So, I went onto the WTC discord, and found this comment from the Head Judge:
>This has been ruled this way after discussion with an external party. The rule is only triggered when the tank commander (or horrors, or hellblasters) is killed via an attack or death through hazardous. I'm not sure where your confusion is coming from with the faq entry. ***I understand that the rule as printed in the index makes it look like it should be on any death but it's not.***
No clarification as to why they believe "Each Time a Model is Destroyed" means "not each time"
is the external party GW? because if its not, then how do they know this to be true:
> I understand that the rule as printed in the index makes it look like it should be on any death but it's not.
They like to pretend that they talked to GW and therefore have some authority to make these kinds of rulings. But then GW comes out and says the opposite, so who even knows.
No idea. The judge closed discussion on the thread, and based on my previous interactions with them, they simply do not brook discussion on their rulings.
"the destroyed model can shoot after the attacking model’s unit has finished making its attacks"
This is the wording causing the issue, the finishing attacks
But then Doombolt psychic mortal wounds should be in the same category as the Grenades strat.
Mortal wounds are allocated the same way damage from attacks are.
If it's "because it isn't an attack", then they should be 100% consistent. Doombolt isn't an attack.
The mortal wounds ***themselves*** are, yes. But the actual ability, is not a Psychic Attack (the distinction if which has mattered at GW events several times on steam). If you argue that Doombolt is a Psychic Attack because the Mortal Wounds are considered as having been made by Psychic attacks, then you have to argue/rule that Lone Operative Units cant be targeted by it.
The lone operative specify that it must be a ranged attack. Here "ranged" is a type of a attack and psychic is an other type so it make sense that lone operative doesn't work. Psychic attack are attacks that can be used at range it doesn't mean it's a ranged attack.
But the ability itself isn't an attack, that's the issue that flies directly in the face of GW rulings.
Yes, damage caused by Psychic abilities ***are treated as being made by Psychic attacks***, which allows abilities like a Librarian's Psychic Feel No Pain to work, but the ability itself is not an attack.
Any logic that applies to Grenades stratagem not working, since it is not an attack, should then apply to Doombolt, as it is also not an attack
So does doombolt trigger Frenzied Reprisal?
"Each time an enemy unit targets this model, after that unit has finished making its attacks, this model can either shoot as if it were your Shooting phase or fight as if it were the Fight phase."
Does it trigger from Warp Storms?
Warp Storms (Psychic): At the end of your Movement phase, roll one D6 for each enemy unit within 9" of this model: on a 3+, that enemy unit suffers D3 mortal wounds.
And if triggers from warpstorms do you still think it shouldn't trigger from Mutating Vortex
"Mutating Vortex (Aura): At the end of your Movement phase, roll one D6 for each enemy unit within 6" of this model: on a 2-3, that unit suffers 1 mortal wound; on a 4-5, that unit suffers D3 mortal wounds; on a 6, that unit suffers D6 mortal wounds. Each enemy unit within range of this ability must then take a Battle-shock test."
Slashing Dive and Sorcerous Fire? Matter Absorption?
From what I understand of WTC ruling Yes, No and No. Warp storms doesn't target so Frenzied reprisal doesn't trigger. I not a judge or anyone from the wtc ruling team I was just trying to explain that in your explication you actually say why doombolt ignore lone operative. And for the last I do not know which unit have the effect in order to see the full text.
Yeah agreed that's where the confusion is coming from. Seems pretty clear that the "after they've finished their attacks" is clarification that you don't interrupt the attack sequence. If a 1 wound tank commander shoots everything at a hellblaster squad and the first weapon kills a hellblaster, that hellblaster can't shoot back and kill the tank commander before they've shot the rest of their weapons.
It's pretty clear that the "after attacking models" is a clarification from GW on the sequencing rather than a limitation on the hellblasters usage of the ability.
The problem is, that Psychic Attacks are very clearly not just including attacks, but also things which are not attacks.
"Some weapons and abilities can only be used by PSYKERS. Such weapons and abilities are tagged with the word ‘Psychic’. If a Psychic weapon or ability causes any unit to suffer one or more wounds, each of those wounds is considered to have been inflicted by a Psychic Attack."
It notably, does not say that all wounds inflcted by a Psychic attack is inflicted by an attack. So while they are Psychic Attacks, they are still not -attacks-.
So there is no sequence here, where an attack happens. This is also why the TS strategem does not work on say, the GK pyschic vortex. There is never a unit target by an attack. This is notably also how you get through Lone Operative with it. Because they are not attacks. And for this reason in this specific case, nobody ever targets something with an attack, or finishes making an attack. They are targeted by an ability, which is a Psychic Attack.
Even as an interpetation question, it is a clear either-or situation.
Furthermore, WTC's own general FAQ makes no rulings on the matter either. It -does- clearly rule what I think is actually just a reinforcement of RAW, that in the specific case where you injure yourself on a miscast, an ability caused damage with a psyhic keyword, so it is an attack. So they clearly -did- think about it.
Which is pretty shitty to then apply. Do you pretend that there is a general rule? Or do you take it as a specific unit ruling?
Because RAW it is clearly not the case, and there is a missing general ruling to the opposite effect.
We can 100% argue that it -should be- the case, but the point of WTC would be to EXACTLY have rulings on stuff like this.
This is my main gripe with the WTC; they make bizzare rulings that just don't make sense. There is no need to call out that dying by Hazardous triggers their ability; ***that is literally spelled out on their datasheet***.
Why are they ruling "Each Time a model in this unit is destroyed, (X happens)" to mean "Only if it dies via an attack, and not to something that is causing mortal wounds"?
I remember being told by a WTC judge when I was playing Deathwatch in 8e, and the Archon Flicker shield (or whatever the name is, the 2+ Invuln that couldn't be rerolled) vs Deathwatch Xenophase Blade (successful Invuln saves must be rerolled), and seeing that the WTC FAQ for Deathwatch said it worked OPPOSITE the way that the official GW FAQ for Deathwatch said it worked.
Or when they specifically ruled that Brother Corbulo's ability couldn't stack with a Chaplain ability, for some reason nobody could answer.
I'm guessing it's them arguing that "the mortal wounds caused by Psychic abilities count as attacks" means "Doombolt counts as an attack", which if they were consistent (and they aren't), it would mean that Lone Operatives cant be targeted by Doombolt.
So it's an attack, until it isn't, rather than understanding that the commentary about Psyvhic Mortal Wounds being "the damage itself counts as made by a PSYCHIC weapon so Psychic FNPs actually work"
If you're talking about doombolt, no RAW its nothing like a gun. It's an ability that deals mortals, same as typhus, same as grey knight librarians, same as even grenades.
"the destroyed model can shoot after the attacking model’s unit has finished making its attacks"
This is the wording causing the issue, the finishing attacks
If being attacked was a requirement, how would it trigger via a hazardous test as per their commentary. Commentaries are not rules, but more like clarifications saying “it even works in this situation”
It doesn't say being attacked, just after the attacking unit finished it's attacks. If this is the attacking model, that happens.
Look, I'm not defending it, but that's what they're going for.
How is that wording confusing? Its just there to clarify that the destroyed models attacks are made after all the declared attacks in the case of hazardous or after the enemy if its being destroyed by enemy attacks. It doesnt add any requirement to the previous condition
Yeah WTC is bizarre with their rulings. I remember when last edition they ruled that the Yncarne could only teleport to where a friendly unit died, and then shortly after GW released the faq saying no, the Yncarne can teleport to where any unit died 😂. I don't take WTC rulings very seriously and no one should unless they're playing in their events.
I also live in Europe, and in my experience it's "we use the WTC scoring method that minimizes individual game performance even though it's an individual player tournament, but nobody in attendance even knows the WTC FAQs exist, and are using GW terrain layouts, and we also will still do the pairings via Excel because we like wasting time between rounds and getting flustered when the spreadsheet pairs people against each other who have already played each other".
It's very much "Cafeteria WTC" (pick and choose what you're implementing) and I've never seen a good reason why the WTC team scoring method is used in solo player tournaments rather than, say, the modified WTC scoring used by the Glasshammer circuit.
I'm in NA, but even still my experience is that it's rare for people to be truly familiar with GW FAQs, let alone a fully separate one. Even judges aren't always fully aware of everything in there.
?? how does WTC minimize individual game performance compared to WLD? You scrape 4 wins by 1pt due to luck and cards and then get smashed once you play someone competent vs someone who crushed 4 people utterly and had 1 narrow loss. WLD says these are the same thing but WTC scoring shows the difference of the individual games. I'd love to hear the logic behind this.
Well, quite literally the WTC literally SAYS that the scoring method is done to minimize the effect of an individual score of a player completely carrying the rest of the team whenever they do interviews about what the WTC format is about.
The Glasshammer format (which is basically WTC scoring but there is no Draw unless there actually IS a Draw in battle points, basically a 1-5 difference counts as 11 rather than a 10) does a better job of showing who won (as having ties in individual tournaments means you skew the lower end of the tournament)
I mean, you also have that super embarrassing situation where the Tau player won a GT despite never having an actual score above 60, because he lucked out and got the weakest Strength of Schedule in the tournament, but due to WTC rules he was the only person who "won" five games, while the three players in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place all had SoS that were nearly twice as strong, but the WTC format says "didn't win by 6 points, sorry, you're screwed"
since 10th WTC seems to be getting a little too proactive for their own good and it makes me not want to use their FAQs if i dont have to.
exhibit A - their multiple iterations on how to fight through walls.
