavior, no offense. This is something that bare minimum, would destroy any hopes you may have had at a decent sportsmanship score. Not to mention pulling a move like this going to make your opponent not give you an inch for the rest of the game. Hope you enjoy being called on every move, every roll, and every strat after that because pulling a move like that would all but guarantee your opponent is going to do everything in their power to ruin your game.

Tl;Dr even if it is RAW the gun dies from the aura, the bad blood and karma you would get just isn't worth it.

Octovol wrote:


Not sure this is a meaningful change? I cant remember the exact wording of the original, just the number of non-vehicle/monster things is new isn't it?

Yes, and other characters.

The other thing to note is the way it is worded seems like characters may get to attach themselves to other units again.

Seems like 8th was a complete strip-down, with 9th reintroducing more complex rules and things similar to USRs; this is not a bad thing if done right. As it stands now we have the 3rd/4th edition problems of multiple same named rules with slight variations, and silly different names that are carbon copies of the same rule(every once in a while FAQ'd in opposing ways)




Automatically Appended Next Post:

U02dah4 wrote:
There are two effects

First effect of the aura is to continuously check that there is a techmarine within 6".

If there isn't a further effect is triggered namely the gun is removed.

If both units are under the rule is disabled on the gun so no effect.

If just the techmarine then the aura cannot locate it during the first check and the second effect occurs as its not been disabled.

If just the gun the check occurs and locates the techmarine (although if it didn't the second effect would be disabled.)

Only the area of the aura within 6" of the aircraft has no effect.

This would have to be wrong in order for you to be right and so far you have not supplied any evidence supporting your position just an assertion that you are right which yoinwould have done by now had you a case.

So you are going backwards and still utterly wrong on just about everything.

The Aura has 1 effect: destroy the gun if no gunner unit is withing the aura.

The check is the aura, the effect is the negative answer to the check.

But even if we applied your nonsense of 2 effects: both do nothing under the strat (aura abilties have no effect).

Your other bit erroneously applies the Aura to the gunner unit, this is patently false. The strat does not change the status of the Techmarine Gunner unit into somehow not a Techmarine gunner unit, and the strat in this scenario is also having no effect on the gun.

The Aura on the gun checks for a gunner unit within range, sees that there is one(because none of the Techmarine Gunner's status as a friendly <CHAPTER> Techmarine Gunner unit changes in any way) so does not apply the Effect.

There is no way for the strat to destroy any models that have an aura ability interdendent on proximity to other models.

Also mentioned in the footnotes of the Sisters article:

* In the new edition, your charge roll has to be sufficient to reach ALL of the units you have declared a charge against, otherwise your charge is unsuccessful and no models are moved.

Which helps mitigate the overwatch cost a bit

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
I don't think the copter would kill the gun. The gun just states "is there a gunner within 6 inches, if not the gun dies." Aura ability or no, the gunner is physically still within 6" of the gun. Yes the auras are shut down and I would agree he could not fire it, but saying that the gun dies because it's an aura for what is really more of a check just seems asinine. Don't get me wrong, I hate TFC with a passion, but this doesn't seem right that you can pay a CP and just remove it for flying close.

Not even on just a RAI basis but a RAW one, aura or no, the gun only requires a check to see if a model is physically within 6". It is not an aura ability giving the gunner a boost, it's merely a check to see if it's there. The copter does not remove the gunner, it does not physically push away the gunner, it merely removes the effect of aura abilities. So even if you're arguing that it shuts down the aura affect of the gunner to keep the gun alive... You've now argued that the rule is null and void because your copter nullifies the aura that if there is no gunner within 6, the model dies and it has no effect. After all, you're arguing ALL effects of the aura are shut down. By pure RAW with that line of thinking, you could kill the tecmarine and if the gun was still within range of the copter using the strat, it wouldn't actually need to be removed because the aura is null and void now.

Either way this argument feels moot to be totally honest, I cannot see any TO looking at that in an event and going "oh yeah the gun is dead, easy". It just comes across as incredibly TFG behavior, no offense. This is something that bare minimum, would destroy any hopes you may have had at a decent sportsmanship score. Not to mention pulling a move like this going to make your opponent not give you an inch for the rest of the game. Hope you enjoy being called on every move, every roll, and every strat after that because pulling a move like that would all but guarantee your opponent is going to do everything in their power to ruin your game.

