Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

If you can see this message, the SSL certificate expiration has been fixed.
Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 186 KB, 1028x567, technical_thread.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
33900815 No.33900815 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Howdy elegan/tg/entlemen. Welcome to another Warhammer 40K 7th edition Rules and Technical Questions thread. Feel free to ask a question about anything rules or codex related and the enlightened community of /tg/ will provide the answer.

to start us off...

Is there a limit to how many 'look out sirs' I can attempt? Say my squad of muhrines with an attached librarian is hit with a strength 8, ap 3 large pie plate-- and the librarian is in the front of the pack (closest to the firer (non barrage)) , can I really take 10 "look out sirs" with all 10 muhreens, if all are within 6'' of the librarian??

>> No.33902696

Why does no one talk 40k when I want opinions?

>> No.33902698

>>33900815
Pretty much. Allocate to closest that is within range, rinse and repeat.

>> No.33902736

Ok, two questions.

If I'm using Abbadon how do I use his weapons since he has two with different stats and special abilities?

Also, because he has all four marks, and it doesn't say "included in his stats" does this mean he's initiative 7 and toughness 6?

>> No.33902790

>>33902736
You pick one or the other during his step in close combat. Keep in mind you still get a +1 for two weapons.

As for the marks, I believe he does get bonuses not in his stats.

>> No.33902805

>>33902790
Ok, thanks.

>> No.33902843

Not so much rules as advice, but:
Would I get my ass kicked if I replaced my LRC with a Stormwolf? If it matters there aren't termies in it.

>> No.33902930

Units with the Battlesmith rule, such as Magos Dominus or Arch-Magos, can repair robutts if they are in base contact with them.

However, every single robutt (Castellax, Vorax, Thanatar, etc) is a monstrous creature. This means that units can't join them or get within 1" of them.

So...does that mean it's impossible to repair a robutt, or am I missing a way to get the magos to touch the robutt?

>> No.33902941

New to 7th so haven't read everything since I still need to pick up the book but attacking vehicles, is it still 3+ if moved normally and 6+ if moved at cruising?

>> No.33902950

What's the easiest way to squeeze a few more HQ slots into my army?

>> No.33902981

>>33900815
Forgeworld Rule response:

Does Chaff give the 4+ Invulnerable to weapons with the Missile Type Profile or any missile weapon (common sense.)

The response is: ANY WEAPON with the word MISSILE in its title = 4+ Invulnerable.

Krak Missile, Flakk Missiles, Smart Missiles, etc.

>> No.33903008

>>33902950
1. Play unbound
2. Play Space Wolves
3. Take any option that gives you access to a retinue (Seer Council, Court of the Archon, Necron Court, SM Command Squad, etc.)
4. Tech-priests or Techmarines don't take up FOC slots.

>> No.33903124

>>33903008
I'm playan Orks

>> No.33903168

>>33903124
I haven't seen the new book yet, so I can't help much. Though if nothing has changed, you can still get an easy Mek or Painboy into a lot of units via upgrade.

>> No.33903223

>>33903124
Take 2 troops for every 2 HQs you want, done.

>> No.33903375

>>33903223
do Warbosses still let you take nobs/meganobs as troops?

>> No.33903387

How are flyers in 7th? They were strong early 6th, but then everyone got a way to deal with them. Any big changes?

>> No.33903451

>>33903375
no

>> No.33903598
File: 21 KB, 472x444, 1400749683206.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
33903598

>>33903451
Why do they hate us?

>> No.33903618

>>33902930

That was a rule that became invalid with the change from 6e to 7e. No way to restore battle-automata wounds now.

>> No.33903640

>>33903618
>No way to restore battle-automata wounds now.

You can still cast IWND on them.

>> No.33903649

What happens if a psyker gets Possesion off, but also gets a perils, and said perils is the one that removes the psyker. Does that mean the spell cannot go off because the psyker cannot be removed therefore the criteria for the spell cannot be met?

>> No.33903678

>>33903649
yes

>> No.33903710

>>33903640

Speaking of cybertheurgy, that actually leads to another question.

What the fuck happens when you cast Rite of Dread Castigation and roll a miscast fuckup? Did you just mishap the enemy ANYWAY?

>> No.33903734

>>33903710
I'd say yea

>> No.33903793

I dont understand chain swords on CSM. What is the benefit of giving them a chain sword instead of a bolter? Does it give them an extra CC attack?