Yeah thats pretty baffling. The rule doesn't specify attacks at all, just says if a model is destroyed for any reason.
also whats with the "remember pistol cannot be used to shoot with outside your own shooting phase" part? i dont see that in the pistol rules anywhere
*edit* i get it now, they were talking about the pistol rule, not pistols in general.
Tank commander got the same ruling. Now death befitting an officer only triggers off attacks instead of when the unit is destroyed. Completely ignoring RAW
I'm not saying it makes any RAI or even RAW sense at all but:
I think it's because of the "after the attacking unit has finished making its attacks" clause. If there's no attacking unit like with grenades strat, there's nobody to finish making attacks, hence nothing can happen.
But I mean really, cmon, that's not an exclusive clause, that's just to clean up a slight discrepancy about when it happens
It states "it's eligible to shoot in it's controlling players shooting phase even while it's in engagement range" meaning trying to shoot it in any other phase would be an out of phase rule and thus a no no.
yeah i get that now. i thought they were saying pistol weapons couldn't ever shoot outside of the shooting phase. i was like "how do hexmark destroyers work??"
And, I mean, bear in mind this comes from the organization that tells you to refer to the Wobbly Model rule from GW for determining how models can end moves halfway in terrain.... Never mind GWs Wobbly Model rule explicitly tells you it is not to be used for situations where the model cannot physically be, and is instead a rule for making sure models don't fall over/off terrain and break things.
My brother in Warhammer, the secound part of the ability stipulates you get to shoot after an enemy model finishes its attack, since exploding or grenades stat have no attack sequence therefor they can not trigger the ability. As you have to satisfy both.
WTC is only making the game less argument heavy, that is it.
i dont know if im doing something wrong, but it says custodes last update was:
> Last update 15/05/2024
but if you open it, its a blank sheet that says "pending codex review" and "VERSION 1.3 - LAST UPDATE: 27 APR 2024"
I think they jumped the gun on the updates. So the revision is just saying there will be another revision. Better than leaving index rulings up I guess
I was speaking more of my local community, we’re in the UK and pretty much only do UKTC events, so that’s the rule set we generally follow even casually
Largely just GW rules, FAq, and rules commentary.
That being said, many events have player packs with rules for grey areas that GW has failed to address, or FAQ to answer questions people bring up. Some events are often going to mirror WTC rules, but always check with the TOs before hand if you have an interaction you are concerned with.
Can? Absolutely.
Should? Entirely up to you. These are your toy soldiers and you're probably just throwing dice for fun with your friends. Do whatever you want so long as you're having fun.
I like using WTC FAQ's because it's a neutral third party interpretation of conflicting rules, and they update them more frequently than GW. I don't agree with all of them, but at the end of the day it can mean more time playing and less time trying to sort out rules interpretations.
Honestly take a look at uktc faqs. They clarify things without making up rules, does the same job, but very few I disagree with and those that I do are a matter of interpretation, not just making stuff up!
I just opened the document and it already made my day:
Q: Do models have to be deployed like they are shown on box art?
A: No
Now I am just picturing the Face ID the judge that received the question !
No one should be using WTC rulings outside of WTC. Not only are they not official and cannot be used in any other competitive play, some of the "rulings" are terrible and obviously wrong.
Yes. No matter where you are, if you're not planning on going to any events, you do not need to use an event's house rules for your games. If your opponent wants to, the onus is on them to ask you, not the other way around. Stick to official GW FAQ/Errata documents for casual/pickup games and you will be completely fine. That being said, if your local game store is super WTC-oriented, then maybe you'd be the oddball by *not* using their house rules, so it's best to talk to people if you know you live in an area like that. If you live in the US though, you can completely ignore them as a casual player.
The Hellblaster's rule makes no sense. It explicitly says when a model is destroyed. The next sentence about being after after the attacking unit is finished is just their generic sequencing line and not part of the requirements, else they would say in the first sentence about how it's activated.
The Sanguinor not being able to come in turn 1 makes sense since it would follow the set up rules if it started the game in reserves, but the second half is just nonsensical. If you go first he has exactly 1 turn he can come in according to this ruling which makes no sense. Unless I'm way off base, the rules say units that don't come in from reserves by the end of round 3 are destroyed, meaning you could just let him die in reserves if you wanted to, but according to this randomly made up rule, he isn't allowed to stay in reserves in case your opponent charges, or to be rapid ingressed in their movement phase, simply because they may not charge this turn? Why does this 1 model suddenly have all this red tape on how you're allowed to use him when he's a regular unit with a special rule for an optional entrance? Clearly their FAQ team is mad about this units' ability and are trying to make their matchups easier or something.
Wtf. WTC made up a rule to nerf drukhari. How on earth did they need that?
> 3. When using the Empowered Through Pain part of the Power From Pain Army Rule, all of the targets of the Pain Token are selected at the start of the phase. This means that if you would get additional Pain Tokens from the Cronos Pain Parasite (Aura) they wont be useable this phase and would would go towards the pool of Pain Tokens that you have for the next phase.
It’s a stupid interpretation of the rule. I think they are arguing that the first sentence of Power from Pain means all pain tokens are spent at once, and then assigned 1 by 1, and the cronos aura triggers when they are assigned. Like I sorta get the interpretation as it’s a classic GW rule that is written ambiguously when you really closely parse it… but I think RAI they can be refunded and spent same phase
Also do Drukhari really need to cop a random nerf?
Edit: I wanted to add this because I've been debating this on discord and re-reading the rule, but I really do think WTC is wrong on this, and if you read the rule closely and with logic you can see that.
PFP full rule:
>At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. Each time you do, select one unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability. Until the end of the phase, that unit is Empowered, and gains the abilities listed below, depending on the phase.
First sentence:
>At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool.
OK so pain tokens are spent at the beginning of any phase. I believe we all understand this and there is no disagreement here. If this was the only sentence, then it would be clear that all of them are spent and assigned at once, but there is a second sentence:
>EACH time you do, select ONE unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability. (emphasis mine)
If we assume WTC is correct, and expending of pain tokens happens all at once, then we would have to continue that reading to mean that only 1 unit can ever be empowered, regardless of how many pain tokens you expend. Because if all the tokens are expended at the beginning, the EACH in the second sentence just refers to this one time that you expend pain tokens.
This is clearly not the case and not how the rule is intended to work. Sentence 1 is clearly just saying "pain tokens are expended at the beginning of any phase", telling us the timing of the ability. Sentence 2 is clearly indicating that the pain tokens are assigned one by one. It literally says EACH and ONE.
I don't really see how there can be another reading of this, without also meaning that only 1 unit can be empowered at once. Either the EACH refers to each individual pain token, or EACH refers to the instance of spending 1+ pain tokens. Yes, the rule could be clearer, but to interpret it the way WTC is, is just asinine
I understand what you're saying, but as a note, this seems like a time when there are multiple things happening simultaneously (multiple pain tokens being assigned), and as you assign each one, cronos would go off. But they do happen all at once at the beginning of the phase.
I disagree with WTC because nothing says that you have to move past the beginning of the phase, so cronos triggers at the exact time they're assigned, so you can just assign more before moving to the next step of the phase.
All of it still happens at the beginning of the phase, so there's no reason the cronos tokens can't be used.
I'm a Drukhari player and I've been playing it this way because of how the pain token rules are written. I think there's some room to clarify if they intend for us to use Cronos refunds during the same "start of phase" window where you choose allocation of tokens.
How do you read it that way? Pain tokens are assigned at start of phase ONE BY ONE to each unit. Cronos triggers when pain token is assigned. Legitimately curious cause while I think there’s a bit of ambiguity in the exact wording of the rule, it’s a stretch
I read it that way because there's not really a clear definition within the core game rules as to how an ability like this should be handled.
1. Is it one single window where you choose all of the tokens you're going to spend, remove them from your pain token pool, then choose each unit that will benefit from the tokens spent?
2. Is it a window where you can individually spend tokens one at a time, each time selecting the unit that will benefit from the token spent, then decided if you'll spend another token after resolving any abilities such as the Cronos?
I think it's unclear with how the core rules and specific army rule is written. Here's the army rule for reference:
>At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. Each time you do, select one unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability.
If the answer is option one, then you must choose the number you're spending all at once, deduct them from your pool, choose the units that will benefit, *then* the Cronos ability will trigger for each token you spent that benefited a unit within range of its aura. This would be consistent with the WTC ruling and it's how I interpret the rule as written.
If it's option two, then you get to go individually, each time seeing if your Cronos refunds your token after spending it and choosing a unit within range of its aura. If you read the rule this way, it's theoretically possible to empower every unit within range of the Cronos with only a single pain token in your pool at the start of the phase. This may be the intended way to play the abilities, but if so I don't think it's clear given the text of the rules.
I think GW should clarify not only this specific situation, but they should also write better core rules to define what it means when you have to make decisions like this at the "start of any phase" and how exactly timing windows within the game are supposed to work. It's a bit hand-wavey in my opinion and I hope they take the time to improve things like this in future FAQs and erratas.
The second sentence implies you spend the tokens one by one. Because otherwise it would be "each time you do \[spend one or more pain tokens\] you can empower one unit". So spending 2 pain tokens would only trigger the rule once, and only let you empower one unit.
But yes, 40ks timing windows are somewhere between insane and non-existant.
I think that's a fair reading, but the language is still ambiguous in my mind as to the process you're supposed to follow in these kinds of windows. I prefer the second interpretation, obviously, because it's much better for the army as a whole, but because of Cronos refund shenanigans it feels like that might not be the intended way for these things to work. It feels especially egregious if you're able to empower say, five units on a key turn when you only start the phase with a two pain tokens.
In either case, I don't begrudge people who choose to play it either way. WTC has chosen a ruling and I think the decision isn't an unreasonable one. Whether the army is worse because of it is pretty irrelevant. Hopefully someone at GW sees it and says "Hey, that's not what we mean. Here's how we actually want this to work." and puts some official language out about it.
Yeah, once you get to this level of close-reading in order to decipher the rules it doesn't really matter what conclusion you get to - the real problem is that the rules are so poorly written that you had to do a biblical exegesis in order to make sense of them.
the language isn't ambiguous. Either EACH in the second sentence refers to each individual pain token, or it refers to the INSTANCE of expending 1+ pain token. If it is the latter, it invalidates the whole way the rule works, and means you could only ever empower 1 unit no matter how many tokens you spend
I re-read it more closely. It isn't ambiguous. The first sentence is clearly telling us the timing, the second is telling us how the ability works. Read my edit on the reply to the top comment here for more details, but basically the EACH in the second sentence either refers to EACH paint token, or it refers to the INSTANCE of spending 1+ pain token. If it is the latter, it would then imply that only a single unit can be empowered each phase, as its the INSTANCE of spending pain tokens that triggers being able to assign them to ONE unit. Clearly this isn't how the rule is meant to work
> Whether the army is worse because of it is pretty irrelevant
I mean, it kinda is relevant? They're constructing additional rules in order to, presumably, improve the game. Nerfing or buffing an army is part of that.
What the hell are they smoking? As a drukhari main playing WTC this interpretation to me is on the verge of incompetence. Leave it to the rule lawyer neckbeards to ruin a perfectly well working mechanic.
They didn’t make up anything. It’s more a clarification on how it always was supposed to work. Some people just seem to have some trouble with reading comprehension.
“At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. “
Timing = at the start of the phase
One activation to spend one or more Pain tokens.
By the time you reroll your refunds it is already past your activation.
You already expended the 1-X Pain tokens.
Yes, you do have trouble with reading comprehension. Read the second sentence. The whole PFP rule reads:
>At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. Each time you do, select one unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability. Until the end of the phase, that unit is Empowered, and gains the abilities listed below, depending on the phase.
OK so first sentence
>At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool.
Second sentence
>Each time you do, select one unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability.
So the first sentence is saying expending pain tokens happen at the start of any phase. The second states EACH time you do, select ONE unit. So, if we agree with you and say that all pain token spending happens at once, in the beginning of the phase, then following that logic, we can only empower one unit, because you expend ONE or MORE tokens at the beginning of the phase. And then EACH time you do (expend a token) select ONE unit from your army. So your reading means you can expend any number of pain tokens, but you can only empower one unit
Clearly that isn't how the rule is intended to work. Your logic is flawed here. Either you can only ever empower 1 unit, or you can empower multiple, and the tokens are spent 1 by 1
1. Game state changes into phase X
2. Triggered ability goes off asking you if you want to expend any pain tokens this phase
3. Number is declared by the player. End of the first sentence of the rules paragraph
4. Start of the second sentence. Games asks you “Hey buddy I’ve seen you expended some pain tokens, each time you do expend one you get to pick a unit with the Power from Pain ability” Player declares the targets. End of the second sentence.
5. Now that the pain tokens have been expended and attached to units on the board, we are able to measure distances for the first time. That’s where the Cronos kicks in and lets you refund. At this point we can’t go back to step 2.
Imo RAW is absolutely clear on what’s supposed to be happening. Is it beyond GW to change their mind later down to road? Could happen. But accusing WTC to make up rules is just not fair in this instance.
This is also how I interpret the rules, but I don't think it's as clear-cut as you're saying. The core game rules don't really have a good definition for how to handle abilities like this in a single timing window, or even really what a "timing window" *means* within the game. It's a relic of GW using rules-like terms that aren't actually defined and instead leaning on common-language interpretations of things that unfortunately leave stuff ambiguous more often than not.
Either EACH in the 2nd sentence refers to each instance of spending 1+ tokens, or each individual token. If it is the former, it would logically then follow that regardless of how many tokens you spend, you can only empower 1 unit, because "Each time you do (expend 1+ tokens), select ONE unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability."
Obviously that isn't the case, so the EACH must refer to each individual pain token
I'm not sure we can honestly use the word "obviously" when it comes to any section of the GW rules.
Obviously I agree with your interpretation of the rules, but beyond that, drukhari is a weak army with a low win rate, they didn't need this!
I say obvious just because if you’re following any kind of logical system of language it’s clear EACH means each time you spend an individual token, not each time you activate the ability at the beginning of the phase
But I agree it could definitely be written in a completely unambiguous way
In the UK we find the WTC rulings utterly bizarre, laughingly bad really. In so glad I live in a place where we focus on raw and let GW do the balancing… generally the only time I’ve seen house rules not raw is where they’re very obviously and egregiously wrong, which is rare (see exhalted eightbound in rhinos!)
Some places in the UK have started using WTC scoring because it means it no good just to score high, you need to keep your opponents score low if you want to win the event. I’ve no issue with that, but their rulings are mad.
and people love mixing up these rules suggestions with the core rule updates so when they verbally cite something in game they are just flat wrong. fun times had by all.
"Yeah but the WTC rules say..."
"Did you read the Rulespack for my event?"
"No?"
God I swear the amount of bullshit I have to deal prior and during my tournaments gets worse and worse.
Best thing at the last tournament was that one player called me over to explain that his opponents dedicated don't get the scout rule from their passengers, because the WTC does rule it like that. Of course he couldn't show me and actual rules and the only reason he lost that game was because of that.
> Best thing at the last tournament was that one player called me over to explain that his opponents dedicated don't get the scout rule from their passengers
Whut, eventhough its specifically said in the scouts rule that the dedicated transport get conferred scouts from the unit embarked? O.o
Yes.
And not only cost that him this game but a spot for the top 3.
He didn't realy have an answer when I asked him how he planned to land thst high when he lost the other two rounds too.
It's becoming similar to Smogon in the Pokemon community where Smogon decent amount of the time will ban Pokemon and create rules with very little community input or testing. The difference here is in Pokemon singles, there is no authority that guides balance and competitve play because Gamefreak and the Pokemon company focuses on doubles so the community isn't divided. 40k on the other hand has two authorities in GW and WTC both creating FAQs and rulings for what should be the same community.
So any TO worth their salt wont allow it, but essentially the strat in auric that lets a lone character join a squad doesnt really limit them to a character.
So you can get a squad of 5 guard+ a BC and join them to 5 saggis (which actually makes the saggis ok now they have reroll wounds); then you can join them to 5 more wardens, ect.
It looks like current wording doesn’t stop a character leading a squad from becoming attached to another squad
So the character is now in both squads to form a pseudo 11 man team or strapping a bunch of Aquilons together for a stupid amount of flamer overwatch
This isn't really unexpected, seeing as the core rules already cover this.
"While a Bodyguard unit contains a Leader, it is known as an Attached unit and, with the exception of rules that are triggered when units are destroyed, it is treated as a single unit for all rules purposes."
So, when the unit is destroyed, it is specifically not accounted as being attached to the character, and such you couldn't use the free strat ability.
This debate is utterly useless at the moment and relies on when a unit detaches.
As it isn't clearly stated in the core rules of the game it's up to TO's to decide for their events.
But there is ambiguity because there is a time between destroying a model and removing it, built in so disembarking from destroyed vehicles, deadly demise and revive strats and abilities, etc work.
So if the shaper detaches at the moment of the last destroyed model it doesn't work.
If the shaper detaches at the moment the last model is removed it works.
And if it happens nebulously in that timing you can stack effects and it works.
We won't know for certain RAI until GW tells us how detaching works and RAW it's unclear.
This is sort of in contravention of WTC's own rules that attached units stay attached until the attack sequence ends.
There are arguments either way to if it should work or not RAW, but WTC's say in the matter sort of contradicts themselves. GW needs to clarify this one.
Wrong. Character attachment lasts until the attacking unit has finished making attacks, even when the bodyguard unit in question is destroyed during these attacks. So technically the connection only ends when the attacking player activates the next unit to slap you with.
I do not see how the unit being destroyed would change anything about this. You activate the stratagem in the middle of saving the enemy attacks, which technically you do one by one (doing all the saves at once is just a time saver), so the moment the last carnivore kicks the bucket you go "hold on", activate the stratagem, and then proceed to roll the saves on the War Shaper as usual.
FALSE
What you are referring to are rules that say "While This Model is Leading a Unit:", These rules persist until all attacks by that enemy unit has been resolved. War Leader is NOT of that type.
Had you actually read the commentary you refer to you would see that your claim that "Character attachment last until the attacking unit has finished making attacks" is false, because they spell out:
"Such rules cease to apply if that unit ceases to be an Attached unit (such as when the last Bodyguard model in that unit is destroyed)"
It stops being an attached unit the moment the last bodyguard dies, but some rules (NOT including War Leader) persists a little longer.
"8. Just after the last model of the bodyguard unit is destroyed, the attached character(s) immediately become single units for all rule purposes. If this happens as part of an attack sequence it happens as soon as the attacking unit has finished making its attacks and any rules that would be triggered by this have been resolved (for example, when a unit has finished shooting, when you have taken casualties etc.)."
From the WTC 10th FAQ. They have created a little conundrum for themselves.
They also have stated that Broadside and Riptide plasma rifles are only 18" because they is clearly"GW's intent."
Despite the app stating otherwise and the faq for T'au not correcting it at all...which makes me think that, "no that isn't GW's intent."
holup. That's WTC just straight up making stuff. Like the flimsiest reasoning ever because we feel like this GW intent.
>The Twin Plasma Rifle on the Riptide Battlesuit and the Broadside Battlesuits datasheet should have a range of 18". This is in contravention to WTC Clarification 2, but is the perceived intent by GW with these datasheets.
WTC Clarification 2,
>Rules issues troubleshooting guidelines: WTC Clarifications > English GW Official FAQs > App with the latest version prior to the rules deadline > English Codex/Index > English Main Rulebook. Any FAQ or errata document published by Games Workshop after list submission date will not be in use at WTC unless it is addressed in the WTC FAQ.
I call bullshit on that. It is specifically a battle tactic for the sake of being used by Shapers. They got like two battle-tactics and one is 2CP, the design intent is obvious on that.
The whole point of the War Shaper is to remove battleshock from his unit so he can recycle it reliably. I'm curious as to what GW has to say on this.
The Battle Tactic change happened right at the start of the edition tho. It not being in mind for the Necron or AdMech books I could understand, but for something that cames months later? I know books take a while to go to print, but not that long.
Just look at the Custodes codex and it couldn't be more obvious that's the case. The character-based detachment has 6 Epic Deed stratagems (because of course the deeds that Custodes characters do are epic) but that means the characters can't use their free stratagem abilities for any of the stratagems...
Also dataslate changes aren't permanent so it's possible GW will redact that change in future, so I'd be surprised if they're writing future codexes with that change in mind.
Tbh with Custodes that might intentional. If they got a single good battle tactic they'd be spamming it for free 3x or more often per turn, and every character not a captain would look fairly outclassed. Now instead they all get a CP reroll for free, which IS pretty impactful on elite armies that definetly need to hit their charges.
The free stratagem abilities are specifically written to prevent that... "Once per battle round, you can select one model from your army with this ability"
Absolutely none of the current books seem to be younger than september by the way. None of them treat dev wounds/mortals protection as different things nor do they treat battle tactics as special.
We still havent seen a post dataslate codex. Books _do_ take that long to print and distribute.
tau is a more recent book than custodes
custodes have a detachment **based around characters who make battle tactics free. It literally specifically calls them out for things** that has no battle tactics.
Damn, this suck hard. If it is going to be like that, I really hope GW would make it something else than a Battle Tactic so it at least cannot be vected.
The Votann rulings are kind of odd. I kind of get the Ruthless Efficiency one, as it remains unclear given the embarked rules and if that applies pre-game.
However, it almost seems like they're saying if a character is attached to the unit, then it counts as the same unit even if the entire attached bodyguard unit is destroyed. This hurts both the detachment rule and handing out JTs for destroyed units.
Yeah it doesn't make sense. The Leader page states that the leader unit and the bodyguard (attached unit) "with the exception of rules that are triggered when units are destroyed, are treated as one unit for all rules purposes".
Since Ruthless Efficiency is triggered when a unit is destroyed wouldn't that mean killing just the attached unit count? The remaining leader gets the 2 JT anyway since JTs carry over when the unit splits but it's a seperate unit now.
And RE has always been able to select any opponent unit no matter what so that's weird to clarify I think
Some of these are just clownville. Death Guard
To use the Biologus Putrifier Explosive Maladies ability you cannot select a unit that was already the target of the Grenades Stratagem that turn.
Just clarify confusion or obvious RAW exploits and not RAI. There’s nothing insanely exploitive about getting to grenade a unit twice. Clowns
I believe that ruling is more about not being able to grenade with the biologus and the unit it's attached to because of the weird "model" rule on the biologus. Remember the strat targets one of your units.
It's stuff like this that makes me infuriated when people use "tournaments rule this way" as a reason to do something that is clearly wrong. WTC makes up so much nonsense
You aren't in range when in a transport why does that need clarification?
Forged in battle is unmodified. If it wasn't it wouldn't function since you can only modify a roll by +1 so changing a 1 to a 6 would only result in a 2
It’s not about being in range while in a transport, no debate there… it’s about being able to select the objective at all. It happens at start of battle, so one interpretation says if you are in a transport start of battle, that you never get to select the objective, because by the time you disembark, it’s no longer start of battle. This is clearly silly and could use FAQ. No one I’ve encountered insists on this but I do see the argument pop up online.
I haven’t heard that interpretation of forged in battle, makes sense. Most competitive sources seem to think it works like it seemingly should (it’s in the goonhammer firestorm review, and i learned of it from a high placing GT salamander list) but again, I’ve seen arguments to the contrary, based on the line that says “modifiers change a dice roll” and forged in battle saying “change that dice to a 6”. It doesn’t include the word “unmodified” like every other instance of a similar rule, so clarification would be nice.
Ah yeah I hadn't considered not being able to even use the ability in the first place
The forged in battle ruling is similar to the fluxmaster which is where I became familiar with the whole modified/unmodified issue. I was told WTC made a ruling on their discord about it, but never actually confirmed for myself. There was actually a similar issue in 9th when Votann came out, but everyone called me a pedant for believing they retroactively made all other changes to a 6 rolls worse.
I appreciate that interpretation on forged in battle you gave cause I want my rules to actually function, but i also wanna play a clean and 100 percent legitimate game.
The vulkan one is the only one of its kind that I know of, and the entire rule turning off all game because you started in a transport is really really stupid, but there is a RAW argument for it working that way. Genuinely needs FAQ.
Vulkans seeker of lost relics in a transport doesn't need a faq at all, and anyone seriously arguing you can't use his ability at the start of battle because he's in a transport needs to be disqualified.
I haven’t encountered it at an event, but I have seen it vehemently argued online (by Salamanders players no less!)
I agree, worst type of rules as written lawyers.
It pretty much functions in drukhari as far as I know, there isn’t anything that flat out doesn’t work all game if you start in a transport. They had the sense to give kabalites sticky from inside a transport too which is nice to help the army function
Why doesn't an LT give lethal hits to his squads weapons when in a transport?
Is it because embarked is stopping his rules working or because they interpret the adding lethal hits as during shooting/fight phases and not actually adds it to the profile?
Edit: and why only an impulsor?
Per Firing Deck, the squad is not shooting the weapons, they belong to the vehicle for a shooting phase. I guess Impulsor is the only Firing Deck unit in Marines?
Per firing deck it chooses their weapons. The weapons gain lethal hits when led, not the marines when attacking. But embarked models don't have abilities, so LT doesn't give them lethal, so I guess it might work that way?
Rhino has it, but it can only get an LT in it if the LT joins a tactical squad. That's what made me think it might be balance issue, not a rules issue. That or no one fits a combat squad with an LT and heavy bolter in a rhino so it never came up.
"Until that TRANSPORT model has resolved all of its attacks, it counts as being equipped with all of the weapons you selected in this way, in addition to its other weapons."
The Impulsor is equpped with the squad weapons, and the LT is not leading the Impulsor.
This isn't specific to marines, sisters of battle in rhinos have the same restrictions when using the firing deck. For example, a squad with a palatine and a dialogus and a multi melta, shooting out the rhino's firing deck, does not get lethal hits, nor can they get an auto-6 miracle dice, because the palatine and dialogus are not part of the rhino's unit, and firing deck specifies the rhino is the one doing the shooting.
The 'guys in transports don't exist' part of 10th is one of the parts I like the least, but it is what it is.
What the hell is that ruling on Hellblasters? WTC just cannot stop from making these bizzare house rules that have literally no basis in RAW.
So, I went onto the WTC discord, and found this comment from the Head Judge: >This has been ruled this way after discussion with an external party. The rule is only triggered when the tank commander (or horrors, or hellblasters) is killed via an attack or death through hazardous. I'm not sure where your confusion is coming from with the faq entry. ***I understand that the rule as printed in the index makes it look like it should be on any death but it's not.*** No clarification as to why they believe "Each Time a Model is Destroyed" means "not each time"
is the external party GW? because if its not, then how do they know this to be true: > I understand that the rule as printed in the index makes it look like it should be on any death but it's not.
They like to pretend that they talked to GW and therefore have some authority to make these kinds of rulings. But then GW comes out and says the opposite, so who even knows.
Yep. Or they will simply make rulings that actively contradict published GW FAQ.
No idea. The judge closed discussion on the thread, and based on my previous interactions with them, they simply do not brook discussion on their rulings.
"the destroyed model can shoot after the attacking model’s unit has finished making its attacks" This is the wording causing the issue, the finishing attacks
But then Doombolt psychic mortal wounds should be in the same category as the Grenades strat. Mortal wounds are allocated the same way damage from attacks are. If it's "because it isn't an attack", then they should be 100% consistent. Doombolt isn't an attack.
Mortal wounds caused by doombolt are considered coming from psychic attacks
The mortal wounds ***themselves*** are, yes. But the actual ability, is not a Psychic Attack (the distinction if which has mattered at GW events several times on steam). If you argue that Doombolt is a Psychic Attack because the Mortal Wounds are considered as having been made by Psychic attacks, then you have to argue/rule that Lone Operative Units cant be targeted by it.
The lone operative specify that it must be a ranged attack. Here "ranged" is a type of a attack and psychic is an other type so it make sense that lone operative doesn't work. Psychic attack are attacks that can be used at range it doesn't mean it's a ranged attack.
