Rune Priest Storm Caller range while in a vehicle

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.

**Stavkat**

I am NOT asking the question about whether vehicles get cover saves, so PLEASE don't start a fight over that, let alone mention it.

All I am asking is where do you measure the 6 inches from? The entire hull of the vehicle? The center of the vehicle? The 'hatch' the runepriest cast it from? Also, if the answer isn't the hull, do you place a 25mm base down wherever the center is and measure six inches from there, or do you just measure from a pinpoint? Thanks in advance.

**Gwar!**

Stavkat wrote:All I am asking is where do you measure the 6 inches from? The entire hull of the vehicle? The center of the vehicle? The 'hatch' the runepriest cast it from? Also, if the answer isn't the hull, do you place a 25mm base down wherever the center is and measure six inches from there, or do you just measure from a pinpoint? Thanks in advance.

Page 66, BRB, under "Embarking".

No, I don't even have to look that up anymore.

**Augustus**

Hull

**Stavkat**

Gwar, thanks for mucking up the thread with a series of giant pictures. No really, I really appreciate it. It is not like you couldn't have made a one liner joke about it instead. You really need all those pictures there.

**Gwar!**

Stavkat wrote:Gwar, thanks for mucking up the thread with a series of giant pictures. No really, I really appreciate it. It is not like you couldn't have made a one liner joke about it instead. You really need all those pictures there.

1) It's a single Black and White picture.
2) It's a joke. Laugh at it.
3) I also answered your question. Why are you being so hostile?

**Stavkat**

Augustus wrote:Hull

Anyway, thanks to the both of you for the answer. Never would have thought that the embarking section would mention measuring a distance not involving shooting, although it makes sense doesn't it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gwar! wrote:
Stavkat wrote:Gwar, thanks for mucking up the thread with a series of giant pictures. No really, I really appreciate it. It is not like you couldn't have made a one liner joke about it instead. You really need all those pictures there.
1) It's a single Black and White picture.
2) It's a joke. Laugh at it.
3) I also answered your question. Why are you being so hostile?

1) It is a large vertical rectangular picture showing quite a few separate panels, which of course can each individually be called pictures themselves.
2) Right after I told everyone to not bring it up, you did bring it up AND I had to scroll for awhile to get past it. (Psst - and it wasn't funny to me either seeing as I just read one of the nastiest threads I have ever seen, dealing with that issue)
3) Yes you did, even with a page number, thank you. You still don't need to force your extraneous nonsense on the thread after I asked everyone not to, right? Of course it's right. Friends?

**ChrisCP**

Hi Stavkat. Did you know there is a Totally Awesome Liquid Alabma Snake FAQ that says;
"Q: Do vehicles gain a cover save from Shield of
Sanguinius?
A: Yes."
It's here http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1240365a_FAQ_BloodAngels_2010.pdf

Also you're quite rude.

**Gwar!**

ChrisCP wrote:Hi Stavkat. Did you know there is a Totally Awesome Liquid Alabma Snake FAQ that says;
"Q: Do vehicles gain a cover save from Shield of
Sanguinius?
A: Yes."
It's here http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1240365a_FAQ_BloodAngels_2010.pdf

Also you're quite rude.

Hi Chris. Did you know that Space Vampires are not the same as Space Furries?

Also, did you know that the Totally Awesome Liquid Alabma Snake FAQ ignores the RaW and don't mean anything as per GWs own admission?

**Dashofpepper**

Stavkat wrote:Gwar, thanks for mucking up the thread with a series of giant pictures. No really, I really appreciate it. It is not like you couldn't have made a one liner joke about it instead. You really need all those pictures there.

Humor is always welcome in 40k. Stop griping.

**ChrisCP**

Gwar! wrote:Hi Chris. Did you know that Space Vampires are not the same as Space Furries?

Also, did you know that the Totally Awesome Liquid Alabma Snake FAQ ignores the RaW and don't mean anything as per GWs own admission?

Mornin' Gwar. Yeah totally, but because they all bleed red it's had to tell without my coffee

Lets try that again.
"Page 37, Storm Caller, replace the last sentence
with:
[…] he and all friendly units within 6" benefit
from a 5+ cover save."
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m800008a_FAQ_SpaceWolves_Jan2010
Of course they gain one, otherwise would you take your non-unit thing off the board please?

I want this 'admission' you speak of did they submit it in writing? As far as I can tell they never admit anything, high quality gloss is the best we can hope for.
Also 'ignores RAW?', '...unit within 6" recive a 5+ a cover save...' '"Q: Do vehicles gain a cover save from Shield of Sanguinius? A: Yes." which bit ignores RAW?

**Gwar!**

ChrisCP wrote:
Gwar! wrote:Hi Chris. Did you know that Space Vampires are not the same as Space Furries?

Also, did you know that the Totally Awesome Liquid Alabma Snake FAQ ignores the RaW and don't mean anything as per GWs own admission?

Mornin' Gwar. Yeah totally, but because they all bleed red it's had to tell without my coffee

I want this 'admission' you speak of did they submit it in writing? As far as I can tell they never admit anything, high quality gloss is the best we can hope for.
Also 'ignores RAW?', '...unit within 6" recive a 5+ a cover save...' '"Q: Do vehicles gain a cover save from Shield of Sanguinius? A: Yes." which bit ignores RAW?

