[Laplace]

However, I bring up the issue because of something I ran across.

Basically, I have heard of mixed rulings at Rogue Traders and other events.

Also, a major annual officially sponsored event, Adepticon (http://www.adepticon.org) specifically says that Skimmers CAN be penetrated in an assault in their FAQ on rules.

The argument for the "can penetrate" rule is that the glancing rule is in the shooting section. In the assault section, it mentions nothing about skimmers other than it takes a 6 to hit.

So am I saying the FAQ is wrong? No, but I am saying that it should not be deemed as always right. The fact that there have been official rulings stating the contrary should make someone ask before a Rogue Trader or other event. It is a siginificant ruling for anyone using skimmers, or even people who face them.

 

[Daedelus]

Hmmm... I'm going to have to argue against this ruling, based on the fact that the bit about fast moving skimmers is in it's own section. The olny interpertation is that it was ment to apply globally, otherwise it would not have it's own heading, and would have been mentioned in the shooting section. In fact, the only mention of skimmers in the shooting section is under the imobalized damage result (as far as I can see).

Obviously when attending Adepticon, this ruling would apply, as it has been made clear in the spesific faq for the spesific event. But going by BGB, I see no ruling to support this.

The Adepticon people must just have something against skimmers.

The argument for the "can penetrate" rule is that the glancing rule is in the shooting section. In the assault section, it mentions nothing about skimmers other than it takes a 6 to hit.

Also if we apply this logic fully to the assult on vehicles section, then tno harm can come to a vehicle in an assualt at all. As the damage tables are in the shooting section, in the assualt section there is no mention of damage to vehicles.

 

[Laplace]

Also if we apply this logic fully to the assult on vehicles section, then tno harm can come to a vehicle in an assualt at all. As the damage tables are in the shooting section, in the assualt section there is no mention of damage to vehicles.

pg 71: "Armor Penetration is worked out as normal (D6 + the Strength of the attacker)..".

"as normal" refers to pages 65 onward.

 

[Daedelus]

pg 71: "Armor Penetration is worked out as normal (D6 + the Strength of the attacker)..".

"as normal" refers to pages 65 onward.

Onward from page 65 includes page 69. "Skimmers Moving Fast"

 

[Ebon Hand]

I agree that the FAQ should be viewed as always right. Strange rulings such as "Skimmers Moving Fast only applies to shooting because it is in the shooting section" only serves to confuse people. It ends up with everyone claiming to know official rulings and no one knowing what the actual official ruling is. Besides, I think everyone can agree that skimmers are fragile enough even with glancing hits hitting them.

 

[tarzen]

And where does it refer to shooting in the faq? hint, it doesn't. In fact, just point out that haywire grenades can only be used in assault. Then slap them with your bgb. Case solved boys=)


edit: just checked their site. Boy are they screwed up. Like the deepstriking one. You ought to ask if all your skimmers count as moving more than 6" on the first turn, as they just arrived too=)
The mix and match feral orcs.
Fury of the ancients-heheheh, soo funny.

I wish I could go just to laugh at them.
Further edit...this is what I emailed them, you may wish to do the same...


While I fully conceed the point that you are in a position to make and enforce any rules you wish, the ones you have in your FAQ have a few errors.

First, and most critically, you folks claim that Skimmers Moving Fast doesn't apply to assaults, even though the Eldar Faq makes it quite clear that it does as it references Haywire grenades specifically, which, as you well know, can only be used in assault.

Second, If you choose to count deepstriking skimmers as moving fast, and having displaced more than 6", might I recommend you hold the same for deploying vehicles. Since the rules don't say they count as moving more than any other distance, and in fact, since you can't move deepstrikers, nor can you deploy units out of fast moving transports (say drop pods), then you may wish to either change this to them not counting as displacing, or all vehicles should be put on a fair platform and be counted as moving more than 6" first turn too.

Third, why use a mix match of rules for the feral orcs list. Why not just use the official rules that GW released instead of forcing people to get another book just to use a single model in their army, even though the current rules work for it.

And lastly, Fury of the ancients. Again, while you are more than within your rights as organizers to play by any rules you wish, the ones you choose to enforce on this are a mockery of what the bgb and codex:SM say.

Just a concerned gamer with friends attending your tournie. Hope that all the gaming goes well, and that every one has fun,

 

[TzarNikolai]

Second, If you choose to count deepstriking skimmers as moving fast, and having displaced more than 6", might I recommend you hold the same for deploying vehicles. Since the rules don't say they count as moving more than any other distance, and in fact, since you can't move deepstrikers, nor can you deploy units out of fast moving transports (say drop pods), then you may wish to either change this to them not counting as displacing, or all vehicles should be put on a fair platform and be counted as moving more than 6" first turn too.

i think DE raiders deepstriking count as moving over 6" not sure about landspeeders deepstriking. i think its only a DE codex specific rule.

 

[Laplace]

First, and most critically, you folks claim that Skimmers Moving Fast doesn't apply to assaults, even though the Eldar Faq makes it quite clear that it does as it references Haywire grenades specifically, which, as you well know, can only be used in assault.

You do make a good point there. Have you received a reply about their rationale?

The only reason I can think of of why they gave that ruling in light of it is that a grenade although done during the assault phase is still a ranged weapon (i.e. something that would normally used during the shooting phase. Grenades seem to be an exception to the rule). While an assault weapon (powerfist, cc weapon, etc) physically touches the vehicle.

Thus, if you apply that logic, anything that doesn't physically touch the skimmer will count as glancing.

However, the text in the Eldar FAQ does seem to say that it is not so.

 

[farseer_seele]

You do make a good point there. Have you received a reply about their rationale?

The only reason I can think of of why they gave that ruling in light of it is that a grenade although done during the assault phase is still a ranged weapon (i.e. something that would normally used during the shooting phase. Grenades seem to be an exception to the rule). While an assault weapon (powerfist, cc weapon, etc) physically touches the vehicle.

Thus, if you apply that logic, anything that doesn't physically touch the skimmer will count as glancing.

However, the text in the Eldar FAQ does seem to say that it is not so.

read your codex: i beleive that it say it sticks to the vehicles, emitting electromagnetic pulses to disrupt circuitry, so they stick, ie physically touching the vehicle. case double closed.

 

[Laplace]

Well, it seems the adepticon people are bent on sticking to their guns and not providing an explanation .

Given the evidence, I would tend now to agree with the idea that skimmers that moved are always glanced. At least, if you following official GW pubs which they seem to not want to address.

Kind of sad really. I don't mind open debate on rules questions, but wish they would state that these are indeed "house rules".

 

[Ostsol]

Yeah, it's just DE. The Marine codex simply says that Landspeeders deep-strike and provides no additional rules.

 

[Laplace]

WOW.

Just checked the Adepticon FAQ again and seems they did a complete 180.

They are now agreeing with what was posted.

Thanks guys for the info!

 

[tarzen]

Wow! I guess one email can have a bit of an effect, eh?

Cheers, and I hope it helps you out.

 

[Laplace]

Wow! I guess one email can have a bit of an effect, eh?

Cheers, and I hope it helps you out.

Actually no, since I'm not bringing any skimmers. But it will help my DE friend.