NOVA OPEN 2012 8/30-9/2; RESULTS ON PAGE 17

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.

**Grimwulfe**

I hate Yogurt!

Oh gak theres goes the planet!

**Leth**

I still fail to see how anrakyrs power(or any power for that matter) would work from a fire point as they specifically say what you can use a fire point for in the rulebook. By its very workings nothing else would be able to use them.

**Widowsbane**

Nova Staff,

Great job on both the primer packet missions and the FAQ...in a difficult landscape and with time pressures you kids really pulled it off...congrats...can not wait for the event...

Anrakyr states, "Release the tomb wraiths and Destroyer Lord Saldr'ky. Prepare for the harvest!"

Check the forums for the full army list...would love to hear the communities thoughts...

**Gornall**

Any word on an ETA for the final FAQ and packet for the GT and/or Narrative?

**MVBrandt**

FAQ in moments, GT final packet is up on whiskey40k.

Here's the final draft narrative packet (draft applying only to things like typos and the like)

http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NOVA-2012-Warhammer-40000-Final-Narrative-Packet-11.pdf

Why aren't YOU playing in the Narrative? You can do it along with the GT, and/or Invitational!

**Gornall**

Awesome! I like the idea of selecting a Warlord trait at army list creation, even though now I wish I was bringing a Eternal Warrior/Immovable Object Warlord instead of an utility HQ. In any case, it looks like it will be a lot of fun!

Minor typo on page 13, as it refers to Round 3 instead of Round 4

**MVBrandt**

Nice catch ... we just fixed it, going to print tomorrow

Here's GT Final Packet (missions won't change, polish/typos have been caught/changed):
http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NOVA-2012-Warhammer-40000-DRAFT-Final-GT-Packet.pdf

Here's Invitational Final Packet:
http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NOVA-2012-Warhammer-40000-Final-Invitational-Packet.pdf

Here's Trios Final Packet:
http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NOVA-2012-Warhammer-40000-Final-Trios-Packet.pdf

Relinking Narrative Final Packet:
http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NOVA-2012-Warhammer-40000-Final-Narrative-Packet-11.pdf

FAQ Final Packet (changed Anrakyr back, among a few others):
http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NOVA-FAQ-v6th.21.pdf

All GT players - check out the Narrative and Trios; you can do either of these in addition to the GT. Further, the Narrative has a competitive track, enabling you to play further 40k games with the 2k list you bring to the GT, should you so desire (you can also take a round off the Narrative).

**djdarknoise**

Question on round 2 - The Relic.

The Relic is worth the other four objectives combined for the purposes of the Objective Goal, but is it also worth then 4 points when determining results at the end of game for the score sheet, which also states "Objective Goal"; i.e., normally there are 5 objectives, does the relic now make this mission worth a potential 9 when calculating standing?

**MVBrandt**

Relic is worth 1, not 4, It's basically an objective, moveable like the relic.

**djdarknoise**

MVBrandt wrote:Relic is worth 1, not 4, It's basically an objective, moveable like the relic.

Sounds good; I was just confused by 'It is equal in value to the other four objectives for purposes of the Objectives goal" and read that as "equal to all four" combined (emphasis mine)

**MVBrandt**

It's a good catch that it can be misread

We'll try to emphasize that when we get to the mission during the GT. I wish you'd caught it before we went to print!

**djdarknoise**

I was too busy painting!

And by painting, I mean "sitting on my couch watching Netflix while the models sat in front of me."

**DarkCorsair**

Mike,

Soul Devourer for chaos daemons. "The Daemon counts as armed with a power weapon. In addition, if a model suffers any unsaved wounds from the Daemon's close combat attacks..."

So, the Daemon counts as having a normal power weapon as the additional rules are separate. Does this mean you go by what the model is armed with, effectively making the GW Lord of Change model (staff) S8?

**MVBrandt**

No. The power weapon it counts as being equipped with has additional unique special rules, making it an unusual power weapon. So, AP3 (overridden by the superior AP of the MC in most cases), strikes at model's S and I.

**DarkCorsair**

MVBrandt wrote:No. The power weapon it counts as being equipped with has additional unique special rules, making it an unusual power weapon. So, AP3 (overridden by the superior AP of the MC in most cases), strikes at model's S and I.

The thing is, the power weapon itself does not have unique rules. Soul Devourer does 2 things:

1) Gives the model a power weapon.
2) Gives the unsaved wounds caused by the Daemon's close combat attacks special rules.

The special rules are in no way related to the power weapon other than that both are given by Soul Devourer. In other words, if the Daemon chose not to attack with the power weapon for some reason, he/she/it would still receive the special rules granted.

**carlosthecraven**

Hi Mike

Did you reach a decision regarding paint scores and allies? (two forces scored seperately or a single force that is aesthetically pleasing together).

Apologies if this has been posted somewhere already.

Cheers,
Nate

**MVBrandt**

Response in the NOVA forums from our Chief Appearance Judge, Geoff R.

Geoff's perhaps not possessed of much flowery language, but he knows his stuff on the appearances front, here's his response re: that question:

To avoid undue complication to the appearance judging for armies that include allied forces, we are not going to judge the allied detachment as a separate part. We expect the allied contingent to be painted to the same standard as the rest of the army, but not necessarily like the rest of the army, (you do not need to paint your Gray Knight allies in jungle camouflage to accompany your Catachan guard, for example. Yes, I spelled gray correctly.) However, we do expect that you paint, base and present the allied detachment in such a way that its status as a part of the army is readily visibile. The how of this is entirely up to you,the player. This is a creativity thing, no?

