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.

So I haven't got my codex on me and I'm preparing a list. The first question is about regular stealers:

1. If you have a broodlord and buy toxin sacs for the brood do you have to purchase them for the broodlord as well?

Second question is really to do with something that happened yesterday regarding ymgarls:

2. My opponent had tried to surround a piece of terrain which he correctly assumed my ymgarls were coming out of. However he left me space to deploy 2...way out of coherency. Is that legal? I assumed it was since the only stipulations for models being destroyed was impassable terrain and enemy models.

1. Yes, as he is part of the Brood and the entire Brood must take the upgrade.

2. Yes that is legal, as far as I can tell.

Excellent. Thanks especially for the 1st one. Since I haven't got my dex I wasn't sure. I seem to remember the broodlord having his own available sets of upgrades.

Lukas: He(the broodlord) does have his own set of upgrades, and the Genestealers in the brood have their own upgrade option available to them, and then the Entire brood may have adrenal glands and/or toxin sacs(at points cost per model detailed in their entry) which must be bought as an every model or no model

They can deploy out of coherency in this case, however after that they follow the rules for units out of coherency:

During the course of a game, it’s possible a unit will get
broken up and lose unit coherency, usually because it
takes casualties. If this happens, the models in the unit
must be moved in such a way that they restore
coherency in their next Movement phase. If the unit
cannot move for some reason in its next turn (because
they are pinned down by a barrage or sniper fire, for
example), then they must move to restore unit
coherency as soon as they have the opportunity.

ihatehumans wrote:They can deploy out of coherency in this case, however after that they follow the rules for units out of coherency:

During the course of a game, it’s possible a unit will get
broken up and lose unit coherency, usually because it
takes casualties. If this happens, the models in the unit
must be moved in such a way that they restore
coherency in their next Movement phase. If the unit
cannot move for some reason in its next turn (because
they are pinned down by a barrage or sniper fire, for
example), then they must move to restore unit
coherency as soon as they have the opportunity.

Part 2

If they do this, then they move out of the terrain to get close to each other, but are still out of coherency, can they then charge (and still be out of coherency)?

<-- Opponent playing Luke

Yes, the only drawback to being out of coherency is you MUST move to try to restor it - there is no further prohibition saying you cannot then move.

cmac wrote:Part 2

If they do this, then they move out of the terrain to get close to each other, but are still out of coherency, can they then charge (and still be out of coherency)?

<-- Opponent playing Luke

No. See p. 34. "...(E)ach model must end its assault move in coherency with another model in its own unit that has already moved."

If you can (re)gain coherency during your assault move, then you may assault.

Except that that is not a requirement to initiate assault in the first place - however you could then argue you would break that rule by initiaiting assault in the first place...


However if another 6" move still doesnt bring you into coherency youve done VERY well!

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except that that is not a requirement to initiate assault in the first place - however you could then argue you would break that rule by initiaiting assault in the first place...

However if another 6" move still doesnt bring you into coherency youve done VERY well!

I don't see a lot of room to wiggle here - "each model MUST end its assault move in coherency with another model in its own unit that has already moved" seems pretty absolute. You can declare an assault, but if you can't follow the movement requirements for assault, I don't think you can actually assault. Break no rule, right?

Hmmm. That's interesting. I can't actually remember if my ymgarls were in coherency after they made assault moves.

Not that it matters, I got thrashed.