|
Post by asvic on Jul 2, 2020 17:43:51 GMT
Hm yeah, so technically you have to charge the aircraft plus another unit, complete the charge against said other unit so you can have a successful charge, and then you can pile-in and fight the aircraft... dafuq. Just put it on the heap of Day 1 FAQs. If only. Pile ins, consolidations and heroics are still moves. And no move can leave you in aircrafts eng. range. But you need to get closer to tem if you are flying. Totes will be FAQed.
|
|
|
Post by acehilator on Jul 2, 2020 17:58:14 GMT
Yeah I think the intention is that if a melee is happening around the base of the flyer, that the units in melee can try to ignore it when moving into positions. But needs a FAQ for sure.
|
|
|
Post by PumpkinHead on Jul 2, 2020 19:20:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by yoritomo on Jul 2, 2020 19:25:52 GMT
I think it’s cute how y’all think there’s going to be some magical day one FAQ that answers all your questions. Since when has GW put out worth while FAQs in a timely manner?
If there is a day one FAQ it will probably just errata some typos, like the one on the strategic reserve page.
|
|
|
Post by PumpkinHead on Jul 2, 2020 19:26:27 GMT
Stolen from a different forum, but is kind of crazy that this wasn't caught before release.
New rulebook pdf, page 18 (emphasis added):
The player commanding the target unit then makes one saving throw by rolling one D6 and modifying the roll by the Armour Penetration (AP) characteristic of the weapon that the attack was made with. For example, if the weapon has an AP of -1, then 1 is subtracted from the saving throw roll. If the result is equal to, or greater than, the Save (Sv) characteristic of the model the attack was allocated to, then the saving throw is successful and the attack sequence ends. If the result is less than the model’s Save characteristic, then the saving throw fails and the model suffers damage. An unmodified roll of 1 always fails.
And from page five (emphasis added):
A dice roll can be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below 1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less than 1, count that result as a 1.
This would me that if the leaked Bladeguard Veteran storm shield rule (4++ Invulnerable and a +1 to Save characteristic) is applied to units with a 2+ Save characteristic like Custodes and Terminators... They’ll have a 1+ Armor Save and be virtually indestructible! Let’s say you’ve got a 1+ Armor Save being hit by an AP -6 weapon:
If you roll a 1, an unmodified roll of 1 always fails; Save Failed.
If you roll a 2 through 6, it will be modified to a 1; This is equal to the Save characteristic of the model; Save Passed.
|
|
|
Post by Laeketh on Jul 2, 2020 19:46:01 GMT
Stolen from a different forum, but is kind of crazy that this wasn't caught before release. New rulebook pdf, page 18 (emphasis added): The player commanding the target unit then makes one saving throw by rolling one D6 and modifying the roll by the Armour Penetration (AP) characteristic of the weapon that the attack was made with. For example, if the weapon has an AP of -1, then 1 is subtracted from the saving throw roll. If the result is equal to, or greater than, the Save (Sv) characteristic of the model the attack was allocated to, then the saving throw is successful and the attack sequence ends. If the result is less than the model’s Save characteristic, then the saving throw fails and the model suffers damage. An unmodified roll of 1 always fails. And from page five (emphasis added): A dice roll can be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below 1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less than 1, count that result as a 1. This would me that if the leaked Bladeguard Veteran storm shield rule (4++ Invulnerable and a +1 to Save characteristic) is applied to units with a 2+ Save characteristic like Custodes and Terminators... They’ll have a 1+ Armor Save and be virtually indestructible! Let’s say you’ve got a 1+ Armor Save being hit by an AP -6 weapon: If you roll a 1, an unmodified roll of 1 always fails; Save Failed. If you roll a 2 through 6, it will be modified to a 1; This is equal to the Save characteristic of the model; Save Passed. What is the wording on the Stormshield? If it says modifies the save characteristic and not the roll, then that would make sense, but if it modifies the save roll, then it is fine, rolling a 2 would still end as a -3 and fail.
|
|
|
Post by acehilator on Jul 2, 2020 20:00:33 GMT
It modifies the characteristic, so currently yes, it would be busted if Terminators with stormshield got the same rule. Which they don't yet. So please don't even start this discussion here, it is currently nowhere near pertinent.
Regarding the matter of the magical Day 1 FAQ, it was just a figure of speech. Given the current state of the world, a useful FAQ/Errata document by winter 2021 is early enough.
|
|
|
Post by infornography on Jul 2, 2020 20:25:28 GMT
Stolen from a different forum, but is kind of crazy that this wasn't caught before release. New rulebook pdf, page 18 (emphasis added): The player commanding the target unit then makes one saving throw by rolling one D6 and modifying the roll by the Armour Penetration (AP) characteristic of the weapon that the attack was made with. For example, if the weapon has an AP of -1, then 1 is subtracted from the saving throw roll. If the result is equal to, or greater than, the Save (Sv) characteristic of the model the attack was allocated to, then the saving throw is successful and the attack sequence ends. If the result is less than the model’s Save characteristic, then the saving throw fails and the model suffers damage. An unmodified roll of 1 always fails. And from page five (emphasis added): A dice roll can be modified above its maximum possible value (for example, a D6 roll can be modified above 6) but it can never be modified below 1. If, after all modifiers have been applied, a dice roll would be less than 1, count that result as a 1. This would me that if the leaked Bladeguard Veteran storm shield rule (4++ Invulnerable and a +1 to Save characteristic) is applied to units with a 2+ Save characteristic like Custodes and Terminators... They’ll have a 1+ Armor Save and be virtually indestructible! Let’s say you’ve got a 1+ Armor Save being hit by an AP -6 weapon: If you roll a 1, an unmodified roll of 1 always fails; Save Failed. If you roll a 2 through 6, it will be modified to a 1; This is equal to the Save characteristic of the model; Save Passed. OOOH good eye! I'm sure it will either be FAQ'd or at least be relegated to a RAI interpretation, but MAN those who are strict RAW may be in for a surprise!
