# I got the new rulebook!



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

Good news i got the rulebook today i ordered it from games workshop and had it mailed to my house this is in the uk its due out in 27 days any questions about 5th ed ill answer them:so_happy:

WARNING DONT READ BELOW IF YOU DONT WANT 5TH ED SPOILERS

Questions already answered

Vehicle Ramming rules 
You cant fire when you ram a tank its one hit on both tanks the strength depending on 3 things

Armour-Each point of armour above 10 on the point of impact (up to +4)
Speed-Each full 3" moved that turn by the rammer before impact (up to +8 if moved 24 inchs)
Mass-If the vechile is a tank (+1)

For example:A land raider moves 10" and rams a ork trukk hitting the side of the trukk the trukk takes a strength 8 hit because the armour of the land raider is 14 so +4 its moved 10" so +3 and it is a tank so +1 4+3+1=8
The land raider suffers a strength 3 hit because the trukk's armour is 10 so +0 a trukk is not a tank so +0 and +3 because the land raider moved 10"

After this happens the armour penetration is decided and then result, if the vechile which is rammed is not destroyed the tank which charged it stops right next to it but if the vechile which has been rammed is destroyed then it keeps moving till it reachs its full movement if it come into contact with a enemy unit or tank then the unit would be tank shocked and tank would be rammed again

Ramming a skimmer
Okay the rule is that skimmers can decided to let the other persons tank him them or they can try to dodge on a 1 or 2 its a normal ram or on 3+ the skimmer dodges if the skimmer dodges then the ramming tank cannot move any further 

Turbo Boost 
Turbo boost can still move up to 24 inchs but cannot move through difficult terrain,shoot,launch assaults or execute any other voluntary action in the same turn, in the following shooting phase the bike has a 3+ cover save but the bike loses the new ability to go to ground and they automatically pass pinning tests. For the a unit using the turbo boosters they must be at least 18" inchs away from the starting point to claim their 3+ cover save

Snipers
Snipers now use their own bs to hit and are always 4+ to wound but they now have rending and pinning also they count as strength 3 against vehicles

rending
Rending you need a 6 when rolling to wound it automatically wounds the target with is ap2 also against vehicles when doing armour penetration if you get a 6 you can roll a d3 and add that to the score

CC If Fearless
Its not by outnumbered any more but by the number of wounds you lost by in CC so if a fearless unit loses by 4 wounds then they have to take 4 wounds on their men with armour saves allowed


----------



## Ordog (Mar 28, 2007)

Uhm......What?

I mean...in Germany the new Rulebook comes out in 21 Days.....in UK they start selling offical in 27 days.

Why they should send you the preorder-book now ??


----------



## solitaire (Mar 24, 2008)

Cool, I have heard of GW occasionally shipping out Codexes early so I guess the same has happened for the Rulebook.
So then, are the new Vehicle Ramming rules what they are cracked up to be?


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

Ordog said:


> Uhm......What?
> 
> I mean...in Germany the new Rulebook comes out in 21 Days.....in UK they start selling offical in 27 days.
> 
> Why they should send you the preorder-book now ??


They must have sent it accidently


----------



## njfed (Jan 28, 2008)

Hmmmness.
How to take advantage of an early rule book.

Ebay is that way --->


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

solitaire said:


> Cool, I have heard of GW occasionally shipping out Codexes early so I guess the same has happened for the Rulebook.
> So then, are the new Vehicle Ramming rules what they are cracked up to be?


Their quite good if you dont have any guns left on the tank and have high armour

You cant fire when you ram a tank its one hit on both tanks the strength depending on 3 things

Armour-Each point of armour above 10 on the point of impact (up to +4)
Speed-Each full 3" moved that turn by the rammer before impact (up to +8 if moved 24 inchs)
Mass-If the vechile is a tank (+1)

For example:A land raider moves 10" and rams a ork trukk hitting the side of the trukk the trukk takes a strength 8 hit because the armour of the land raider is 14 so +4 its moved 10" so +3 and it is a tank so +1 4+3+1=8
The land raider suffers a strength 3 hit because the trukk's armour is 10 so +0 a trukk is not a tank so +0 and +3 because the land raider moved 10"

After this happens the armour penetration is decided and then result, if the vechile which is rammed is not destroyed the tank which charged it stops right next to it but if the vechile which has been rammed is destroyed then it keeps moving till it reachs its full movement if it come into contact with a enemy unit or tank then the unit would be tank shocked and tank would be rammed again


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

njfed said:


> Hmmmness.
> How to take advantage of an early rule book.
> 
> Ebay is that way --->


Could do but i get to read all the new rules early =)


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

sounds pretty good, can you still shunt smaller vehicles out of the way like a tank shock, or is it only ramming now? and I heard skimmers can try to dodge a ram, whats the deal with that?


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

maddermax said:


> sounds pretty good, can you still shunt smaller vehicles out of the way like a tank shock, or is it only ramming now? and I heard skimmers can try to dodge a ram, whats the deal with that?


