PDA

View Full Version : Most Easily Misinterpreted Rules...



PaulmanMN
11-08-2009, 13:00
Well, being a Necron player, and tired of getting my ass kicked by phase out on a regular basis, I am starting a couple of new armys. One will be just your basic vanilla space marines, (playing with a different chapters codex every now and then) and I will be starting up a space wolves company as soon as it gets released.

What i would like to know, what do people think are the most easily misinterpreted rules. I know "Well be back" confounded us :confused: for a few games before we got it all sorted out, and I wish to avoid all these issues later.

(This isnt an actual rules clarification question, more of a general question regarding folks opinions....)

Thanks guys!

PaulmanMN

Lord Damocles
11-08-2009, 13:05
'...automatically passes all moral tests...' or similar, eg. God of War.


'Take a pinning test'.
'Na ah! I'm immune'
'OK, lets go through this *again*...'

or

'Take a leadership test'.
'I'm fearless so I auto pass'
-Facepalm-

kurac
11-08-2009, 13:05
And They Shall Know No Fear...i still don't how that's diffrerent from Fearless.
Luckely i have a friend that does...he's usualy around when i play marines....when he's not, i play Guard.

dOOHICKY
11-08-2009, 13:10
And They Shall Know No Fear...i still don't how that's diffrerent from Fearless.
Luckely i have a friend that does...he's usualy around when i play marines....when he's not, i play Guard.

Distinguishing features...

Pinning Tests - ATSKNF takes them, fearless don't
Morale checks (Apart from combat resolution) - ATSKNF takes them, Fearless does not
Morale Check from losing Combat - ATSKNF takes them at - depending of how much they lost by. Fearless takes wounds depending how much they lost by.
However, If ATSKNF models fail test and are caught by sweeping advance, they then turn to Fearless and take wounds instead.

Giganthrax
11-08-2009, 13:18
People in my LGS tend to be very confused or forgot about wound allocation rules.

Warlord Nazgred
11-08-2009, 13:33
yes I hate it when people get wound allocationfor example

me "that one wound from a krak missile on your vanguard vetran squad with the attatched captian"

other player " ok I'll take it on the captian "

me "ok"

rolls a one and removes a vetran in the squad

me " erm your captain should be dead from instant death"

and I think you know the rest

the_picto
11-08-2009, 13:38
The main things I see people doing wrong are;

Cover saves for vehicles.
Wound allocation.
How ATSKNF works in a sweeping advance.

Petay1985
11-08-2009, 13:53
The main things I see people doing wrong are;

Cover saves for vehicles.
Wound allocation.
How ATSKNF works in a sweeping advance.

Really!? thats quite impressive getting ATSKNF wrong in sweeping advance! can we have an example of this foolishness?

Corrode
11-08-2009, 13:59
How on earth is ATSKNF hard to work out? Auto-rally (barring the 6" rule), take No Retreat! wounds instead of dying if you get swept. Is there any more than that to it?

Wound allocation is always done horribly though. I try and do it properly on my own units, but I think I've only played one or two people who got it right. People often seem to 'forget' you can't hit attached ICs in combat without declaring it, too - either they try and take saves on their HQ or they try and ask me to allocate wounds to them as well from general squad wounds.

Urath
11-08-2009, 14:02
Yeah, I agree. ATSKNF is basically a no brainer. I often see people arguing over rules like "Deathwing Assault" or whether a deepstriking unit can assault after they've deployed, even though I know they can't, one other Dark Angels player - who shall be reffered to as one of the Fallen, insists that Deathwing can assault after deepstriking.

People often **** up wound allocation or cheat, in the example mentioned a few posts above. People lie about who is taking the wound. Tbh, I think it's little to do with misinterpreting the rules, but more to do with people trying to confuse others and cheat, by giving their army a boost.

Warpcrafter
11-08-2009, 14:02
Deff Rollers. It gets like the Hatfields and the McCoys at my FLGS when that one comes up.

Askari
11-08-2009, 14:39
I deliberately misinterpret the Wound Allocation rules.
Because they're silly.

(Of course, I ask my opponent about it first)
=)

the_picto
11-08-2009, 15:10
Really!? thats quite impressive getting ATSKNF wrong in sweeping advance! can we have an example of this foolishness?

Well they don't actually get as far as sweeping advance. I've just seen a few people playing ASTKNF as making marines fearless in combat, then getting slightly confused when try and explain it to them.

Nym
11-08-2009, 15:11
I often hear people saying "You were already locked in CC so you can't attack my unit that just charged you".

