Switch Theme:

8th edition Rulebook, Faction Indexes & Imperial Armour Indexes FAQ submission thread (for GW)  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

Hey everyone, I figured it would be a good idea to collect all the legitimate (unanswerable or bizarre) questions you find in the 8th edition rules together into one thread so they can be sent to GW (and/or tournament organizers) for use in making their FAQs.

If you see legitimate arguments/discussions about rules questions in other threads, please post the pertinent question (along with any relevant rules information) into this this thread. If a question is based on a loophole that 95% of players and tournament judges would agree on the answer, then it isn't worth including on this list.

But most importantly: PLEASE DO NOT ACTUALLY DISCUSS/ARGUE THE RULES IN THIS THREAD. If you think a particular question has an easy answer that was missed by the person adding it into the thread, then posting about it ONCE is fine (and appreciated), but please do not engage in a back and forth discussion about a rule...start another thread on the topic if you need to do that.

Also: please don't post a question unless you've read all the pertinent rules already and still can't figure out the answer. If you don't have access to the rules yet, please wait until you do (and have read them) to post your question.

Thanks!

----

UPDATE (August 21st): Updated, removing questions answerd in the latest GW FAQ releases (Grey Knights codex & CSM codex FAQs, v1.0). As always, if you spot a question on the list that you think has been answered by the official GW FAQs, please let me know (and where in the FAQs you think that answer is).



RULEBOOK FAQs
Spoiler:

DATASHEETS

• The 'Modifying Characteristics' rules say that multiplication/division modifiers are applied before any addition/subtraction modifiers. Is this guideline always applied this way, no matter when the modifiers take effect during the game? For example, say a Genestealer Cult Acolyte Hybrid unit has the Might From Beyond psychic power cast on them in the psychic phase (giving all models in the unit +1 Strength). Then in the subsequent fight phase, an Acolyte in that unit makes melee attacks with a heavy rock cutter (which doubles the model's Strength). Would these attacks be resolved at S9 or S10? Especially considering the rules discussing how to calculate a melee weapon's Strength characteristic (pg 175 of the rulebook) says that: 'you should modify the model's current Strength characteristic' (emphasis mine). So if an addition modifier occurs earlier in the turn and then a multiplication modifier occurs later in the turn, is the multiplication modifier still always applied first? Is the answer the same even if the modification is permanent for the rest of the game (such as with Fabius Bile's Enhanced Warriors ability)? In that case, is a permanent +1 S modifier still always calculated after a multiplication modifier (such as the 'x2 S' modifier from a power fist, for example)?

• If a weapon/ability references a model's 'Wounds characteristic' such as with an Ork tellyport mega-blasta, the Red Terror's Swallow Whole ability, etc., does this referring to the model's starting Wounds characteristic value, or its current Wounds characteristic value after it has suffered damage and has lost some wounds?


CORE RULES

• The rules for re-rolls (pg 178) say that re-rolls happen 'before modifiers are applied', which was also backed up with the answer given in the 'designer's commentary' PDF. But how does this policy work with re-rolls that require the player to know whether something has succeeded or failed before being able to re-roll the dice when modifiers are involved? For example, an Ultramarine model with a BS 2+ is firing a heavy weapon on the move against a unit of T'au Stealthsuits in cover (-2 to its rolls to hit), but is also within 6" of Roboute Guilliman, and so will be able to re-roll failed hit rolls. If modifiers are always applied after re-rolls then that means this model would only be able to re-roll any '1's rolled, even though the rolls of '2' & '3' will ultimately end up being misses. Is this really the correct way to play?


MOVEMENT PHASE

• Given the clarification regarding moving and vertical distances in the 'Stepping into a new edition of Warhammer 40,000' PDF, how exactly do you measure movement for a model with the FLY keyword when it moves vertically? Do you only measure the horizontal distance it moves (no matter how much it moves up or down vertically during that move)? Or do you just measure a straight line between where it starts and ends its move (essentially measuring diagonally if the model is ending its move up or down vertically from where it starts)? Or do even models with the FLY keyword still have to follow the guidelines laid out in the 'Stepping into a new edition of Warhammer 40,000' (so while they ignore terrain that they move completely over during their move, when ending their move up or down vertically from where they start, then they must count both the horizontal and vertical distance that they moved)?

• When it comes to models not being able to move within 1" of enemy models in the movement phase, does this mean that they can never pass within 1" of an enemy model at any point during their move, or just that they cannot finish their move within 1" of an enemy model (but could pass within 1" of them during their move)?

• Is a falling back unit free to pass within 1" of all enemy units carte blanche, so that they're able to move freely between the gaps of enemy models that are all part of the same unit (so long as they don't moving through the actual enemy models themselves)?

• With many models that have a minimum move characteristic, when they have suffered enough wounds their movement characteristic is listed as just: 20" (such as the Astra Militarum Valkyrie when it is down to 1-3 wounds remaining). Does this mean when the unit reaches this damage level it no longer has a minimum move requirement? Or does that just mean it has to move exactly 20" (no more, no less, unless it is Advancing).

• When a model that has a minimum move characteristic uses the Supersonic ability to advance, does this add 20" to just its maximum Move characteristic, or does it also apply to its minimum Move characteristic? For example, a wounded Astra Militarum Valkyrie has a 20-30" Move characteristic. If it advances, is this move restricted to 40-50", or is it 20"-50"?

• Many fortifications are described as a 'model' and when taken by an opponent that makes them an 'enemy model'. Is a unit that starts its move within 1" of an enemy 'model' fortification really subject to the falling back rules (they may only remain stationary or fall back) as the rules seem to indicate? If so, does this even apply to fortifications like a Skyshield Landing Pad that have no weapons mounted on them?

• When a fortification is described as a model in its datasheet, are friendly models able to move on top of it, such as with a Skyshield Landing Pad or Void Shield Generator? What about with enemy models, are they able to move on top of an enemy Skyshield landing pad during their movement phase? If no, can they do so when they're charging it (can they move on top of it as part of their charge, pile-in or consolidation moves)?

• Many units are able to drop bombs on enemy units that they 'flew over' during the movement phase (for example, Ork Deffkoptas and Aeldari Swooping Hawks). Is the unit dropping bombs allowed to double-back and essentially end up where they started their movement but still count as having flown over the enemy unit (providing that they had enough movement distance to accomplish this)? Or must they actually finish their move on the opposite side of the enemy unit from where they started the move to count as having flown over them? If the answer is the former (that they are allowed to double-back and still drop their bombs), exactly how far do they need to move over the enemy unit to count as having flown over them? Do they have to pass all the way over at least one enemy model in the unit, or do they merely need to move partially over a single model by just a fraction of an inch in order to qualify?


PSYCHIC PHASE

• A few units have abilities that say they cannot be 'affected by psychic powers in any way', such as the Culexus Assassin and the Sisters of Silence with their Abomination/Psychic Abomination abilities. How broad is this protection offered to an 'abomination' unit against psychic powers (see specific examples below)?
    A) If a psychic power targets opposing units, but the effects of that power on a unit with the Abomination ability would modify their characteristics, deny them a save, add modifiers to their rolls, and/or cause them to re-roll dice, does the unit ignore all of these types of effects? For example, if an enemy Space Marine unit has Null Zone cast on it, and a unit with the Abomination ability is within 6", can it still use its invulnerable save? Or if an enemy Deathguard unit has Miasma of Pestilence cast on it and a unit with the Abomination ability shoots at that Deathguard unit, does it ingnore the -1 shooting penalty?
    B) If a psychic power gives an enemy unit defensive bonuses (improved Toughness, save, re-roll saves, etc.), and that enemy unit is attacked by a unit with the Abomination ability, are those defensive bonuses ignored? For example, an enemy Blood Angels unit has Shield of Sanguinius cast on it, giving it a 4+ invulnerable save. Can that save be taken against attacks made by a unit with the Abomination ability?
    C) If a psychic power gives an enemy unit offensive bonuses to its attacks (improved BS, WS, Strength, Damage, AP, etc.), and that enemy unit targets a unit with the Abomination ability, are those bonuses ignored? For example, an enemy Space Marine unit has Might of Heroes cast on it, improving its Strength and Attacks by +1. If that enemy unit wishes to direct one or more of its meele attacks against a unit with the Abomination ability, are those bonuses then ignored?


SHOOTING PHASE

• Just to be 100% clear on the matter: a firing model can find itself in a position where it cannot possibly hit its target due to negative 'to hit' modifiers, correct?

• The rules say 'Unless otherwise stated, each model in the unit attacks with all of the ranged weapons it is armed with'. Does a model really have to always fire all of its weapons (and so must use any 'once per battle' weapons like a hunter-killer missile the first time it fires)?

• Are the rules for 'fast dice rolling' always optional, or if a player has multiple weapons that share the prerequisite characteristics (same BS, Strength, Armour Penetration and Damage) are they compelled to use 'fast dice rolling'?

• If 'fast dice rolling' is always optional (see the previous question), does that really allow a firing player to switch back and forth between firing different types weapons to maximize casualties, no matter how long that makes the game last? For example, say a firing unit has several 'Damage 1' and 'Damage 2' weapons and is shooting at a unit made up of 3 Wound models. Can the firing player resolve his 'Damage 2' weapons one at a time until one successfully damages an enemy model, and then switch over to resolving his 'Damage 1' weapons until a casualty has been caused, only then to switch back to resolving 'Damage 2' weapons again (and so on and so forth), so that absolutely no damage gets wasted? Or is a player, even when rolling their attacks one at a time, required to resolve all attacks made by identical weapons first before moving onto another type of weapon?

• If multiple models in a unit are shooting with a weapon that, on a hit roll of '1', will either slay the bearer (e.g., supercharged plasma gun) or inflict a mortal wound on its bearer (e.g. Ork kustom mega weapons), do the hit dice for each model need to be rolled separately to track this (despite the 'fast dice rolling' rules saying otherwise)? If they can be rolled all together how exactly should the effects of any '1's rolled be distributed throughout the unit?

• Many bodyguard units (Space Marine Honour Guard & Company Veterans, Tau Crisis Bodyguards, Tyranid Tyrant Guard, etc.) have an ability that allows them to 'intercept that hit', yet the ability is described as being triggered when the model (they're protecting) 'loses a wound'. Do these abilities intercept the entire hit (no matter how much damage that attack is causing) as a single mortal wound, or do these abilities only work on a wound by wound basis? So for example, if a Hive Tyrant, that is within 3" of Tyrant Guard, is hit and wounded by a Lascannon that is inflicting '4' wounds, are 4 separate rolls made (and for each '2+' the wound is removed from the Tyrant and becomes a mortal wound on the Tyrant Guard), or is only a single roll made (and on a '2+' all 4 wounds are removed from the Tyrant and become a single mortal wound on the Tyrant Guard)?

• When a vehicle with the Explodes ability explodes and does a random amount of mortal wounds to every unit within a specified distance, do you roll once and apply that amount of mortal wounds to every unit within the specified distance, or do you roll separately for each unit within the specified distance to see how many mortal wounds that individual unit suffers? For example, if an Ork Battlewagon explodes and there are 3 enemy units within 6", do you roll one D6 to see how many mortal wounds all 3 units suffer, or do you roll a D6 for each of the 3 units separately to see how many mortal wounds they each suffer?

• Many models have movable parts that, when moved, can dramatically change the dimensions of the model, making them able to see or be seen by enemy models. Are there any restrictions to when/how a model is able change its dimensions? For example, can an Astra Militarum player raise the barrel of their Basilisk's earthshaker cannon during their shooting phase, to use the height of that barrel to spot enemy models it couldn't otherwise see (so as to be able to shoot them with its heavy bolter), but then lower that barrel back down after the shooting phase is over so that the enemy cannot spot the Basilisk during their own shooting phase?


CHARACTERS

• If a weapon that has an ability that allows it to 'target units that are not visible to the bearer' (like an Astra Militarum earthshaker cannon, for example), and the closest enemy unit is a character with less than 10 wounds, but which isn't visible to the firer, is such a weapon able to target the character in this case? Or does a character with less than 10 wounds always have to be both visible and the closest unit in order to be targeted?

• If a character that starts a game with 10+ wounds takes damage and is reduced to less than 10 wounds, is it suddenly no longer to able to be targeted unless it is the closest visible unit to an enemy? Or is the 10+ wounds guideline only based on the wounds characteristic the model starts the game with? Conversely, if a Space Marine Chaplain Venerable Dreadnought (from Imperial Armour) is the warlord of an army and is given the Iron Resolve warlord trait (improving its 9 Wounds up to 10 Wounds), does it now count as a CHARACTER model with 10 wounds and so can be targeted freely?

• The 'Stepping into a new edition of Warhammer 40,000' PDF clarifies that the restriction on targeting a CHARACTER that has less than 10 wounds only applies to shooting attacks that occur during the Shooting phase. What about with shooting attacks that occur outside the shooting phase but which specify that the unit shoots 'as if it were the Shooting phase', like with Ynnari Strength from Death or the Primaries Ancient's Astartes Banner ability, for example? Since these attacks occur 'as if it were the Shooting phase' does that mean they cannot freely target a CHARACTER with less than 10 wounds?


CHARGE PHASE

• If attempting to charge an enemy unit that is up on terrain that has no place to put further models within 1" of them (such as an entirely filled hilltop, for example), is it effectively impossible to charge that enemy unit? Or is a unit allowed to charge them using the Wobbly Model Syndrome rules to just count as being within 1" of them even though the charging models can't be placed there? If the answer is that the unit is not allowed to charge in this case, then what about if the charging unit is a very tall model without a base? In other words, if the charger is allowed to measure from the top of the model (because it has no base), can that allow it to come within 1" of the enemy models on the top of the hill without actually moving up there?

• If a player has multiple units able to fire overwatch against a single enemy charging unit, who gets to choose what order those units fire in? The player whose turn it is (the charging player) because of the Sequencing rule on page 178? Or does the firing player get to choose?

• If a unit has an ability that lets it fire at other units even when there are enemy units within 1" of it, such as the Khorne Lord of Skulls' Titanic Daemon Engine ability, or the Baneblade's Steel Behemoth ability, can that ability be used to allow the unit to fire overwatch at an enemy charging unit even when the unit already has an enemy unit within 1" (provided the unit also follows any additional criteria required by the ability to allow it to fire while enemies are within 1"? For example, if a Baneblade already has an enemy unit within 1", but is charged by another enemy unit, is it allowed to overwatch all its weapons besides its twin heavy bolter/flamer at the charging unit?

• Can heroic interventions only be made against enemy units that just completed a charge and are within 3" of the character? Or can a character make a heroic intervention against a random enemy unit that just happens to be within 3", regardless of whether or not they charged, or even when no charges at all were made that phase?

• When firing overwatch with a weapon that has an ability that triggers on a specific result rolled, do modifiers still apply towards triggering that ability, even though they are ignored for determining if the overwatch attack actually hits? For example, if a Space Marine fires both weapons of a combi-plasma during overwatch (giving the model a -1 modifier on its hit rolls) and chooses to utilize the plasma's supercharge profile, do rolls of '2' cause the bearer to be slain (because the -1 modifier still applies for the supercharge ability even though that modifier doesn't affect whether the shots actually hit or not)? Or if a Necron Immortal fires a tesla carbine in overwatch while under the influence of an Overlord's My Will Be Done ability (giving +1 to its hit rolls), does the Tesla ability to cause 3 hits instead of 1 still apply on the a roll of '5' (which misses because of the overwatch rules, but still counts as a roll of '6' because of the +1 modifier)?


FIGHT PHASE

• In order for a model to make melee attacks, they must be within 1" of an enemy or within 1" of a friendly model from the same unit that is itself within 1" of an enemy. However, when fighting across different vertical levels (such as different floors of a ruin) models with a base (typically) cannot possibly be within 1" of a friendly model from the same unit that is on a different vertical level. In this situation, are only models that are on the same vertical level as an enemy able to attack? For example, say a unit of Orks is occupying an upper level of a ruin, 3" vertically from the tabletop. If a Space Marine unit charges the Orks, but can only fit a single model on that upper level (because there is no room to place more models), can only that 1 Space Marine make melee attacks (because none of the other Space Marines are within 1" of him)? Or should the Wobbly Model Syndrome rules be used to imagine that the other Space Marines are up on that upper level (assuming those Space Marines had enough movement to get up there) and therefore are also able to attack?

• Some hover vehicles have an ability that dictates you must measure to/from the model's hull rather than its base (a T'au Devlifish's Hover Tank ability, for example). However, the tallest flying stand provided for these types of models is more than 1" tall, making it categorically impossible for an enemy model (that is mounted on a base) to get within 1" of the hover vehicle, which means these types of models cannot be charged and/or attacked in the fight phase. Is this intended, or should there be some workaround to allow hover vehicles to be charged and attacked in the fight phase?

• If a weapon allows the bearer to make multiple hit rolls for each attack made with the weapon (Tyranid ravenous maw, Tyranid Threscher scythe, Ork mega-choppa, Ork klaw of gork, etc.), does this mean each attack is potentially able to inflict multiple hits & wounds (assuming multiple hit rolls succeed, of course), or is it supposed to mean (for example) that if you get to roll 3 hit dice for a single attack, no matter how many of those rolls are successful you still just inflict a single hit? And in the particular case of the Ork spinnin' blades, it says you 'roll D3 dice for each attack made with this weapon', as opposed to 'hit rolls' for other similar weapons. Are spinnin' blades supposed to be resolved somehow differently from weapons that generate extra 'hit' rolls?


MORALE PHASE

• When taking a morale test, you roll a dice and add the number of models slain to get a result. Is the number of models slain added to the roll considered a modifier? If yes, what is the point of having the Space Marine 'And they Shall Know No Fear' ability, as before modifiers are applied Space Marines always pass their morale tests (as their lowest Ld of 7 is still higher than the highest roll possible (a '6')?

• The rulebook FAQ (v 1.1) PDF clarified that models removed via a failed morale test are not considered to be slain. Does that mean a unit which has had one or more of its models removed via a failed morale test is never considered to be destroyed (cannot be used to achieve the First Blood victory condition and/or allow a Ynnari unit within 7" to soulburst)? And does the answer change at all if the very last model(s) of a unit are removed via a failed morale test (does the unit count as being destroyed in this case)? Or is a unit considered destroyed when all its models are slain and/or removed from play via a failed morale test?


TRANSPORTS

• If an enemy unit has completely encircled a transport, can the unit inside really embark right 'through' the enemy models, so long as they can still be placed within 3" of the transport and more than 1" away from the enemy models?

• If a transport starts the movement phase within 1" of an enemy unit, can the unit inside disembark normally (allowing them to move, shoot, etc.) or are they bound by the rules for falling back in this case and must either remain on the vehicle or alternatively disembark and make a fall back move?


FIGHTING A BATTLE

• Can you really make any model in your army the Warlord, including a fortification?

• If a Warlord is slain but then later on is revived (Roboute Guilliman, for example) and returned to play, does the opposing player still get credit for the 'Slay the Warlord' objective, or must the Warlord be slain at the end of the battle for the point to be awarded?

• If a player's warlord is removed from play due to a failed morale test (i.e. the player knowingly makes his warlord part of a multi-model unit specifically so they can remove their Warlord via a failed morale test), does this totally prevent the opponent from ever earning the 'Slay the Warlord' objective (as the Warlord has not been 'slain' in this case, just removed from play)?

• In the unlikely (but entirely possible) scenario where a player cannot possibly set up their entire force wholly within their deployment zone, what happens to the models/units they cannot fit in there? Are they simply not used in the game? Or are they allowed to be placed into a form of reserves and enter from a board edge on the first turn (or something like that)?


MATCHED PLAY

• For matched play, and especially for an organized event, are there any restrictions on what sized bases a model is allowed to be mounted on? For example, must an older model (that was sold with smaller base) be re-based to match the size of the base sold for the current version of that same model? And are players allowed to mount a model onto a much larger base than it is sold with, because they like the way it looks and/or because it gives them a useful gameplay advantage (can be used to block opposing models from moving, effectively increases the model's aura range, etc.)?


OBJECTIVES

• Missions that use objective markers typically say they can be placed 'anywhere on the battlefield' (with a few other restrictions). Does this mean it is perfectly permissible to place an objective marker in a location that some (or all) enemy units may not be able to reach, such as on the upper levels of a ruin, for example?

• Are there any restrictions against moving a model directly over an objective marker? For example, can a large model (like a Necron Monolith, Imperial Knight, etc.) end its move directly over an objective marker, thereby making it impossible for enemy models to come within 3" of the objective marker's center? Similarly, can a fortification be set up directly on top of an objective marker, effectively claiming the objective for the player with the fortification until the fortification is destroyed by the opponent?

• With the Priority Orders Received (66) tactical objective (which can only be achieved using your Warlord), what happens if the bonus objective generated requires multiple units to complete, such as with Hold the Line (43)? What about if this bonus objective is one that isn't completed using your own units, such as with Psychological Warfare (55) or Area Denial (54)?


BATTLE-FORGED ARMIES

• In the 'Designer's Commentary' PDF it was clarified that a Battle-forged army can never have fewer than 0 command points. However, some people are still confused by this answer as to whether this means that you are not allowed to have an army list that would have fewer than 0 command points or rather that this means you are free to take as many Auxiliary Support Detachments as you like (even when your true command point total is below 0), but when you do, you still just start the game with 0 command points.