Okay the rule is that skimmers can decided to ram them if they want or they can try to dodge on a 1 or 2 its a normal ram or on 3,4,5 or 6 the skimmer dodges if the skimmer dodges then the ramming tank *cannot* move any futher 

For ramming a smaller vechile do you mean like a walker?


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

Thanks for the quick reply! I was thinking an ork trukk or buggy really, small fast vehicles that can run interference. The old tank shock rule meant you could just move them out of the way (if you had a heavier vehicle that is). 

Oh, and how has Turbo Boost been effected?

Thanks man! I think you'll be pretty popular for a while!


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

maddermax said:


> Thanks for the quick reply! I was thinking an ork trukk or buggy really, small fast vehicles that can run interference. The old tank shock rule meant you could just move them out of the way (if you had a heavier vehicle that is).
> 
> Oh, and how has Turbo Boost been effected?
> 
> Thanks man! I think you'll be pretty popular for a while!


Lol that would be fun

Im not completely sure but what it says is they can still move up to 24 inchs but cannot move through difficult terrain,shoot,launch assaults or execute any other voluntary action in the same turn, in the following shooting phase the bike has a 3+ cover save but the bike loses the new ability to go to ground and they automatically pass pinning tests. For the a unit using the turbo boosters they must be at least 18" inchs away from the starting point to claim their 3+ cover save


----------



## BringerOfDeath (Jun 10, 2008)

how about sniper rifles is BS to hit and 4+ to wound?

you are one lucky duck i ordered my one 2 weeks ago i do hope it comes early
i have gone for the gamers Ed if you got the Gamers one how is the ammo crate
cheers


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

BringerOfDeath said:


> how about sniper rifles is BS to hit and 4+ to wound?
> 
> you are one lucky duck i ordered my one 2 weeks ago i do hope it comes early
> i have gone for the gamers Ed if you got the Gamers one how is the ammo crate
> cheers


Snipers now use their own bs to hit and are always 4+ to wound but they now have rending and pinning also they count as strength 3 against vehicles.

I didnt get the gamers edition as it seemed too expensive


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

3+ cover save now, instead of invulnerable? hmm.... bikers of tzeentch are sad now. 

Anyway, I've got to head off to bed now. Thanks man, I'll come back tomorrow and see what else comes out of this sweet gift you got.


----------



## BringerOfDeath (Jun 10, 2008)

£60 is expensive but the wife do's not now so it should be ok
is rending the same 
as i have a eldar army that needs more troops thinking of pathfinders


----------



## maximus2467 (Jun 14, 2007)

Triple 888 said:


> Snipers now use their own bs to hit and are always 4+ to wound but they now have rending and pinning also they count as strength 3 against vehicles.
> 
> makes guard snipers crap then.


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

BringerOfDeath said:


> £60 is expensive but the wife do's not now so it should be ok
> is rending the same
> as i have a eldar army that needs more troops thinking of pathfinders


Rending is to wound roll not to hit roll


----------



## Druchii in Space (Apr 7, 2008)

Nice, it is fun and lucky to get an early copy, I remember getting the mumak 2 weeks early when it first came out back when I used to play Lotr. 

As to my query, I have heard rumours it was changing, so just wanted to know if anything has happened to the way Fearless works regarding losing CC. Cheers.


----------



## BringerOfDeath (Jun 10, 2008)

that sounds good 
thanks 
and IG are getting new codex


----------



## Octavian (Jun 5, 2008)

I heard rumors that rending works different in 5th ed, Could u plz inlighten us on that.
Also on the quick referance sheet for 5th ed they show modifiers on the vehicle damage table does that meen when u get 3-weapon destroyed but u have a +1 modifier it then becomes 4-Immobilised.


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

Druchii in Space said:


> Nice, it is fun and lucky to get an early copy, I remember getting the mumak 2 weeks early when it first came out back when I used to play Lotr.
> 
> As to my query, I have heard rumours it was changing, so just wanted to know if anything has happened to the way Fearless works regarding losing CC. Cheers.


Fearless i dont think has changed as they never need to take a check after losing combat


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

Octavian said:


> I heard rumors that rending works different in 5th ed, Could u plz inlighten us on that.
> 
> Also on the quick referance sheet for 5th ed they show modifiers on the vehicle damage table does that meen when u get 3-weapon destroyed but u have a +1 modifier it then becomes 4-Immobilised.


-Rending you need a 6 when rolling to wound it automatically wounds the target with is ap2 also against vehicles when doing armour penetration if you get a 6 you can roll a d3 and add that to the score

-Is that a question?


----------



## Druchii in Space (Apr 7, 2008)

Aye by losing a CC, I meant how extra wounds are caused if outnumbered, it the previous editon if outnumbered you had to take a number of saves, has this changed at all.


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

Druchii in Space said:


> Aye by losing a CC, I meant how extra wounds are caused if outnumbered, it the previous editon if outnumbered you had to take a number of saves, has this changed at all.


Its not by outnumbered any more but by the number of wounds you lost by in CC so if a fearless unit loses by 4 wounds then they have to take 4 wounds on their men with armour saves allowed


----------



## Druchii in Space (Apr 7, 2008)

Ah ta.. it did make it in, thanks for the response.