This is part of our Unity category on the NOVA Open appearance scorecard, and is worth up to 15 points, out of 100. Also note that basing is worth up to 10 points out of 100, so that 1/4 of your total score rests here. For the Army score, we emphasize the 'army' aspect-- unity of time and pace and force, almost as much as the painting aspect. This is to be fair to those players of modest painting skills who can still put a visually appealing and understandable army on the table.

**djdarknoise**

DarkCorsair wrote:
MVBrandt wrote:No. The power weapon it counts as being equipped with has additional unique special rules, making it an unusual power weapon. So, AP3 (overridden by the superior AP of the MC in most cases), strikes at model's S and I.

The thing is, the power weapon itself does not have unique rules. Soul Devourer does 2 things:

1) Gives the model a power weapon.
2) Gives the unsaved wounds caused by the Daemon's close combat attacks special rules.

The special rules are in no way related to the power weapon other than that both are given by Soul Devourer. In other words, if the Daemon chose not to attack with the power weapon for some reason, he/she/it would still receive the special rules granted.

Doenst Soul Devourer "counts as" a power weapon?

**Hulksmash**

@dj

RAW seems to favor DarkCorsair:

"The Daemon can reach into an enemy's body, wrench out its soul and devour it. The Daemon counts as armed with a power weapon. In addition, if a model suffers any unsaved wounds from the Daemon's close combat attacks, it must immediately take a leadership test for each wound suffered (on its own leadership value, the model cannot use another model's LD for this test). If any of these tests are failed the victim suffers instant death."

Note the additional rules aren't directly part of the power weapon. So RAW I think DarkCorsair is correct but RAI I'd say it isn't meant to be seperate and would now be written as a unique power weapon.

**ontargetstudios**

for the Trios is it 1 HQ, 2(3) Troops, 0-1 elite, 0-1 hvy, 0-1 fast, 0-1 fort per side or am I just reading this wrong? Also can two seperate 1k lists be used for the 2 team game portions?

Thanks
Steve
OTS

**Grimwulfe**

It uses Allies FOC

So..

1 HQ
2-3 Troops
1 Elite
1 Fast
1 Heavy

IF you want a fortification you have to give up either a Elite, Fast or Heavy spot for it.

At least this is how I ready it in the packet. So the ONLY changes from Allied FOC are you can take a 3rd troop and you have to sacrifice one of your special slots for a fortification.

On your last question. No your 1k has to be the same for both doubles games.

**ontargetstudios**

Grimwulfe wrote:It uses Allies FOC

So..

1 HQ
2-3 Troops
1 Elite
1 Fast
1 Heavy

IF you want a fortification you have to give up either a Elite, Fast or Heavy spot for it.

At least this is how I ready it in the packet. So the ONLY changes from Allied FOC are you can take a 3rd troop and you have to sacrifice one of your special slots for a fortification.

On your last question. No your 1k has to be the same for both doubles games.

So if it uses the Allies FOC(I read this as both armies being treated as the allied addition) I am assuming this limits your team to only two armies and additional forces cant be used as allies.

example: SM teammate cant bring tau as additional allied army in his 1k list and his ork teammate would not be able to bring a farseer with bikes in his half.

is that right?

**Grimwulfe**

Correct because the 1k army has to be from 1 codex which matches the same codex you use in the 2k game.

**MVBrandt**

Yes, because of the restrictions a player would only be able to select from one Codex for his Doubles list. You can still build a normal list for your Singles list.

Instead of the Doubles list being two individuals with their own allies, each individual IS an ally.

**djdarknoise**

MVBrandt wrote:Yes, because of the restrictions a player would only be able to select from one Codex for his Doubles list. You can still build a normal list for your Singles list.

Instead of the Doubles list being two individuals with their own allies, each individual IS an ally.

So for clarification;

"Doubles—Each player must also create and bring a Doubles list. This list follows the rules for an Allied Detachment according to the Warhammer 40,000 6th Edition Rulebook, with two exceptions:
You may convert either 0-1 Elite, 0-1 Heavy, or 0-1 Fast Attack into 0-1 Fortifications"

Does this mean, for the doubles, that each persons 1k list can have a fortification? I.e. you can have 2 fortifications (one per player) in the Doubles game?

**Grimwulfe**

Yes as long as you convert one of your special slots

**MVBrandt**

While the way Troy wrote that is anything but polite for a public forum, yes, that's correct.

**Birdux**

NOVA FAQ question: Question on the assault rules. When charging with two squads, A and B, charging into squad C. If squad A makes its assault first, overwatch is declined and they make their base to base for assault, can squad B be overwatched when it declares its charge? asked due to subphases and has a big impact on assault armies.

**MVBrandt**

Once a squad basees you, you're locked/engaged, and you can't overwatch subsequently. So if you choose to "Wait," and get pinned by the first assaulters, NO you cannot overwatch subsequently. That's how we've ruled it in the FAQ at present, and that'ls how we'll rule it for NOVA (this year at least).

That's one of those ones GW might change.

BTW - Checklist for prep, and tons of info, for all attendees and possible attendees at:

http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-nova-cometh-true-wargaming.html

**djdarknoise**

MVBrandt wrote:While the way Troy wrote that is anything but polite for a public forum, yes, that's correct.

Pfft. Troy and Mike beat me up all the time. Last tournament, they took my lunch money *sniff*.