BATTLEFIELD TERRAIN

• Infantry units get the benefit of being in cover if they are 'on a ruin'. What exactly does this mean? For example, if the ruin is mounted on a base, does the infantry unit count as being 'on' the ruin if they are standing anywhere on the ruin's base? Or if the ruin isn't mounted on a base, does this mean the infantry unit must be on the upper level(s) of the ruin in order to benefit from cover?

• The 'Stepping into a new edition of Warhammer 40,000' PDF clarifies that models are able to move over terrain (by counting the vertical distance it moves up/down the terrain), but when it comes to ruins, non-INFANTRY models 'can only end their move on the ground floor of ruins'. So just to be 100% clear: if a vehicle wants to move into the ground floor of a ruin (the ruin has a flat center area where the vehicle can fit inside), but along the edge of that ruin there is a 1" tall wall, is the vehicle able to move into the ruin (deducting 2" for moving over the wall)? Or are non-INFANTRY models prohibited from ever moving over ruins walls in any circumstance, no matter how tall or short that wall might be?

• The rulebook FAQ (v 1.0) PDF changed via errata that when you're checking to see if models in the target unit are obscured by terrain, this is checked per firing 'model' instead of by the firing 'unit'. Does this mean that when a unit is required to be physically obscured by cover in order to benefit from it, they must be sufficiently obscured when checked from EVERY SINGLE model in the firing unit (or they otherwise do not benefit from that cover at all)? Or is the errata instead telling us that a unit being fired upon can benefit from cover against some models in a firing unit, but not against others in the same unit (and so we need to keep track of which firing models they do not get cover against and which they do)? For example, say 10 Space Marines are firing bolters at a unit of Ork Warbikers that are in a forest. From the perspective of 5 Marines, all the Ork Warbikers are at least 50% obscured by the forest, but for the other 5, they can see one Warbiker completely unobscured. Does the Warbiker unit not get the benefit of cover from all of the Space Marines (as long as there is at least one Ork Warbiker that is obscured by less than 50% to at least one Space Marine), or are we supposed to keep the firing for the two groups of Marines separate and give the benefit of cover to one of the groups and no benefit of cover to the other group?

• If a unit of infantry are entirely on an upper level of a ruin, are they completely unable to be charged by a (non-flying) biker, monster or vehicle unit (that is mounted on a base)? If the answer is that they are unable to be charged in this case, then what about if the charging unit is a very tall model without a base? In other words, if the charger is allowed to measure from the top of the model (because it has no base), can that allow it to come within 1" of the enemy models on the upper level of the ruin without actually moving up there?


---------------


CODEX ADEPTUS ASTARTES: GREY KNIGHTS
Spoiler:
• Can the Heed the Prognosticars stratagem be used on a GREY KNIGHTS CHARACTER that is set up in a teleportarium chamber? Can it be used on a GREY KNIGHTS CHARACTER that is embarked on a transport?


CODEX ADEPTUS ASTARTES: SPACE MARINES
Spoiler:
• The Space Marine Apothecary's Narthecium (including the Primaris Apothecary says it affects 'friendly <CHAPTER> INFANTRY or BIKER' units. Should this not be: 'friendly <CHAPTER> INFANTRY or <CHAPTER> BIKER' units or is this really supposed to apply to any BIKER unit, regardless of its Chapter? For reference, the Ork Painboy's Dok's Tools ability says: '<CLAN> INFANTRY or <CLAN> BIKER unit'.

• Can a unit that is off the battlefield in a teleportarium chamber make an 'emergency teleport' (utilizing a Teleport Homer), or can only units that are already on the battlefield make an 'emergency teleport'?

• In matched play, how many points does an Intercessor Squad's auxiliary grenade launcher cost to take?

• Sternguard Veteran Squad's keywords & faction keywords are lowercase, when all other keywords & faction keywords in the game are all capitals. Is this an intentional difference or just a typo?

• The Stormraven Gunship's transport rules says: '...each Centurion takes the space of 3 infantry models.' Should 'Centurion' in that sentence actually be a capitalized keyword? Or is a Centurion Sergeant not supposed to take up the space of 3 infantry models in a Stormraven?

• Is the Bolter Drill stratagem only used once per game and then affects every hit roll you make for the rest of the game for a model with a bolt weapon (including with friendly non-IMPERIAL FIST models), because that's what the rules as written seem to indicate?

• The Raven Guard Strike From the Shadows stratagem says that units utilizing from this stratagem are set up 'at the beginning of the first battle round but before the first turn begins'. In matched play games, do units set up in the shadows still count as being on the battlefield for the purposes of the Tactical Reserves rule (requiring at least half your units to be set up on the battlefield)? And when these units are set up on the battlefield, are they bound by the normal rules for reinforcements (meaning they can't move in the movement phase during their first turn) or are they able to move freely in their first movement phase? Finally, just to be clear: are units that are 'in the shadows' set up onto the table before or after seeing which player is taking the first turn?

• Can the Tactical Flexibility stratagem be used on a unit that is currently not on the table (like a Terminator Squad in a teleportarium chamber waiting to arrive, or a Tactical Squad that is embarked inside a transport?

• Can the Chapter Warlord Traits also be used by their successor chapters (even if just the successor chapters listed in the codex), or are the chapter warlord traits really only available to the listed chapters?


CODEX HERETIC ASTARTES: CHAOS SPACE MARINES
Spoiler:
• Can a model that disembarks from a transport perform a Daemonic Ritual instead of moving any further that phase? Or does the fact that the model disembarked mean it cannot perform a Daemonic Ritual the same phase?

• If a unit of Khorne Bezerkers charges an enemy unit, wipes it out with its first 'fight' and then consolidates into a new enemy unit within 3" (that they didn't declare a charge against), are they able attack the new enemy unit with their second 'fight'? Because the rules do state that units which charge can only target enemy units that they charged in the previous phase.

• Does the Aspiring Sorcerer in a Rubric Marines squad benefit from the All Is Dust ability? Or is it only supposed to affect the actual Rubric Marine models in the unit?

• When a Noise Marine is slain by something that isn't an attack (a mortal wound caused by Fabius Bile's Enhanced Warriors ability, for example), does it still get to make one last attack via its Music of the Apocalypse ability (because the ability rules say that the Noise Marine's attack occurs 'after the attacking unit has finished making all its attacks')?

• Can a Helbrute first replace its muti-melta with a Helbrute fist, and then replace both its Helbrute fists with 2 power scourges?

• When a Maulerfiend replaces 'both magma cutters with lasher tendrils', does this count as just one set of lasher tendrils or a pair of them?

• In a matched play game, does the Tide of Traitors stratagem require reinforcement points to utilize?

• The Alpha Legion Forward Operatives stratagem says that units utilizing from this stratagem are set up 'at the beginning of the first battle round but before the first turn begins'. In matched play games, do units set up in concealment still count as being on the battlefield for the purposes of the Tactical Reserves rule (requiring at least half your units to be set up on the battlefield)? And when these units are set up on the battlefield, are they bound by the normal rules for reinforcements (meaning they can't move in the movement phase during their first turn) or are they able to move freely in their first movement phase? Finally, just to be clear: are units that are 'in concealment' set up onto the table before or after seeing which player is taking the first turn?


---------------


IMPERIUM INDEX 1 FAQs
Spoiler:

BLOOD ANGELS

• The Sanguinary Priest's Blood Chalice and Narthecium (including the Sanguinary Priest on Bike & Brother Corbulo's Narthecium/Red Grail) says it affects 'friendly BLOOD ANGELS INFANTRY or BIKER' units. Should this not be: 'friendly BLOOD ANGELS INFANTRY or BLOOD ANGELS BIKER' units or is this really supposed to apply to any BIKER unit, regardless of its Chapter? For reference, the Ork Painboy's Dok's Tools ability says: '<CLAN> INFANTRY or <CLAN> BIKER unit'.


DARK ANGELS

• Asmodai's Exemplar of Hate, Ezekiel's Book of Salvation, and Deathwing/Ravenwing Apothecary's Narthecium all say they affect 'friendly DARK ANGELS INFANTRY or BIKER' units. Should this not be: 'friendly DARK ANGELS INFANTRY or DARK ANGELS BIKER' units or is this really supposed to apply to any BIKER unit, regardless of its Chapter? For reference, the Ork Painboy's Dok's Tools ability says: '<CLAN> INFANTRY or <CLAN> BIKER unit'.

• The Dark Angels Company Champion replaces its Master Crafted Power Sword with a Blade of Caliban. In matched play, a Blade of Caliban costs 0 points, but its stats are quite superior to a Master Crafted Power Sword (which costs 10 points). Is this an oversight or intentional?


SPACE WOLVES

• A Wolf Priest's Healing Balms (including Wolf Priest on Bike, Wolf Priest in Terminator Armour and Ulrik the Slayer) say they affect 'a SPACE WOLVES INFANTRY, BIKER or CAVALRY' unit. Should this not be: 'a SPACE WOLVES INFANTRY, SPACE WOLVES BIKER or SPACE WOLVES CAVALRY' unit or is this really supposed to apply to any BIKER or CAVALRY unit, regardless of its Chapter? For reference, the Ork Painboy's Dok's Tools ability says: '<CLAN> INFANTRY or <CLAN> BIKER unit'.


DEATHWATCH

• Is the Special Issue Ammunition ability really not supposed to be available for the Chaplain, Librarian and Watch Captain (that are taken from the main Adeptus Astartes datasheets)? And does Special Issue Ammunition really not apply to a master-crafted boltgun and to the boltgun portions of a combi-weapon?


IMPERIUM INDEX 2 FAQs
Spoiler:

ASTRA MILITARUM

• Two models from an Astra Militarum Infantry Squad can form a heavy weapons team, and if you do so, the squad then has 9 models. However, in matched play, the points value summary lists Infantry Squads as 10 being models. Does that mean you can have 10 models in the unit including a heavy weapons team? And how many points do you pay for the heavy weapon team in an Infantry Squad? 4 points as its only one one model or 8 points because its supposed to represent two models?

• Two models from an Astra Militarum Infantry Squad can form a heavy weapons team, and if you do so, how many lasguns, if any, does that heavy weapons team retain (besides the heavy weapon they must take)? Do they retain just 1 lasgun like heavy weapon teams in a Heavy Weapon Squad, both lasguns or do they lose both lasguns when they form a heavy weapon team?

• The Ratling Find the Best Spot ability says they can be placed 'after both armies are fully deployed'. Can an Astra Militarum player ever count as having 'finished setting up their army first' when they still have Ratling units waiting to be set up this way? And for matched play, do Ratlings waiting to be set up this way still count as being on the battlefield for the requirement that a player must set up at least half their units on the battlefield?

• The Firing Deck and Extended Firing Deck abilities (on the Banehammer, Doomhammer, Shadowsword & Stormlord) seem to be missing a bunch of the rules that are found in the Open-Topped ability on transports from other factions (Orks, Drukhari, etc.), namely this: 'When [embarked models fire], any restrictions or modifiers that apply to this model also apply to its passengers; for example, the passengers cannot shoot if the model has Fallen Back in the same turn, cannot shoot (except with Pistols) if this model is within 1" of an enemy unit, and so on.' Should these rules also apply to the Firing Deck/Extended Firing Deck abilities? Or are embarked units using the Firing Deck/Extended Firing Deck abilities allowed to fire the same turn their transport has Fallen Back and when the enemy is within 1" (with non-pistol weapons)?

• When a unit disembarks from a Valkyrie using the Grav-chute Insertion ability, it has a chance to suffer casualties only if the Valkyrie moves more than 20". Is this intentionally designed so that if the Valkyrie moves its minimum 20" move (and just its minimum 20" move), then the unit is able to disembark without chance of suffering casualties? Or is it supposed to be: if the Valkyrie is using its Hover Jet ability (a max 20" move) then its passengers can disembark via Grav-chute Insertion without the chance of suffering casualties, but when making its normal 20-45" move then passengers disembarking using Grav-chute insertion have the chance to suffer casualties?


ADEPTUS MECHANICUS

• In a battle round where the Litany of the Electromancer canticle is in effect, exactly when do you roll a D6 for each enemy unit within 1" of your units with the Canticles ability? Do you check range and roll once only at the start of that battle round? Or is it anytime an enemy unit comes within 1" of one of your units with the Canticles ability then you immediately roll at that point? If the answer is the latter, what about when an enemy unit starts the battle round within 1" of one of your units with the Canticles ability, do you roll for that enemy unit, and if so, when?

• If an Adeptus Mechanicus unit fires a phosphor weapon along with other types of weapons, does this automatically prevent the enemy unit from getting a cover bonus against all of their attacks (since the phosphor weapon's rules imply that they merely have to 'attack' a unit to deny it a cover bonus)? Or does that ability only apply when taking savings throws against a wound caused by a phosphor weapon?


ADEPTUS MINISTORUM

• What exactly does the Hand of the Emperor act of faith do? Because although it allows a unit to 'move as if it were the movement phase', when acts of faith are rolled for, it is already the start of the movement phase (the start of the turn is also the start of of the movement phase), and therefore when a unit moves using the Hand of the Emperor, it counts as having moved in the movement phase.

• Celestine's Beacon of Faith ability says 'ADEPTA SORORITAS units within 6" of Celestine add 1 to their Shield of Faith invulnerable saves.' Is this ability improving the actual Invulnerable save from '6+' down to '5+' or is this instead just a +1 to the actual saving throw roll? If the answer is the latter, then when combined with Seraphim's Angelic Visage ability (which requires Seraphim to re-roll failed Shield of Faith invulnerable saves) does this really mean that when a Seraphim rolls a '5' for their invulnerable save (which would succeed after the +1 modifier provided by Celestine is applied) it is forced to re-roll that result?


THE INQUISITION

• The Dominate psychic power can force an enemy model to 'shoot a single weapon or make a single close combat attack'. If the weapon or enemy model firing has an ability that allows it to generate additional attacks based on the success/failure of an attack it makes, can the Inquisition player also utilize those extra attacks? And does it make any difference if the extra attacks are generated by the weapon itself or instead by an ability that the enemy model naturally has? For example, if an Inquisition psyker forces Irillyth (Asuryani, Imperial Armour Index: Xenos) to fire its Spear of Starlight, can the Inquisition player utilize the extra attacks that occur for each successful hit with this weapon (up to a max of 4)? Or if an Inquisition pskyer forces Old One Eye (Tyranid, Index: Xenos 2) to make a close combat attack, can the Inquisition player utilize the Berserk Rampage ability to generate an extra attack (if the first one successfully hits)?

• Inquisitor Greyfax has a power level of 5 and in matched play costs 85 points. Inquisitor Coteaz has a power level of 4 but in matched play costs 100 points, and neither model has any wargear options. Surely at least one of the power levels or point values between these two models must be incorrect, no?

• Inquisitor Coteaz's Spy Network ability allows a friendly unit to fire at enemy units that 'set up on the battlefield after the game has begun'. In the case of an enemy transport that is set up on the battlefield during the game and then immediately disembarks its passengers, which of these enemy units can be fired at via this ability?
    A) the transport and all of the disembarking passenger units (presuming they are valid targets) can all be fired upon, one at a time.
    B) only the transport can be fired upon.
    C) only one of these enemy units can be fired upon, either the transport or one of its passenger units (that is a valid target), chosen by the firing player.


CHAOS INDEX FAQs
Spoiler:

KHORNE

• The Herald of Khorne on a Blood Throne is described as being 'attended by two Bloodletters'. Is there any point at all to these Bloodletters being mentioned? Do they do anything at all?


TZEENTCH

• Can an army that contains THOUSAND SONS Rubric Marines with a battlefield role of Troops also contain DEATH GUARD Plague Marines that have the battlefield role of Troops as well? Or must a player instead build their army around the THOUSAND SONS faction keyword before their Rubric Marines gain the battlefield role of Troops?

• In matched play, how many points does it cost for a Burning Chariot/Herald of Tzeentch on Burning Chariot to take the 3 accompanying Blue Horrors?

• If the Blue Scribes syphon an enemy psychic power using their Xirat'p's Sorcerous Syphon ability, and that power has a faction keyword (such as Space Marine's Veil of Time and Might of Heroes that use the ADEPTUS ASTARTES keyword, for example), are they allowed to change that faction keyword when they recast the power (like to TZEENTCH, CHAOS or DAEMON)? Or are enemy powers that use faction specific keywords essentially useless for the Blue Scribes to recast?


NURGLE

• Can an army that contains DEATH GUARD Plague Marines that have a battlefield role of Troops also contain THOUSAND SONS Rubric Marines with a battlefield role of Troops as well? Or must a player instead build their army around the DEATH GUARD faction keyword for their Plague Marines to gain the battlefield role of Troops?

• Can generating new Pox Walker models via the Curse of the Walking Pox ability allow the unit to exceed its original starting size? Can it allow the unit to exceed 20 models?

• Is it intentional that Epidemius's Tally of Pestilence can affect Heretic Asatartes Daemon units that have the mark of Nurgle (Possessed, Helldrakes, Forgefiend, Obliterators, etc.)?

• For matched play, the Lord of Contagion's point value of 184 (when taking its required plaguereaper) makes absolutely no sense compared to Typhus's point value of 164. Typhus has the same characteristics and all the abilities that the Lord of Contagion has, but also has: blight grenades, a ranged weapon, a melee weapon with better characteristics, the Host of the Destroyer Hive ability and two psychic powers. Surely this can't be correct, can it?


CHAOS DAEMONS MISCELLANEOUS

• Be'lakor picks 2 psychic powers from the dark hereticus discipline. However, 3 of the 6 powers in that discipline only affect heretic astartes, not daemons. Is Be'lakor able to change the HERETIC ASTARTES keyword in those powers to DAEMON, or is he stuck just using Smite, Infernal Gaze, Death Hex & Gift of Chaos when taken as part of an all daemon force?


XENOS INDEX 1 FAQs
Spoiler:

CRAFTWORLD AELDARI

• The psychic power Fortune says: 'If a unit already has an ability with a similar effect (e.g. The Avatar of Khaine's Molten Body ability) this psychic power does not affect them.' How similar does the effect of an ability have to be for Fortune not to affect a unit? Does this apply to any ability that is able to ignore wounds, no matter what the roll required to ignore the wound is (even like Spirit Stones, which require a 6+ to ignore a wound)? What about abilities that are only able to ignore mortal wounds but not regular wounds (like a Ghosthelm)?

• Karandras' Shadow Strike ability says 'add 1 to hit rolls for attacks for Karandras that target a unit in cover'. What exactly is a 'unit in cover' as that term is not actually used in the rules at all? Is this ability only supposed to apply to Karandras' shooting attacks that target an enemy unit that is getting the benefit of cover? Or is it supposed to also affect his melee attacks as well, and if so, exactly what criteria is used to determine when the target unit is 'in cover' or not, especially when targeting a non-INFANTRY unit (that typically needs to be both entirely on terrain and obscured by at least 50% in order to get the benefit of cover).

• If a model uses its Warp Jump Generator ability to Fall Back in the movement phase, is it then able to fire in the subsequent shooting phase because it had the FLY keyword when it fell back?


DRUKHARI AELDARI

• In matched play, how many points does a Crucible of Malediction cost?


YNNARI AELDARI

• Can a Soulburst action allow a Ynnari unit that is 4" away from the enemy to 'fight as if it were in the Fight phase', use its 3" Pile In move to get within 1" of the enemy and make melee attacks against it? Or must the Ynnari unit already be within 1" of an enemy unit to be able to 'fight as if it were in the Fight phase'?

• The Strength from Death soulburst abilities all say that a unit is able do something 'as if it were' a different phase. Does this mean these abilities cannot be used in that actual phase mentioned in the rule? For example, can the soulburst action that allows a Ynnari unit to 'shoot as if it were your Shooting phase' be used during the Shooting phase (thereby allowing a Ynnari unit to fire twice in the same Shooting phase)? Or can these actions only be utilized in a different phase? Another example: can the Soulburst action that allows a Ynnari unit to 'fight as if it were in the Fight phase', be used during the Fight phase to allow the unit to attack before it would normally be able to? For example, if a Ynnari unit is charged by enemy unit 'B', and in the Fight phase, another unit is destroyed within 3" (by enemy charging unit 'A'), can the Ynnari unit use a Soulburst action to fight before enemy unit 'B' gets a chance to fight, even though they had charged?

• If the Strength From Death ability allows a psyker to cast a psychic power in the enemy's turn of a matched play game, does this still follow the normal Psychic Focus rules and prevent the enemy from casting that same psychic power that same turn (assuming both players are using the same psychic powers)? Or conversely, in a matched play game, if the enemy casts a psychic power and then a psyker using the Strength From Death ability wants to cast the same power (in the same turn), is he not able to because of the Psychic Focus rules?

• When a unit uses the Strength From Death ability to 'move as if it were your Movement phase', does this movement count as the unit having moved in 'the preceding Movement phase'? For example, if a unit with heavy weapons remains stationary in its Movement phase, but then in its Shooting phase uses a Soulburst action to move, are models in that unit then able to fire their heavy weapons without penalty because they remained stationary in the previous Movement phase? Or does the fact that the models moved as if it was their Movement phase (during their Shooting phase) mean they suffer the normal -1 to hit for moving and shooting their heavy weapons?


