Battleground Games Forum

Games Workshop => Warhammer 40K => Topic started by: andalucien on October 18, 2013, 04:40:39 PM

Title: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: andalucien on October 18, 2013, 04:40:39 PM
OK.

The independent tournament FAQ has just been updated to version 2.0 and includes rulings up to and including Space Marines.

http://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/40k-faq/

Feast of Blades just used it, DaBoyz is about to use it, Adepticon will be using it, Las Vegas Open will be using it.   This IS the new INAT. 

Some of the above GT's are adding their own rules on top of the base (consensus-driven) FAQ (some even to reverse certain rulings the individual TO finds unpalatable).

Can Battlegrounds use this FAQ for our events?

If you want, you can do what FOB did, and issue amendments to rulings in here that you want to go against.   But it would be great to take this treasure trove of clarifications (which will be updated periodically as new codices, official FAQ's, and supplements come out) as a starting point.   
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Chase on October 18, 2013, 04:44:35 PM
Sam doesn't really visit the boards.  Moving over to something like this will happen at some point.

I'll ask him to read it when he has a chance.  We've got a busy few weeks ahead of us as far as 40k goes.  He may or may not have time.  :)
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: robpro on October 18, 2013, 04:59:39 PM
I came here expecting something about eating babies. I am disappointed.
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: keithb on October 18, 2013, 05:18:26 PM
I came here expecting something about eating babies. I am disappointed.

this.
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Loranus on October 18, 2013, 07:07:15 PM
I came here expecting something about eating babies. I am disappointed.

this.

Ditto
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Benjamin on October 18, 2013, 07:39:41 PM
Real baby back ribs, dripping with sauce.
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Typhus on October 18, 2013, 08:53:12 PM
"A charging unit must roll for its normal 2D6 charge range before attempting to
determine if any of the charging models will be forced to move through difficult
terrain. Then, before moving any of the charging models, both players will have
to mentally map out where each charging model can and will move. If this
process determines that the charging unit will have to move through DT, then at
this point, roll the additional difficult terrain D6 as instructed on page 22 of the
rulebook. If the charging unit has an ability allowing them to re-roll some or all
of their charge range (such as the Fleet special rule), then this ability can either be
utilized before rolling the additional difficult terrain D6 or after, but not both.

Ex: A unit with Fleet rolls 2D6 for its charge range and scores 3". As this is not
enough distance to reach its target, the charging player decides to re-roll both dice
and this time scores 11". Unfortunately, this new charge range now means the unit
will be charging through DT, so the additional difficult terrain D6 is rolled, with a
’1 being the result. However, the charging unit cannot re-roll this ’1 result, as
they have already utilized their Fleet re-roll."

This is stupid, and has no place because the rules for charging through difficult terrain and fleet are well established in the main rule book.

Didn't we have a thread about this the last time INAT updated and almost everyone hated it because it made no sense for 1/2 of their updates and over-wrote common sense things that are already in the main rule book?

Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Typhus on October 18, 2013, 08:59:13 PM
"Independent Characters from the Chaos Daemons codex cannot join units from
the Chaos Space Marines codex."

This violates the rules of Battle Brother allies as well as Daemonic Instability.
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Loranus on October 18, 2013, 09:30:09 PM
Just looking at the Space Marine Section makes me Facepalm.
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: andalucien on October 18, 2013, 09:48:46 PM
Cool, so we can all re-start all of the internet rules debates on this forum, and not come to any kind of agreement, and most people will never read it anyway, and we can just keep on playin' by different rules at different tables, and NOT playing the way they play it at nearly all the big tourneys in the USA. 
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Loranus on October 18, 2013, 10:48:19 PM
Cool, so we can all re-start all of the internet rules debates on this forum, and not come to any kind of agreement, and most people will never read it anyway, and we can just keep on playin' by different rules at different tables, and NOT playing the way they play it at nearly all the big tourneys in the USA. 

Welcome to the Internet would you like to take off your Jacket? Any Tourney FAQ is going to be different than any other Tourney FAQ. This one as Typhus pulled out seems to actually counter Rules in the books with its own Rules. The Space Marine Section is restating stuff in the Codex that they probably haven't looked at intensely since I can name page numbers off the top of my head to look at.

Lashing out with both Satire and sarcasm isn't going to help you out every time one of these FAQs get posted up people point out stuff they don't like about it. It is a forum a place of discussion and people are discussing it. And like always the final decision will be left up to Battlegrounds Staff to use it. If Sam reads it as he is the main rules Judge for Plainville 40k events and he says they should use it they will use it and everyone will abide to it if they want to play at Battlegrounds.

Stay Calm and Roll Dice.
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: andalucien on October 18, 2013, 11:00:30 PM
Fair enough.  I should probably also stop bringing this up again every three months :)   I think I might be a little obsessed...
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Benjamin on October 18, 2013, 11:03:13 PM
If the homebrew FAQ/Errata is shit, I wouldn't want to see it used only because everyone else using it.

