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.

Hi guys,

Today during a game, an interesting question came up.

Since the Blood Angel FAQ stated when the models makes its close combat attacks have to be in range of the Sanguinary Priest in order to get the Furious Charge, does that carry over to Tervigon's Furious Charge and Toxin Sacs ability to gaunts? They aren't worded exactly the same, but very similar concept.

What do you guys think?

Thank you very much

I would probably play it that way, though to be fair, that is a completely arbitrary determination based solely on the fact that I feel it makes sense to play it that way.

You should discuss it with your opponent before the game and if you disagree, roll off. If you're playing by the GW FAQs, then this ruling only applies to BA players and not to any other codex.

I would agree that rules in any codex (or its FAQ and errata) apply only to the army defined by that codex.

yes, because its completely balanced and fair that free units wound T5-6 models on a 4+ and strike at initiative 5.

I think the BA FAQ is good precedent. It isn't specified when exactly they gain the bonus or for how long - the only defining factor is distance. If not in that distance at any time then {poof} ability gone.

Scott-S6 wrote:I think the BA FAQ is good precedent. It isn't specified when exactly they gain the bonus or for how long - the only defining factor is distance. If not in that distance at any time then {poof} ability gone.

Although personally I wouldn't care which way it was played, this ruling is a disadvantage to a BA player and even opens up other potential loop holes.

The example of a loop hole would be this:

Two groups, the Sanguinary Priest by himself, behind a wall of Tac Marines. One squad assaults the Tac Marines, drawing it to the side but still remaining within 6 inches of the Sanguinary Priest, then a jump infantry squad with all Power Fists assault the Sanguinary Priest. After all assault moves and all defender reactions, which assault takes place first?

Since the rules require us to complete an assault combat between two squads prior to moving on to the next group of units, the attacker would want the jump infantry squad to go first because that would deny the Tac squad FNP, which the defender would want the opposite. I guess the players would then roll off to see which squad gets to go first, and frankly this is the only situation that I can think of where two players would possibly argue about what order the units are resolved for CC.

The BA FAQ is not a rules change it is just telling you how the rules have always worked. You always needed to be in range to confer furious charge. Tervigons are not different, you need to be in range when you're attacking to benefit from Adrenal Glands and Toxin Sacs. If you've been playing it differently then thats a house rule and you go wild with that bad boy.

Aramoro

hamsterwheel wrote:You should discuss it with your opponent before the game and if you disagree, roll off. If you're playing by the GW FAQs, then this ruling only applies to BA players and not to any other codex.

Kilkrazy wrote:I would agree that rules in any codex (or its FAQ and errata) apply only to the army defined by that codex.

While pretty much any sane person can agree and understand that a FAQ ruling for a particular instance only applies to the specific rule in question, when it comes to a situation where there is no clear answer AND no specific ruling on the matter then it absolutely makes sense to apply the same reasoning used in a similar FAQ ruling because there simply isn't anything necessarily better to go by and besides the more consistency that is applied across the game generally the more it makes sense to people.

Of course, as always these things should be discussed with your opponent ahead of time, but with that said I do think it is entirely reasonable to apply the Blood Angel's ruling to the Tervigon's special rule simply because we don't have any other better basis to go by.

Correction to my earlier post, the BA FAQ only includes Furious Charge and not Feel no pain for when to measure.

yakface wrote:

hamsterwheel wrote:You should discuss it with your opponent before the game and if you disagree, roll off. If you're playing by the GW FAQs, then this ruling only applies to BA players and not to any other codex.

Kilkrazy wrote:I would agree that rules in any codex (or its FAQ and errata) apply only to the army defined by that codex.

While pretty much any sane person can agree and understand that a FAQ ruling for a particular instance only applies to the specific rule in question, when it comes to a situation where there is no clear answer AND no specific ruling on the matter then it absolutely makes sense to apply the same reasoning used in a similar FAQ ruling because there simply isn't anything necessarily better to go by and besides the more consistency that is applied across the game generally the more it makes sense to people.

