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.

FoolWhip wrote:Of course. But this means my massively expensive flying hive tyrant of doom can DS in with bonus to his reserves roll.

... he can't deepstrike.

Wings = jump pack = deep strike.

Wings = move as Jump Pack = no DS as this is not part of the JI movement rules.

FoolWhip wrote:Wings = jump pack = deep strike.

wings =/= jump infanrty
wings == move like jump infanrty
jump infantry == deep strike

edit ninja'ed

Tri wrote:

FoolWhip wrote:Wings = jump pack = deep strike.

wings =/= jump infanrty
wings == move like jump infanrty
jump infantry == deep strike

edit ninja'ed

I am confused,

Are you saying they can't ds or they can? The last codex they could DS, and the rules for wings have not changed...

FoolWhip wrote:Of course. But this means my massively expensive flying hive tyrant of doom can DS in with bonus to his reserves roll.

Actually, no, it doesn't.

A Hive Tyrant with wings cannot deep strike.

Read the rules for Wings again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

FoolWhip wrote:Are you saying they can't ds or they can? The last codex they could DS, and the rules for wings have not changed...

-Sigh- Read the codex again. What does it say?

The rules for wings HAVE changed. In the 4th ed codex, they made the model Jump Infantry.

In the 5th ed, they allow the model to MOVE AS IF Jump Infantry. They do NOT become Jump Infantry.

Gwar! wrote:

FoolWhip wrote:Of course. But this means my massively expensive flying hive tyrant of doom can DS in with bonus to his reserves roll.

Actually, no, it doesn't.

A Hive Tyrant with wings cannot deep strike.

Read the rules for Wings again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

FoolWhip wrote:Are you saying they can't ds or they can? The last codex they could DS, and the rules for wings have not changed...

-Sigh- Read the codex again. What does it say?

The rules for wings HAVE changed. In the 4th ed codex, they made the model Jump Infantry.

In the 5th ed, they allow the model to MOVE AS IF Jump Infantry. They do NOT become Jump Infantry.

*Shuts up and gets out his codex.

FoolWhip wrote:*Shuts up and gets out his codex.

Good lad. Excellent way to celebrate 100 Posts

Rulebooks. Read round the world but written for Jervishammer.

MC's with wings is being discussed here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/275032.page

Please stay on topic here.

Sorry Alpharius. Going to the next thread... I wish my 100th post had been something more... substantial then admitting I was wrong. *Sigh*

This seems to be a clear case of ambiguity, and I think the only definitive way to answer this is wait for the FAQ's. However in the mean time I might as well offer my opinion.

I am inclined to say that they do not stack. The Hive Commander ability says " If a Hive Tyrant has the Hive Commander upgrade, a single unit of Troops may outflank. In addition, whilst the Hive Tyrant is alive, you add +1 to your reserve rolls."

I think the key is that the way they phrased the first sentence - if *a* Hive Tyrant. That seems to suggest if any have Tyrant has it, then you reap the benefits - once. Furthermore, they specify a *single* unit of Troops. They could have said one unit of troops, but saying single makes it pretty clear that even if you have 2 you are still allowed a single unit of troops. The second sentence is slightly more ambiguous, but it is a subjunctive clause to the first sentence, and therefore is using the same context of the first sentence.

My opinion is that it really comes down to the word choice in the second sentence of Add. If you add +1, then add +1 again you have +2. If it had said, for example, "whilst the Hive Tyrant is alive you have +1 to your reserves roles", then I would agree that it does not stack.

Zeneth wrote:My opinion is that it really comes down to the word choice in the second sentence of Add. If you add +1, then add +1 again you have +2. If it had said, for example, "whilst the Hive Tyrant is alive you have +1 to your reserves roles", then I would agree that it does not stack.

Good point.

I would point out that the rule entry also doesn't say "Whilst A Hive Tyrant is alive you....." it instead says Whilst THE Hive Tyrant is alive you...". This points out that you are not considering all the hive tyrants with the hive commander upgrade on the board but each hive tyrant that has the hive commander upgrade on the board.

Astropath FTW anyone¿

Green Blow Fly wrote:Astropath FTW anyone¿

Page number in Codex Tyranids for unit "Astropath"? I can seem to find it in mine.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Astropath FTW anyone¿

Autarch? clearly GW will vote which ever way it feels like ... i'd like to think No since thats what happened in codex 2 back but space wolves got drop pods that carry 10 and in the SM codex (2 back) they carry 12...

Heres hoping GW can think of a third way and really fox us .. maybe if you have two models can come on turn 1 when you roll a 7

We had this argument for the IG command squads with all kinds of weird and wonderful precendent/logic/mathematics being lobbed in.

Wait for the GW FAQ so that they can fully explain themselves (or not if they simply choose to elaborate on how multiple Nid melee weapons stack instead).

Only GW can answer this question and +1 is pretty darn good¡

I just said +1... heh.

G

Wings = MOVE AS jump infantry (does not make them jump infantry, just their movement ability)

Jump infantry grants deepstrike.

Deepstrike is not a movement, it is a deployment type.

move as jump infantry = how far/when they can move does not include the alternate method of deployment.
---------------

here are some arguments against it stacking.

1. it doesnt say it does
2. last race to get update was not FAQed the stacking ability
3. why would there be 2 hq choices, with 2 different abilities that grant +1 to reserve roll if you could just take 2x of 1 HQ to get the 2+ bonus to reserve rolls?

If you want 2+ to your reserve roll take the Tyrant + the Swarmlord. Besidies ontop of +2 to reserve rolls you can reroll your outflank rolls. ..oh and it completely negates this argument till it gets FAQed for ...well not 100% clarity, but hopefully more than we currently have.