Tl;Dr even if it is RAW the gun dies from the aura, the bad blood and karma you would get just isn't worth it.

the check is the aura if the aura has no effect in the area the check does not occur in that area. RAI certainly might not be the case but RAI is irrelevant we play by RAW because we cannot know GW intention untill they tell us in an faq.

I'm arguing the aura check is shut down only within the aura of the aircraft outside that they continue as normal.

auras don't have to be beneficial debuffs shut down just as buffs

yes that is correct killing the techmarine while in range of the gun keeps the gun alive until the stratagem wares off or the models move apart not all interactions are beneficial



it is a weird interaction in the rules but it is the RAW one and only effects a couple of units in the game and only if their not screened it won't come up often. I'm also not saying I think it should work that way just that it does.

If you stick to the rules your opponent is allowed to waste their clock time checking them. Your not presenting a RAW case that it doesn't work that way in fact you appear to recognise it does. Just that you don't like it or think it should and that you would be unsporting if faced by this. I'm not sure you speak for every TO, most I know stick to RAW as long as the game functions( unless the tournament pack says otherwise.)

That character rule pretty much just means the lone character off in nomans land (usually a SSAG) can still be targeted, despite notbeing the closest period

I like all of the new editions rules so far, except for some odd visibility issues like ruins blocking los infinetely and some models that are small but have 18+ wounds.
Also, does that mean if a unit hugs a ruins wall, but can still shoot a flyer that is at the other end of the board, although you only can see stuff 90 degrees above you or behind you?

Funnily enough I wonder what they will do with the Engineseer.
He is fine as a cheap repair bot in AM lists because they dont have other repairing units like us.
He has gotten a cool looking beefy model and was even promoted to be a HQ for admech ( because admech was unplayable with just the dominus)
Lorewise he isnt really fitted to be an HQ, although GW could further differentiate between the admech enginseers and the engineseers that are even further down the ladder of rank who are gifted to the IG.
He had only a couple of purposes which SOLELY come from being cheap. Namely farming CP, standing in the way or covering the no mans land behind you, which he now no langer can do.

we can't say for sure we don't have full los rules

as to the enginseer his function is to be cheap repair vehicles and with the new wl traits has a range of auras lots of castles will want one or two stood next to cawl/dominus

The main thing id note for us on the new Look out sirrules is that cavalry don't block LoS.

they do if theres 3 of them or more. That part of the rule doesnt look at unit tags, just how many of them are in the unit.

I thought about a thing concerning the new multi-charge rule and the Serberys Raiders.

So the new multi-charge rules says that if you declare a charge against more than 1 unit, the charge roll needs to be sufficient to be able to reach ALL the declared targets. If it doesn't, the charge fails and no model moves.

This means that once a turn, we could use the Raiders to be a roadblock to protect a unit. By placing them in a conga line between our would-be charged unit, and the opposing would-be charging unit, the opponent have to declare a charge against the Raiders to move within 1" of them to reach the other side, or must charge around them, losing charge distance in the process. Now if the enemy targets the Raiders with a charge, we can use the stratagem to have them move immediately 12" away. Now our opponent must be able to reach the Raiders, who're much farther away then before, or his charge fails.

Though in the rumours thread, someone mentioned Reece saying that we haven't seen one of the biggest changes of melee combat, so that tactic may fall flat depending on said rule.

theres another big melee change?
Concerning. They already revealed terrain affects combat now, big things can shoot into combat, overwatch is a stratagem, and falling back has a mild risk of causing mortal wounds.
I am having a hard time thinking of what they could change core-rule wise for combat that wouldnt actually severely hurt it. That is, except for allowing you to attack Heroic Intervened units you didnt declare but i would be surprised if they did that because that rule is there to prevent you from just dumping all the attacks on that character.

... *gasp* maybe the character rule applies in melee but you cant attack them period if you can attack something else now??? lol

 Vineheart01 wrote:
they do if theres 3 of them or more. That part of the rule doesnt look at unit tags, just how many of them are in the unit.

Fair enough i misunderstood

U02dah4 wrote:

If just the techmarine then the aura cannot locate it during the first check and the second effect occurs as its not been disabled.

the strat doesn't remove the techmarine so the thunderfire can still detect that there is a techmarine withint 6".

Not really tactics related, but noted in a signature something about "Fires of Cyraxus".

