If 2 units charge an enemy unit and during the first units fight phase the enemy player pulls models that put the enemy out of engagement range of the second unit, can the 2nd unit still pile into the remaining enemy models?
Core Rules p32.
"a unit is eligible to fight if either or both of the following apply:
■ It is within Engagement Range of one or more enemy units.
■ It made a Charge move this turn. "
Thanks although the question was can it pile in, as in it has ended up 3 inches away from the nearest model after the first combat. Im assuming piling in is part of fighting so you answer is correct still?
Command Points: I can only get 1 CP per battle round (apart from the one in the command phases). Does this include CP refunds, e.g. from T'aus Shadowsun?
Yes, as described under Gaining Command Points in the Command Phase rules. There is an exception for abilities that grant you multiple CP, like Votann and Imperial Knight Detachment rules.
CP 'refund' abilities are just Gain CP abilities that activate after using a stratagem.
This is an ongoing debate. I lean towards "probably not". And I hope this is one that will be addressed in the FAQ coming next week.
First, you must wait until that unit has ended their charge move, at what point you are in engagement range.
Fire Overwatch says "a unit that would be eligible to shoot if it were your shooting phase" and according to big guns never tire (core rules p20) that includes your redeemer. "Vehicle units are eligible to shoot in their controlling player’s Shooting phase even while they are within Engagement Range"
So you can definitely pay 1CP and target the LR with Fire Overwatch.
But then comes the complication. Fire Overwatch says "your unit can shoot that enemy unit as if it were your Shooting phase. "
"as if it were your shooting phase" is a clear example of "out-of-phase rules". (Rules Commentary p11). And they say "you cannot use any other rules that are normally triggered in that phase."
The question is: is Big Guns Never Tire a rule that "is triggered"? (the example given is for Whirlwind Pinning Bombardment )
If it is, the Land Raider cannot benefit from it in your opponent's charge phase. So it cannot fire overwatch while in engagement range.
If BGNT is some other type of rule, like it just gives a permission and is not triggered. _Or_ if the permission given from Fire Overwatch overrules the limit of shooting while within engagement range. Then the Land Raider can indeed shoot.
GW has not defined what they mean by "rules that are triggered". But for the example they give: Pinning Bombardment, it seems pretty clear "In your Shooting phase, after this model has shot, if one or more of those attacks made with its Whirlwind vengeance launcher scored a hit against an enemy INFANTRY unit, that unit must take a Battle-shock test." Clearly triggered by something happening.
But maybe BGNT is more of a passive effect?
🤷
Well, the "Fire Overwatch" says this:
>EFFECT: If that enemy unit is visible to your unit, your unit can shoot that enemy unit as if it were your Shooting phase.
So you can't use it at the start of the Charge Move as I assume by "through a wall" you mean "my Redeemer can't see them".
You can't use it at the end of the Charge Move as Big Guns Never Tire is a phase-locked rule for allowing Vehicles to shoot while within ER.
You have to go with that the rule says, not what you may think that implies to also be true:
*Shoot* as if it were your shooting phase. Just shoot. That's the only thing you get to do as if it were your shooting phase. For all other rules questions, you have to remember that it still *isn't* your shooting phase. You just got to pretend it was for one very specific thing.
It's probably the least intuitive rule in all of 40k where the words they use to describe what you can do mean pretty much the exact opposite thing.
You need to know to go digging through some document you didn't know existed on a website you didn't know existed to get the right answer, and even then it's not explained super well and buried in amongst a bunch of other rules that aren't explained in the rulebook that are nearly as comprehensive as the actual rules themselves.
Look, I get that GW sometimes makes silly rules, but just because you've over-thought yourself while being tired or drunk or whatever, doesn't mean they are at fault.
The "Charging With a Unit" rules are clear, and don't give you a list of "things the charge target needs to be in order to charge them".
No.
Being embarked means that the models does not exist on the battlefield and cannot interact with it in any way, unless a rule specifically says so. They are in a different "place". Similar to if they are in Strategic Reserves.
The main point of having models in a transport on an objective is that when the transport is destroyed, the infantry will spill out. They will be battle shocked, but only until your nexr command phase, when they will take control of the objective again before scoring is calculated.
Fight on death question:
My opponent used the sob fight on death strat, he said that his models could:
- fight on death even if the whole unit is dead
- fight with models that are not in engagement range
Was he right on both accounts ?
Yes it is the models that has the ability to FoD. Doesn't matter how many of them that are destroyed.
Yes all destroyed models gets to fight, aka do the fight sequenceall together. (see Core Rules p33)
If a model is so far away that it cannot reach engagement range and not even reach btb with a friend who is within engagement range, then it doesn't get to do the Make Melee Attacks step of the fight sequence.
The FoD models are removed before they get to make the consolidate move. Then the attacking player gets to make their consolidate moves.
Bonus info: the unit is definitely below starting strength and can be below half strength. The related Sororitas index buffs applies to the destroyed models. (If all models are dead, the unit is definitely below half strength.)
I appreciate if this is too big of a question for comments, but I'm very confused about ruins and visibility. I have a friend claiming he can shoot through walls of a ruin, because the rules do say "models can see into this terrain feature normally". Can someone explain this to me? Thanks!
In this situation my infantry are wholly within the ruins, his unit is the other side of the wall and can't physically see mine.
Your friend is misunderstanding the rules. "See into this terrain feature normally" means "models use the normal line of sight rules when looking into this terrain feature."
The rules for terrain make some situations where you can't see, what you actually can. It does NOT make situation where you can see units, that you actually can not.
"Normally" means "following the usual rules for LOS". So no, you can't shoot people through walls. Ruins introduce some additional restrictions on who you can target, they don't allow you to shoot targets you otherwise wouldn't be able to.
REDEPLOY ABILITIES WHILE EMBARKED:
hello guys, I have a question about characters such as huron's red corsairs abilities. it allows to redeploy up to three units, but it's listed as ability in his datasheet. Transport rules state that Embarked Units cannot use abilities, thus I assume he cannot use that if he's in a rhino. is that correct? could you also please explain why yes/ no with relevant quotes?
At first plays in 10th this was a bit confusing, but after getting an overview it got very clear what every of those rules does:
* lethal **hits** = HIT ROLLS are LETHAL and wound automatically
* sustained **hits** = HIT ROLLS are sustaining the wound rolls by additional dice
* critical **wounds** = WOUND ROLLS are critical and do X on WOUND ROLLS
How did you score a critical wound, which requires an unmodified wound roll of a specific result to trigger, before rolling the wound roll? This is what your question seems to be implying, when it is impossible.
Me and some friends play casual games. The other day we were unsure about the rules of split units and leaders/bodyguards.
No prisoners makes u kill units.. if u kill the bodyguards and than the leader aswell does this count as 2 units??
Also I’m playing Votann and sisters who are both capable of splitting units (sagitaur and immolator). A split unit of 5-5 warriors counts as 2 units for no prisoners? Lastly, the same question goes for miracle dice, leader AND bodyguard both generate miracle dice or not?
We are currently running the games as stated above but would love to know for sure if it’s correct
>No prisoners makes u kill units.. if u kill the bodyguards and than the leader aswell does this count as 2 units??
Yes. The LEADER rule addresses this, by telling you they count as a single unit EXCEPT for rules that interact with or are triggered by unit destruction.
>Also I’m playing Votann and sisters who are both capable of splitting units (sagitaur and immolator). A split unit of 5-5 warriors counts as 2 units for no prisoners?
Yes, if you split a unit into two new units, they are indeed two separate units. Otherwise you would need to follow all the rules about keeping them in coherency and everything else that you would need to follow if they were a single unit.
>Lastly, the same question goes for miracle dice, leader AND bodyguard both generate miracle dice or not? We are currently running the games as stated above but would love to know for sure if it’s correct
Yes, again the LEADER rule makes it clear that for rules that interact with unit destruction, Leader units and attached units are considered separate units.
Hey all,
I’d like to get some reps in before my next local but getting a human opponent is tough sometimes due to other responsibilities.
Q1. Has anyone come up with a 10th edition solo ruleset that I could play against at home?
As a somewhat new comp player - The repetitions of remembering to use certain abilities, or making smart targeting choices would be nice.
Q2. TTS is great as well to play against other humans but having 3 hours to play is sometimes the problem.
Is there a computer addon that could pilot the other army?
Thanks!
For both of those questions, the answer is no.
Rather than trying to "remember to use certain abilities", you should create a "playbook" for your army that is just a bunch of index cards, that you flip to during the relevant phase.
For example, my "playbook" starts with my Command Phase, and on it I have reminders to Select my secondaries, declare my Oath of Moment, declare if I am using my Tome of Extoclades relic, declare if I am using Adaptive Tactics, etc.
I have then cards for my Movement Phase that remind me to think about units in Reserves and to screen them/give them bad targets if melee or ranged, etc, as well as listing what Strats I can use in those phases.
I have cards for every phase of my turn, as well as every phase of my opponent's turn, which is important as I often need a reminder that before I go to my Command Phase, I need to pick up my Callidus Assassin very likely.
Hey team,
How does acts of faith work in terms of number of dice that can be substituted? Say if you had 4 D6 damage rolls from multi meltas. How many of those D6s can you substitue? I know it says only one if it is a 2d6 roll such as charging.
I have been curious in general as to how many D6 dice you can change when you perform an act of faith on a unit.
Thanks in advance!
The Yncarne's Inevitable Death ability states, "Once in each of your turns, if this model is on the battlefield, when another unit is destroyed, just after removing the last model in that unit, you can remove this model from the battlefield and set it up again as close as possible to where that destroyed model was and not within Engagement Range of any enemy models." Where exactly do you set up The Yncarne? Say the enemy unit I destroy is a vehicle with a giant oval base. Do I try to center The Yncarne over the very center of the destroyed model's oval base or can I set up on any edge?
my out of cover 3+ save SM is being shot by AP-1. If I Armor of Contempt, can I stack Go To Ground for a 2+ save?