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

maddermax said:


> 3+ cover save now, instead of invulnerable? hmm.... bikers of tzeentch are sad now.
> 
> Anyway, I've got to head off to bed now. Thanks man, I'll come back tomorrow and see what else comes out of this sweet gift you got.


It was to keep grey nights from using the cheesecannon to claim that, despite the save being due to speed, and the cheesecannon's ability to ignore invulnerable saves is because it disrupts daemons auras. I don't believe the mark of tzeentch works like that anyways, I recall a post on another thread regarding mark of tzeentch and turbo boost.


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

Son of mortarion said:


> It was to keep grey nights from using the cheesecannon to claim that, despite the save being due to speed, and the cheesecannon's ability to ignore invulnerable saves is because it disrupts daemons auras. I don't believe the mark of tzeentch works like that anyways, I recall a post on another thread regarding mark of tzeentch and turbo boost.


A cover save is much more appropriate anyway, I never understood why they didn't just use that in 4th to be honest, less rules that try to modify it (psycannon/MoT ect), and represents more accurately the difficulty of hitting fast moving targets.

That change to the fearless rule is really going to hurt large units of orks and buff terminators I Think. On the other hand, with the counter charge thing they'll be able to get more guys in combat, so maybe its even.

Hmm....I think these rule changes are starting to grow on me. 

One more question though, do you still get +1 attack for an extra cc weapon/pistol if you have a powerfist? I've heard that its like powerclaws now, you need 2 of the same type to get the extra attack.

Triple888, thanks for all the info, champion effort man:good: maybe you should collate some of the questions and answers onto your first post, turn it into a bit of a Q&A?


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

maddermax said:


> One more question though, do you still get +1 attack for an extra cc weapon/pistol if you have a powerfist? I've heard that its like powerclaws now, you need 2 of the same type to get the extra attack
> 
> Triple888, thanks for all the info, champion effort man:good: maybe you should collate some of the questions and answers onto your first post, turn it into a bit of a Q&A?


-Its true you need two power fists,thunder hammers and lightning claws to get the bonus attack to the model

-Im going to do that


----------



## Dies Irae (May 21, 2008)

owwwwwwww, rending is now on wound, how will my genestealers kill the Marines now? I just killed 5 or 6 of them with 36 attack, now i will have less than 24 chances to destroy them!

a question for you: what about the fluff??? Is it any big defferency between 4th and 5th edition? Is there a lot of fluff in the rulebook? Or even little novels, like in Codexs?


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

Dies Irae said:


> owwwwwwww, rending is now on wound, how will my genestealers kill the Marines now? I just killed 5 or 6 of them with 36 attack, now i will have less than 24 chances to destroy them!
> 
> a question for you: what about the fluff??? Is it any big defferency between 4th and 5th edition? Is there a lot of fluff in the rulebook? Or even little novels, like in Codexs?


Yes their is *alot* of fluff expecially for humanity


----------



## DarknessDawns (Oct 21, 2007)

okay is it just me or is rending just silly now
think, a 6 to wound will always wound unless its like toughness 7,8 or 9
its not logical
or am i just being silly


----------



## Ordo Xeno Commander (Jan 17, 2007)

Triple 888 said:


> -Its true you need two power fists,thunder hammers and lightning claws to get the bonus attack to the model
> 
> -Im going to do that


 
What about the thunder-hammer storm shield combo, it totally ruins that combo/idea


----------



## ogretyrant83 (Jun 13, 2008)

I'm thinking/hoping ya read the rending wrong bit silly and yay more human unfo ave imperator!


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

DarknessDawns said:


> okay is it just me or is rending just silly now
> think, a 6 to wound will always wound unless its like toughness 7,8 or 9
> its not logical
> or am I just being silly


As he said earlier, a 6 to wound also makes the attack ap2, which is the important part, so its not useless, just toned down somewhat. It'll still help tear through heavily armoured troops. Plus, it means that a bunch of genestealers can still tear through a wraithlord if that ever comes up.


----------



## Inquisitor Aurelius (Jun 9, 2008)

But Chaos Marines don't have an option to take dual fists...

Bugger.

Alright, how does consolidating/sweeping into combat work? Is there any way to keep your guys stuck in, other than somehow avoiding a win until the opponent's turn?


----------



## darkflop (Apr 26, 2008)

I suppose the Ork big choppa, which is a two-handed weapon, still doesn't provide an extra attack, is that right?

Is there any change to the Tank shock?


----------



## mrrshann618 (Jun 6, 2008)

No kidding, now there is no reason to take powerfists on normal guys. Might as well spend those 5 extra points to get the "stunning ability" if your going to buy a big squishy.

If I remember right, Thunderhammer/stormshield didn't give an extra attack, then again I really only used the lightning claw variety.


----------



## Alaric (Jun 10, 2008)

i got my rule book weeks and weeks ago. the internet is great is all i have to say.