What about champions that have a bolter and a power sword? Do they get an extra attack?

There is so much more in these rules that is unclear.

>> No.33903810

>>33903793
>Does it give them an extra CC attack?

yes

>Do they get an extra attack?

no

>> No.33903818

>>33903793
Yes.

Chain + Bolt pistol = +1 to base attack
Bolt gun doesnt confer this

>> No.33903856

>>33903793
You get an extra attack for having two CC weapons. If a unit has bolt pistols, giving them a chainsword will give them two weapons, and thus +1A. Bolters aren't CC weapons, so bolter+chainsword doesn't give +1A.

>> No.33903999

>>33903810
>>33903818
>>33903856

Thank you anon

>> No.33904015

>>33903793

It's not unclear at all you just have a shit grasp of the rules.

>> No.33904326

>>33902950

There is no FOC limit until 2000 points anymore.

>> No.33904373

>>33903387

Flyers are the same in 7th.

>> No.33904644

>>33904326
guess I'm takin some grots then

>> No.33904793

>>33902843
In real life you would

>> No.33904847
File: 99 KB, 658x596, ork warband chart.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
33904847

>>33903124
>>33903223
The Ork Warband allows you to take three HQs

>> No.33904885

>>33904793
Is that a joke or a competitive thing?

>> No.33904894

>>33904847
>no objective secured

>> No.33904912

>>33904847
meh, its better to take 2 HQs for every 2 troops, make them painboys and spread that FNP around.

>> No.33904953
File: 380 KB, 1090x717, 1397441389900.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
33904953

I have a few FW models such as a Contemptor Pattern Dreadnought, will this make my list unbound or is there a way to make it FoC legal?

>> No.33904954

>>33904894
Boohoo, just have to kill all the enemy defenders instead
Don't forget to fill a couple of troop slots with 35 point grot mobs (or 30 point trukks, they can be bought on their own now and count as scoring) to sit on objectives so the boyz are free to advance instead of babysitting markers

>> No.33904956

>>33904912
>6+ FNP

I fail to understand why everyone thinks this is so good

>> No.33904978

>>33904953
Forge World models are legal for standard play, so long as you have the rules.

>> No.33904986

>>33904956
Painboys is normal FNP, so 5+.

>> No.33905009

>>33904986
oh well shit that's pretty OK i guess

>> No.33905013

>>33904978
Thank you!

>> No.33905043

Could someone explain detachments to me? Mostly what I'm wondering is, can a heavy support unit from an allied detachment join a primary combined arms detachment on the board if the allies' HQ is in reserve?

>> No.33905072

>>33905043
I don't know what you're asking. You're asking if you're allowed to keep your allied HQ in reserve but not the other parts of his detatchment?

If so, yes.

>> No.33905116

>>33905043
Detachments do not matter at all for deciding which units will start the game in reserve or on the board

>> No.33905117

>>33904978
Legal yes, but good luck getting every Triptide Double Riptide Gunlining Wave Serpent spamming faggot to allow them.

>> No.33905128

>>33905072
>>33905116
That's exactly what I was asking, thanks.

>> No.33905163

>>33905117
>playing against people who field cheese

Riptides are countered extremely easily
>Do you want to play?
>No

>> No.33905248

>>33905117
i never play with those sort of faggots, so long as the rules are legit my people are always cool with stuff.

>> No.33905356
File: 98 KB, 677x434, Stonecrusher_Carnifex.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
33905356

>>33900815
How does /tg/ feel about the Stonecrusher Carnifex?

>> No.33905377

>>33905356
Its nice

>> No.33905400

>>33905356
it's an actual useful carnifex that people occasionally cry over because they're not use to nids being a threat

>> No.33906152

How do I set up terrain without it being shitty?

>> No.33906231

>>33906152

One large line of sight blocker in the center.

One medium line of sight blocker on each corner of the table.

That's pretty much all you need. You can scatter small area terrain or less LoS blocking terrain throughout if you want, but 7E removing area terrain makes it not much more than some interesting things to walk over.

>> No.33906646

Fellow beards, I come with two quandries

1- Now that the Dark Angels FAQ has been changed, does the force field generator work from inside vehicles again?

2- Does the standard of devastation affect storm bolters?

>> No.33906758

>>33906646
>1- Now that the Dark Angels FAQ has been changed, does the force field generator work from inside vehicles again?