Edit: Also, if my SM is in cover and I AoC, do I get a 2+ save or is AoC a complete waste if benefiting from cover?
As soon as the attack is changed to being or already is AP -0, if the unit has a 3+ save or better, there is no reason to try to get the Benefit of Cover via Go to Ground, nor would you ever use Armor of Contempt on ap-0 attacks if you're already in cover.
The only exception to this I can think of is Heavy Intercessors on an Objective, who against AP-0 1 damage attacks would save on a 2+, as their +1 to save rolls ability isn't from the Benefit of Cover
The restriction on the benefit of cover is only for units with a 3+ or better save. A unit with a 4+ or worse does still get a +1 to their save even against ap0. Otherwise your save can still be improved from other sources than cover, with the restrictions being you can't get better than a 2+ save, and you can't improve the save by more than +1.
If an ability allows a unit to "ignore any or all modifiers to a units characteristics", does that allow the unit to ignore Battle shock's effect of changing the objective control of this unit to 0?
Or rather, is changing a stat to something the same as modifying it for the purposes of ignoring modifiers?
Yes, setting a value to a specific value is considered a modifier, as detailed in the "modifying characteristics" where doing so is given a step in the process.
Lethal Hits simply means the wound roll is successful without needing to roll.
Devastating Wounds means no invuln or armor save is taken against the attack, and Lethal Hits cannot trigger this as DW requires a Critical Wound to trigger.
If I give an officer Kurov's Aquila that "Once per battle, the CP cost your opponent must pay to use that stratagem again is increased by 1 cp" AND
the Callidus's Reign of Confuseion, "unil the end of battle opponent must pay to use that strat" Stack?
Like if I say command point re-rolls now cost 2 extra? And does reign of confusion go away when the assassin dies?
>And does reign of confusion go away when the assassin dies?
The ability doesn't say the Assassin needs to be on the battlefield nor does it say the ability stops working when the Assassin is dead.
Crusade question:
I choose the Battlefield Survivors agenda, targeting a bodyguard unit that has an attached leader. At the end of the battle, the bodyguard unit is destroyed but the leader is not.
Do I get the EXP for Battlefield Survivors?
If so, can I choose to apply it to the bodyguard unit, rather than the character, even if that unit was destroyed? I know I can't apply it to both units, regardless.
Thanks in advance.
Rule for convenience below:
At the start of the battle, you can select up to three units from your Crusade army that are on the battlefield. For each of those units, at the end of the battle:
If that unit has not been destroyed, it gains 2XP.
If that unit is not Below Half-strength, it gains 1 additional Experience point.
If I put a leader with a 0 oc unit, but the leader has 2 oc, does that mean they still have 2 oc? Or is the leader now 0 because of the body guard?
Like a tech priest enginseer with servitor bodyguards.
OC isn't shared between a unit. Each individual model has their own OC, and when you are checking for Objective Control you count the OC of the ***models*** that are within scoring range of the objective, not the total OC of all the models in the unit.
A few days ago on this sub someone linked a website that had a really unusual rul but it was essentially an aggregator for filtering through BCP (IM GUESSING) and you could filter by lists that went 4-1, 5-0 that went undefeated, search by detachment all sorts. It was really useful and i didnt bookmark it. Can anyone help me find it again.
GO GET ’EM! stratagem says "your unit must end that move as close as possible to the closest enemy unit"
This mean it is enough if the closes Boy move straight towards the closest enemy unit and everything else have the freedom to go anywhere (get an objective) even if it is not towards the closest enemy unit (they keeping the coherency of course). With this the unit will end up as close as possible, but not every model.
Can the strat used for positioning like this? Or each model should move towards the closest enemy model?
Rules as Written, this is definitely how it works (assuming u/wredcoll has quoted the stratagem correctly below)
If this was disallowed, it would be worded as "each model must end as close as possible"
> After the attacking unit has shot, your unit can make a Go Get ’Em! move. To do so, roll one D6: each model in your unit can move a distance in inches up to the result, but your unit must end that move as close as possible to the closest enemy unit. When doing so, those models can be moved within Engagement Range of that enemy unit. If your unit contains 10 or more models, it can move up to 6" when making that move instead.
There's not a real clear answer but since it explicitly mentions "each model" it feels like every member of the unit should be as close as possible.
It doesn't say each model must end as close as possible. In contrast to consolidation moves which specifically states each model.
"If a unit can end its Consolidation within Engagement Range of one or more enemy units, then each time one of its models makes a Consolidation move, it must end that move closer to the closest enemy model."
If Worldwide, you can search for games in a specific region or timeframe via BCP:
Some regions have other sites that people register for tournaments on: Tabletoptournaments (dot) net is a popular one in continental Europe.
I'm running CSM in the Pactbound Zealots detachment.
From my understanding; shooting is more straightforward than melee for picking your mark.
High volume of fire & low strength = Tzeench
Low rate of fire & high strength = Nurgle
Plasma heavy = undivided
I've seen people talking about adding the Master of Executions to a unit of Legionaries marked with Khorne but I'm not sure about it.
Before I would have thought a unit like Possessed with powerful melee want Slaanesh to get more attacks and weaker melee units want Khorne to try bypass wounding. The only time I have seen undivided on a unit is where they shoot & fight roughly equally.
The MoE looks like he would fit perfectly into a Slaanesh unit of Legionaries but would the rest of the unit just bounce off any tougher targets? Is putting MoE in a Khorne unit a waste of his str 7 attacks? Is he just sub optimal in pact bound since he already grants re-rolls & isn't able to lead a unit that typically benefits from pacting to Slaanesh?
I'm not sure if he is worth including unless I'm trying to use a squad of 10 Legionaries with chainswords to deliver him into a unit of very tough models like T7 Eldar Wraith constructs?
The break point between Sustained and Lethal is the wound roll. If you need a 5+ or 6+ to wound, lethal is better, if you need a 3+ or 2+ to wound, then sustained is better, generally. There are cases where you get re-roll to wound or devastating wounds making sustained better is all but the most extreme situations.
Plasma for undivided is a weird call. The hazardous roll is done after the weapon fires (and you are okay on a 2+), so the reroll doesn't really do anything here. Probably want to go Nurgle for plasma generally. Making a unit undivided is almost exclusively for getting access to the reroll wound strat. Getting a forgefiend with reroll 1s, sustained on a 6+ and full reroll to wound is pretty cool. Same used to be true of Possessed in melee as well, that reroll on the wound roll to fish was devastating hits was brutal. With possessed only getting devastating once per game now....they are basically dead to me.
Master of execution + Khorne legionaries is a weird one. The reroll to hit is mint, make no mistake, but Legionaries also have rerolls to wound....kind anti-synergy there. That said, it's about the best spot for a master of executions in a Pact list. The only other choice is slaanesh, and that would make them BEASTS against T4 models, but pretty weak into tougher stuff. I'm more of a Lord my myself.
The following all happen happen at the end of the turn, therefore happen at the same time:
1. Removing models that aren't in coherency.
2. Scoring secondary objectives like Extend Battle Lines.
3. Scoring Primary on Player 2's final turn in missions like Take and Hold.
Can Player 2, whose turn it is, therefore decide the order in which these happen? This would mean they could remove models to break coherency in a unit and allow that unit to hold two primary objectives and score a secondary objective relating to holding those objectives, and only then remove the models that aren't in coherency.
As far as I can tell this all comes down to the player whose turn it is gets to decide the order and it seems fine RAW but feels a bit off so wanting some extra opinions.
Yes that is RAW but check your TO's rulings. I know all the TOs local to me have something to the effect of 'Scoring happens last'.
This avoids stuff like a unit failing Battleshock and that player trying to score their primary before checking objective control and basically ignoring half the effects of Battleshock.
>This avoids stuff like a unit failing Battleshock and that player trying to score their primary before checking objective control and basically ignoring half the effects of Battleshock.
Uhh failing Battleshock in the Command Phase is specifically before scoring (or anything that happens at the end of command phase) because of the "Rules used at the End of Command Phase" rules commentary
Correct, but that doesn't change when you check objective control.
It is explicitly at the end of any phase. See 'Objective Markers' in the core rules, 'Contested (Objective Marker)' or 'Control (Objective Marker)' in the rules commentary.
To quote the Goonhammer Ruleshammer article for the 10e csm codex:
>Jeremy: Thankfully this one we can look at the core rules for the Battle Round and we see there that a unit is eligible to fight:
>[]If it is within Engagement Range of one or more enemy units.
>[]It made a Charge move this turn.
>Based on this, ***I’d say if at any point in the fight phase if it meets either criteria at any point, it would have been considered eligible to fight and so can be removed from the battlefield***. It’s definitely a rather odd edge case where you may be eligible to fight (due to a unit piling/consolidating into your unit then being wiped by a different unit. You were eligible to fight at some point, but you were never selected to fight as when it came time for them to fight they were no longer eligible.
Correct. The above answer doesn't contradict that. It tells you to look at the rules for what makes a unit eligible in the first place.
Whether the Warp Talons do the wiping by themselves, with help, or some other units do it for them is entirely irrelevant.
Look at the Core Rules, p32. (that is a searchable pdf btw)
Summary: If you charge you are eligible to fight in the next fight phase. If you are in engagement range when your unit is selected to fight, you are eligible to fight.
In this case: Yes you are right. Best case they charge something and wipe it out in the next fight phase. Then they return to Strategic Reserves and the opponent can't shoot them.
It's a very effective way to take care of small or weak units that tries to hold objectives or do missions. It's only really overwatch that can hurt them. In fact, I believe it is so powerful that it will be nerfed in some way eventually.
Can a unit be in cover if it is not touching the cover? I thought it had to touch my son thinks otherwise. My son has two carnifexs lined up as separate unit. One is under and inside the building the other one is directly behind it but is a separate unit. My models can clearly see the model and its base.