----------



## Ordo Xeno Commander (Jan 17, 2007)

well if it aint helpful, dont say it.

anyway, wow that really sucks. still, thankfully most of my CC termies are twin lightning claws, so they keep their bonuses :biggrin:


----------



## daemion (May 26, 2008)

Dammit. :ireful2:I spent ages changing arms on all my aspiring champs to powerfists for my 4000pt Chaos slobs. Now I suppose I have to change them back to power weapons and pistols with meltabombs... Oh well. Still rather excited about the new ed... A pistol still confers the extra attack in cc if teamed up with a 'normal' cc weapon or power weapon though??? Thanks for the info mate! :biggrin:
BTW, can you please tell me just how transports(like the humble rhino) become more survivable? I have heaps I would like to use again... Cheers!- Damian.


----------



## Churlton (Nov 23, 2007)

*Ramming - Orks Point of view*



Triple 888 said:


> Their quite good if you dont have any guns left on the tank and have high armour
> 
> You cant fire when you ram a tank its one hit on both tanks the strength depending on 3 things
> 
> ...


I got to see a copy last week k:
I thought about the humble Ork trukk ramming; you would need two things to be in place for an awesome trick.

1. Be on a road (Fast vehicles allow "flat-out" speed of upto 18": Combat <6"/ Cruising <12"). Road movement allows + 6" for any vehicle (IIRC).

2. Be kitted out with a "Reinforced Ram". Allows to behave as a tank (ie tankshock), adds +2 to the front AV.

Therefore:

Moving at maximum speed, 24" = +8 S
AV above 10 = +2 S
A Tank + +1 S

Total = S11 hit against a Landraider !!!!!!! (S10 if we are limiting top values)

or S9 if not on a road ... still not to be sniffed at.

:mrgreen:


----------



## Rindaris (Mar 17, 2008)

Alaric said:


> i got my rule book weeks and weeks ago. the internet is great is all i have to say.


I don't believe these forums support book piracy.

But to stay on topic I have a Gamers Edition reserved and I can't wait to get it. And I've been stocking up on stuff to revamp my SM army, so I'm not to worry about all the changes.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Churlton said:


> I got to see a copy last week k:
> I thought about the humble Ork trukk ramming; you would need two things to be in place for an awesome trick.
> 
> 1. Be on a road (Fast vehicles allow "flat-out" speed of upto 18": Combat <6"/ Cruising <12"). Road movement allows + 6" for any vehicle (IIRC).
> ...


Doesn't that mean that the trukk takes a hit too? If I remember, both vehicles take a hit, right?

Also, I thought that nothing can be higher than S10 in 40k.


----------



## Lord Sinkoran (Dec 23, 2006)

The power fist thing doesn't really bother me I only use power fists on my khorne champions and seeing they get 5 attacks on the charge the -1 for not havinf to combat weapons doesn't bother me.


----------



## daemion (May 26, 2008)

That's true... Never thought about that at all!!! ...Guess I'm just being greedy and want more attacks! Heh! Might just leave them on and play with em a while. Thanks mate. I really didn't want to replace the damn arms again.


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

Hey Triple888, if your still reading this occasionally, could you tell us how assigning wounds in close combat works? 

Galahad mentioned on the "vs. death company" thread in tactics that since wounds caused at the same initiative now are all assigned at the same time before saves are taken, you could "assign" certain types of attacks (like rending/power weapon hits) to who you wanted. 

This would mean that a unit of 8 death company could charge a unit of say 5 marines, cause 11 wounds total, including 4 rends, and then the marine owner could assign wounds so that 3 of the rends were on one SM, 1 rend and a wound on a second, and 2 wounds on all the others. Is this the way it is done, so that you can "stack" wrap around wounds, even from special weapons/abilities?


----------



## Deceiver (Sep 19, 2007)

all models have to be allocated 1 wound before being assigned a 2nd like in shooting.
cassaulties can be taken from anyone in the unit. Not just from those in btb and within 
2" of those btb.


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

Indeed, but does that mean you can, say, allocate a rend(or power weapon) wound to marine 1, a normal wound to marines 2-5 (so they get their saves), Then wrap around a rend to marine 1 again (as he's already dead anyway) then normal wounds to the others(so they get saves)? you've allocated the wounds evenly, as needed, but the two "special" attacks which ignore armour has just been wasted on one guy.


----------



## Churlton (Nov 23, 2007)

darklove said:


> Doesn't that mean that the trukk takes a hit too? If I remember, both vehicles take a hit, right?
> 
> Also, I thought that nothing can be higher than S10 in 40k.


You are right on both counts;
But a 40pt trukk possibly taking out a 250pt Uber tank ....... It's got to be worth a try, even if it is suicide :fuck:k:


----------



## blitz451 (Apr 4, 2008)

maddermax said:


> Indeed, but does that mean you can, say, allocate a rend(or power weapon) wound to marine 1, a normal wound to marines 2-5 (so they get their saves), Then wrap around a rend to marine 1 again (as he's already dead anyway) then normal wounds to the others(so they get saves)? you've allocated the wounds evenly, as needed, but the two "special" attacks which ignore armour has just been wasted on one guy.



As i read it that would be correct. I did not notice any differentiation between types of wounds when allocating them. Also troops with different weapons are rolled separately. 