NECRONS

• Can the Powers of C'Tan target enemy units that are also within 1" of friendly units? In the case of Time's Arrow, can it target an enemy CHARACTER (that has less than 10 wounds) even if that character is not the closest visible enemy target?

• Currently Anrakyr the Traveler, Illuminor Szeras and Triarch Praetorians all cannot utilize the transport abilities of Ghost Arks (the two characters only), Night Scythes & Monoliths as none of them have a <DYNASTY> keyword, which is required to be embarked or set up on a tomb world. Is this intentional?

• If an enemy transport is set up during the game (such as a Space Marine Drop Pod or Tyranid Tyrannocyte) and it immediately disembarks passengers, is a Deathmark unit allowed to use its Ethereal Interception ability to target a passenger unit that just disembarked this way? Or can they only target the transport itself (before it disembarks its passengers)?

• Can a Ghost Ark use its Repair Barge ability on a unit within 3", even if another Ghost Ark has already used its Repair Barge ability on that same unit that same turn? Other abilities that return models/wounds to a unit prohibit multiple uses on the same unit within a single turn (such as Ork Dok's Tools, Space Marine Narthecium, etc.).

• Is the Ghost Ark supposed to have the Open-topped ability? It was open-topped in previous editions and it appears to be open-topped, so just making sure.

• Should the Doomsday Ark have the Hovering ability like the Ghost Ark has (as they are models with nearly identical dimensions)?

• Are units that arrive via a Night Scythe's Invasion Beams or a Monolith's Eternity Gate supposed to be able to move in the same turn they arrive? Because as written, they are units arriving mid-turn and therefore follow the rules for 'Reinforcements' in the rulebook (page 177), and therefore cannot move any further in the movement phase that they arrive in.

• If a C'tan Shard of the Deceiver uses its Grand Illusion ability to redeploy a Ghost Ark with a unit embarked on it, does this count as 1 or 2 units being redeployed?

• If a C'tan Shard of the Deceiver uses its Grand Illusion ability to redeploy a Ghost Ark, Night Scythe or Monolith, are any units that disembark from those vehicles on the first turn also bound by the prohibition of not being to charge on the first turn?


XENOS INDEX 2 FAQs
Spoiler:

ORKS

• Can the Mob Rule's ability to use the number of models in the unit as their Ld characteristic then be passed onto other Ork units within 6", or is the ability to use the Ld of a unit within 6" limited to the actual Ld characteristic listed in a model's profile? For example, Ork unit A, comprised of 30 models, is within 6" of another Ork unit B, which only has a few models remaining. Can Ork unit B use the Ld 30 of Ork unit A?

• Mad Dok Grotsnik's Super Cybork Body doesn't mention that it cannot be combined with Dok's Tools or Biker Kok's Tools, the way other Cybork Bodies do, is this an oversight or intentional? For example, if Mad Dok Grotsnik suffers an unsaved wound, does he get to roll to ignore that wound using his Dok's Tools (6+) and if that roll fails, again with his Super Cybork Body (5+)?

• If a unit of Stormboyz that Advanced in the previous movement phase declares a charge while within 6" of a friendly Ork Warboss do the Stormboyz still need to roll for their Full Throttle ability (to see if they die on a roll of '1')? Or can they opt just to use the Warboss's Waaagh! ability and ignore their own Full Throttle ability?

• The Tankbustas datasheet says: 'for every 5 Tankbustas or Boss Nobz in the unit, it may be accompanied by up to 2 Bomb Squigs. The use of 'or' in that sentence is a bit confusing. Is the rule just trying to say: 'for every 5 models in the unit (excluding other Bomb Squigs), it may be accompanied by up to 2 Bomb Squigs'? Or something else? And just to clarify, you cannot take more than 1 Boss Nob in the unit, correct?


T'AU EMPIRE

• Can a Tau Commander's declare a Mont'ka or Kauvon while in a Manta Hold? Or must the model be on the table in order to make this declaration?

• If a Mont'ka has been declared by a regular T'au commander, can Farsight also immediately declare his own Mont'ka during the same turn? Or can his second Mont'ka only be declared on any subsequent turn after a Mont'ka/Kauyon was declared? Similarly, If a Kauyon has been declared by a regular T'au commander, can Shadowsun also immediately declare her own Kauyon during the same turn? Or can her second Kauyon only be declared on any subsequent turn after a Mont'ka/Kauyon was declared?

• When Kauyon or Mont'ka is declared at the start of a turn, do the units within 6" of the commander immediately gain the benefits of the ability, even if the commander (or those units) subsequently move more than 6" away from each other? Or is the 6" range to the commander only checked in the shooting phase (when the ability's effects actually matter), meaning a unit that started the turn more than 6" away from the commander could potentially benefit from it in the shooting phase if the commander moved to within 6" of them?

• Is the 6" range for an Ethereal's Invocation of the Elements ability checked only once in the movement phase right when the elemental power is declared, and then the affected units can still benefit from the ability even if they, or the Ethereal end up more than 6" away from each other? Or is the range instead only checked when the effects of the elemental power would actually matter (in the morale phase for Calm of Tides, in the shooting phase for Storm of Fire, when a unit suffers a wound for Sense of Stone and in the movement phase for Zephyr's Grace)?

• If a T'au infantry/battlesuit unit contains a model that has already lost wounds, can the Saviour Protocols ability still allow a new wound to be allocated onto a Drones unit within 3"? Or in that case must the new wound be allocated to the model that has already lost wounds?

• Just to clarify: after the errata in Index: Xenos 2 FAQ (v1.0), Drone's Saviour Protocols ability still occurs after the infantry/battlesuit unit is successfully wounded, but before they would take any saving throws, correct?

• If a T'au Infantry unit that has Drones accompanying them is deployed inside a Tidewall where do their accompanying Drones need to be deployed, as they're supposed to be placed in coherency with their unit, but can't be because they're not allowed inside the Tidewall? Can they just deploy anywhere within 2" of the Tidewall that their parent unit is embarked in? Or can a unit that has accompanying Drones not be deployed directly into a Tidewall?

• T'au Photon Grenades only affect enemy units 'until the end of the turn'. In 8th edition, a turn is only the current player's turn, which makes Photon Grenades only useful for overwatch (where the negative modifier will affect the enemy's melee attacks in the same turn). Should this not instead be: 'until the end of the next turn' or are Photon Grenades designed to only be used during overwatch?


TYRANIDS

• When a unit suffering from Instinctive Behavior wishes to shoot, but the nearest visible enemy unit is within 1" of a friendly Tyranid unit, are they able to skip this enemy unit and fire at the next nearest visible enemy unit, or do they just not get to fire at all in this instance?

• When a Hive Tyrant has the Catalyst psychic power cast on itself and has a unit of Tyrant Guard within 3" loses a wound, which of these abilities is resolved first (as they both occur when the Hive Tyrant loses a wound)? Is this covered by the 'Sequencing' rules in the rulebook (pg 179), which means the player whose turn it is gets to choose which of these abilities gets resolved first (which typically means the Tyranid player's opponent will get to choose)?

• In matched play, does a Hive Tyrant really pay 0 points for monstrous rending claws compared to monstrous scything talons which cost 31 points? This seems like a mistake, especially as standard rending claws are more points (2) than standard scything talons (0).

• Does a Tervigon has to pay points for its Stinger Salvo, as its datasheet strangely says it can 'fire stinger salvoes', not that it is 'armed' with them (like every other weapon does)?

• Is a Broodlord affected by his own Brood Telepathy ability? Or does it only apply to standard Genestealer units (as the word 'Genestealer' in the ability is not a bolded keyword)?

• In a matched play game, is an opponent effectively able to kill the Deathleaper simply by keeping the target of the 'It's After Me!' ability inside a transport until turn 4 (thereby preventing Deathleaper from arriving on the table)? Or is Deathleaper allowed to deploy within 6" of a transport if its target character is inside of it?

• In the unit datasheets, anytime a model has scything talons (including monstrous and massive scything talons), they are referred to as a 'pair' (of scything talons). In the points summary, while there is a listing for 'two pairs' of massive & monstrous scything talons, the standard listing just calls them 'massive scything talons' and 'monstrous scything talons' (with no mention of them being 'a pair'). Does that mean in matched play if a Hive Tyrant has just a single pair of monstrous scything talons, it has to pay 62 points total for them (31 points each monstrous scything talons of the pair)? Even though the 'two pairs' option is just 41 points?

• Is a Tyrannocyte only able to carry a single infantry unit (of up to 20 models), or is it supposed to be like the other race's transports that are able to carry multiple infantry units so long as the total doesn't exceed 20 wounds?

• When a model equipped with a lash whip is slain in the fight phase, the rules say to 'leave it where it is' until it gets the chance to attack back. How exactly is a slain model in this state treated?
    A) Do aura abilities from a slain model that is left on the table still apply to other friendly units (does a slain Tyranid Prime's Alpha Warrior ability still apply to nearby Tyranid Shrike/Warrior units)?
    B) Do enemy models still need to pile-in/consolidate towards a slain model that is left on the table if it is the closest model to them?
    C) If another enemy unit that has yet to fight is only within 1" of a slain model that has been left on the table, are they able to use the presence of the slain model to declare a fight (and then pile in to potentially attack)?
    D) Can a slain model that has been left on the table still move (namely make a pile in move)?
    E) When the slain model that has been left on the table does get a chance to fight, does it need to be within 1" of an enemy model (or within 1" of a friendly model of its own unit that is itself within 1" of an enemy model) in order to be able to attack? Or does it just automatically get to attack whenever the rest of its unit attacks, no matter where the model is actually located on the table?
    F) If a slain model that has been left on the table has all of its potential foes killed by a different friendly unit before it gets to attack, is the model immediately removed? Or do you wait until the end of that fight phase to see if any other enemy units end up moving close enough to be attacked? Or does the model simply remain in play forever until the next time it gets to fight in a fight phase?


GENESTEALER CULT

• When a Genestealer Cult unit is being set-up on the battlefield via the Cult Ambush ability, what happens if there is no place to put the unit on the table that meets all the required criteria? For example, if a unit has to be placed within 6" of a table edge and not within 9" of the enemy, and there is simply no space along the specified table edge that isn't within 9" of an enemy model, is the unit destroyed? Or can it just wait until next turn to try again? If its the latter, do you roll again for the unit on the Cult Ambush table to see how it arrives in the next turn, or do you use the same results again that you rolled from the previous turn?

• Can a character that was previously wounded use the Unquestioning Loyalty ability to pass off a new wound to another model in its own unit? For example, a Magus that was already wounded (from a previous turn) suffers a new wound, would he be able to use Unquestioning Loyalty to pass that new wound off to a familiar in his own unit?

• When a Patriarch embarks on a transport, does it really only count as a single infantry model (against the maximum capacity of the transport) despite being a fairly large model that has 6 Wounds?

• If a Patriarch is accompanied by any Familiars, is it still able to use the Swift and Deadly ability (to charge even when it Advanced)? Or can that ability only be used when no other model is part of the Patriarch's unit?

• Does the Acolyte Iconward's Nexus of Devotion ability really only work on models within 6" as opposed to units within 6", like most every other 'ignore wound' ability does (Space Marine Narthecium, Ork Painboy, etc.)?


---------------


IMPERIAL ARMOUR INDEX: FORCES OF THE ADEPTUS ASTARTES FAQs
Spoiler:

ADEPTUS ASTARTES BATTLEFIELD SUPPORT - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• The Tarantula Sentry Gun's Automated Artillery ability describes how a Tarantula fires when it is equipped with a twin heavy bolter or twin lascannon, but not what to do when it is equipped with a twin assault cannon or multi-melta. If equipped with either of those latter weapons, does the Tarantula just not follow the Automated Artillery ability rules?

• The Tarantula Sentry Gun's Automated Artillery ability says just that it must target the nearest enemy unit of the specified type 'within range', but makes no mention of being able to ignore that closest enemy unit if it is not visible or is within 1" of a friendly unit. Is a Tarantula able to ignore enemy units that aren't visible or within 1" of a friendly unit, or are they simply unable to fire in these situations? For example, if the closest enemy INFANTRY unit to a Tarantula (that is equipped with a twin heavy bolter) isn't visible or is within 1" of a friendly unit, is the Tarantula able to fire at the next closest viable enemy INFANTRY unit, or can it not fire at all in that case?

• The Tarantula Sentry Gun's Automated Artillery ability says: 'However in all cases this model may only target enemy CHARACTER models if they are the closest model.' Is this supposed to reference CHARACTER models that have less than 10 wounds? Or are Tarantulas really not able to target enemy CHARACTER models that have 10+ wounds unless they are the closest model?

• The Tarantula Sentry Gun's Automated Artillery ability says: 'However in all cases this model may only target enemy CHARACTER models if they are the closest model.' If a Tarantula Sentry Gun armed with a twin heavy bolter wishes to fire, and the closest enemy unit is a non-INFANTRY unit (which it ignores since it is a non-INFANTRY unit), but the nearest enemy INFANTRY unit is a CHARACTER model, what happens? Is the Tarantula able to ignore the CHARACTER and fire at the next closest viable enemy INFANTRY unit or is it not able to fire at all?

• The Tarantula Air Defense Battery Fully Automated Weapons ability says that it must target the nearest visible enemy unit that can FLY. What if the nearest enemy unit that can FLY is out of range or within 1" of a friendly unit? Does the Tarantula not fire at all in that case, or does it default to firing at the nearest non-FLYING enemy unit instead? Also, that same ability says that if there are no visible enemy units that can FLY, the Tarantula must target the nearest non-FLYING enemy unit (but no mention of visibility here). So in this case, if the nearest non-FLYING enemy unit isn't visible or is within 1" of a friendly unit, can the Tarantula fire at the next nearest viable target, or is it just unable to fire?

• The Castellum Stronghold fortification is a 'Realm of Battle tile', but each bunker must be considered a model (as they have a profile of characteristics) in order to be attacked, etc. As the bunkers are located along the edges of the 2'x2' tile, they all cannot physically fit inside several of the deployment maps. In this case is the Castellum Stronghold simply not allowed in that game, or is a player still allowed to set it up in these situations as long as they attempt to put as much of the Castellum Stronghold in their deployment zone as possible?


IMPERIAL ARMOUR CHARACTER APPENDIX

• Does Armenneus Valthex's Battle Alchemy ability apply only to 'boltguns' and 'storm bolters', not to any other type of 'bolter' weapon, such as: twin boltgun, the boltgun portion of a combi-weapon, master-crafted boltgun and hurricane bolter?

• When Lias Issodon uses his Master of Ambush ability to set-up up himself and 3 friendly units in the shadows, does this count as a single unit being deployed (with all 4 units being deployed at once)? Or do you instead place each of those units separately in the shadows one at a time as a separate deployment?


IMPERIAL ARMOUR INDEX: FORCES OF THE ASTRA MILITARUM FAQs
Spoiler:

ASTRA MILITARUM - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• The Astra Militarum models that accompany a Hades Breaching Drill are called 'Veteran' (and 'Veteran Sergeant'), yet have a BS of '4+' and a Ld of '7' (and a Ld of '8' for the Vet Sergeant, equal to a Company Commander!). However Veteran Astra Militarum (in Index: Imperium 2) have a BS of '3+' and a Ld of '6' (Ld of '7' for the Vet Sergeant). Are the Veterans that come with the Hades Breaching Drill actually supposed to have a BS of '3+' and a Ld of '6' (Ld of '7' for the Vet Sergeant)? or are they not supposed to be Veterans at all (and have stats that match standard Astra Militarum infantry)?

• The hellstrike, hellfury and skystrike missiles (on the Avenger Strike Fighter, Lightning Strike Fighter, Thunderbolt Heavy Fighter, Valkyrie Sky Talon, Vendetta Gunship & Vulture Gunship) all have no limitations on how many times they can be fired during the game. Can a model equipped with 6 skystrike missiles really fire all 6 of them every turn along with all its other weapons? Or are these supposed to be once per battle weapons like the hunter-killer missile?

• In matched play, the Stygies Thunderer Siege Tank with a Demolisher cannon costs 210 points, compared to a Leman Russ Demolisher (found in Index: Imperium 2) with a Demolisher Cannon and Heavy Bolter that comes to 180 points, despite the fact that the only difference between the two is that the Thunderer has +1 Wound (and doesn't have a Heavy Bolter). Is this a mistake or is +1 Wound really supposed to be worth 38 extra points?

• All of the Macharius tanks (Macharius Heavy Tank, Macharius Omega, Macharius Vanquisher & Marcharius Vulcan) lack the adamantium tracks melee weapon that the Baneblade tanks have, despite the models all being nearly identical in size (including the size of their tank treads). Was this an oversight, or intentional?

• The Primaris Redoubt fortification is now a 'model', which means it must be wholly set-up within a player's deployment zone. Given that this is a 2'x2' tile, it cannot physically fit inside several of the deployment maps. In this case is the Primaris Redoubt simply not allowed in that game, or is a player still allowed to set it up in these situations as long as they attempt to put as much of the Primaris Redoubt in their deployment zone as possible?

• The Tarantula Battery's Automated Artillery ability says just that it must target the nearest enemy unit of the specified type 'within range', but makes no mention of being able to ignore that closest enemy unit if it is not visible or is within 1" of a friendly unit. Is a Tarantula able to ignore enemy units that aren't visible or within 1" of a friendly unit, or are they simply unable to fire in these situations? For example, if the closest enemy INFANTRY unit to a Tarantula (that is equipped with a twin heavy bolter) isn't visible or is within 1" of a friendly unit, is the Tarantula able to fire at the next closest viable enemy INFANTRY unit, or can it not fire at all in that case?

• The Tarantula Battery's Automated Artillery ability says: 'However in all cases this model may only target enemy CHARACTER models if they are the closest model.' Is this supposed to reference CHARACTER models that have less than 10 wounds? Or are Tarantulas really not able to target enemy CHARACTER models that have 10+ wounds unless they are the closest model?

• The Tarantula Battery's Automated Artillery ability says: 'However in all cases this model may only target enemy CHARACTER models if they are the closest model.' If a Tarantula Sentry Gun armed with a twin heavy bolter wishes to fire, and the closest enemy unit is a non-INFANTRY unit (which it ignores since it is a non-INFANTRY unit), but the nearest enemy INFANTRY unit is a CHARACTER model, what happens? Is the Tarantula able to ignore the enemy CHARACTER and fire at the next closest enemy INFANTRY unit or is it not able to fire at all?

• The icarus lascannon & icarus quad lascannon are listed as being 'Heavy D6' & 'Heavy 4D6' weapons respectively. Yet in every other book (both Imperial Armour Index: Forces of the Adeptus Astartes and Index: Imperium 2, for example) they are 'Heavy 1' and 'Heavy 4'. Which of these versions is correct?

• Is the 8" range of the Defensive Heavy Stubber on an Avenger Strike Fighter a typo? In previous editions the range of this weapon was 36", so the reduction to 8" seems like it is perhaps a mistake.


DEATH KORPS OF KRIEG - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• In matched play, shouldn't the Death Korps of Krieg Command Squad be limited to one per DEATH KORPS OF KRIEG OFFICER in the same Battle-forged detachment? Same for the Death Korps Death Rider Command Squadron, shouldn't that be limited to one per DEATH KORPS DEATH RIDER CAVALRY OFFICER in the same Battle-forged detachment?

• Why are the Death Korps of Krieg unable to take a Hades Drill with an accompanying Death Korps Combat Engineer Squad while there is still a bundle sold on the Forge World website consisting of a Hades Drill together with a Death Korps Combat Engineer Squad (called the 'Death Korps of Krieg Subterranean Assault Squad')?


ELYSIAN DROP TROOPS - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• In matched play, shouldn't the Elysian Command Squad be limited to one per ELYSIAN DROP TROOPS OFFICER in the same Battle-forged detachment?

• The 'Warhammer 40,000 - Imperial Armour Index: Forces of the Astra Militarum - update version 1.0' says that' 'Models that have the AERONAUTICA IMPERIALIS keywords on their datasheets replace them in all instances with ELYSIAN DROP TROOPS. However, in the case of the Officer of the Fleet (from Index: Imperium 2), this means that his Strafing Coordinates ability now applies to every single ELYSIAN DROP TROOPS unit (which is super powerful). Was this intended, or should his ability only apply to ELYSIAN DROP TROOP units that also have the FLY keyword?

• The Elysian Drop Troops Army List rules says that: all ELYSIAN DROP TROOPS models gain the Aerial Drop ability, but then goes on to clarify that TAUROS units also benefit from from this ability, which is strange because TAUROS units are already ELYSIAN DROP TROOPS models, and so naturally have this ability. Just to double-check: are Valkyries, Valkyrie Sky Talons, Vendetta Gunships, Vulture Gunships, Thunderbolt Heavy Fighters, Lighting Strike Fighters & Avenger Strike Fighters that replace their AERONAUTICA IMPERIALIS keywords with the ELYSIAN DROP TROOPS keywords supposed to have the Aerial Drop Ability or not?

• The 'Warhammer 40,000 - Imperial Armour Index: Forces of the Astra Militarum - update version 1.0' fixed the plasma pistol's supercharged Damage characteristic (changing it from '3' down to '1'), but the Plasma gun's supercharged Damage characteristic is still listed as '3' on the Elysian Drop Troops Wargear summary page (pg 120). Should this also be changed down to '1'?