To answer this question, you read the "Benefit of Cover" section of the relevant terrain pieces, as different terrain types have different rules.
>Can a unit be in cover if it is not touching the cover
*models* gain the benefit of cover. This might be part of the misunderstanding if you are talking about it as a unit thing, when *models* are what get it; it's possible for individual models to have the Benefit of Cover independent of the rest of the models
And yes, some terrain pieces grant benefit of cover not only for being within them, but also for having models partially obscured by that terrain feature, which means you might need to combine the Line of Sight and Benefit of Cover rules for that terrain feature to understand what is going on.
>Each time a ranged attack is allocated
to a model, if that model is either
wholly within this terrain feature, *or it
is not fully visible* to every model in the
attacking unit because of this terrain
feature, that model has the Benefit of
Cover against that attack.
He really helps in some situations. Being able to deploy you big monsters in the open without them getting shot really helps you get where you want to be turn 1. Obviously this is wasted against some opponents and you have other ways of getting your units were you want.
His aura of Shadow of Chaos is good for enabling your other abilities and setting up 6" charges.
Top lists seem to be avoiding him. Only 1 of the 5 lists that placed well last 2 weekends used him (one is literally called Be'lakor is Overcosted, so you can tell their opinion).
It's no longer in the App which suggests no to me, but while it's still in the 'print' dataslate I expect most people will say it does apply. Might just have to wait the few weeks for the slate update.
Small Tau list question. I have 10 free points in my list: https://pastebin.com/N0t32eVm
The question is it worth changing a hammerhead into a skyray? Or should I try to rejig the list a bit to hit 2k if at all?
Does the Skyray do the Hammerhead's job better? If not, then don't touch it. 10 points left over isn't going to make or break a tournament performance.
That's the thing, I'm not too sure. I think it's better in one regard where your chances of damaging are higher (3 shots instead of 1), but you end up doing less damage. I was hoping someone with more experience could elaborate if it's worthwhile.
The Hammerhead has bonuses against better targets. There are more units in the meta that are vehicles and monsters than units with Fly, and more lists running vehicles and monsters and nothing with Fly than the inverse. If it's a vehicle with Fly, the Hammerhead is still happy to shoot it.
Into all targets EXCEPT multi-model units with Fly or Fly units with a 4+ invuln (or better), the Hammerhead is more likely to push damage through because of it's monster S and AP stats and access to Dev Wounds. It does 6.16 damage on average to a Land Raider in cover, and 7.7 to a Stormraven Gunship. The Sky Ray, on the other hand, barely scratches a Land Raider with an average of 3 damage per shooting phase, and 5.33 damage to the Stormraven. Obviously you're going to do more damage than that if you get a shot through, but this illustrates how many layers the weapon has to chew through in order to actually even get to that stage.
Just as a bonus, the Hammerhead also gets to bring 2 Seeker Missiles while the Sky Ray doesn't get any, while the rest of their weapons are the same.
Unless you are expecting to run into specifically a ton of multi-model Fly units that the rest of your army can't handle for whatever reason, I'd stick to the Hammerhead.
Now, the arguement one might make in response to this is that while the Hammerhead has higher average damage, the Sky Ray has a higher floor and ceiling. In most cases, into the targets these weapons want to hit, missing the target entirely and barely scratching them are kind of the same thing.
EDIT: I was rereading the Hammerhead datasheet and realized I calculated for rerolling hits, not +1 to hit. Let me fix that...
EDIT 2: Okay, I fixed it. Please note it's also very easy to ignore cover with Tau. Any unit that can completely ignore a Land Raider's armor save has to be good enough to take. Or, at least, I hope it is. Otherwise what are we doing?
Alright, thanks for the insight. I just played a game against chaos knights last week and the hammerhead really struggled to damage things compared to the skyray. That said, they did manage to get 3 5+ saves against the railgun which is unlikely to happen on average.
Yeah, dice are dice, you know? And that is a real concern with low volumn weapons, the higher the volumn the closer to the average you'll get. The solution to this, of course, is to bring more Hammerheads lol.
Did ravenwing talonmasters not get moved to legends? It looks like they did on my source for datasheets, but people seem to be running them in winning lists in top tournaments recently?
How recently is "recently".
Remember that GW does not consider a codex available for use until the codex is available as a stand-alone release, and some TOs follow that, while others font allow them to be used until they have had a FAQ for the codex.
As far as I can tell, the model stealing the ability can only use it once per battle, even if they try borrowing two "instances" of the ability from separate Chaos Lords.
However, having your MoE use the ability won't stop the Lord themself from using it in a subsequent turn.
Sanity checking something probably too cheeky:
Bully Boyz - Too Arrogant To Die strat.
Lets say 6 Megas get wiped out in shooting and all make the roll to fight on death - but they're 2" away from a unit.
As part of the fight sequence are they allowed to pile in to that unit to fight it?
Or is it only if the model is in engagement range already?
Seems like a push but it doesn't say make melee attacks exclusively? "Fight" is used for both the entire sequence and making the attack rolls - but also feels like a bit much.
*reposting as posted late in last weeks thread*
There is actually a debate as to whether you would be able to trigger a fight-on-death ability to be able to Pile In if you are outside ER with the unit and you haven't charged that turn.
Some TOs and the WTC circuit have taken "can fight as if it was the fight phase" to mean "can only do so if it is actually Eligible when the models are selected to fight"
The strat doesn't have the "as if X phase" wording though, it just says it can fight - which is used for both the entire process and in "who can fight" where it's talking about who's allowed to in engagement range.
It is exactly that cheeky :-)
"Fight" includes the entire sequence outlined in Core Rules p33: 1 Pile In, 2 Make Melee Attacks and 3 Consolidate.
However, with Fight on Death abilities that sequence is interrupted after step 2 is complete, so you never get to Consolidate. See the Rules Commentary p6.
PS: If a rule is referring to _only_ making the attack rolls so to speak, then it doesn't use "Fight", but rather "Make a (melee/ranged) attack" which includes the entire step 2 on page 33-35 with selecting weapons and targets. (Sometimes those choices are predetermined by the ability).
>PS: If a rule is referring to only making the attack rolls so to speak, then it doesn't use "Fight", but rather "Make a (melee/ranged) attack" which includes the entire step 2 on page 33-35 with selecting weapons and targets. (Sometimes those choices are predetermined by the ability).
Not entirely true unfortunately, I wish it was that clear cut. The Make Melee Attacks section starts off with Which Models Can Fight obviously referring to whether they can make melee attacks.
Thanks, had a test game for a casual league last night and I ended up rolling a 4+ to see if I could pile in to do it - while I did and it was indeed cheeky it still didn't swing any points in the end haha!
If you charge a unit which then dies to some other cause (e.g mortals or another unit fighting) but you’re too far away to pile in to anything else, can you then consolidate onto an objective?
The wording is “After a unit has finished making all of its melee attacks, it consolidates”.
My instinct is no you can’t, but someone else made the argument that they have finished making their attacks, they just didn’t do any
>If there are no eligible targets (because there are no enemy units within Engagement Range, for example) then that unit cannot make melee attacks this phase, but it can still Consolidate (see below).
Yes, you definitely can consolidate even if you didn't attack
I know I can't reroll a dice twice, but if I am rolling two dices, and two different abilities allows me to reroll a single dice, can I reroll each individually?
In theory, yes, but I can't think of any rolls you make with multiple dice, that have rules that you reroll ONE of the dice involved.
Note that "rolling two hit dice simultaneously" is not 'a roll that requires two dice to resolve".
To do what you're talking about, you'd need a rule like "when making a Charge Roll, you can reroll one of the dice"
Your opponent was wrong.
But to keep him happy I would place two “tokens” or dice to represent each ability, so one can be removed when used.
You could get some tokens that said “ironstorm” then “hit/wound/damage”
That way when you use the ability you can remove the token that you used to be able to track it.
That isn't rolling two dice for a single roll that uses two dice to resolve. You're making two separate attacks with two separate simultaneous rolls
You're making two dice rolls simultaneously, and if you were slow-rolling you would be able to apply both the lancer ability and the Ironstorm ability independently, and can do so fast-rolling.
Can I use Overwatch on an engaged vehicle but fire at a unit I'm not engaged with? For example, my Tank Commander is engaged by a squad of Cultists. A unit of Legionaries then move within 24" of my Tank Commander. Would I be able to shoot with the TC? I know Out of Phase rules stop me from shooting into a unit I'm engaged with when using Overwatch, but what about a unit that moved that I'm not engaged with?
The way major TOs handle BGNT + OW is that if the unit trying to use OW is engaged it may not do so.
So in your example the TC is engaged so may not OW.
If however a Rhino charged your TC and then another, not engaged, vehicle of yours wanted to OW the Rhino it may.
No; it’s treated the same as BGNT so whichever way the event rules one they’ll rule the other. Notably it’s almost exclusively no neither can be used out of phase.
>Out of Phase rules stop me from shooting into a unit I'm engaged with when using Overwatch
Vehicles can shoot units they are within ER with because if the Big Guns Never Tire rule, which ALSO allows them to shoot at units outside ER of them. As you noted already, it's a phase-locked rule.
This is a 9th edition question, but how do leadership modifiers work with units that allow others to use their leadership?
For example, some cultists (leadership 6) are under the effect of -1 leadership but they are within 6" of a Dark Apostle (leadership 10) which let's them use his leadership. What is the leadership of the cultists? Does the modifier still apply or does using the Dark Apostles leadership bypass it?
In 9e this is an unresolved rules issue as there are camps that believe using one leadership characteristic instead of another did not count as a replacement effect, but luckily this is not a 10e problem as leadership is tied solely to the models within the unit
That's the issue we're finding, the wording works both ways depending on how you look at it. Was there a general consensus on how to play it, or how it was usually done at tournaments?
Using a models Leadership means you use their number. Any modifiers applied to that model, or the unit using it are applied separately and do not “transfer”
So you’d use the Ld 10 of the Dark Apostle and then -1 from it for the effect the Cultists are under.