If you have 5 marines 3 w/bolters, 2 w/lascannons and they take 10 wounds you will have to allocate 2 wounds apiece. Then you roll six saves for the marines with bolters if 2 fail then 2 are removed. Now you roll 4 saves for the lascannon marines if you fail one then you must remove one of your marines with the lascannon. The (flawed) logic being that the heavy weapon marines are the only ones trained to use those weapons.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

blitz451 said:


> As i read it that would be correct. I did not notice any differentiation between types of wounds when allocating them. Also troops with different weapons are rolled separately.
> 
> If you have 5 marines 3 w/bolters, 2 w/lascannons and they take 10 wounds you will have to allocate 2 wounds apiece. Then you roll six saves for the marines with bolters if 2 fail then 2 are removed. Now you roll 4 saves for the lascannon marines if you fail one then you must remove one of your marines with the lascannon. The (flawed) logic being that the heavy weapon marines are the only ones trained to use those weapons.


Maybe the heavy weapon was also damaged beyond repair when the Marine holding it was splatted by that Krak missile/plasma gun etc. - that would be logical when you consider the lethal nature of 40k weapons.


----------



## blitz451 (Apr 4, 2008)

Excellent point and perfectly logical. The explanation i gave in my earlier post is what they printed in the rulebook if i'm remembering correctly (i'm at work). Had they used your explanation i wouldn't have batted an eye.


----------



## maximus2467 (Jun 14, 2007)

maddermax said:


> Indeed, but does that mean you can, say, allocate a rend(or power weapon) wound to marine 1, a normal wound to marines 2-5 (so they get their saves), Then wrap around a rend to marine 1 again (as he's already dead anyway) then normal wounds to the others(so they get saves)? you've allocated the wounds evenly, as needed, but the two "special" attacks which ignore armour has just been wasted on one guy.


if this is true then its crap! (pardon my poor diction) if someone tried doing this against me after i've just scored four rending wounds on a squad i'd leap over the table and stamp some sportsmanship and fair play into them with my size elevens.


----------



## blitz451 (Apr 4, 2008)

maximus2467 said:


> if this is true then its crap! (pardon my poor diction) if someone tried doing this against me after i've just scored four rending wounds on a squad i'd leap over the table and stamp some sportsmanship and fair play into them with my size elevens.



LOL irony rocks :laugh:


----------



## Lax (Jun 16, 2008)

May look strange, but with my friends, we allocate weapon by weapon...
ex : 3 laser canons and 2 bolters wounds on a four man team.
I allocate LC wounds on men 1-2-3, then the two bolters ones remaining on men 4-1.

I don't understand why we should do :
LC wound 1, bolter wounds 2-3-4, LC wound 1...


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

maximus2467 said:


> if this is true then its crap! (pardon my poor diction) if someone tried doing this against me after i've just scored four rending wounds on a squad i'd leap over the table and stamp some sportsmanship and fair play into them with my size elevens.


"Hey, I've got some wounds to allocate myself"unish:

I've always said, physical violence is the best way to advocate fairness:biggrin:


----------



## Kronus (Mar 1, 2008)

maddermax said:


> Indeed, but does that mean you can, say, allocate a rend(or power weapon) wound to marine 1, a normal wound to marines 2-5 (so they get their saves), Then wrap around a rend to marine 1 again (as he's already dead anyway) then normal wounds to the others(so they get saves)? you've allocated the wounds evenly, as needed, but the two "special" attacks which ignore armour has just been wasted on one guy.


Thats how I read it. The specific example they give was utlizing just this tactic as the wound against which they got no armour saves was designated to the guy who was also inflicted the most wounds. I imagine this tactic will soon be heavily abused. Powerfists and Characters, because of their lower/higher I (they wont strike at same time as other wounds) shouldn't be affected but standard powerswords and rending may well be. Furthermore this benefits a small squad over a large squad, a big squad or mob is unlikely to be able to stack power weapon attacks while if DC charged a 5 man combat squad I imagine it would be able to do so quite easy



maximus2467 said:


> if this is true then its crap! (pardon my poor diction) if someone tried doing this against me after i've just scored four rending wounds on a squad i'd leap over the table and stamp some sportsmanship and fair play into them with my size elevens.


Lol get prepared to use them. Most people at tourneys go to win and have been effectively culling kill zones for years for tactical advantages. You can bet that this will be abused to the max by quite a number of people in a competitive setting


----------



## Bishop120 (Nov 7, 2007)

I know this is a little bit late on topic about the Powerfists but if the actuall codex was written similar to the previous "internet" pre-release then while a powerfist (attacks at init 1) wont recieve any additional attacks from an additional CCW thats not similar (PF/TH..) other weapons could still use the power fist as an additional CCW. Example Chapter master armed w/ both a Power Weapon and a Power Fist could choose to attack at normal init with his power weapon and recieve the +1 Attack but if he choose to wait till Init 1 to use his power fist he would not recieve the +1. 

Can you confirm or deny that the rules were written this way???


----------



## Lax (Jun 16, 2008)

I've read it like this too.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Is there a change in the infiltrate rules? Can you please tell me what 5th ed. says about it?


