D
-
Hallo und Willkommen bei der GW-Fanworld. Setz dich doch zu uns, registriere dir einen Account und finde, wonach du suchst!
GW zum Tyra FAQ
- Ersteller HiveTyrantPrometheus
- Erstellt am
- Status
7) Can a unit which the psychic power "Onslaught" was casted upon run two times in one shooting phase?
The text for the psychic power "Onslaught" reads, that the affected unit can both run and shoot in its Shooting Phase. Does this mean that the unit can "run" exactly one time and then "shoot" exactly one time, or may I replace the shooting with a second "run" movement? (The rulebook says that shooting can be replaced by running without restrictons.) Or does the rule text for "Onslaught" replace the base rule and the unit can actually only "Run" one time and "Shoot" one time?
Zuletzt bearbeitet:
D
Deleted member 4411
Gast
Da kann ich helfen:
Onslaught = Anschlag (im Übrigen eines der wenigen im Englischen übergebliebenen niederländischen Wörter, genau so wie Darth Vader = Dunkler Vater).
Gruß
General Grundmann
Zuletzt bearbeitet von einem Moderator:
Zu Aufpeitschen dann noch:
"Können Schocktruppen durch aufpeitschen im Zug ihres ankommens sprinten und angreifen, sofern sie die Sonderregel sprinten haben (zb. Liktor, Trygon, Venatoren)?"
Mein Englisch ist leider nicht so gut, deshalb müßte dass jemand auf Englisch übersetzen. Außerdem:
"Ignoriert die Harpunenkanone Deckungswürfe die durch Nebelwerfer, Turbobooster und Sturmgeschwindigkeit gewährt werden?"
"Können Schocktruppen durch aufpeitschen im Zug ihres ankommens sprinten und angreifen, sofern sie die Sonderregel sprinten haben (zb. Liktor, Trygon, Venatoren)?"
Mein Englisch ist leider nicht so gut, deshalb müßte dass jemand auf Englisch übersetzen. Außerdem:
"Ignoriert die Harpunenkanone Deckungswürfe die durch Nebelwerfer, Turbobooster und Sturmgeschwindigkeit gewährt werden?"
@ Schwarmherrscher: Im Codex steht Infanterieeinheiten. Ist also keine ungeklärte Frage...
Wuerde ich trotzdem dazuschreiben.
Vielleicht meinten sie ja nur, dass Modelle mit Fluegeln nicht durch duerfen und haben nicht bedacht, dass der Term "Infanterie" bereits im Regelbuch abgedeckt ist (immerhin reden wir von GW...).
Vielleicht meinten sie ja nur, dass Modelle mit Fluegeln nicht durch duerfen und haben nicht bedacht, dass der Term "Infanterie" bereits im Regelbuch abgedeckt ist (immerhin reden wir von GW...).
So, Frage 6 hab ich ausgelassen, ich denke für sowas sind die Briten zu stolz, vor allem wenns auch noch von den Krauts kommt 🙄
Schaut bitte nochmal jemand drüber!
1) Do the effects of Tyranid close combat weapons (TCCW) accumulate, for example, if a Tyranid Warrior is equipped with Scything Talons and Rending Claws, does he have to chose whether his CC-attacks are rending, or he may re-roll dice results of 1? Or could possibly both rules be granted at the same time to the same model?
Possible arguments: Since TCCW grant their bearers special rules, they should count as special close combat weapons (SCCW) according to the rulebook, page 42. The effects of SCCW generally do not stack, e.g. the effects of power fists and power claws cannot be used at the same time. However, the description texts of the TCCW on page 84 in the Codex: Tyranids (2010) indicate that simply bearing the weapon grants their effect to the equipped model. If TCCW would be declared as "Weapons Biomorphs" instead of the rulebook term "Close Combat Weapons" (CCW), just like in the old Tyranids codex, there would not be any issue to discuss. But CCWs should follow their rules depicted in the rulebook on page 42.