If you're referring to the months old 7th edition FAQs, yes, they removed the nerf to DA wargear in vehicles.

If you're talking about a recent FAQ change to DA then I dunno.

>> No.33906818

Not played a game with my Catachans yet. Here is a 100pt list based on what models I've got. Critique from experienced IG players most welcome.

Company Command squad 60
Vox-caster 5
Col. “Iron Hand” Straken 130

Infantry Platoon
Platoon Command Squad 30
Vox-caster 5
Heavy-flamer 10
Flamer x2 10

Infantry Squad 50
Vox-caster 5
Flamer 5

Infantry Squad 50
Vox-caster 5
Flamer 5

Heavy Weapons Squad 45
Autocannon x3 30

Veterans 60
Meltagun x3 30
Demolitions 30


Scout Sentinel Squadron 105
Autocannon x3 15
Camo-netting 45

Valkyrie Squadron 125
Heavy Bolters 20

Basilisk 125

>> No.33906979

Is the Sicaran as good as I think it is? S 7 AP 4 Heavy 6 Twinlinked, Rending, Ignores Jink will destroy a wave serpent's day. For just 135 points.

>> No.33907022

>>33906646
>Does the standard of devastation affect storm bolters?
Currently, RAW, yes. Also Heavy Bolters and even Vulcan Mega-bolters, assuming you can get them.

However, expect people to whine about it, and it's been explicitly banned from most major tournaments:
http://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/40k-faq/

>> No.33907298

>>33906979
As someone who plays 30k. Yes it's fantastic

>> No.33907378

>>33902736
>>33902790
Abaddon has T5 and I6. He has all marks and they are already included in his profile because the mark rule says models that start with the marks already have them included. And don't try to go around it by saying "it's a different special rule", it's not. It's just a rule that says he has all marks.

>> No.33907439

>>33905400
If you let carnifexes get into close combat you deserve it. They can't even deep strike anymore. They have to march ALL THE WAY across the board to whatever they want to fuck up. You have 3, maybe 2 turns if the board is small to bring them down, most armies should be able to bring those down before they get into assault range with some focussed fire.

>> No.33907599

>>33902941
Wasn't even that in 6ed

Its now just ws1 all the time unless it gets immobolized. Not moving or being stunned doesn't let you auto-hit them either

>> No.33907685

I've got four questions that come up often in my FLGS and nobody knows how to answer them.

If an independent character is joined to a unit that all has the Brotherhood of Sorcerer's rule and that character successfully casts Possession, is the entire unit destroyed as well?

Do vehicles get a cover save against Grav weapons?
Do Grav weapons work off of Majority save or on a model-by-model basis?


With the changes to Jink, meaning you do it after they roll to hit, can you now jink Markerlights?

>> No.33907698

>>33906979

Only bad thing about it is the cost and size of the model.

Also it has the relic restriction on it.

>> No.33907868

>>33907685
>Possession
No. The idea is to see each psyker unit as separate units based on your army list. If you bought a psyker and a Brotherhood of Sorcerers these are two separate psyker units and thus, even if the IC joined the squad, is still a separate psyker. The same goes for casting the same spell with a psyker joined psychic squad. Both separately bought units can both cast the spell.

>Grav weapons cover save
As long as the grav weapon does not have Ignores Cover, then yes, you can take cover saves as normal.

>Grav and majority save
Majority roll and when tied use the highest/weakest armour save.

>Jink Marklights
First of, you decide to Jink BEFORE any To Hit rolls are made. Secondly, yes, you may Jink against Markerlights.

>> No.33907896

>>33907868
Thank you.

>> No.33908042

>>33907868
>Jink against Markerlight shots
nope

>> No.33908855

>>33908042
And why not?

>> No.33908874

>>33908042
Nevermind, no saves can be taken. You're right. Fuck me for hating Tau so much I barely know their rules (and no one I know really plays a lot with them.)

>> No.33908913

>>33907685
>>33907868
>No. The idea is to see each psyker unit as separate units based on your army list. If you bought a psyker and a Brotherhood of Sorcerers these are two separate psyker units and thus, even if the IC joined the squad, is still a separate psyker. The same goes for casting the same spell with a psyker joined psychic squad. Both separately bought units can both cast the spell.

Totally reasonable but it doesn't actually say that anywhere. All you have is the rules for ICs joining units to form new units. And it clearly says they become a new single unit.

"When an Independent Character joins a unit, he counts as part of that unit for all rules purposes..."
pg. 166

If a rule says the whole unit is destroyed, then the whole unit is destroyed, Independent Character included.

If a rule says that a unit cannot attempt to manifest the same psychic power more than once per phase, then that means the whole unit including any Independent Characters that are part of that unit.

How the units/models are selected in the Army List has no bearing on how they behave once they game is underway, in this case.

>> No.33909331

How do Deffkoptas drop their bombs? The bomb rule says only flyers and FMCs can drop them.

>> No.33909519

I want to start an Adepta Sororitas army. What should I get?

>> No.33909733

>>33908855
No saves can be taken against Markerlights.
It's fucking retarded and would make cover a lot better against them (How the fuck are you placing targeting shit on my guys that are jinking around your shitty BS3?) and make the game a lot more balanced. But nope, Markerlights continue to be broke as shit.

>> No.33909860

>>33909331
Actually, it doesn't say that at all.

What it says is:

>"Bombs are weapon types unique to Flyers and Flying Monstrous Creatures."
and
>"To make a Bombing Run, a Flyer must be Zooming; a Flying Monstrous Creature must be Swooping."
and
>"Move the model that is making the Bombing Run, and then nominate one model that it passed over. Place the blast marker....."

Now the second doesn't affect Deffkoptas, as they are neither Flyers nor FMCs. So they merely follow the third quote.

However, according to that first line, bombs are unique to Flyers and FMCs- so, RAW, Deffkoptas might not even be able to take bombs at all.

I could read it three ways-

1. Bombs are unique to Flyers and FMCs. Deffkoptas cannot take them.
2. Codices override the BRB where there is conflict, so we ignore the first quote.
3. The first quote is fluff, not crunch, so we ignore it.

This is all of course RAW, RAI is obvious. There is not yet any errata on this matter.

>> No.33911544

>>33909519
A card with no credit limit.

>> No.33911766

>>33909519
>I want to start an Adepta Sororitas army

why would you ever want that

>> No.33911823

>>33904015
fuck you. there are many things in 40K that are buried in strange sextions of the rule book or codex

>> No.33911862

>>33911766
Why not?

Noobfag here

>> No.33911915

>>33911862
ancient, ugly, expensive even for 40k, metal models

boring fluff, space marines are the same but more variety

even more irrelevant to the setting than Tau

games workshop barely acknowledges they exist

outdated as fuck even with the new book

>> No.33911962

>>33911915
Ah fuck...
Can I play Space Marines with some Battle Sister then?

>> No.33912005

>>33909519
Saint Celestine, 12 bolter bitches, 4 heavy bolters, 4 heavy flamers, 4 flamers, five superiours, four immolators and three exorcists

>> No.33912024

>>33911962
SoB counts-as Codex: Space Marines? Might work.

>> No.33912303

>>33911962
Depends. What about the Sisters do you want to use?

>> No.33912399

>>33912303
Seraphims and Battle Sisters. Is that possible?

>> No.33913387

>>33912399
Here is what you do Anon...

Get a Space Marine army. A basic, solid one. Learn to play first since this is cheaper.

Sisters are, legitimately, hard-mode. They are under-powered and over-priced in every sense. You are looking at $90 a squad for Sisters vs. $30 a squad (with discounts from some stores or so) for Marines.

Marines are pose-able multi-part plastic kits. Sisters are single-pose molded metal you can't convert significantly.

If you enjoy your marines? Then buy the following.

1x Saint
10x Serpahin, Melta-pistols a must.
20x Sisters, make sure to get meltas.
1x Sister with Multi Melta
1x Immolator with Multi Melta

This makes for a good 500-ish point ally for a space marine army and you only spend about $200-400 depending on your sources (New vs ebay.)

Play wise - the Seraphim with Saint can swoop in and fuck shit up. The sisters provide a blob squad and meltas. Immolator gives you some mobile melta transport fun. (Maximum of 6 sisters can ride inside though.)

>> No.33913445

>>33913387
Thx anon!

>> No.33913691

>>33913445
Also to add - you could go the Imperial Guard route.

Guard = High body count and/or a lot of tanks, survivability factor is lower.
Marines = Fewer bodies but better at killing, survivability factor is higher.
Sisters = A mix between the above, without access to heavy armor, reliable artillery.
Scions = Sisters but with fewer bodies and aircraft
Inquisition = Add on for any of the above
Knights = Allies to the above


Guard and Marines are most well rounded. Sisters are -almost- there, but the physical cost ($$$) of their models prevents you from being efficient. Then their rules make them difficult to play. The lack of heavy armor (lemans and land raiders) can be supplemented with allied in units...but honestly?

Sisters work better as an ally than a primary army. You'll want to use them to get a lot of meltas on the field if you are trying to play competitively. If it is just for fluff then do w/e you want but dont expect a win.

>> No.33913879

would drop pods bought as DT for a pedro's scoring sternguard count as objective secured in Abattleforged army?

why, why not?

>> No.33913900

>>33913879
Yes.
And it also does so in an unbound army.
Pedro's rules are cray-cray.

>> No.33914282
File: 21 KB, 410x385, smart sluger.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
33914282

Question! we all know that we can now ally two detachments of the same faction together as battle brothers. Now I have a list idea for orks. As you know orks got the normal book and the Ghazy rule book with different warlord traits, relics, and rules. If I have two different detachments but they are both ork faction but each are from the two separate books... does that mean that all the special rules of both detachments can be used by the other? For example, the Greentide Stampede rule in the ghazy book affecting an ork detachment from normal ork book.

>> No.33914314

>>33914282
Special rules for detachments only go to units in that detachment.

However, if your Warboss from D1 joins into a squad that has the Greentide Stampede rule from D2 - he would benefit

>> No.33915794

>>33900815
>Waaagh!: Once per game, at the start of any of your turns after the first, a model with this
special rule can, if he is your Warlord, call a Waaagh! On the turn he does so, all friendly
units made up entirely of models with the ’Ere We Go! special rule may charge in the Assault
phase even if they made a Run move in the same turn.

So does this mean Stormboyz can assault out of deepstrike? Note that it says: all friendly
units (...) may charge in the Assault
phase (...).

RAI this shoudln't work, but RAW it means any unit with HWG can charge, whatever would otherwise stop it.

>> No.33915855

If I put two twelve inch movers in the same unit that are different kinds of units (chaos lord with jump pack, in a squad of chaos spawn) Can I still get the twelve inch move?

>> No.33915920

>>33915855
Yes.

>> No.33915935

>>33915794
Fuck no it doesn't. You can't just chop words out of sentences and call it RAW. WAAAGH lets you assault even if you ran, that's it.

>> No.33916459

>>33915935
I didn't chop anything that is important for this sentence regarding my question.
It says units may assault, <even if>, which means they can all assault.
Out of curiosity, have you ever taken a course in formal logic?

>> No.33916526

i dont understand how FNP works.

I have a unit of 'ard boyz with a painboy added.

when throwing my saves, do i still go for my 4+ armour save and then 5+ FNP?

>> No.33916541

>>33916459
The predicate of that sentence clearly defines the situation in which the rule allows you to assault.

>> No.33916570

>>33916526
Yes. You get to make saves and then FNP. Though I have no idea why you'd ever take 'ard boys when 4 points is over halfway to another boy.

>> No.33916581

>>33916526
>do i still go for my 4+ armour save and then 5+ FNP?

Yes, FNP is roll to IGNORE wounds, not to save them so even if you get wounded by something that ignores your armor you get your FNP as long as it doesnt cause instant death.

>> No.33916623

>>33916570

im on a tight budget and i like metal as fuck orks with a big boss to kill shit everywhere i go

>> No.33916880

>>33916541
Do I really have to explain what 'even if' means?
Ok, 'even if' is an additional clause (notice the coma) that removes the prohibition of assaulting after running. It doesn't mean "only units that would under all conditions be able to assault if they didn't just run"

>> No.33917396

>>33915794
>>33916459
>>33916880

You are the exact kind of person that everyone hates.

>>33916526
You may only ever make one save per wound.

FNP isn't a save, so you can make it too- instead of saving against a wound, it "ignores" an "unsaved wound".

Which means yes, you roll your 4+ then your 5+. Or, just roll the 5+, if the attack ignores your armor.

>> No.33917421

Do different sources of FNP stack? Do I get 2 FNP rolls if I have two sources of it?