Of course, as always these things should be discussed with your opponent ahead of time, but with that said I do think it is entirely reasonable to apply the Blood Angel's ruling to the Tervigon's special rule simply because we don't have any other better basis to go by.

It seems to me that the rule in the Tyranid codex is quite clear. The unit needs to be within six inches of the Tervigon.

I don't see why we need to alter this by reference to the Blood Angels FAQ. The question hasn't apparently been asked or perhaps GW would have answered it in the Tyranid FAQ.

If we do accept this change, how does it affect the rule about Venomthrope's Toxic Miasma? The rules are the same. Once again it isn't a question which is posed in the FAQ.

I feel there is a danger of stretching our chain of inference too far.

Homersstodnt wrote:yes, because its completely balanced and fair that free units wound T5-6 models on a 4+ and strike at initiative 5.

Bear in mind that
1. You have to build the Tervigon model because there isn't an official one.
2. The Tervigon has a 45% chance each time it poops out a unit of Gants of running out of Gants for the rest of the game. On average a player will get about 15 free Gants per Tervigon per game.
3. The Gant is the second weakest unit in the codex.
4. If the enemy kills the Tervigon, all the Gants spawned or not and any IC which has joined them within range suffers a bunch of damage.
5. The Gants only get Toxin and Adrenal if you pay for them on the Tervigon, making it a 180 point model.

I'm not going to say the Tervigon is a 100% fair and balanced unit, however I think you will agree it is not a war winning weapon in itself.

There is no change to how Tervigons work, they have and always have only worked when you are actually attacking in combat, not when you declare the charge.

The BA's FAQ helps you here because it's exactly the same thing, so when look for consistency that clears it all up for you.

I do not understand why people think this is a rules change. If you were playing it that you could charge your gaunts 10" away from your Tervigon and still benefit from Furious Charge and Poison because you started with 6" you were cheating, if you continue to do it you are still cheating. No change there.

Aramoro

hamsterwheel wrote:

The example of a loop hole would be this:

Two groups, the Sanguinary Priest by himself, behind a wall of Tac Marines. One squad assaults the Tac Marines, drawing it to the side but still remaining within 6 inches of the Sanguinary Priest, then a jump infantry squad with all Power Fists assault the Sanguinary Priest. After all assault moves and all defender reactions, which assault takes place first?

Since the rules require us to complete an assault combat between two squads prior to moving on to the next group of units, the attacker would want the jump infantry squad to go first because that would deny the Tac squad FNP, which the defender would want the opposite. I guess the players would then roll off to see which squad gets to go first, and frankly this is the only situation that I can think of where two players would possibly argue about what order the units are resolved for CC.

Actually, the attacker has the right to decide what order the assaults will happen.

Aramoro wrote:There is no change to how Tervigons work, they have and always have only worked when you are actually attacking in combat, not when you declare the charge.

The BA's FAQ helps you here because it's exactly the same thing, so when look for consistency that clears it all up for you.

I do not understand why people think this is a rules change. If you were playing it that you could charge your gaunts 10" away from your Tervigon and still benefit from Furious Charge and Poison because you started with 6" you were cheating, if you continue to do it you are still cheating. No change there.

Aramoro

It's unlikely that there would have been an argument at all if the RAW answered the question to begin with including the necessity of GW FAQing it in the BA Codex, so your presumption that it was always this way and that anyone playing it differently is cheating, I find a bit disconcerting.

As to the idea of inferring rules from one FAQ and applying it to another Codex, the Tyranid FAQ implies that Special Rules cannot penetrate the hull of a transport vehicle to affect the crew inside. It does this with the Shadow in the Warp and the Spirit Leach rulings. If you would like to argue that a Psychic Hood working and Shadow in the Warp are two seperate things and thus one ruling shouldn't affect the other, then I would appreciate you understanding that a Sanguinary Priest and a Tervigon are two seperate things and one ruling shouldn't affect the other.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

andruin wrote:Actually, the attacker has the right to decide what order the assaults will happen.

Ahh, you are correct per the text at the bottom of page 34 of the BRB, making the ruling even worse for BA players trying to share the Aura with multiple squads.

