Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,523 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
http://www.adepticon.org/wpfiles/inat/INATFAQv3.3.pdf

I realize this is not a valid FAQ, and I don't know if this has been posted here before, but I just looked this over, and it looks well thought out and comprehensive. I am personally going to use this until the real thing comes out. BTW by the looks of things, whoever guessed 9 pages: if this is anything like the real FAQ, whenever it shows up, you win. ;P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
New codex is so confusing, the only bit that made sense to me is the instinctive bevaviour, I think I would be better of just useing the 4th ed codex
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
There's some good and some bad, there are a few which just seems wrong

Hive Commander not working off the board

Tyrants being able to leave the Tyrant Guard

Spore Mine may not Assault (clearly they can RaW so it's a rules change, not a clarification)

Spore mines getting assaulted waiting for everyone to arrive

Troops in vehicles not being able to go to ground with their cover saves from the Doom (nothing really supports this 'clarification')

'It's after me' Ignoring Stubborn, but that's more because I consider anything which modifies a stat to be a modifier.

Those are the only ones I would consider to be wrong, so it's a decent start.

Aramoro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,410 Posts
wow. some of those tyranid rules are bogus. i can't wait until the real FAQ comes out so i can slap the people who did this one. some of the rules are spot on, but many contradict themselves.
Don't play at Adepticon (or associated cons) and you'll be right, then.

Valid or not (according to GW), these ARE the FAQs used by the Adepticon crowd for THEIR tournaments, and are solely binding in those theatres alone.

The entire document covers more than JUST the tyranid stuff - several others get around the same number of pages.


Wouldn't work here. You'd have better luck herding cats than getting all of out TOs agreeing on ONE big FA to iron out wrinkles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
i don't play there so i probably won't have a problem. the main big issues that i've been fighting for, such as the invulnerable on the doom, being able to use the mawloc on top of models, the tyrant being able to leave his guard, the tyrant and guard being able to assault as one unit, and the doom affecting models that are embarked are all correct from my p.o.v. but some other rulings such as 2 tyrants reserve roll bonus not being cumulative while the outflanking troops ARE cumulative, the tyrant's reserve bonus not being available while not on the field, units not being able to utilize the trygon's tunnel network from deep strike, units being able to take cover saves against terror from the deep, units being able to take cover saves from spirit leech, and units being able to take cover saves from an exploding pyrovore are just some of the rules that i would still like to see in the real FAQ.

i understand that there are other faqs and not just the nids in this pdf, but i don't really know all of the other armies like the back of my hand so i can't really comment on the rest. the templar FAQ is spot on, i have no further queries with their rulings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,523 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
As far as I am concerned with it, the original codex is a piece of crap in regards to its writing and clarity of thought. At my club, I asked people if they could live with these rules until a real one comes out. Adapticon, as far as I know, is pretty big. So, I figured this would do until GW got off their lazy collective asses. This is my first new codex for an army I play and I have been seriously unimpressed by the lack of writing skills, forethought, and general alpha, beta, and theta testing of the book before it went out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,314 Posts
i don't play there so i probably won't have a problem. the main big issues that i've been fighting for, such as the invulnerable on the doom, being able to use the mawloc on top of models, the tyrant being able to leave his guard, the tyrant and guard being able to assault as one unit, and the doom affecting models that are embarked are all correct from my p.o.v. but some other rulings such as 2 tyrants reserve roll bonus not being cumulative while the outflanking troops ARE cumulative, the tyrant's reserve bonus not being available while not on the field, units not being able to utilize the trygon's tunnel network from deep strike, units being able to take cover saves against terror from the deep, units being able to take cover saves from spirit leech, and units being able to take cover saves from an exploding pyrovore are just some of the rules that i would still like to see in the real FAQ.
So basically you like every rulling in favour of Nid's and hate every ruling against Nid's? Come on at least you could pretend to be objective.