RENEGADES & HERETICS - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• The 'Warhammer 40,000 - Imperial Armour Index: Forces of the Astra Militarum - update version 1.0' changed the Renegades & Heretics Chaos Spawn's INFANTRY keyword to BEAST. However, the Chaos Spawn still has the <CHAOS COVENANT> keyword, which can only affect INFANTRY units. Are Renegade & Heretics Chaos Spawn not supposed to have the <CHAOS COVENANT> keyword, or are they supposed to benefit from a chaos covenant even though they are not an INFANTRY unit?

• Units with the Uncertain Worth ability do not have a listed Leadership characteristic until they take their first Morale test. What happens if such a unit suffers an attack that requires knowledge of the unit's Leadership characteristic value, such as with the Callidus Assassin's neural shredder? In that situation do you immediately generate the model's Ld characteristic (via Uncertain Worth) or does such an attack have no effect on the unit because it doesn't have a Ld characteristic yet?

• The Renegade Commander & Renegade Enforcer have the Uncertain Worth and Fanatic abilities, both of which are only used when the unit has to take a Morale test. However, as both these units are comprised of only a single model (and therefore never have to take a Morale test), is there any point to them having these abilities?


IMPERIAL ARMOUR INDEX: FORCES OF CHAOS FAQs
Spoiler:

THE HELLFORGED - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• The Hellforged Sicaran Venator's Undying Hatred ability & The Hellforged Cerberus Heavy Destroyer's Eternal Hatred ability both mention them causing a casualty in the 'preceding turn', which, when they're firing their weapon (outside of overwatch) means the opposing player's turn. Are these abilities really only supposed to work if the model causes a casualty in the preceding player turn? Or are these rules supposed to refer to the previous 'battle round' instead?

• The 'Warhammer 40,000 - Imperial Armour Index: Forces of Chaos - update version 1.0' clarified that a Hellforged Rapier Battery's crew and guns each form a separate unit (one unit of guns, one unit of crew). Yet, the Artillery & Daemon Unleashed abilities both refer to crewman 'from the same unit'. Are references to crew 'from the same unit' supposed to actually be crew that the guns 'were deployed with'?

• The Hellforged Dreadclaw Drop Pod & Hellforged Kharybdis Assault Claw both do not mention that CULT OF DESTRUCTION infantry models take up the space of 3 models, is this an oversight?

• Should the Hellforged Mastodon be able to transport a Hellforged Rapier Battery (and if so, how many models does a Rapier gun model count as when being transported)? It seems strange that a Kharybdis Assault Claw can do this, but a Mastodon cannot.

• Is the Hellforged Mastodon's In the Belly of the Beast ability really supposed to be able to kill a Dreadnought (if you roll a '1' when disembarking only Dreadnoughts)?


EYRINE CULTS - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• A Rhino disembarking from a Chaos Sokar Pattern Stormbird Gunship has to 'exit via the rear' of the Stormbird, what exactly does this mean?


CHILDREN OF THE WARP - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• Does the Dark Pact Word Bearers stratagem have any affect on Arch-Daemonic Rituals? If yes, what happens if the summoning model using this stratagem rolls triples (as the stratagem only ignores mortal wounds for rolling triples, but the Arch-Daemonic Ritual slays the summoning model outright if triples are rolled)?

• Zarakynel has the souleater blade which, on a 4+ to wound, inflicts 3 mortal wounds 'instead of its normal damage'. If Zarakynel needs either a 5+ or 6+ to cause a wound (vs T8+/T14+, respectively), what happens when she rolls a 4 to wound in those cases? Is it a failure to wound (no damage), or 3 mortal wounds?

• Are the Spined Chaos Beast & Giant Chaos Spawn's ALLEGIANCE faction keyword (chosen as one of the 4 chaos gods) considered to be the same as the Heretic Astartes <MARK OF CHAOS> faction keyword and the KHORNE, NURGLE, TZEENTCH and SLAANESH faction keywords that other Chaos Daemons have? In other words, if an ability affected models with the NURGLE keyword, would this apply equally to a Heretic Astartes unit with the NURGLE mark of chaos, a Plaguebearer unit (which naturally has the NURGLE faction keyword) and also to a Spined Chaos Beast with NURGLE allegiance?


IMPERIAL ARMOUR INDEX: XENOS FAQs
Spoiler:

NECRONS - IMPERIAL ARMOUR
• The Tomb Citadel fortification is a 'Realm of Battle tile', but each element must be considered a model (as they have a profile of characteristics) in order to be attacked, etc. As these elements are all located in the corners of the 2'x2' tile, they all cannot physically fit inside several of the deployment maps. In this case is the Tomb Citadel simply not allowed in that game, or is a player still allowed to set it up in these situations as long as they attempt to put as much of the Tomb Citadel in their deployment zone as possible?


TYRANIDS - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• The 'Warhammer 40,000 - Imperial Armour Index: Xenos - update version 1.0' clarified that the Barbed Hierodule & Harridan are both equipped with 'massive scything talons' and the Scythed Hierodule is equipped with 'two pairs of massive scything talons'. However, in the Tyranids Points Values section, this weapon is listed as 'Massive scything talons (single/pair)' for '60/90' points. Does the 'single' points value here refer to the massive scything talons that the Barbed Hierodule & Harridan have, while the 'pair' points value refer to the two pairs of massive scything talons that the Scythed Hierodule has? Because this is different than how the points for scything talons are listed in Index: Xenos 2 (there, two pairs of scything talons are listed as 'two pairs'). Or is the Scythed Hierodule really supposed to be paying 180 points for two pairs of massive scything talons and are both the Barbed Hierodule & Harridan supposed to pay 90 points for a pair of massive scything talons?


ORKS - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• Ork Mek Boss Bugzzgob's Kustom Force Field ability says: 'If this model is equipped with a kustom force field...' but Buzzgob not described as being equipped with a kustom force field on his datasheet, nor is he given the option to do so. So is Buzzgob supposed to come equipped with a kustom force field automatically, and if so, in matched play do points need to be paid for it?

• The Ork Meka-Dread must take either a Mega-Charga or Kustom Force Field as a wargear option, but for matched play neither of these are listed in the Orks points summary. Are these both supposed to be 0 points or are their points costs just missing?

• The 'Warhammer 40,000 - Imperial Armour Index: Xenos - update version 1.0' clarified how a Meka-Dread can take 'rokkit-bomms', but for matched play, rokkit-bomms are not listed in the Orks point summary'. Are they supposed to be 0 points, or is the 'rokkit bomm racks' (listed as 13 points in the 'Orks Wargear' section) supposed to be the same thing as 'rokkit-bomms'? Because there doesn't seem to be any mention of 'rokkit bomm racks' on any datasheet. And just FYI, rokkit-bomms do not have a weapon profile in the Orks ranged weapons summary.


DRUKHARI - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• Should the Tantalus be prohibited from transporting Hellions and Scourges (like Raiders & Venoms are)?


T'AU EMPIRE - IMPERIAL ARMOUR

• Should XV9 Hazard Battlesuits be T6 instead of T5? Only because every single other Battlesuit had its Toughness raised by +1 from their 7th edition rules to 8th edition, so its really odd that this one suit type did not.

• When the XV109 Y'vahra Battlesuit uses the Overcharged Burst ability, does this improve both its ionic discharge cannon and its phased plasma-flamer, or does only one of those two weapons get to fire using the improved 'nova' profile?

• The XV107 R'varna Battlesuit has a power level of 19 and in matched play 429 points. The XV109 Yvahra Battlesuit has a power level of 20, but in matched play costs 395 points (a higher power level, but a lower points value). Are either the points values or power levels transposed between these two models?

• Either the power level or the points cost of the KX139 Ta'unar Supremacy Armour seems to be in error, especially when compared to the Aeldari Revenant Titan (which is 60 power & 1,200 points no matter what weapons it takes). The KX139 is 55 power level, yet even with its cheapest weapon options, it is only 1,152 points. Is its power level too low or is its points cost too high?

• Does Longstrike's Fire Caste Exemplar (+1 to hit rolls on friendly Hammerhead's within 6") apply only to TX7 Hammerhead Gunships as written, or should it also benefit TX7 Heavy Bombardment Hammerhead Gunships & TX7 Fire Support Hammerhead Gunships?






This message was edited 323 times. Last update was at 2017/08/21 23:00:21


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

Okay, I've gone through and added quite a few of your questions so far (thanks for all the submissions!). I'm still not all the way there yet, so don't fret if you don't see your question added to the list yet. Please note though, in some cases I might be adding your question in a different way than you wrote it...for example maybe you wrote it as a question about a specific ability, and I've changed it to be more of a general rules question.

As I add your questions to the original post, I'll be going through and deleting your posts, as a way to keep this thread nice and tidy, but also for me to be able to keep track of which posts I've already looked at and which I haven't yet.

In some cases, if I feel like your question is clearly answered by the rules, or are so pedantic that the vast majority of players/tournament judges would easily come to an answer, I'm not going to include them in the list and I'll be deleting your post as well (again, just to keep things tidy), but I'll try to post a reply to them to explain why I feel this way about them. If you think I'm wrong, feel free to respond once stating your case a second time.

Throc wrote:I have one similar to the shooting question in the op. If a model behind another friendly unit can see (LoS questions not withstanding) an enemy unit can it then shoot through a friendly unit?

I know a LOT of people have similar questions to this, so in that regard it probably is a good FAQ question, but I also think its just a matter of people getting used to 8e and then those questions just automatically go away. And if not, I think we can safely guarantee that tons of other players will be submitting that question to GW, so I don't think we need to make sure to include on this list.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:First the general questions -

- Do friendly units block line of sight? Can I see past another squad to fire at an enemy unit?

- how does variable damage work? Do I roll after each unsaved wound, or do I roll before firing the weapon and apply the result to all of the shots fired?

Same as what I responded above regarding units blocking line of sight. I know these are common questions right now, but I do think its just because the 8e rules are so different, not because they're actually unclear in these particular cases.

Aeri wrote:Do Auras stack? (for example Drone controller)
(Rulebook states that all modifiers stack, but some argue that an aura works only once)

Do Models that Deep Strike at the end of the movement phase count as having moved?

The rulebook section on 'reinforcements' covers that units arriving as reinforcement count as having moved. If there is some different connotation concerning units arriving specifically at the 'end' of the movement phase, you'll need to provide me some examples so I know what to write.

As for your Aura question, I think its too general to be included like that, because some auras are going to specify that they stack/don't stack right in their text, so there's no way GW could make a blanket ruling. Instead, I think each instance will have to be FAQ'd separately.

Kanluwen wrote:An errata I think that needs to be done...

Astra Militarum:
Infantry and Veteran Squads--Sergeants come equipped with a Laspistol and Chainsword OR a Lasgun.
Scions--Tempestors come equipped with a Hot-shot Laspistol OR a Hot-shot Lasgun.

Can you please explain further why you think this is something unclear that needs to be clarified, cause I'm not seeing it with what you've written so far.

Traditio wrote:I have a question about IG:

Does Gaze affect both friendly and enemy models?

I need more information on what you are referring to, please!

tydrace wrote:Just to be clear, do only bold and capitalized words indicate keywords for the sake of applying special rules? For example, Old One Eye's special rule Alpha Leader states it works for "friendly <HIVE FLEET> Carnifex units". The Rubric Marines special rule All is Dust states you "Add 1 to the saving throws for Rubric Marines". In both cases, the units they refer to are not written in bold nor are they capitalized. So is it correct to believe that Old One Eye (who has the CARNIFEX keyword) does NOT benefit from the Alpha Leader special rule, and that the Aspiring Sorcerer (who has the RUBRIC MARINES keyword) does NOT benefit from the All is Dust special rule?

Found it good to get two separate examples (one of one unit buffing another, and one of one unit buffing itself).

I think this is a valid point, but I also think it is probably way too general for GW to be able to address this question as a general thing. I've included the Old One Eye question specifically and sadly that's the way I think it has to go (every case individually).

Do you think the Rubric Marine question is a real issue (people thinking All Is Dust might apply to the Sorceror)?

gnofry wrote:Ragnar Blackmane's Fenrisian Wolves are 2" faster than the normal Fenrisian wolves. Which is correct?

I added all your questions (more or less) except for this one. Since these are named Wolves (not just generic 'Fenrisian Wolves') there's no reason I can see they can't have different stats than standard Fenrisian Wolves. If they were just called Fenrisian Wolves but had a different MV characteristic, then I think that would be some indication of a possible typo, but as it reads now, I just don't personally see the point in asking the question personally.

Gordon Shumway wrote:Can Helbrutes replace two fists for two Helbrute hammers or two power scourges? The wargear options is worded differently for those weapons than missle launchers which specifies the Helbrute can replace one fist with a missle launcher.

I added all your questions except the specific bit about a Helbrute taking two hammers. I can see why taking two power scourges would be crazy good, but as I'm reading it I don't see any advantage to taking a 2nd hammer, so therefore its kind of a moot point, no?

kiciek wrote:Tyranids:
When shooting T-fex with rupture cannon twice (stationary)
must we keep dice pairs separate, and we get bonus AP only on pair that has 2 hits? Or any 2 of 4 shoots boost AP?

OP - Can you once if few days or week gather questions into your post?

I think that's pretty clear answered by the ability's rule itself, which says 'both' instead of just saying '2' hits. So yeah, you'd have to keep track of each time you fire the weapon separately.

And yes, I'm definitely adding in peoples' questions as they post them here (and then deleting their posts once I have).

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2017/07/05 21:54:56


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

Okay, I added quite a few more submissions!

Here's a few more notes for the stuff I didn't add (or just notes in general in some cases) before I go ahead and delete these posts from the thread.

Aaranis wrote:Imperium 2, Adeptus Mechanicus:

- Concerning the Canticles of the Omnissiah, can you alternate at will between rolling and choosing them, or must you keep one of the two methods for the whole game ?

The rules seem incredibly clear when I read them. You either pick the Canticle, in which case you can't use the same one two turns in a row, or alternatively you choose to roll, in which case you might get lucky and be able to get the same one multiple turns in a row. What leads you to believe you have to make one choice for the whole game?

Khadorstompy wrote:Here is another couple questions for you.

If a Transport is in close combat and has rules to allow unit inside to shoot out. Can the unit shoot out while the transport is in close combat? What if the Transport has rules to shoot while in close combat.

If a transport falls back out of close combat can a unit inside still shoot?

The transport rules in question pretty much answer all of these explicitly (from what I can tell). The only thing that's perhaps mildly questionable is if the unit inside disembarks does it still count as having started the movement phase within 1" of the enemy (and therefore must fall back), so I added only that question.

Audustum wrote:The rules for pistols state that a pistol-bearer can shoot while within 1" of an enemy unit. The rules also state the pistol-bearer can shoot even if OTHER friendly unit are within 1" of an enemy unit, which seems to exclude the pistol-bearer's unit from consideration. They don't say anything about the pistol-bearer being able to shoot enemies within 1" of himself/herself.

So can the pistol-bearer shoot at an enemy unit within 1" of the pistol-bearer?

No the pistol rules state that the unit can fire even if other friendly units are within 1" of the SAME enemy unit. So what the rules are saying is this: If a model has a pistol, it can fire at an enemy unit within 1"...and it is even allowed to do this if another friendly unit is also within 1" of that same enemy unit (which would normally prohibit that enemy unit from being targeted).

AutocannonSidearm wrote:Many abilities e.g. Ezekiel's Book of Salvation target specific keywords, in this case: "DARK ANGELS INFANTRY or BIKER".

Should I read that as "DARK ANGELS INFANTRY or DARK ANGELS BIKER"?

I added that question for every single chapter I could find (Space Marines, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves). If you know of any other datasheets that have the same grammatical error, please let me know.

humanas wrote:-- If a model is armed with 2 different close combat weapons and uses both to strike, are all of its attacks resolved at the same time? For example, a Space Marine Captain armed with a P.Sword and a chainsword charges a unit of gaunts. After charge move and pile in, he is within 1" of 2 gaunts. He strikes 4 times with the P.sword. He scores 2 wounds. The defending player removes the 2 gaunts that are within 1". Is the cahinsword attack then lost due to no models being within 1"??

To me, this seems like the exact same question as different weapons in a shooting unit, and one that is ignoring the steps presented for how to resolve attacks. You check to see if your model is able to attack in the 'choose targets (3)' step of the fight phase. After that it does not matter if the attacking model is within 1" of an enemy unit. By step 5 'resolve close combat attacks', you can resolve your attacks one at a time, but that doesn't change anything at all about which units can be targeted and which models can be casualties by those attacks.

RiTides wrote:This thread is fantastic! Do you have a timeline for when you plan to send it on to GW?

No timeline yet, but I'm checking with people in the know the best way about getting this to GW and whether they'd rather have some questions ASAP and then get more later as they filter in, or whether they'd rather wait for a more thorough list before we send it in.

MagicJuggler wrote:
On another note, the Daemonic Ritual rule is poorly worded. Does it mean that:
A) only models with the Daemonic Ritual rule can summon any Daemon?
B) only Daemons can summon any model with the Daemonic Ritual rule?
C) only models with the Daemonic Ritual rule can summon other models with the Daemonic Ritual rule?

The Mark of Chaos question is already in the list in a slightly different form.

I've looked over the rules for Daemonic Ritual and it seems crystal clear to me. Any CHAOS CHARACTER can perform a Daemonic Ritual to summon a unit that has the Daemonic Ritual ability. What exactly is confusing?

Elric Greywolf wrote:
neogeo wrote:
The core rules clearly state, under reinforcements, that "units that arrive as reinforcements count as having moved for the purpose of firing heavy weapons."
What about the Grey Knight ability "Gate og Infinity" that allows a unit to be "set up anywhere on the battlefield"?
Are they covered by the same restriction?


Compare the wording here to the wording of Ork's "Da Jump." That one specifically calls out that yes, it counts. Gate specifically does NOT call it out, so no, it doesn't count.

Anytime there is one ability in the game that is similar to a bunch of other abilities that other factions have, but is different only because text is omitted (as opposed to specifically saying that it has an exception), it is probably worth putting it in a FAQ, because anytime a company takes on such a big project as redoing all of their factions, there is a LOT of stuff like this that can slip through the cracks that they didn't intend.

broxus wrote:In regards to the Furioso dreadnaught. Where the fists suppose to be included in the cost of the model? It currently is 52 points more than a base dreadnaught with similar stats before weapons are purchased for either unit.

Same points as I've made before regarding 'is this the right points value' questions. There needs to be definitive evidence that something is amiss. But the fact, in this case, that the Death Company dreadnought is also around the same points cost as the Furioso perhaps means that GW has placed a premium on Blood Angels Dreadnoughts for some reason? Maybe there are easy buffs they can get that make them much more deadly than other Dreads? I honestly don't know, but again, there needs to be a pretty thorough examination presented before I'm going to add questions like this into the list.

Mulletdude wrote:XENOS INDEX 2 FAQs

ORKS

• Does the Ork Boyz units lose the benefit from the Green Tide special rule if the unit drops below 20 models or is that a unit buff applied to the unit at the beginning of the game that lasts regardless of the number of models in the unit?

There are a TON of abilities like this throughout the rules (so if this is a question, then they all are). What gives you any indication that this buff might apply once they unit is below the specified number of models? It seems crystal clear to me, and I think 99% of players would probably also find it really clear.

bortass wrote: I believe this one was answered today in the Ad Mech faction focus:
• Are rules that trigger on a 'hit roll of 6+' as with Necron tesla weapons, affected by positive 'to hit' roll modifiers? For example, if a model firing a tesla weapon has a +1 modifier to its rolls to hit, does that now mean any roll of '5' or '6' would cause three hits instead of one?

It's in the paragraph about electro priests 6+ hit effect triggering on a 5 or 6 if there is a +1 modifier.

Not sure if I should have posted this or not, so feel free to delete...

Its fine to let me know about stuff like this, but GW needs to put this in a FAQ. Just having it mentioned in a faction focus that many people will never read just doesn't cut it. Plus, the faction focuses are written by a 3rd party (Frontline gaming), and while you'd assume that everything they mention in their articles would get fact-checked by GW's rules writers, you might be surprised that stuff can indeed slip through, or GW can change its mind when they actually get around to FAQ'ing it proper.

niv-mizzet wrote:Is the point cost of angelus boltguns correct? Seems excessive for a side-graded bolter especially when they can take plasma pistols, a demonstrably better weapon, for less cost.

I know Angelus Boltguns are from the Blood Angels, but again if you're complaining about points values on something, then give me a comparison on why you think it is so bad that must be a typo.

MagicJuggler wrote:A Valkyrie enters Hover Mode and charges a Leman Russ.

Can it subsequently turn off Hover Mode? If yes, does the mandatory move from Supersonic count as Withdrawing?

Given that a model with the FLY keyword can still fire even if it falls back, does this question really matter? If the Valkyrie switches off hover mode, it has to move away from the Leman Russ and end its move more than 1" away from enemy units (the requirement for falling back), can still shoot since it has the FLY keyword. So what is the real question? Can it advance and/or charge that same turn? I mean, I don't see any reason why the unit can't fall back while also following the Supersonic rule, so I think the answer to those two questions is clearly: no.

Is there some other issue I'm missing?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
On the topic of Unquestionable loyalty - it says the model is slain. Would that mean that multiwound models, such as Aberrants, would lose both wounds from a weapon due to the Unquestionable Loyalty that would otherwise normally only remove one ? Seems fairly inconsistent.