----------



## Lax (Jun 16, 2008)

Infiltrators and scouts are the same, except that they have the rule of side manoeuver (can come from reserves by the sides of the table).


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

Great! This finally makes Flayed Ones an option!


----------



## Iacomus (Aug 5, 2007)

blitz451 said:


> AThe (flawed) logic being that the heavy weapon marines are the only ones trained to use those weapons.


Hav you looked at the models? The ammo feeds etc are all in the back packs. How could you swap weapons in the middle of a battle??? Guard weapons are served by a team, so another of the team could take over at a pinch. of course guard do die!

I am looking at combat shileds now. V rending in hth, you can allocate the rending hits on the shields so that your guy has a chance with the 5+ inv save.


----------



## Iacomus (Aug 5, 2007)

Lord Kronus said:


> Lol get prepared to use them. Most people at tourneys go to win and have been effectively culling kill zones for years for tactical advantages. You can bet that this will be abused to the max by quite a number of people in a competitive setting


I can see this being FAQ'd pretty quick, something along the lines of wonds of similar class must be allocated sequentially. At least I hope so!!!


----------



## Inquisitor Aurelius (Jun 9, 2008)

Oh dear GODS, I hope so. I mean, with "wraparounds", a tooled-up five-man Chosen squad could routinely kill more than a tooled-up ten-man. Where's the logic, dude?


----------



## blitz451 (Apr 4, 2008)

I don't know. It looks to me like they are trying to tone down abilities like rending. 5th seems to be a step away from the big nasty vehicles and uber units.

Even with the new wound allocation rending is still a good ability, it's not 'one character wiping out a whole unit in one assault' good, but it's still good.


----------



## Bishop120 (Nov 7, 2007)

DOes the Ramming rule max at +8 for movement at 24" or does it allow Eldar vehicles to use their super engines at 36" giving them +12 for movement?

That woud be insanely crazy if they can get a full +12 from movment for ramming purposes.. You can hardly shoot them down as is, they can dodge ramming roughly 66% of the time, and they would just fly around ramming through any vehicles on the board.


----------



## Lord Sinkoran (Dec 23, 2006)

Bishop120 said:


> DOes the Ramming rule max at +8 for movement at 24" or does it allow Eldar vehicles to use their super engines at 36" giving them +12 for movement?
> 
> That woud be insanely crazy if they can get a full +12 from movment for ramming purposes.. You can hardly shoot them down as is, they can dodge ramming roughly 66% of the time, and they would just fly around ramming through any vehicles on the board.


I think ramming maxs out at 10


----------



## Lax (Jun 16, 2008)

There is only one issue 
I haven't read any ramming max, but since ramming vehicle receives damage from speed...

Eldar vehicles can have a +12 for ramming, but they take a attack of force 12 minimum in return !
You have to be sure you want to try ^^!


----------



## rincewind (May 6, 2008)

Haha, Kamikaze pilots... I actually like that for my insane Dark Eldar! :grin:


----------



## maddermax (May 12, 2008)

They really should make it that you can only ram a vehicle with an equal or lower armour value than your own, Eldar may be tricksy, but they aren't yet completely insane.


----------



## Engelus (Jul 26, 2007)

Bishop120 said:


> DOes the Ramming rule max at +8 for movement at 24" or does it allow Eldar vehicles to use their super engines at 36" giving them +12 for movement?
> 
> That would be insanely crazy if they can get a full +12 from movement for ramming purposes.. You can hardly shoot them down as is, they can dodge ramming roughly 66% of the time, and they would just fly around ramming through any vehicles on the board.


something tells me that you can't dodge ramming if you are the one doing it, you are either going to crush your hull or not.

and also remember that that you Receive a different hit calculation from the vehicle you are ramming, a skimmer with 11 armor moving 12" that rams a tank of 14 armor deals a hit of s5 while Receiving a hit of s9.


----------



## solitaire (Mar 24, 2008)

Star Engines won't work for Ramming as it said in a recent fAQ that the extra 12' is done in the shooting phase, unfortunately.


----------



## bishop5 (Jan 28, 2008)

a couple of questions?

... is the fluff any good? artwork, etc?
... are vehicle defensive weapons S4?
... are the close combat rules any better (more fluid, easier, etc)

thanks in advance k:


----------



## Triple 888 (Mar 25, 2008)

Sorry about no replys guys ive had work experience this week and its been brutal ill try and answer most questions on monday and after as im busy building up my army this weekend


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

I've seen the 5th ed book - the fluff is great and art work to match


----------



## mrrshann618 (Jun 6, 2008)

I got to take a look at the rule book today. I thought I reaqd something about instant death weapons. 
For wound allocation you have to first remove as many models as there are instant death hits. For example A dev squad shoots a unit of CSM. 2 las cannon and 4 bolters hit and wound. If I read that part right, 2 are removed, then the 4 are distributed and rolled against the remaining.

Did I read this right?

