Note - this is not an offiacial FAQ (I'll leave Allen to see to that),
but rather a collection of the answers to our questions recently dealt
with by Jervis. So the rulings ARE official.
>1) What is the effect during the shooting phase of blast markers placed
>on detachments with superheavy weapons, particularly if the detachment
>contains ONLY superheavy weapons, such as a warlord with only death rays
>or a detachment containing only land raiders?
>
>On the one hand the arguement is that each superheavy weapon should be
>treated as having a firepower of one; each blast marker causes the loss
>of one firepower, so it would therefore cause the loss of one death-ray
>or anti tank shots in the above detachments.
>
>The contra argument is that superheavy weapons are only firepower=1
>during firefights. Accordingly, there is no mechanism by which blast
>markers affect their shooting, so the titan or land raiders could just
>sit there accumulating blast markers while still firing at full effect.
>The penalty is that it would have difficulties in any assaults or
>firefights, and won't pass any leadership tests in a hurry.
The first interpratation (sp?) is correct. Each blast marker stops one
super heavy weapon from firing.
>The ruling that blast markers affect the shooting of super heavy weapons
>seems to have reached only about half of the GW store staff and customer
>service reps - it may be that at some point in future, there will need
>to be a page in White Dwarf dealing with this and other frequently asked
>questions!
It will be covered in a battle report in WD 211
>2) How many stands of terminators can a land raider or rhino carry? The
>rules give them a transport (2), therefore 2 units, even of terminators
>(as there are no special exceptions for them) whereas in 40k there is
>only enough room for 5 models of terminators in either.
Strictly by the rules, two stands can be carried. As a house rule for
thos
willing to put up with the extra complexity, only allow one stand, as
per
40K.
>3) When must the +25 cost for a detachment HQ be paid? In the Space
>marine list, is the +25 added on if the detachment is lead by a captain
>at a cost of 25pts? In the Eldar list, is the +25 paid if the
>detachment is lead by a Farseer at a cost of 50pts? It appears that the
>list for marines and chaos marines has been compiled in a different
>manner to the Eldar list. From the examples given in the armies book,
>it would appear that the marines must pay the +25 in addition to the
>captain, but the farseer cost already includes the +25. And can you
>confirm that the cost of Tarzak grimsteel, the chaos lord example on pge
>94, is a typo, the correct cost being 57 (chaos lord 25 + rhino 7 + 25
>detachment HQ)?
Unfortunately a number of errors creeped into the example detachments in
the army book. Fortunately, in every case where there is a
contradiction,
the detachment list is correct, and the example is wrong. Bear this in
mind
and you should be OK.
>4) The rules for Eldar Exarchs are also causing confusion. Can they
>only be added to basic Aspect Warrior stands, confering the assault
>skill, or can they be added to a stand of Swooping Hawks? What is the
>effect of adding an Exarch to a Dark Reaper squad? Is the unit's range
>15cm or 45cm, assault value 3 (4 divided by 2, plus 1; or 4 plus 1
>divided by 2), firepower 2?
- FIRST ANSWER
- Another typo. A stand led by an Exarch can either use its own ability,
- or
- the Exarchs, but no both at the same time. So, for example, those Dark
- Reapers could count their heavy weapon ability when shooting and their
- assault ability in close combat, the Swooping Hawks would count as
- having
- Jump Packs when they move and Assault when they fight in close combat,
- etc.
- In other words, they get the best of both worlds!
BUT
Andy has taken me to - task on the answer I gave about
Exarchs (I wasn't around when they were playtesting the Eldar, and got
things a bit wrong... sorry!). The following is likely to be the -
_revised_
answer we give in WD211:
Add the following to the end of the Assault Special Ability description:
"If combined with the heavy weapon ability, change the range to 45cm and
add +1 firepower, but halve the unit's assault value before adding +1."
>5) When during the turn order are skimmer war engines, such as the
>Eldar Engines of Vaul, eligible to pop-up:
>
>a) At the start of the shooting phase (allowing them to be shot at
>by
>vehicles and infantry;
>b) At the start of the war engine shooting phase;
>c) When the owning player decides to shoot with their detachment
>(effectively preventing all but other war engines yet to shoot from
>shooting back);
>d) At some other time?
P: c
>6) What was the rationale behind making Terminators marines with a
>save, as opposed to marines with hero status (particularly as ork nobz
>now outclass terminators in close combat)?
P: We felt it better reflected their abilities (Terminators are
primarily
shooters, Ork Nobs primarily assault troops). Also Terminators just
aren't
as goon in close combat as Space Marine Assault squads, while Nobz are
amongst the most effective assault troops in the Ork army. As a house
rule
allowing players to upgrade Terminators to assault troops would be fine,
but converting the miniatures to show the Thunder Hammers etc might be
rather fiddly!
>7) When a transport carrying a unit with the save special ability
>is
>destroyed, what happens to the transported unit:
>a) The infantry are destroyed on a roll of 1,2 or 3 as per pge 15
>of
>the rules;?
>b) The infantry are destroyed on a roll of 1, 2 or 3 only if they
>also
>fail their saving throw with a second 1, 2 or 3?
P: b
>8) There has been some concern about the abilities of Tyranid
>bio-titans, given that they have no shields or special saving throw.
>Part of the background information says that the Tyranid titans have
>regeneration. Is this:
>a) Some special, otherwise undocumented feature;
>b) A reference to the ability of all war engines to repair damaged
>systems.
P: The ability of Tyranid Bio-Titans to regenerate is represented by
their
high armour value and number of wounds.
>9) When the rules call for a value to be halved, eg. the
>firepower of
>units with assault orders during the shooting phase, do you:
>a) Round up;
>b) Round down?
P: Up to you, but be consistent!
>10) Barrage weapons, whilst being super heavy weapons, have a
>firepower
>calculated by adding up the targets under a template, and place blast
>markers based on this firepower on the second column of the blast
>marker table (under Firepower). Are the Heavy Barrage weapons:
>a) treated in the same way on that table (except for the alternate
>turn
>shooting and the doubling of hits to calculate firepower);
>b) treated as super heay weapons on the blast markers table?
P: a
Hope that helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Also here is my take on the HQ points costs - this is not official, but
in the light of JJ's answer above we're going to need some concensus on
this. Much of the thought effort expended in arriving at the list below
was actually done by others on the list, most notably Temp.
I think there should be some more detail in the FAQ about the commanders
/ detachment HQs. Jervis' answer recently was somewhat vague,
indicating that the lists were correct and the examples wrong.
For the record, it seems logical that:
Ork, Imperial Guard and Tyranids as per the lists.
(Although the Ork Warlord appears 10pts overpriced as a result)
Space Marine Detachments -
any unit as detachment HQ at +25 to basic cost
or Captain HQ at 25+25=50 (plus any upgrades)
or Librarian HQ at 35+25=60 (plus upgrades)
Ditto for the Armour Detachment
This tallies with the cost of a Chapter Master (a Captain with
commander status) at 50pts.
Eldar Detachments -
any unit as detachment HQ at +25 to basic cost
or Farseer HQ at 50 (plus any upgrades)
This tallies with the cost of the commanders
Chaos Marine Detachments
any unit as detachment HQ at +25 to basic cost
or Chaos Lord HQ at 25+25=50 (plus any upgrades)
or Sorceror HQ at 35+25=60 (plus upgrades)
This tallies with the cost of the commanders
Richard
Received on Sat Apr 19 1997 - 10:58:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:21 UTC