Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

"Wait...is that right?!" Why not ask? This is the place to share a rules question (or revelation) you learned at the table.
User avatar
CarbonMagos
Member
Posts: 268
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 12:30 am
Name: Eric S
Experience Level: Experienced
Play Style: Casual
Armies: Adeptus Mechanicus, Imperial Guard

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby CarbonMagos » Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:53 pm

Gotta admit I'm a bit perplexed by the minor nerf to Graia's dogma (successful "refusal to yield" now leaves the model with one wound, so high damage weapons are only truly ignored if you only had one or two wounds left).

It's not like that's the best dogma, and now it's even worse on multiwound models than it already was.

I just played my first game where my Spearhead was Stygian on Friday. Looks like that was a good call >_>
Especially considering they're one of the few things not affected by the deep strike change, a la Raven Guard.

Some of these changes really do seem pretty "rich get richer"; it will be interesting to see what tourneys look like now.

The clarifications to the Guard CP machine are welcome and sensible, even if they don't make it any less strong.
Image
User avatar
Memento
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 12:42 pm
Name: Anthony
Experience Level: Experienced
Play Style: Casual+Competitive
Armies: Thousand Sons, Daemons, Ultramarines

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby Memento » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:41 pm

Ascion wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:06 pm
Memento wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 6:58 pm
PlaguemasterFlex wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 6:43 pm


Lol me too, literally primed them earlier today. It is an 8" charge out of deep strike though with the Brayhorn, so it's roughly 65-70% chance of success with a command reroll. Not as beautiful as with warptime but might still be ok. I've had to do it a handful of times warptime failed to go off. But definitely very unexpected change.
You can always use Warp Fate in conjunction with the Command Reroll for a "full" Charge reroll.
Hmm can't seem to find it, what's Warp Fate? I was thinking Temporal Flux from the Mutalith Vortex Beast would be my best bet, but I don't own that model.
I meant Gaze of Fate.

Dave just knows what I'm talking about because we're actually the same person.
User avatar
Draaen
Member
Posts: 420
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 4:02 pm
Name: Mark
Experience Level: Advanced
Play Style: Casual+Competitive
Armies: Tau, Space Marines, Daemons

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby Draaen » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:56 pm

So with he fly assault ruling in the rulebook it says you ignore vertical movement for charge distances because you fly. So am I correct in reading this as allowing me to move on top of a building that is 8" away from me but 12" high with my suits with 8" move? This is the way I thought it worked in previous editions but I've had conversations with people that you would measure it in a diagonal line. It would be something awesome to come out of this for me because I just enjoyed the though of my dudes hopping on top of buildings. It always seemed cool.

I'd also like to point out ork bosses can now effect ork bikes with their waagh! Which seems totally awesome.

The other thing that I had heard a lot of talk about was some rules change to armies with the -1 to hit modifiers. I was a little surprised not to see anything on that.

With the deep strike beta rules for an aggressive style list I can see myself running stealth suits, ghostkeels, cold stars, piranhas and a couple cheap units of vespid to come in turn 2. If the cold star wasn't the go to commander before he sure is now. The Tau in cover sept tenant now works in the first turn even if Tau don't go first. That now seems like a really intriguing stay at home force in a mixed detachment army. Or for a bunch of ghostkeels who would have -2 to hit and a 2+ save. That would be hard to shift.
Game Preferences:
Current Beta rules in effect
I'm happy to play lower points levels with people who are staring out or building up new forces
Fair warning my doofy daemons have 3rd party models, scratch builds, old warhammer models and I haven't moved all their bases over to the 40k ones yet! Happy to switch to either Tau or White Scars.
User avatar
MrScotty
Officer
Posts: 1691
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 10:55 am
Name: Scott Mechler
Experience Level: Advanced
Play Style: Casual+Competitive
Armies: All of Them

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby MrScotty » Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:34 am

Draaen wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:56 pm
So with he fly assault ruling in the rulebook it says you ignore vertical movement for charge distances because you fly. So am I correct in reading this as allowing me to move on top of a building that is 8" away from me but 12" high with my suits with 8" move? This is the way I thought it worked in previous editions but I've had conversations with people that you would measure it in a diagonal line. It would be something awesome to come out of this for me because I just enjoyed the though of my dudes hopping on top of buildings. It always seemed cool.

