Astra Militarum Typos/Issues/FAQ needed

[hendrik]

Ah, yes,  found it!

[Malus Trux]

Malus, is the vehicle within 12" when he's on board? ;)

Yes but unlike the fixit rule it doesn't say if he's embarked & while I would argue the same point I just want to be sure there's no loopholes.

[Minsc]

What LD is the Tank Commander/Pask supposed to have from a "pick your Warlord"-PoV?

They have LD -, but can obviously be the Warlord (Pask especially, since he has a Warlord Trait.)

By RAW, silly as it sounds, a Tank Commander/Pask can never be your Warlord if you include -any- other HQ option, even priests, comissars, primaris psykers and enginseers, since they all have higher Ld than "-".

By RAI, the Tank commanders and Pask obviously has Ld9, but it isn't actually stated anywhere.

[Raulmichile]

Another question,since orders don't have to be resolved immediately anymore, can you stack orders on a unit? First rank fire,second rank fire and take aim come to mind

I'm reading the rule and I'm not so shure about the order not having to be carried on immediately by the ordered unit. To me the wording implies you have, but I admit it is not cristal clear as the last eeition,

[Malus Trux]

By RAW, silly as it sounds, a Tank Commander/Pask can never be your Warlord if you include -any- other HQ option, even priests, comissars, primaris psykers and enginseers, since they all have higher Ld than "-".

Those can't be the Warlord as they do not take up an HQ slot and as such can't be taken as the compulsory HQ. CCS & Lord Commissar however do count in your question.

[Spacefrisian]

Look out sir in a tank?, now i imagin this other tank jumping in front of the Tankcommander with his tank when this Ork Nob is about to tear that tank open with his powerklaw, sure is a funny sight.

[Thoqqu]

Regarding the heirloom bolt pistol, BRB states how character's attack becomes precision shot/strike. The actual function for precision shots/strikes is then explained in bold. However those are not explicitly stated to be available only to characters, for reference see sniper usr. (Regarding take aim).

 

Ergo all shots from The Emperor's Benediction can be targeted by the shooter, since they are precision shots.

 

On an other note, Just realised this, tank commanders are not limited to just one so you can take 15 leman russes in a list if you want to and have Pask as your warlord to boot =P

30 with double foc...

[Seahawk]

 

Yes but unlike the fixit rule it doesn't say if he's embarked & while I would argue the same point I just want to be sure there's no loopholes.

No loopholes, no worries. It's just like any other "within X inches" bubble effect rules.

 

@Minsc: Good call on the TC Ld! I'll add it in.

 

 

I'm reading the rule and I'm not so shure about the order not having to be carried on immediately by the ordered unit. To me the wording implies you have, but I admit it is not cristal clear as the last eeition,

That wasn't his question; you can't have more than one order on a unit, and that unit can perform it's action at any point during the shooting phase, not just at the start anymore. This was discussed elsewhere though.

 

 

 

Minsc, on 17 Apr 2014 - 19:07, said:

By RAW, silly as it sounds, a Tank Commander/Pask can never be your Warlord if you include -any- other HQ option, even priests, comissars, primaris psykers and enginseers, since they all have higher Ld than "-".

 

Those can't be the Warlord as they do not take up an HQ slot and as such can't be taken as the compulsory HQ. CCS & Lord Commissar however do count in your question.

They can be, actually. That they don't count as compulsory means nothing when the rule says:

 

"This is always the HQ choice character with the highest Leadership."

 

So yes, if you take a tank commander and any other Ld choice, the tank commander cannot be your warlord. They don't count for compulsory choices, but they're still HQ's for all intents and purposes.

 

 

Look out sir in a tank?

Not all that far-fetched. For the USAF, Air Force One's escort pilots are trained and expected to intercept enemy missiles with their own jets. Escort ships take the hits for the bigger important ships. Is it too crazy to imagine one commander seeing a threat his boss doesn't, and acts selflessly to save him (the whole reason behind "LO,S!" rolls).

 

 

 

Regarding the heirloom bolt pistol, BRB states how character's attack becomes precision shot/strike. The actual function for precision shots/strikes is then explained in bold. However those are not explicitly stated to be available only to characters, for reference see sniper usr

Sniper does not have the Precision Shot special rule, so this is a bad reference. When rolling to hit with a sniper weapon, if you roll a 6, then it results in a Precision Shot, at which point it references page 63. The rule "Precision Shot" is still undefined, unlike "Precision Shots", which are quite clearly laid out on p.63. When the label is placed on a model or weapon, we just don't know what it does at this time.

 

It could be written for 6.5/7th edition, when this is better laid out for us. 

[Cpt_Reaper]

Issue raised by my club on the TC:

 

Squadron rules, BRB,  page 77: Abandoning squad-mates
If a member of a squadron is Immobilised, the rest of the squadron are permitted to 'abandon it'. To do so, the rest of the Squadron must move out of cohenrency with it; treat the Immobilised model(s) as a separate unit from then on.

 

TC rules, Am codex, page 32: Leman Russ Commander

A Tank Commander and his Leman Russ Squadron count as an HQ choice for the entire of the battle. The Tank Commander's Leman Russ cannot leave the unit or join another unit, even if the rest of his squadron are destroyed.

 

RAW Issue: If the TC is Immobilised, the whole unit may not move until he is destroyed as they cannot abandon him.

[RolandTHTG]

Issue raised by my club on the TC:

 

Squadron rules, BRB,  page 77: Abandoning squad-mates

If a member of a squadron is Immobilised, the rest of the squadron are permitted to 'abandon it'. To do so, the rest of the Squadron must move out of cohenrency with it; treat the Immobilised model(s) as a separate unit from then on.

 

TC rules, Am codex, page 32: Leman Russ Commander

A Tank Commander and his Leman Russ Squadron count as an HQ choice for the entire of the battle. The Tank Commander's Leman Russ cannot leave the unit or join another unit, even if the rest of his squadron are destroyed.

 

RAW Issue: If the TC is Immobilised, the whole unit may not move until he is destroyed as they cannot abandon him.

I think that is how GW intended it to work. No Issues from my perspective. Note that the non-TC tanks can move around the immobilized one, they just can't leave coherency.

[Minsc]

I think that is how GW intended it to work. No Issues from my perspective. Note that the non-TC tanks can move around the immobilized one, they just can't leave coherency.

 

Agreed. RAW it's clearly that way, and RAI can go either way, but I see no issue with the squadron being forced to stay around and "guard" their commander.

 

It both makes sense and is quite cool from a gameplay PoV.

[WarriorFish]

Good work everyone so far, this topic is being quite fruitful :)

[Hidicul]

I don't play Guard, but I have experience with a couple of your issues so figured I'd way in.

 

First Take Aim; from the quote on the rule I'd have to say treat it as only on a 6. Everything that has been put into a codex or FAQ thus far has been either its a 6, this model makes per scion shots on a to hit roll of "-", or all shots are. Going by these examples I'd say the intention is to give them access to persicion shots. Now if they FAQ it to be like the Vindicate all I can say is enjoy your Ward cheese and watch the rest of us complain about how broken you all ;)

 

Tank guys as warlord; now I can't remember if this is in the brb or not, however it is in most codexes for whatever reason, but whenever a vehical needs a leadership test it is considered to be LD 10. Now if you can field a vehicle as an HQ then to me that says he can be a warlord, also my vehicle HQ has to be my warlord unless I include one of the other two must be warlord guys, then I can choose which one it is. I'm sure you guys can field a Russ or whatever and have it be your warlord. Remember though, its no longer hard to take down vehicles, I've seen, and had Land raiders glanced to death before my turn one.

[BitsHammer]

I'm going to have to dispute this: "That wasn't his question; you can't have more than one order on a unit, and that unit can perform it's action at any point during the shooting phase, not just at the start anymore. This was discussed elsewhere though."

 

Page 28, first paragraph: "Orders are issued and their effects are resolved at the start of the Shooting Phase."

This means before you can go on to shooting anything else the orders have to be resolved. And in the case of shooting attacks the attack must be completed by the unit entirely before the next unit can act. To me that makes it pretty clear that the orders need to be issued, and resolved completely, at the start of the shooting phase completely before anything else runs or shoots during the phase.

[cypherthefallenangel]

"Take Aim"

"The ordered unit must make a shooting attack. When resolving this shooting attack, all models have the "precision shot" special rule."

 

No where does it say that a roll of 6 grants Precision shot.

 

From the glossary section of the codex AM.

"Precision shots:

Wounds from precision shots are allocated to the model/models of your choice in the target unit, as long it is with in range and line of sight of firing model rather than following the normal rules for wound allocation. This means that wounds generated from precision shots can be allocated to special weapons and even characters!

A character that has wounds allocated to it can still look out, sir.

Snapshots, weapons that scatter or dont roll to hit can not be precision shot."

 

This order is pretty self explanatory. ALL shots made by the ordered unit, that aren't snapshots, template, or blast ARE precision shots, not only rolls of 6.

I think you are overreacting trying to nerf the order. AM isn't Tau or Eldar or even close to what they are power wise. I for one will be using the order as it was clearly written and intended to be used.

Edited, the above quotes are verbatim from C:AM

[Heru]

I think the confusion has come from the hardback edition not including the information on precision shots, instead people have had to refer to the character access rule for precision shots in the paper version of the rulebook.

 

I'm really starting to wonder if it even worth continuing with the paper editions of the books anymore.