Possible answer: Tyranid close combat weapons count as weapons Biomorphs. Hence, the effects of several TCCW can be used at the same time if the unit is equipped accordingly. Tyranid organisms are created to fulfill their dedicated purpose, and anything else would mean a weakness that the Hive Mind could easily compensate.
2) Do Tyranid close combat weapons (TCCW) accumulate with “Toxin Sacks” (poisoned weapons)? Or does the bearer have to decide whether to use the the Toxin Sacks or his other close combat weapons?
Possible arguments: The biomorph "Toxin Sacks" turns all TCCW that a creature is equipped with into poisoned weapons. Toxin Sacks are SCCW according to rulebook on page 42. The rules for Toxin Sacks indicate, that the poisoned weapons become "Poison Weapons" (hence losing all their other special rules). However, it might be intended that the "Poison" special rules are granted additionally to the TCCW's normal effects (e.g. "Rending" for Rending Claws etc. - combining rending claws with
Toxin Sacks would result in poisoned and rending attacks).
Possible answer: Toxin Sacks grant their effect in addition to any other equipped Tyranid close combat weapon. The poisonous effect of the Toxin sacks grant their bearers even deadlier methods to bring death upon the enemies of the Hive Mind.
3) Can the Mawlock Deep Strike directly into an enemy unit?
Possible arguments: When using the Deep Strike rule, you must physically place one model of the deep striking unit on the table. (In 4th edition, you could simply declare any target point, but in 5th edition, you have to place the deep striking model itself onto the gameboard). According to the rulebook, you cannot place models on top of an enemy unit, since you must always maintain at least 1 inch distance from all enemy models. Hence, is it possible to declare the Mawlock's target point ontop/within an enemy unit? If you would not be able to deep strike on top of an enemy unit, you would have to rely on that the Mawlock scatters exactly in the direction of a unit in order to be able to use the Mawlock’s special deep strike attack. The rule would only make sense if a "hit" result can actually hit the targeted unit. This is only possible if we may place him directly upon the (unlucky) enemy unit.
Possible answer: When using the Mawlocks’s deep strike rule, the Mawlock may be placed directly upon any enemy unit before the scatter distance and direction is determined. The powerful Hive Mind is able to force the Mavlocks to deep strike directly into the heart of the enemy forces without even hesitating.
4) Does the Doom of Malan'Tai's special ability "Spirit Leech" affect units which are embarked within a transport?
Possible arguments: Referring to the Codex: Tyranids (2010), "Spirit Leech" is neither a psychic power, nor a shooting attack. It simply affects all enemy non-vehicle units within 6 inches. Embarked units are non-vehicles and they count as being on the table, e.g. embarked units can claim mission objectives. However, embarked units cannot be affected by shooting attacks since they are not a valid target in means of the basic shooting rules. Due to the fact that "Sprit leech" is not a shooting attack, but a special rule, it is not necessary to select any target.
As a result, there should be good reasons to argue that embarked units are vulnerable to the Spirit Leech as they count as being on the table.
Possible answer: Yes. The Doom of Malan'Tai's special ability "Spirit Leech" can affect embarked units, if the transport is within range. How could a metal tank wall protect you from the mighty powers of the Hive Mind that could - with a blink of an eye - leech your puny soul?
5) Are any cover saves allowed against the Doom of Malan'Tai's special ability "Spirit Leech"?
Possible arguments: It is not clearly defined whether cover saves can only be taken against shooting attacks. "Spirit Leech" is not a shooting attack, so it is unclear whether the Doom's enemies can take cover saves against the Spirit Leech, e.g. when hiding in area terrain or behind a wall/fence etc. In contrary, it is not possible to take cover saves in close combat due to the close combat rules. For special abilities like "Spirit Leech", no applicable rule could be found in the codex or the rulebook.
Possible answer: Enemy units affected by the Doom of Malan'Tai's special ability "Spirit Leech" cannot use cover saves. As described above, how could a tiny fence or tree protect you from the mighty powers of the Hive Mind?
(Anmerkung Glassmoon: wie schauts eig. Mit Rüstungs- und Rettungswürfen aus?)