In case anyone was interested in seeing some of the unit art plates from there?
This was the Warhammer Community article from Warhammer Fest in 2017 where they showed them.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:

If just the techmarine then the aura cannot locate it during the first check and the second effect occurs as its not been disabled.

the strat doesn't remove the techmarine so the thunderfire can still detect that there is a techmarine withint 6".

It removes the aura detecting the techmarine not the techmarine still being on the battlefield is irrelevant

I am not sure if aura abilities exist outside of the rules themselves. I am inclined to think that it only shuts down the TFC; it does not cause it to be removed.

Your not sure aura abilities exist outside the rules? Then i'm certain your answer is not grounded in the rules. To what do you think the strategem refers when it says "aura abilities.

Core rules

Aura Abilities
Some units – usually
Characters – have
abilities that affect certain
models within a given
range. Unless the ability in
question says otherwise, a
model with a rule like this
is always within range of
the effect.

I meant that I don't think auras exist as physical qualia on the board that can be blocked in the manner you describe.

U02dah4 wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:

If just the techmarine then the aura cannot locate it during the first check and the second effect occurs as its not been disabled.

the strat doesn't remove the techmarine so the thunderfire can still detect that there is a techmarine withint 6".

It removes the aura detecting the techmarine not the techmarine still being on the battlefield is irrelevant

Once again, no it does not remove the Aura.

It removes the effect of the Aura.

You have even admitted this yourself.

The Check is the Aura(same as say, a Captain's "Friendly <CHAPTER> units within 6"), the effect is the destruction of the gun(back to the Captain's Aura effect being re-roll 1's to hit).

I am really not sure if you are just Dense, or really trying to go at any angle you can grasp at to get the effect you have decided should happen.

The Strat only removes the effect of the Aura, not the aura in totality(functionally identical, but a big distinction), and even if it did remove the whole aura; that would include the destruction of the gun.

so you agree it does not remove the aura

it removes the effect of the aura (it's semantically the same thing as removing the aura but only within the area within 6" of the aircraft) and you know what i meant.

the check and the removal are both effects of the aura rules. Your artificially trying to seperate parts of the aura rule and say those bits are effects and those bits are not. effectively picking and chooseing which bits to apply, When there is no rules based reason for doing so.

the aura has no effect within 6" of the aircraft therefore the whole aura rule has no effect in that range. That is what i have argued all along. i don't deny the removal is an effect of the rule but so is the check.

To quote you
"I am really not sure if you are just Dense, or really trying to go at any angle you can grasp at to get the effect you have decided should happen." but you cant pick and choose to suit you. i get it you want the more powerful version of the rules where you negate the whole rule on the character which might be intended but that's not what the stratagem says it refers to the area within 6" of the aircraft only. Yes in this situation and randomly with servitors mindlock ths version is better for the admech player but in most its worse. You block half the CPT aura but not all for example.


"The Strat only removes the effect of the Aura, not the aura in totality(functionally identical, but a big distinction), " correct

"and even if it did remove the whole aura; that would include the destruction of the gun. " incorrect because the whole aura is effectively removed but only within 6" of the aircraft. so yes if the gun is in that range thats how it works but if the gun is outside that range then the aura functions normally except within 6" of the aircraft where the aura has no effect.


If you go back a page or two ago i made a reference to the new look out sir rule not allowing cavalry to block LOS to a character. Someone pointed out i was mistaken - using the rules I looked it up varified I was wrong - so I posted that i was mistaken. There argument convinced me because it was based .... in the rules.

Your arguments don't because to date you have quoted no rules to support your position. Furthermore the relevant rule on the strategem as I quoted early refers only to the area within 6" of the aircraft. I mean if you can find me a quote stateing that enemy models within 6" lose their aura abilities sure i'll look it up and agree. What I won't do is accept your position based on you telling me how it works when what your saying goes against the RAW


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Suzuteo wrote:
I meant that I don't think auras exist as physical qualia on the board that can be blocked in the manner you describe.

I guess that would depend on your definition of physical qualia

Auras have rules - those have defined characteristics such as a 6" range or only effecting <forgeworld> sure there might not be a physical circle on the board. However their is an abstract one. I cannot see a circle but i can use a tape measure to determine whats in that area.

Stratagems also have rules - they also have defined characterstics. Such as what and when it can target sure their might not be physical marker of that strategem on the board. However their is an abstract one. If I use protector doctrina imperative on a unit of vanguard there is no physical marker but their is a buff to hit and specified duration.

