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.
2012/07/27 06:07:26
Subject: Wrecked passengers cannot assault in their next turn?
The str 10 hits with no armor save goes quite a ways to mitigate that though.
You'd think that, but Terminators laugh in the face of that. We aslo don't know what special rules will appear for new assault vehicles and assault fliers. Time will tell. Just wondering if the wording in that subtext is actually a glitch.
Here's another brain bender. What armor facing does a Dreadnought that's in a Stormraven take the S10 AP1 hit on? Most places in the rulebook say rear for most special rules on vehicles, but it's not specified here.
Has to be rear. You get hit on all sides. Kinda like an when an explosion happens on the inside. It hits all sides including the rear.
Meks is da best! Dey makes go fasta and mo dakka!
2012/07/27 17:09:06
Subject: Wrecked passengers cannot assault in their next turn?
jbunny wrote:No strick RAW says I may assault the turn I disembark. So I can assault in my opponents turn if that is the turn I disembark.
Again I am NOT in favor of this interputation. But it does show how silly RAW can get.
Spoiler:
Yes indeed. Being able to assault during your opponents turn is imbecility. I don't think anyone will actually play it that way, and frankly, the people actually advocate for that are either,
a) Trying to rape the rules for every little advantage they can get in a tournament or,
b) They are intentionally hunting for RAW conflicts that break the game because they think it's fun be the devil's advocate.
No one likes to play games against the (a) type people, and the people in set (b) are probably warmahordes players.
coredump wrote:I am completely convinced this is Written as Intended.
As mentioned, it would be stupid to be better off to have your transport destroyed, then if it stays whole.
It would be stupid for my models to be safer if I leave your transport alone, rather than blow it up.
Spoiler:
When this conversation came up the first time, I was sure that the words "their subsequent" was intended to mean "the subsequent". However, I now agree with coredump. I am firmly convinced that this is exactly as they intended it. They did it to address exactly the type of scenario that Macok pointed out. Maybe the assault vehicle thing is a glitch. It seems obvious to me that they don't want you to be able to initiate a charge in your opponents assault phase. But perhaps they did mean for you to be able to assault in your next assault phase out of a destroyed assault vehicle.
In any case, RAW, you cannot assault during your turn with units that we're embarked on vehicles that were destroyed in your opponents previous turn BECAUSE you were forced to disembark. The space marine in me doesn't like it. But the gamer in me thinks this is the way it should be.
Son 0f Dorn wrote:
Here's another brain bender. What armor facing does a Dreadnought that's in a Stormraven take the S10 AP1 hit on? Most places in the rulebook say rear for most special rules on vehicles, but it's not specified here.
Spoiler:
The NOVA open FAQ is intsructing people to randomize with a D3. We'll see what INAT says.
EDIT : Reduced text wall.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2012/07/27 17:36:14
2500 pts
Horst wrote:This is how trolling happens. A few cheeky posts are made. Then they get more insulting. Eventually, we revert to our primal animal state, hurling feces at each other while shreeking with glee.
2012/07/27 17:39:53
Subject: Wrecked passengers cannot assault in their next turn?
The str 10 hits with no armor save goes quite a ways to mitigate that though.
You'd think that, but Terminators laugh in the face of that. We aslo don't know what special rules will appear for new assault vehicles and assault fliers. Time will tell. Just wondering if the wording in that subtext is actually a glitch.
Here's another brain bender. What armor facing does a Dreadnought that's in a Stormraven take the S10 AP1 hit on? Most places in the rulebook say rear for most special rules on vehicles, but it's not specified here.
Has to be rear. You get hit on all sides. Kinda like an when an explosion happens on the inside. It hits all sides including the rear.
That's some nice reasoning, but NOWHERE does it say that in the rules. I've searched quite extensively. It'll probably be end-of-summer FAQ, though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grugknuckle wrote:When this conversation came up the first time, I was sure that the words "their subsequent" was intended to mean "the subsequent". However, I now agree with coredump. I am firmly convinced that this is exactly as they intended it. They did it to address exactly the type of scenario that Macok pointed out. Maybe the assault vehicle thing is a glitch. It seems obvious to me that they don't want you to be able to initiate a charge in your opponents assault phase. But perhaps they did mean for you to be able to assault in your next assault phase out of a destroyed assault vehicle.