I agree with you, Psychic Hoods do not work on Embark dudes now. It has never been stated that they do and we now have clear precedent that they do not. That is why the Nid FAQ is such a screw-up.

There is absolutely no reason to ever think Tervigons should work when you are not in range. Ignoring the BA FAQ for a moment. If you are not within 6" of it the effects do not apply, it does not say 'If you start an assault within 6" of a Tervigon you get Furious Charge' on Adrenal Glands.

No we have a FAQ about something which is absolutely identical, in every way, and it has a FAQ just the clear up any confusion about how it works. You would have to be unbelievably obsequious to not see it's the same so works the same way. Even if you stay hard line and say BA FAQ does not apply to Tervigons. Even then there is no reason to ever thing tervigons work differently except wishful thinking.

Sanguinary Priest and a Tervigon are two seperate things and one ruling shouldn't affect the other.

It is not a ruling, it is a FAQ, it's telling you how the game has always works, just clarifying it for you. It doesn't change how it works.

Aramoro

hamsterwheel wrote:Since the rules require us to complete an assault combat between two squads prior to moving on to the next group of units, the attacker would want the jump infantry squad to go first because that would deny the Tac squad FNP, which the defender would want the opposite. I guess the players would then roll off to see which squad gets to go first, and frankly this is the only situation that I can think of where two players would possibly argue about what order the units are resolved for CC.

Rule book already covers this - if it's your turn then you choose the order.

andruin wrote:Actually, the attacker has the right to decide what order the assaults will happen.

Not quite.

Aramoro wrote:I agree with you, Psychic Hoods do not work on Embark dudes now. It has never been stated that they do and we now have clear precedent that they do not. That is why the Nid FAQ is such a screw up.

There is absolutely no reason to ever think Tervigons should work when you are not in range. Ignoring the BA FAQ for a moment. If you are not within 6" of it the effects do not apply, it does not say 'If you start an assault within 6" of a Tervigon you get Furious Charge' on Adrenal Glands.

No we have a FAQ about something which is absolutely identical, in every way, and it has a FAQ just the clear up any confusion about how it works. You would have to be unbelievably obsequious to not see it's the same so works the same way. Even if you stay hard line and say BA FAQ does not apply to Tervigons. Even then there is no reason to ever thing tervigons work differently except wishful thinking.

Sanguinary Priest and a Tervigon are two seperate things and one ruling shouldn't affect the other.

It is not a ruling, it is a FAQ, it's telling you how the game has always works, just clarifying it for you. It doesn't change how it works.

Aramoro

I'm not suggesting I would play it any differently as I see no reason why this interpretation is any better than anyone elses. As far as the GW FAQ, it's actually GW's house rules which are not the rules of the game. The description of Errata and FAQs on GWs site says as much. The RAW are the rules which include the Errata, and the FAQ are their house rules. Its the same thing as saying these two dudes had a game and they decided to play it one way versus another, the only destinction is that they both happen to be GW employees.

Precedent means nothing in comparing Tyranids to BA. Space marines can add IC's to drop pod units and Tyranids cannot. Therefore comparing like units and mechanics cannot be done.

GW (via 'Ardboyz precedent) defaults to the INAT FAQ for unresolved rulings. INAT states Tervigon Brood Progenitor bonuses are measured at the beginning of each assault phase. The GW FAQ did not address or contradict this in their Tyranid FAQ.

agrees with hyv3 <-

in weird situations not covered by rules, default to the rules FAQ of the tournament your currently playing in. If no such document exists, fall back on INAT, instead of arguing like chimps with knives.

The INAT FAQ is far from official or correct. Measuring for Adrenal Glands at the start of the assualt phase is a rules change as that is not what it says it does. This is not a 'weird situation not covered by the rule' It's really really obvious by reading the words in the books.


The Mycetic Spore is not a precedent even though it is stupid as Spore are MC, not vehicles. So theres at elas a difference in unit types.

Aramoro

GW utilizes INAT for 'Ardboyz and (I believe) Throne of Skulls. Adepticon utilizes INAT (400+ 40k competitors in 2010). And my local hobby group (DaBoyz - 80 player GT, 32 player by-monthly tourney) uses INAT. That's as official as I'll ever need.