As to whether a stratagem can effect the characteristics of a an aura up until recently the answer was no. However as with all GW games rules are absolute until GW create one that says otherwise.

So then it comes down to the specific instance

"untill the start of your next turn, enemy models aura abilities have no effect within 6" "

Fixed time frame and a clear rule - enemy models aura abilities have no effect within 6" implying the stratagem creates an abstract area within 6" in which enemy models aura abilities have no effect. So by definition the strategem does block in the manor I describe by the stratagem creating an exception to the normal game rules. Unless you can quote a rules based reason that it doesn't.

U02dah4 wrote:
so you agree it does not remove the aura

it removes the effect of the aura (it's semantically the same thing as removing the aura but only within the area within 6" of the aircraft) and you know what i meant.

the check and the removal are both effects of the aura rules. Your artificially trying to seperate parts of the aura rule and say those bits are effects and those bits are not. effectively picking and chooseing which bits to apply, When there is no rules based reason for doing so.

the aura has no effect within 6" of the aircraft therefore the whole aura rule has no effect in that range. That is what i have argued all along. i don't deny the removal is an effect of the rule but so is the check.

To quote you
"I am really not sure if you are just Dense, or really trying to go at any angle you can grasp at to get the effect you have decided should happen." but you cant pick and choose to suit you. i get it you want the more powerful version of the rules where you negate the whole rule on the character which might be intended but that's not what the stratagem says it refers to the area within 6" of the aircraft only. Yes in this situation and randomly with servitors mindlock ths version is better for the admech player but in most its worse. You block half the CPT aura but not all for example.


"The Strat only removes the effect of the Aura, not the aura in totality(functionally identical, but a big distinction), " correct

"and even if it did remove the whole aura; that would include the destruction of the gun. " incorrect because the whole aura is effectively removed but only within 6" of the aircraft. so yes if the gun is in that range thats how it works but if the gun is outside that range then the aura functions normally except within 6" of the aircraft where the aura has no effect.


If you go back a page or two ago i made a reference to the new look out sir rule not allowing cavalry to block LOS to a character. Someone pointed out i was mistaken - using the rules I looked it up varified I was wrong - so I posted that i was mistaken. There argument convinced me because it was based .... in the rules.

Your arguments don't because to date you have quoted no rules to support your position. Furthermore the relevant rule on the strategem as I quoted early refers only to the area within 6" of the aircraft. I mean if you can find me a quote stateing that enemy models within 6" lose their aura abilities sure i'll look it up and agree. What I won't do is accept your position based on you telling me how it works when what your saying goes against the RAW


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Suzuteo wrote:
I meant that I don't think auras exist as physical qualia on the board that can be blocked in the manner you describe.

I guess that would depend on your definition of physical qualia

Auras have rules - those have defined characteristics such as a 6" range or only effecting <forgeworld> sure there might not be a physical circle on the board. However their is an abstract one. I cannot see a circle but i can use a tape measure to determine whats in that area.

Stratagems also have rules - they also have defined characterstics. Such as what and when it can target sure their might not be physical marker of that strategem on the board. However their is an abstract one. If I use protector doctrina imperative on a unit of vanguard there is no physical marker but their is a buff to hit and specified duration.

As to whether a stratagem can effect the characteristics of a an aura up until recently the answer was no. However as with all GW games rules are absolute until GW create one that says otherwise.

So then it comes down to the specific instance

"untill the start of your next turn, enemy models aura abilities have no effect within 6" "

Fixed time frame and a clear rule - enemy models aura abilities have no effect within 6" implying the stratagem creates an abstract area within 6" in which enemy models aura abilities have no effect. So by definition the strategem does block in the manor I describe by the stratagem creating an exception to the normal game rules. Unless you can quote a rules based reason that it doesn't.

So you really are just dense or trying to get your way.

The check is the definition of an aura.

But none of the Fething matters.

The (or feth it, one of the) effect(s) of the aura is destruction of the gun.

WHICH THE STRAT CAUSES NOT TO HAPPEN.

Just as you seem the think the definition of an aura is removed("If at any time there are no <CHAPTER> Techmarine Gunner units with 6" of a Thunderfire Cannon), you cannot separate out and apply the Effect of the Aura("that Thunderfire Cannon is destroyed") without removing it as well.

You were trying to separate the two effects and I was telling you you can't do that it's arbitrarily picking and choosing.

I don't separate the two they are either disabled or not but only within the area within 6" of the aircraft.