As for why Cult 'Unquestioning Loyalty' automatically kills a model (even if that model has 2 wounds remaining), that's just how GW wrote it...I don't really get why it is so strange. You control which models take the hit, so if you're putting it on a 2W guy, that's your fault.



This message was edited 15 times. Last update was at 2017/07/19 01:05:17


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

broxus wrote:
Do units inside of Baneblade troop transport variants get to shoot in overwatch? They are able to shoot in the normal shooting phase so it would seem they can overwatch also.

Unless the unit is the target of a charge (which I don't think they can be, as they 'can't be affected in any way') they don't get to fire overwatch. The rules would have to specifically grant them permission to do so. I know its jarring because units inside transports could overwatch in 7th edition, but there is no indication anywhere in the rules (that I can see) that implies embarked units can possibly fire overwatch when their transport is charged.

 kodos wrote:
with the FAQ being very clear on that one, Space Marines ATSKNF has no effect?
(no Marines has lower Moral than 6 therefore rolling a 6 before modifiers are applied never count as failed)
or does this not count as modifier?

No, adding the number of casualties is part of the process of what a morale test is, not a modifier.

But on the front of modifiers vs. rolls that succeed/fail, they still need to answer that specific question, because it really is non-sensical to try to re-roll 'hits' (for example) if you're not allowed to apply modifiers first (so that question is definitely still staying on my FAQ list).

 Leth wrote:
 yakface wrote:
But on the front of modifiers vs. rolls that succeed/fail, they still need to answer that specific question, because it really is non-sensical to try to re-roll 'hits' (for example) if you're not allowed to apply modifiers first (so that question is definitely still staying on my FAQ list).
They specifically covered that though in the FAQ

Yes, agreed that they gave an explicit answer (although it's just what the RAW had), but they specifically didn't address the situation where you have negative or positive modifiers applying to a roll but needing to know if the roll succeeds or fails before you can reroll it.

They need to specifically address this with a concrete example of how it works. Because doing it RAW is just bonkers.

Edit: I've updated the question regarding this subject to have more detail of exactly what I'm talking about (a concrete example).

 Leth wrote:
It feels like you are just not agreeing with how it works. They laid it out. It doesnt not become affected by modifiers until you get to the final step. the 2,3,5 didnt become 1,2,4 until AFTER the re-roll step.

Their example did not specifically cover abilities that trigger off a success or failure (like a hit/miss), and they need to cover it simply because the way they've ruled it, when applied to those types of abilities is ridiculously unintuitive. I'll be fine playing that way, but I just know I'll be at a tournament trying to explain to somebody why they can't re-roll the dice they think they should be able to re-roll.

GW should just have an example of one of those types of abilities in their FAQ so it is as crystal clear as possible.

 Leth wrote:
I guess. I think it is just one of those things where it is not intuitive only because of past editions. If you read the rules fresh it is straight forward.

It has nothing to do with previous editions. If you have a rule which says you get to re-roll misses, then players are going to want to re-roll any dice that doesn't actually cause a hit. The fact that people have to go into a little sidebar of the rulebook to figure out that modifiers aren't applied until after re-rolls so that means they don't actually get to re-roll all their misses is not intuitive, no matter how you want to spin it.

 Leth wrote:
So in the Designers notes how would you know what you can and can not re-roll without referencing your hit stat? Your hit stat makes it clear what you can and can not re-roll. Then modeifiers apply after that.
 Ghaz wrote:
Age of Sigmar has had the 're-rolls before modifiers' rule from the start. If you have any AoS players in your group, it shouldn't be a problem.

Again, I understand how the rule works as they FAQ'd it. But it is absolutely ridiculous to say that it isn't unintuitive.

If little Timmy shows up to the game with his Ultramarines that have a BS 3+, and his guys are within 6" of Robby G (who lets him re-roll misses), but his firing model is carrying a heavy weapon that moved and targeting a Tau Stealthsuit, he's got a -2 to hit. Now he rolls the dice and is about to pick up the rolls that didn't cause a hit (anything under a 5+) and some guy has to come over and tell him that, no, he doesn't get to re-roll 4-5 because re-rolls happen before modifiers are applied. But Timmy says: but, but those are misses. And the guy has to say: sorry buddy, that's just how the rules work.

It is unintuitive and totally unnecessary. All GW had to do was say:

Re-rolls happen after modifiers (if any) are applied. However, when the rules call for a specific numerical dice result to be re-rolled (such as: 'rolls of 1') this always refers to the unmodified value actually rolled on the dice.

And there you'd have it. The rules would then play as people intuitively imagine they would. If they have an ability that allows them to re-roll '1's, then they'd get to re-roll '1's no matter the modifiers involved. And if they also had an ability that allowed them to re-roll misses, then they'd get to re-roll all the dice that would actually end up missing their target.



This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2017/07/19 01:09:28


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 Renesco P. Blue wrote:
can "characters" embark upon transports that already contain another unit if there is space for them to fit?

Does the rule "authority of the inquisition" allow alcolytes to take a landspeeder storm or other previously unallowed transports as dedicated transports?

Both those questions are pretty clearly answered in the rules IMHO.

1) There is no limitation to the number of units that can ride in transports.

2) The Authority of the Inquisition ability says that they ignore transport faction keyword restrictions, but all other types of transport restrictions still apply. So since an Inquisitor doesn't have the 'SCOUT' keyword, it can't use a Land Speeder Storm.

 kodos wrote:
this is clear, as advancing is added to the movement characteristic of the model and movement is "up to".

so an advancing damaged flyer can move 20"-40"

I disagree (that it is clear).

Advancing adds to the model's Move characteristic. In this case, the model's Move characteristic has both a maximum and minimum value, so it is closer to RAW to say that the 20" would be added to both the model's max and min value.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
I don't think the 2nd Question for the T'au Empire is a meaningful or appropriate question.

There are basically two places where "-1 to hit" on an enemy will be useful - when the enemy is shooting, or when the enemy is fighting in melee.

Photon Grenades are a weapon that can be used in Overwatch.

Photon Grenades used in Overwatch (that successfully hit) will apply that -1 to hit during the subsequent Fight phase.

Thus, the wording does not suggest uselessness - just less use than we T'au players would like!

Okay, I've updated the wording to mention their use in overwatch.

Plague Dave wrote:
Chaos Index:

I know what you mentioned about points questions, but this one's gotta get fixed, clearly:

The Lord of Contagion is a copy/paste of Typhus with a weaker weapon, two fewer weapons, 1 less ability, and isn't a psyker, yet he costs more points because he has to pay a hefty cost for his Plaguereaper. Sadly, this makes a great new model a complete non-choice in an Index where I don't see too much of that elsewhere.

So why does the Lord of Contagion cost more than Typhus?

Also, why can Death Guard take a Chaos Lord on Palanquin of Nurgle, but not a Sorcerer on Palanquin of Nurgle?

I added the question about Typhus vs. the Lord of Contagion's point values to the list (because it is absurd).

As for the other question, the way GW has stuff written now, having a Sorceror on a Palanquin of Nugle would have to be an entirely new datasheet. As such, there is literally no point in asking this in a FAQ, as your only hope is for them to add that back in when they finally release their codex.

 Oaka wrote:
When a model is removed from the battlefield only to return to play at a later point, does it retain the condition it was in when removed, in regards to things such as wounds remaining and psychic power buffs or debuffs? i.e. Necron reanimation protocols and the Yncarne.

I think that's too broad a question for GW to be able to answer en masse, because each ability that allows models to return to play could be totally different. So if you've got some specific example you think is really confusing/pressing, you could ask that (for example, I added the question about Reanimation Protocols and number of wounds because similar abilities do only return models with a single wound remaining).

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Yakface:

Kanwulen was asking for an errata, as many Guard players want a lasgun for their Infantry squad sgts instead if the laspistol and chainsword. It is not a FAQ due to clarity but more of a request for flexibility. The sgt can still get a boltgun, but that does not benefit fro frf,srf.

Traditio: Gaze of the Emperor is not unclear in its effect. Any model in the middle of the line causes the roll for mortal wounds on their unit. Whether that model is friendly or enemy does not matter. It is the same effect as the Deathstrike missile: every other unit within 6", includes friendly units.

Thanks for the clarification. I agree that the guard question, is more of a wishlist/errata deal than a FAQ, so I don't think it makes sense to include it on this list.

I also agree that the Gaze of the Emperor wording seems 100% clear to me as well.

 tydrace wrote:
I found two more option changes that work differently from previous edition

In many previous editions, a Blood Angels Assault Squad was able to replace a weapon for a meltagun for every five models in the unit, but they lack they option to do so now. Is this an oversight or intentional?

In many previous editions, a Space Marine Dreadnought, as well as many of its variants, was able to embark on a normal Drop Pod during during deployment, but they lack the option to do so now. Is this an oversight or intentional?

For the Blood Angels query, this is clearly a case of simplification in the index, as the Blood Angels now use the standard marine assault squad rules now. So this is not something I can see them changing/adding until an actual BA codex comes out and is therefore not really useful to add to this list IMHO.

For the Drop Pod, I guess it *could* just be an oversight, but it seems pretty damn unlikely to me.

 AndrewC wrote:
Did they mean for transports to become donuts of doom?

As it stands any exploding transport inflict mortal wounds to any unit within 6" before the embarked unit gets out. But they themselves are unaffected.

Andrew

Yeah, passengers always are slain on a 1/6 chance regardless of whether the vehicle explodes or not, so that seems like a pretty hefty penalty already.

 Ghaz wrote:

Something else to ponder. The way that 'Transports' is worded it seems like you roll a D6 for all of the models embarked and for each 1, a model of your choice is removed. So if you have a Character embarked with a unit, the Character will only be removed if every single die rolled a 1 (unless you decided to remove him first for some reason).

I believe this is totally intentional, as a way to protect special models in your transports, as the 'auto-slain' mechanic is pretty brutal.


This message was edited 10 times. Last update was at 2017/07/05 22:32:43


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 alextroy wrote:
Is this really a necessary question? This is a new edition of the game, but I'm pretty sure Photon Grenades only reducing the effectiveness of your enemies attack the turn the charge is exactly all they have done since inception.

If they wanted it only to be useful in overwatch, they should have snuck that in (like: 'can be used only during overwatch'). Because as it reads now, I think there are a lot of people which can read that rule and totally just gloss over how long it lasts and just assume it will apply in the enemy's next shooting phase.

Ruin wrote:
Got a couple that doesn't look like they've been covered.

In matched play, what is the points cost for a Wolf Guard pack leader in power armour? The only points costs listed on page 216 of index Imperium 1 are for WGPL in Terminator armour. Are we to assume they are the same points, an oversight or something else.

Skulltaker seems to have lost the option to be mounted on a Juggernaut. There are several other instances of characters that have options there is no stock miniature for (such as Kosarro Khan on Moondrakken) as it was an option in previous iterations and people may have converted one, but no such option is there for Skulltaker even though this is the same case.
Intentional or oversight?

The WGPL is actually covered in each of the indexes under 'unit champions' where it explains the points cost for every unit champion is the same as the cost of a normal member of the unit, with the lone exception of WGPL in terminator armor.

As for Skulltaker, similar to what I said before about Nurgle Sorcerers not being able to take a Palanquin, if GW were going to allow it, they would have had to include a separate datasheet. Since they didn't, the chance of this being reversed or fixed via FAQ is nigh-impossible, so you'll just have to wait for their codex and hope for the best.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Is it intended that weapons with the autohit ability, such as flamers, can hit units with the airborne rule? That feels like an oversight, as in earlier editions that was impossible.

They have lots of things that specify they cannot affect models with the FLY keyword (such as Ork bomb squigs, for example), but there is no 'AIRBORNE' keyword (just the ability). As such, they'd pretty much either have to make these auto-hit weapons not be able to work against any FLY units (including Tau battlesuits, etc) or they just had to suck it up and let them hit airborne models. But is it really a problem? Most of those weapons (the Hemlock Fighter's D-Scythes being a big exception) aren't particularly good at damaging multi-wound models, which is what 'airborne' models tend to be.

So I just don't see much of a case of this somehow being a simple oversight they missed.

 Voodoo_Chile wrote:
Chaos Index,

Daemonic Ritual: Is there any limit to the number of Daemonic Rituals an individual Chaos Character can perform per Movement phase?

Yeah, I just don't personally see the ambiguity. The rules state that a character can 'attempt to summon a DAEMON unit'. They simply aren't given permission to make more than one attempt per movement phase.

Dionysodorus wrote:
Necrons:

Does the Tesla rule ("Each hit roll of 6+ with this weapon causes 3 hits instead of 1") have any effect if the hit roll would not otherwise cause a hit?

For example, if an Overlord uses My Will Be Done on a unit of Immortals, the effect will still apply during Overwatch on the enemy's next turn. A natural hit roll of 5 is a modified hit roll of 6+ due to MWBD, but an unmodified 6 is normally required in order to hit at all. Does this roll inflict 3 hits or 0 hits?

I do not see this particular case as an issue, because the Tesla ability causes '3 hits instead of 1'. If the roll in question is not causing 1 hit, then the Tesla ability cannot possibly replace that 1 hit with 3 hits. If you can think of another ability that provides a different kind of benefit that could still occur with modifiers during overwatch, let me know.

BaconCatBug wrote:If you somehow take a morale test without actually suffering any slain models (no idea how it might happen but who knows if the future brings any such nonsense), does a Daemonic Icon add models to a unit if you roll a 1?

Similarly, if a Daemonic Icon instructs you to add, for example, D6 slain models and you roll a 6 but only 3 were slain, do you add 3 or 6?

It's probably obvious and a matter of semantics but it seems vague to me since I don't recall "slain" ever being properly defined.

Its pretty pointless to include questions about hypotheticals. If you can find an instance where there's an actual issue as you describe in the first example, then let me know.

As for your second query. While they may not specifically define 'slain' they do say when models reach '0' wounds they are slain and removed from play, so I think it is pretty clearly obvious that slain=dead (which matches the dictionary definition of the word). So by having the word 'slain' in that rule, they're telling you that the Daemonic Icon can't generate more models to the unit than you started with, you can only restore dead models back to the unit.


This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2017/07/19 01:24:35


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

Loopstah wrote:

Astra Militarum IA Index
Malcador tanks don't get Grinding Advance on their Battle Cannon, is this an oversight? The Annihilator and Defender variants get it on their Demolisher cannons

I added all your questions except for this one. As was pointed out by others, this is a benefit given to the hull-mounted Demolisher Cannon, whereas the Battle Cannon on the standard Malcador is turret-mounted. Plus its not even like every tank that uses the same chassis (the Valdor & the Infernus) all have that same special rule like the Leman Russ does.

 Talamare wrote:
Can Chaos Thousand Sons and Death Guard summon Daemons if they choose to use the Thousand Sons / Death Guard Keyword as their Core Keyword.

I'm having trouble figuring out why this would be a question as well. You just keep reinforcement points set aside in your army roster (you don't pick the actual units) and then when it comes time to perform the summoning ritual you just follow those rules which say you have to summon a unit that matches the same chaos mark. So it seems 100% legal to me. What am I missing?

 Vector Strike wrote:
Ooh, FW questions are now acceptable? Nice! Couple from me:
(Imperial Armour: Xenos Index)

4. Why Technical Drones can't repair vehicles? Was it intentional or was it overlooked?

9. Shas'O R'alai has special rules regarding Characters, but without the Sniper rule, he'll rarely use them in a game. Is this intentional?

10. Why does a Swiftstrike Railgun cost almost the double of a Heavy Rail Rifle, while having only half of its range? Isn't the short range compensating the mobiel platform it is installed in?

I added all your questions except for those above. A few questions from me to you:

4) Why do you think technical drones should be able to repair vehicles? I need context for why you think that's a legitimate question.

9) It seems to me that with the Mantra Strike ability, he has a perfectly decent chance of being able to obliterate characters in some cases. Plus, since he can fly if you want to send him over enemy lines he can often be put closest to an enemy (even if he'll almost certainly die doing so). I just don't necessarily see why that can't be a (not that great) ability for him to have as it stands.

10) I need more info on this question, especially because weapon point values are often totally tailored for the unit they're going to be on (so often aren't balanced against a weapon cost on another vehicle). So again, I'd need more info on why you think this is a valid question, plus you really do need to specify which units have all these weapons, so I don't have to spend time searching through the books looking for them.

 skoffs wrote:
- Is the Monolith supposed to be BS3? Right now it says it's BS4, but everything else in the Necron army is shooting at BS3 or BS2. Why is that the only thing with BS4?

Okay, added all your questions (including the open-topped Ghost Ark one) except for the above question. If the Monolith had just a single BS listed, you could maybe think it was a simple typo. But the fact that it has the degrading BS chart and is labeled 4+/5+/6+ makes it pretty hard for me to believe that. I mean, the Monolith is a soulless, well Monolith, so it makes sense (to me, at least) it doesn't shoot so well. I know in previous editions it wasn't like that, but it also wasn't able to fire all its weapons in any direction either, so it easily could have been about balance.

gungo wrote:
So the Ork mega dread and both arm options are still sold on FW site but no rules in the book.

All your question added except this one. I feel your pain, but its not something I could see them 'fixing' via a FAQ...they're going to have to release something else substantial to do that.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
One for the Index: Xenos 2 list:

Actually, that could be generalised a bit; if an ability allows a unit to fire a particular weapon more than once per shooting phase, when do we nominate targets for the second round of shooting from that particular weapon? Before or after the first time it shoots?

Edit: Xenos 2 Orks again: Warboss on Warbike; should his Waaagh! Rule affect Ork Bikers rather than Infantry? More of an errata/wish list one that but it'd be nice.

For now, I just added the question specifically for the supa-gatler. If you can think of any other instances where just a WEAPON gets to fire a second time (as opposed to a unit being able to fire a second time) then let me know and I'll edt the question to make it more generalized (and put it in the rulebook section).

As for you other point, as you say its more of an errata/wish list request, as there is no indication that it should work for Bikers. So its not really the kind of thing I'm adding to this particular list.

skarsol wrote:
FW Chaos Index:

1)Hellforged Dreadclaw Drop Pod: Why Contemptor and Hellbrute (not actually a thing) but not Decimator or Leviathan?

2) Hellforged Kharybdis Assault Claw: Why Contemptor, Hellbrute (not actually a thing), and Rapier Battery (wha? Can it take 3 in one 'unit'?) but not Decimator or Leviathan?

3) Aetaos'Rau'Keres: Weapons that can sometimes make units that you have to have paid points for previously on the off chance that it triggers are dumb.


IA: Astra Militarum - Renegades and Heretics:

4) This unit replaces <CHAOS COVENANT> with <NURGLE> similar to how <LEGION> and such work. It then has a rule that effects non-<NURGLE> units. Is that Covenant <NURGLE> units, as distinct from Mark of Chaos <NURGLE> units, similar to how Legion <MADEUPNAME> is not the same as Craftworld <MADEUPNAME>?

Added nearly all your questions, whew you had a LOT (thanks!). The only ones I didn't do in complete are the above ones, for the following reasons:

1) & 2) Were both added as-is, except for why a Leviathan (& Deredo) isn't included. It has 14 wounds, compared to 10 for the Contemptor, 8 for the Helbrute and Decimator (I did ask that question). I went back and looked at these transports in the previous rules and they don't have a history of transporting Leviathans or Doredos, so it doesn't seem worth asking IMHO. I also know Helbrute is misspelled, but its not like there is another thing called 'Hellbrute' to get it confused with, so there's no real question to answer (besides just admitting they screwed up).

3) Not really a question.

4) I know exactly what you're talking about, but I think its pretty clear that everything with the NURGLE keyword has the NURGLE keyword, whether they get if from a 'Mark of Chaos', a 'Chaos Covenant', or an 'Allegiance', you know what GW will say. At the end of the day, as vague as their ruling on the 'make up your own' keywords was, everything that has the NURGLE keyword is going to not get affected by the Plague Ogryn's ability.

Keel wrote:
In the Imperial Armour Index Forces of the Adeptus Astartes, the Quad Launcher appears in the Appendix with both a points cost and a weapons profile, but there is no unit that can take it. Is it safe to assume that it is intended as an option for the Rapier Carrier?

Land Raider Achilles has it.



This message was edited 15 times. Last update was at 2017/07/19 01:42:56


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 Byte wrote:
Can "Smite" be used into a combat or in a combat? Provided closest enemy unit and all that jazz.

Reference?

The rules seem completely clear to me. Smite is not a shooting attack, and only shooting is prohibited from targeting an enemy unit that is within 1" of a friendly unit. Therefore, Smite is under no such prohibition.

 skoffs wrote:
Hey yakface,
Were you still going to be adding submitted questions to the top post?
(Also, where outside of Dakka should we be "frequently" asking these questions so that GW might see them?)

I am still adding questions slowly but surely, day by day.

I have been able to get in touch with Games Workshop and confirm that they are indeed aware of this thread (yay). So as they come out with/update their official FAQs, I'll just be going through the master list and removing anything that they answer, leaving just the stuff they have yet to answer.

As for where you can submit your own questions to them, I don't really have answer for you. I can't give out the email address I have, so I'd suggest maybe posting questions to their facebook pages or send an email to their customer service address (on their main website) and hope it gets passed onto the rules team? Those are just my best guesses.

