Warhammer 40K INAT FAQ version 2.0 Released...

[Crimson Devil]

even when the rules clearly say different eh?

 

You will notice that on Storm Caller the writer is clearly referencing the cover rules as they were written at the time. Not giving the bonus in of itself to the power. It is my opinion that said advantage disappeared with those rules.

 

Counter Attack defines the bonus it gives as +1 attack. If GW had said it is a charge then you would have a point, but they didn't. The statement in the rule book is clarifying that the bonus is exactly the same as a charge, not classifying it as a charge.

[Vassakov]

Crimson Devil, your argument does not hold water. Sorry. And you are selectivly misquoting the rulebook.

 

BBB, Pg 74:

 

If the [Ld] test is sucessful all models in the unit get +1 attack, exactly as if they too had assualted that turn.

 

Emphasis mine. Now this is fine, but in the case of Blood Claws and Ragnar, there is an additional clause that is activated as the Blood Claws assualt.

 

Codex: Space Wolves, Pg 10

 

They recieve a bonus of +2 attacks whenever they charge.

 

Now, I think we can all agree that charging and assaulting are the same thing. If Blood Claws move exactly as if assaulting, then Berserk Charge kicks in. Unfortunately it's the RAW.

 

Storm Caller I will admit probably doesn't work anymore as the rules don't really work the same. A clear FAQ on this would be nice, but nevermind.

[the jeske]

Now, I think we can all agree that charging and assaulting are the same thing.

thats the problem . in the 4th we had more then some fun with the assault word. because techniclly it wasnt in the rules . we have the same fun now . GW as always forgets that its important to dont name the same thing in 2 different ways .

[Lord Ragnarok]

Let's watch the bashing folks, either on each other or bashing other boards. This will be the only in thread nudge.

 

For my purposes I don't see why I need to use this. I'll use whatever GW officially posts, or adhere to any tourney restrictions(or not play if I don't like the restrictions).

[dietrich]

They note at the start of the document that in Fourth Edition, GW very much had a Rulebook > Codex attitude. In Fifth Edition, it's changed to be the other way. If you read some of the posts on dakka, the BC getting +2Attack on a counterattack is 'under review'. Do models with Furious Charge get +1 S/Init on a Counterattack? I don't think it's crystal clear that BCs get +2 attack, but I think on the Codex>Rulebook basis, they should.

 

And while it's pretty minor to state that SW's have access to Land Raider Redeemer, the Ironclad Dread, etc. - there is a very small minority that yell and scream that they don't.

 

And while it's beneficial to get the SM codex point cost for rhinos and razorbacks, I'm not sure that it's right, since there is a price given in the SW codex. And while some don't think there's a need for a document like this, there is. Now, I think about 90% of the FAQ gives answer that is how about 80% of gamers would play anyway - but it's to deal with the few real problem children.

 

When you play within a small group, it's very easy to come to gentlemen's agreements on how to play something (especially when it's things that effect army selection - like WGBL's taking heavy weapons or SW fielding an Ironclad). But, when you're pulling together a bunch of strangers, it does help since everyone may have their own separate house rules.

 

And that's really all that this is - a set of house rules. And while I certainly don't agree with everything in it, and would play some of it differently (or allow my opponent to) - I admire the time that 9 people took to compile the thing. And you may not like tournies, or may not like Adepticon, but it is consistently the best gaming event that I attend (although I don't go to many) every year. And if you don't want to play 40k there, then learn Lord of the Rings, because Jamie runs a great event.

[G. A. K.]

Do models with Furious Charge get +1 S/Init on a Counterattack?

 

And while it's pretty minor to state that SW's have access to Land Raider Redeemer, the Ironclad Dread, etc. - there is a very small minority that yell and scream that they don't.

 

And while it's beneficial to get the SM codex point cost for rhinos and razorbacks, I'm not sure that it's right, since there is a price given in the SW codex. And while some don't think there's a need for a document like this, there is. Now, I think about 90% of the FAQ gives answer that is how about 80% of gamers would play anyway - but it's to deal with the few real problem children.

 

Frankly, furious charge isn't linked with the USR 'Counter-Attack'. if you had a guy with FC and CA then YES he would get +1 S/Int but most all don't so they don't. The Official GW FAQ for wolves states we us codex SM for all vehicles (and upgrades) but the Ven Dread and we can also use all variants of those vehicles. If GW wants to change the rules... let GW change the rules. Thats my view on this whole matter.