I'd also like to point out ork bosses can now effect ork bikes with their waagh! Which seems totally awesome.

The other thing that I had heard a lot of talk about was some rules change to armies with the -1 to hit modifiers. I was a little surprised not to see anything on that.

With the deep strike beta rules for an aggressive style list I can see myself running stealth suits, ghostkeels, cold stars, piranhas and a couple cheap units of vespid to come in turn 2. If the cold star wasn't the go to commander before he sure is now. The Tau in cover sept tenant now works in the first turn even if Tau don't go first. That now seems like a really intriguing stay at home force in a mixed detachment army. Or for a bunch of ghostkeels who would have -2 to hit and a 2+ save. That would be hard to shift.
Given the way that the movement rules work, this would be only the case with a charge rule, and only because of the FAQ. The movement rules state "no part of a model's base (or hull) may be moved farther than this" and though Fly allows you to move across models and terrain as if they aren't there, it doesn't grant an exception to the rule I just quoted. RAW, a unit with Fly would seem to have a "bubble" of possible movement in any direction with a radius equal to its Move stat, so you would measure diagonally (or up) to move up a ruin.

The only thing you don't have to do is move horizontally to the base of the terrain piece, then move up it, like a unit without Fly would have to.

Also, bear in mind, per the FAQ you could not successfully make that charge unless there were physical space on top of that ruin for your models to sit. A unit taking up the entire space of a ruin level aboveground has effectively got a mario star block when it comes to taking any sort of damage from assault...and I have just updated my game preferences, because that's very, very silly to me.
Game Preferences:
A model may assault upper levels of terrain if they charge far enough to climb them
All current beta rules in effect unless opponent prefers otherwise
I love setting up custom, fluffy scenarios, PM me!
User avatar
MrScotty
Officer
Posts: 1691
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 10:55 am
Name: Scott Mechler
Experience Level: Advanced
Play Style: Casual+Competitive
Armies: All of Them

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby MrScotty » Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:03 am

Also, this may shed some light on our Tau Drone discussion:

Q: Some units have an ability that says that the models in the
unit must be deployed at the same time, but thereafter each
model is treated as a separate unit (e.g. Vehicle Squadron, Drone
Support, etc.). For the purposes of missions that have the First
Blood victory condition, if a unit has such an ability, does every
model in it need to be destroyed for the opponent to claim First
Blood, or just a single model?
A: The models in such units are each treated as individual
units after they have deployed, so destroying a single one
of them satisfies the First Blood victory condition.

If these models are only treated as individual units AFTER THEY ARE DEPLOYED, then presumably before they are deployed, they are not treated as individual units. I.E, while you are building a list.
Game Preferences:
A model may assault upper levels of terrain if they charge far enough to climb them
All current beta rules in effect unless opponent prefers otherwise
I love setting up custom, fluffy scenarios, PM me!
User avatar
The cosmic serpent
Posts: 481
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:37 am
Name: Keith
Experience Level: Intermediate
Play Style: Casual
Armies: Eldar (CWE, DE, H), GK, Crons, Tau, AL
Location: Chelmsford MA

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby The cosmic serpent » Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:33 am

After I've slept on it some new thoughts:

Deep strike beta rule is still better than 7th. You can guarantee a unit arrives and it doesn't scatter and there is no risk your dudes impale themselves on spikes or get lost in the warp for all eternity. However it is still a big handicap as even if you aren't shot off the board while you wait for your beta strike your opponent will have had 1 or 2 movement phases to cover the board to increase his DS denial zone as well as get up on points for objectives (or maelstrom). Seems to me DS goes back to being an objective grab option or a "killing blow" option where you use a big bad squad to come in and neutralize your opponents strongest unit or grab that crucial objective/VP.

Turn 1 assaults are still possible with a few factions, mostly of the space elf or sensual chaos variety. I wouldn't be surprised if Ork Speed Freaks becomes a thing and they are turn 1 in your face when their codex is released.

I don't mind the 0-3, I caught on a while ago that GW wants you to buy things in threes so I commonly have 3 of a lot of units/models but usually never more than 3 (riptides are an exception lol). Even if tactical drones are limited I can make it work. If not then all the better.

If they roll inquisition back up with Grey Knights ala Daemon-hunters two problems fixed in 1 go. GK get access to cheaper ground troops with a somewhat better variety of long range firepower, and Inquisition gets some flashy units and decent HQ options. What really hurts GK right now is their lack of ranged weapons and cheap bodies, not necessarily losing deep strike turn 1.
User avatar
Draaen
Member
Posts: 420
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 4:02 pm
Name: Mark
Experience Level: Advanced
Play Style: Casual+Competitive
Armies: Tau, Space Marines, Daemons

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby Draaen » Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:00 am

MrScotty wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:34 am
Also, bear in mind, per the FAQ you could not successfully make that charge unless there were physical space on top of that ruin for your models to sit. A unit taking up the entire space of a ruin level aboveground has effectively got a mario star block when it comes to taking any sort of damage from assault...and I have just updated my game preferences, because that's very, very silly to me.
I re-read the FAQ and it only says they effectively ignore vertical distances which is a lot different then ignoring vertical distances. Kind of a wishy washy way to put it but it just seems to me that fly works in the assault phase basically the same as the movement phase.

The no space to drop models in the top of ruins is an age old time "honored" tradition I've seen ever since I started playing back in 3rd. My solution to it was that I would always move my models to condense them on the ruin if I had say pathfinders in a 2nd story to allow the most of my opponents models to get up top. For models without fly I always envisioned them being able to push my little fishmen back but if there wasn't enough space how could they get up there? I do like some terrain to be restrictive such as impassible terrain as that makes the game more tactically interesting so long as it is not just rules abuse.

Good catch on the attached drone unit datasheet.
Game Preferences:
Current Beta rules in effect
I'm happy to play lower points levels with people who are staring out or building up new forces
Fair warning my doofy daemons have 3rd party models, scratch builds, old warhammer models and I haven't moved all their bases over to the 40k ones yet! Happy to switch to either Tau or White Scars.
User avatar
The cosmic serpent
Posts: 481
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 10:37 am
Name: Keith
Experience Level: Intermediate
Play Style: Casual
Armies: Eldar (CWE, DE, H), GK, Crons, Tau, AL
Location: Chelmsford MA

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby The cosmic serpent » Tue Apr 17, 2018 2:00 pm

MrScotty wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:34 am

Also, bear in mind, per the FAQ you could not successfully make that charge unless there were physical space on top of that ruin for your models to sit. A unit taking up the entire space of a ruin level aboveground has effectively got a mario star block when it comes to taking any sort of damage from assault...and I have just updated my game preferences, because that's very, very silly to me.
I don't know kind of makes sense from a cartoon kind of perspective. You have some gnarly unit hanging out on a hill top and all the space is taken up. Say you have some genestealers or orks trying to climb up the side of a rocky cliff. When they get to the top *blam* boot on the head and back down they go never getting to the top. Fly units though are debatable can their jetpacks sustain thrust long enough for them to engage the guys on the top? For how long if they have no where to land when they get up there? Like the road runner on top of a cliff and the coyote makes it up but the thrust goes out and he falls back down.