|
|
|
Post by LordPathos on Jul 2, 2020 20:35:07 GMT
I don't think this is correct. Sure, an unmodified roll of 1 always fails. But that makes it sound like a modified roll of 1 doesn't. Which is not true. If the result is ever 1, it fails. I believe it is just trying to be specific that a natural dice roll of 1, even if you have a +100 modifier to it, still fails.
The +1 to armor bit is just another modifier, not a 'set your armor save characteristic to x'. Idk the stats to the new veterans, for example's sake let us say they are 3+ with the new fancy SS that gives +1Sv. They get hit by a AP-4 weapon, they would get no regular armor save right? (Roll of 6 to save, 6-4 = 2, 2 < 3. Veteran guy dies, takes a wound, w/e) But no, you get the +1 Sv. So now it becomes a -3 modifier to your save. So a 6 could still save you.
|
|
|
Post by able on Jul 2, 2020 20:51:41 GMT
I don't think this is correct. Sure, an unmodified roll of 1 always fails. But that makes it sound like a modified roll of 1 doesn't. Which is not true. If the result is ever 1, it fails. I believe it is just trying to be specific that a natural dice roll of 1, even if you have a +100 modifier to it, still fails. The +1 to armor bit is just another modifier, not a 'set your armor save characteristic to x'. Idk the stats to the new veterans, for example's sake let us say they are 3+ with the new fancy SS that gives +1Sv. They get hit by a AP-4 weapon, they would get no regular armor save right? (Roll of 6 to save, 6-4 = 2, 2 < 3. Veteran guy dies, takes a wound, w/e) But no, you get the +1 Sv. So now it becomes a -3 modifier to your save. So a 6 could still save you. They explicitly stated for 8th that modifying a characteristic was not a modifier. It came up a with regard to something about units that ignore modifiers attacking units that treat all attacks as 6+. Obviously not binding, but without stating that modifications to characteristics are treated as modifiers to rolls should be the default interpretation. It will almost certainly be errataed to have a modified roll of 1 fail, but currently it doesn't. They have a save characteristic of 1+, and after modifiers it was a 1. That means they save. This is totally stupid, and anybody that tries to swing it will get told where to shove it, but does seem to be what they have written.
|
|
|
Post by PumpkinHead on Jul 2, 2020 21:25:08 GMT
Rules as Intended versus Rules as Written, that is always the little nitch that rules lawyers live. As written, only a natural 1 will fail, assuming all storm shields function like those the blade guard carry.
|
|
|
Post by N.I.B. on Jul 2, 2020 21:52:01 GMT
Can't find the Matched Play rules, looking through the messy 131 pages codex leak. Where are they?
|
|
|
Post by winterman on Jul 2, 2020 22:27:27 GMT
Can't find the Matched Play rules, looking through the messy 131 pages codex leak. Where are they? If its the same one I linked earlier its page 63 to 86 under eternal war missions. There's nothing for matched play specifically, I think the announced Chapter Approved thing will codify the matched play things.
|
|
|
Post by princeyg on Jul 2, 2020 22:42:39 GMT
As far as I understand it, the matched play regulations will be in the chapter approved book. Overall, I am currently 50/50 on this new edition. Lots of stuff I like (crusade, terrain) and some stuff that I am a bit iffy about (goodbye 30 man gaunt units). There seems to have been a considerable change in how the game is played even if its not as drastic mechanically as 7th to 8th was. Very much a case of get some games in and see. Us nid players are certainly going to have to learn to adapt all over again. I am torn about the 1+ save issue, as I honestly cant believe they would do something like that. HOWEVER.....people have moaned for years that terminators are not worth the points (damn I am old enough to remember them making saves on 2d6!!) Maybe this is in fact intended for a very few select units (I am fully aware that GW's idea of "few select units" can get a bit exaggerated over time) though I also recognise that as my second army is in fact Deathwing I may be a bit biased. Still have no clue what the heck this is going to do to my Goff/Bad Moon Piscina campaign based orky horde
|
|
|
Post by N.I.B. on Jul 2, 2020 22:52:48 GMT
Can't find the Matched Play rules, looking through the messy 131 pages codex leak. Where are they? If its the same one I linked earlier its page 63 to 86 under eternal war missions. There's nothing for matched play specifically, I think the announced Chapter Approved thing will codify the matched play things. But that's just a list of how to score objectives in the different missions. Nothing about how rules differ in Matched Play from Crusade or Open play. Never mind, found it. Page 65 of the leaked pdf. Only adresses how to play reserves though.
|
|