Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Guest on Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:50 pm

Some stuff came up during the game Tyson and I had today (as well as some rulings I've wondered about) and I was wondering what the general ruling of this league is.

Do Necrons get WBB if they fail a Dangerous Terrain test?

Are Necrons that are Sweeping Advanced allowed WBB? RAW they are, but RAI (by GW) they are not. What does the league prefer? The only game I played in the league used both rulings with some questionable logic - the Lord can (if he has a res orb) but everything else can't even if there's a Tomb Spyder in range.

can Tomb Spyders be deployed as one unit? The Codex seems to imply that they can but goes on to say that they are independant.


Last edited by HolyCause on Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:00 am; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : I can have reasons??)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Timbo on Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:48 pm

From sweeping advance in rulebook: "The destroyed unit is removed immediately. Unless otherwise specified, no save or other special rule can rescue the unit at this stage; for them the battle is over." Sweeping advance does not inflict wounds, and wounds is what WBB applies to, correct?

Timbo
Lord of Titan

Posts : 1177
Join date : 2009-01-26
Age : 46
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Veyure on Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:57 pm

I can't remember what exactly it says for WBB but does it not say that a WBB is not allowed if the wound allows no armour save? If it does then the dangerous terrain would eliminate the necron without WBB.

The tomb spiders deploy at the same time but act independantly of each other and do not need to be deployed together. Kind of like a IG Platoon,

Veyure
Inquisitor

Posts : 699
Join date : 2008-03-19
Age : 31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Lord_Commander_Stash on Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:57 pm

HolyCause wrote:Some stuff came up during the game Tyson and I had today (as well as some rulings I've wondered about) and I was wondering what the general ruling of this league is.

Do Necrons get WBB if they fail a Dangerous Terrain test?

Are Necrons that are Sweeping Advanced allowed WBB? RAW they are, but RAI (by GW) they are not. What does the league prefer? The only game I played in the league used both rulings with some questionable logic - the Lord can (if he has a res orb) but everything else can't even if there's a Tomb Spyder in range.

can Tomb Spyders be deployed as one unit? The Codex seems to imply that they can but goes on to say that they are independant.

I think they do get WBB rolls for dangerous terrain. RAW wise they certanly do, but thinking about it dangerous terrain only causes one wound, so it is possible to pull yourself out of the muck, lava, what ever it would be.

I dont believe WWB should apply to a squad getting run down after a sweeping advance. No other saves can save you from this, and fluff wise, the unit gets shot down as they run, hacked to bits, etc. Also the game mechanics make it weird if they do get back up: A unit victoriously beats them in hand to hand, and then gets shot and assaulted by the survivors who get back up??? Most armies would be smarter than that I would hope Wink

I dont have a necron codex, but I assume that tomb spiders use a common feature to the codexes where you can take multiple single selections for one force organization slot (they arent powerful enough to use up a whole slot, so you can buy 3 for one slot, yet they are individual units).

Lord_Commander_Stash
Grandmaster

Posts : 476
Join date : 2008-03-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Lord_Commander_Stash on Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:58 pm

Veyure wrote:I can't remember what exactly it says for WBB but does it not say that a WBB is not allowed if the wound allows no armour save? If it does then the dangerous terrain would eliminate the necron without WBB.

The tomb spiders deploy at the same time but act independantly of each other and do not need to be deployed together. Kind of like a IG Platoon,

WBB says "...that allow no armour save in hant to hand combat...or that cause instantdeath..."

Lord_Commander_Stash
Grandmaster

Posts : 476
Join date : 2008-03-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Guest on Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:44 am

WBB says "...that allow no armour save in hant to hand combat...or that cause instantdeath..."
Ah you miss an important part: WBB actually says "any weapon whose Strength is twice the Toughness". Even the bgb defines "instant death" the same way. Dangerous Terrain tests have no Strength per se, and they're definitely not a close combat attack, thus... the conflict might occur.

thinking about it dangerous terrain only causes one wound
This is true, thanks for pointing that out. I always thought Dangerous Terrain instantly killed a model, I never knew it inflicted just one wound. So that solves that issue completely Smile

Sweeping advance does not inflict wounds, and wounds is what WBB applies to, correct?
WBB says this:

"Any Necron model that is reduced to 0 Wounds, or would otherwise be removed as a casualty [...]"

Some people try to argue the "removed as a casualty" bit, but if they're not removed as a casualty, what are they removed as? Injury? An accident? A saint? Silly logic for those who try to argue such a noun (or lack thereof) imho...

But anyway, every time a Necron model is removed from play as a casualty (or simply removed, reduced to 0 wounds, becomes an injury, whatever) they are laid on their side and on a 4+ blah blah blah we all know this. The important thing to consider in WBB is when is it not allowed. WBB states on the matter: when a weapon doubles the toughness, and when it cancels an armour save in close combat (and the whole 6" or 12" tomb spyder thing).

