Random FAQ

Commissar Dick wrote:lol sounds fun infact sounds like i win easier stephs way lol but seems a bit of a stretch of the rules tbh

this wasnt me this was Russ bloody oath didnt log me off

Dark Eldar vehicles can get an upgrade called a Torment Grenade Launcher (TGL). This launcher reduces all enemy unit's leadership within 6" by 1. Does this mean that three raiders with the upgrade, if next to a squad, can reduce it's leadership by 3?

The exact wording is as follows:

"Some Dark Eldar skimmers are modified to incorporate hull-mounted launchers that send barbed grenades spinning into the ranks of the foe. Each grenade spews out an ochre cloud of phantasm gas that causes abject terror in the minds of those nearby. To represent this, any enemy unit that is within 6" of one or more vehicles with torment grenade launchers suffers a -1 penalty to its leadership. Enemy units must pass a morale check if they wish to assault such a vehicle - if this test is failed, they may not assault that turn."

Thoughts?

IASGATG wrote:Dark Eldar vehicles can get an upgrade called a Torment Grenade Launcher (TGL). This launcher reduces all enemy unit's leadership within 6" by 1. Does this mean that three raiders with the upgrade, if next to a squad, can reduce it's leadership by 3?

The exact wording is as follows:

"Some Dark Eldar skimmers are modified to incorporate hull-mounted launchers that send barbed grenades spinning into the ranks of the foe. Each grenade spews out an ochre cloud of phantasm gas that causes abject terror in the minds of those nearby. To represent this, any enemy unit that is within 6" of one or more vehicles with torment grenade launchers suffers a -1 penalty to its leadership. Enemy units must pass a morale check if they wish to assault such a vehicle - if this test is failed, they may not assault that turn."

Thoughts?

6" of one or more vehicles with torment grenade launchers suffers a -1 penalty to its leadership

I think it still only reduces it by one reading that but would be cool if it reduce it by -3, not 100% sure though.

Yeah, I'd say the same as Charlie here: "one or more" means for me it doesn't matter how many as long as there is at least one. I don't think it cumulates; we'll have to wait for the FAQ I guess...

i am not trying to MONKEY DANCE THE PEANUT BUTTER SANDWHICH WITH A COUPLE OF BANANAS

Elvis please explain to us older people what this means, I'm confused!

Oh my god, you 40k guys have a lot of possible interpretations of your rules...

SOOOOooooo glad I play bloodbowl just at this point....lol!

Mind you, I still get them wrong sometimes...

Personally I think GW worship the chaos god of arguments and deliberately put contradictions in each new ruleset just to mess with you all!!!

Hey, promise me one thing...no one will talk 40k rules when we're all getting legless on the 21st? (ref: the last session takeaway meal / booze up / drinking game fest!!!)

...

Possibly.

If u swear even things that I don't class as swearing it puts stupid words to replace them

I read the rules for charging to be more on the lines of you charge the unit you shot and its always been that way and generally its move closest to closest implying you move the attacking unit in the direction of the defending unit.

and yes GW contredict thier rules so much (its the same in fantasy) but generally you just dont bother and charge the one unit the way its ment to be played.

Just realised with your Reavers Tom, you can only hit one unit (of your choice), and cover saves apply: if you chose to attack the second unit behind for example they get a 4+ cover save against it ! (Well 6D3 + 3D6 is still going to ruin my day, but well )

How'd you get a 4+ cover save? It's not like I'm shooting through the first squad into the second... I'm just raining death down onto you from above. Guess we misread the rules.

Imagine I have two lines of infantry, you go through both of them, draw a line from where you start to where you finish, and if you decide to attack the second line (because it's an HQ for example?) they get a cover save as if you were shooting from the point you started the movement. It represents the fact they have to avoid the cover to get to the unit behind.

Just saw that on Warseer.

It makes sense if you are flying at troop level. Alternatively I could argue that instead of flying through the first and second units, I merely fly OVER them, dropping the payload onto the second unit. However as it says take cover saves as normal, I'd be more inclined to agree with your point of view.

syxx wrote:If u swear even things that I don't class as swearing it puts stupid words to replace them

LOOOOL your funny Elvis, Banana isn't a swear word

If u put a swear it replaces ur words

Shooting at a troop transport.

Say I have a devastator squad, and for the sake of argument it has 2 lascannons and 2 missile launchers. I tell all of them to fire at a Rhino carrying 10 marines. The missiles fire frag rounds. I fire first with the lascannons, the lascannons blow up the rhino and the guys get out. Can the explosion from the frag missiles hurt the troops if it scatters/lands on them?

Or does it count as, everything fires, THEN they get out?

U fire all shots the it blows up so no

All shots from a same squad are resolved at the same time. So all shots are aimed at the vehicule and resoved at the same time (guys are still inside)

Couple of dodgy questions that came up lately. First about being tabled (we more or less came to the same answer anyway, forum just clarifies it)
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=298219

Second one about pain tokens. Wasn't really sure about who gaines pain token, if we could have one without killing straight away (moral test + running off board mainly)
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=298440
Still in discussion but RaW seems to give the pain token to the unit that caused the last moral test.