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.

Some reading through it, and there are a couple contradictions on the first read:

+BA.38A.02 – Q: Are a Stormraven‟s wings considered part of its „hull‟?
A: Yes, wings aren‟t „decorative elements‟ (such as gun barrels, dozer blades, antennas, banners, etc), and are therefore part of the vehicle‟s hull [clarification].

+BA.38A.07 – Q: When a Stormraven is immobilized (off its base) can friendly or enemy models move under its wings at all?
A: Friendly models are able to move under the wings provided they can physically fit there. Enemy models may also move under the wings provided they physically fit there and don‟t move so their base is within 1” of the hull (unless assaulting, of course) [clarification].

Which is it? If the wings are considered hull in the first one, then no enemy models cannot move under the wings, and must stay 1" away from them, correct? It seems like an outright contradiction.
--------------------------------------------------

+BA.41E.01 – Q: Is „The Dead Man‟s Hand‟ considered a single-handed close combat weapon?
A: Yes, meaning Tycho does get the +1 Attack bonus in close combat for wielding two single-handed weapons [clarification].
Ref: BA.49C.03,

Q: Is Tycho’s Deadman’s Hand an additional close
combat weapon?
A: No.

The INAT FAQ contradicts the GW FAQ on this one, no?

The Stormraven ruling is pretty much them playing it the same way GW said to play the Valk. Which is wings are hull for being shot at and such but only the base matters for movement purposes. I get that and it's the way it's played almost everywhere because of how the Valk is played. But some people need the reminder. As for the Tycho thing they'll probably clean it up now that you brought it to their attention

The INAT hasn't been updated since the GW BA & Tyranid FAQs came out.

carmachu wrote:

+BA.38A.07 – Q: When a Stormraven is immobilized (off its base) can friendly or enemy models move under its wings at all?
A: Friendly models are able to move under the wings provided they can physically fit there. Enemy models may also move under the wings provided they physically fit there and don‟t move so their base is within 1” of the hull (unless assaulting, of course) [clarification].

Does this mean my firewarriors can go under my devilfish provided they fit under there?

Sounds like a nice easy way to stop jerks from assaulting them.

@Capt Zach

If your devilfish uses a flying stand ala the Valk/Stormraven Conversions then sure It's the standard ruling from GW on the Valk. They just extended it to the only other "Flying" unit in the game currently.

I want to know what prompted the change in the Astropath rule? Now it says that his bonus still works when he is in reserves, as he is "alive". I remember the old FAQ that it wouldn't work because it did not specifically say that it worked in reserves, unlike the Eldar Autarch.

Gavo wrote:I want to know what prompted the change in the Astropath rule? Now it says that his bonus still works when he is in reserves, as he is "alive". I remember the old FAQ that it wouldn't work because it did not specifically say that it worked in reserves, unlike the Eldar Autarch.

For this (and the Tyranid version), I suspect they were influenced by this poll, plus feedback & comments from the community.

Hulksmash and Janthkin are 100% spot on.

CptZach wrote:

Does this mean my firewarriors can go under my devilfish provided they fit under there?

Sounds like a nice easy way to stop jerks from assaulting them.

Yes, your Firewarriors can fit under a Devilfish (mostly) if you mount it on the tallest stand provided by GW (remember, the INAT requires you to use the standard GW basing or treat your model as if it was if you've converted it).

The thing is, when a unit declares it is assaulting, it is allowed to move within 1" of enemy units, even ones it doesn't end up getting into base contact with, so putting your Firewarriors under your Devilfish isn't going to stop them from being assaulted.

carmachu wrote:Some reading through it, and there are a couple contradictions on the first read:

+BA.38A.02 – Q: Are a Stormraven‟s wings considered part of its „hull‟?
A: Yes, wings aren‟t „decorative elements‟ (such as gun barrels, dozer blades, antennas, banners, etc), and are therefore part of the vehicle‟s hull [clarification].

+BA.38A.07 – Q: When a Stormraven is immobilized (off its base) can friendly or enemy models move under its wings at all?
A: Friendly models are able to move under the wings provided they can physically fit there. Enemy models may also move under the wings provided they physically fit there and don‟t move so their base is within 1” of the hull (unless assaulting, of course) [clarification].

Which is it? If the wings are considered hull in the first one, then no enemy models cannot move under the wings, and must stay 1" away from them, correct? It seems like an outright contradiction.
--------------------------------------------------

+BA.41E.01 – Q: Is „The Dead Man‟s Hand‟ considered a single-handed close combat weapon?
A: Yes, meaning Tycho does get the +1 Attack bonus in close combat for wielding two single-handed weapons [clarification].
Ref: BA.49C.03,

Q: Is Tycho’s Deadman’s Hand an additional close
combat weapon?
A: No.

The INAT FAQ contradicts the GW FAQ on this one, no?

The wings are the hull yes, but remember, you measure distance from the base of a model to (in the case of the vehicle) its actual hull. So a Valkyrie, even on the ground (when immobile) allows models to move under its back wings without their bases coming within 1" of the wings of the back of the Valk. However, the wings off the side of the Valk taper and touch the table, so it is generally impossible for enemy models to move under the side wings without coming within 1" of the Valk model.

That is why it is possible for enemy models to move under the back wings of a Valk but not its side wings.


As for Tycho's 'Dead Man Hand' the INAT was last updated in June and we have a blurb right at the very top that any GW rulings that come out after that contradict ours naturally take precedence over our rulings. When we next put an update out we'll correct/remove all the questions/rulings that contradict GW's.

Gavo wrote:I want to know what prompted the change in the Astropath rule? Now it says that his bonus still works when he is in reserves, as he is "alive". I remember the old FAQ that it wouldn't work because it did not specifically say that it worked in reserves, unlike the Eldar Autarch.

Yep, Janthkin has it right. The big stick-up for some members of the INAT council was really the idea that if we allowed rules off the table to effect the game without them explicitly saying so then it opened the door for all rules that don't have a range to do so (like Eldar 'Runes of Warding' being used when in Reserves, for example).

However, it was pretty clear that the majority of the community was playing that abilities that are in effect while the model 'is alive' were allowed to be used off the table, so like all our rulings we took a hard look at it and decided that we could draw a line in the sand with the 'alive' terminology and say that only abilities that specify that they are in use when in Reserve OR that specify while the model 'is alive' can be used while in Reserve.

This allows the INAT to match how most people play (which is generally the goal of the document) while still preventing wacky scenarios like Eldar 'Runes of Warding' being used in Reserve from happening.