Aramoro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,166 Posts
I agree with some of INAT, and violently disagree with some of INAT, in all their sections. Our local group voted to use INAT in anything official with the group to avoid arguments. That's it's major utility. At least everyone is using the same rules. I could say the Swarm Lord ability is RAW available "When he is ALIVE" and he's certainly alive when off the board. Nevertheless, it does give a baseline, and many tournaments use it just because it's something you can point to as a concrete ruling, good or bad. And some of them are BAD!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,063 Posts
don't forget space wolves, there FAQ was so long they could of done another codex
Check the Skaven one, it even makes the WHFB Rulebook FAQ look small:laugh:

There's some good and some bad, there are a few which just seems wrong
Agree.

wow. some of those tyranid rules are bogus. i can't wait until the real FAQ comes out so i can slap the people who did this one. some of the rules are spot on, but many contradict themselves.
You do realize why they have made the FAQ, right? Its because GW hasnt been arsed to get their own out yet. In order to actually have judges doing anything but explaining how certain Tyranid rules work at their tournament stuff like this is necessary. Its also for the sake of making sure that all players play the game the same way during the tournament, which is kind of important.

Kudos to the guys that did the FAQ for that tournament. I wont be using it though but thats another story. Engagement like that shows that the judges want a fair tournament where all players have the same chance, and that everyone knows their chances from the start. That is good for the hobby:good:

Whatever [insert generic random Johnny Boy here] thinks of it is, imho, irrelevant. As said above, accept the rules interpretation or stay home.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,523 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I agree with some of INAT, and violently disagree with some of INAT, in all their sections. Our local group voted to use INAT in anything official with the group to avoid arguments. That's it's major utility. At least everyone is using the same rules. I could say the Swarm Lord ability is RAW available "When he is ALIVE" and he's certainly alive when off the board. Nevertheless, it does give a baseline, and many tournaments use it just because it's something you can point to as a concrete ruling, good or bad. And some of them are BAD!
Yeah, some are bad, but at least it is clear. :biggrin:
 

·
WFB Moderator
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
Thry need a V3.4 as well now... the daemon FAQ disagrees with some of the INAT rulings, shame really as I prefer the INAT in this case (though I dont agree with a lot of the Nid ones).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
436 Posts
It would be nice if they released a nid faq, but I can understand why they haven't.
They spent all their time creating a new picture for the page leading to the FAQ's instead!

Well at least we don't have to see that stupid elf any more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Some of the rules seem a bit contradictory. In the case of the two tyrants with Hive commander. The FAQ states that the 2 Tyrants can each bestow the outflank ability on a unit of troops, while later stating that they may not stack the reserves bonus. For it to be consistent they should only get to bestow the outflank ability once regardless of the number of tyrants with Hive Commander, OR they should have both the reserve bonus stacking and the ability to give outflank to two units. Also I noticed in this FAQ that is states that the Reserve bonus from the Hive Commander ability may not be used while the Hive tyrant is in reserve.
Can anyone cite another codex or rule that supports this ruling?
I'm very interested as I am about to be a in a local tourney in a few weeks. Also I would know if there is a precident that may influence the actual GW official FAQ for Tyranids.

Any info is appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
screw tyranids! my friend runs nd uber cheat list. AND to top it all off he cheats too just because he cant bear to lose! me and my three friends are doing a 5 round campagin Chaos + Tyranids vs IG and SM and my IG and my friends SM army have lost 3 games in a row! its completley insane i think that Tyranids need a new codex not jsut and FAQ. I know that soudns stupid but some of the shit that is in the new codex is just bogus!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,195 Posts
I know that soudns stupid...
Not at all! I mean it couldn't possibly be the fact that some people have a nack for tactics no matter what army they play, but hey, using tactics is cheating huh?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,523 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Tau are in serious need of a new codex. On the other hand, the only person who beats me when I have used 4th and 5th edition tyranids codex is a Space Marine player. I think it really comes down to your ability to make an army and then use it properly during the game. Properly used, any of the new codex can go toe to toe with nids and win when used properly. Even some of the old. For example, eldar.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top