TopC wrote:Wings = MOVE AS jump infantry (does not make them jump infantry, just their movement ability)

Jump infantry grants deepstrike.

Deepstrike is not a movement, it is a deployment type.

move as jump infantry = how far/when they can move does not include the alternate method of deployment.
---------------

here are some arguments against it stacking.

1. it doesnt say it does
2. last race to get update was not FAQed the stacking ability
3. why would there be 2 hq choices, with 2 different abilities that grant +1 to reserve roll if you could just take 2x of 1 HQ to get the 2+ bonus to reserve rolls?

If you want 2+ to your reserve roll take the Tyrant + the Swarmlord. Besidies ontop of +2 to reserve rolls you can reroll your outflank rolls. ..oh and it completely negates this argument till it gets FAQed for ...well not 100% clarity, but hopefully more than we currently have.

For the first part, Deep Strike is not a deployment type. It is a rule within the game that is referenced very clearly in the sub-header "Movement" for Jump Infantry. If you want to know how "moving like Jump Infantry" works, consult the "Movement" sub-header in the BRB, where it clearly states that they benefit from the option to Deep Strike.

I don't see why Hive Commander would not stack, since Autarchs stack. They are HQs, not upgrades. That may be the logic behind the IG ruling. I do agree, until we get a FAQ, this will be a nagging question.

Wings = MOVE AS jump infantry (does not make them jump infantry, just their movement ability)

Jump infantry grants deepstrike.

Deepstrike is not a movement, it is a deployment type.

move as jump infantry = how far/when they can move does not include the alternate method of deployment.

You were bang on until you said Deep striking wasn't movement. pg95 of the rule book states deepstrike model "can't move further" and "obviously count as moving" and finally refer to "their deep strike move".

As others have pointed out this all falls under the movement section in the JI entry of p52 which should be enough without the repeated references to DS being movement in the DS rules.

here are some arguments against it stacking.

1. it doesnt say it does
2. last race to get update was not FAQed the stacking ability
3. why would there be 2 hq choices, with 2 different abilities that grant +1 to reserve roll if you could just take 2x of 1 HQ to get the 2+ bonus to reserve rolls?

If you want 2+ to your reserve roll take the Tyrant + the Swarmlord. Besidies ontop of +2 to reserve rolls you can reroll your outflank rolls. ..oh and it completely negates this argument till it gets FAQed for ...well not 100% clarity, but hopefully more than we currently have.

Swarmlord is just a Tyrant special character so having his stack with a Hive Tyrant implies that 2 Hive Tyrant's rules stack. You say it doesn;t say they do stack but it does in fact say that. The way it is worded means that multiple HCs mean multiple +1s to reserves rolls (so a potential plus 3 on plantestrike). Notice the different wording to Lictors where it states having a lictor gives a similar benefit whilst the Hive Commander states "the Hive Tyrnat".

The way it is wored by RAW the reserves stack although interestingly you can only out flank 1 unit no matter the number of Hive Commanders. RAI I'm not convinced and on the reserves they've ruled both directions in the past and to be honest I beleive that the out-flanking is intended to stack and I wouldn't say either way on the reserves.

I'm happy to play RAW until an FAQ or indeed come to an agreement with player TO if they see it differently.

The +1 to reserves (or for that matter, other effects) is such a wicked mess because ...drum roll please ... GW cant bother to be consistent. There really isnt that much difference between the eldar and IG rules, the justification GW fell back on to make them different relies on fluff. So they could easily go either way, or invent a new weird path as Tri suggested.

The main difference in interpretation comes down to whether one believes that the rule calls for setting up a state (ie has +1 been added to reserve rolls?) vs whether one believes the rule calls for a new instance each time (ie has +1 been added for this model, if so go on and check the next model and add another +1 for it).

There is a good basis for going with the state idea, that multiple hive commanders would all have their rule satisfied by having +1 added once. The arguements made for this idea do hold up, we just dont know what is RAI from GWs point of view. Plus, there is the following:

If we are going with the idea that two hive commanders do not stack, the same idea could be applied to ALL rules that modify a roll. If a roll has been given +1 for any reason, wouldnt that satisfy all rules that call for the roll to get +1? Why does it matter that one rule is a hive commander and one is a named special character? We simply look at the rule for the model and check and see if the roll has been modified by a +1. The rule doesnt say to ignore other modifiers if they are caused by other rules.

To use an example people are presenting:

We add +1 for a hive commander.
We also have the swarmlord, so we must add +1 to reserve rolls..have we done this? Yes, we have already added +1 to reserve rolls so this rule is satisfied as well.

There is no particular reason to stop midway through the process. If a rule that adds +1 creates a state effect, then all rules that look for that state effect are satisfied. The rule doesnt tell us to check and see if the +1 has come from any particular source, they all should be the same.....if we are going with this idea at all.

So really its a very muddy area; and while thinking that they dont stack because its a state effect is appealing, logically anything will not then stack.



Sliggoth


PS

And on the flying model question, the rule is move as jump infantry moves. So any way in which JI can move, winged models can move. So winged models can move 6" on the ground (as JI moves) or winged models can move 12" through the air (as JI moves) or falls back as JI falls back or deep strikes as JI deepstrikes....if deep strike is a move. Looking at the deep strike rules we see that deep strike is not a subheading under deployment, deep strike is instead a separate rule with a coequal heading between reserves and night fighting.
The deeps strike rules themselves call deep strike both movement and a move.

Just follow the simple steps:

1) Winged models move as Jump Infantry move.
2) JI can deepstrike
3) Deep strike is a move
4) Winged models can deepstrike