Ah, I see what you mean now. I thought you meant they get a 5+ save vs Pens and Glances. Yes, they get a 5+ save. They cannot ever use it though, as they don't have wounds.

Also:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&categoryId=1000018§ion=&pIndex=0&aId=3400019&start=1

What's the difference between Errata and FAQs?
As it is rather obvious from their name, these documents include two separate elements - the Errata and the FAQs. In case you were wondering, 'Errata' is a posh (Latin!) way to say 'Errors', and 'FAQs' stands for 'Frequently Asked Questions'. It is important to understand the distinction between the two, because they are very different.

The Errata are simply a list of the corrections we plan to make on the next reprint of the book to fix the mistakes that managed to slip into the text (no matter how many times you check a book, there are always some!). These are obviously errors, for example a model that has WS3 in the book's bestiary and WS4 in the book's army list. The Errata would say something like: 'Page 96. Replace WS3 with WS4 in the profile of the so-and-so model'.

The Errata have the same level of 'authority' as the main rules, as they effectively modify the published material. They are 'hard' material. It is a good idea to read them and be aware of their existence, but luckily there are very few of them for each book.

The FAQs on the other hand are very much 'soft' material. They deal with more of a grey area, where often there is no right and wrong answer - in a way, they are our own 'Studio House Rules'. They are, of course, useful when you play a pick-up game against someone you don't know, or at tournaments (i.e. when you don't have a set of common 'house rules' with the other player). However, if you disagree with some answers and prefer to change them in your games and make your own house rules with your friends, that's fine. In fact we encourage you to shape the game around your needs and your taste. We firmly believe that wargaming is about two (or more!) people creating a gaming experience they are both going to enjoy. In other words, you might prefer to skip the FAQs altogether and instead always apply the good old 'roll a dice' rule whenever you meet a problematic situation.

- Games Development, November 2008

**ChrisCP**

And where in that article do they say the "...FAQ_BloodAngels_2010.pdf" is meaningless

I'd agree there is an indication that the FAQs 'often' deal with 'a grey area' where there is 'no right and wrong' and that one may choose to 'skip the FAQ's altogether' and replace them with a 'roll a dice' rule. But no where an admission of the specific or the FAQ documents as a whole being 'meaningless'.

Seriously however, I feel that the 'Errata' 'FAQ' distinction GW has made is to avoid having to re-print every codex due to the document being change to such a great degree - it would be interesting to see if people started to return their books which were 'riddled with errors and issues of clarity' demanding a replacement with the corrections contained - after all we didn't pay $X for a defective product (well we did but I can dream).

**Synnister**

Gwar! wrote:Ah, I see what you mean now. I thought you meant they get a 5+ save vs Pens and Glances. Yes, they get a 5+ save. They cannot ever use it though, as they don't have wounds.

Isn't there a section in the Vehicle section that talks about cover saves? I'm at work so can't reference it atm.

**Stavkat**

Well luckily my question was simple and got answered before the circus started.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dashofpepper wrote:Humor is always welcome in 40k. Stop griping.

Of course it is welcome. Sadly I found no humor in it after just reading the nastiest dakkadakka thread I have ever laid eyes upon on that very issue. Also, kinda odd and pointless to gripe about me 'griping' about something after gwar 'griped' about me 'griping' about him doing the exact opposite of what I asked. Gripe-ity gripe gripe gripe. For reals.

**Gwar!**

Synnister wrote:
Gwar! wrote:Ah, I see what you mean now. I thought you meant they get a 5+ save vs Pens and Glances. Yes, they get a 5+ save. They cannot ever use it though, as they don't have wounds.

Isn't there a section in the Vehicle section that talks about cover saves? I'm at work so can't reference it atm.

Yes, there is. It makes it very clear that the only way for you to be able to take a cover save against a Penetrating or Glancing hit is if the vehicle is obscured.

**Kommissar Kel**

Gwar! wrote:
Synnister wrote:
Gwar! wrote:Ah, I see what you mean now. I thought you meant they get a 5+ save vs Pens and Glances. Yes, they get a 5+ save. They cannot ever use it though, as they don't have wounds.

Isn't there a section in the Vehicle section that talks about cover saves? I'm at work so can't reference it atm.
Yes, there is. It makes it very clear that the only way for you to be able to take a cover save against a Penetrating or Glancing hit is if the vehicle is obscured.

It also tells you hat that cover save is on(hint: it isn't a 5+)

**Gwar!**

Kommissar Kel wrote:
Gwar! wrote:
Synnister wrote:
Gwar! wrote:Ah, I see what you mean now. I thought you meant they get a 5+ save vs Pens and Glances. Yes, they get a 5+ save. They cannot ever use it though, as they don't have wounds.

Isn't there a section in the Vehicle section that talks about cover saves? I'm at work so can't reference it atm.
Yes, there is. It makes it very clear that the only way for you to be able to take a cover save against a Penetrating or Glancing hit is if the vehicle is obscured.

It also tells you hat that cover save is on(hint: it isn't a 5+)

Yes. Now, show me where it says Storm Caller Obscures the vehicle?

**insaniak**

Dashofpepper wrote:Humor is always welcome in 40k. Stop griping.

Humour is. Deliberately derailing a thread with off-topic nonsense is not.

The question has been answered. This thread is done.