In any case, RAW, you cannot assault during your turn with units that we're embarked on vehicles that were destroyed in your opponents previous turn BECAUSE you were forced to disembark. The space marine in me doesn't like it. But the gamer in me thinks this is the way it should be.
This is exactly how I feel now. I had a really bad knee jerk reaction at first, but when you step all the way back to look at it, it makes a lot of sense
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/07/27 17:43:56
"The one hand: a Fist. The other hand: held out to your brother."
12500+ pts. 2500 pts.
"Primarch-Progenitor, to your glory and the glory of him on earth!"
I can possibly see the wreck thing being written to prevent someone from gaining an advantage when their vehicle gets blown up,
However, if this is true then I can only assume that the assault vehicle is an over sight, and it was meant to allow for assaulting next turn. No RAW to support, just a feeling from playing multiple editions.
Grugknuckle@ I agree with your 2 groups of people. For this case, I would be B. Just trying to show that taking a hard RAW standpoint is not always the correct thing to do, and intent should be taken into account from time to time.
On Dakka he was Eldanar. In our area, he was Lee. R.I.P., Lee Guthrie.
2012/07/27 19:05:46
Subject: Wrecked passengers cannot assault in their next turn?
Compel wrote:My head hurts....But then a massive part of me can't help but think that a big rule change like that should have been made blatantly clear...Where-as the only really clear thing is the Assault Vehicle line.
You would think right? Part of me thinks that GW doesn't give a crap how we play the game. I kind of think they want us to argue about it. Have you ever noticed how difficult it is to get them to actually clarify the rules? There is no hot line to call. There is really no way for peons like us to submit questions. The best we can get is some moron from customer service who doesn't even play the game. Then they publish "Frequently Asked Questions" on the very day that the rules come out. My question is, "Who was asking those questions and how frequently did they ask them?" It obviously wasn't anyone from YMDC because we didn't even have the rules yet!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/07/27 20:33:59
2500 pts
Horst wrote:This is how trolling happens. A few cheeky posts are made. Then they get more insulting. Eventually, we revert to our primal animal state, hurling feces at each other while shreeking with glee.
2012/07/27 21:49:03
Subject: Wrecked passengers cannot assault in their next turn?
Grugknuckle wrote:
You would think right? Part of me thinks that GW doesn't give a crap how we play the game. I kind of think they want us to argue about it. Have you ever noticed how difficult it is to get them to actually clarify the rules? There is no hot line to call. There is really no way for peons like us to submit questions. The best we can get is some moron from customer service who doesn't even play the game. Then they publish "Frequently Asked Questions" on the very day that the rules come out. My question is, "Who was asking those questions and how frequently did they ask them?" It obviously wasn't anyone from YMDC because we didn't even have the rules yet!
You do know that there is an email to submit questions to for the FAQ's, right? The reason they had FAQ's the day the BRB hit was to address immediately present rules conflicts in the codexes. They've reported that normally junior designers are responsible for handling the FAQ's. I think that's why we see some whacky or counterintuitive things in them. However, with the attention they received for the launch, it would seem that the main designers, or indeed their own authors, were responsible for handling them. At the Open Day event, they said they'd have an FAQ for the BRB and updates to the codex FAQ's at the end of the summer (end of August?) and it looks like they mean to really stay on top of things for this edition. Word is getting out on sites like Naftka's blog that they intend to fluidly update each codex (via FAQ's and digtally) for the entirety of the edition. We're talking about regular unit releases and even points value corrections! We're in for some very excitng times. We just have to be patient while the first 6th ed codex gets off the ground.
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
2012/07/28 00:26:41
Subject: Re:Wrecked passengers cannot assault in their next turn?
We aslo don't know what special rules will appear for new assault vehicles and assault fliers. Time will tell. Just wondering if the wording in that subtext is actually a glitch.
2500 pts
12500+ pts. 
2500 pts. 
difficult it is to get them to actually clarify the rules? There is no hot line to call. There is really no way for peons like us to submit questions. The best we can get is some moron from customer service who doesn't even play the game. Then they publish "Frequently Asked Questions" on the very day that the rules come out. My question is, "Who was asking those questions and how frequently did they ask them?" It obviously wasn't anyone from 