But Sweeping Advance says that no special rule can save them. Problem is, it doesn't define what kind of rule - a USR (such as Feel No Pain), or a codex rule?

Well, GW's position is that Codex Trumps Rulebook. Therefore, RAW, WBB is allowed after Sweeping Advances.

In 4th edition, SA explicitly mentioned WBB. The wording of the rule was exactly the same; it was also covered in the Necron FAQ. However, 5th edition removed that explicit mentioning along with the FAQ entry - thus breaking the RAW aspect. Since the WBB exception was in parenthesis it seems that RAI it's using the 4th edition method.


I'm asking what the league's official standing on the matter is so it doesn't arise in games when I am (inevitably) sweeping advanced.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  System Commander on Thu Nov 26, 2009 9:53 am

This has been a problem that GW has taken the wide, wide circle on taking.

WBB have never been able to save necrons from Sweeping advance, so there's reason to start now. I know it would be nice for the necron players to get a break on it, but it was definitely not their intention to go that way.

When is doubt on controversial issues, I like to consult the Adepticon FAQ, written by Yakface and his team.. which if you recognized the name is what GW used in their big round of Faq updates a year ago. They took a bunch of notes form the adpeticon faq and formed their own. As per the adpepticon faq, no WBB for the necrons. You can check it out here..

This is another issue that has been debated over and over again across the forums. Mainly because its very strong if they get it.. so worth debating.


http://www.adepticon.org/wpfiles/inat/INATFAQv3.0.pdf

System Commander
System Commander

Posts : 4689
Join date : 2008-02-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Terran on Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:20 am

Related tangent: What kind of name is 'Yakface', and why would any professional ever want to be called it? I have seen it in the FAQ's, and I always wonder what he was thinking.

Terran
Assassin

Posts : 305
Join date : 2009-09-14
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  smackman on Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:37 am

I've been playing necrons this league and I've been playing:

WBB for dangerous terrain - YES
WBB for sweeping advance - NO, not even a lord, not even if you have a monolith standing by with a ctan and 3 tomb spiders ready to dedicate their shooting phase to welding and duct taping.

smackman
Inquisitor Lord

Posts : 754
Join date : 2008-11-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Guest on Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:21 am

I don't like that FAQ. It sporadically is useful, yes, but most of it is just rehashing RAW (which can be, surprisingly, learned from actually reading the rules) or dreaming up new rules based on how they want to see 40K. "Destroyers are jetbikes" - no, they're not. They MOVE like jetbikes. They are still infantry and assault like infantry. Wtf, are we just going to ignore the codex now? Even the official FAQ says they're jetbikes.

Rant off.

Note that the FAQ still says "clarification" so even they admit that RAW it's allowed Razz

Just wanted to know what the league used, so I guess it's answered.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  gluvzer on Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:35 am

Granted I don't know my Necron stuff overly well....But doesn't a destroyer being a jetbike just make them better than before?

_________________

gluvzer
Lord of Titan/Hero of ToonCon/Ayatollah of Rock n' Rolla
Lord of Titan/Hero of ToonCon/Ayatollah of Rock n' Rolla

Posts : 1428
Join date : 2008-03-11
Location : S'toon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  System Commander on Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:11 pm

I dont agree that anyone can read the rules and learn all the subtleties. To become a true RAW expert you have to become intimate with the exact wording of all the rules in the rulebook, know where to look for your points in the different sections, know how they've worded other codexes, know your current Faq, etc. Its something that can take some time and alot of people don't wnat to get that intimiate with it. In the end, it results in alot of arguments, disgareements and opinions during the game..

I think the Adpeticon Faq is a fantastic indicator on what the competitive community as a whole is leaing towards things. They place alot of emphasis on how the rule plays out in the game and if it gives a codex an unfair advantage. Several tournies across the US are using it as standard now, and like I mentioned .. GW has taken points from it and put it into their own faq's. There are definitely things I dont agree with in it, but for the most part it does a fantastic job.

The jetbike point is a strange one. Movement.. no problem there.. they move as jetbikes. Assaults.. well, the assault is a move and an attack. One can argue that since they "move" as jetbikes, they get to move as a jetbike during the move portion of the assault .. If thats the case, then they are essentially jetbikes for all intents and purposes. I can see why it ruled in such a way inthe FAQ, jsut make them jetbikes period for clarity sakes... because as usual GW has left is vague. I'll have to see how they have the assault worded in the book when I get home.

One can make arguments for both ways though. An assualt is a different phase from moving, and it says they only move as jetbikes so you could reason that in the movement pahse, they move as a jetbike but in the assault phase they assault as infantry. Then, one can argue it says "move" so that means every times it moves at all, it follows rules for jetbikes. Fall backs, assaults, difficult terrain, dangerous terrain, etc.. all are moves so they would use jetbikes rules for moving for all those.

