Rules Clarification: Re: Smart Missiles

So Darren and I had a discussion during the game where my Tau fought his Eldar whether or not Tau Smart Missiles could bypass the Harlequin's limiting range abilities. Although in that particular case it was a non-issue anyways (since I rolled high enough to spot them regardless) I did find the following in a FAQ that seems to validate my original belief. Here's the portion of the FAQ that seemed to most pertain to the subject:

Tau FAQ

Of particular interest: "Smart Missile System – This weapon relies on the intelligence of the drone to hunt down its target...models firing Smart Missiles do not need to test if they can see their targets when playing with the Night Fighting rules or Concealment rules." Also, although it's an older FAQ, version 2 of the Tau FAQ asks a similar question if the range of Smart Missiles is affected by Night Fight rules. The answer was "No as stated Smart Missiles do not require line of sight" (I have a copy of that FAQ if anyone wants to see it). In this case I think the Concealment thing is most applicable, since it works on the same principles as the Harlequin Veil, only for Concealment it works only for the first turn. So I'm just wondering what peoples' thoughts were on the subject.

Justin

PS. On another fun matter (from that same version 4 FAQ), apparently targets hit by a unit using Markerlights to improve their chances of hitting don't benefit from cover saves. That was news as well.

Can you post the exact wording on the cover saves part. Because if this is the case there would never be a reason to use the -cover save reduced- benefit of markerlights. I think that it makes one benefit overpowered and another completely obsolete. However I am writing this without my codex infront of me.

Actually don't worry about that last post, I was reading your post wrong. I now get it, you can't take cover saves from a markerlight shot.

gluvzer wrote:Can you post the exact wording on the cover saves part. Because if this is the case there would never be a reason to use the -cover save reduced- benefit of markerlights. I think that it makes one benefit overpowered and another completely obsolete. However I am writing this without my codex infront of me.

Yeah I thought the whole Markerlights reducing cover save was sort of made invalid by this as well, but here's the actual wording:

"Targets illuminated by Markerlights that are subsequently hit by weapons using the Markerlight to improve their chance of hitting do not receive cover saves." Once again from the same Version 4 FAQ.

So yeah, I agree, this does make Markerlight hits even more deadly than they were previously... provided I'm reading this right.

Still doesn't answer my question regarding Smart Missiles and Harlequin Veils though. =(

Justin

The facts of the matter (as I see them) are:

a) Concealment specifically states that it uses the night fight rules (PG. 84, BGB) for units attempting to target and enemy and so for for the purposes of this dispute concealment and night fight are effectively the same thing.
b) The Harlequin veil of tears psychic ability is not night fight and has nothing to do with line of sight. It is an "always on" style psychic power that has a similar game mechanic, but nowhere states that uses the night fight rules or has anything to do with them.
c) The FAQ that you are quoting from and linked to us, is from 2004, was written for the previous tau codex and is not applicable at all to the conversation... Though the names of alot of equipment and abilities stay the same from a rac's codex to their next codex, their game rules do often change (sometimes significantly) and old FAQ's become obsolete.

The rules lawyers at warseer have compiled a 100% unofficial faq for the latest eldar codex that contains a ruling on the Veil of Tears power along with their reasoning behind their ruling that you can see here:
http://warseer.com/wintermute/Warseer%2040K%204th%20Ed%20-%20Eldar%20FAQ%20v1.0-3.pdf
I am not linking this saying that we should just all obey because they say so but because their reasoning behind the ruling is the same as mine. They also include a list of weapons that they feel, under the current rules, can get around the VoT because of their own unique rules (and smart missiles are not on this list).

- D

P.S. I also don't mean to sound overly passionate about this, I am not, really. But I do love a good argument

Hmmm... yeah that whole target business does seem to put a new spin on the topic. Poop. Well, this does nothing but continue my long held opinions the Eldar are rediculously overpowered. =) It's nice to finally find a real discussion of the issue somewhere. I scoured several forums trying to find somebody who had discussed the issue, It seemed as if it was something nobody wanted to really discuss and preferred to leave for GW to make an official ruling on.

As for the FAQ thing, this is where things get more complicated. It appears GW put out two FAQs, one for Tau Empire, found here. Then there's the 4.0.1 version I've made mention to found here. Now the Tau Empire FAQ was last updated 08/29/06 while the V4.0.1 Tau FAQ was last looked over 01/30/06 but the V4.0.1 FAQ says "Note that only four of the FAQs were replaced, so Version 4.0.1 will be the latest version for the majority of FAQs below.", so I'm stuck at a loss. Which trumps, the chronologically most recent or the technically most recent? I remember a similar thing occurred with the Dark Angels during their second Codex. The new Codex (not the latest Codex, the second Dark Angels Codex) was created but the old FAQ still applied until the old FAQ was redone (except for certain parts within the new Codex that specifically said it overruled any past judgements). Once again though I'm not really familiar with what GaP is on these sorts of things. Which is why I'm curious whether the whole using Markerlight hits ignores cover thing still applies.

Justin

Except one is a FAQ for Codex: Tau.... It is a set of addendum's to the OLD Codex:Tau book to make THAT BOOK compatible with 4th edition. If it is not in the new Codex: Tau Empire or the Codex: Codex Tau Empire FAQ then it no longer applies...

Just my opinion, but it seems rather straightforward

Yeah I have to agree, the whole thing is a gongshow. I mean after the novelty of maybe finding a wicked Tau rule everyone seemed to have misplaced had passed I realized it is an old FAQ and while it says it's the Tau FAQ not the Codex: Tau FAQ I still wouldn't press to say it's a playable rule (the no cover saves from Markerlight hits). Still, it would be nice for GW to get their stuff together. I mean really, how hard could it be to do what GW does? I'd love to get paid to play a hobby game, tweak around with rules and see how to make the game better. Bah.

Justin