Schaut bitte nochmal jemand drüber!
1) Do the effects of Tyranid close combat weapons (TCCW) accumulate, for example, if a Tyranid Warrior is equipped with Scything Talons and Rending Claws, does he have to chose whether his CC-attacks are rending, or he may re-roll dice results of 1? Or could possibly both rules be granted at the same time to the same model?
Possible arguments: Since TCCW grant their bearers special rules, they should count as special close combat weapons (SCCW) according to the rulebook, page 42. The effects of SCCW generally do not stack, e.g. the effects of power fists and power claws cannot be used at the same time. However, the description texts of the TCCW on page 84 in the Codex: Tyranids (2010) indicate that simply bearing the weapon grants their effect to the equipped model. If TCCW would be declared as "Weapons Biomorphs" instead of the rulebook term "Close Combat Weapons" (CCW), just like in the old Tyranids codex, there would not be any issue to discuss. But CCWs should follow their rules depicted in the rulebook on page 42.
Possible answer: Tyranid close combat weapons count as weapons Biomorphs. Hence, the effects of several TCCW can be used at the same time if the unit is equipped accordingly. Tyranid organisms are created to fulfill their dedicated purpose, and anything else would mean a weakness that the Hive Mind could easily compensate.
2) Do Tyranid close combat weapons (TCCW) accumulate with “Toxin Sacks” (poisoned weapons)? Or does the bearer have to decide whether to use the the Toxin Sacks or his other close combat weapons?
Possible arguments: The biomorph "Toxin Sacks" turns all TCCW that a creature is equipped with into poisoned weapons. Toxin Sacks are SCCW according to rulebook on page 42. The rules for Toxin Sacks indicate, that the poisoned weapons become "Poison Weapons" (hence losing all their other special rules). However, it might be intended that the "Poison" special rules are granted additionally to the TCCW's normal effects (e.g. "Rending" for Rending Claws etc. - combining rending claws with
Toxin Sacks would result in poisoned and rending attacks).
Possible answer: Toxin Sacks grant their effect in addition to any other equipped Tyranid close combat weapon. The poisonous effect of the Toxin sacks grant their bearers even deadlier methods to bring death upon the enemies of the Hive Mind.
3) Can the Mawlock Deep Strike directly into an enemy unit?
Possible arguments: When using the Deep Strike rule, you must physically place one model of the deep striking unit on the table. (In 4th edition, you could simply declare any target point, but in 5th edition, you have to place the deep striking model itself onto the gameboard). According to the rulebook, you cannot place models on top of an enemy unit, since you must always maintain at least 1 inch distance from all enemy models. Hence, is it possible to declare the Mawlock's target point ontop/within an enemy unit? If you would not be able to deep strike on top of an enemy unit, you would have to rely on that the Mawlock scatters exactly in the direction of a unit in order to be able to use the Mawlock’s special deep strike attack. The rule would only make sense if a "hit" result can actually hit the targeted unit. This is only possible if we may place him directly upon the (unlucky) enemy unit.
Possible answer: When using the Mawlocks’s deep strike rule, the Mawlock may be placed directly upon any enemy unit before the scatter distance and direction is determined. The powerful Hive Mind is able to force the Mavlocks to deep strike directly into the heart of the enemy forces without even hesitating.
4) Does the Doom of Malan'Tai's special ability "Spirit Leech" affect units which are embarked within a transport?
Possible arguments: Referring to the Codex: Tyranids (2010), "Spirit Leech" is neither a psychic power, nor a shooting attack. It simply affects all enemy non-vehicle units within 6 inches. Embarked units are non-vehicles and they count as being on the table, e.g. embarked units can claim mission objectives. However, embarked units cannot be affected by shooting attacks since they are not a valid target in means of the basic shooting rules. Due to the fact that "Sprit leech" is not a shooting attack, but a special rule, it is not necessary to select any target.
As a result, there should be good reasons to argue that embarked units are vulnerable to the Spirit Leech as they count as being on the table.