My personal opinion without checking the rulebook is that they should be able to move as jetbikes at all times, including for assaults.

System Commander
System Commander

Posts : 4689
Join date : 2008-02-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Guest on Thu Nov 26, 2009 12:37 pm

But doesn't a destroyer being a jetbike just make them better than before?
I don't really care if it buffs or nerfs them, I'm just pointing out how blatantly wrong the FAQ is per GW's actual rules.

well, the assault is a move and an attack.
But it's in the assault phase, and it's covered by those rules.

Running is also moving, but it ignores difficult terrain. Does that mean it's not moving because it breaks that rule? Well, technically the models "move", but it's not a "move" as defined per the "movement phase".

Then, one can argue it says "move" so that means every times it moves at all, it follows rules for jetbikes.
That's a terrible argument (not meaning offence, just pointing it out)

They move like jetbikes. So they just... move like jetbikes (and they get turbo-boost, wee) in the movement phase.

They assault like infantry - meaning they conduct their assault move/action/whatever per the infantry rules because it's in the assault phase.

Bikes and jetbikes assault differently than infantry, and they have clear rules on it. Those don't apply to Destroyers because they only move (as in the movement phase) like jetbikes - that's the only thing they share with jetbikes (other than the annoying as hell base they have to sit on). And they assault like infantry because they are infantry - the "moving" part of assaulting is part of the "assault action", which is defined for Destroyers as per the infantry template.

because as usual GW has left is vague.
Usually yes, because the rules dept. of GW is... frustrating. But in this case, I disagree. It's really quite clear - everything in the codex is assumed to be infantry unless otherwise specified. AFAIK all 3rd ed codices were like this because they didn't have the super intuitive post-hobby section army lists. Since there is no exception, Destroyers (and their kin) are infantry. But they move like jetbikes. So they're infantry that can move up to 12" and have the turbo-boost special rule. Technically they can also run, which is hilarious. That's probably the reason the Adepticon FAQ changed their unit type.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  System Commander on Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:06 pm


Running is also moving, but it ignores difficult terrain. Does that mean it's not moving because it breaks that rule? Well, technically the models "move", but it's not a "move" as defined per the "movement phase".

This one went over my head, I'm not sure what you were saying up there. It seems alot of confusion for necron movement all of sudden. Your saying that destroyers, wraiths, etc. all move as jetbikes, but only during the movement phase? So they can move 12", turbo boost, etc. but then in the shooting and assault phase they move as infantry? So they can run if they move 12", and if they assault through difficult terrain they roll for distance, etc. Just doing iut to get things straight.

I see your point.. which is exactly what I said.. you can argue both ways with reasons for both. It doesnt say "move in the movement phase", it says "move". There are different types of movements the game in different sections, so I'd really like you to break it down RAW style and see what you come with. Im not saying that as a rude thing.. its actually a request. Im at work so I dont have the assault wordings in front of me.. Im really curious now as to how the assault is worded.

I personally find it odd they'd be zipping all the place in the movement phase no problem then slow down come assault phase.

However, I have no problem if someone wants to sue the rule either way. I think the only time a rule like this presents a problem is when your opponent had an issue with it, and Idont think any of your opponents will mind if you play it the jetbike - movement phase, infantry - assault phase way.

And once again to reiterate.. Im not disagreeing either way. I have to see the assault rules before I could form a proper opinion.. Im just bring up discussion points..


System Commander
System Commander

Posts : 4689
Join date : 2008-02-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Lord_Commander_Stash on Thu Nov 26, 2009 3:05 pm

"HolyCause"
thinking about it dangerous terrain only causes one wound
This is true, thanks for pointing that out. I always thought Dangerous Terrain instantly killed a model, I never knew it inflicted just one wound. So that solves that issue completely Smile


Yeah it used to kill the model, hence Tim's record of 7 dead chaplains with jump packs Laughing

Lord_Commander_Stash
Grandmaster

Posts : 476
Join date : 2008-03-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Veyure on Thu Nov 26, 2009 8:35 pm

In no place can i see an entry in either FAQ that says destroyers are not jetbikes. So i don't understand where this comment comes from.
The only thing i see in either faq is about the wraiths and scarabs not being able to run (adepticon) and saying they are classed as infantry but move as jetbikes(GW)

Destroyers are classed as Jetnikes via the codex and that isn't in despute as far as i see.

Because the wraiths and scarabs only move like jetbikes, i cannot agree to the argument that it only applies in the movement phase. Moving is Moving.