>> No.33917452

>>33915794
You cant, why? Because the only exception WAAAGH gives you is to assault after running,it doesnt say you can assault even if in normal circumstances you cant it says you can assault even if you ran.

>> No.33917472

>>33917421
No

>> No.33917474

>>33917421
No. FNP is a special rule, you can't gain the benefit of a special rule twice.

>> No.33917558

>>33915794
Yes, stormboyz can charge during a waaagh.

>> No.33917607

Am I forced to use the new orks FOC as seen in their codex?

Or can I choose between that one and the standard one?

>> No.33917622

>>33917607
You can choose

>> No.33917856

>>33917396
Great argument faggot. With that scholarly attitude you must be the one who is universally liked.

>>33917452
Please read >>33916880

>>33917558
Great, now help me convince those faggots.

>> No.33918040

>>33917856
>interpret the rules in a way that benefits you
>be a complete asshole about anyone who disagrees with your interpretation
>call THEM the faggots

>> No.33918340

>>33918040
Jumping to conclusions, eh? Leave deduction to us you feeble-minded homosexual. I don't even play orks. It just occured to me that the rule has a loophole and ork players could use some help with their shitty codex.
And finally, this is not "my interpretation". You can interpret poems or shitty modern art. The rule says what it says, designer's mistake.

>> No.33918421

>>33918340
>Shitty codex.
This just in, just because your codex isn't as bonkers as Tau/Eldar it doesn't mean that your codex is shit.

>> No.33918428

>>33903999
more specifically, weapons with the type "pistol" count as a close combat weapon so the bonus you get is for 2 CCWs (assuming you have a second one).

"specialist" and "two-handed" ccws are exceptions to this.

>> No.33918447
File: 63 KB, 830x900, 1405828624378.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
33918447

>>33918340
>using loopholes
>using RAW instead of RAI ever
>especially when RAI clearly contradicts your interpretation of RAW

literally the worst

>> No.33918485

>>33915794
>Note that it says: all friendly
>units (...) may charge in the Assault
>phase (...).

With that backwards-ass logic you can charge after firing heavy weapons, when you're pinned, when you're fleeing.

Please stop posting.

>> No.33918515

>>33918340
Not him but as an Ork player I wish that was true, but you can't just give a codex a generous interpretation just b/c it sucks. You can't assault from deep strike as the power of the Waagh is not a specific contradiction to that rule. So take your ad hominems and lack of reading comprehension and just stop posting.

>> No.33918520

>>33918421
I don't play orks. Read the entire post before you start playing a sage.

>>33918447
This is a 40K Rules/Technical Thread, not your casual scrub hugbox. We're dealing with facts, not your emotions.

>> No.33918555

>>33903387
>>33904373
only played one game so far, but they seem a tiny bit harder to Crash and Burn.

and if extra armour is available it seems like an auto-take now

i could be wrong though

>> No.33918575

>>33918520
I wish you were a tripfag so I could filter you

>> No.33918582

>>33918520
>Muh emotions
>Muh intelligence

cmon dude, step it up, the way the rule is written it isn't using run restriction as an example to lift every other restriction, just that lifts that one restriction.

>> No.33918587

>>33918520
You still called the codex shitty when it clearly is not, faglord.

>>33918485
Dude, that means Immobilized vehicles can charge. Sweet.

>> No.33918629

>>33905043
>>33905072

On the subject of reserves, I haven't been able to find anything to the effect of the old "up to half" rules. Are reserves a free-for-all now as long as something is on the table by the end of the turn?

>> No.33918661

>>33918629
>Are reserves a free-for-all now as long as something is on the table by the end of the turn?

Yeah, if there is nothing on the table by the end of the turn you lose but you can have as many reserves as you want.

>> No.33918669

>>33918587
>tau drone sentry turrets can charge

>> No.33918786

>>33909860
>3. The first quote is fluff, not crunch, so we ignore it.
The first quote is not fluff. The first quote is a statement regarding system-wide rules (and an inaccurate one at that.) It is neither fluff nor crunch.

>> No.33918838

1850 army list for tyranids.

Old One eye
Tyranid prime with flesh hooks

x3 ten man termagaunt broods

x3 three man carnifex broods. each brood has 2 venom cannons, 1 stranglethorn, and a pair of devourers per carni.

Will i do good /tg/

>> No.33919006

>>33918587
>>33918669
They don't have 'Ere We Go, but otherwise - why not?
It's even fluffy...