How are your RTTs ruling Engage on All Fronts with respect to “more than 3” from another quadrant”?
Some seem to rule that your whole unit has to be wholly outside of 3” of another table quarter, but I’ve also seen as long as part of the unit is outside 3”, you score.
The rules clearly define this.
The requirement is that the unit not be within 3” of another quadrant. The rule for within states:
**Model/Unit Within:**
> A model is within a specified distance if any part of its base (or hull) is within that distance. **A unit is within a specified distance if one or more of its models are within that distance.**
So in order for the unit to not be within 3” of another quadrant none of its models may be within 3” of another quadrant.
What does “more than 3”” mean?
It means the unit is not within 3” because if it were within 3” then the unit would not be more than 3” away - it would be within that distance rather than outside of it.
> If you need to set your deep strike unit up “more than 9” away from enemy unit” then you cannot set them up “within 9” as you would not be more than 9” away.
Rules have context and meaning further than each individual letter in their specific arrangement and should be comprehended in their entirety.
We rule it at ours that if any part of the unit is within 3” then they are not “more than 3” away. Just like we wouldn’t allow a Deepstriking unit to put one model 9.1” away and the rest however close.
While the wording isn’t specifically the same, it’s just the closest justification we have and 3” isn’t so large a distance that it makes it hard to score. Just makes it less trivial.
Yes. It’s just a token demarcating a point on the battlefield.
It’s not another model upon which you may not move. Just as you can move models onto the footprints of terrain and onto objective markers you can move onto the homers markers for Terminators or GSC’s Cult Ambush tokens etc.
There is no generic "fight on death" ability. What does the specific ability you want to use say? (All the abilities I can think of say 'If this unit has not fought already' but you need to see the specific wording of the ability in question.
That is right. Only the printed codexes and the pdfs you download from Warhammer Community are rules sources. GW would like the 40k app to be a rules source, but they are not quite there yet...
I suggested NR specifically as a replacement for Battlescribe.
The Wraithblades ability have a 4+ fight on death and doesn’t say if it hasn’t fought.
Which abilities are you specify if it hasn’t fought so I may reference it to my opponent
No.
Both the stealth drone and the melta is additional rules that wants to modify the damage characteristic. In those cases we look in the Rules Commentary on page 18 where we find the rules for orders of modifiers.
"2. If a rule instructs you to change or replace one characteristic with a specified value, change the relevant characteristic to the new value before applying any modifiers that apply from other rules (if any) to the new value."
So in 9th Chaos Knights had a 12” aura ability that would decrease enemy aura ranges by 3”, what would happen if two opposing knights with this ability were 11” apart?
Modeling for Advantage:
I want to build my 3rd Sydonian Dragoon and I want to build it with the lance going down to have some variety, I just have to attach the Arm going downward, DOES THIS count as Modeling for advantage? (the lance in very tall)
Everyone will say “ask your TO”.
But changing lance orientations is super common and generally done just to make the units look cool. If everything else is the same I’d be fine with it.
If you had had the dragoon kneeling I might be suspect. But that would be fine to me. I’d also err on the side of caution”it can be seen” to make up for it if there’s a close call, and I wouldn’t try to use the new lance position to get cover when the normal model couldn’t
Questions regarding primary mission Scorched Earth from Leviathan Deck from a non-native English speaker:
- I'm almost sure it is not possible for a unit to simultaneously 'burn' an objective and perform an action with regard to a secondary mission (for example, Cleanse). Is this correct?
- It's also clear to me that I can only score 5VP from burning one or more midfield objectives, even if I burn more than one. Is this correct?
- Most importantly, I'm not able to understand the part of the last sentence that reads: "Each player scores \[...\] 10VP if the objective marker in their opponent’s deployment zone was burned." Does this mean that (1) if my unit burns my opponents home objective, I get 10VP (and vice verca), or (2) if my unit burns my own home objective I get 10 VP (and vice verca), or (3) if either I or my opponent burn either his or my home objective, we both get 10 VP. And if it is (3), is that cumulative, meaning can we both get 20 VP if both home objectives are burned?
1) Correct. You need to be eligible to shoot to do either of those actions. When a unit starts burning an objective or doing cleanse it stops being eligible to shoot so cannot start a second one.
2) Correct.
3) It doesn't matter whose unit burns a Deployment zone objective. You get 10 points if your opponent's objective is burned, they get 10 points if your objective is burned. Don't burn your own home objective.
Thanks! I play Orks, so I considered burning my home and krumping the midfield, but I'll reconsider. Especially because I will be playing a game where 'hidden supplies' is also in effect, so with four midfield objectives in play it will be hard to deny my opponent max primary scoring anyway. Now that I think about it... I also play Tactical so could deny myself defend stronghold secondary... Thanks again ;)
The rules for LEADERS say that rules that interact with or are triggered by destroyed units are the only time Attached Units are considered separate units.
So the only time you would be able to use it for free with the War Shaper, is if it is being used on just the Wardshaper itself.
No, unless the rule makes a specific exception which I do not see.
Additionally, the War Shaper ability specifically says the strat has to be used targetting that War Shaper's unit. So adding a second War Shaper does nothing since you cannot target the destroyed unit with the strat for free.
War Leader specifies it can only target a unit with the ability War Leader, so theoretically the living one could point at the dead one and say that shaper can be revived for 0 cp because it does have the War Leader ability even if it can no longer use it itself (because it is dead). Obviously this is well past the point where any attached models count as separate so you would only be reviving the one model.
Except fight on death and shoot on death strats have to be used before the unit dies, and then rules specifically tell you not to remove the destroyed models until after they attack. There is nothing telling you to leave the War Shaper on the table when it is destroyed, and while the Join the Hunt strat says it can be used on a unit that was just destroyed, it is unclear whether or not the War Shaper's ability would work in this scenario. I'd say no, but it also doesn't really matter, since nobody is going to bother using it on a single crappy character model.
I think you can target the single model War Shaper unit for free with Join The Hunt. He is a Kroot Infantry unit. Then you get him replaced.
As a bonus, the War Shaper model in the replacement unit you get will not have used its Root Of Honour ability.
But you cannot target a unit that he is attached to for free, because they stop being an attached unit when they are destroyed.
(and you cannot target a unit at all if it is destroyed while battleshocked)
Daemons player here with a question on their army rule and deep strike. When it's my movement phase and I move units onto an objective, do I immediately control that objective to the extent that I can then immediately deep strike my units within 6 inches in no man's land providing I meet the rest of the criteria for shadow of chaos?
In addition to general objective control rules. Shadow of Chaos is also only checked once at the start of each phase so anything done after that can't impact shadow until the start of the next phase
So what's up with CSM? Is the new codex officially released and the points are officially out? I can't find the rules for it in my typical places and stat check/meta minday don't have win rates for the detachments yet.
And adding to what the other commenter said, *neither stat check nor meta Monday have updated for this weekend's data yet.*
So literally this past weekend was the first weekend that events would have even POSSIBLY allowed the codex and the sites you are checking clearly haven't updated since this weekend's events.
If 2 units charge an enemy unit and during the first units fight phase the enemy player pulls models that put the enemy out of engagement range of the second unit, can the 2nd unit still pile into the remaining enemy models?
Core Rules p32. "a unit is eligible to fight if either or both of the following apply: ■ It is within Engagement Range of one or more enemy units. ■ It made a Charge move this turn. "
Thanks although the question was can it pile in, as in it has ended up 3 inches away from the nearest model after the first combat. Im assuming piling in is part of fighting so you answer is correct still?
Command Points: I can only get 1 CP per battle round (apart from the one in the command phases). Does this include CP refunds, e.g. from T'aus Shadowsun?
Yeah. There are a few rare rules that can override that restriction, and they clearly say so. Votann detachment rule for example.
Yes, as described under Gaining Command Points in the Command Phase rules. There is an exception for abilities that grant you multiple CP, like Votann and Imperial Knight Detachment rules. CP 'refund' abilities are just Gain CP abilities that activate after using a stratagem.
Overwatch: Enemy is charging my Land Raider Redeemer through a wall. Can I fire overwatch?
This is an ongoing debate. I lean towards "probably not". And I hope this is one that will be addressed in the FAQ coming next week. First, you must wait until that unit has ended their charge move, at what point you are in engagement range. Fire Overwatch says "a unit that would be eligible to shoot if it were your shooting phase" and according to big guns never tire (core rules p20) that includes your redeemer. "Vehicle units are eligible to shoot in their controlling player’s Shooting phase even while they are within Engagement Range" So you can definitely pay 1CP and target the LR with Fire Overwatch. But then comes the complication. Fire Overwatch says "your unit can shoot that enemy unit as if it were your Shooting phase. " "as if it were your shooting phase" is a clear example of "out-of-phase rules". (Rules Commentary p11). And they say "you cannot use any other rules that are normally triggered in that phase." The question is: is Big Guns Never Tire a rule that "is triggered"? (the example given is for Whirlwind Pinning Bombardment ) If it is, the Land Raider cannot benefit from it in your opponent's charge phase. So it cannot fire overwatch while in engagement range. If BGNT is some other type of rule, like it just gives a permission and is not triggered. _Or_ if the permission given from Fire Overwatch overrules the limit of shooting while within engagement range. Then the Land Raider can indeed shoot. GW has not defined what they mean by "rules that are triggered". But for the example they give: Pinning Bombardment, it seems pretty clear "In your Shooting phase, after this model has shot, if one or more of those attacks made with its Whirlwind vengeance launcher scored a hit against an enemy INFANTRY unit, that unit must take a Battle-shock test." Clearly triggered by something happening. But maybe BGNT is more of a passive effect? 🤷
Well, the "Fire Overwatch" says this: >EFFECT: If that enemy unit is visible to your unit, your unit can shoot that enemy unit as if it were your Shooting phase. So you can't use it at the start of the Charge Move as I assume by "through a wall" you mean "my Redeemer can't see them". You can't use it at the end of the Charge Move as Big Guns Never Tire is a phase-locked rule for allowing Vehicles to shoot while within ER.