I think it's a nice nod to a player who is using terrain to it's full tactical effectiveness.
User avatar
Indy
Member
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:57 pm
Name: JP Anderson
Experience Level: Intermediate
Play Style: Casual+Competitive
Armies: Blood Angels
Location: Melrose

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby Indy » Tue Apr 17, 2018 2:58 pm

The cosmic serpent wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 2:00 pm
MrScotty wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:34 am

Also, bear in mind, per the FAQ you could not successfully make that charge unless there were physical space on top of that ruin for your models to sit. A unit taking up the entire space of a ruin level aboveground has effectively got a mario star block when it comes to taking any sort of damage from assault...and I have just updated my game preferences, because that's very, very silly to me.
I don't know kind of makes sense from a cartoon kind of perspective. You have some gnarly unit hanging out on a hill top and all the space is taken up. Say you have some genestealers or orks trying to climb up the side of a rocky cliff. When they get to the top *blam* boot on the head and back down they go never getting to the top. Fly units though are debatable can their jetpacks sustain thrust long enough for them to engage the guys on the top? For how long if they have no where to land when they get up there? Like the road runner on top of a cliff and the coyote makes it up but the thrust goes out and he falls back down.

I think it's a nice nod to a player who is using terrain to it's full tactical effectiveness.
Granted I play melee-oriented army, so there's my disclaimer...

And I'm all for using terrain to its full tactical effectiveness. DarthHoodie had a thread back there somewhere about increasing the verticality of boards in general. My issue in general with it is that it's a classic example of something that is fine in contained context, but is so easy to manipulate and cheese that it can quickly amount to a sort of griefing. The thing to remember is that 40k is not a precise game: just like the proportions on models are not exact (there's no way 10 of ANYTHING could fit in a Rhino...ok, maybe Grots), so is the effect of terrain and such. The tabletop is used to represent concepts. Otherwise, no unit should get cover unless you have terrain that is modeled at the exact right height and scope and is made out of materials that could realistically stop a bolter round...

The reason rules existed in 7th where models on different floors of a ruined building could still punch each other was kinda sorta supposed to represent the fact that stairs exist...even if they're not visible. Same thing with a Bastion: the door at the base "allowed" combat with models on the top since the idea was that the dudes were running up the stairs to fight.

So...standing on top of the jungle gym and pushing other kids off because there's no room on top I think opens up more issues than might appear at first glance. I mean, if there's no way for the models to physically get on top of the cargo containers...then why are they up there in the first place at all? If there is (say a ramp or ladder or such), then one should be able to Fight at that ramp/ladder/etc...

Food for thought.
“Fairy tales do not give the child his first idea of bogey. What fairy tales give the child is his first clear idea of the possible defeat of bogey. The baby has known the dragon intimately ever since he had an imagination. What the fairy tale provides for him is a St. George to kill the dragon.”

-G.K. Chesteron
User avatar
Memento
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 12:42 pm
Name: Anthony
Experience Level: Experienced
Play Style: Casual+Competitive
Armies: Thousand Sons, Daemons, Ultramarines

Re: Spring 40k FAQ Discussion Thread

Postby Memento » Tue Apr 17, 2018 3:29 pm

My thoughts on the matter tend towards Wheaton's Law.

Also, it's always worth asking: "Is this fun for both me and my opponent?"
- If yes, proceed.
- If no, then reevaluate.

GW writes rules assuming benign intent. There's ample evidence that this kind of friendliness is tragically lacking at the most competitive level of the game. This isn't to say that *all* competitive gamers are WAAC players. Nor is it meant to imply that *most* competitive games are WAAC. Merely that the temptation to collect as many rules-type advantages as possible in an effort to win the game is strong.

Obviously, I can't dictate how anyone at the club wants to play the game, nor would I ever want to. But I very much suggest that we approach the game with the benign intent that GW meant for the game. That's the only way that we can really take lasting enjoyment from this game and hobby without escalating levels of rules-lawyering that isn't fun for anyone.