Warhammer 40k Core Rules Leaked

[toaae]

2 minutes ago, Doctor Perils said:

Does that mean Abaddon's ability only procs once per turn max? And is that per player turn or battle round?

 

Once per battle round.

[Doctor Perils]

Man that's considerably less effective considering its gated behind both a leadership test and another dice roll

[marspeople]

Considering you start the game with 0 CP and only gain 1 per turn, even just 1 bonus one will be significant.

[phandaal]

That rule about no standing on objectives is definitely gonna be abused against knights and big monsters/vehicles.

[Khornestar]

5 minutes ago, phandaal said:

That rule about no standing on objectives is definitely gonna be abused against knights and big monsters/vehicles.

Someone posted this in discord: the knight can’t charge the Russ:

 

[Ammonius]

15 minutes ago, Khornestar said:

the knight can’t charge the Russ:

Is that an objective in between them?

 

[Khornestar]

34 minutes ago, Ammonius said:

Is that an objective in between them?

 

Sorry, yeah. Meant to include that info.

[Dudley Nightshade]

35 minutes ago, Ammonius said:

Is that an objective in between them?

 

I think the thing on the 40mm(?) base sitting on top of the logo is the objective.

[phandaal]

14 minutes ago, Dudley Nightshade said:

I think the thing on the 40mm(?) base sitting on top of the logo is the objective.

 

Yep. In 10th, models cannot end a move on an objective marker. So that Leman Russ is protected from the charging knight because the knight cannot fit in between it and the objective.

 

Expect to see this one abused big time, then FAQed into oblivion.

[Arkangilos]

1 hour ago, Khornestar said:

Someone posted this in discord: the knight can’t charge the Russ:

 

Just cut an objective sized hole in the base. His leg isn’t on it and his base isn’t on it so he isn’t standing on it :p

[Dark Shepherd]

1 hour ago, Khornestar said:

Someone posted this in discord: the knight can’t charge the Russ:

 

Knight gets 10 victory points more for being painted :)

 

Could it make it if it moved its base sideways?

[DemonGSides]

Can't end a movement covering an objective marker.

Good positioning on that IG player.

[Vassakov]

I wonder whether that might get FAQ'd to "unless this move is part of a charge move. When a model consolidates or piles in, it must move off the objective unless that move would take it out of engagement range of an enemy unit it began the move in engagement range of."

 

Stops the "lol my models are unchangeable because your base is big" but I fear rules lawyers would have fun with the above...

[Emicus]

9 hours ago, Khornestar said:

Someone posted this in discord: the knight can’t charge the Russ:

 

User error. Terrain is gamily placed
 

Put the terrain slightly closer and the objective won't matter either. Does that mean terrain is broken?

[Mogger351]

47 minutes ago, Emicus said:

User error. Terrain is gamily placed
 

Put the terrain slightly closer and the objective won't matter either. Does that mean terrain is broken?

Not sure I agree, a knight would fit through that gap sideways comfortably, there's no rules against the objective being close to the terrain  and I aren't convinced having the entire objective area a minimum of 2" away from any terrain, just in case the knight wants to charge something, represents a good set up.

[Rune Priest Jbickb]

I've read through the transport section like 3 times and I'm still not sure if you can stick multiple units in a transport.... anyone see what I missed?

[Doobles57]

4 minutes ago, Rune Priest Jbickb said:

I've read through the transport section like 3 times and I'm still not sure if you can stick multiple units in a transport.... anyone see what I missed?

I can't see anything that stops you putting more than one unit in a transport. Later in the mission rules there's a note that Dedicated Transports must start with at least one unit embarked, which implies more than one unit can be embarked.

[Petitioner's City]

13 minutes ago, Rune Priest Jbickb said:

I've read through the transport section like 3 times and I'm still not sure if you can stick multiple units in a transport.... anyone see what I missed?

 

I think it's clear more than one unit can be in a transport:

 

Quote

TRANSPORT CAPACITY

 

All TRANSPORT models have a transport capacity listed on their datasheet. This determines the type and maximum number of friendly models that can embark within them. 

 

Units can start the battle embarked within a TRANSPORT model instead of being set up separately - declare which units are embarked within a TRANSPORT model before you set it up.

 

[Xenith]

11 hours ago, Khornestar said:

Someone posted this in discord: the knight can’t charge the Russ:

 

 

Seems like the IG player has used the rules of the game to their advantage, and thematically blocked a choke point with one of their tanks, no doubt the crew selling their lives to halt the knight advance. Naturally, the knight will refuse to stomp all over the ancient archaoetech that the objective represents, their whole reason for being on this battlefield in the first place - to do so and fail in such a fashion would bring unimaginable dishonour to his house and anger his martian allies, who he needs to repair his knight. 

[Emperor Ming]

That's some really shady terrain placement

[Petitioner's City]

4 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

That's some really shady terrain placement

 

It's also something the book actively discourages

 

 

[Rune Priest Jbickb]

2 hours ago, Petitioner's City said:

 

I think it's clear more than one unit can be in a transport:

 

 

This is where I was coming down on it too, I just wish it was more explicitly stated. Seem a bit gray the way they worded it. It would have been easy to explicitly state.

[Khornestar]

I guess I have mixed feelings about it. 
 

On one hand, allowing models to stand on top of the objective would prevent the can’t-move problem, but then it opens up the blocking-off problem if a knight stands on the center of the objective with its huge base.

 

On the other hand, this new rule leads to the situation in the picture, which careless or unsportsmanlike players will use to their advantage, prevented only by a suggestion to play nice (essentially)? That… doesn’t seem good enough.

 

I agree with those saying the person who placed the terrain did so against the spirit of the game. Maybe we should get accustomed to measuring the largest base being used in a given game and make sure it can be accommodated by terrain placement, but does that not feel a bit “extra” and cumbersome? Just an extra few seconds, so not the end of the world of course.

 

Not sure I can think of a better alternative on 7 minutes of wakefulness and no coffee, but both situations are awkward and make for bad gameplay. I guess the spirit of fair play must prevail for this new rule to work out positively. I could foresee tournaments using more standardized terrain placement for this reason.

Edited May 30, 2023 by Khornestar

[DemonGSides]

The rules even suggest specific terrain features.

I also think a fair play would be to say that the knight can smash right through those low walls NBD, so we can just move the terrain piece alittle to accomodate the knight, then return it to where it was once the charge/fight is finished.  Obviously not good enough for a tournament, but I don't care about that edge case.

[Xenith]

1 hour ago, Petitioner's City said:

 

It's also something the book actively discourages

 

 

 

You're conflating the objective marker itself, and the 3" zone of control around it. In the above image, the objective is neither on, nor within 1" of a terrain feature, while the 3" zone from the objective includes the ruins, so this play is perfectly legal. 

 

Placment of objectives near terrain, or vice versa, is nothing new. Neither is positioning terrain in such a way that prohibits movement of large models - that's the downside to their raw power. In the above example, the knight player should have sent a smaller knight in there instead of the larger. Omnissiah knows they have enough movement to do whetever the hell they want. 

 

Similarly, sitting large models directly on top of an objective was an issue in 9th - if that knight got there first it could have put one end of it's base on top of the objective, and forced any models charging it from a specific direction no not be able to get within 3" of the objective. 

 

Edited May 30, 2023 by Xenith