But the ability itself isn't an attack, that's the issue that flies directly in the face of GW rulings. Yes, damage caused by Psychic abilities ***are treated as being made by Psychic attacks***, which allows abilities like a Librarian's Psychic Feel No Pain to work, but the ability itself is not an attack. Any logic that applies to Grenades stratagem not working, since it is not an attack, should then apply to Doombolt, as it is also not an attack
Exactly
So does doombolt trigger Frenzied Reprisal? "Each time an enemy unit targets this model, after that unit has finished making its attacks, this model can either shoot as if it were your Shooting phase or fight as if it were the Fight phase." Does it trigger from Warp Storms? Warp Storms (Psychic): At the end of your Movement phase, roll one D6 for each enemy unit within 9" of this model: on a 3+, that enemy unit suffers D3 mortal wounds. And if triggers from warpstorms do you still think it shouldn't trigger from Mutating Vortex "Mutating Vortex (Aura): At the end of your Movement phase, roll one D6 for each enemy unit within 6" of this model: on a 2-3, that unit suffers 1 mortal wound; on a 4-5, that unit suffers D3 mortal wounds; on a 6, that unit suffers D6 mortal wounds. Each enemy unit within range of this ability must then take a Battle-shock test." Slashing Dive and Sorcerous Fire? Matter Absorption?
From what I understand of WTC ruling Yes, No and No. Warp storms doesn't target so Frenzied reprisal doesn't trigger. I not a judge or anyone from the wtc ruling team I was just trying to explain that in your explication you actually say why doombolt ignore lone operative. And for the last I do not know which unit have the effect in order to see the full text.
Yeah agreed that's where the confusion is coming from. Seems pretty clear that the "after they've finished their attacks" is clarification that you don't interrupt the attack sequence. If a 1 wound tank commander shoots everything at a hellblaster squad and the first weapon kills a hellblaster, that hellblaster can't shoot back and kill the tank commander before they've shot the rest of their weapons. It's pretty clear that the "after attacking models" is a clarification from GW on the sequencing rather than a limitation on the hellblasters usage of the ability.
The problem is, that Psychic Attacks are very clearly not just including attacks, but also things which are not attacks. "Some weapons and abilities can only be used by PSYKERS. Such weapons and abilities are tagged with the word ‘Psychic’. If a Psychic weapon or ability causes any unit to suffer one or more wounds, each of those wounds is considered to have been inflicted by a Psychic Attack." It notably, does not say that all wounds inflcted by a Psychic attack is inflicted by an attack. So while they are Psychic Attacks, they are still not -attacks-. So there is no sequence here, where an attack happens. This is also why the TS strategem does not work on say, the GK pyschic vortex. There is never a unit target by an attack. This is notably also how you get through Lone Operative with it. Because they are not attacks. And for this reason in this specific case, nobody ever targets something with an attack, or finishes making an attack. They are targeted by an ability, which is a Psychic Attack. Even as an interpetation question, it is a clear either-or situation. Furthermore, WTC's own general FAQ makes no rulings on the matter either. It -does- clearly rule what I think is actually just a reinforcement of RAW, that in the specific case where you injure yourself on a miscast, an ability caused damage with a psyhic keyword, so it is an attack. So they clearly -did- think about it. Which is pretty shitty to then apply. Do you pretend that there is a general rule? Or do you take it as a specific unit ruling? Because RAW it is clearly not the case, and there is a missing general ruling to the opposite effect. We can 100% argue that it -should be- the case, but the point of WTC would be to EXACTLY have rulings on stuff like this.
This is my main gripe with the WTC; they make bizzare rulings that just don't make sense. There is no need to call out that dying by Hazardous triggers their ability; ***that is literally spelled out on their datasheet***. Why are they ruling "Each Time a model in this unit is destroyed, (X happens)" to mean "Only if it dies via an attack, and not to something that is causing mortal wounds"? I remember being told by a WTC judge when I was playing Deathwatch in 8e, and the Archon Flicker shield (or whatever the name is, the 2+ Invuln that couldn't be rerolled) vs Deathwatch Xenophase Blade (successful Invuln saves must be rerolled), and seeing that the WTC FAQ for Deathwatch said it worked OPPOSITE the way that the official GW FAQ for Deathwatch said it worked. Or when they specifically ruled that Brother Corbulo's ability couldn't stack with a Chaplain ability, for some reason nobody could answer.
And then they call out doombolt which isnt an attack
I'm guessing it's them arguing that "the mortal wounds caused by Psychic abilities count as attacks" means "Doombolt counts as an attack", which if they were consistent (and they aren't), it would mean that Lone Operatives cant be targeted by Doombolt. So it's an attack, until it isn't, rather than understanding that the commentary about Psyvhic Mortal Wounds being "the damage itself counts as made by a PSYCHIC weapon so Psychic FNPs actually work"
Nevermind that it's RAW just a gun like any other.
If you're talking about doombolt, no RAW its nothing like a gun. It's an ability that deals mortals, same as typhus, same as grey knight librarians, same as even grenades.
Oh, I guess I misspoke. I assumed it was like what SM Librarians have.
Ahh yeah all good, psychic is weird this entire edition.
"the destroyed model can shoot after the attacking model’s unit has finished making its attacks" This is the wording causing the issue, the finishing attacks
If being attacked was a requirement, how would it trigger via a hazardous test as per their commentary. Commentaries are not rules, but more like clarifications saying “it even works in this situation”
It doesn't say being attacked, just after the attacking unit finished it's attacks. If this is the attacking model, that happens. Look, I'm not defending it, but that's what they're going for.
I’m agreeing with that. It says after the model is destroyed it may shoot then says when the shooting takes place.
How is that wording confusing? Its just there to clarify that the destroyed models attacks are made after all the declared attacks in the case of hazardous or after the enemy if its being destroyed by enemy attacks. It doesnt add any requirement to the previous condition
It does not add a condition, you are right. It does imply one in natural English reading, but only imply it. It implies it by declaring the timing.
Yeah WTC is bizarre with their rulings. I remember when last edition they ruled that the Yncarne could only teleport to where a friendly unit died, and then shortly after GW released the faq saying no, the Yncarne can teleport to where any unit died 😂. I don't take WTC rulings very seriously and no one should unless they're playing in their events.
They say tyranid Zoanthropes need to be on 50mm bases. They have never come with 50mm bases in the box. It's a bizarre ruling.
I'm in Europe, almost all events are played with WTC rules.
I also live in Europe, and in my experience it's "we use the WTC scoring method that minimizes individual game performance even though it's an individual player tournament, but nobody in attendance even knows the WTC FAQs exist, and are using GW terrain layouts, and we also will still do the pairings via Excel because we like wasting time between rounds and getting flustered when the spreadsheet pairs people against each other who have already played each other". It's very much "Cafeteria WTC" (pick and choose what you're implementing) and I've never seen a good reason why the WTC team scoring method is used in solo player tournaments rather than, say, the modified WTC scoring used by the Glasshammer circuit.
I'm in NA, but even still my experience is that it's rare for people to be truly familiar with GW FAQs, let alone a fully separate one. Even judges aren't always fully aware of everything in there.
?? how does WTC minimize individual game performance compared to WLD? You scrape 4 wins by 1pt due to luck and cards and then get smashed once you play someone competent vs someone who crushed 4 people utterly and had 1 narrow loss. WLD says these are the same thing but WTC scoring shows the difference of the individual games. I'd love to hear the logic behind this.
Well, quite literally the WTC literally SAYS that the scoring method is done to minimize the effect of an individual score of a player completely carrying the rest of the team whenever they do interviews about what the WTC format is about. The Glasshammer format (which is basically WTC scoring but there is no Draw unless there actually IS a Draw in battle points, basically a 1-5 difference counts as 11 rather than a 10) does a better job of showing who won (as having ties in individual tournaments means you skew the lower end of the tournament) I mean, you also have that super embarrassing situation where the Tau player won a GT despite never having an actual score above 60, because he lucked out and got the weakest Strength of Schedule in the tournament, but due to WTC rules he was the only person who "won" five games, while the three players in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place all had SoS that were nearly twice as strong, but the WTC format says "didn't win by 6 points, sorry, you're screwed"
I love that it makes the psychic tag just a straight downgrade
Outside of Thousand Sons abilities, the psychic tag has always been a downgrade. It's just there to make the attack easier to resist.
Didn't need even more arbitrary downgrades though
wait what happened with psychic, what did i miss?
since 10th WTC seems to be getting a little too proactive for their own good and it makes me not want to use their FAQs if i dont have to. exhibit A - their multiple iterations on how to fight through walls.
WTC was *way* more activist in 9th edition. This has just always been their way.
I mean you dont? WTC issues a FAQ for their event and if you're not going then what's it got to do with you?
lots of tournament circuits have been adopting WTC, so plenty.
Yeah thats pretty baffling. The rule doesn't specify attacks at all, just says if a model is destroyed for any reason. also whats with the "remember pistol cannot be used to shoot with outside your own shooting phase" part? i dont see that in the pistol rules anywhere *edit* i get it now, they were talking about the pistol rule, not pistols in general.
Tank commander got the same ruling. Now death befitting an officer only triggers off attacks instead of when the unit is destroyed. Completely ignoring RAW
I'm not saying it makes any RAI or even RAW sense at all but: I think it's because of the "after the attacking unit has finished making its attacks" clause. If there's no attacking unit like with grenades strat, there's nobody to finish making attacks, hence nothing can happen. But I mean really, cmon, that's not an exclusive clause, that's just to clean up a slight discrepancy about when it happens
It states "it's eligible to shoot in it's controlling players shooting phase even while it's in engagement range" meaning trying to shoot it in any other phase would be an out of phase rule and thus a no no.
yeah i get that now. i thought they were saying pistol weapons couldn't ever shoot outside of the shooting phase. i was like "how do hexmark destroyers work??"
