40K 9th ed

[Mulgrok 172]

I like how Heroic Intervention now makes the character a valid target for charging units.  No more free kills for Adrax though.

[Ish 5,696]

22 minutes ago, Mulgrok said:

I like how Heroic Intervention now makes the character a valid target for charging units.  No more free kills for Adrax though.

But it does raise the question: what happens when non-Character models make a Heroic Intervention?

[Mulgrok 172]

9 minutes ago, Ish said:

But it does raise the question: what happens when non-Character models make a Heroic Intervention?

it does not specify characters.  Anything that intervenes is targetable.

[Ish 5,696]

Ah. I misread and/or misremembered the rule.

[Lord Hanaur 1,440]

1 hour ago, Mulgrok said:

it does not specify characters.  Anything that intervenes is targetable.

The rule specifically says that you cannot attack anyone who you didnt charge, in 9E as well.

[Dusldorf 285]

7 minutes ago, Lord Hanaur said:

The rule specifically says that you cannot attack anyone who you didnt charge, in 9E as well.

Wrong:

[Sgt. Rock 1,059]

I like it. Makes you think twice about throwing that valuable character into the fray right out of the gate.

[VonVilkee 2,803]

5 minutes ago, Sgt. Rock said:

I like it. Makes you think twice about throwing that valuable character into the fray right out of the gate.

Or just be careful with the placement to limit the number of models in support range... Half inch will be limiting...

[Mulgrok 172]

I am thinking that Fragstorm Grenade Launchers are a trap.  They are only really more effective than storm bolters against units of 11+ models and in the 6" between rapid fire range of bolters and max range of the grenades, but can not be used in close combat.  Since Dreadnoughts always rapid fire bolt weapons, grenades should be avoided.

EDIT: I made this post because I just learned fragstorm grenade launchers are blast weapons.

[Brandon 122]

Since the 9E objective markers are officially 7.5" (7.57" technically), I wonder if Ordo or OFCC will make some sweet custom neoprene objective marker mats? I have a set to support Team USA 40k and have enjoyed using them.

 

[Lyraeus 1,046]

I need to find all my Deff Dreads... 

[Ish 5,696]

The distance between the pivot point of a Leman Russ Battle Tank turret to the tip of it’s muzzle is about 4”...

Simple geometry means that if spun in a complete 360° circle, the muzzle would travel approximately 25”...

An undamaged Leman Russ has a Movement characteristic of 10”... 

Therefore, a Leman Russ tank cannot rotate its turret by more than 144° in a single Movement phase (and this will decrease as it takes damage)...

However, weapons do not have facings (with the sole exception of the Warlord Battle Titan’s rear mounted lascannons for some reason?) so there is no need to ever rotate a turret...

This is the single most complicated and most unnecessary rule I have seen from GW in over twenty years! 

[Mulgrok 172]

I assume this is to stop people exploiting measuring from the hull for movement and turret/sponson for LoS (assuming the turret sticks out farther than the hull)

EDIT: they probably just mean the distance measured from the point sticking out, not the rotational distance

[Ish 5,696]

Yeah, but if the turret is rotated... it’s the point sticking out (the muzzle) that’s going to move the furthest.

[Inquisitor66 685]

8 minutes ago, Ish said:

Yeah, but if the turret is rotated... it’s the point sticking out (the muzzle) that’s going to move the furthest.

You measure the difference between the start and end point, you ca. Spin the turret around 10x as long as the tip is within 10 inches of where it started before you moved.

[Ish 5,696]

Not a according to the portion of the rules I highlighted above. You have to measure along the path actually traveled.

[jesselowe 126]

In the sentence "The distance a model moves is measured using the part of the model's base (or hull) that moves furthest along its path (including parts that rotate or pivot)" does the word in bold refer to the model or to the base/hull/rotating part?

[Dusldorf 285]

1 minute ago, jesselowe said:

In the sentence "The distance a model moves is measured using the part of the model's base (or hull) that moves furthest along its path (including parts that rotate or pivot)" does the word in bold refer to the model or to the base/hull/rotating part?

Whichever moved the furthest

[jesselowe 126]

Let me rephrase: Which of these would be the correct rewriting of the rule?

A) The distance a model moves is measured using the part of the model's base (or hull) that moves furthest along the model's path (including parts that rotate or pivot).

B) The distance a model moves is measured using the part of the model's base (or hull) that moves furthest along the base's, hull's, or rotating/pivoting part's path (including parts that rotate or pivot).

[Dusldorf 285]

Same answer. You're overthinking it, just find whatever piece moved furthest and find out how far it moved. 

[Ish 5,696]

Much simpler solution: don’t treat turrets, sponsons, gun barrels, and radio aerials as part of the hull.

[Dusldorf 285]

8 minutes ago, Ish said:

Much simpler solution: don’t treat turrets, sponsons, gun barrels, and radio aerials as part of the hull.

That'd be a house rule, since any part of a model with no base is now considered the hull:

[Sgt. Rock 1,059]

Considering that there are no fire arcs for vehicle weapons, this is all a bit of a meaningless discussion. You don't need to rotate the turret or sponsons or whatever unless you just think it looks better, and anyone who's going to nitpick against you for trying to bring in a tiny bit of "rule of cool" by rotating your weapons to face what you're shooting at is probably a dickbag not worth playing against. Movement is the same; measure from point A on the vehicle at the start of the move to point A on the vehicle at the end of the move. 

[Dusldorf 285]

5 minutes ago, Sgt. Rock said:

Considering that there are no fire arcs for vehicle weapons, this is all a bit of a meaningless discussion. You don't need to rotate the turret or sponsons or whatever unless you just think it looks better, and anyone who's going to nitpick against you for trying to bring in a tiny bit of "rule of cool" by rotating your weapons to face what you're shooting at is probably a dickbag not worth playing against. Movement is the same; measure from point A on the vehicle at the start of the move to point A on the vehicle at the end of the move. 

There are situations where you might need to rotate something. For example, if you are castling a Leman Russ behind an obscuring piece of terrain and surrounded it with a bunch of infantry, and don't want to move the infantry, then you can instead rotate a sponson or turret so that it can see around the terrain.

[Ish 5,696]

13 minutes ago, Sgt. Rock said:

Considering that there are no fire arcs for vehicle weapons, this is all a bit of a meaningless discussion. You don't need to rotate the turret or sponsons or whatever unless you just think it looks better, and anyone who's going to nitpick against you for trying to bring in a tiny bit of "rule of cool" by rotating your weapons to face what you're shooting at is probably a dickbag not worth playing against.

That’s how it should work, unfortunately the rules say it isn’t how it does work...

Movement is the same; measure from point A on the vehicle at the start of the move to point A on the vehicle at the end of the move.

But the rules say, explicitly, to measure along the path that it travels. If the rotating barrel moves 12”, then the model moved 12”...