Yes, Spod and Drop pod are differen't unit types. How about SitW, a passive anti-psyker ability not affecting embarked units as precedent? If precedents work cross-codex, then runes of warding, psychic hoods, and runic weapons should not affect embarked units either.

hyv3mynd wrote:then runes of warding, psychic hoods, and runic weapons should not affect embarked units either.

Or even while embarked, no?
At least until they say specifically otherwise.

/shrug

Aramoro wrote:The INAT FAQ is far from official or correct. Measuring for Adrenal Glands at the start of the assualt phase is a rules change as that is not what it says it does. This is not a 'weird situation not covered by the rule' It's really really obvious by reading the words in the books.


The Mycetic Spore is not a precedent even though it is stupid as Spore are MC, not vehicles. So theres at elas a difference in unit types.

Aramoro

I would have to agree with you. As soon as no model is within range of the power then they lose the upgrades. There are lots of things that are in the inat faq that i would consider wrong but that is why they listed them as "clarifications". It was just a bunch of dudes that argued over the rules and took a vote on how it was played and the majority won. Do the same at your game club if you don't like their rulings.

kirsanth wrote:

hyv3mynd wrote:then runes of warding, psychic hoods, and runic weapons should not affect embarked units either.

Or even while embarked, no?
At least until they say specifically otherwise.

/shrug

Runes of warding, and psychic hoods that are inclusive and before the Dark Angels codex by my reading would still work. Any hoods/runic weapons forward that use the same wording for targeting as SitW probably would not. I am kind of hoping that GW will walk that ruling back as it seems they opened a huge can of worms with it.

If we play by the BA ruling, regarding Tervigon's ability, is it as long as one model is in the 6" range, the whole unit gets FC or poison attacks? or is it changed?

That hasn't changed. When measuring to a unit you only need to touch one member. (unless a special rule explicitly says otherwise)

The INAT was dead wrong on this one. There is no time to check or duration specified so the ability only works while you're in range.

hamsterwheel wrote:

Scott-S6 wrote:I think the BA FAQ is good precedent. It isn't specified when exactly they gain the bonus or for how long - the only defining factor is distance. If not in that distance at any time then {poof} ability gone.

Although personally I wouldn't care which way it was played, this ruling is a disadvantage to a BA player and even opens up other potential loop holes.

The example of a loop hole would be this:

Two groups, the Sanguinary Priest by himself, behind a wall of Tac Marines. One squad assaults the Tac Marines, drawing it to the side but still remaining within 6 inches of the Sanguinary Priest, then a jump infantry squad with all Power Fists assault the Sanguinary Priest. After all assault moves and all defender reactions, which assault takes place first?

Since the rules require us to complete an assault combat between two squads prior to moving on to the next group of units, the attacker would want the jump infantry squad to go first because that would deny the Tac squad FNP, which the defender would want the opposite. I guess the players would then roll off to see which squad gets to go first, and frankly this is the only situation that I can think of where two players would possibly argue about what order the units are resolved for CC.

So you know, and not many people know this, but the person whos turn it is determined the order of assaults.

MRB Pg 34. States "There may be several separate assaults being fought simultaneously in different parts of the battlefield. If this is the case, the player whos turn it is can choose the order in which to resolve combats, completing each combat before moving on to the next one, and so on until all combats are resolved."

Hope that helps things.

Already been pointed out.

This is my my tervies get crushing claws, then they can join in in the attack.

One misconception that a couple people seem to have in this thread: GW makes FAQs because people ask about the topic or seem to be confused about the topic. Many FAQs have clear answers in the rules but either because the wording is complicated or counter intuitive a FAQ is written. Or possibly because one particular letter caught the FAQ writer's eye.

There are many questions that truly need a FAQ but we often get FAQs answered that arent really unclear while the troublesome ones get ignored. Just because a question was or wasnt FAQed often doesnt seem to have much to do with how badly a FAQ was needed.



Sliggoth