 

G

[dietrich]

The GW FAQ that I have says to use the point costs and rules from C:SM for Dreads (except the Ven Dread), Speeders, Attack Bikes, Whirlwins, Predators, Land Raiders, and Vindicators (and all variants and options). It doesn't say anything about Rhinos or Razorbacks. In the unit entries for GH, BC, LF, and WG it says, and I don't have my rulebooks here, but something like, 'May take a Rhino (see Codex: Space Marines) for +50 points.' I can see the arguement that since it refers to the C:SM, you should use their point cost (35 - with smoke). Or do you pay 50 points because that is the SW codex? Do you pay 50 points and use the SM codex options (so you start with smoke launchers, but extra armor is 15 points) or use the SW codex options (which I guess, you'd still get smoke for free, but it'd only be 5 pionts for extra armor?).

 

It's my understanding that the German SW FAQ says they pay SM points for rhinos and razorbacks, but I haven't checked it.

[Max_Dammit]

It's my understanding that the German SW FAQ says they pay SM points for rhinos and razorbacks, but I haven't checked it.

 

This is true, so you can state its something that GW has forgotten. and in the end the SW rino will only cost you 3 points more if you take it with armour smoke and light :D

[Gondlir the Wandbearer]

The B&C is not universally loved either. Spend some time on other boards and you'll see quite a bit of venom towards you. For fluff and painting tips B&C is excellent. If you want to learn rules and tactics than Dakkadakka is better.

 

Are you kidding me? There's a guy on Dakka who's seriously arguing that SW cannot use Ironclads, Redeemers or LS Storm. While I agree that B&C isn't universally loved, I have a lot more respect for B&C rules advice than Dakka's.

 

Of course, if you like it, then by all means, use it. I won't.

 

@ G.A.K.: I'm pretty sure the FAQ doesn't mention Leman Russes and their options ;-) .

[dietrich]

I put up the poll on dakka about SW using Ironclads, LRRs and LRCs. http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/223815.page

 

It ended up about 5:1 for the 'Yeahs'. Which means, if you play in two three-round tournies, one guy will have a fit because you have a Land Raider Redeemer in the list. Again, I think a lot of the INIT FAQ rulings is stuff that most gamers would agree upon and/or realize is junk. And you always have the option to disregard it in a game (sorry, but DH assault cannos should be Heavy 4 and rending - and I'd let the other guy use that even though it's against the FAQ).

 

This document isn't for friendly games, and it isn't for a bunch of 'reasonable' gamers. It's for some hardcore and not-so-hardcore tourney players. And it establishes the boundaries of what you can field and/or expect. I'd rather have this than see someone show up with Chronus in a SW list and be told they need to play 70 points light. Or to show up with an LRR and waste 10 minutes calling a judge over to convince my opponent that I can actually field a LRR, and then watch the guy give me a 0 on comp and sportsmanship.

[Crimson Devil]

Crimson Devil, your argument does not hold water. Sorry. And you are selectivly misquoting the rulebook.

 

BBB, Pg 74:

 

If the [Ld] test is sucessful all models in the unit get +1 attack, exactly as if they too had assualted that turn.

 

Emphasis mine. Now this is fine, but in the case of Blood Claws and Ragnar, there is an additional clause that is activated as the Blood Claws assualt.

 

Codex: Space Wolves, Pg 10

 

They recieve a bonus of +2 attacks whenever they charge.

 

Now, I think we can all agree that charging and assaulting are the same thing. If Blood Claws move exactly as if assaulting, then Berserk Charge kicks in. Unfortunately it's the RAW.

 

Storm Caller I will admit probably doesn't work anymore as the rules don't really work the same. A clear FAQ on this would be nice, but nevermind.

 

Not misquoting anything. I believed the same as you not long ago, but I realized that Counter Attack and Assault/Charge are similar but not the same. In both previous editions they were considered different bonuses. "exactly as if they had assaulted that turn" is not the same as had assaulted that turn. A dog is not a cat despite both being animals.