The other thing I noticed is that you have to remove one model for each unsaved wound in that group. So allocating an ap1 weapon to the same trouper wouldn't do anything if that trooper has the same profile as any other model in that group.
I.E. 5 man marine: 1 Vet. sgt., 1 hvy, 3 bolter, with 2 plasma weapons and 4 bolter weapons. 2 plasma go to bolter marine, 1 bolter to BM, 1 bolter to hvy, 1 bolter to Sgt., ---Wraparound 1 bolter to BM. BM's take 2 AP hits and 2 saveable hits, Hvy takes 1 sv, and sgt. takes 1 sv.

Did I read this all right? I only got a prolonged glance at the book as everyone else was hording around as well.


----------



## Captain Galus (Jan 2, 2008)

are pistols able to be shot in close combat??!?!


----------



## your master (Jun 14, 2008)

*snipers*

sniper rules sound ace its about time they had rending


----------



## Kronus (Mar 1, 2008)

bishop5 said:


> a couple of questions?
> 
> ... is the fluff any good? artwork, etc?
> ... are vehicle defensive weapons S4?
> ...


In answer to your second question. Def weps = STR 4 or lower. You can only fire all your weapons if you either remain still (if your not fast) or move upto 6" if your fast otherwis.



mrrshann618 said:


> I got to take a look at the rule book today. I thought I reaqd something about instant death weapons.
> For wound allocation you have to first remove as many models as there are instant death hits. For example A dev squad shoots a unit of CSM. 2 las cannon and 4 bolters hit and wound. If I read that part right, 2 are removed, then the 4 are distributed and rolled against the remaining.
> 
> Did I read this right?
> ...


They way I read it wound allocation takes place before saves not after and nothing stops you from stacking certain wounds as such. i.e. My 5 man combat squad gets hit and wounded by 8 lasgun and 2 plasma shots, nothing stops from what I have read from putting both plasmas shots on one man thus voiding one. Wont help you where you have a large unit



Captain Galus said:


> are pistols able to be shot in close combat??!?!


The rules regarding pistols havent changed. They count as additional cc weapons in combat


----------



## Inquisitor Aurelius (Jun 9, 2008)

Wound-stacking is bloody daft. It makes smaller units able to do more damage than larger ones. You shouldn't lose fewer men from eight bolter shots and two melta than you would if there were only three bolter shots. It doesn't make sense from a perspective of game balance or logic. You'd think that they could get at least one of them right :angry:.


----------



## ClubnBabySealz (Jun 5, 2008)

that wound stacking is crap. where is the logic in it?? if it is like that im sure it wont be after the first faq.


----------



## Lax (Jun 16, 2008)

Inquisitor Aurelius said:


> It makes smaller units able to do more damage than larger ones. You shouldn't lose fewer men from eight bolter shots and two melta than you would if there were only three bolter shots. :.


Hmmm, not sure ! Even if I hate the fact that we can stack AP or ID wounds on the same model.

5 SM squad taking 8 shots of bolter and 2 melta = one dead from meltas, 2-3 deads from bolter, that's 3-4 deads on 5 men !

10 SM squad taking the same = 2 deads from meltas, 2-3 deads from bolters, that's 4-5 deads on 10 and your melta was more useful.

5 SM squad taking 4 shots of bolter and 1 melta = one dead from melta, 1-2 deads from bolter

10 SM squad taking 4 shots of bolter and 1 melta = one dead from melta, 1-2 dead from bolters

---------------------------

Now with a little squad without special weapon :

5 SM squad taking 5 shots of bolter = 1-2 deads
10 SM squad taking 5 shots of bolter = 1-2 deads
5 SM squad taking 15 shots with 4 force = 10 deads
10 SM squad taking 30 shots = 10 deads

---------------------------

So we can see that it is important to have numerous shots on ennemies units, to remove interest in stacking.


----------



## blitz451 (Apr 4, 2008)

Ok i'd like to (hopefully) clear up a little bit of confusion we seem to be having with wound allocation.

1.) If all models in the targeted unit are the same (weapons, special rules, etc.) then there is no wound allocation and they simply remove all of the unsaved wounds as normal.

2.) If for example you have two models with heavy weapons then you allocate wounds. Once each model has been given one wound then you start allocating the second and third wounds. Once all wounds are allocated then you roll them by group not individual model. 

_example: 10 marines have been hit by 20 attacks two of which are rending. the marine unit has two marines with lascannons the rest are identically equipt. The marine player allocates two hits to every model with the rending attacks allocated to the normal marines. The attacking player then rolls 16 wound dice against the normal marines and 4 wound dice against the lascannons. against the normal marines he rolls 8 wounds including two 6's for the rending attacks and 3 wounds on the lascannons. The marine player then rolls 6 armor saves for his nomal marines (remember the two rending attacks rolled 6's to wound) and 3 armor saves for his lascannons. He makes 3 armor saves for his marines and 1 armor save for his lascannons. Then he must remove 5 normal marines(3 failed armor saves and two rending attacks) and both lascannon marines (only 1 of 3 wounds were saved so two models are removed)._

Obviously this gets more complicated the more mix and match your units are, but it's still not too bad. The ability to negate special attacks by wound stacking is pretty minimal as you can only stack wounds by group not model. The best you can hope for is to keep the attacks off of your special characters or heavy weapons guys. I hope this clears things up a little bit.