[Seahawk]

Let's not continue the debate for "6's vs auto" here; we all know it's an issue one way or the other, and there's an ++OR++ thread here that you can discuss it in.

 

@Fulkes: On the topic of order issuance vs timing, here's how I read it.

 

"Orders are issued and their effect resolved at the start of your Shooting phase. .../...issue and resolve each order one at a time."

 

"Unless an order causes the ordered unit to make a shooting attack or Run, receiving it does not prevent the ordered unit from acting later in that phase, whether the order was successful or not."

 

Now, to the orders.

- "The ordered unit must make a shooting attack."

- "The ordered unit must Run."

 

Yes, the ordered unit must do this thing. It doesn't say when it must do this thing, however. Compare to before, where the verbiage was:

 

- "the squad immediately carries out the order"

- "the ordered unit immediately shoots/runs/goes to ground"

 

To me, it's quite clear that the order is issued (Ld test) and resolved (gains Precision, Pinning, Ignores Cover, etc). Then you issue remaining orders. Then the units can act/shoot in whatever order you wish, because they aren't, unlike before, required to immediately act on that order. Plus, the whole underlined part kinda clues us in. ;)

[BitsHammer]

I'm pretty sure the fact that the order must be "resolved" at the start of the shooting phase says when to do it right there. You don't get to order and then not do anything, you have to complete acting out the orders before anything else can happen in that phase. Actually the line you quoted sums it up nicely:

 

"Orders are issued and their effect resolved at the start of your Shooting phase. .../...issue and resolve each order one at a time."

 

So orders are issued and resolved completely before the next order is issued at the top of the Shooting phase. So if the unit passes, it needs to complete that order immediately before anything else gets to act. I don't see any gray areas here or loopholes to abuse in this.

[Seahawk]

It doesn't say it must act out immediately. The orders are only saying that that unit must take that action during that phase, not right when the order is issued.

[Fibonacci]

"Unless an order causes the ordered unit to make a shooting attack or Run, receiving it does not prevent the ordered unit from acting later in that phase, whether the order was successful or not."

[clipped]]

Plus, the whole underlined part kinda clues us in.

So ... if the unit is ordered to make a shooting attack but does not do so at that time, then it cannot take an action later in that phase.

[Seahawk]

No, that's saying it can act later in the phase if the order was successful.

 

The orders aren't saying "must make an immediate shooting attack", or "causes this unit to make an immediate shooting attack." It's just "must make a shooting attack", without any indication as to WHEN they need to do this, only that they must do it at some point that phase.

[BitsHammer]

It doesn't say it must act out immediately. The orders are only saying that that unit must take that action during that phase, not right when the order is issued.

It says the order must be issued and resolved one at a time at the start of the shooting phase. I don't see how you can not resolve it immediately before moving onto ordering the next unit. It doesn't have to use the word "immediately" because it tells you to resolve the order before issuing the next order. The only way you could do this is by doing it immediately after issuing the order but before issuing the next order. Why do we need to be redundant and put the word "immediately" in there too?

[Plague Angel]

"Unless an order causes the ordered unit to make a shooting attack or Run, receiving it does not prevent the ordered unit from acting later in that phase, whether the order was successful or not."

Read that again with a different emphasis:

 

"Unless an order causes the ordered unit to make a shooting attack or Run receiving it does not prevent the ordered unit from acting later in that phase, whether the order was successful again."

 

It seems pretty clear that the ordered shooting attack or the ordered running is the unit's action in the phase, and thus does prevent further action later.

[BitsHammer]

 

"Unless an order causes the ordered unit to make a shooting attack or Run, receiving it does not prevent the ordered unit from acting later in that phase, whether the order was successful or not."

Read that again with a different emphasis:

 

"Unless an order causes the ordered unit to make a shooting attack or Run receiving it does not prevent the ordered unit from acting later in that phase, whether the order was successful again."

 

It seems pretty clear that the ordered shooting attack or the ordered running is the unit's action in the phase, and thus does prevent further action later.

Yup. There is only one order that doesn't follow the pattern of shooting or running ("Get back in the fight!") and that one even goes on to mention that it lets you shoot, run and assault as normal just to make sure everything is clear on what the unit can/can't do. So basically the orders have to happen at the start of the shooting phase, are resolved completely before any following orders can be issued or anything else happens, and then if they didn't make you shoot or run you can still act normally (which looks like a clause mostly put in there for "Get back in the fight!" but can also apply to Krieg's Move Through Cover order), otherwise they've completed their action for the turn and are done for the turn.

[Seahawk]

Compare to Tank Orders, which still include the "immediately" verbiage, except for Strike and Shroud. Would you argue that this must be done immediately, despite the clear difference in timing between that order and the others?