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.

Ok

He shoots at my troops with the night spinner then he assuallts my troops with another unit .

lol sorry comp crashed


ok he says in the pile in my unit have to take a DT test but the BRB says no tests need to be taken for pile ins

so whos right ?

i say me since if i was actualy in terrain and i would not take the test when piling in why do i now have to take a test when in essence its the same thing also pile in is a move i cant choose not to make

snakel wrote:Ok

He shoots at my troops with the night spinner then he assuallt my troops with another unit .

oK HERE IS THE

I agree with this and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

I am guessing you are going to ask if the assaulting unit takes a Dangerous and Difficult Test, to which the answer (I think, I don't actually have the rules on me as I refuse to buy WD) is no, only the shot unit counts as in DT.

Anybody?

snakel wrote:Anybody?

The BRB says no DT for pile in.

Does the Nightspinner say otherwise? If not, then No DT for Pile in. Simple.

Nightspinner rules state that "the next time a unit moves it must take a dangerous and difficult terrain test" it doesn't specify what sort of moving it has to be. The question is does the pile-in count as moving, or not.

Time to clear this up.

First of all it's not called pile in, it's called defender reacts. This is indeed a move and it doesn't cause models to roll for dangerous terrain.

So you should remove the marker (as the unit moved) but you shouldn't roll for dangerous terrain as you don't do that for react moves.

If it is a move and the Nightspinner explicitly states "the next time the unit moves" wouldn't that mean he does roll for DT, even though the rulebook says otherwise? Codex > rulebook and all that.

Personally, I wouldn't play it like that, as it seems an exploit more than anything, but I don't know what to make of it in a RaW sense.

Codex Doesn't > Rulebook... If it did, Sweeping Advance Wouldn't work.

Specific > General. In this case, the specific rules for Defenders react trump the general "when it moves" clause.

Fair 'nuff, I was brought under that impression when I was reading the rulebook for the first time. (out of curiousity, what in the codices is at odds with SA?)

What about when tank shocking? I'm just reading that section of the rulebook, it doesn't say units that are not falling back from the tank shock have to make DT tests.

Araenion wrote:Fair 'nuff, I was brought under that impression when I was reading the rulebook for the first time. (out of curiousity, what in the codices is at odds with SA?)

What about when tank shocking? I'm just reading that section of the rulebook, it doesn't say units that are not falling back from the tank shock have to make DT tests.

1) WBB and ATSKNF are two examples that come to mind.

2) Units that fall back still take Dangerous Terrain tests as normal.

WBB, for a start.

What I mean is if the unit passes their morale test, and do not fall back, but move out of the way of the tank. Does that count as "falling back" with regards to dangerous terrain tests?

Araenion wrote:What I mean is if the unit passes their morale test, and do not fall back, but move out of the way of the tank. Does that count as "falling back" with regards to dangerous terrain tests?

No.

Araenion wrote:What I mean is if the unit passes their morale test, and do not fall back, but move out of the way of the tank. Does that count as "falling back" with regards to dangerous terrain tests?

It does not.

Gah! frigging ninjamonocleshark!

That's what I thought, thanks for clearing it up. Nightspinner has a lot of unclear rules regarding it...for another instance, since you remove the marker *after* the unit has finished its move(that's what it says), does that mean jump infantry equivalents roll twice for DT? Because the marker in question represents DT and they remove it after they moved, that would mean they both started and ended their move in a DT, constituting two separate tests.

Sorry for all these questions, hopefully I'm not alone in wondering about them and your replies will be helpful to someone else as well.

You only make 1 DT check per phase, no matter how many times you move. Its in the rules for taking the tests...

Gah! I did check that section, but I missed it...serves me right for trolling the forums with a fever. Thanks.

Ok

this argument is still in our game club .

The spinner rules say once it has shot and hit a unit they have to take both difficult and dangerous Terrian tests for any move what so ever .

The Rule book says that units making a defenders react and pile in do not take such tests .

Now please is the defenders react and pile in a move (in game terms) and does the codex trump the BRB on this one?

The BRB is a more specific rule, so no DT test.

The nightspinner would have to state INCLUDING pile in moves to be more specific, and it doesnt.

No, this is a case of GW making rules without proof-reading them.

The "next time they move (for whatever reason)" doesn't leave a lot of room for interpretation. This includes voluntary moves as well as compulsory moves and moves that may be immune to difficult or dangerous terrain.

Make a house rule for it, 'cause GW's rules are crap. I'd personally recommend that you change the text to either:
"The next time they move (for whatever reason), the unit must take a difficult and dangerous terrain test regardless of and abide these results and restrictions even should the situation not ordinarily merit these tests."
or
"The next time the unit moves in such a way they would be eligible for difficult and/or dangerous terrain tests, they are treated as being in difficult and dangerous terrain."

As the rules are written now, there are a number of ways of getting rid of the token without having to take the negative impact of it, which I would argue is against the spirit of the rules (and as such not an argument for these boards).

The rule was written in such a way the token can be gotten rid of through Defender's React and other similar moved. I would say it was probably deliberately done so that way.

GW do have some holes in their rules and inconsistency, but generally speaking they do tend to get the point across they are looking for...

calypso2ts wrote:The rule was written in such a way the token can be gotten rid of through Defender's React and other similar moved. I would say it was probably deliberately done so that way.

GW do have some holes in their rules and inconsistency, but generally speaking they do tend to get the point across they are looking for...

Like I wrote, discussing what the spirit of the rules is (I cunningly didn't write "RAI" there) isn't for this forum, but generally speaking the Nightspinner is so overcosted enough that allowing house ruling it for increased performance isn't going to negatively affect your gaming experience, unless the Eldar player is far superior in tactical usage.

The RAW is quite clear, though.

Gotcha, we are on the same page then

Are there multiple editions of this rule or what? The White Dwarf sitting next to my keyboard says "... [the unit that got hit] count as being in both difficult and dangerous terrain" and DOES NOT say that the unit has to take dangerous terrain tests. That's the US version, WD 365 pg. 25. The unit counts as being in difficult and dangerous terrain, and the negative effects of that are completely ignored during pile in moves.

Can someone claiming that the rule specifies dangerous terrain tests please identify which edition of White Dwarf that version of the rule is supposed to be in?

Well, for starters, White Dwarf magazines are not rulebooks...

Although in this case the Nightspinner was released as an official rule set for the Eldar codex.

I consider the WD to be more an Errata like "Oops, we left out a whole unti for a few years, we better fix it" than an article

SaintHazard wrote:Well, for starters, White Dwarf magazines are not rulebooks...

Except in the case of the NS, where the ONLY official rules are to be found...

solkan wrote:Can someone claiming that the rule specifies dangerous terrain tests please identify which edition of White Dwarf that version of the rule is supposed to be in?

Those are the rules, which is why moves that are not subject to difficult terrain removes the token (RAW) - something I'd argue is contrary to the unit's utility and further removes any justification for the unit to be used if compared to the extremely important HS section for Eldar (it's competing with all the goodies in the army list, if it had been FAST ATTACK, however, you'd see people using them a lot more).

Edit: I just realized my text is out of place when I removed the rules text. Test is not called for, but terrain is.