Fortunately, p41 BRB was FAQed (but the problem still comes up from time to time).

dOOHICKY
11-08-2009, 15:22
People forgetting that when you are charged your IC in the charged unit must react first if possible.

the1stpip
11-08-2009, 15:29
People on the Warhammer Forum seem to be confused about combat squad deployment in Dawn of War scenarios.

Ravenous
11-08-2009, 15:44
People dont read the goddamn rulebook then ask me how 'xyz' rule works when the book is right in front of them.

Damn kids and thier conflangled ipods, read a book!

Steel Legion for Life
11-08-2009, 15:56
Vehicle cover is a big area of clash.

Most people seem to play any obscuring is a 4+ save, but you need 50%+ of the model obscured by terrain to qualify. And they can't be obscured in area terrain.

Why?

The rulebook states area terrain does not grant a cover save to vehicles in it. Full stop.

Tanks in woods = no cover save, if the trees move to allow the models in. Lame as you like, but that's the rules.

PaulmanMN
11-08-2009, 16:08
Vehicle cover is a big area of clash.

Most people seem to play any obscuring is a 4+ save, but you need 50%+ of the model obscured by terrain to qualify. And they can't be obscured in area terrain.

Why?

The rulebook states area terrain does not grant a cover save to vehicles in it. Full stop.

Tanks in woods = no cover save, if the trees move to allow the models in. Lame as you like, but that's the rules.

Dude, you have just absolutely just made my YEAR!!!!

MasterDecoy
11-08-2009, 16:22
The amount of poeple Ive had to explain that synapes =/= fearless.....

They share a lot of the same benifets and drawbacks, but synapes has a few extra benifets that I've seen people try to take advantage of with their fearless models.

E.G:
Me: Ok you wounded my hive tyrant with your dire sword.
Them: Ok take a leadership test or its dead.
Me: (without rolling) OK, passed it.
Them: Why?
Me: Hive tyrant is a synapes creature, creatures in synapes auto pass all ld tests barring psycic tests and target priority(which doesnt exist anymore).
Them: So it just makes them fearless then?
Me: No!!!!!

slingersam
11-08-2009, 17:00
The amount of poeple Ive had to explain that synapes =/= fearless.....

They share a lot of the same benifets and drawbacks, but synapes has a few extra benifets that I've seen people try to take advantage of with their fearless models.

E.G:
Me: Ok you wounded my hive tyrant with your dire sword.
Them: Ok take a leadership test or its dead.
Me: (without rolling) OK, passed it.
Them: Why?
Me: Hive tyrant is a synapes creature, creatures in synapes auto pass all ld tests barring psycic tests and target priority(which doesnt exist anymore).
Them: So it just makes them fearless then?
Me: No!!!!!

You do know in the new rules, you will have to pass an armor save for each point of combat you've lost by.

Narf
11-08-2009, 17:00
wound allocation on squadrons!

i have one friend who when you shoot at his 3 landspeeders, and only cause two glancing hits, will put them on the same one, as he reckons i havnt done enough to damage more than one, but if i do 3 glancing hits he'll put them one on each.

he does the same for his marines, squad of 10 takes 9 wounds, he'll roll 9 dice and take watever models he wants off, squad of ten takes 10 wounds he'll roll for eacj group.

now this seems insane to me, as as far as i can see, 1 wound, means one allocated save, 2 wounds means 2 and so on, so really he should be rolling for groupings anyway.

but he wont listen so we just play his rules which makes him happy and us happy when the 2 multimelta hits from his speeders only take weapons of one russ, instead of 2

and edited to put this in


You do know in the new rules, you will have to pass an armor save for each point of combat you've lost by.

yes that will come after, the diresword has some form of instant death ability, based on a leadership test, which the tyrant ignores

the_reaper
11-08-2009, 17:04
Jump pack/jet pack

-reaper

Sir_Lunchalot
11-08-2009, 17:29
Imperial Guard heavy weapons in the last two sets of rules. last edition, the rules were the worst possible fit to the models, now they're a decent fit to some models, but everyone just got used to the painfully counter-intuitive rules from the last book.

Fixer
11-08-2009, 17:34
Vehicle cover is a big area of clash.

Most people seem to play any obscuring is a 4+ save, but you need 50%+ of the model obscured by terrain to qualify. And they can't be obscured in area terrain.


Actually it's 50% of the armor facing. if you're shooting a tank from it's side and half that side is covered you get a cover save.