Veyure
Inquisitor

Posts : 699
Join date : 2008-03-19
Age : 31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Guest on Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:33 am

Robyn, I've been reading along in this thread and have a question - Is the Adepticon FAQ considered 'official' as far as our league goes?
I understand that it's officially unofficial, but as our 'head honcho', are you saying we should use it to settle disputes?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  System Commander on Fri Nov 27, 2009 12:51 am

Nope, its definitely not offical for the league. That thing is way to big and way to ugly to be carried around. Some of things they rule on in there was to combat or fix issues surrounding the game circuit in their area.. so I definitely wouldn't quote it.

That being said, it is nice to have a resource available to go to get some answers if your wondering how others people take on a rule is.. and experienced long time vets as that.

System Commander
System Commander

Posts : 4689
Join date : 2008-02-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  System Commander on Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:51 am

I took a spin through the assault rules and I couldnt find anything that would have be believe that anything that moves as jetbikes is only restricted to moves in the movement phase, and not in the other phases.

The assault rules are pretty straight forward.. it says make a 6" move just like you move in the movement phase.. so I would have to say if you move as a jetbike, your always moving as a jetbike, doesnt matter what phase your moving in.

All that means in the end though is if your assaulting through cover, you dont have to roll for difficult terrain, but you youwold have to make dangerous terrain tests. As well, you wouldn't be able to run since jetbikes can't run... and I cant think of a single reason why you would ever run.. if your not going to shoot.. you could just move 18" and get your free 4+ cover save.

As for why they would do this and not just call them jetbikes outright, it would only come into play when something affects say only infantry or only bikes. They be subject to any infantry effcts, but not to any jetbikes effect.

Unless someone can convince me otherwise, but its how I felt before and I saw nothing to change that in the rules.

And in the end, there is Greg's point. Wraiths and swarms and clarified as "moving as jetbikes" in the faq, but destroyers have no errata. As long as their codex entry says they are a jetbike.. then they are a jetbike through and though.

System Commander
System Commander

Posts : 4689
Join date : 2008-02-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Guest on Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:32 pm

Destroyers are infantry that move as jetbikes. This cannot be argued at all - their unit type is still infantry and the codex is very clear on this. All 3rd edition codices assumed all unit types were infantry, and exceptions were noted or blatantly obvious - vehicles had armour values, jetbikes had "jetbike" in their unit entry title. If they were "Destroyer Jetbikes" they would be counted as jetbikes for all purposes, yes.

I think it's bad logic to assume that they assault like jetbikes due to how they move because the exception/change for jetbikes that assault are noted in their unit type, not how they move. In the bgb there is a section dedicated to how jetbikes act. There are three sections: moving, shooting, and assaulting. "... count[ing] as jetbikes for movement purposes" (pg 17) makes Destroyers fit under the section of movement only. Thus, they move like jetbikes but still assault like infantry because their unit type is still infantry.

Consistency-wise it makes no sense, but it is RAW.

In 3rd edition there was no "jetbikes must make a dangerous terrain test when they assault" clause, they simply assaulted like bikes... who assaulted like infantry. So if you want to argue in the context of the codex, they still assault like infantry.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Veyure on Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:28 pm

The unit entry in the necron code "which i have right in front of me" has JETBIKES under special rules. That leads me to argue that you are wrong.

Despite this argument, i don't know why you would assault with destroyers anyway.

Veyure
Inquisitor

Posts : 699
Join date : 2008-03-19
Age : 31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Guest on Fri Nov 27, 2009 6:35 pm

Veyure wrote:The unit entry in the necron code "which i have right in front of me" has JETBIKES under special rules. That leads me to argue that you are wrong.
... lol... did you even read the rule?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Terran on Fri Nov 27, 2009 8:03 pm

Maybe refer this one on up to www.heresy-online.net. There are a whole whack of rules lawyers there with whom you could argue relatively meaningless minutiae until your fingers fall off and your eyes fall out.

Terran
Assassin

Posts : 305
Join date : 2009-09-14
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Paz on Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:38 pm

Destroyers HAVE NO LEGS. problem solved.

...what are they gunna do, drag themselves into combat? With is the best example of ridiculous "RAW versus RAI" I have seen.

Paz
Lord of Titan

Posts : 2709
Join date : 2008-03-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Guest on Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:18 am

Aye, towards the end I was just arguing for the sake of argument. I tend to do that when I think people can't prove me wrong Razz

Anyway, on an issue raised last game between Tyson and I, it appears that, per RAW, if Scarabs that turboboost are hit with markerlights twice their cover save is still only 3+. I would assume that 40K uses a sort of "add up all of the modifiers" system, but if anyone wishes to disagree with that (or outright disallow it), please post!


EDIT: I just realized that a Necron Lord that joins a Scarab unit gets a +1 modifier to any cover save he might have as per the Stealth USR... sweet!
EDIT: Checked the Necron FAQ, and that's false. I like it when GW disagrees with their own RAW Smile

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Some stuff about Necrons - new question

Post  Sponsored content Today at 11:11 am


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum