New FAQs now available.

Trystis wrote:

I don't think it would need to be clarified since it isn't being snap shot.

RuleBook Pg 88: "Fast vehicles that moved at Cruising Speed can fire up to two weapons using their full Ballistic Skill - other weapons can only make Snap Shots."

So a ravager moving at Crusing Speed may fire two weapons at full BS and one at Snap Shot because Aerial Assault does not specifically say it effects Snap Shots. (as per my previous quotes)

Really frustrating >.<

Codex trumps rule book so ravagers can fire all weapons at ballistic skill 4 none are being snap fired so there is no need to say it affects snap shots.

Trystis wrote:

Codex trumps rule book so ravagers can fire all weapons at ballistic skill 4 none are being snap fired so there is no need to say it affects snap shots.

Except its not trumping the rulebook, rulebook specifically says "special rules can only effect snap shot if they specifically state it, otherwise snapshot overrides the special rule."

I think you are reading too much into titittliewinks22, GW rules by general nature will never be as specific as you want them. I'm pretty sure the section you are referring to in the BRB is about modifying snapshot ballistic skill specifically. In this case, the instance of snap shotting is completely ignored rather than modifying the BS of the snap shot directly. I think it was an attempt at preventing overwatch shenanigans with Tau perhaps.

Thor665 wrote:

Well, if you wanted to go pedantic and RAW the Shock Prow grants the ability to tank shock, but not to ram.

I suspect most people will allow both unless they're whiny.

Pg 93 of The Rules- "Any vehicle that can Tank Shock can also Ram."

Therefore, if our Raiders/Ravagers have Shock Prows, they can Tank Shock AND Ram ^_^.

ligolski wrote:

I think you are reading too much into titittliewinks22, GW rules by general nature will never be as specific as you want them. I'm pretty sure the section you are referring to in the BRB is about modifying snapshot ballistic skill specifically. In this case, the instance of snap shotting is completely ignored rather than modifying the BS of the snap shot directly. I think it was an attempt at preventing overwatch shenanigans with Tau perhaps.

Well if this is the case then Ravagers/Tantalus/Reapers can fire normal BS at flyers as long as they go crusing speed... I don't believe that is the intention of the rule, but if we assume the Aerial Assault rule ignores the snap shot effects of moving at crusing speed (which I believe it should) then it ignores all instances of snap shot.  Even a crew shaken result can be ignored if you move at crusing speed under this interpretation. I just don't think its right to ignore the rules of snapshot under one set of conditions but not all others.

There's a contradiction that has been needing a FAQ clarification, I've emailed GW many times now about it and every time they say "we'll consider that the next time we update the FAQ." Apparently it was deemed to be a non issue.

Tittliewinks22 wrote:

There's a contradiction that has been needing a FAQ clarification, I've emailed GW many times now about it and every time they say "we'll consider that the next time we update the FAQ." Apparently it was deemed to be a non issue.

Apparently you didn't ask them frequently enough not like some players asking for the clearance of Lhamaean rules  

Btw, aerial assault does not say anything about skyfire rule, only that you can shoot with full BS if you go at cruising speed, but you sttil should fire snap shots if firing at flying units.

Razorfate wrote:

Btw, aerial assault does not say anything about skyfire rule, only that you can shoot with full BS if you go at cruising speed, but you sttil should fire snap shots if firing at flying units.

Exactly. Aerial Assault does not mean Skyfire. I never ran it as such. Aerial Assault just makes it so our 3 gun ravager can fire all 3 guns, moving at cruising speed.

Question, since all webway FAQ was thrown out can I have a Wraithknight pop-out of it or a squad of Wraithguard w/ a Spiritseer? If so then oh my EPIC!

MurDok wrote:

Question, since all webway FAQ was thrown out can I have a Wraithknight pop-out of it or a squad of Wraithguard w/ a Spiritseer?  If so then oh my EPIC!

It certainly seems that way.
It would fit in with the Battle Brothers/Using Transports change (though whether it would fit in with other allies is a question - can you imagine a horde of Nid Monstrous Creatures popping out of a Webway Portal?!).

I'm sure necrons would love it too lol.

Squidmaster wrote:

MurDok wrote:

Question, since all webway FAQ was thrown out can I have a Wraithknight pop-out of it or a squad of Wraithguard w/ a Spiritseer?  If so then oh my EPIC!

It certainly seems that way.
It would fit in with the Battle Brothers/Using Transports change (though whether it would fit in with other allies is a question - can you imagine a horde of Nid Monstrous Creatures popping out of a Webway Portal?!).

I'd argue that non-Battle Brother allies cannot do so, since the Webway Portal is STILL a piece of equipment, which can not benefit allies who are less than BB status.

Jimsolo wrote:

Squidmaster wrote:

MurDok wrote:

Question, since all webway FAQ was thrown out can I have a Wraithknight pop-out of it or a squad of Wraithguard w/ a Spiritseer?  If so then oh my EPIC!