Additionally, if you're shooting the vehicle from it's side and the side is entirely covered (perhaps you can only see a small slant of it's front armor) you get a 3+ cover save.

Yautja
11-08-2009, 17:45
Shooting out of open topped vehicles and thinking that fast vehicles can move over 6" and everyone on board can still shoot.

IhasAshuvel
11-08-2009, 17:55
The Golden Rule.

Known as "The Most Important Rule!" in the 5th ed rulebook.

PaulmanMN
12-08-2009, 09:41
Thanks for the kind advice guys, looks like I really need to keep ATSKNF and Fearless at the forefront of my mind.

grissom2006
12-08-2009, 10:09
The fact that even if out range with a Plasma Weapon the Gets Hot Rule and is out of range still has to roll and see if the man holding it doesn't get wounded.

Grazzy
12-08-2009, 10:38
Wound allocation without a shadow of a doubt.

omni989
12-08-2009, 10:55
The books are getting clearer, I think....

grissom2006
12-08-2009, 11:33
The books are getting clearer, I think....

Sometimes they do and it is certainly a lot clearer than when RT was the rules they make a huge step in the right direction and then faulter back in a few areas.

Lord Malorne
12-08-2009, 11:42
The Golden Rule.

Known as "The Most Important Rule!" in the 5th ed rulebook.

Oddly, that causes the most arguments and should in truth not have been put in the book, not in my area, from what I have seen it does cause a lot of snarky remarks and 'high horse-ness' in people.

Tarax
12-08-2009, 12:49
Oddly, that causes the most arguments and should in truth not have been put in the book, not in my area, from what I have seen it does cause a lot of snarky remarks and 'high horse-ness' in people.

Remind me what that rules was. Was it: 'Have fun!' ?

That could be very misleading as everyone has a different opinion of 'fun'. Also, I remember that it said that you go throw out the rulebook and just make up whatever rule you wanted. Now, how misleading can that be?

aekold666
12-08-2009, 13:02
Vehicle cover is a big area of clash.

Most people seem to play any obscuring is a 4+ save, but you need 50%+ of the model obscured by terrain to qualify. And they can't be obscured in area terrain.

Why?

The rulebook states area terrain does not grant a cover save to vehicles in it. Full stop.

Tanks in woods = no cover save, if the trees move to allow the models in. Lame as you like, but that's the rules.

Could you please please give me the pagenumber where this is stated. You just made my day.

Lord Malorne
12-08-2009, 13:10
Remind me what that rules was. Was it: 'Have fun!' ?

That could be very misleading as everyone has a different opinion of 'fun'. Also, I remember that it said that you go throw out the rulebook and just make up whatever rule you wanted. Now, how misleading can that be?

This kind of response is exactly what I meant, in my player group games go smoothly and if anything comes up we agree to handle it then and there with a solution. That was in effect long before the 'most important rule' what I am referring to is people on teh interwebz, coming into a thred, posting 'don't forget the most important rule',considering it adds nothing to the discussion or resolution of a question it might aswell be spam.

Players are generaly (not always) smart enough to play a game with common sense and to agee on how a grey area should work, the 'most important rule' is just a pathetic addition to the book.

Giganthrax
12-08-2009, 13:28
The Golden Rule.

Known as "The Most Important Rule!" in the 5th ed rulebook.
Yepp, people misinterpret that all the time. Usually when I'm beating some scrub into the ground, he starts complaining and mentioning the golden rule (usually accompanied by calling my army cheesy, or saying I'm a power gamer).

Almost invariably leads to arguments, as I tell them that yes, I'm having quite a lot of fun when I play competitively, and then they start the usual scrub bullcrap, and the situation often degenerates into pointless arguing where the scrub somehow thinks that his definition of fun is more worth then mine, and then relies on that "most important rule" to have an imagined moral high ground over me or something.

IhasAshuvel
12-08-2009, 13:31
This kind of response is exactly what I meant[etc]


Yepp, people misinterpret that all the time. [etc]

Thing is, this can also be a misinterpretation of the rule - the rule could be interpretated as simply being considerate of your opponent and talking to them about any queries that come up during the game rather than shouting "lrn 2 RaW nub!".

Lord Malorne
12-08-2009, 13:42
Thing is, [etc].

Another way of reading it.

Why not simply say that? Its a pointless addition, the only people it effects is people with social difficulties who would not accept it anyway.

Corrode
12-08-2009, 13:58
Wound allocation without a shadow of a doubt.

