40k Rule - Rulings
Sat, 06/13/2009 - 11:36
As with any game there are a lot of ambiguous rules and rulings that can turn sour during a heated tournament game. I was wondering, what are these rule queries? I also want to pass this on to the council, will there be a General FaQ for the Warmasters challenge? Sometimes a roll-off is not enough.
Topics that can be ruled on:
Death Rollas and ramming.
SM Gate out of CC.
Land Raider assault ramps(for older codexes)
Models that dont fit fully on the table when comming on from reserve.
etc etc...
any other questions? I just wanted to get the ball rolling.
Mon, 06/15/2009 - 08:51
#2
Hi
Regarding FAQ usage, we will most likely (I am deliberately leaving a little wiggle room here) be using the Independant National Warhammer 40,000 Tournament FAQ v2.2 (the one used by adepticon) for the Warmaster's 40K Challenge and the Invitational Tournament for the top circuit players. We will encourage organizers to look to it as well, but we want them to have the freedom to run a tournament in a manner that seems fit to them. If we decide to use it we will add it to player resources section of the website when we post the beta scenarios and player's guide.
For Warhammer Fantasy, no such text exists, so we are willing to address anything that comes up that is not covered under the current GW FAQs.
Cheers,
Nate
Mon, 06/15/2009 - 13:04
#3
Just to let everyone know where to find the INAT so they can review
http://www.adepticon.org/files/INATFAQv2.2.pdf
Please read through it carefully. The INAT is not simply a clarification of RAW, though they have some of that in there. This also tries to actually make clarifications and slight modifications to the rules to bring better balance.
The DakkaDakka crew (led by Yakface and Centurion99) are the ones who put this together originally and continuously try to improve it.
Please let us know what your thoughts are on using something like this.
Later,
Greg
Mon, 06/15/2009 - 17:37
#4
Ya I have DL'd the FAQ a while back when it was first posted. I think it'd be a great idea if the Warmaster Tournaments used this as their FAQ of choice as well. It is pretty well written and everyone then has access to it before each tournament people would be able to read it over and be ready to discuss any rules issues that come up during a game. As well then you would be assured that if you play in Woodstock one weekend with an army list, and then play in Kitchener the next weekend with the same list you know that the same FAQ's are used and so you know the same rulings will apply in both locations.
Tue, 06/16/2009 - 14:40
#5
Yeah, I'm 100% in favour of some kind of "encouraged" FAQ's system. Obviously each individual store/organizer would have the final say in regards to how they run thier events, but I would think that most of them would like to have a document they can fall back on when it comes to a sticky rule.
I'm sure that some organizer's don't want to seem like the "bad guy" or get involved in some kind of heated rules debate, especially if it's something that they're not familiar with... but being able to say "Well, we run a Warmasters system here, and also use the Official Warmasters FAQ... hey look, your questions covered right here." Would keep things consistant and since you'd be getting feedback from the organizers/owners you could update things.
I would personally perfer to know what to expect in regards to rulings, even if I don't agree with them or use a different interpritation with my own hobby group... it's just easier to know before the event begins, and I think most people would agree with that statement.
Tue, 06/23/2009 - 17:13
#6
Speaking of Fantasy, Nate have you guys looked into the Dire Wolf FAQ's? These seem to be the ones most of the independant tournaments in the UK or Austrailia seem to turn to. This might be something you might want to look at.
Tue, 06/23/2009 - 18:04
#7
The dire wolf FAQ's have been used as a basis for recent GW Fantasy FAQ's.
A lot of the rulings from what I've seen come from a "if we like your army then we'll power you up" perspective. The treeman strangleroot stand and shoot 360 reaction being a prime example.
I've been less than impressed with the FAQ's personally. Have you guys used them at all?
Later,
Greg
Wed, 06/24/2009 - 09:49
#8
Hi
Yeah, Dire Wolf is... mediocre.
That their work has formed the basis of GW's FAQs is disappointing.
As a vampire counts players, even I feel that the rulings regarding the helm of commandment are too permissive.
But more than that is the inconsistency in their logic, or the application of that logic. For example, the Empire banner involving fear on the charge is treated in exactly the opposite manner of the Bretonnian impetuous rule, despite being effectively the same thing.
My feeling is that people use Dire Wolf because at the moment there is no better alternative. If I had the time, I would either start our own or join the Dire Wolf group and start changing things. But alas, I am too busy with this already.
Cheers,
Nate
Who's online
There are currently 0 users and 5 guests online.
It would be nice to have a Warmaster FAQ or something saying that Warmaster tournaments will be using the Adepticon FAQ's since most tournaments are going that way.
For questions like the above and others.
Stratford Gaming Union Forums - http://www.stratfordgamingunion.proboards.com/
Stratford Gaming Union Blog - http://stratfordgamingunion.blogspot.com/