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.

I was at a tournament today and overheard someone explain a ruling....

Lord Commissar can take a camo cloak. The IG FAQ says...replace the second sentence with: (paraphrase) camo cloaks give +1 to cover saves.

The third sentence in the IG book then says a model wearing the camo cloakhas the stealth universal special rule.

Therefore, the Lord Commissar gets a +1 to his cover save, and gets stealth for a total of +2, and as stealth is a USR can give a unit he is with +1 cover.

We all know that the FAQ intended to replace the third sentence, not the second....so RAW or RAI????

Technically, you overheard correct. The third sentence is the one that gives them Stealth, and as the FAQ is written now, Imperial Guard Camo Cloaks give +1 to cover saves AND the Stealth special rule.

I would never let something like this fly. Ever. It's an obvious typo. Every group has their own dynamic, but I would be very put out if a TO ever let that stand.

And then I would go out of the way (even throwing the game if necessary) to heavy flamer the crap out of that squad!

Remember though that the Comissar gets Stealth and +1 to his cover save, he doesn't confer the +1 to cover to his squad, "only" stealth

Gah! It's Eldar Shadowseer veil of Tears all over again. Technically, yes, a model with a camo cloak (from IG) has Stealth +1 cover. RAI it is clearly a typo.