It certainly seems that way.
It would fit in with the Battle Brothers/Using Transports change (though whether it would fit in with other allies is a question - can you imagine a horde of Nid Monstrous Creatures popping out of a Webway Portal?!).

I'd argue that non-Battle Brother allies cannot do so, since the Webway Portal is STILL a piece of equipment, which can not benefit allies who are less than BB status.

I'd agree. In non-BB allies, who are enemy units, can use it then so can actual enemy units. I don't particularly want a squad of Paladins coming through my own bloody portal thanks!

From the German Rulebook there is no hint available that says the (old) codex special rule of reavers of "terrain experience" (if thats what it is called in english) is now "skilled rider". In 6th edition that could be found on the glossary... is there any clarification on this that I missed?

Aroban wrote:

From the German Rulebook there is no hint available that says the (old) codex special rule of reavers of "terrain experience" (if thats what it is called in english) is now "skilled rider". In 6th edition that could be found on the glossary... is there any clarification on this that I missed?

This seems to be purely a translation issue. In the English version of the codex, Reavers are shown to have the Skilled Rider special rule. This has not changed in 7th edition.

Squidmaster wrote:

MurDok wrote:

Question, since all webway FAQ was thrown out can I have a Wraithknight pop-out of it or a squad of Wraithguard w/ a Spiritseer?  If so then oh my EPIC!

It certainly seems that way.
It would fit in with the Battle Brothers/Using Transports change (though whether it would fit in with other allies is a question - can you imagine a horde of Nid Monstrous Creatures popping out of a Webway Portal?!).

Thanks to MurDok and Squidmaster, I'm seriously considering using the combination of WWP+Wraithknight(+Spiritseer). Although the WK can deep strike as she's a 'jump' monstrous creature, I think it's too risky due to her big body and expensive point. - Imagine roll 1 for the deepstrike mishap!

So my strategy is as follows:
- A venom with a haemy is deployed at the front line (12" from the center line), declares Jink if it gets shot.
- T1, the venom goes 6", the haemy disembarks and runs another 6", opens the WWP.
- T2 (or later if I fail to the reserve roll), the WK pops up from the WWP and bombards enemy with her two S10 AP2 weapons.

Any thought or suggestion?

The main one is that you're spending 240 points or more on a model with two S10 AP2 guns and then not putting it on the table for at least one turn and possibly four. Why?

Idea sounds fun, but I would take wraithblades with a spiritseer.
The knight should stand on the table from the beginning. With a scatter laser
and, I don't know, how the big gun is named. S6 AP2, 3 shots w/ 3" explosion...
He will kill a full squad each turn, I think.

Thanks for the reasonable suggestions guys. I may try wraithguards/blades with a spiritseer embarking on a raider then.

EDIT. Oh, both are bulky geez..

Web way portal, then?

Zenotaph wrote:

Web way portal, then?

May be effective. Though, I'm not sure of the short 12"-range of their wraithcannon shot from the center line in the movement through the WWP.

Enter the field on the other side then and use it as a shield. Or enter some cover.
With T5 and 3+ armor roll, they should survive pretty well, I think.

Count Adhemar wrote:

The main one is that you're spending 240 points or more on a model with two S10 AP2 guns and then not putting it on the table for at least one turn and possibly four. Why?

In order to make the turns she IS on the table vastly more productive. I'm not saying that deep-field arrival is a good or bad choice for this particular pair (no experience with them) but the 'you waste turn one' argument is a common one people levy against Deep Strike units/lists. As a dedicated Deep Strike player, I think this is a misconception. Especially for units that do better close up (such as wyches, grotesques, wracks, just to name a few) Deep Strike is a good way to get up close to the enemy without having to deal with the first turn which will essentially be wasted closing in towards the enemy and getting shot up.

Jimsolo wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

The main one is that you're spending 240 points or more on a model with two S10 AP2 guns and then not putting it on the table for at least one turn and possibly four. Why?

In order to make the turns she IS on the table vastly more productive.  I'm not saying that deep-field arrival is a good or bad choice for this particular pair (no experience with them) but the 'you waste turn one' argument is a common one people levy against Deep Strike units/lists.  As a dedicated Deep Strike player, I think this is a misconception.  Especially for units that do better close up (such as wyches, grotesques, wracks, just to name a few) Deep Strike is a good way to get up close to the enemy without having to deal with the first turn which will essentially be wasted closing in towards the enemy and getting shot up.  

Except the Wraithknight has 36" range guns and 12" movement. Yes, he's also a bit of a beast in close combat but if you want him to assault then Deep Strike is still not a good option as it will be at least turn 3 and could be turn 5 before he's even allowed to do so! He could be anywhere on the board by that stage if you start him on the table, plus he gets 1-4 extra turns of shooting in.

I've been pondering a list with the Wraithblades on a Tantalus with a Spiritseer then have some guardian defenders pop out of the WWP.