Khadorstompy wrote:
 yakface wrote:
The transport rules in question pretty much answer all of these explicitly (from what I can tell). The only thing that's perhaps mildly questionable is if the unit inside disembarks does it still count as having started the movement phase within 1" of the enemy (and therefore must fall back), so I added only that question.

Really can you explain it to me then cause I have read the Rules on PG. 183 multiple times and the transport in question and I can't tell. Also I think you thought I was referring to Open-topped when I referring to Extended Firing Deck

But see, you didn't mention Extended Firing Deck in your original question! But specific details about where the question stems from because there are no longer universal special rules, so you have to ask about the particular rule on the particular unit that's confusing you.

And for the record, there is a question already on the list for Firing Deck/Extended Firing Deck.

 sfshilo wrote:
Since a guard regiment <Regiment> cannot name themselves "Crimson Fists" and get Pedro's benefits does the same apply to Daemonic CSM units and Chaos Daemon heralds?

A heralds abilities target <Mark> Daemon units. Chaos daemon units have <Mark> and Daemon faction keywords.

CSM daemonic units however are different, they have <Mark of Chaos> in the faction keyword, but the Daemon keyword is just a keyword not a faction.

FYI: I play both and would love for them to interact, but I also understand that making this illegal for Marines/Guard and not for CSM/Daemons is probably balanced.

The core rules make it clear that a faction keyword is functionally the same as a regular keyword (just that only faction keywords can be used for army creation).

I do not think the chaos powers keywords fall into the same ruling as the 'homebrew' keyword ruling that GW made because they are not completely open keywords where you can plug in whatever you want. You're specifically limited to NURLGE, KHORNE, TZEENTCH & SLAANESH. Therefore, no matter whether it comes from a Heretic Astartes <MARK OF CHAOS>, a Renegades & Heretics <CHAOS COVENANT> or even a Spined Chaos Beast's <ALLEGIANCE>, they all end up being a: NURLGE, KHORNE, TZEENTCH & SLAANESH keyword.

As such, I'd personally feel a little embarrassed asking GW a question that boils down to 'is the NURGLE keyword the same as a NURGLE keyword?'


This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/07/19 01:43:19


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

kiciek wrote:
Chaos Index Heretic Astartes.:
All combi weapons but plasma has full profile included. Plasma has only normal shoot, and "see plasmagun" text.
Can Combi-plasma fire overcharged? If it can is overcharged profile equal to overcharged plasmagun?

What else could 'see plasmagun' be except to see the plasmagun's profile for the supercharge profile? Because every other part of the standard plasmagun profile is listed. If that's not referring to the supercharge profile, then I don't know what else it could be. So could it be more clear? Sure, but I don't think there's a valid counter-argument for what that could be referring to (and therefore little chance for confusion).

 Talamare wrote:
Tau Drones attached on Vehicles state that the Vehicle should be considered to be equipped with the weapons that the Drones carry as if it were their own. Are you still forced to follow "Threat Identification Protocol" that forces you to shoot the nearest target, or are you allowed to shoot who you want?

Can Crisis Bodyguards absorb Nova wounds from Riptide?.

When drones are attached they are embarked, meaning their abilities have no effect. The vehicle gains their weapons while attached. So the vehicle has 4 additional pulse carbines. Where is the argument that Threat Identification Protocols should apply when they drones are attached?

As for the second question, Bodyguards can only steal wounds from CHARACTERS, so I don't think that's a possibility.

 Deathklaat wrote:
Just for clarification a Trygon could only get +5 attacks as one of it's 6 base attacks must be used with the tail weapon.

Also i'd like to know what happens with a Tyrant or Carnifex that replaces all of it's scything talons with ranged weapons and then gets into CC.

Does it only use one attack with the tail weapons or do they gain the profile listed in the main rule book?

I already added questions that cover this in the 'fight phase' section of the rulebook questions.

Ruin wrote:
Just noticed one in Index Chaos.

The Plague Marine Champion can exchange his Bolt Pistol and Bolter for a Power Fist and Plasma GUN.

Is this intentional or a misprint?

Please give me more information on why you believe this to be a possible misprint.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
skarsol wrote:
Vehicles either have an explicit CC weapon or they use the standard one from the rulebook, both of which are copyable.
That isn't what the problem is. (I made the same mistake myself.) The problem is the special rule explicitly allows only to copy INFANTRY CCW. If you're not within 9" of any INFANTRY, what can you copy? You can't use the basic CCW because it only allows you to do so if you don't have a melee weapon, not if you don't have any melee weapons you can use.

This falls back to the same question I have in the fight phase section of the main rulebook questions. Essentially GW is going to have to either have to rule that the basic 'close combat weapon' profile can be used anytime a model has melee attacks to be made but no weapon to use them with (because they have another melee weapon that can't be used for those attacks for whatever reason), or they're going to have to rule that in those weird cases, the model simply can't use their attacks.

In either case, the question is essentially already on the list.

SquiggelSquirrel wrote:

4. Can an Aspiring Champion (Chaos Space Marines) take, for example, a combi-flamer and a power sword?

I need more details on exactly why this is a question/what the implications of what you're asking are, etc.

skarsol wrote:
The chariots of Slaneesh have an attack that hits upon contact with the enemy unit. A D6 per model within an inch, on a 6 that model takes a mortal wound. This is apparently intended to replicate a chariot slamming into the lines of a unit. However, RAW, a single model from the unit can be placed out in front of the unit, still in cohesion but outside of 1" of any other model in the unit, forcing the chariot to hit it and only deal one wound with this attack. This effectively nullifies the point of the attack. If this is not how the rule is intended, please update to allow pushback or the attack to happen at pile in so that it can be used properly.

I added your other question (about Belakor).

The one about Chariots isn't really a FAQ question, because the rule is really clear. I understand you don't think it is as powerful as it should be, but given that you can move however you like with your charge moves, you know if you roll a high enough charge distance you can move your chariot around the side of the closest model and get within 1" of a ton of enemy models, right?

 BaconCatBug wrote:
For models such as Valkyries and Stormravens that are mounted on a tall flight stick on a "proper" base (as opposed to the hover base that, for example, Land Speeders or Dark Eldar Raiders are mounted on), do you measure distances to and from the base or the hull?

If it's the latter, how do models embark and disembark on these without needing to ascend terrain?

This is covered in the rules. Measurements are from the model's base unless the model has an ability that says otherwise (like a Falcon) or doesn't have a base at all. All the flyers I can think of do not have such a rule.



This message was edited 25 times. Last update was at 2017/07/19 01:44:38


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

fresus wrote:
Index Xenos 1:
The Yncarne can be set up/redeployed when a unit is completely destroyed, and may not charge in the turn she uses that ability.
Can she still perform a heroic intervention (this ability can indeed be used during the opponent's turn)?
And more generally, does having something that prevents you from charging also prevents you from performing heroic interventions?

I really don't see that as being a question that isn't totally answered by the rules (a 'yes'). The only thing the model is prevented from doing is charging. Any other way of getting into combat would be fine.

AutocannonSidearm wrote:
Master of Ordnance targets <REGIMENT> Basilisks, Wyverns, Manticores or Deathstrikes.

Tyranid Prime targets <HIVE FLEET> Tyranid Warriors and Tyranid Shrikes.

Tau Ethereal targets T'AU EMPIRE INFANTRY and BATTLESUIT units.

These are all totally valid issues, but unlike the situation where a very general keyword like BIKER was being left 'unlocked' (so to speak), none of these really have much potential to be abused and so therefore don't really need to be addressed (except to just show GW where they're being a little sloppy). So I think I'm gonna pass on including them for now, sorry about you taking the time to find them!

AutocannonSidearm wrote:
Bonus Question:

Why does the T'a'u' Saviour Protocols rule refer to the DRONES keyword? Shouldn't it be DRONE?

and yet...

Designer's notes looked like it cleared up some of the keyword choosing rules, but it still feels a bit odd to me:

Q: If I can choose a keyword for a unit, such as
<REGIMENT> for Astra Militarum, could I choose
that keyword to be, for example ‘Blood Angels’ or
‘Death Guard’?

A: No. In the example above, ‘Blood Angels’ is a Chapter of the Adeptus Astartes and ‘Death Guard’ is a Legion of the Heretic Astartes – neither of which are Regiments of the Astra Militarum.

Which just confuses me more: I would have thought you could choose e.g. Death Guard, but that REGIMENT: Death Guard and LEGION: Death Guard would not interact.
So a <REGIMENT> cannot be Blood Angels, Death Guard, or Militarum Tempestus. What else can it not be?

How do I decide if any given keyword is a valid choice?

It seems like the rules rely on the fluff, which is vast.

Another example, since theirs is a little trite:
Urien Rakarth has the PROPHETS OF PAIN keyword, which I've never heard of before, and I thought it might be for Wracks and Talos and things.
I assume now it's a <HAEMONCULUS COVEN>, which is easy enough to infer. Would be easier if it was explicit.
How would I know for sure, check the fluff?

The DRONE issue is the same as though they have a BIKER keyword and then refer to it as BIKES in the rules. GW's definitely a little sloppy at their keyword game, but given its something they just introduced its not all that surprising. But when it comes to things like DRONE vs DRONES and BIKER vs BIKES, while that is technically an issue, its also the kind of thing that is really hard for someone to not know exactly what they're talking about, and therefore it really isn't a problem they desperately need to address (and therefore is something I'm not going to bother putting on the list).

When it comes to your frustration with GW's 'build a keyword' system, I totally feel your pain, but honestly I don't think there's much GW can do beyond the FAQ answer they've already given, which is by necessity incredibly vague. The reason is, the whole point of the system is to allow players to make their own legions, chapters, etc, but at the same time also allow you to pick any of the existing 'real' legions, chapters, etc.

So the only way GW could truly fix this would be to put out a massive list of keywords that you're NOT allowed to select for each type of 'build a keyword', and that would be a huge pain and is simply never going to happen. Ultimately their FAQ answer boils down to: 'don't be a dick', and that's pretty much all I think they can do given how they want the system to function.

 Frozocrone wrote:
Quantum Shielding:

Each time this model suffers damage from an unsaved wound, roll a D6. If the result is less than the damage inflicted by the attack, then the damage is ignored (e.g. if this model suffers 4 damage, if you then roll a 3 or less the damage is ignored)

How does this interact with multiple wounds (e.g. 4 Lootas do a total of 8 damage from their Deffguns which do 2 damage each)?

How does this interact with weapons that have a random damage characteristic (e.g. Damage of D3 or D6)?

Yeah, I'm having a hard time figuring out why this might be confusing. An attack is defined in the rules (a single 'shot' of a weapon, so a heavy 3 weapon makes 3 attacks), and that pretty much clears up any potential confusion. You roll for each separate attack against how much damage that 1 attack is causing the model. Is there something else I'm missing?

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Mad Dok Grotsnik's Dok's Tools state they are not cumulative with other Dok's Tools but regular Painboyz Dok's Tools do not have this restriction. Is this intentional or an oversight ala Cybork Body

The standard Dok's Tools is written in the way that tells you that a single unit just gets the benefits of Dok's Tools if it is within range of any PAINBOYZ. Mad Dok Grotsnik didn't really need an additional clarifier, but they put it there anyway. But to me this doesn't seem necessary to have answered.



This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2017/07/05 22:33:49


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 Vector Strike wrote:
4) Why should they repair only battlesuits? Suits are made with the same materials of tanks. They have similar material complexity. I see no point in not letting them repair vehicles - not even from a balance standpoint, as suits pack much more punch for their price in comparison to vehicles. I guess they kept the suit only repair as they can double duty as wound soak, but it's not that great of justification to avoid repairing vehicles.

10) Only Broadsides (GW index xenos 2) have Heavy Rail Rifles, while the Barracuda AX-5-2 and Tiger Shark Fighter-Bomber (both from FW index xenos) have access to the Swiftstrike Railgun. The former has 60" range, while the latter has 36"; as it is mounted on minimal 20" platforms, it has a real range of 56". But the HRR costs only 63p, while the StR goes by 101p.
1.6x more expensive for no real gain (at most, LoS-blocking terrain - which are completely subjective; also, this is countered by the fact both swiftstrike platforms are forced to move 20" and will lose range to a mobile target easier)... the other options for the same slot (HBC and Ion Cannons) are so cheaper people will barely take heed of the swiftstrike railguns. What's the point in having an option if it's not worth at all?

Also, a new one for Barracudas: they used to have 2 auto-targeting burst cannons/cyclic ion blasters in Taros book, ignoring cover and separate targeting. While the separate targeting thing is now moot, the ignore cover characteristic is gone. Was it intentional?

I added the questions about R'alai and the XV9's not getting a Toughness bump, because I agree that both of those are backed by some decent logic to conclude that they might be mistakes.

However:

4) Unless there is some previous iteration of the repair drones rules that allowed them to repair vehicles before that looks like it might have somehow got missed in translation to 8e, there is simply no reason to ask this question. Why do repair drones only fix battlesuits? because that's what GW says they do. Why can Ork Painboyz only fix up infantry models and not boyz on bikes? Because that's what they say they do.

10) The points costs of weapons is often totally based upon what unit that weapon gets taken by, so their point values are absolutely not equal. For example, Ork Burnas are 0 points, but that's only because Burna Boyz themselves are 14 points base. So if you were to compare a Burna at '0' points to a Rokkit at '12' points, it would not make any sense at all either.

The only time I think we can try to ask about whether a point value is a mistake or not is when the base model (before weapons are added) of one thing is way higher in points then another thing, when they are both essentially the same model without their weapons. Or after adding all weapons to a model and then comparing that total to another model that has all its weapon points added as well. But trying to compare individual weapon/wargear point costs in 8e is madness, and certainly not worth trying to write to GW everytime something out of context doesn't seem to make sense.

 Weboflies wrote:
When fast rolling dice in Shooting against a unit with some models out of LOS, once the models in the target unit that are in LOS are removed, and those which are out of LOS "gain the benefit of cover" as per the Designer's notes, Does this mean that the remaining wounds are not allocated (the benefit of the cover in this case being that there is no LOS and the unit may not be targeted), or that they are indeed allocated to models which may not be seen, but with a save modifier for cover?

Yeah, I gotta disagree that this is a confusing issue and I don't think anything in the rules is contradicted by their designer's notes ruling on cover saves. Per the steps of shooting, all range and line of sight is only ever checked before any dice rolling starts, so once you start rolling any 'to hit' dice, then the ship has sailed on what is in range and what is in line of sight. Cover saves can change on a per-model basis because wounds are allocated and saves are taken one at a time (even when you fast roll your hits and wounds, saves are still allocated and taken one at a time).

 wyomingfox wrote:
Xenos Index - Tau - Shas'o R'alai has the Assassin rule which allows him to reroll hits against characters. However, he lacks any ability to target a character if they are not the closest enemy unit. Is this an oversight?

I added the KX139 question, but this one I'm not adding as the rule does work as written with no issues (you can still target characters with 10+ wounds freely and you can still do a Mantra Strike to drop down and pluck out badly placed enemy characters). Its obviously not as awesome as we'd probably like wanting to play with him, but there's nothing wrong or confusing with the rules.

 Talamare wrote:
"General vs Specific"

In previous editions of the game, this rule has always been included. I don't see it in this edition of the rule book. Is this still a rule?

I'm not going to include that question on this list. There was never any reason to have that rule made in the first place, as specific always has to override general for rules to function in any game ever made. And the fact that when they did publish that rule it only served to confuse more people than it actually helped means they obviously wouldn't bother doing it again, especially when they're keeping their rules to the absolute bare minimum.

So of course feel free to try to contact GW yourself this question, but I can save you the time and tell you the answer must always be 'yes' if you want to try to play a game.

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2017/07/01 12:17:55


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 Lord_Valorion wrote:
Chaos Index Clarification:

Champion Wargear List: Is it right that you can´t combine the weapons of the first paragraph with the weapons of the second paragraph? It is a "take two of these OR take one of these" situation? For example a champion with da power axe and a combimelta is not possible?

Seems completely clear to me: the second part of the list starts with 'alternatively', which can only mean that it is alternative to picking from the first list.

Now, if GW still sells models equipped with stuff that you can't take because of the new rules, then give me concrete examples, and I'll definitely add that to the list.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Typo issue: The Morkanaut is listed as having a "klaw of Mork (or possibly Gork)" but lists a "klaw of Gork (or possibly Mork)" in the data sheet and in the summary at the back.

Obviously the intent is use the "klaw of Gork (or possibly Mork)" entry but strictly speaking that's not something you can do.
 BaconCatBug wrote:
Another Typo/Incorrect name/Copypaste issue: Tartaros Terminator Squads list the model types as "Tartaros Terminator" and "Tartaros Sergeant", but the Wargear options state "For every five models in the unit, one Cataphractii Terminator may replace..."

Both of these are obviously valid points, but are also not something where there is any valid other interpretation of what it could be. Given that Codexes are coming out fairly soon, trying to get something 'fixed' where nobody is confused by it (even when it is a typo) just doesn't seem worth bothering.

Captyn_Bob wrote:
Pretty sure renegade miliita have a typo on heavy weapon selection. For every 10, two additional models may from a heavy weapon team, pretty sure should be for every 10 two models may from a heavy weapon team, without the additional.

Its not 'additional' models, its 'other' models. This is just the (kind of clunky) way GW makes it clear that the models making up the heavy weapon team cannot be the same models that took one of the previous wargear options (Chaos sigil, vox-caster, etc).

Pseudomonas wrote:
Inquisitors have the option of being a psyker or having the iron will ability but although being a psyker is clearly more beneficial there is no points cost associated with this upgrade. Is this intentional?

While I agree this is a little strange, it also doesn't seem likely to be something they could/would do anything about via FAQ.

gungo wrote:
Since fw is the next far release see if these two questions can get answered as well.
2) the mega dread has a full model and several weapon arm options listed still on the fw website but no dataslates. Is this intentional not to have any rules?

I added your other question about the Meka-Dread. As for the Mega-Dread, its another case of: Forgeworld would have to put out a full PDF to provide rules for that model, so if it was a 'mistake' its not something they could answer via a FAQ (so Its not worth including). Doesn't mean you shouldn't bitch to them about it, its just not a really great FAQ question.

 SolidOakie wrote:
How about you have 2 units of 20 bloodletters. Unit A loses 1 model, Unit B loses 6. Now reality blinks for unit A and he rolls a 6. Can unit A add 6 models to it or is it capped at 1? In other words, do slain bloodletters get thrown into a pool?

You have a point, sure, but someone could also argue that bloodletters 'slain' in their last game were technically 'slain' then, and so are therefore available to be added to units. At some point, a question becomes so absurd that GW won't even consider dignifying it with an answer. This ability allows units to add back models that were previously killed. Its not rocket science and I doubt a high percentage of players are going to be confused by the point of the ability. Therefore, I just don't see it as a question that is really ambiguous.

 skoffs wrote:
Maybe try change one of the Necron ones from-
Should Anrakyr the Traveler and Illuminor Szeras have a Dynasty keyword? Because without one, they cannot ride in any of the Necron transports (as they all require a <DYNASTY> keyword to use)?
to
Should Night Scythes, Monoliths, and Ghost Arks say NECRON INFANTRY for the keywords of what models can use them instead of <DYNASTY> INFANTRY? (at the moment it prevents Anrakyr the Traveler and Illuminor Szeras from being able to use them).
The Frontline Gaming guys seemed to think that was supposed to have been the case (NECRON instead of DYNASTY)

I think the question as written in the FAQ currently would get the same answer (if that's what they intend it to be).

 Kingsley wrote:
Again, I know the RAW (that you can take dedicated transports based off of vehicle selections in a detachment), but it's so weird that I think direct confirmation would be helpful.

Its just not a big deal because all transports cost so many points that its not something that people can abuse. The rules were clear before the FAQ and they directly answered the question in the FAQ, so I don't think they're going to answer it even more directly again.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Imperium 1 FAQ says a Company Champion has to pay for the Combat Shield despite it not being listed in his wargear list for some stupid reason.

The Autarch has a similar issue with the Forceshield but received no FAQ clarification.

So which is it?

-----

This one has come up a lot as well and could use an FAQ to stop it. They did after all address the whole "My Regiment is called Ultramarines" nonsense:

Some keywords have pluralised versions (CHARACTER, CHARACTERS, DRONE, DRONES etc). Can we assume that the pluralised versions are the same word as the non-plural one? Because I have seen far too many people try to argue they are separate keywords.

The Combat Shield on the Company Champion FAQ answer seemed pretty direct to me (that's why I deleted the Auturch Forceshield question from the list). If there is a piece of wargear that has a point cost and a model has an ability with the exact same name as that wargear, then you have to pay the points for it. What exactly is ambiguous about their answer?

As for the pluralized keywords, again I'm going to fall back on the fact that, while technically wrong, there isn't anything confusing or ambiguous about them, because (as far as I know) there's aren't some units with the DRONE keyword and others with the DRONES keyword to make it unclear. Yes, GW plays fast and loose with pluralizing keywords, but we intuitively know what they're talking about because what other possibility could it be?

 Shadenuat wrote:
What is the difference between Avatar of Khaine and Yncarne "fearless" bubble rules?

Although the two rules do use different terminology (one auto-passes the test and the other means they're immune to the test completely), is there any practical question to how this is actually confusing in the game? Because if there isn't a genuine example of how it is confusing, then its not really worth bothering trying to get them to answer, except just to find out that two different people wrote each of the rules and worded it differently when they did.


