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.

rigeld2 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:INAT FAQ updated 2-23-2012

◊NEC.44C.01 – Q: Are Wraiths penalized by having
their Initiative lowered when assaulting through
difficult or dangerous terrain?
A: Wraiths are unaffected when assaulting through standard
difficult terrain, however assaulting through dangerous
terrain still causes them to strike at Initiative 1 that round
(as even though they automatically pass the dangerous
terrain test, they still have to take it) [clarification].

Good for INAT. Please re-read the tenets.

And? The INAT FAQ was updated yesterday with a specific reference to this situation. Thought it might help.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Or you treat taking the test as including the possibility of being slowed, so you dont take the test at all, and no I1 reduction

Certainly it is how I assume others will play wraiths against me

Well, that's how I was playing it always (mainly because that was the correct way in the previous edition and I just assumed as much for this edition), but having had this brought up to my attention now it will certainly change how I play the wraiths.

The problem here is that the necron rule is "fluffy" while the BRB rule is precisely about the game mechanic.

1) The wraith unit is forced to take a dangerous terrain test but is not "slowed" by the test.
2) Dangerous Terrain tests cause the model to attack at I1.

#1 does not say you do not have to roll - so lets say you roll
#1 does not say that you automatically pass or get 6's or anything - so lets use an example of rolling less that a 6 - lets say a 4.

3) Game mechanic terms - Your movement is 4. Your strike at I1.
4) Fluff terms - Your movement is "slowed" and your attacks are "slowed". Both of these should not effect a unit of wraiths.

That "striking at I1" is triggered by the roll for DT does not change the fact that it is the DT that is slowing you. #2 is actually according to the same "fluff" as #1 "slowing" the unit regardless of the mechanic involved.

The dangerous terrain wording is different and more easily clarified by RAW. They wraith unit does still have to take the test, they just automatically succeed. Whereas other specific units clarify they "ignore" it. Nowhere does it say that wraiths ignore the rules for any terrain, it simply states they either automatically pass or they just aren't slowed by it, via movement. If wraiths really were supposed to assault into cover without penalty then they would have said they "ignore" the terrain OR they would have given them similar wording to the previous codex of acting as if they had assault grenades. Neither is case, and NOTHING says they throw out the entire rule set for assaulting through cover, simply that they aren't slowed by terrain. This has nothing to do with the initiative lowering aspect of the rule.

Also, dangerous terrain does not slow your movement unless it is also difficult, but it still lowers your initiative to 1 if you took a test. I think you got confused on that part.

NecronLord3 wrote:
And? The INAT FAQ was updated yesterday with a specific reference to this situation. Thought it might help.

And? The INAT FAQ is not a valid source of rules or rules clarifications in YMDC. Its in the tenets.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:
And? The INAT FAQ was updated yesterday with a specific reference to this situation. Thought it might help.

And? The INAT FAQ is not a valid source of rules or rules clarifications in YMDC. Its in the tenets.

Actually there is no such rule. If you read those rules you will see that only it references official sources for rules questions. I never sited it as official ruling simply used it as an example of how to handle the situation.

Which again goes back to the Tenets:

4. Rules as Written are not How You Would Play It. Please clearly state which one you are talking about during a rules debate, and do not argue a RAW point against a HYWPI point (or vice-versa).

NecronLord3 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:
And? The INAT FAQ was updated yesterday with a specific reference to this situation. Thought it might help.

And? The INAT FAQ is not a valid source of rules or rules clarifications in YMDC. Its in the tenets.

Actually there is no such rule. If you read those rules you will see that only it references official sources for rules questions. I never sited it as official ruling simply used it as an example of how to handle the situation.

Actually there is. You can only use official rules sources for rules questions, and if you are making a HYWPI statement you must clearly state which you are doing

You are breaking one rule either way, so which is it?