If one model is wholly within the stratagem aura and one is not then the enemy models auras have no effect on the model in the aircrafts aura as that is what the stratagem does.

It does not stop the enemies models auras affecting the model not within 6" of the aircraft as there is no rule telling you to do that unless you can supply one.

I will quote the stratagem again.... "until the start of your next turn, enemy models aura abilities have no effect within 6" "

There is no part of that rule that prevents auras functioning outwith 6" of the aircraft. Or says because one model is within the aircraft range all models are unaffected by the aura.

If you can not provide ANY.... evidence to support your position then I can only conclude that you are to quote you "just dense or trying to get your own way". Because up till now you haven't made a case you just state it doesn't work that way without evidenceing that.

I have finally figured out your issue.

U02dah4 wrote:
If one model is wholly within the stratagem aura and one is not then the enemy models auras have no effect on the model in the aircrafts aura as that is what the stratagem does.

It does not stop the enemies models auras affecting the model not within 6" of the aircraft as there is no rule telling you to do that unless you can supply one.

I will quote the stratagem again.... "until the start of your next turn, enemy models aura abilities have no effect within 6" "

You have no Idea how to read the Strat.

So let's set up a scenario, You have an Archeopter unit with a command uplink and fly it into a position with the following radii: 1 Unit of 6 Hellblasters, Closest model is 4" away, furthest is 9" away, there is only 1 other model in the unit within 6" of the Archeopter. There is A Primaris Captain 5" from the Archeopter, but within 6" of both the nearest Hellblaster and one of the further hellblasters. There is also a Primaris Lt 7" from the Archeopter, but within 6" of the Hellblasters.

By your reading, 4 of the Hellblasters can re-roll 1's to both hit and wound.

What you should be getting from the rule is that all the Hellblasters may re-roll 1s to wound, but none may re-roll 1s to attack.

It is the typo plural "models" instead of Posessive "model's" that is causing your nonsense confusion.

And: your confusion is still nonsense, in the TFC or other "Crewed Artillery" rules because the entirety of that gun destruction effect is on the gun: The effect that destroys the gun is on the gun under the strat. So you seem to not even know what is being discussed here.

And: Yes, it is clearly a typo "enemy models aura abilities" is completely meaningless unless read in the possessive, or plural possessive.

No by my reading all of the hellblasters benefit from the auras.

The primaris captains/lieutenents auras are worded such that only one model in the unit needs to be affected for the whole unit to benefit.(the aura targets unit not models.

Given most auras work that way thats why 6" of the aircraft is less powerfull than removing the aura entirely

The captain benefits from neither aura as its within aircrafts aura the lieutenent from both as its outside the aircrafts aura

As to tfc it does not matter from which model the aura is comming from. That aura does not apply within 6" of the aircraft - it is a null zone. - no check occurs in that reagion - it continues to check outside that region and will remove the gun if no tech priest can be found outwith that region.


And finnaly the crux of the issue. "Enemy models aura abilities". you can't prove it's a typo- RAW it proves me correct and you wrong. What your doing is making an argument based on intention, you believe its a typo because GW intented it to stop enemy models projecting auras.

Luckily theres a tradition of RAW trumps RAI, because we cannot know GW intention - maybe it was a typo maybe it wasn't you can't prove that but you did just prove yourself wrong under RAW.



As to not making sense, it makes sense you just don't agree with what it says.

Enemy models aura abilities within 6"

Within 6" of the aircraft - makes sense -defined area of the battlefield

Aura abilities within 6" - makes sense - rules following the definition of aura abilities in the core rules within a defined 6" area of the battlefield

Enemy models aura abilities within 6" - makes sense- - only effects enemy models rules following the definition of aura abilities (otherwise it would negate itself) within a defined 6" area of the battlefield

It makes sense you may not beleive it was intended but intention is irrelevant when the raw makes sense.

Could you 2 guys please consider taking this argument to the YMDC forum?
At this point it's just you two arguing back and forth and while this is a mega thread, it is pretty much choking the thread right now

 Thairne wrote:
Could you 2 guys please consider taking this argument to the YMDC forum?
At this point it's just you two arguing back and forth and while this is a mega thread, it is pretty much choking the thread right now

Yeah I tried to talk tactics again a few posts ago but it got drowned in the fight

Seriously drop the argument about that stupid strat.
It needs a faq no matter how you look at it, so just wait for the faq and shut up.