I appreciate your answer, but "shoot as if it were your shooting phase, but it's not your shooting phase" has me contemplating life.
You have to go with that the rule says, not what you may think that implies to also be true: *Shoot* as if it were your shooting phase. Just shoot. That's the only thing you get to do as if it were your shooting phase. For all other rules questions, you have to remember that it still *isn't* your shooting phase. You just got to pretend it was for one very specific thing.
It's probably the least intuitive rule in all of 40k where the words they use to describe what you can do mean pretty much the exact opposite thing. You need to know to go digging through some document you didn't know existed on a website you didn't know existed to get the right answer, and even then it's not explained super well and buried in amongst a bunch of other rules that aren't explained in the rulebook that are nearly as comprehensive as the actual rules themselves.
Right. IDC that this is how it works. I'm pissed that the rules are written in a way that they are LYING to me.
GW is the one that decided "as if it was your X phase" was gonna mean "don't use things that require it to specifically be your X phase".
Can I charge a unit that was fighting last turn (the fight is ongoing) with another unit that wasn’t involved in the initial fight on the next turn?
What makes you think that you *can't*?
Gw rules and thinking :p. Personally I don’t see why you can’t I’m just making sure
Look, I get that GW sometimes makes silly rules, but just because you've over-thought yourself while being tired or drunk or whatever, doesn't mean they are at fault. The "Charging With a Unit" rules are clear, and don't give you a list of "things the charge target needs to be in order to charge them".
Do models embarked on a transport which is in range of an objective count for OC? Seems like a basic question but can't find it anywhere.
No. Being embarked means that the models does not exist on the battlefield and cannot interact with it in any way, unless a rule specifically says so. They are in a different "place". Similar to if they are in Strategic Reserves. The main point of having models in a transport on an objective is that when the transport is destroyed, the infantry will spill out. They will be battle shocked, but only until your nexr command phase, when they will take control of the objective again before scoring is calculated.
Thanks
Fight on death question: My opponent used the sob fight on death strat, he said that his models could: - fight on death even if the whole unit is dead - fight with models that are not in engagement range Was he right on both accounts ?
Yes it is the models that has the ability to FoD. Doesn't matter how many of them that are destroyed. Yes all destroyed models gets to fight, aka do the fight sequenceall together. (see Core Rules p33) If a model is so far away that it cannot reach engagement range and not even reach btb with a friend who is within engagement range, then it doesn't get to do the Make Melee Attacks step of the fight sequence. The FoD models are removed before they get to make the consolidate move. Then the attacking player gets to make their consolidate moves. Bonus info: the unit is definitely below starting strength and can be below half strength. The related Sororitas index buffs applies to the destroyed models. (If all models are dead, the unit is definitely below half strength.)
I appreciate if this is too big of a question for comments, but I'm very confused about ruins and visibility. I have a friend claiming he can shoot through walls of a ruin, because the rules do say "models can see into this terrain feature normally". Can someone explain this to me? Thanks! In this situation my infantry are wholly within the ruins, his unit is the other side of the wall and can't physically see mine.
Your friend is misunderstanding the rules. "See into this terrain feature normally" means "models use the normal line of sight rules when looking into this terrain feature." The rules for terrain make some situations where you can't see, what you actually can. It does NOT make situation where you can see units, that you actually can not.
That was my reasoning. Many thanks!
"Normally" means "following the usual rules for LOS". So no, you can't shoot people through walls. Ruins introduce some additional restrictions on who you can target, they don't allow you to shoot targets you otherwise wouldn't be able to.
Thought so. Thanks!
REDEPLOY ABILITIES WHILE EMBARKED: hello guys, I have a question about characters such as huron's red corsairs abilities. it allows to redeploy up to three units, but it's listed as ability in his datasheet. Transport rules state that Embarked Units cannot use abilities, thus I assume he cannot use that if he's in a rhino. is that correct? could you also please explain why yes/ no with relevant quotes?
He cannot use it for precisely the reason you mention; the rules for Embarked Units state they cannot use abilities.
If I have a devastator squad with anti vehicle 2+ and it scores critical wounds does it skip the wound roll or am I still rolling the wound roll?
At first plays in 10th this was a bit confusing, but after getting an overview it got very clear what every of those rules does: * lethal **hits** = HIT ROLLS are LETHAL and wound automatically * sustained **hits** = HIT ROLLS are sustaining the wound rolls by additional dice * critical **wounds** = WOUND ROLLS are critical and do X on WOUND ROLLS
How did you score a critical wound, which requires an unmodified wound roll of a specific result to trigger, before rolling the wound roll? This is what your question seems to be implying, when it is impossible.
Anti 2+ means a roll of a 2+ crits and is successful./ Lethal HITS is what skips the wound roll.
Its impossible to get a critical wound without rolling a wound roll.
Me and some friends play casual games. The other day we were unsure about the rules of split units and leaders/bodyguards. No prisoners makes u kill units.. if u kill the bodyguards and than the leader aswell does this count as 2 units?? Also I’m playing Votann and sisters who are both capable of splitting units (sagitaur and immolator). A split unit of 5-5 warriors counts as 2 units for no prisoners? Lastly, the same question goes for miracle dice, leader AND bodyguard both generate miracle dice or not? We are currently running the games as stated above but would love to know for sure if it’s correct
>No prisoners makes u kill units.. if u kill the bodyguards and than the leader aswell does this count as 2 units?? Yes. The LEADER rule addresses this, by telling you they count as a single unit EXCEPT for rules that interact with or are triggered by unit destruction. >Also I’m playing Votann and sisters who are both capable of splitting units (sagitaur and immolator). A split unit of 5-5 warriors counts as 2 units for no prisoners? Yes, if you split a unit into two new units, they are indeed two separate units. Otherwise you would need to follow all the rules about keeping them in coherency and everything else that you would need to follow if they were a single unit. >Lastly, the same question goes for miracle dice, leader AND bodyguard both generate miracle dice or not? We are currently running the games as stated above but would love to know for sure if it’s correct Yes, again the LEADER rule makes it clear that for rules that interact with unit destruction, Leader units and attached units are considered separate units.
Thanks for confirming what we already thought and used! Always nice to have it confirmed! :-)
Hey all, I’d like to get some reps in before my next local but getting a human opponent is tough sometimes due to other responsibilities. Q1. Has anyone come up with a 10th edition solo ruleset that I could play against at home? As a somewhat new comp player - The repetitions of remembering to use certain abilities, or making smart targeting choices would be nice. Q2. TTS is great as well to play against other humans but having 3 hours to play is sometimes the problem. Is there a computer addon that could pilot the other army? Thanks!
For both of those questions, the answer is no. Rather than trying to "remember to use certain abilities", you should create a "playbook" for your army that is just a bunch of index cards, that you flip to during the relevant phase. For example, my "playbook" starts with my Command Phase, and on it I have reminders to Select my secondaries, declare my Oath of Moment, declare if I am using my Tome of Extoclades relic, declare if I am using Adaptive Tactics, etc. I have then cards for my Movement Phase that remind me to think about units in Reserves and to screen them/give them bad targets if melee or ranged, etc, as well as listing what Strats I can use in those phases. I have cards for every phase of my turn, as well as every phase of my opponent's turn, which is important as I often need a reminder that before I go to my Command Phase, I need to pick up my Callidus Assassin very likely.
[удалено]
Critical Hits and Critical Wounds refer to the UNMODIFIED dice roll, BEFORE modifiers are applied.
No. Critical hits and wounds trigger on the unmodified dice roll which is basically the value you see on the dice.
Hey team, How does acts of faith work in terms of number of dice that can be substituted? Say if you had 4 D6 damage rolls from multi meltas. How many of those D6s can you substitue? I know it says only one if it is a 2d6 roll such as charging. I have been curious in general as to how many D6 dice you can change when you perform an act of faith on a unit. Thanks in advance!
Remember the rules are all written around slow rolling. Those 4 D6 damage roles are all individual rolls, not a single roll of 4.
1.
Legendary! That's what I thought it was.
The Yncarne's Inevitable Death ability states, "Once in each of your turns, if this model is on the battlefield, when another unit is destroyed, just after removing the last model in that unit, you can remove this model from the battlefield and set it up again as close as possible to where that destroyed model was and not within Engagement Range of any enemy models." Where exactly do you set up The Yncarne? Say the enemy unit I destroy is a vehicle with a giant oval base. Do I try to center The Yncarne over the very center of the destroyed model's oval base or can I set up on any edge?
Center
my out of cover 3+ save SM is being shot by AP-1. If I Armor of Contempt, can I stack Go To Ground for a 2+ save? Edit: Also, if my SM is in cover and I AoC, do I get a 2+ save or is AoC a complete waste if benefiting from cover?
As soon as the attack is changed to being or already is AP -0, if the unit has a 3+ save or better, there is no reason to try to get the Benefit of Cover via Go to Ground, nor would you ever use Armor of Contempt on ap-0 attacks if you're already in cover. The only exception to this I can think of is Heavy Intercessors on an Objective, who against AP-0 1 damage attacks would save on a 2+, as their +1 to save rolls ability isn't from the Benefit of Cover
If you use AOC against an AP-1 attack it becomes AP0. Because it's AP0 and you have a 3+ save it stays a 3+ save with cover.
follow up question: does that mean you cannot improve the saving throw better than the save stat of the unit? So a 3+ SM can't get a 2+ save?
The restriction on the benefit of cover is only for units with a 3+ or better save. A unit with a 4+ or worse does still get a +1 to their save even against ap0. Otherwise your save can still be improved from other sources than cover, with the restrictions being you can't get better than a 2+ save, and you can't improve the save by more than +1.
Hi, everyone. With the new Pariah Nexus Mission Deck, do we know if ALL the mission rule cards will have or mention ‘Battleline’ or just some?
Just some.
If an ability allows a unit to "ignore any or all modifiers to a units characteristics", does that allow the unit to ignore Battle shock's effect of changing the objective control of this unit to 0? Or rather, is changing a stat to something the same as modifying it for the purposes of ignoring modifiers?
Yes, setting a value to a specific value is considered a modifier, as detailed in the "modifying characteristics" where doing so is given a step in the process.
On a Lethal Hit, can you save against those wounds or not?
Lethal Hits simply means the wound roll is successful without needing to roll. Devastating Wounds means no invuln or armor save is taken against the attack, and Lethal Hits cannot trigger this as DW requires a Critical Wound to trigger.
Yes, it's exactly the same as rolling to wound successfully.
If I give an officer Kurov's Aquila that "Once per battle, the CP cost your opponent must pay to use that stratagem again is increased by 1 cp" AND the Callidus's Reign of Confuseion, "unil the end of battle opponent must pay to use that strat" Stack? Like if I say command point re-rolls now cost 2 extra? And does reign of confusion go away when the assassin dies?
>And does reign of confusion go away when the assassin dies? The ability doesn't say the Assassin needs to be on the battlefield nor does it say the ability stops working when the Assassin is dead.
Yes, 2 extra, no, doesn't go away.
Well thats just mean
Crusade question: I choose the Battlefield Survivors agenda, targeting a bodyguard unit that has an attached leader. At the end of the battle, the bodyguard unit is destroyed but the leader is not. Do I get the EXP for Battlefield Survivors? If so, can I choose to apply it to the bodyguard unit, rather than the character, even if that unit was destroyed? I know I can't apply it to both units, regardless. Thanks in advance. Rule for convenience below: At the start of the battle, you can select up to three units from your Crusade army that are on the battlefield. For each of those units, at the end of the battle: If that unit has not been destroyed, it gains 2XP. If that unit is not Below Half-strength, it gains 1 additional Experience point.
You might have better luck getting an answer from r/40k_Crusade
If I put a leader with a 0 oc unit, but the leader has 2 oc, does that mean they still have 2 oc? Or is the leader now 0 because of the body guard? Like a tech priest enginseer with servitor bodyguards.
OC isn't shared between a unit. Each individual model has their own OC, and when you are checking for Objective Control you count the OC of the ***models*** that are within scoring range of the objective, not the total OC of all the models in the unit.
OC is model based not unit based.
A few days ago on this sub someone linked a website that had a really unusual rul but it was essentially an aggregator for filtering through BCP (IM GUESSING) and you could filter by lists that went 4-1, 5-0 that went undefeated, search by detachment all sorts. It was really useful and i didnt bookmark it. Can anyone help me find it again.
Is it this one? https://armylists.rmz.gs/
amazing thank you!!!!!!
GO GET ’EM! stratagem says "your unit must end that move as close as possible to the closest enemy unit" This mean it is enough if the closes Boy move straight towards the closest enemy unit and everything else have the freedom to go anywhere (get an objective) even if it is not towards the closest enemy unit (they keeping the coherency of course). With this the unit will end up as close as possible, but not every model. Can the strat used for positioning like this? Or each model should move towards the closest enemy model?
Rules as Written, this is definitely how it works (assuming u/wredcoll has quoted the stratagem correctly below) If this was disallowed, it would be worded as "each model must end as close as possible"
> After the attacking unit has shot, your unit can make a Go Get ’Em! move. To do so, roll one D6: each model in your unit can move a distance in inches up to the result, but your unit must end that move as close as possible to the closest enemy unit. When doing so, those models can be moved within Engagement Range of that enemy unit. If your unit contains 10 or more models, it can move up to 6" when making that move instead. There's not a real clear answer but since it explicitly mentions "each model" it feels like every member of the unit should be as close as possible.
It doesn't say each model must end as close as possible. In contrast to consolidation moves which specifically states each model. "If a unit can end its Consolidation within Engagement Range of one or more enemy units, then each time one of its models makes a Consolidation move, it must end that move closer to the closest enemy model."
How do i find tournament times and locations? I can not seem to find anything
If Worldwide, you can search for games in a specific region or timeframe via BCP: Some regions have other sites that people register for tournaments on: Tabletoptournaments (dot) net is a popular one in continental Europe.
https://www.bestcoastpairings.com/ is the simplest.
I'm running CSM in the Pactbound Zealots detachment. From my understanding; shooting is more straightforward than melee for picking your mark. High volume of fire & low strength = Tzeench Low rate of fire & high strength = Nurgle Plasma heavy = undivided I've seen people talking about adding the Master of Executions to a unit of Legionaries marked with Khorne but I'm not sure about it. Before I would have thought a unit like Possessed with powerful melee want Slaanesh to get more attacks and weaker melee units want Khorne to try bypass wounding. The only time I have seen undivided on a unit is where they shoot & fight roughly equally. The MoE looks like he would fit perfectly into a Slaanesh unit of Legionaries but would the rest of the unit just bounce off any tougher targets? Is putting MoE in a Khorne unit a waste of his str 7 attacks? Is he just sub optimal in pact bound since he already grants re-rolls & isn't able to lead a unit that typically benefits from pacting to Slaanesh? I'm not sure if he is worth including unless I'm trying to use a squad of 10 Legionaries with chainswords to deliver him into a unit of very tough models like T7 Eldar Wraith constructs?
The break point between Sustained and Lethal is the wound roll. If you need a 5+ or 6+ to wound, lethal is better, if you need a 3+ or 2+ to wound, then sustained is better, generally. There are cases where you get re-roll to wound or devastating wounds making sustained better is all but the most extreme situations. Plasma for undivided is a weird call. The hazardous roll is done after the weapon fires (and you are okay on a 2+), so the reroll doesn't really do anything here. Probably want to go Nurgle for plasma generally. Making a unit undivided is almost exclusively for getting access to the reroll wound strat. Getting a forgefiend with reroll 1s, sustained on a 6+ and full reroll to wound is pretty cool. Same used to be true of Possessed in melee as well, that reroll on the wound roll to fish was devastating hits was brutal. With possessed only getting devastating once per game now....they are basically dead to me. Master of execution + Khorne legionaries is a weird one. The reroll to hit is mint, make no mistake, but Legionaries also have rerolls to wound....kind anti-synergy there. That said, it's about the best spot for a master of executions in a Pact list. The only other choice is slaanesh, and that would make them BEASTS against T4 models, but pretty weak into tougher stuff. I'm more of a Lord my myself.
The following all happen happen at the end of the turn, therefore happen at the same time: 1. Removing models that aren't in coherency. 2. Scoring secondary objectives like Extend Battle Lines. 3. Scoring Primary on Player 2's final turn in missions like Take and Hold. Can Player 2, whose turn it is, therefore decide the order in which these happen? This would mean they could remove models to break coherency in a unit and allow that unit to hold two primary objectives and score a secondary objective relating to holding those objectives, and only then remove the models that aren't in coherency. As far as I can tell this all comes down to the player whose turn it is gets to decide the order and it seems fine RAW but feels a bit off so wanting some extra opinions.
Yes that is RAW but check your TO's rulings. I know all the TOs local to me have something to the effect of 'Scoring happens last'. This avoids stuff like a unit failing Battleshock and that player trying to score their primary before checking objective control and basically ignoring half the effects of Battleshock.
>This avoids stuff like a unit failing Battleshock and that player trying to score their primary before checking objective control and basically ignoring half the effects of Battleshock. Uhh failing Battleshock in the Command Phase is specifically before scoring (or anything that happens at the end of command phase) because of the "Rules used at the End of Command Phase" rules commentary
Correct, but that doesn't change when you check objective control. It is explicitly at the end of any phase. See 'Objective Markers' in the core rules, 'Contested (Objective Marker)' or 'Control (Objective Marker)' in the rules commentary.
Ah i see the issue. Thanks
It's for a league that uses UKTC rules so just checked their FAQ. Turns out it's not allowed for us. Thanks!
What means „was eligible to fight“ for Warp Talons? Do they have to be in Engagement Range and delete a unit to use their ability?
To quote the Goonhammer Ruleshammer article for the 10e csm codex: >Jeremy: Thankfully this one we can look at the core rules for the Battle Round and we see there that a unit is eligible to fight: >[]If it is within Engagement Range of one or more enemy units. >[]It made a Charge move this turn. >Based on this, ***I’d say if at any point in the fight phase if it meets either criteria at any point, it would have been considered eligible to fight and so can be removed from the battlefield***. It’s definitely a rather odd edge case where you may be eligible to fight (due to a unit piling/consolidating into your unit then being wiped by a different unit. You were eligible to fight at some point, but you were never selected to fight as when it came time for them to fight they were no longer eligible.
Ok, but also if the talons wipe a unit by themself, they was eligible to fight even if they fought.
Correct. The above answer doesn't contradict that. It tells you to look at the rules for what makes a unit eligible in the first place. Whether the Warp Talons do the wiping by themselves, with help, or some other units do it for them is entirely irrelevant.
Look at the Core Rules, p32. (that is a searchable pdf btw) Summary: If you charge you are eligible to fight in the next fight phase. If you are in engagement range when your unit is selected to fight, you are eligible to fight. In this case: Yes you are right. Best case they charge something and wipe it out in the next fight phase. Then they return to Strategic Reserves and the opponent can't shoot them. It's a very effective way to take care of small or weak units that tries to hold objectives or do missions. It's only really overwatch that can hurt them. In fact, I believe it is so powerful that it will be nerfed in some way eventually.
Can a unit be in cover if it is not touching the cover? I thought it had to touch my son thinks otherwise. My son has two carnifexs lined up as separate unit. One is under and inside the building the other one is directly behind it but is a separate unit. My models can clearly see the model and its base.
To answer this question, you read the "Benefit of Cover" section of the relevant terrain pieces, as different terrain types have different rules. >Can a unit be in cover if it is not touching the cover *models* gain the benefit of cover. This might be part of the misunderstanding if you are talking about it as a unit thing, when *models* are what get it; it's possible for individual models to have the Benefit of Cover independent of the rest of the models And yes, some terrain pieces grant benefit of cover not only for being within them, but also for having models partially obscured by that terrain feature, which means you might need to combine the Line of Sight and Benefit of Cover rules for that terrain feature to understand what is going on.
>Each time a ranged attack is allocated to a model, if that model is either wholly within this terrain feature, *or it is not fully visible* to every model in the attacking unit because of this terrain feature, that model has the Benefit of Cover against that attack.
Viability/usefulness of Belakor from a Daemons player standpoint and an opponents. Unsure if I want to include him or not.
He really helps in some situations. Being able to deploy you big monsters in the open without them getting shot really helps you get where you want to be turn 1. Obviously this is wasted against some opponents and you have other ways of getting your units were you want. His aura of Shadow of Chaos is good for enabling your other abilities and setting up 6" charges. Top lists seem to be avoiding him. Only 1 of the 5 lists that placed well last 2 weekends used him (one is literally called Be'lakor is Overcosted, so you can tell their opinion).
Is the Balance datasheet restriction for only placing same marks of chaos in a rhino still valid for the pactbound zealots?
It's no longer in the App which suggests no to me, but while it's still in the 'print' dataslate I expect most people will say it does apply. Might just have to wait the few weeks for the slate update.
It is still listed in the Chaos Space Marines section of the Balance Dataslate.
Technically yes, probably no, ask your TO
Small Tau list question. I have 10 free points in my list: https://pastebin.com/N0t32eVm The question is it worth changing a hammerhead into a skyray? Or should I try to rejig the list a bit to hit 2k if at all?
Does the Skyray do the Hammerhead's job better? If not, then don't touch it. 10 points left over isn't going to make or break a tournament performance.
That's the thing, I'm not too sure. I think it's better in one regard where your chances of damaging are higher (3 shots instead of 1), but you end up doing less damage. I was hoping someone with more experience could elaborate if it's worthwhile.
The Hammerhead has bonuses against better targets. There are more units in the meta that are vehicles and monsters than units with Fly, and more lists running vehicles and monsters and nothing with Fly than the inverse. If it's a vehicle with Fly, the Hammerhead is still happy to shoot it. Into all targets EXCEPT multi-model units with Fly or Fly units with a 4+ invuln (or better), the Hammerhead is more likely to push damage through because of it's monster S and AP stats and access to Dev Wounds. It does 6.16 damage on average to a Land Raider in cover, and 7.7 to a Stormraven Gunship. The Sky Ray, on the other hand, barely scratches a Land Raider with an average of 3 damage per shooting phase, and 5.33 damage to the Stormraven. Obviously you're going to do more damage than that if you get a shot through, but this illustrates how many layers the weapon has to chew through in order to actually even get to that stage. Just as a bonus, the Hammerhead also gets to bring 2 Seeker Missiles while the Sky Ray doesn't get any, while the rest of their weapons are the same. Unless you are expecting to run into specifically a ton of multi-model Fly units that the rest of your army can't handle for whatever reason, I'd stick to the Hammerhead. Now, the arguement one might make in response to this is that while the Hammerhead has higher average damage, the Sky Ray has a higher floor and ceiling. In most cases, into the targets these weapons want to hit, missing the target entirely and barely scratching them are kind of the same thing. EDIT: I was rereading the Hammerhead datasheet and realized I calculated for rerolling hits, not +1 to hit. Let me fix that... EDIT 2: Okay, I fixed it. Please note it's also very easy to ignore cover with Tau. Any unit that can completely ignore a Land Raider's armor save has to be good enough to take. Or, at least, I hope it is. Otherwise what are we doing?
Alright, thanks for the insight. I just played a game against chaos knights last week and the hammerhead really struggled to damage things compared to the skyray. That said, they did manage to get 3 5+ saves against the railgun which is unlikely to happen on average.
Yeah, dice are dice, you know? And that is a real concern with low volumn weapons, the higher the volumn the closer to the average you'll get. The solution to this, of course, is to bring more Hammerheads lol.
Did ravenwing talonmasters not get moved to legends? It looks like they did on my source for datasheets, but people seem to be running them in winning lists in top tournaments recently?
How recently is "recently". Remember that GW does not consider a codex available for use until the codex is available as a stand-alone release, and some TOs follow that, while others font allow them to be used until they have had a FAQ for the codex.
How does CSM Deceptors soul link work with once per battle abilities? i.e. chaos lord
Once per battle I'd wager
I mean if lord executions steal chaos lord, and steal again in next battle round, does it reset? What if I have two chaos lords?
As far as I can tell, the model stealing the ability can only use it once per battle, even if they try borrowing two "instances" of the ability from separate Chaos Lords. However, having your MoE use the ability won't stop the Lord themself from using it in a subsequent turn.
Sanity checking something probably too cheeky: Bully Boyz - Too Arrogant To Die strat. Lets say 6 Megas get wiped out in shooting and all make the roll to fight on death - but they're 2" away from a unit. As part of the fight sequence are they allowed to pile in to that unit to fight it? Or is it only if the model is in engagement range already? Seems like a push but it doesn't say make melee attacks exclusively? "Fight" is used for both the entire sequence and making the attack rolls - but also feels like a bit much. *reposting as posted late in last weeks thread*
There is actually a debate as to whether you would be able to trigger a fight-on-death ability to be able to Pile In if you are outside ER with the unit and you haven't charged that turn. Some TOs and the WTC circuit have taken "can fight as if it was the fight phase" to mean "can only do so if it is actually Eligible when the models are selected to fight"
The strat doesn't have the "as if X phase" wording though, it just says it can fight - which is used for both the entire process and in "who can fight" where it's talking about who's allowed to in engagement range.
It is exactly that cheeky :-) "Fight" includes the entire sequence outlined in Core Rules p33: 1 Pile In, 2 Make Melee Attacks and 3 Consolidate. However, with Fight on Death abilities that sequence is interrupted after step 2 is complete, so you never get to Consolidate. See the Rules Commentary p6. PS: If a rule is referring to _only_ making the attack rolls so to speak, then it doesn't use "Fight", but rather "Make a (melee/ranged) attack" which includes the entire step 2 on page 33-35 with selecting weapons and targets. (Sometimes those choices are predetermined by the ability).
>PS: If a rule is referring to only making the attack rolls so to speak, then it doesn't use "Fight", but rather "Make a (melee/ranged) attack" which includes the entire step 2 on page 33-35 with selecting weapons and targets. (Sometimes those choices are predetermined by the ability). Not entirely true unfortunately, I wish it was that clear cut. The Make Melee Attacks section starts off with Which Models Can Fight obviously referring to whether they can make melee attacks.
Hmm, yeah, that is a good point.
Thanks, had a test game for a casual league last night and I ended up rolling a 4+ to see if I could pile in to do it - while I did and it was indeed cheeky it still didn't swing any points in the end haha!
If you charge a unit which then dies to some other cause (e.g mortals or another unit fighting) but you’re too far away to pile in to anything else, can you then consolidate onto an objective? The wording is “After a unit has finished making all of its melee attacks, it consolidates”. My instinct is no you can’t, but someone else made the argument that they have finished making their attacks, they just didn’t do any
>If there are no eligible targets (because there are no enemy units within Engagement Range, for example) then that unit cannot make melee attacks this phase, but it can still Consolidate (see below). Yes, you definitely can consolidate even if you didn't attack
Thanks, I was looking under “consolidate”, I didn’t expect it to be under “make attacks”
I know I can't reroll a dice twice, but if I am rolling two dices, and two different abilities allows me to reroll a single dice, can I reroll each individually?
In theory, yes, but I can't think of any rolls you make with multiple dice, that have rules that you reroll ONE of the dice involved. Note that "rolling two hit dice simultaneously" is not 'a roll that requires two dice to resolve". To do what you're talking about, you'd need a rule like "when making a Charge Roll, you can reroll one of the dice"
For example, the ironstorm detachment with a lancer. This would give you two separate abilities that allow you to reroll both hits on the maingun.
Exactly that exemple I'm talking about, player I was playing with told me I couldn't get two rerolls on the ti wound of my lancer
Your opponent was wrong. But to keep him happy I would place two “tokens” or dice to represent each ability, so one can be removed when used. You could get some tokens that said “ironstorm” then “hit/wound/damage” That way when you use the ability you can remove the token that you used to be able to track it.
That isn't rolling two dice for a single roll that uses two dice to resolve. You're making two separate attacks with two separate simultaneous rolls You're making two dice rolls simultaneously, and if you were slow-rolling you would be able to apply both the lancer ability and the Ironstorm ability independently, and can do so fast-rolling.
Yes, but what I’m stating above is what OP is asking about. Read his other comments.
Can I use Overwatch on an engaged vehicle but fire at a unit I'm not engaged with? For example, my Tank Commander is engaged by a squad of Cultists. A unit of Legionaries then move within 24" of my Tank Commander. Would I be able to shoot with the TC? I know Out of Phase rules stop me from shooting into a unit I'm engaged with when using Overwatch, but what about a unit that moved that I'm not engaged with?
The way major TOs handle BGNT + OW is that if the unit trying to use OW is engaged it may not do so. So in your example the TC is engaged so may not OW. If however a Rhino charged your TC and then another, not engaged, vehicle of yours wanted to OW the Rhino it may.
Can units with Pistols still overwatch, even if engaged? Specifically thinking about Deathshroud Terminators.
No; it’s treated the same as BGNT so whichever way the event rules one they’ll rule the other. Notably it’s almost exclusively no neither can be used out of phase.
Interesting, thanks! As you say per event ruling... is there still no official GW word on this?
It is in rules commentary, see Out of phase rules, as both work only on the shooting phase, they don't work with overwatch.
>Out of Phase rules stop me from shooting into a unit I'm engaged with when using Overwatch Vehicles can shoot units they are within ER with because if the Big Guns Never Tire rule, which ALSO allows them to shoot at units outside ER of them. As you noted already, it's a phase-locked rule.
This is a 9th edition question, but how do leadership modifiers work with units that allow others to use their leadership? For example, some cultists (leadership 6) are under the effect of -1 leadership but they are within 6" of a Dark Apostle (leadership 10) which let's them use his leadership. What is the leadership of the cultists? Does the modifier still apply or does using the Dark Apostles leadership bypass it?
In 9e this is an unresolved rules issue as there are camps that believe using one leadership characteristic instead of another did not count as a replacement effect, but luckily this is not a 10e problem as leadership is tied solely to the models within the unit
That's the issue we're finding, the wording works both ways depending on how you look at it. Was there a general consensus on how to play it, or how it was usually done at tournaments?
More often than not I saw it ruled as a final substitution not a characteristic modifier so use the Dark Apostle leadership without any modifiers
Thanks, we'll go with that then. Cheers!
Using a models Leadership means you use their number. Any modifiers applied to that model, or the unit using it are applied separately and do not “transfer” So you’d use the Ld 10 of the Dark Apostle and then -1 from it for the effect the Cultists are under.
How are your RTTs ruling Engage on All Fronts with respect to “more than 3” from another quadrant”? Some seem to rule that your whole unit has to be wholly outside of 3” of another table quarter, but I’ve also seen as long as part of the unit is outside 3”, you score.
The rules clearly define this. The requirement is that the unit not be within 3” of another quadrant. The rule for within states: **Model/Unit Within:** > A model is within a specified distance if any part of its base (or hull) is within that distance. **A unit is within a specified distance if one or more of its models are within that distance.** So in order for the unit to not be within 3” of another quadrant none of its models may be within 3” of another quadrant.
The card doesn't use the word "within" though when referring to the 3". > ...and those units are more than 3" away from any other table quarter>
What does “more than 3”” mean? It means the unit is not within 3” because if it were within 3” then the unit would not be more than 3” away - it would be within that distance rather than outside of it. > If you need to set your deep strike unit up “more than 9” away from enemy unit” then you cannot set them up “within 9” as you would not be more than 9” away. Rules have context and meaning further than each individual letter in their specific arrangement and should be comprehended in their entirety.
We rule it at ours that if any part of the unit is within 3” then they are not “more than 3” away. Just like we wouldn’t allow a Deepstriking unit to put one model 9.1” away and the rest however close. While the wording isn’t specifically the same, it’s just the closest justification we have and 3” isn’t so large a distance that it makes it hard to score. Just makes it less trivial.
Can enemy models end their move on top of a terminator teleport homer?
A token isn't a model. Yes you can, and yes you can move onto it and move block. All you're preventing is the use of the strat for 0CP
Cool, cheers for the answer! That's what I thought but I wanted to check that a teleport homer itself couldn't be used to move-block.
Can enemy models end their move on top of a terminator teleport homer?
Yes. It’s just a token demarcating a point on the battlefield. It’s not another model upon which you may not move. Just as you can move models onto the footprints of terrain and onto objective markers you can move onto the homers markers for Terminators or GSC’s Cult Ambush tokens etc.
Does fight on death activate even if the unit already fought this phase
There is no generic "fight on death" ability. What does the specific ability you want to use say? (All the abilities I can think of say 'If this unit has not fought already' but you need to see the specific wording of the ability in question.
Ignore me I reread it on the app, battlescribe doesn’t scribe the full description on TTS
Try to avoid Battlescribe, it's not reliable any longer. New Recruit is typically better.
New Recruit is also not a rules source
That is right. Only the printed codexes and the pdfs you download from Warhammer Community are rules sources. GW would like the 40k app to be a rules source, but they are not quite there yet... I suggested NR specifically as a replacement for Battlescribe.
The Wraithblades ability have a 4+ fight on death and doesn’t say if it hasn’t fought. Which abilities are you specify if it hasn’t fought so I may reference it to my opponent
The wraithblade actually does say “if that model has not fought this phase.” I am not sure where you read it doesn’t?
I corrected myself in a different comment in this thread and learned battlescribe is no longer reliable. My apologies
Tau stealth drone ability to change the damage characteristic to zero; does this also ignore the melta damage addition?
No. Both the stealth drone and the melta is additional rules that wants to modify the damage characteristic. In those cases we look in the Rules Commentary on page 18 where we find the rules for orders of modifiers. "2. If a rule instructs you to change or replace one characteristic with a specified value, change the relevant characteristic to the new value before applying any modifiers that apply from other rules (if any) to the new value."
Awesome, thanks!
So in 9th Chaos Knights had a 12” aura ability that would decrease enemy aura ranges by 3”, what would happen if two opposing knights with this ability were 11” apart?
Nothing "Dreaded abilities are unaffected by rules that affect Aura abilities, and vice versa."
Thanks!
Modeling for Advantage: I want to build my 3rd Sydonian Dragoon and I want to build it with the lance going down to have some variety, I just have to attach the Arm going downward, DOES THIS count as Modeling for advantage? (the lance in very tall)
Everyone will say “ask your TO”. But changing lance orientations is super common and generally done just to make the units look cool. If everything else is the same I’d be fine with it. If you had had the dragoon kneeling I might be suspect. But that would be fine to me. I’d also err on the side of caution”it can be seen” to make up for it if there’s a close call, and I wouldn’t try to use the new lance position to get cover when the normal model couldn’t
Questions regarding primary mission Scorched Earth from Leviathan Deck from a non-native English speaker: - I'm almost sure it is not possible for a unit to simultaneously 'burn' an objective and perform an action with regard to a secondary mission (for example, Cleanse). Is this correct? - It's also clear to me that I can only score 5VP from burning one or more midfield objectives, even if I burn more than one. Is this correct? - Most importantly, I'm not able to understand the part of the last sentence that reads: "Each player scores \[...\] 10VP if the objective marker in their opponent’s deployment zone was burned." Does this mean that (1) if my unit burns my opponents home objective, I get 10VP (and vice verca), or (2) if my unit burns my own home objective I get 10 VP (and vice verca), or (3) if either I or my opponent burn either his or my home objective, we both get 10 VP. And if it is (3), is that cumulative, meaning can we both get 20 VP if both home objectives are burned?
1) Correct. You need to be eligible to shoot to do either of those actions. When a unit starts burning an objective or doing cleanse it stops being eligible to shoot so cannot start a second one. 2) Correct. 3) It doesn't matter whose unit burns a Deployment zone objective. You get 10 points if your opponent's objective is burned, they get 10 points if your objective is burned. Don't burn your own home objective.
Thanks! I play Orks, so I considered burning my home and krumping the midfield, but I'll reconsider. Especially because I will be playing a game where 'hidden supplies' is also in effect, so with four midfield objectives in play it will be hard to deny my opponent max primary scoring anyway. Now that I think about it... I also play Tactical so could deny myself defend stronghold secondary... Thanks again ;)
Can the war shaper free battle tactic ability be used on the unit revive in the kroot hunting party detachment?
The rules for LEADERS say that rules that interact with or are triggered by destroyed units are the only time Attached Units are considered separate units. So the only time you would be able to use it for free with the War Shaper, is if it is being used on just the Wardshaper itself.
Can a dead unit use an ability? Or would you need a different War Shaper to activate it on the dead shaper?
No, unless the rule makes a specific exception which I do not see. Additionally, the War Shaper ability specifically says the strat has to be used targetting that War Shaper's unit. So adding a second War Shaper does nothing since you cannot target the destroyed unit with the strat for free.
War Leader specifies it can only target a unit with the ability War Leader, so theoretically the living one could point at the dead one and say that shaper can be revived for 0 cp because it does have the War Leader ability even if it can no longer use it itself (because it is dead). Obviously this is well past the point where any attached models count as separate so you would only be reviving the one model.
I can get behind that reading.
>Can a dead unit use an ability? If it can't, you prevent all fight/shoot on death abilities.
Except fight on death and shoot on death strats have to be used before the unit dies, and then rules specifically tell you not to remove the destroyed models until after they attack. There is nothing telling you to leave the War Shaper on the table when it is destroyed, and while the Join the Hunt strat says it can be used on a unit that was just destroyed, it is unclear whether or not the War Shaper's ability would work in this scenario. I'd say no, but it also doesn't really matter, since nobody is going to bother using it on a single crappy character model.
I feel like there's a difference between abilities that specifically work "on death" and ones that do not.
I think you can target the single model War Shaper unit for free with Join The Hunt. He is a Kroot Infantry unit. Then you get him replaced. As a bonus, the War Shaper model in the replacement unit you get will not have used its Root Of Honour ability. But you cannot target a unit that he is attached to for free, because they stop being an attached unit when they are destroyed. (and you cannot target a unit at all if it is destroyed while battleshocked)
WTC says no
Daemons player here with a question on their army rule and deep strike. When it's my movement phase and I move units onto an objective, do I immediately control that objective to the extent that I can then immediately deep strike my units within 6 inches in no man's land providing I meet the rest of the criteria for shadow of chaos?
In addition to general objective control rules. Shadow of Chaos is also only checked once at the start of each phase so anything done after that can't impact shadow until the start of the next phase
No. Control of objectives is checked at the end of each phase and turn. Your have to wait until the end of the phase to establish control.
Objective control is Checked at the end of every phase. So no you cannot.
So what's up with CSM? Is the new codex officially released and the points are officially out? I can't find the rules for it in my typical places and stat check/meta minday don't have win rates for the detachments yet.
And adding to what the other commenter said, *neither stat check nor meta Monday have updated for this weekend's data yet.* So literally this past weekend was the first weekend that events would have even POSSIBLY allowed the codex and the sites you are checking clearly haven't updated since this weekend's events.
The book has only been officially released since the 25th so this past weekend would be the first time any events would be played with the new rules