Possible answer: Yes. The Doom of Malan'Tai's special ability "Spirit Leech" can affect embarked units, if the transport is within range. How could a metal tank wall protect you from the mighty powers of the Hive Mind that could - with a blink of an eye - leech your puny soul?
5) Are any cover saves allowed against the Doom of Malan'Tai's special ability "Spirit Leech"?
Possible arguments: It is not clearly defined whether cover saves can only be taken against shooting attacks. "Spirit Leech" is not a shooting attack, so it is unclear whether the Doom's enemies can take cover saves against the Spirit Leech, e.g. when hiding in area terrain or behind a wall/fence etc. In contrary, it is not possible to take cover saves in close combat due to the close combat rules. For special abilities like "Spirit Leech", no applicable rule could be found in the codex or the rulebook.
Possible answer: Enemy units affected by the Doom of Malan'Tai's special ability "Spirit Leech" cannot use cover saves. As described above, how could a tiny fence or tree protect you from the mighty powers of the Hive Mind?
(Anmerkung Glassmoon: wie schauts eig. Mit Rüstungs- und Rettungswürfen aus?)
Zuletzt bearbeitet:
würde noch dass mit dem zwei mal rennen reinpacken durch aufpeitschen und vlt noch nach einem klaren wording für die harpunenkanone der wachen. Vlt mit nem diagramm wer jetzt wo coversaves ignoriert und ob die kanone generierte deckung vom boosten, graftfelder etc auch ignoriert.
Danke, aber ohne die sehr gute Vorlage von Ody wärs nicht möglich gewesen!
Mache dann heute abend/morgen weiter. Bis dahin bitte fleißig englische Texte sammeln. 😀
Hm, ja, paar kleinere Verschreiber drin. Aber nix schlimmes.
Ich würde zudem in den "possible answer"-Teilen den Fluff weglassen. Das ist ja eben mit Regeln und Fluffteil gerade das Problem, das GW da manchmal nicht ausreichend trennt.
@Nemesis: Rüstungs- und Rettungswürfe sind klar geregelt. Und es heißt "take cover saves" nicht "use".
Ich würde zudem in den "possible answer"-Teilen den Fluff weglassen. Das ist ja eben mit Regeln und Fluffteil gerade das Problem, das GW da manchmal nicht ausreichend trennt.
@Nemesis: Rüstungs- und Rettungswürfe sind klar geregelt. Und es heißt "take cover saves" nicht "use".
Danke, geändert!
Den Fluff Teil finde ich gerade an dieser Stelle angebracht, das liest man so auch oft in den offiziellen FAQ-Antworten von GW, von daher denke ich dass es ihnen sehr gefallen wird.
Was meint Ihr?
Das mit 2x rennen ist zwar auch meiner Ansicht nach eindeutig nicht möglich (Hallo Grundmann ^^), aber ich hab ja schon mal einen entsprechenden Text vorbereitet.
Was die Harpunenkanonen angeht, so hat man nur ein Problem, wenn man die Regeltechnischen Begriffe "Deckung" und "Deckungswurf" nicht korrekt auseinander hält: Die Harpunenkanone kann unter ganz bestimmten Umständen den Deckungswurf negieren, den man durch im Weg stehende Deckung erhalten würde. "Fest verdrahtete" Deckungswürfe wie z.B. Nebelwerfer, Boosten oder Störsysteme sind ganz eindeutig nicht davon betroffen und wirken daher weiterhin.
Auch hier würde es aber nicht schaden, die Frage wenigstens zu stellen. Könnte so aussehen:
6) Can you please clarify in which situations a Hive Guard's target is granted cover save?
The rules for the Impaler Cannon in the Codex: Tyranids (2010) say that an enemy is only granted a cover save if he is directly whithin a piece of (area-)terrain or in directly contact with cover, such as standing directly behind a wall, which is located between the target and the Hive Guard unit. Does this mean, that those two types of cover are the only ones which grant the target a cover save against the Impaler Cannon? Or do e.g. Smoke Launchers, the Tau Disruption System or a previous Boost movement also still grant cover saves as normal?