>>33918582
If so, why wouldn't it say:
>(...) On the turn he does so, all friendly units made up entirely of models with the ’Ere We Go! special rule may run and charge in the same turn.

>> No.33919114

>>33919006
If it were the other way around, why wouldn't it say something like
>On the turn he does so, all friendly units made up entirely of models with the ’Ere We Go! special rule may charge, ignoring any rule otherwise restricting them from doing so.
or if it would be for deep striking specifically for some reason
>On the turn he does so, all friendly units made up entirely of models with the ’Ere We Go! special rule may charge, even if they ran in the previous Shooting phase and/or they arrived via Deep strike this turn.

>> No.33919166

>>33918838
Replace all the fex guns with devourers and laugh at everything.

You also need more synapse. Someone kills the prime and suddenly the fexes just start eating each other.

>> No.33919350

>>33918838
hardly a rules question, but:

probably not. the fex broods are huge point-sinks without enough specialization. (and what is the prime for?)

also,
n00b. don't give up - you'll get better eventually

and for christs sake: will you guys please stop taking this
>>33915794
>>33917452
>>33917856
>>33918340
>>33918520
faggot's bait so we can get back to actual questions.
>the english language being clear and unambiguous.
>being so new to GW bullshit to not know what the rule means in spite of what it actually says.

>> No.33919433

>>33919114
Yeah, why not. But I'm arguing for RAW not RAI.

>> No.33921192

This thread is already shit, so I'm going to drop the derailment bomb.

Models with no close-combat weapon are counted as having a single close-combat weapon.

Pistols are considered a close-combat weapon for the purpose of gaining +1 attack.

Therefore, does a model with nothing but a pistol gain +1A? He has the default CC weapon, as pistols are not a CC weapon. They however count as one for the +1 attack, together with the default weapon, for two CC weapons.

>> No.33921237

>>33921192
it has to count in the profile saying that it has a CCW, and the pistol to gain the extra attack in CC

>> No.33921258

>>33921192
>Models with no close-combat weapon are counted as having a single close-combat weapon.
Where does it say that?

>> No.33921273

>>33921192

The pistol is a close combat weapon, so why would it get a free CCW for "having no weapon" when it has the pistol, idiot.

>> No.33921278

>>33921192
>He has the default CC weapon

Unless it is stated in its equipment, no it does not. There is no such a thing as "default" CC weapons

>> No.33921302

>>33921192
No because they are mutually exclusive as they only count as a CCW when the model doesnt have one so its either a pistol counting as one or counting as having one when you have none.

>> No.33921303

>>33921192
>He has the default CC weapon, as pistols are not a CC weapon.

This is wrong, retard. Pistols are a CCW no matter what, not just for the +1A.

>> No.33921323

>>33921192

Why do you think SW and CSM get extra chainsword if it's pointless.

>> No.33921340

>>33921278
>>33921258

"If a model is not specifically stated as having a weapon with the Melee type, it is treated as being armed with a single close combat weapon."
-BRB

>>33921273
Because the pistol isn't a CCW, it's a pistol. However:

"Pistols are effectively Assault 1 weapons. A Pistol also counts as a close combat weapon in the Assault phase."
-BRB

Now, it COUNTS as a CCW. However, as we said above, a model receives the default CCW if it does not have a weapon with the "melee" type, which a pistol does not.

>> No.33921376

>>33921258
>>33921278
In the "Weapons" section beneath "Close Combat Weapons":

"If a model is not specifically stated as having a weapon with the Melee type, it is treated as being armed with a single close combat weapon."

Just below that:

"A pistol can be used as a close combat weapon. If this is done, use the profile given above - the STrength, AP and special rules of the pistol's shooting profile are ignored."

Below that:

"...If a model has two or more Melee weapons he gains +1 attack in close combat."

So a model with a pistol and no CCW listed in his profile (no weapon with the melee type) is treated as being armed with a CCW automatically. Combine this with the fact that you can treat the pistol as a CCW, and you have 2 CCWs for +1 attack.

>> No.33921434

>>33921376

+1 Two Weapons: Engaged models with two single-handed weapons (often a Melee
weapon and/or pistol in each hand) get +1 Attack. Models with more than two weapons
gain no additional benefit; you only get one extra Attack, even if you have four arms and
a sword in each.