[Grey Mage]

*nods* This is a WIP document. Im happy they atleast are flagging things for reveiw, and some of them are even explaining their reasoning. SW's arent the only players wholl be having disagreements with them on this thing. Howling banshees have the same problem with their counterattack rules for example. In any case itll either get sorted out or it wont. If I like it in general Ill probly show it to my LGS, and if I dont I wont, but Ill look at it to know what Im dealing with in case anyone else does.

 

It never hurts to listen and be prepared. I do think they could do things better though.

[Crimson Devil]

The B&C is not universally loved either. Spend some time on other boards and you'll see quite a bit of venom towards you. For fluff and painting tips B&C is excellent. If you want to learn rules and tactics than Dakkadakka is better.

 

Are you kidding me? There's a guy on Dakka who's seriously arguing that SW cannot use Ironclads, Redeemers or LS Storm. While I agree that B&C isn't universally loved, I have a lot more respect for B&C rules advice than Dakka's.

 

Of course, if you like it, then by all means, use it. I won't.

 

@ G.A.K.: I'm pretty sure the FAQ doesn't mention Leman Russes and their options ;-) .

 

And there are plenty of difficult posters here too. There are many people that like and post on both boards, attacking Dakka or any other forum will only drive fellow B&Cers away.

[dietrich]

One of the big problems is GW's poor rules writing. Especially in the past, they have used multiple names for the same or similar effect and the same or similar name for different effects. And, as noted in the INIT FAQ, GW changed their philosophy. It used to be Rulebook > Codex (and even tried the Wargear book, which I don't think was widely accepted). So, if something changed in the Rulebook, it could trickle down to the Codexes. Now they say Codex > Rulebook. Which is fine, but now you get nonsense like DH dedicated transports can't be used as a battlefield taxi (like other dedicated transports) because the DH codex specifies that only the unit that has the trasport can use it. And while the guys on the INIT FAQ council might disagree with that, they're trying to follow the GW Codex > Rulebook situation. Look at the codexes with major issues - they're mostly older (SW, DH, WH, IG). Now, SW and IG should be replaced soon. =I= may hang around for awhile, since there's no rumors that a new =I= codex is in the works.

 

Yes, there's ruling in the INIT FAQ that most gamers won't agree with. Will I let my opponent have terminators rapid fire as if stationary? Yes. But, for :cuss in the tourney, there's an answer, if you're your on the wrong end, I feel bad for you, but you knew that coming into the tourney as well.

[WolfLordLars]

The B&C is not universally loved either. Spend some time on other boards and you'll see quite a bit of venom towards you. For fluff and painting tips B&C is excellent. If you want to learn rules and tactics than Dakkadakka is better.

 

Are you kidding me? There's a guy on Dakka who's seriously arguing that SW cannot use Ironclads, Redeemers or LS Storm. While I agree that B&C isn't universally loved, I have a lot more respect for B&C rules advice than Dakka's.

 

Of course, if you like it, then by all means, use it. I won't.

 

@ G.A.K.: I'm pretty sure the FAQ doesn't mention Leman Russes and their options ;-) .

 

And there are plenty of difficult posters here too. There are many people that like and post on both boards, attacking Dakka or any other forum will only drive fellow B&Cers away.

 

I think we are talking to one of the difficult posters.

 

I got onto DakkaDakka years ago, didnt care for the people involved or how they did things. To that same end, I stick to the SW section of this forum.

 

Their little document is full of errors that are clear as day if you actually read the rules. That whole "ironclad/redeemer/storm" issue seems to point to the fact that they are not the 'go-to' guys for rules. In my opinion, B&C does that quite well. Question is posted, opinions are given, answer is nailed down, we move on.

 

You like that forum, I dont. You will use their "rules". I wont. Its all good. Just dont start in with me because you happen to support it unless you want it coming right back at you.

[Grey Mage]

Crimson Devil, your argument does not hold water. Sorry. And you are selectivly misquoting the rulebook.

 

BBB, Pg 74:

 

If the [Ld] test is sucessful all models in the unit get +1 attack, exactly as if they too had assualted that turn.

 

Emphasis mine. Now this is fine, but in the case of Blood Claws and Ragnar, there is an additional clause that is activated as the Blood Claws assualt.

 

Codex: Space Wolves, Pg 10

 

They recieve a bonus of +2 attacks whenever they charge.