The sad thing is that if you just read all the rules pertaining to wounding, they're actually about the clearest-written rules in there.

Giganthrax
12-08-2009, 14:01
Thing is, this can also be a misinterpretation of the rule - the rule could be interpretated as simply being considerate of your opponent and talking to them about any queries that come up during the game rather than shouting "lrn 2 RaW nub!".
I'm always considerate to my opponents. I always explain rules they don't know to them. I always let them use my templates and my dice and I share my soft drinks with them. I'm always civil.

It's when someone comes up with "the most important rule states that both of us should have FUN(tm), but you're POWER GAMING(tm), so now I'm not having fun, so you're breaching a rule" that I get annoyed.

Also, usually the people who quote the most important rule are the ones who have the least experience with human relations, and tend to be overall bad sports, anyway.

Madigan
12-08-2009, 14:54
Wound allocation confusion is thankfully not as common in my area. The major rule confusions here almost always have to do with if a unit (infantry or vehicle) gets a cover save or not. We typically play on fairly terrain-full tables (40%-60% of the table area covered with buildings, area terrain, or barricades) so the general rule of thumb is that a unit has a cover save unless proven that it doesn't. Thus the "-1 to cover saves in case of a dispute" rule comes up a lot.

Other than that, the rules for multiple assaults are often mis-read and/or forgotten, especially concerning multiple units with multiple independent characters all fighting in the save combat. It's confusing enough even when you know the rules, but once two people with slightly different understandings on how 5th Ed combat works get into it, it just gets ugly fast.

This is especially compounded when the person that does understand the full extent of the rules uses their knowledge to carefully place their assaulting models so that it's almost impossible for their opponent's IC to get into the first round of combat.

Another rules section that is often mis-understood is the rules for Independent characters joining and leaving units. Actually, most of the special rules for ICs are often mis-interpreted.

Son of Russ
12-08-2009, 15:44
Deff Rollers. It gets like the Hatfields and the McCoys at my FLGS when that one comes up.

I hear that. That rule is a real pain.

Ravenous
12-08-2009, 15:51
I'm always considerate to my opponents. I always explain rules they don't know to them. I always let them use my templates and my dice and I share my soft drinks with them. I'm always civil.

It's when someone comes up with "the most important rule states that both of us should have FUN(tm), but you're POWER GAMING(tm), so now I'm not having fun, so you're breaching a rule" that I get annoyed.

Also, usually the people who quote the most important rule are the ones who have the least experience with human relations, and tend to be overall bad sports, anyway.

Ah yes FAAC gamers, its the pretenious alpha nerds that get bent out of shape when you dont have fun their way which leads them in the dark reaches of Fluff/Fun At All Costs.

Netfreakk
12-08-2009, 16:57
Vehicle cover is ambiguous to me. 50% which direction? what if it's diagonal terrain? if it's true line of sight and I see 2 sides, but one side has the cover can I shoot the other side and not give you cover? does 50% for dreadnoughts mean fromt he leg up? but the legs are shorter than the torso so is it like a 1/2" higher than the legs? etc etc.

Ekranoplan
12-08-2009, 17:04
From 4th edition, the area terrain rules were never used properly at my FLGS. People never seemed to understand that some terrain features should not be classed as area terrain. They would count hills as area terrain, for example. Sometimes we would agree before the game that certain ruins templates are not area terrain (because they are relatively intact/sparse), and then they would not allow units to shoot through the windows of the ruin.

Vedar
12-08-2009, 17:34
My old gaming group did the same thing. They counted placing a tank in full view on top of a hill as in cover. It took a good amount of showing them in the book MC and Vehicles do not get a cover save from being on top of a hill.

The rules are quite clear on this. I believe the BGB also says something to the effect if you are not sure on it being 50% covered give it a -1 to its save or something like that.

Another rule that people forget is if you are shooting at a vechile where you can't see the vechile that is facing you (meaning you can only see a little bit of the side of the tank) it gets a +1 to the cover save.

Another one they forget it that the vechicle gets a cover save based off the cover used. Most of the time this is a 4+ but if it is a bunker or fortified ruins it could be a 3+

Cry of the Wind
12-08-2009, 17:43
The sad thing is that if you just read all the rules pertaining to wounding, they're actually about the clearest-written rules in there.

The problem is most people I've played haven't read them once or twice and so don't have a clue. Then the game gets bogged down. I can put my models into their groups very quick now but it takes 10min to work out the result of an attack on a Tac squad with a character with some people....

Funny how the people I play with tend to lean to the WAAC side and so know the rules while the FAAC people I have to avoid since they can't grasp concepts like wound allocation since "that's dumb it shouldn't work that way" is the response when sarge bites it.

IhasAshuvel
12-08-2009, 17:50
Funny how the people I play with tend to lean to the WAAC side and so know the rules while the FAAC people I have to avoid since they can't grasp concepts like wound allocation since "that's dumb it shouldn't work that way" is the response when sarge bites it.

Yep is it BS - how dare the sarge take one in the face when a 10 strong unit suffers 9 wounds? The special/heavy weapons and sarge should always be the lasting ones standing because they are the most powerfull right?

Ravenous
12-08-2009, 18:17
The problem is most people I've played haven't read them once or twice and so don't have a clue. Then the game gets bogged down. I can put my models into their groups very quick now but it takes 10min to work out the result of an attack on a Tac squad with a character with some people....

Funny how the people I play with tend to lean to the WAAC side and so know the rules while the FAAC people I have to avoid since they can't grasp concepts like wound allocation since "that's dumb it shouldn't work that way" is the response when sarge bites it.

Its true, every single person that has called me a power gamer havent even read the rules and they just go from edition to edition with their half painted proxy armies without buying a rulebook, and they just muddle their way through 3 hour games saying "well I dont care I play for fun, oh btw how does tank shock work again?".

I wonder if they take the same approach to life, because it shows ;)

Doppleskanger
12-08-2009, 18:41
The one I see people miss most often is when you blow up a transport. When you blow it up it's supposed to be that an area exactly the size of the vehicle becomes DANGEROUS terrain and the embarked models are placed within it. That means to move out they have to roll terrain tests and dangerous terrain tests. Most people seem to treat it like they,ve simply disembarked. Not a game breaker, but you know,play the rules.

PikeZ33
12-08-2009, 18:54
The amount of poeple Ive had to explain that synapes =/= fearless.....

They share a lot of the same benifets and drawbacks, but synapes has a few extra benifets that I've seen people try to take advantage of with their fearless models.

E.G:
Me: Ok you wounded my hive tyrant with your dire sword.
Them: Ok take a leadership test or its dead.
Me: (without rolling) OK, passed it.
Them: Why?
Me: Hive tyrant is a synapes creature, creatures in synapes auto pass all ld tests barring psycic tests and target priority(which doesnt exist anymore).
Them: So it just makes them fearless then?
Me: No!!!!!

Also, it was FAQ'd that all Tyranids including the synapse creates are immune to instant death (period). It was previously the twice-strength ID, but was extended to all forms of ID in the FAQ.


The one I see people miss most often is when you blow up a transport. When you blow it up it's supposed to be that an area exactly the size of the vehicle becomes DANGEROUS terrain and the embarked models are placed within it. That means to move out they have to roll terrain tests and dangerous terrain tests. Most people seem to treat it like they,ve simply disembarked. Not a game breaker, but you know,play the rules.

Also, Pg. 61: A vehicle becomes difficult dangerous only if it's destroyed, known as wrecked (5 result) ... if it explodes (6 result) it becomes difficult only, unless they FAQ'd it.

Edit again: I do play where area terrain grants a save to nonMC/veh in that area terrain, but I can't seem to verify it in the rulebook. The section on area terrain only states difficult tests and the importance of laying out the boundary. Can I get some help here?

ehlijen
12-08-2009, 18:59
Vehicle cover is a big area of clash.

Most people seem to play any obscuring is a 4+ save, but you need 50%+ of the model obscured by terrain to qualify. And they can't be obscured in area terrain.

Why?

The rulebook states area terrain does not grant a cover save to vehicles in it. Full stop.

Tanks in woods = no cover save, if the trees move to allow the models in. Lame as you like, but that's the rules.

That is not entirely correct. Yes, it is difficult to achieve obscurment for vehicles in area terrain, but nowhere is it made flat out impossible.

The rules state that vehicles while vehicles are not automatically in cover as other units are, the 50% takes precedent. That means that if the thing that grants 50% cover is the area terrain it is in (however hard that is to achieve), it has indeed recieved a cover save from it, just not via the area terrain rules.

As for moving the trees: A) who says you have to move the tank onto where the trees were and B) the rulebook is actually quite explicit in that they must go back to where they were before unless if possible; they are only removed to allow models to be moved in between them and then put back where they were.

Hadafix
12-08-2009, 20:10
For those that have played against or with the BT, explaining any of their rules. I use all of them, even Target Priority, as its written in the Codex. One of the 2 big sticking points are RZ, the Holy Orb and the EC being a HQ.

I tend to just hand over my codex, point to what it says and get ready for the counter. Holy Orb is a sticking point to most though, imo.

My area is pretty much RAW with common sense if mistakes are made.

TheEndIsHere
12-08-2009, 20:43
"-1 to cover saves in case of a dispute" rule comes up a lot.


Any rule like this, my main opponent seems to love this rule, or the in case of dispute, roll a dice to which is right.

"I roll 2d6 armour penetration with my fusion blaster on your Monolith"
"No monoliths ignore that"
"Yea but its not a melta gun, its a Fusion blaster"
"Same thing'
"OK then, *rolls* on a 4 or more I get 2 dice for AP"

Or:

"Im in cover I get a 4+ save"
"I don't think you are, sooooo its a 5+ now, roll your saves"

"I roll wbb for them"
"I don't think you should so on a 4+, you get wbb and on 1,2 or 3 you don't"

That rule does NOT mean anyhting you don't like is disregarded on a 4+!

D-End

le bard
12-08-2009, 22:17
Yep is it BS - how dare the sarge take one in the face when a 10 strong unit suffers 9 wounds? The special/heavy weapons and sarge should always be the lasting ones standing because they are the most powerfull right?

on the point of the weapons, it doesn't make sense. if a special weapons trooper falls, logically wouldn't somebody else pick up their weapon?

Lord Damocles
12-08-2009, 22:19
on the point of the weapons, it doesn't make sense. if a special weapons trooper falls, logically wouldn't somebody else pick up their weapon?
Logically, how would a Marine pick up his dead buddy's Lascannon without swapping backpack etc. first?

ReveredChaplainDrake
12-08-2009, 22:28
"I roll wbb for them"
"I don't think you should so on a 4+, you get wbb and on 1,2 or 3 you don't"

That rule does NOT mean anyhting you don't like is disregarded on a 4+!
Unfortunately, that's almost exactly what the rule suggests players do. Ah, the Cheating Clause. This is annoyingly popular with little kids who are unfamiliar with the game's more exotic rules, or for people who don't read their rulebooks. It's also why I dread fielding my Templars, because their FAQ doesn't address jack.

I am meticulous about my own Wound Allocation, and it's really a pet peeve of mine to see an opponent just ignore theirs. In order to not give my opponents an excuse in-game, I pre-allocate any wounds I cause (in the most beneficial way for them, of course) so they don't have to do any work. Apparently, counting past 10 constitutes hard math. :eyebrows:

ehlijen
12-08-2009, 22:37
on the point of the weapons, it doesn't make sense. if a special weapons trooper falls, logically wouldn't somebody else pick up their weapon?

That's assuming the other troopers are trained in its use and that it wasn't damaged by whatever killed it's bearer. If in doubt, a trooper would always prefer a weapon he know works (because he maintained it) to one that might not due to battle damage, no matter how much more powerful it is.

sycopat
12-08-2009, 23:30
on the point of the weapons, it doesn't make sense. if a special weapons trooper falls, logically wouldn't somebody else pick up their weapon?

It does actually make sense. 40k games represent live firefights, if a trooper goes down it means he was in range and line of sight of an enemy with a weapon capable of piercing his armour. Waltzing over to pick up his gun will therefore put you in range and line of sight of the enemy, and he will make you dead.

I can see the logic of troopers swapping weapons with dead/injured comrades, but not in the middle of a firefight.

Marshal Augustine
13-08-2009, 00:00
one that I see ignored a lot is pinning tests. They have to be taken as soon as a wound from a weapon that causes pinning is taken... this can happen a few times during the shooting phase... and people forget. Then at the end of the phase even pinned units have to take a morale test to see if they fall back.

Yeah.

Jackmojo
13-08-2009, 00:22
+1 for Vehicle cover rules (specifically squadrons and concealed facings) I've explained these rules (after re-reading them for myself several times) at least twice for every member of my gaming group (admittedly some of those were on the internet, rather then to them...).

And as a subset of that, cover for Artillery Type units (almost always the Thunderfire Cannon).

Regarding wound allocation, for me and my buddies it was more a matter of needing to remember to do the new way, then anyone not understanding the rule (and now that we've gotten used to it its OK). I do rather miss the simplicity of torrent of fire for speed of play and lack of shenanigans if nothing else.

Jack