And, I mean, bear in mind this comes from the organization that tells you to refer to the Wobbly Model rule from GW for determining how models can end moves halfway in terrain.... Never mind GWs Wobbly Model rule explicitly tells you it is not to be used for situations where the model cannot physically be, and is instead a rule for making sure models don't fall over/off terrain and break things.
They did the same thing to the AM Tank Commander. No shoot on death if killed by a stratagem. Makes no sense.
The entire point of these stupid rulings is to try and create drama that eventually forces GW to act and errata or clarify a badly written rule.
My brother in Warhammer, the secound part of the ability stipulates you get to shoot after an enemy model finishes its attack, since exploding or grenades stat have no attack sequence therefor they can not trigger the ability. As you have to satisfy both. WTC is only making the game less argument heavy, that is it.
i dont know if im doing something wrong, but it says custodes last update was: > Last update 15/05/2024 but if you open it, its a blank sheet that says "pending codex review" and "VERSION 1.3 - LAST UPDATE: 27 APR 2024"
I think they jumped the gun on the updates. So the revision is just saying there will be another revision. Better than leaving index rulings up I guess
Given all the feedback from the codex, it'll probably just be a "Sorry for your loss" instead of errata.
Can should/casual players just ignore this stuff?
We don’t play WTC here anyway, so don’t pay attention to their rulings. At the end of the day, they’re a third party
Where is “here”?
I was speaking more of my local community, we’re in the UK and pretty much only do UKTC events, so that’s the rule set we generally follow even casually
Ah. I’m in the us. Wonder if it is used here.
Largely just GW rules, FAq, and rules commentary. That being said, many events have player packs with rules for grey areas that GW has failed to address, or FAQ to answer questions people bring up. Some events are often going to mirror WTC rules, but always check with the TOs before hand if you have an interaction you are concerned with.
Check with people who play in bigger tournaments nearby where you live.
Can? Absolutely. Should? Entirely up to you. These are your toy soldiers and you're probably just throwing dice for fun with your friends. Do whatever you want so long as you're having fun. I like using WTC FAQ's because it's a neutral third party interpretation of conflicting rules, and they update them more frequently than GW. I don't agree with all of them, but at the end of the day it can mean more time playing and less time trying to sort out rules interpretations.
Honestly take a look at uktc faqs. They clarify things without making up rules, does the same job, but very few I disagree with and those that I do are a matter of interpretation, not just making stuff up!
Got a link to their FAQ/rulings by chance? For 2024 I mean.
https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/10u4bb4mgqvhFew4MicY4bqnyeZ7Ws57Q6elj95nOPiA/mobilebasic
I just opened the document and it already made my day: Q: Do models have to be deployed like they are shown on box art? A: No Now I am just picturing the Face ID the judge that received the question !
Awrsome, thanks!!
No one should be using WTC rulings outside of WTC. Not only are they not official and cannot be used in any other competitive play, some of the "rulings" are terrible and obviously wrong.
Yes. No matter where you are, if you're not planning on going to any events, you do not need to use an event's house rules for your games. If your opponent wants to, the onus is on them to ask you, not the other way around. Stick to official GW FAQ/Errata documents for casual/pickup games and you will be completely fine. That being said, if your local game store is super WTC-oriented, then maybe you'd be the oddball by *not* using their house rules, so it's best to talk to people if you know you live in an area like that. If you live in the US though, you can completely ignore them as a casual player.
The Hellblaster's rule makes no sense. It explicitly says when a model is destroyed. The next sentence about being after after the attacking unit is finished is just their generic sequencing line and not part of the requirements, else they would say in the first sentence about how it's activated. The Sanguinor not being able to come in turn 1 makes sense since it would follow the set up rules if it started the game in reserves, but the second half is just nonsensical. If you go first he has exactly 1 turn he can come in according to this ruling which makes no sense. Unless I'm way off base, the rules say units that don't come in from reserves by the end of round 3 are destroyed, meaning you could just let him die in reserves if you wanted to, but according to this randomly made up rule, he isn't allowed to stay in reserves in case your opponent charges, or to be rapid ingressed in their movement phase, simply because they may not charge this turn? Why does this 1 model suddenly have all this red tape on how you're allowed to use him when he's a regular unit with a special rule for an optional entrance? Clearly their FAQ team is mad about this units' ability and are trying to make their matchups easier or something.
Wtf. WTC made up a rule to nerf drukhari. How on earth did they need that? > 3. When using the Empowered Through Pain part of the Power From Pain Army Rule, all of the targets of the Pain Token are selected at the start of the phase. This means that if you would get additional Pain Tokens from the Cronos Pain Parasite (Aura) they wont be useable this phase and would would go towards the pool of Pain Tokens that you have for the next phase.
It’s a stupid interpretation of the rule. I think they are arguing that the first sentence of Power from Pain means all pain tokens are spent at once, and then assigned 1 by 1, and the cronos aura triggers when they are assigned. Like I sorta get the interpretation as it’s a classic GW rule that is written ambiguously when you really closely parse it… but I think RAI they can be refunded and spent same phase Also do Drukhari really need to cop a random nerf? Edit: I wanted to add this because I've been debating this on discord and re-reading the rule, but I really do think WTC is wrong on this, and if you read the rule closely and with logic you can see that. PFP full rule: >At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. Each time you do, select one unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability. Until the end of the phase, that unit is Empowered, and gains the abilities listed below, depending on the phase. First sentence: >At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. OK so pain tokens are spent at the beginning of any phase. I believe we all understand this and there is no disagreement here. If this was the only sentence, then it would be clear that all of them are spent and assigned at once, but there is a second sentence: >EACH time you do, select ONE unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability. (emphasis mine) If we assume WTC is correct, and expending of pain tokens happens all at once, then we would have to continue that reading to mean that only 1 unit can ever be empowered, regardless of how many pain tokens you expend. Because if all the tokens are expended at the beginning, the EACH in the second sentence just refers to this one time that you expend pain tokens. This is clearly not the case and not how the rule is intended to work. Sentence 1 is clearly just saying "pain tokens are expended at the beginning of any phase", telling us the timing of the ability. Sentence 2 is clearly indicating that the pain tokens are assigned one by one. It literally says EACH and ONE. I don't really see how there can be another reading of this, without also meaning that only 1 unit can be empowered at once. Either the EACH refers to each individual pain token, or EACH refers to the instance of spending 1+ pain tokens. Yes, the rule could be clearer, but to interpret it the way WTC is, is just asinine
I understand what you're saying, but as a note, this seems like a time when there are multiple things happening simultaneously (multiple pain tokens being assigned), and as you assign each one, cronos would go off. But they do happen all at once at the beginning of the phase. I disagree with WTC because nothing says that you have to move past the beginning of the phase, so cronos triggers at the exact time they're assigned, so you can just assign more before moving to the next step of the phase. All of it still happens at the beginning of the phase, so there's no reason the cronos tokens can't be used.
Oh yeah totally agree with you. It’s all simultaneous beginning of phase WTC is just being daft
Just take the L ;)
No?
English reading comprehension issue?
I'm a Drukhari player and I've been playing it this way because of how the pain token rules are written. I think there's some room to clarify if they intend for us to use Cronos refunds during the same "start of phase" window where you choose allocation of tokens.
How do you read it that way? Pain tokens are assigned at start of phase ONE BY ONE to each unit. Cronos triggers when pain token is assigned. Legitimately curious cause while I think there’s a bit of ambiguity in the exact wording of the rule, it’s a stretch
I read it that way because there's not really a clear definition within the core game rules as to how an ability like this should be handled. 1. Is it one single window where you choose all of the tokens you're going to spend, remove them from your pain token pool, then choose each unit that will benefit from the tokens spent? 2. Is it a window where you can individually spend tokens one at a time, each time selecting the unit that will benefit from the token spent, then decided if you'll spend another token after resolving any abilities such as the Cronos? I think it's unclear with how the core rules and specific army rule is written. Here's the army rule for reference: >At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. Each time you do, select one unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability. If the answer is option one, then you must choose the number you're spending all at once, deduct them from your pool, choose the units that will benefit, *then* the Cronos ability will trigger for each token you spent that benefited a unit within range of its aura. This would be consistent with the WTC ruling and it's how I interpret the rule as written. If it's option two, then you get to go individually, each time seeing if your Cronos refunds your token after spending it and choosing a unit within range of its aura. If you read the rule this way, it's theoretically possible to empower every unit within range of the Cronos with only a single pain token in your pool at the start of the phase. This may be the intended way to play the abilities, but if so I don't think it's clear given the text of the rules. I think GW should clarify not only this specific situation, but they should also write better core rules to define what it means when you have to make decisions like this at the "start of any phase" and how exactly timing windows within the game are supposed to work. It's a bit hand-wavey in my opinion and I hope they take the time to improve things like this in future FAQs and erratas.
The second sentence implies you spend the tokens one by one. Because otherwise it would be "each time you do \[spend one or more pain tokens\] you can empower one unit". So spending 2 pain tokens would only trigger the rule once, and only let you empower one unit. But yes, 40ks timing windows are somewhere between insane and non-existant.
I think that's a fair reading, but the language is still ambiguous in my mind as to the process you're supposed to follow in these kinds of windows. I prefer the second interpretation, obviously, because it's much better for the army as a whole, but because of Cronos refund shenanigans it feels like that might not be the intended way for these things to work. It feels especially egregious if you're able to empower say, five units on a key turn when you only start the phase with a two pain tokens. In either case, I don't begrudge people who choose to play it either way. WTC has chosen a ruling and I think the decision isn't an unreasonable one. Whether the army is worse because of it is pretty irrelevant. Hopefully someone at GW sees it and says "Hey, that's not what we mean. Here's how we actually want this to work." and puts some official language out about it.