----------



## The_Chaplain (Jun 17, 2008)

maybe its one of those things that gets simpler after some practice, but it sounds a little complicated at the moment


----------



## Inquisitor Aurelius (Jun 9, 2008)

Hmm. Alright, allocation by group sounds a touch more reasonable. I don't like it, but I can live with it. At least, I think I can. I guess I'll just have to wait and examine the whole thing in context.


----------



## Cole Deschain (Jun 14, 2008)

It's really not that bad, as I said.
It's like target saturation, really.


----------



## darklove (May 7, 2008)

The wound allocation system is really good and after playing my first 5th ed. game last week it didn't take very long to get used to it either.


----------



## The_Chaplain (Jun 17, 2008)

darklove said:


> The wound allocation system is really good and after playing my first 5th ed. game last week it didn't take very long to get used to it either.


well thats refreshing to hear :grin:


----------



## julio d (Apr 20, 2008)

blitz451 said:


> I don't know. It looks to me like they are trying to tone down abilities like rending. 5th seems to be a step away from the big nasty vehicles and uber units.
> 
> Even with the new wound allocation rending is still a good ability, it's not 'one character wiping out a whole unit in one assault' good, but it's still good.


haha if you have someone like a chaplain charging in at ini 5 (or 6 with fc) he gonna go at his own initiative and still give 5-6 pw attacks with no real benefit from wound allocation

also the wound allocation with ppl being able to stack multiple plasma and melta shots on one model is just gonna add some gory war movie-esque imagery to a battle (ie rambo IV)


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

there is some truth to the "no more uber squads of doom from hell wielding hackmaster +20 and bfg 9000" idea. since points value is an inexact art form, other rules need to be in place to even out what cannot be reasonably taken care of with points values. thus rules like force org charts, and wound allocation. In a game like warhammer, it is easy to combine units and have them do a lot more, or a lot less than their points value would suggest. There are situations where the points value of a model does not necessarily reflect what it can potentially do, but what it is reasonably expected to be able to do. A basilisk versus a five man terminator squad, for example. The termies cost more, but the basilisk can potentially destroy them in one, well-placed shot. the difference is that the termies can be reasonably expected to do more damage, when used correctly.


----------



## Lax (Jun 16, 2008)

Son of mortarion said:


> The termies cost more, but the basilisk can potentially destroy them in one, well-placed shot. the difference is that the termies can be reasonably expected to do more damage, when used correctly.


I second, but I don't think the basilisk is the best example with a 2D6 dispersion  It can kill guards too !


----------



## Stefendlabise (Jun 5, 2008)

Hey, guys.

I got my rulebook yesterday (yee-hah!), and I'm quite astonished :shok: at the *disappearance of Target Priority rules* for deciding which unit you'll shoot at. Apparently, you just have to 1) see the enemy unit and 2) be in weapon range.

Can anyone confirm this or is it "just" a fluke of the French edition?!


----------



## Lax (Jun 16, 2008)

How could it be an error if a unit gets a cover save if it's half hidden by another unit ? 
Happy for you, since we're one week of the release for us.


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

Lax said:


> I second, but I don't think the basilisk is the best example with a 2D6 dispersion  It can kill guards too !


Right right. I was just using an extreme example regarding the points difference versus the actual potential of the unit. you are right about the drift, and that is ont of the main reasons for the basilisk being as cheap as it is.


----------



## Stefendlabise (Jun 5, 2008)

Lax said:


> How could it be an error if a unit gets a cover save if it's half hidden by another unit ?


Mmmm... Still, that does not seem the same: consider three squads:
- your poor 10-strong IG squad with melta
- a 20-strong Chaos cultists squad (with zip, nada, zilch) on your 10 o'clock 40 inches away
- a Chaos Term squad on your 2 o'clock, 3 inches away.

All this on an open battlefield (ie no cover whatsoever). Yes, it's hypothetical :biggrin:

No 4+ cover save, and you still can shoot the cultists without a Ld test, even if it's definitely not the closest or more dangerous of the two?!

Admittedly, it can be convenient here and there, but IMHO, it still sounds pretty idiotic.

Ah, well... Perhaps I'm just being dense, I don't know.

Tell you the truth, I haven't played since 2nd ed. :blush: (my friends and I never could accept 3rd), except a quick introduction game to 4th ed. last year (though I've read the rulebook plenty of times).


----------



## grimaldus44 (Jul 8, 2008)

u can only diystory a monolth by have a stenth 9 or 10 wepon


----------



## Son of mortarion (Apr 24, 2008)

grimaldus44 said:


> u can only diystory a monolth by have a stenth 9 or 10 wepon


Not quite, a glancing hit can still destroy the monolith, a melta gun over 6 inches can still destroy a monolith as it is an ap1 weapon, and gets a +1 to the roll on the chart, thus making the penalty for glancing hits -1, whicj the melta gun can destroy the monolith on a 6. alternately, multiple immobilized results are upgraded to vehicle wrecked. weapon destroyed results in excess of the weapons on the monolith are upgraded to immobilized, or wrecked if already immobilized. 

While the new rules make vehicles more resilient, they in no way make them invulnerable.


----------