Unfortunately, for whatever reason, it seems excessively difficult lately to find a decent set of universal rules interpretation.
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: robpro on October 18, 2013, 11:07:31 PM
"A charging unit must roll for its normal 2D6 charge range before attempting to
determine if any of the charging models will be forced to move through difficult
terrain. Then, before moving any of the charging models, both players will have
to mentally map out where each charging model can and will move. If this
process determines that the charging unit will have to move through DT, then at
this point, roll the additional difficult terrain D6 as instructed on page 22 of the
rulebook. If the charging unit has an ability allowing them to re-roll some or all
of their charge range (such as the Fleet special rule), then this ability can either be
utilized before rolling the additional difficult terrain D6 or after, but not both.

Ex: A unit with Fleet rolls 2D6 for its charge range and scores 3". As this is not
enough distance to reach its target, the charging player decides to re-roll both dice
and this time scores 11". Unfortunately, this new charge range now means the unit
will be charging through DT, so the additional difficult terrain D6 is rolled, with a
’1 being the result. However, the charging unit cannot re-roll this ’1 result, as
they have already utilized their Fleet re-roll."

This is stupid, and has no place because the rules for charging through difficult terrain and fleet are well established in the main rule book.

Didn't we have a thread about this the last time INAT updated and almost everyone hated it because it made no sense for 1/2 of their updates and over-wrote common sense things that are already in the main rule book?

This is stupid, but if you read the rulebook for charging and look at their diagrams, it kind of says to resolve it like this. I had an issue with someone in a game where they said that because their closest to closest wasn't through difficult it didn't matter if anybody else in their unit had to go through it because you "couldn't backtrack and add the difficult die later."
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: andalucien on October 18, 2013, 11:11:02 PM
Yeah I feel like if you ask 5 people how charging through difficult terrain works you will get 6 different answers.   My approach is to just let people play it however they think it works.
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Sir_Prometheus on October 20, 2013, 01:05:49 AM
It was clear in 5th
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Typhus on October 20, 2013, 01:44:39 AM
There's a chart in the back of the book that tells you units, how many dice they use to move through difficult, and the effects of charging through terrain has on them and the amount of dice to use.
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: robpro on October 22, 2013, 12:49:14 PM
I played against a guy on Saturday who told me that when you disembark onto difficult, each model had to roll 2d6 and pick the highest so he started doing that for each guy in the rhino. I told him thats not how it works blah blah but he was adamant so I said take a full 6 inches then to save time. If he wants to move sisters without flamers next to scarabs and not shoot the scarabs, then why should I stop him?
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Typhus on October 22, 2013, 07:37:17 PM
I played against a guy on Saturday who told me that when you disembark onto difficult, each model had to roll 2d6 and pick the highest so he started doing that for each guy in the rhino. I told him thats not how it works blah blah but he was adamant so I said take a full 6 inches then to save time. If he wants to move sisters without flamers next to scarabs and not shoot the scarabs, then why should I stop him?

It's fine, people still disembark wrong.  RAW, you start in base to base with the vehicle and then move 6".  Everyone just goes out 6".
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Sir_Prometheus on October 22, 2013, 07:56:05 PM
I thought that too. But man, everyone told me I need roll difficult. Was this the one time i didn't argue enough?
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: robpro on October 23, 2013, 09:38:36 AM
I played against a guy on Saturday who told me that when you disembark onto difficult, each model had to roll 2d6 and pick the highest so he started doing that for each guy in the rhino. I told him thats not how it works blah blah but he was adamant so I said take a full 6 inches then to save time. If he wants to move sisters without flamers next to scarabs and not shoot the scarabs, then why should I stop him?

It's fine, people still disembark wrong.  RAW, you start in base to base with the vehicle and then move 6".  Everyone just goes out 6".

This guy said you put the model in base then rolled 2d6 and moved it, then repeated for the next model in the transport. I said you should just do one roll for the unit, and this guy wanted to argue, so i told him just to move them all 6". He played slow all game, we only finished 4 turns of a 1500 game in 2 hours and 15 minutes, and only because I kept saying things like "let's keep this moving, we're just starting turn 3 after 90 minutes and we need to get to turn 5."
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: Sir_Prometheus on October 23, 2013, 11:14:11 AM
Well, OK, we all know you don't roll 2d6 for each individual model.

But this has opened up a more interesting question (That I had had once, then discarded):

DO you have to roll difficult terrain when disembarking if doing so into difficult terrain?

I can think of at least a dozen games that have been won or lost by such things. 
Title: Re: A modest proposal. SAM - please consider
Post by: robpro on October 23, 2013, 11:25:38 AM
Yes, check out the disembark section in the rulebook, it specifically mentions what to do when disembarking in difficult. I'd provide a page reference but I don't have the rulebook on me.