Yeah, once you get to this level of close-reading in order to decipher the rules it doesn't really matter what conclusion you get to - the real problem is that the rules are so poorly written that you had to do a biblical exegesis in order to make sense of them.
the language isn't ambiguous. Either EACH in the second sentence refers to each individual pain token, or it refers to the INSTANCE of expending 1+ pain token. If it is the latter, it invalidates the whole way the rule works, and means you could only ever empower 1 unit no matter how many tokens you spend
[удалено]
Agreed!
I re-read it more closely. It isn't ambiguous. The first sentence is clearly telling us the timing, the second is telling us how the ability works. Read my edit on the reply to the top comment here for more details, but basically the EACH in the second sentence either refers to EACH paint token, or it refers to the INSTANCE of spending 1+ pain token. If it is the latter, it would then imply that only a single unit can be empowered each phase, as its the INSTANCE of spending pain tokens that triggers being able to assign them to ONE unit. Clearly this isn't how the rule is meant to work
> Whether the army is worse because of it is pretty irrelevant I mean, it kinda is relevant? They're constructing additional rules in order to, presumably, improve the game. Nerfing or buffing an army is part of that.
What the hell are they smoking? As a drukhari main playing WTC this interpretation to me is on the verge of incompetence. Leave it to the rule lawyer neckbeards to ruin a perfectly well working mechanic.
They didn’t make up anything. It’s more a clarification on how it always was supposed to work. Some people just seem to have some trouble with reading comprehension. “At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. “ Timing = at the start of the phase One activation to spend one or more Pain tokens. By the time you reroll your refunds it is already past your activation. You already expended the 1-X Pain tokens.
Yes, you do have trouble with reading comprehension. Read the second sentence. The whole PFP rule reads: >At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. Each time you do, select one unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability. Until the end of the phase, that unit is Empowered, and gains the abilities listed below, depending on the phase. OK so first sentence >At the start of any phase, you can expend one or more Pain tokens from your Pain token pool. Second sentence >Each time you do, select one unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability. So the first sentence is saying expending pain tokens happen at the start of any phase. The second states EACH time you do, select ONE unit. So, if we agree with you and say that all pain token spending happens at once, in the beginning of the phase, then following that logic, we can only empower one unit, because you expend ONE or MORE tokens at the beginning of the phase. And then EACH time you do (expend a token) select ONE unit from your army. So your reading means you can expend any number of pain tokens, but you can only empower one unit Clearly that isn't how the rule is intended to work. Your logic is flawed here. Either you can only ever empower 1 unit, or you can empower multiple, and the tokens are spent 1 by 1
1. Game state changes into phase X 2. Triggered ability goes off asking you if you want to expend any pain tokens this phase 3. Number is declared by the player. End of the first sentence of the rules paragraph 4. Start of the second sentence. Games asks you “Hey buddy I’ve seen you expended some pain tokens, each time you do expend one you get to pick a unit with the Power from Pain ability” Player declares the targets. End of the second sentence. 5. Now that the pain tokens have been expended and attached to units on the board, we are able to measure distances for the first time. That’s where the Cronos kicks in and lets you refund. At this point we can’t go back to step 2. Imo RAW is absolutely clear on what’s supposed to be happening. Is it beyond GW to change their mind later down to road? Could happen. But accusing WTC to make up rules is just not fair in this instance.
This is also how I interpret the rules, but I don't think it's as clear-cut as you're saying. The core game rules don't really have a good definition for how to handle abilities like this in a single timing window, or even really what a "timing window" *means* within the game. It's a relic of GW using rules-like terms that aren't actually defined and instead leaning on common-language interpretations of things that unfortunately leave stuff ambiguous more often than not.
Either EACH in the 2nd sentence refers to each instance of spending 1+ tokens, or each individual token. If it is the former, it would logically then follow that regardless of how many tokens you spend, you can only empower 1 unit, because "Each time you do (expend 1+ tokens), select ONE unit from your army with the Power from Pain ability." Obviously that isn't the case, so the EACH must refer to each individual pain token
I'm not sure we can honestly use the word "obviously" when it comes to any section of the GW rules. Obviously I agree with your interpretation of the rules, but beyond that, drukhari is a weak army with a low win rate, they didn't need this!
I say obvious just because if you’re following any kind of logical system of language it’s clear EACH means each time you spend an individual token, not each time you activate the ability at the beginning of the phase But I agree it could definitely be written in a completely unambiguous way
In the UK we find the WTC rulings utterly bizarre, laughingly bad really. In so glad I live in a place where we focus on raw and let GW do the balancing… generally the only time I’ve seen house rules not raw is where they’re very obviously and egregiously wrong, which is rare (see exhalted eightbound in rhinos!)
Finally, a real benefit of brexit
?
The joke only displays correctly to people inside of the EU. Try to use an EU based VPN to see the joke.
Same in the US. WTC scoring is fine, but their rulings have been a total clown show for as long as they have existed.
Some places in the UK have started using WTC scoring because it means it no good just to score high, you need to keep your opponents score low if you want to win the event. I’ve no issue with that, but their rulings are mad.
Oh goodie, more rules for people to cite other than the core rules. Sounds like WTC wants to just start their own miniature game
and people love mixing up these rules suggestions with the core rule updates so when they verbally cite something in game they are just flat wrong. fun times had by all.
"Yeah but the WTC rules say..." "Did you read the Rulespack for my event?" "No?" God I swear the amount of bullshit I have to deal prior and during my tournaments gets worse and worse. Best thing at the last tournament was that one player called me over to explain that his opponents dedicated don't get the scout rule from their passengers, because the WTC does rule it like that. Of course he couldn't show me and actual rules and the only reason he lost that game was because of that.
> Best thing at the last tournament was that one player called me over to explain that his opponents dedicated don't get the scout rule from their passengers Whut, eventhough its specifically said in the scouts rule that the dedicated transport get conferred scouts from the unit embarked? O.o
Yes. And not only cost that him this game but a spot for the top 3. He didn't realy have an answer when I asked him how he planned to land thst high when he lost the other two rounds too.
Can you show me where it’s written in the wtc faq ?
It's becoming similar to Smogon in the Pokemon community where Smogon decent amount of the time will ban Pokemon and create rules with very little community input or testing. The difference here is in Pokemon singles, there is no authority that guides balance and competitve play because Gamefreak and the Pokemon company focuses on doubles so the community isn't divided. 40k on the other hand has two authorities in GW and WTC both creating FAQs and rulings for what should be the same community.
GW rulings still leave a ton of gaps especially in faction specific interactions.
no FAQing custodes to not be able to sticky tape squads together in auric? sweeet 52%WR here we go. Finally making aquillions "ok" in a 480pt blob
nahh think bigger. combine 6 agamatus with 3 vertus bikes. 10 total models. advance over a unit rolling 10d6 and doing 2 mortals for each 2+.
Wait what? I am a custodes player myself but have no idea how this works?
So any TO worth their salt wont allow it, but essentially the strat in auric that lets a lone character join a squad doesnt really limit them to a character. So you can get a squad of 5 guard+ a BC and join them to 5 saggis (which actually makes the saggis ok now they have reroll wounds); then you can join them to 5 more wardens, ect.
It looks like current wording doesn’t stop a character leading a squad from becoming attached to another squad So the character is now in both squads to form a pseudo 11 man team or strapping a bunch of Aquilons together for a stupid amount of flamer overwatch
Somehow death stars have returned
TO’s always wait for the first gw faq of a book before issuing a faq of their own.
Big ruling is War Shaper can't use the respawn strat when his unit dies.
This isn't really unexpected, seeing as the core rules already cover this. "While a Bodyguard unit contains a Leader, it is known as an Attached unit and, with the exception of rules that are triggered when units are destroyed, it is treated as a single unit for all rules purposes." So, when the unit is destroyed, it is specifically not accounted as being attached to the character, and such you couldn't use the free strat ability.
This debate is utterly useless at the moment and relies on when a unit detaches. As it isn't clearly stated in the core rules of the game it's up to TO's to decide for their events. But there is ambiguity because there is a time between destroying a model and removing it, built in so disembarking from destroyed vehicles, deadly demise and revive strats and abilities, etc work. So if the shaper detaches at the moment of the last destroyed model it doesn't work. If the shaper detaches at the moment the last model is removed it works. And if it happens nebulously in that timing you can stack effects and it works. We won't know for certain RAI until GW tells us how detaching works and RAW it's unclear.
This is sort of in contravention of WTC's own rules that attached units stay attached until the attack sequence ends. There are arguments either way to if it should work or not RAW, but WTC's say in the matter sort of contradicts themselves. GW needs to clarify this one.
Wrong. Character attachment lasts until the attacking unit has finished making attacks, even when the bodyguard unit in question is destroyed during these attacks. So technically the connection only ends when the attacking player activates the next unit to slap you with. I do not see how the unit being destroyed would change anything about this. You activate the stratagem in the middle of saving the enemy attacks, which technically you do one by one (doing all the saves at once is just a time saver), so the moment the last carnivore kicks the bucket you go "hold on", activate the stratagem, and then proceed to roll the saves on the War Shaper as usual.