 

Now, I think we can all agree that charging and assaulting are the same thing. If Blood Claws move exactly as if assaulting, then Berserk Charge kicks in. Unfortunately it's the RAW.

 

Storm Caller I will admit probably doesn't work anymore as the rules don't really work the same. A clear FAQ on this would be nice, but nevermind.

 

Not misquoting anything. I believed the same as you not long ago, but I realized that Counter Attack and Assault/Charge are similar but not the same. In both previous editions they were considered different bonuses. "exactly as if they had assaulted that turn" is not the same as had assaulted that turn. A dog is not a cat despite both being animals.

So your telling me that a Relic Blade doesnt ignore armor saves? After all it "counts as" a power weapon... wich doesnt make it one, and the rules for Relic Blade dont say they ignore armor saves... simply that it strikes at Str6. Or that Vulcan hestan doesnt make any of your flamers or meltas twin linked, or your thunderhammers mastercrafted because after all... they only "count as" being that way. So sorry that you dont get a bonus for it.... you didnt need those rerolls did you?

 

Sorry man, but thats bollucks.

 

The rules for Bloodclaws states that their +2 bonus replaces the normal +1 bonus for charging. Charging=Assaulting. If youd like the full quote I can provide it.

[WG Vrox]

So I just received an email from one of the Orgainizers for Seattle's Indy GT Conquest

 

 

In which he stats

 

"We will be following the current FAQ, and utilizing Adepticon's guidelines as well. I think you'll find your questions answered there, as alluded to in your email to me."

 

 

Guess I will not be bringing my BC or RP for that event.

 

WG Vrox.

[Gondlir the Wandbearer]

And there are plenty of difficult posters here too.

 

Point, though I've noticed few enough on the Wolf forum here. There's (can't say the a-word, can I?) everywhere. IMO, though, Dakka seems to atttract them in unequal measures. Plus, I just don't care for their hardcore approach to rules wordings in a game by a company that has repeatedly proven to have no interest in creating watertight rules, that I mostly only play casually these days anyway.

 

Like WLL, I tend to stick to the forums here that interest me (Space Wolves and occasionally their arch-enemies, the Sons).

Other than that, my go-to forum for most warhammer stuff is Warseer.

[WolfLordLars]

Holy crap, another tournament?

 

Good lord, guess I need to turn our FAQ into a .pdf so it looks 'official'. Its a damn sight better than what they are peddling.

 

 

Anyway...

[Crimson Devil]

And there are plenty of difficult posters here too.

 

Point, though I've noticed few enough on the Wolf forum here. There's (can't say the a-word, can I?) everywhere. IMO, though, Dakka seems to atttract them in unequal measures. Plus, I just don't care for their hardcore approach to rules wordings in a game by a company that has repeatedly proven to have no interest in creating watertight rules, that I mostly only play casually these days anyway.

 

Like WLL, I tend to stick to the forums here that interest me (Space Wolves and occasionally their arch-enemies, the Sons).

Other than that, my go-to forum for most warhammer stuff is Warseer.

 

And there it is. I'm quiting this thread. I'm not going to waste anymore time defending Dakka or Yak from closed minds.

[obs0l3te]

well on a good note, I hear SHEVACON

 

Is going to be using the rules as they should be yaaay! one out of 3!!!

 

 

 

I simply cannot believe there is a argument about this. Peeps are pulling certain words out "Assault" "Charge" and saying they aren't the same...?

 

By the way it sounds if "assault" and "charge" are two different things then the whole berserk charge rule is invalid.

 

at any rate....

 

I assaulted the enemy lines with my troops.

I charged the enemy lines with my troops.

 

sounds the same to me?

[the jeske]

By the way it sounds if "assault" and "charge" are two different things then the whole berserk charge rule is invalid.

welcome to spain the place where the SW codex is banned from tournaments/.

[LPetersson]

welcome to spain the place where the SW codex is banned from tournaments/.

 

Unfortunately I don't speak Spanish, so could you tell me if it is the translation into Spanish that causes confusion?

[Max_Dammit]

as far as i know there is no Spanish FAQ, and thats where the problem starts, they cant use the English one, don't ask me why

[LPetersson]

Huh? What?

 

Are your rulebooks in English or Spanish?

And what do you do for the other FAQs? I.e. The 5th edition FAQ and the FAQs for the other armies?