Possible answer: Cover saves due to special rules such as Smoke Launchers still can be taken against wounds inflicted by an Impaler Cannon, since there is a difference between "cover" and "coversave". "Cover" can grant a cover save under certain circumstances, but agains the Impaler Cannon some of those circumstances do not work. A "built-in" coversave granted by a special rule hence cannot be bypassed by the Impaler Cannon.
Ich denke auch dass die Fluff-Argumente / Erklärungen gut sind. GW argumentiert auch so, und dann sehen sie, dass wir immerhin im Fluff begründete Antworten suchen. 😉
Übrigens, bzgl. Doom: Spirit Leech ignoriert ausdrücklich Rüstungswürfe. Dass Rettungswürfe erlaubt sind, ist denke ich auf jeden Fall klar. Nur Deckungswürfe sind irgendwie etwas unklar, da diese i.d.R. nur im Kontext mit Beschuss auftauchen. Aber es gibt halt regeltechnisch keine exakte Einschränkung auf "nur gegen Beschuss". Gegen explodierende Fahrzeuge kann man z.B. auch Deckungswürfe machen, soweit ich mich erinnere. (Wobei das wiederum extra da steht oder so...)
Jo, das mit den Schwarmwachen muss noch mit rein. Ansonsten sau lässig, wie ihr das schon gemacht habt. ;-)
Geben Sporenminen wirklich Killpoints?
Nach der momentanen Formulierung dürfen sie lediglich keine MZ umstreiten. Codex S. 48:
mfg. Autarch L.
Nach der momentanen Formulierung dürfen sie lediglich keine MZ umstreiten. Codex S. 48:
(mission objectives = Missionszielmarker) Eine Erratierung wäre hier wünschenswert.
mfg. Autarch L.
mission objectives =/= Missionsmarker
In der Vernichten Mission sind die mission objectives zum Bleistift eben gerade Killpoints.
In der Vernichten Mission sind die mission objectives zum Bleistift eben gerade Killpoints.
Die Regelstelle konnte mir bisher niemand zeigen.
In den Beschreibungen für seize ground/capture and control sind objectives die Missionszielmarker, bei annhilation wird (mission) objective nicht verwendet. Der richtige Terminus wäre victory conditions gewesen.
mfg. Autarch L:
In den Beschreibungen für seize ground/capture and control sind objectives die Missionszielmarker, bei annhilation wird (mission) objective nicht verwendet. Der richtige Terminus wäre victory conditions gewesen.
mfg. Autarch L:
Die erwähnte Flügel/Schockfrage ist eigentlich offensichtlich - geflügelte Kreaturen bewegen sich wie Sprungtruppen, und daß Sprungtruppen schocken dürfen steht ausdrücklich in ihrem Absatz über Bewegungsregeln. Und letztendlich ist aus der Reserve kommen auch eine Bewegung.
Auf jeden Fall sollte die Sporenminenfrage dazu:
After a unit of spore mines deep strikes, each mine moves independently. The codex states that when a mine moves randomly into a friendly model, the mine is removed. This would make most mines of a large swarm disappear in their first movement phase, as most directions are blocked by mines of the same swarm, thus making large clusters of mines ineffective. Is this intended, or should other spore mines be ignored for this purpose?
Eventuell nochmal besser formuliert 😉
Auf jeden Fall sollte die Sporenminenfrage dazu:
After a unit of spore mines deep strikes, each mine moves independently. The codex states that when a mine moves randomly into a friendly model, the mine is removed. This would make most mines of a large swarm disappear in their first movement phase, as most directions are blocked by mines of the same swarm, thus making large clusters of mines ineffective. Is this intended, or should other spore mines be ignored for this purpose?
Eventuell nochmal besser formuliert 😉
Stammt das aus dem englischen Dex? In meinem eng. Dex steht auf jeden Fall nichts von so einer Regelung!
Da steht nur das Minen explodieren die:
- einen LP verlieren
- sich in unpassierbares Gelände bewegen
- seine Bewegung innerhalb von 2" um ein gegnerisches Modell beendet
- Status