This message was edited 18 times. Last update was at 2017/07/06 01:28:41


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 skoffs wrote:
 yakface wrote:
 skoffs wrote:
Maybe try change one of the Necron ones from-
Should Anrakyr the Traveler and Illuminor Szeras have a Dynasty keyword? Because without one, they cannot ride in any of the Necron transports (as they all require a <DYNASTY> keyword to use)?
to
Should Night Scythes, Monoliths, and Ghost Arks say NECRON INFANTRY for the keywords of what models can use them instead of <DYNASTY> INFANTRY? (at the moment it prevents Anrakyr the Traveler and Illuminor Szeras from being able to use them).
The Frontline Gaming guys seemed to think that was supposed to have been the case (NECRON instead of DYNASTY)

I think the question as written in the FAQ currently would get the same answer (if that's what they intend it to be).

Perhaps, but the reworded version would clarify whether Praetorians can use them, too, rather than just those two HQ.

Well, you didn't mention that before! I've gone ahead and changed the question.

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
 yakface wrote:

THE INQUISITION

• Inquisitor Greyfax has a power level of 5 and in matched play costs 100 points. Inquisitor Coteaz has a power level of 4 but in matched play costs 85 points, and neither model has any wargear options. Surely at least one of the power levels or point values between these two models must be incorrect, no?

Quick correction: you have the points listed backwards. Greyfax costs 85 in matched play and Coteaz is 100.

Thanks, fixed.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
 yakface wrote:
 Lord_Valorion wrote:
Chaos Index Clarification:

Champion Wargear List: Is it right that you can´t combine the weapons of the first paragraph with the weapons of the second paragraph? It is a "take two of these OR take one of these" situation? For example a champion with da power axe and a combimelta is not possible?

Seems completely clear to me: the second part of the list starts with 'alternatively', which can only mean that it is alternative to picking from the first list.

Now, if GW still sells models equipped with stuff that you can't take because of the new rules, then give me concrete examples, and I'll definitely add that to the list.

This Aspiring Champion with Power Axe and Combi-melta (the official clampack model) is now technically illegal because of the rule.

Thanks! Good enough for me.

This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/07/06 08:15:56


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

Okay, I've removed all the questions from the IA Adeptus Astartes & IA Chaos indices that were answered by GW's Imperial Armour FAQs of those two books.

As always, if you spot any questions still in the list you think were actually answered by a FAQ, please let me know (and let me know exactly where in the FAQ the question was answered).

Audustum wrote:
Astra Telepathica question. Gaze of the Emperor asks us to draw a 2D6" line and make a check for each model under the center of it, but how thick is the line supposed to be? More specifically, how wide is the "center"?

While you have a valid point, I think the fact that they went out of their way to specify that players should use the 'center' of the line is sufficient enough to get the idea across to the vast majority of players and tournament judges, even if it isn't enough to stand up in court.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
So I know some of you have direct contact with the 40k FAQ people, can you please impress to them the necessity of moving the designers note questions into the main rulebook/index FAQs as appropriate?

Right now in order to play a game we need upwards of 5 different FAQs printed (Designers Commentary, Rulebook FAQ, Stepping into a new Edition and two Index FAQS) and it would be preferable to condense these as much as possible.

Can WS and BS be enhanced (not using the word modified here deliberately) to be 1+, 0+, -1+ or other "silly" numbers?

While obviously modifiers after the fact are fine (and a 1 always misses anyway), however some models have the ability to permanently enhance an attribute. One example is the Dark Eldar Succubus who can take a combat drug giving +1WS, turning her WS2+ into a WS1+, and also take a weapon that has a -1 to hit (Archite glaive). So in the case of this succubus, she would have a WS of 1+, rolls a 2 which becomes a 1.

Does this still hit or does the "A roll of 1 always fails" rule apply?

Yeah, I don't think I can impress anything upon anyone. GW clearly believes that the questions they've answered in the 'designer's commentary' and 'stepping into the new edition' PDFs are all answered by the RAW, but people are just having a bit of a hard time wrapping their heads around some of the changes. So in their mind, I think they imagine more or less phasing out those PDFs over time as not being needed, whereas the official rulebook FAQ is stuff that is needed forever. Not saying I agree with that concept (especially on some of the answers which don't quite seem RAW), but I'm just saying its unlikely anyone could get them to merge that stuff into the official rulebook FAQ.

As for your second question, I don't think that's something that needs to be answered. The 'always fail on a roll of a 1' seems pretty solid and I don't think there would be enough people confused by the idea that there could possibly be auto-hits to think otherwise.

Aeri wrote:
For the BRB:

Can a unit be charged in the charge phase, if it is on an upper level of a ruin and the whole floor is occupied by models so that no charging model can be placed on that level.

That question has been on the list from the very first day.

 Talamare wrote:

So is your question something along the lines of...
"Do permanent stat enhancements count as a modification/being modified?"

Edit... if that wasn't your question... It is mine now!

That question is 'kind of' already on the list in the rulebook section (the very first question), although I just asked about modifiers that occurred earlier in a turn compared to modifiers that then occurred later (is multiplication still applied before addition, even if the addition modifier occurs at an earlier time).

I'd add your Drukhari combat drugs example to it, but unfortunately the Drukhari don't have any weapons that multiply their characteristics, so its kind of a moot point from a practical perspective. If you (or anyone else) can think of a model that gets a permanent addition/subtraction characteristic change at the start of the game that also has access to a multiplication modifier weapon, please let me know.

 Talamare wrote:
Do Daemon Heralds buff the Strength of Mount/Cavalry/Chariot Attacks that have pre-set profiles?

If the weapon is based off of the model's S characteristic, then of course. If the weapon instead has a preset S, why would anyone ever think it would?

 Shadenuat wrote:
A question about Nightwing "Vector Shift" ability (Xenos IA, Eldar): just to clarify, when speaking about beginning of the movement phase, it only means movement phase of the player who controls it, correct? Otherwise it would be possible to use best option during yours and enemy phase.
What about if player controlling Nightwing goes second and did not yet have a movement phase - does Nightwing operate with Retracted Wings or Extended Wings, or does it gain no bonuses/penalties whatsoever?

Although it just says 'at the start of the movement phase' it goes on to say: 'before this model is moved'.

So while not 100% airtight technically, its pretty hard for anyone to get confused by this as it happens before the model is moved (which only happens in its own movement phase).

 Talamare wrote:
 yakface wrote:
 Talamare wrote:
Do Daemon Heralds buff the Strength of Mount/Cavalry/Chariot Attacks that have pre-set profiles?

If the weapon is based off of the model's S characteristic, then of course. If the weapon instead has a preset S, why would anyone ever think it would?

Mainly because of how insanely inconsistently the Daemon book is written.
The fact that these Separate Attack Profiles have a Large Black Bold Border before it implying some potential significance to it.
Specifies an existing unit and uses that unit's actual strength. Using that actual's unit actual weapons.

Note, I'm talking about stuff like Burning Chariots and Screamers, Unclean One and Nurglings, etc

They went out of their way to make people understand these are more than just a Sword. They are different models that share the same base.


From the 'stepping into the new edition' FAQ:
Q. How do the weapon profiles of Cavalry mounts, and other models such as chariots (which have weapon profiles for riders and mounts), work?
A. Each weapon profile is treated as a separate weapon the model is equipped with. Note that typically these weapon profiles have abilities that mean they can be used to make additional attacks. For example, a Thunderwolf mount provides its rider with a set of extra attacks with its own melee weapon profile (crushing teeth and claws). So, the rider can make all its attacks using, for example, its thunder hammer, and then it can make an additional set of attacks using the Thunderwolf’s melee weapon profile. When resolving these attacks, bonuses and penalties to the rider’s hit rolls and wound rolls also apply to the Thunderwolf’s attacks – it is effectively a weapon wielded by the rider. As such, where a mount’s weapon profile has a Strength characteristic other than User – as is the case with the Thunderwolf – the Strength of the mount’s attacks is not affected by changes to the model’s Strength. Note, however, that the mount’s weapon profile would be affected by changes to the Strength (or other characteristics) of a model’s weapons.


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Not sure if this has been answered, but how so plasma weapons interact with disgustingly resiliant? Does a 5+ ignore the overcharge effect when a 1 is rolled?

If the supercharge just slays the model then there are no wounds inflicted to be prevented by Disgustingly Resilient. If the supercharge inflicts a mortal wound, then yes Disgustingly Resilient could be used to ignore that mortal wound.

This message was edited 14 times. Last update was at 2017/07/19 01:48:43


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 Rustyeh wrote:
I would like to ask this, or well add to this:
• When a Hive Tyrant has the Catalyst psychic power cast on itself and has a unit of Tyrant Guard within 3" loses a wound, which of these abilities is resolved first (as they both occur when the Hive Tyrant loses a wound)? Is this covered by the 'Sequencing' rules in the rulebook (pg 179), which means the player whose turn it is gets to choose which of these abilities gets resolved first (which typically means the Tyranid player's opponent will get to choose)?

If you cast the Catalyst power to the Tyrant guard insted, it will pretty much go like this:
Cast Catalyst on Tyrant Guard ->
Hive Tyrant loses a wound ->
2+ the Tyrant Guard "suffers a mortal wound"

Will the Tyrant Guard be able to get the Catalyst save for this?

This question has been on the list for quite a while already.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Question 1 for Forgeworld Xenos:
TomWilton wrote:
The Necron Gloom Prism Wargear upgrade neglects to state in its description that it turns the unit it is purchased for into a Psyker.
Deny The Witch Tests specifies that this ability when by Psykers has a maximum range.
Would this mean that RAW Gloom Prism has no maximum range and would need an FAQ/Errata mention to gain one?


This question has been on the list for quite a while.

 OIIIIIIO wrote:
I would like to see if this is a misprint:

Blood Angels entry for Mephiston. You can super charge his plasma pistol and if you roll a one the bearer is slain .... he has 5 wounds. Is this a misprint or is it intentional?

Yeah, there are many, many models that have this same issue. I think the best we can hope for is for them to correct it in the codexes, I don't think they're going to touch it in the index FAQS.

 Lockark wrote:
Something I personally noticed missing that I asked on the Face book page had to do with the DKoK breeching drill. The unit is a breaching drill plus Vets.

DKoK can't normally take vets, and the bundle on the FW website is for a breaching drill and DKoK engineers.

It seems strange they are selling a bundle for a unit you can't even take anymore. You can't even have the engineer models from the bundle stand in for combat vets since vets lost the ability to take carapace armour.

Okay, I'm giving in and adding this to the list.

 Niiai wrote:
Does the mawlock die if he pops away after the 3round?

If the deattleapers target is in a transport the first 3 turns of the game, does the deathleaper die?

I added the Deathleaper question, but for the Mawloc question: it is already indirectly answered by the ruling on the Swooping Hawks (in the Index Xenos 2 FAQ). Use the RAW, which is that a Mawloc unit simply needs to arrive by turn 3. Once it does that, if it has an ability that allows it to be taken off the table, then it is fine to do so even in a matched play game.


This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2017/07/20 00:27:13


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

Tower wrote:
1) Another Ynnari mirror match question. There is a large scrum in the center of the table, and many strong units are near one another. One of my opponents units dies, triggering soulburst for both of us. I know the sequencing rules allow me, if it is my turn, to choose the order these abilities resolve. If I choose one of my units, say guardians, to take a soulburst action first, does my opponent need to declare what unit will soulburst after I am done, and the action they will take, before I resolve the free action on my guardians? Or can they wait to see what the new board state looks like?

2) Now, assume the two soulburst actions triggered (soulburst 1), my guardians went first, resolved an additional shooting phase, and killed another unit. This triggers another soulburst action (soulburst 2) for both players. Since it is my turn, do I choose to order the soulburst 2s now, and resolve them, or do we need to resolve my opponents soulburst 1 first?

As the player whose turn it is, how much information do I have when deciding how to sequence simultaneous abilities? Let's say one of my units dies on my turn, triggering soulburst for my opponent and the inevitable death ability for her Yncarne. Assume the Yncarne and another of my opponents units are in range to soulburst. In deciding the order to resolve those abilities, do I know which of my opponents units will take the soulburst action, or whether the Yncarne will choose to move using inevitable death? Does inevitable death only "trigger" and require ordering if she elects to use it?

I added the vast majority of your questions (whew, there were a lot of them), but the ones I didn't are listed above. Here's why I don't think they're probably worthwhile to include on this list:

1) I think the point you're missing here is when it comes to the 'sequencing' rules, they are for resolving 'rules' which occur at the same time, not anything like 'actions' that result from rules. So when a unit gets destroyed within 7" of units from both sides, you now have two rules which are supposed to happen at the same time. Both players are supposed to pick one of their units within 7" and choose to resolve a soulburst action with that chosen unit. But picking the unit is absolutely part of the rule that is simultaneous. So therefore, the player whose turn it is has to make the choice of which player resolves their 'Strength From Death' rule first, which then includes the chosen player picking their unit and then picking which action (if any) they are going to take with that unit.

2) I think this is a valid question. But, I think it is too rare and too complex for GW to even bother to take a crack at answering. Plus, when you really break it down, there is a pretty clear answer from a logical perspective: if you have two things that are supposed to be resolved (because they happened at the same time), and when resolving the first of those two things, you generate more things that need to be resolved, it cannot logically follow that the thing generated by resolving one of those things happened at the same time as the first two things.

In other words, if the destruction of unit A is what triggered two soulburst actions (one from each player) then those are two things that have to be resolved in order based off of the destruction of unit A. If, when resolving the first soulburst action, unit B is destroyed, then any soulburst actions that get triggered off of that are being generated by the destruction of unit B, which by definition happened after the destruction of unit A. Therefore, you must complete all the actions resulting from the destruction of unit A before moving onto any actions triggered by the destruction of unit B.

3) Same as #1. The player whose turn it is would have to pick the order of the rules to be resolved, but only when actually resolving the rules do you (for Strength from Death) pick the unit and then pick the soulburst action it will take and only when resolving Inevitable Death does the player decide if they are going to redeploy their Yncarne.

 Overheal wrote:
Also, the Cadre Fireblade's Volley Fire ability refers to shots while the rules use the term shots and attacks interchangeably. Does this ability grant one additional attack per weapon, or, does it allow the weapon to fire an extra "shot" i.e. does Assault 2 become Assault 3, does Rapid fire 1 become Rapid Fire 2, etc. OR does the ability simply mean a pulse rifle or carbine at half range both would have 3 shots/to-hit-rolls each?

While you are absolutely right that they should have used the word 'attack' instead of 'shot' here, after reading the rule, I don't really see any other valid interpretation that people are likely to confuse this rule with. There's simply no way to get to the idea that it can turn a Rapid Fire 1 weapon into a Rapid Fire 2 weapon.

Tower wrote:
From the list of Xenos 1 questions above:

• The Strength From Death ability says: 'Note that this means that a unit may be able to shoot or fight twice in the same turn.' Does this note limit how many times a unit with the Strength From Death ability is able to fight or fire to only 2 times per turn? For example, is it possible for a single unit with the Strength From Death ability to fire during its Psychic phase (when a unit within 7" is destroyed by a psychic power), again normally during its Shooting phase, again during its Charge phase (when a unit within 7" is destroyed by overwatch) and again during its Fight phase (when a unit within 7" is destroyed by melee attacks)?

Can this happen? A unit is generally limited to 1 soulburst action per turn.

Yeah, sorry that was my bad. The question has been removed.

 Crabbit wrote:
A few discrepancies I have noticed in Imperial Armour Index: Forces of the Astra Militarum:

I apologize in advance if this is a redundant post. I have reworded for additional clarity.

P. 47 & 112 - The Defensive Heavy Stubber is list with a range of 8". The normal heavy stubber is 36". Does the Defensive Heavy Stubber have the correct range listed?

P. 110 - The Stygies Thunderer Siege Tank is listed at 170 points. With the required Demolisher Cannon included (P. 111), the unit costs 210 points. Is this correct? If not, is there a weapon profile missing for a Stygies Demolisher Cannon that costs 0 points on P. 29 and 111?

P. 55 - Is the Artemia Pattern Hellhound missing from the units that can be included in a Death Korps of Krieg list and take the Death Korps of Krieg faction keyword?

P. 55 - Are the Avenger strike fighter (P. 47), Lightening Strike Fighter (P. 48), and Thunderbolt Heavy Fighter (P. 49) missing from the units that can be included in a Death Korps of Krieg list and take the Death Korps of Krieg faction keyword?

P. 47 - Is the Avenger Strike Fighter missing the Strafing Run ability (P. 51)?

For all these questions, I will need way more information on why you think that these cannot possibly be correct as written before adding them to the list.

For example, did the Defensive Heavy Stubber have previous rules where it had a longer range? If not, then why isn't it reasonable to assume that the fact that it is called a 'defensive' weapon mean that its 8" range (the same as flamers) is totally correct?

Or for the Stygies Thunderer Siege Tank, why could the 210 point value not be correct? You need to provide me with correlating information about another nearly identical unit with a radically different point cost to make your argument.

Or why should the Artemia Pattern Hellhound, Lightning, Avenger and Thunderbolt be part of the Death Korps of Krieg regiment? Were the previously available in the last iteration of their army list? Because, especially in the case of the flyers, they don't have a <REGIMENT> keyword, which means you always just take them as part of any army you make anyway (just using the IMPERIUM keyword to build your army around).

Or why do you think the Avenger should have the strafing run ability? Did it have that ability in its previous rules?

(and don't bother giving more info on the Hades Drill with Engineers, that question is already on the list).

BaconCatBug wrote:While the RaW is crystal clear (it's the latter), this is unintuitive and thus worthy of an FAQ entry IMHO. Hopefully GW will live up to their promise and listen to feedback and live errata this.

 vipoid wrote:
Does Celestine's aura give Seraphim a 5++/5++ (that is, a rerollable 5++) or a 6++/5++ (that is, a 6++ which can be rerolled and then saves on a 5++)?


Or more generically, when something says to "add x to a save" as opposed to a "saving throw" or "roll", does it modify the characteristic or the dice roll.

While it was written incorrectly (it should have said 'saving throw' instead of 'save') its clear that it is supposed to be a benefit, which it wouldn't be if you were reading it RAW (it would boost the 6++ Shield of Faith Invulnerable Save up to a 7++). As such, I think the vast majority of players will correctly interpret the rule to be a +1 to the invulnerable saving throw roll.

Plus, I think we can safely assume that if GW wanted to improve an actual Save characterisic they would at least properly capitalize it ('Save') and would probably also say 'characteristic' as well. Not to mention that since its a characteristic that gets worse the higher it is, they would be careful to explain how it was being changed one way or the other.

BaconCatBug wrote:So GW clarified about re-rolling xD6 rolls where x > 1, but a good question to add to an FAQ is an explicit answer over whether the re-roll stratagem can re-roll one of those dice, or whether the stratagem can ONLY apply to single dice rolls.

I don't see them bothering. Their FAQ change says that it works that way 'unless otherwise stated'. The re-roll strategem specifically only allows 'any single dice' to be re-rolled. The fact that they said 'single dice' instead of 'any single dice roll' makes it pretty clear IMHO. I just don't see the majority of players and/or tournament judges having an issue on this front, and as such its not really worth bothering with.




This message was edited 12 times. Last update was at 2017/07/26 00:29:52


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

Dionysodorus wrote:
If you think this is what's intended, then there should definitely be a question about the interaction between Celestine's ability and a Seraphim unit's ability to re-roll failed invulnerable saves. Everyone I've seen using them together is rolling a die, then re-rolling if the die is showing a 4 or less. If Celestine is simply adding a modifier to a saving throw, then this is incorrect, since Seraphim don't actually have any choice whether they re-roll failed invulnerable saves -- they should be re-rolling everything except a 6 even with Celestine close by. This is the only situation I'm aware of where you're forced to re-roll when you wouldn't want to, by an ability that's clearly intended to be beneficial.

Fair enough, question added!

 BaconCatBug wrote:
I only brought up the Celestine thing because my discussions with other people have resulted in confusion and uncertainty. -shrug-

Also, just as a heads up you made a small typo in the tau FW questions, The Eldar Titan is 1,200 points not 1,2000

Thanks, fixed!



This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/07/26 22:16:20


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 Perfect Organism wrote:
When a weapon with the ability to 'target a CHARACTER even if it is not the closest enemy unit' (e.g. an Astra Militarum Sniper Rifle) shoots at a unit (effectively) containing several models with the CHARACTER keyword (e.g. Kaptin Badrukk and his Ammo Runts), can the shooting player choose which specific character model is the target, or are wounds assigned as normal?

Personally, I think it's fairly clear what the intention is, but some people on a facebook group I'm a member of disagree so there seems to be some potential for confusion.

Can you tell me what the argument is based around? Because a 'target' in the shooting rules is always a unit, so although weapons like sniper rifles allow you to target a CHARACTER even when it isn't the closest model, you're still targeting the unit the character is part of. So please let me know why this is a valid question.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
RaW a unit that advances or is within 1" of an enemy may never be selected as a "unit to shoot with" in the shooting phase even if they have Assault or Pistol weapons that could theoretically shoot.

There be errata allowing such units to be selected if they have weapons eligible to fire.