You don't have a weapon in the other hand.

>> No.33921438

>>33921323
I think they get the extra chainsword because GW is incompetent.

It's obvious what the rules are SUPPOSED to say. But, that's not what they ACTUALLY say, as written.

>> No.33921458

>>33921438

RAW is never better than RAI. The game doesn't even work properly with RAW in many situations. You literally get inifinite loops, BSOD game freezes and other crashes if you try to play the rules RAW.

>> No.33921485
File: 146 KB, 500x607, you've got a friend in me.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
33921485

>Terminators will never be able to assault from deep strike

>> No.33921506

No Specified Melee Weapon
If a model is not specifically stated as having a weapon with the Melee type, it is treated
as being armed with a single close combat weapon.
Pistols as Close Combat Weapons
A pistol can be used as a close combat weapon. If this is done, use the profile given above
– the Strength, AP and special rules of the pistol’s shooting profile are ignored.

The pistol IS THE CCW. The rulebook is overwriting itself in the passage IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARDS.

"B-but it said if it has no Melee type-"

Yes, bitch, it then specifically says, COMPLETE WITH A HEADER, that a pistol COUNTS AS A CCW.

>> No.33921558

>>33921340
According to RAW (Which you would realize if you actually read what you quoted) they don't get a CCW for having no listed CCW but at treated as "being armed with a single close combat weapon". Which means, if you want to go with your interpretation that having a pistol doesn't mean having a CCW, that they do not get an extra attack because they are "treated as being armed with a single close combat weapon". Singular.

>> No.33921596

>>33921458
>RAW is never better than RAI
so many people don't understand this

>> No.33921781

>>33921434
The "in each hand" language is not used in the 7th ed ebook version that I have.

>> No.33921863

>>33921485
Pat, pat.
There is still Dawn of War, instant deepstriking of termies into assault without scatter and mishaps.
Termies who strike at initiative and are actually strong, and who can later redeploy with teleport.

>> No.33921880

>>33921781

I copy pasted that from the 7th edition rulebook.

Are you really going to have a rules argument on /tg/ and quote out of date rules?

>> No.33921900

>>33921880

No, he's not even going to bother checking the rulebook.

>> No.33921902

>>33921485
I wish they'd put "units may assault the turn they arrive from reserves" into one/some of the scenarios.

Hey, maybe we'll house rule that, that's a good idea. Maybe like, if Night Fighting is rolled as in effect, on a 5+ that's the case?

>> No.33921942

>>33921902
Play Planetstrike, units that can already Deepstrike anyway can assault the turn they do. The 7e rules are in that Red Waagh supplement

>> No.33921977

>>33921942
>The 7e rules are in that Red Waagh supplement

gross

I think I have that downloaded though.

>units that can already Deepstrike anyway can assault the turn they do.

Neat. No love for the other ways of entering the board, though?

>> No.33922022

>>33906818
infantry squad should be one big unit or in transports, and as one unit it should have a commissar or priest, also the basilisk will probably not see very much use, better off spending the points somewhere else

>> No.33922803

>>33906818
The only change you really need is dropping demolitions from the veterans and then giving them and strakens unit carapace armour.

>> No.33922868

>>33921880
>>33921900
I'm not trying to do any misquoting: I have to rely on the tools I have at my disposal. I guess that means my ebook is out of date. Your version is probably correct.

>> No.33923011

If i'm going battleforged and taking a bunch of formations, am I still required to have an HQ/Warlord in there somewhere?

>> No.33923035

>>33923011

You can just pick a character from one formation and make it warlord. That formation becomes your primary detachment.

>> No.33923103

>>33922868

The part you're talking about was in page 545, right under the big To Hit chart.

It could very well be that yours is the correct version and mine is outdated. Seems strange GW would remove entire swathes of text from the core rules, but it's GW. They did the same to 6E FAQs going into 7E, after all.

Not that it even matters, because the entire reason we're even discussing this is because some stupid faggot thinks having a bolt pistol gives you +1A.

>> No.33923134

>>33923035
what if none of my formations have characters?

>> No.33923287

>>33923134

Read the rules, faggot.

If you do not have
any character models in your army, then select any other model in your army to be the
Warlord. The model you choose as your Warlord also determines your Primary
Detachment.

>> No.33923959

>>33923103
Probably a butthurt space wolf player trying to get his +1 attack back.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action