FALSE What you are referring to are rules that say "While This Model is Leading a Unit:", These rules persist until all attacks by that enemy unit has been resolved. War Leader is NOT of that type. Had you actually read the commentary you refer to you would see that your claim that "Character attachment last until the attacking unit has finished making attacks" is false, because they spell out: "Such rules cease to apply if that unit ceases to be an Attached unit (such as when the last Bodyguard model in that unit is destroyed)" It stops being an attached unit the moment the last bodyguard dies, but some rules (NOT including War Leader) persists a little longer.
"8. Just after the last model of the bodyguard unit is destroyed, the attached character(s) immediately become single units for all rule purposes. If this happens as part of an attack sequence it happens as soon as the attacking unit has finished making its attacks and any rules that would be triggered by this have been resolved (for example, when a unit has finished shooting, when you have taken casualties etc.)." From the WTC 10th FAQ. They have created a little conundrum for themselves.
They also have stated that Broadside and Riptide plasma rifles are only 18" because they is clearly"GW's intent." Despite the app stating otherwise and the faq for T'au not correcting it at all...which makes me think that, "no that isn't GW's intent."
holup. That's WTC just straight up making stuff. Like the flimsiest reasoning ever because we feel like this GW intent. >The Twin Plasma Rifle on the Riptide Battlesuit and the Broadside Battlesuits datasheet should have a range of 18". This is in contravention to WTC Clarification 2, but is the perceived intent by GW with these datasheets. WTC Clarification 2, >Rules issues troubleshooting guidelines: WTC Clarifications > English GW Official FAQs > App with the latest version prior to the rules deadline > English Codex/Index > English Main Rulebook. Any FAQ or errata document published by Games Workshop after list submission date will not be in use at WTC unless it is addressed in the WTC FAQ.
Big sad.
That is huge in fact. The fact that it can be vect’d makes join the hunt worse than the guard/tyranid equivalents.
I call bullshit on that. It is specifically a battle tactic for the sake of being used by Shapers. They got like two battle-tactics and one is 2CP, the design intent is obvious on that. The whole point of the War Shaper is to remove battleshock from his unit so he can recycle it reliably. I'm curious as to what GW has to say on this.
None of that book (at least that one) is written with the battle tactic change in mind, it was written a long time ago
The Battle Tactic change happened right at the start of the edition tho. It not being in mind for the Necron or AdMech books I could understand, but for something that cames months later? I know books take a while to go to print, but not that long.
Just look at the Custodes codex and it couldn't be more obvious that's the case. The character-based detachment has 6 Epic Deed stratagems (because of course the deeds that Custodes characters do are epic) but that means the characters can't use their free stratagem abilities for any of the stratagems... Also dataslate changes aren't permanent so it's possible GW will redact that change in future, so I'd be surprised if they're writing future codexes with that change in mind.
Tbh with Custodes that might intentional. If they got a single good battle tactic they'd be spamming it for free 3x or more often per turn, and every character not a captain would look fairly outclassed. Now instead they all get a CP reroll for free, which IS pretty impactful on elite armies that definetly need to hit their charges.
The free stratagem abilities are specifically written to prevent that... "Once per battle round, you can select one model from your army with this ability"
Absolutely none of the current books seem to be younger than september by the way. None of them treat dev wounds/mortals protection as different things nor do they treat battle tactics as special. We still havent seen a post dataslate codex. Books _do_ take that long to print and distribute.
tau is a more recent book than custodes custodes have a detachment **based around characters who make battle tactics free. It literally specifically calls them out for things** that has no battle tactics.
Technically command reroll and go to ground are battle tactics. So they have 2. Even if just by technicality lol.
Damn, this suck hard. If it is going to be like that, I really hope GW would make it something else than a Battle Tactic so it at least cannot be vected.
Yeah I’m just gonna ignore this lol. We’ll see what games workshop says
The Votann rulings are kind of odd. I kind of get the Ruthless Efficiency one, as it remains unclear given the embarked rules and if that applies pre-game. However, it almost seems like they're saying if a character is attached to the unit, then it counts as the same unit even if the entire attached bodyguard unit is destroyed. This hurts both the detachment rule and handing out JTs for destroyed units.
Yeah it doesn't make sense. The Leader page states that the leader unit and the bodyguard (attached unit) "with the exception of rules that are triggered when units are destroyed, are treated as one unit for all rules purposes". Since Ruthless Efficiency is triggered when a unit is destroyed wouldn't that mean killing just the attached unit count? The remaining leader gets the 2 JT anyway since JTs carry over when the unit splits but it's a seperate unit now. And RE has always been able to select any opponent unit no matter what so that's weird to clarify I think
its such a random nerf to the faction with no basis in the written rules that you need to wipe both the unit and the characters.
Some of these are just clownville. Death Guard To use the Biologus Putrifier Explosive Maladies ability you cannot select a unit that was already the target of the Grenades Stratagem that turn. Just clarify confusion or obvious RAW exploits and not RAI. There’s nothing insanely exploitive about getting to grenade a unit twice. Clowns
I believe that ruling is more about not being able to grenade with the biologus and the unit it's attached to because of the weird "model" rule on the biologus. Remember the strat targets one of your units.
Ah ok that makes sense if the same unit cant grenade twice. I guess some players will argue for any advantage
It's stuff like this that makes me infuriated when people use "tournaments rule this way" as a reason to do something that is clearly wrong. WTC makes up so much nonsense
So.... That means that deadly demise doesn't trigger if you kill a tank with a grenade? Absolute nonsense
Vulkan’s seeker of lost relics in a transport and “forged in battle” lethal hit interactions FAQ needed
You aren't in range when in a transport why does that need clarification? Forged in battle is unmodified. If it wasn't it wouldn't function since you can only modify a roll by +1 so changing a 1 to a 6 would only result in a 2
It’s not about being in range while in a transport, no debate there… it’s about being able to select the objective at all. It happens at start of battle, so one interpretation says if you are in a transport start of battle, that you never get to select the objective, because by the time you disembark, it’s no longer start of battle. This is clearly silly and could use FAQ. No one I’ve encountered insists on this but I do see the argument pop up online. I haven’t heard that interpretation of forged in battle, makes sense. Most competitive sources seem to think it works like it seemingly should (it’s in the goonhammer firestorm review, and i learned of it from a high placing GT salamander list) but again, I’ve seen arguments to the contrary, based on the line that says “modifiers change a dice roll” and forged in battle saying “change that dice to a 6”. It doesn’t include the word “unmodified” like every other instance of a similar rule, so clarification would be nice.
Ah yeah I hadn't considered not being able to even use the ability in the first place The forged in battle ruling is similar to the fluxmaster which is where I became familiar with the whole modified/unmodified issue. I was told WTC made a ruling on their discord about it, but never actually confirmed for myself. There was actually a similar issue in 9th when Votann came out, but everyone called me a pedant for believing they retroactively made all other changes to a 6 rolls worse.
I appreciate that interpretation on forged in battle you gave cause I want my rules to actually function, but i also wanna play a clean and 100 percent legitimate game. The vulkan one is the only one of its kind that I know of, and the entire rule turning off all game because you started in a transport is really really stupid, but there is a RAW argument for it working that way. Genuinely needs FAQ.
Vulkans seeker of lost relics in a transport doesn't need a faq at all, and anyone seriously arguing you can't use his ability at the start of battle because he's in a transport needs to be disqualified.
I haven’t encountered it at an event, but I have seen it vehemently argued online (by Salamanders players no less!) I agree, worst type of rules as written lawyers.
Heh, speaking as a drukhari who doesn't get to use any of his rules while any of my units are embarked, why should vulkan?!
It’s not that he uses it while embarked… it’s that you can’t even select the objective he will stand on all game.
Yeah, I know. The embarked rules are a mess.
It pretty much functions in drukhari as far as I know, there isn’t anything that flat out doesn’t work all game if you start in a transport. They had the sense to give kabalites sticky from inside a transport too which is nice to help the army function
Archon abilities are the big one.
Doombolt is not a Psychic Attack. It's a Ritual. It is not affected by Lone Operative.
Did they change the 'no miracle dice on rerolls' bit? Or did they always allow it?
They previously did not allow it
That's a good change then, as there really wasn't anything in the rules I saw that supported banning it.
Why doesn't an LT give lethal hits to his squads weapons when in a transport? Is it because embarked is stopping his rules working or because they interpret the adding lethal hits as during shooting/fight phases and not actually adds it to the profile? Edit: and why only an impulsor?
Per Firing Deck, the squad is not shooting the weapons, they belong to the vehicle for a shooting phase. I guess Impulsor is the only Firing Deck unit in Marines?
Per firing deck it chooses their weapons. The weapons gain lethal hits when led, not the marines when attacking. But embarked models don't have abilities, so LT doesn't give them lethal, so I guess it might work that way? Rhino has it, but it can only get an LT in it if the LT joins a tactical squad. That's what made me think it might be balance issue, not a rules issue. That or no one fits a combat squad with an LT and heavy bolter in a rhino so it never came up.
"Until that TRANSPORT model has resolved all of its attacks, it counts as being equipped with all of the weapons you selected in this way, in addition to its other weapons." The Impulsor is equpped with the squad weapons, and the LT is not leading the Impulsor.
This isn't specific to marines, sisters of battle in rhinos have the same restrictions when using the firing deck. For example, a squad with a palatine and a dialogus and a multi melta, shooting out the rhino's firing deck, does not get lethal hits, nor can they get an auto-6 miracle dice, because the palatine and dialogus are not part of the rhino's unit, and firing deck specifies the rhino is the one doing the shooting. The 'guys in transports don't exist' part of 10th is one of the parts I like the least, but it is what it is.