Also I know this really REALLY does not matter to all but the spergiest of sperglords, but an official FAQ confirming that pluralised keywords are synonymous with their singular forms would be ever so nice. It's not fun to have someone claim "DRONE" is not the same as "DRONES"

I added all the SM codex queries except for these two. I know that RAW they are absolutely an issue, but honestly they're just too nitpicky for me to put on this list. Feel free to submit them yourself to GW's facebook pages or email them.

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
 yakface wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
Hypothetical: If there is ever an ADEPTUS ASTARTES CHARACTER released that has 9 wounds (from Forge World for example) and they are given the "Iron Resolve" warlord trait, does this make them targetable in the shooting phase due to now having 10 wounds?

I added all the SM codex queries except for the hypothetical (as I'm only adding questions for stuff we can find actual concrete examples of issues for, not just 'this might be a problem in the future' types of issues).

The Forgeworld Chaplain Venerable Dreadnought is an Adeptus Astartes Character with 9 wounds. The Iron Resolve warlord trait would put one at 10 wounds.

I went ahead and added this to the general rulebook question on characters and whether altering their W characteristic affects how they can be targeted (either way).

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/08/09 22:02:55


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in gb
Gargantuan Gargant





This is a good one that popped up:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/735625.page

What to do if there ever ends up a unit with more than 1 wounded model, since the wound allocation rules don't take this into account as it can't "normally" happen.

Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written in the rulebook, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective.
Because some people get their knickers in a twist, I'll list these RaW 'oddities' in my sig. Sadly GW's promise of fixing their broken rules has itself been broken. RaW you cannot advance and then fire assault weapons, you can't shoot pistols if within 1" of an enemy, "minimum" ranges don't work, Seraphim have to re-roll saves that "fail" pre-re-roll, the game simply breaks if you ever have more than one wounded model in a unit, the game also breaks if a single rule ever tries to do multiple things simultaneously, Khârn punches himself in the face if he's not near some meatshields, Librarians on Bikes are locked to the Index power list, Howling Banshees can't declare a charge further than 12", Spore Mines have an infinite range, Shroudpsalm technically doesn't do anything, only enemy models, not friendly models, have permission to move on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, T'au have access to stackable Ignore Wounds (albeit against Mortal Wounds only), and T'au Early Warning Override Support System only works if a unit is "teleporting to the battlefield", not just arriving mid-battle, Genestealer Cults can no longer move after ambushing, you can only ever use the Deathwatch Teleportarium Stratagem "once", and then never again in any battle after you use it, single use weapons MUST be fired the first time a model shoots if they are in range and LOS, if a model splits fire, each weapon must target a different unit, the Agents of Vect stratagem can be used by ANY Drukhari army, not just one with a Kabal of the Black Heart detachment, a Tyrant Guard with Lashwhip can absorb an infinite amount of damage via Shieldwall between the time they die and the time they fight, Chapter Tactics on Successor Chapters don't actually do anything, Codex Leman Russ's can take an infinite amount of Hunter-Killer Missiles, Storm Bolters and Heavy Stubbers, and Imothekh's 'Lord of the Storm' ability hits the "target unit" twice.
--- Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities --- Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. --- 
   
Made in gb
Gargantuan Gargant





I want to start by saying that this is one of those super lucky times when we can say without any sort of ambiguity that this is NOT the intent of the rule in question.

"The Betrayer: You cannot re-roll or modify hit rolls of 1 made for Khârn the Betrayer in the Fight phase. Instead, those attacks automatically hit a friendly unit within 1". Randomly determine which unit is hit if there is more than one. If there are no friendly units within 1" of Khârn, the hits are discarded."

Notice the problem? It hits a Friendly Unit within 1". Khârn himself is a friendly unit within 1" as per the rules for Auras in the Rulebook. Rules as Written, rolls of 1 can never be discarded and instead cause Khârn to punch himself.

Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written in the rulebook, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective.
Because some people get their knickers in a twist, I'll list these RaW 'oddities' in my sig. Sadly GW's promise of fixing their broken rules has itself been broken. RaW you cannot advance and then fire assault weapons, you can't shoot pistols if within 1" of an enemy, "minimum" ranges don't work, Seraphim have to re-roll saves that "fail" pre-re-roll, the game simply breaks if you ever have more than one wounded model in a unit, the game also breaks if a single rule ever tries to do multiple things simultaneously, Khârn punches himself in the face if he's not near some meatshields, Librarians on Bikes are locked to the Index power list, Howling Banshees can't declare a charge further than 12", Spore Mines have an infinite range, Shroudpsalm technically doesn't do anything, only enemy models, not friendly models, have permission to move on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, T'au have access to stackable Ignore Wounds (albeit against Mortal Wounds only), and T'au Early Warning Override Support System only works if a unit is "teleporting to the battlefield", not just arriving mid-battle, Genestealer Cults can no longer move after ambushing, you can only ever use the Deathwatch Teleportarium Stratagem "once", and then never again in any battle after you use it, single use weapons MUST be fired the first time a model shoots if they are in range and LOS, if a model splits fire, each weapon must target a different unit, the Agents of Vect stratagem can be used by ANY Drukhari army, not just one with a Kabal of the Black Heart detachment, a Tyrant Guard with Lashwhip can absorb an infinite amount of damage via Shieldwall between the time they die and the time they fight, Chapter Tactics on Successor Chapters don't actually do anything, Codex Leman Russ's can take an infinite amount of Hunter-Killer Missiles, Storm Bolters and Heavy Stubbers, and Imothekh's 'Lord of the Storm' ability hits the "target unit" twice.
--- Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities --- Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. --- 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 Peregrine wrote:
Or why should the Artemia Pattern Hellhound, Lightning, Avenger and Thunderbolt be part of the Death Korps of Krieg regiment? Were the previously available in the last iteration of their army list? Because, especially in the case of the flyers, they don't have a <REGIMENT> keyword, which means you always just take them as part of any army you make anyway (just using the IMPERIUM keyword to build your army around).


They were part of the DKoK list in previous editions (the Hellhound was in both the siege and assault brigade lists, the flyers were in the assault brigade list that the 8th edition list appears to be based on), and DKoK get the normal "codex" Hellhound. You are correct, however, in assuming that it's a mistake with little or no practical consequence. They share the IMPERIUM keyword so you can put them in your detachments, and even with the DKoK keyword the only DKoK bonuses are either limited to infantry or (in the case of tank commanders) LRBTs and could have no effect on any of these units. So unless I'm missing some obscure edge case this is a future-proofing issue, as something in later rules may care about this.

The last DKoK list I could find was in IA5, 2nd edition. I couldn't see any reference to the Artemia Pattern Hellhound there. Although to be honest, I have no idea where the Artemia Pattern Hellhound rules even existed before this, as they aren't in IA1 2nd edition either. So the more you can manage to fill me in on the past of the Artemia Pattern Hellhound and its rules, the better!

As for the flyers, like I pointed out before, they don't have <REGIMENT> anyway, so it would make no sense to give them the DKoK Regiment keyword.

Or why do you think the Avenger should have the strafing run ability? Did it have that ability in its previous rules?

It did.

I do see that looking back on its rules, but so did some other Imperial flyers that don't have it now (like the Lightning w/ tactical bombs, and the Marauder Destroyer, for example).


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in gb
Gargantuan Gargant





What exactly is a "named character"?

No, I am not being facetious. The codexes state that "Named characters such as [Marneus Calgar][Lucius the Eternal][Lord Kaldor Draigo] already have one or more artefacts, and cannot be given any of the following relics." However, if we're going to go by the dictionary definition of a "named character" due to a lack of any in game definition, it would mean any model or unit that has the CHARACTER keyword that also has a name on it's datasheet is a "named character". Furthermore, several units like "The Emperor's Champion" which were special characters in the past are not "names" in the strictest meaning of the term, but a rank. Since several rules now require you to base it on the background of a chapter (e.g. Successors being able to use their Parent's stratagems), you could argue that Cypher was a pre-heresy Dark Angels title, not a name.

Basically I am asking for an idiot proof confirmation that any model that has the "Only one of this model may be included in your army." are "named characters" for the purposes of Relics.

Edit: I know there is a list of "named characters" in the points section of the rules, but what about non-matched play where points aren't used?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/08/19 19:03:19


Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written in the rulebook, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective.
Because some people get their knickers in a twist, I'll list these RaW 'oddities' in my sig. Sadly GW's promise of fixing their broken rules has itself been broken. RaW you cannot advance and then fire assault weapons, you can't shoot pistols if within 1" of an enemy, "minimum" ranges don't work, Seraphim have to re-roll saves that "fail" pre-re-roll, the game simply breaks if you ever have more than one wounded model in a unit, the game also breaks if a single rule ever tries to do multiple things simultaneously, Khârn punches himself in the face if he's not near some meatshields, Librarians on Bikes are locked to the Index power list, Howling Banshees can't declare a charge further than 12", Spore Mines have an infinite range, Shroudpsalm technically doesn't do anything, only enemy models, not friendly models, have permission to move on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, T'au have access to stackable Ignore Wounds (albeit against Mortal Wounds only), and T'au Early Warning Override Support System only works if a unit is "teleporting to the battlefield", not just arriving mid-battle, Genestealer Cults can no longer move after ambushing, you can only ever use the Deathwatch Teleportarium Stratagem "once", and then never again in any battle after you use it, single use weapons MUST be fired the first time a model shoots if they are in range and LOS, if a model splits fire, each weapon must target a different unit, the Agents of Vect stratagem can be used by ANY Drukhari army, not just one with a Kabal of the Black Heart detachment, a Tyrant Guard with Lashwhip can absorb an infinite amount of damage via Shieldwall between the time they die and the time they fight, Chapter Tactics on Successor Chapters don't actually do anything, Codex Leman Russ's can take an infinite amount of Hunter-Killer Missiles, Storm Bolters and Heavy Stubbers, and Imothekh's 'Lord of the Storm' ability hits the "target unit" twice.
--- Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities --- Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. --- 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Bird from Hell






 yakface wrote:
The last DKoK list I could find was in IA5, 2nd edition.


That's the siege regiment list, the "conventional" DKoK list with tons of static artillery and infantry hordes. There's also the assault brigade list in IA12 that's more of a mechanized list with grenadiers as troops and more vehicles. The 8th edition update, with grenadiers as troops and engineers as elites (instead of the other way around in the siege list) and the static artillery being omitted from the as-printed version seems to have been based on the IA12 list.

I couldn't see any reference to the Artemia Pattern Hellhound there. Although to be honest, I have no idea where the Artemia Pattern Hellhound rules even existed before this, as they aren't in IA1 2nd edition either. So the more you can manage to fill me in on the past of the Artemia Pattern Hellhound and its rules, the better!


The Artemia Hellhound did not exist prior to 8th, the model the rules refer to was simply an alternate aesthetic option for the normal Hellhound rules. I can't prove that it wasn't a deliberate choice to only give the DKoK the "codex" Hellhound but not the virtually identical Artemia variant, but it seems like a case of not remembering that there's a special rule for it. Though, as noted, this is primarily a future-proofing question. At the moment there is no difference between having a {insert random regiment here} Artemia Hellhound vs. a DKoK Artemia Hellhound in a detachment alongside your actual DKoK units, but it's possible (or even probable?) that something in the future could refer to "DKoK vehicles" or similar and make this difference relevant.

And IMO it's a relevant future-proofing question. We have a long list of units that gain the DKoK keyword even though there is currently no situation where it is relevant, including ones that were later added by FAQ, so that seems like a strong hint that something in the future is going to care about it.

As for the flyers, like I pointed out before, they don't have <REGIMENT> anyway, so it would make no sense to give them the DKoK Regiment keyword.


It seems like it at the moment. But there's the odd situation where Elysian aircraft actually gain the <REGIMENT> keyword, and the previously-mentioned future-proofing issue. I think it's especially relevant when the first FAQ added a bunch of units to the DKoK list, despite not currently having any purpose for the keyword, but these units that were formerly in the list were not included.

I do see that looking back on its rules, but so did some other Imperial flyers that don't have it now (like the Lightning w/ tactical bombs, and the Marauder Destroyer, for example).


The old Lightning rules are kind of an odd case. The 40k version was pretty much neglected since 3rd edition, remaining unplayably bad with only token changes to keep up with the new edition, and the strafing run rule seemed like part of that lack of thought. You could only get it by replacing a weapon that benefits from the BS boost with bombs that don't. And the additional weapons you could buy to go with your pair of bombs were either more bombs (no BS benefit), hellfury missiles (a blast weapon with very little BS benefit), or hellstrike missiles (which were broken because of the ordnance rule). Then when the 7th edition DFTS update gave the Lightning its most recent rules the weird strafing run option was removed again. So I don't think it means much as a precedent, and the 8th edition Lightning doesn't even have the option to trade away its autocannon anymore.

The Marauder Destroyer is a more compelling argument, and as the owner of one I'd love to see FW add it back.

Laying low in a blood filled trench
Kill time 'til my very own death
On my face I can feel the falling rain
Never see my friends again

In the smoke, in the mud and lead
Smell the fear and the feeling of dread
Soon be time to go over the wall
Rapid fire and end of us all


SELL ME YOUR FORGEWORLD ATLAS 
   
Made in gb
Troubled By Non-Compliant Worlds




Cyclops Demolition vehicles follow the Vehicle Squadron rules on their dataslate. Up to 3 Cyclops may be taken as one heavy support choice, they are deployed together but thereafter are treated as seperate units for all rules purposes. I think the poster has not read the rule as it makes the queries quite simple to answer...

A) 1 of those is destroyed by enemy shooting, but the last 2 then detonate themselves. Can the destruction of the unit in this case be used to claim the First Blood victory condition and/or is the unit worth 1 victory point in the Big Guns Never Tire mission (where each Heavy Support unit destroyed is worth 1 VP)? If the last Cyclops model destroyed is within 7" of a Ynnari unit with the Strength from Death ability, can the Ynnari unit use the destruction of the Cyclops unit to soulburst in this case?


Yes, the Cyclops that was destroyed by enemy fire would count for first blood. the other 2 Cyclops would not.

B) 1 of those Cyclops detonates itself but the remaining 2 are later destroyed by enemy shooting. Can the destruction of the unit in this case be used to claim the First Blood victory condition and/or is the unit worth 1 victory point in the Big Guns Never Tire mission (where each Heavy Support unit destroyed is worth 1 VP)? If the last Cyclops model destroyed is within 7" of a Ynnari unit with the Strength from Death ability, can the Ynnari unit use the destruction of the Cyclops unit to soulburst in this case?


Yes, as they are seperate units they would each be worth 1 VP in a Big Guns mission. but the Cyclops that self destructed would not.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/08/15 22:40:31


 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

ItsPug wrote:
Cyclops Demolition vehicles follow the Vehicle Squadron rules on their dataslate. Up to 3 Cyclops may be taken as one heavy support choice, they are deployed together but thereafter are treated as seperate units for all rules purposes. I think the poster has not read the rule as it makes the queries quite simple to answer...

Thanks, those questions have now been removed.


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




Chaos:

When a Noise Marine armed with a sonic blaster (an Assault 3 weapon) dies and triggers Music of the Apocalypse, does it get to make 1 shot or 3 shots?

I think that, RAW, it must be just 1 shot (see the "Number of Attacks" section on p179 of the brb), but so far nobody else I've talked to was aware of this, though they've all agreed upon going over the rule carefully. So I bring this up as something GW might want to clarify.

Edit: I think this is still possibly confusing, but it's been pointed out to me that the Overwatch rules talk about "a shooting attack" in a context where it's clear they mean all of the attacks a unit makes while shooting, so I now think RAW goes the other way.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/08/25 00:23:45


 
   
Made in gb
Growlin' Guntrukk Driver with Killacannon






The following question is in the Forge World Forces of the Astra Militarum section:

• The hellstrike, hellfury and skystrike missiles (on the Avenger Strike Fighter, Lightning Strike Fighter, Thunderbolt Heavy Fighter, Valkyrie Sky Talon, Vendetta Gunship & Vulture Gunship) all have no limitations on how many times they can be fired during the game. Can a model equipped with 6 skystrike missiles really fire all 6 of them every turn along with all its other weapons? Or are these supposed to be once per battle weapons like the hunter-killer missile?

But it also applies to the Valkyrie in Index Imperium 2.

   
Made in gb
Gargantuan Gargant





Here is one for thoroughness that I actually think GW need to do given it will be a while for all the codexes to be released.

Page 131 of the SM Codex states "Note that there are several Space Marine Chapters – such as the Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Grey Knights – that deviate significantly from the Codex in terms of organisation and fighting style. The rules and abilities for these Chapters (and any successors they may have) will be detailed in their own codexes."


While obviously this excludes Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Grey Knights by name, it doesn't explicitly name the Dark Angels or the Deathwatch, who are the only Chapters (other than the named 3) who could reasonably considered "Codex Divergent" (which is funny because Black Templars and Iron Hands are in the codex but whatever that's an argument for another day). Dark Angels are not covered background wise in the codex, the only Loyalist First Founding Legion to not be so, and Deathwatch is a chamber militant like the Grey Knights.

So, the obvious answer is, No, you can't take DARK ANGELS or DEATHWATCH, but there doesn't seem to be any hard rule justification for denying it outside of "Look at the fluff for this rule" which seems silly at best.

tl;dr Can we pick DARK ANGELS or DEATHWATCH as the <CHAPTER> keyword for units in Codex: Adeptus Astartes (Space Marines)?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In previous editions, Tyranid Primes and Warriors could take Bonesword & Lashwhip with Rending Claws. The instructions for assembling the model even have this as a configuration. However, the index no longer allows this. Is this intentional?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/08/20 01:03:01


Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written in the rulebook, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective.
Because some people get their knickers in a twist, I'll list these RaW 'oddities' in my sig. Sadly GW's promise of fixing their broken rules has itself been broken. RaW you cannot advance and then fire assault weapons, you can't shoot pistols if within 1" of an enemy, "minimum" ranges don't work, Seraphim have to re-roll saves that "fail" pre-re-roll, the game simply breaks if you ever have more than one wounded model in a unit, the game also breaks if a single rule ever tries to do multiple things simultaneously, Khârn punches himself in the face if he's not near some meatshields, Librarians on Bikes are locked to the Index power list, Howling Banshees can't declare a charge further than 12", Spore Mines have an infinite range, Shroudpsalm technically doesn't do anything, only enemy models, not friendly models, have permission to move on top of a Skyshield Landing Pad, T'au have access to stackable Ignore Wounds (albeit against Mortal Wounds only), and T'au Early Warning Override Support System only works if a unit is "teleporting to the battlefield", not just arriving mid-battle, Genestealer Cults can no longer move after ambushing, you can only ever use the Deathwatch Teleportarium Stratagem "once", and then never again in any battle after you use it, single use weapons MUST be fired the first time a model shoots if they are in range and LOS, if a model splits fire, each weapon must target a different unit, the Agents of Vect stratagem can be used by ANY Drukhari army, not just one with a Kabal of the Black Heart detachment, a Tyrant Guard with Lashwhip can absorb an infinite amount of damage via Shieldwall between the time they die and the time they fight, Chapter Tactics on Successor Chapters don't actually do anything, Codex Leman Russ's can take an infinite amount of Hunter-Killer Missiles, Storm Bolters and Heavy Stubbers, and Imothekh's 'Lord of the Storm' ability hits the "target unit" twice.
--- Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities --- Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. --- 
   
Made in us
[ADMIN]
President of the Mat Ward Fan Club






Los Angeles, CA

 Perfect Organism wrote:
The following question is in the Forge World Forces of the Astra Militarum section:

• The hellstrike, hellfury and skystrike missiles (on the Avenger Strike Fighter, Lightning Strike Fighter, Thunderbolt Heavy Fighter, Valkyrie Sky Talon, Vendetta Gunship & Vulture Gunship) all have no limitations on how many times they can be fired during the game. Can a model equipped with 6 skystrike missiles really fire all 6 of them every turn along with all its other weapons? Or are these supposed to be once per battle weapons like the hunter-killer missile?

But it also applies to the Valkyrie in Index Imperium 2.

No, the Hellstrike Missiles on the Valkyrie are the example of how these weapons are supposed to be written, which is why the question exists for the Imperial Armour version of them.

On the Valkyrie 'Hellstrike Missiles' is just a single weapon system, which therefore is only fired once each time the model shoots (regardless of how many missiles the model actually has on it), and costs 20 points.

In contrast, the Imperial Armour version is called a 'Hellstrike Missile' (singular) and then models are able to take quite a few of them (like 8 on the Marauder Destroyer, for example). Yes, you're still paying 20 points for each of them, but the potential damage output of being able to fire 8 Hellstrike MIssiles every turn (on top of the model's other weapons) just seems quite OTT.


I play (click on icons to see pics): DQ:70+S++G(FAQ)M++B-I++Pw40k92/f-D+++A+++/areWD104R+T(D)DM+++
yakface's 40K rule #1: Although the rules allow you to use modeling to your advantage, how badly do you need to win your toy soldier games?
yakface's 40K rule #2: Friends don't let friends start a MEQ army.
yakface's 40K rule #3: Codex does not ALWAYS trump the rulebook, so please don't say that!
Waaagh Dakka: click the banner to learn more! 
   
Made in nl
Confessor Of Sins






Paying 20 points for a single shot S8 missile is slightly under the top though.

Cratfworld Alaitoc (Gallery)
Order of the Red Mantle (Gallery)
Grand (little) Army of Chaos, now painting! (Blog
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: