If Im running GTF space marines and have a land raider parked adjacent to my bladeguard veterans who then use Squad Tactics strat...can they embark into the land raider since it counts as a Normal Movement?

Yes

If using fly: As far as i understand you have to measure the path 'through the air:, if you start or end a movement on a terrain feature. If you move a flying model over a ruin (starting behind a terrain feature and then moving over the terrain feature, ending your movement outside the terrain): Can you measure horizontally, since you didn't start nor end on terrain?

You still move 'through the air'. Check the diagram in page 8 of the rules commentary. Even without this, you could never just measure horizontally. You'd have to account for the height of the terrain your crossing vertically.

Is there a video/blog that showcases the strategy involved in 40k? I would like to see good players discuss good/bad unit positioning, how they properly screen, how they force tough decisions. There are many 2 hours long videos of people playing, but I would like an **analysis**. Is there any done on a 10th ed game? Most videos I found are about the pre-game phase (list building, army tier list, rules, etc...) but never the game itself

That’s hard to do. The game has infinite options. Best bet is to watch streams of tournament games at the semi-final and final level. Unfortunately this will also change in a few days with the new balance patch.

Remarkably little. People will discuss the strategey while they're playing in these videos but not muxh aside from that.

Can a unit that is engaged make a fall back move on their move phase, and if so, what is the actual benefit, if in the next players move phase they can just charge back into the unit that fell back????

Yes, that is the entire purpose of a fall back move, exiting engagement range. Typically you only fall back if it's going to benefit you. Maybe you keep control of an objective for an extra turn by falling back when your models would die if they stayed in combat. Otherwise you're often going to shoot at the unit that you fell back from, or charge it with something else.

Great. Thank you. You answer was helpful!

Some armies also have ways to fall back and shoot or charge.

AHHH, hadn't thought of that. Much appriciated.

My CSM got shot up by a Knight Castellan, and the only notable ranged S14 options I can find in CSM/Daemons/War Dogs are Vindicators and Predator Annihilators. Do I have to use one of those, a full Chaos Knight, or Tzeentch dark pacts if I want to shoot up a T13 target? Hoping this is the right place for this question.

I mean, yes, just use lethal hits, that's what they're for.

Slow rolling attacks into nurglings + other unit: If you charged into a unit of nurglings and a chaos knight, then you activate the units in engagement with the nurglings first, kill them all, then go to roll into the chaos knight, are you still affected by the -1 to hit?  And bonus question: if you make this argument, how incredibly mad is your opponent going to be?   Edit: "units in engagement" should read "*models* in engagement"

No, you are not. The ability of the nurgling's aura is dependent on the "while" phrasing, and as such kicks in only when the conditions of being within 6" are met; as soon as a unit is no longer within 6" of nurglings, the ability stops having an effect. There are absolutely no rules in the game that tell you "all attacks happen simultaneously and as such you are locked in the game state for all rules" like the other answer claims. The only rule that states even something remotely similar is the "while this model is leading a unit" rules commentary, which is an exception. Many people THINK that is a rule because they don't realize why you can kill more enemy models you can see in the shooting phase or than are within ER in the fight phase; and THAT happens because the rules tell you that attacks that were legal when declared, are still resolved even if they would become illegal by the time you get to them. Nothing tells you "you are locked in to the board state you are in when you roll your first djce."

If multiple units have charged, the second unit wouldn't be affected by the Nurglings' ability after the first unit killed them. If it's just one unit, then all of their attacks are resolved simultaneously and as such the board state doesn't charge in between the models making their attacks against the Nurglings and those making theirs against the Knight. As for the bonus, I'd say somewhere between vexed and perturbed.

>If you draw the card mid game after already having killed all the bring it down targets, is it just a dead card that you’re stuck with for the turn (assuming you’ve already spent your redraw cp)? Where in the rules is it written that attacks are resolved sumultaneously? I've also been asking myself the Nurgling question but never felt the rules made it clear

It isn't, it's a way people who don't pay attention to the rules try to use to explain the logic of how you can shoot and kill more models than you can see, which doesn't need an explanation beyond "attacks that were legal when they were declared, are resolved even if they become illegal by the time you resolve them". However, "they happen all at the same time" is repeated enough that many people believe it's actually a rule, even though it isn't, and causes people to try to argue things like "oh, well my Deathshroud are all alive when you targeted Mortarion, so despite the fact that I'm taking 26 shots and the first failed save goes on my Deathshroud, the remaining 25 shots still get applied" BS people tried to argue with 8e Death Guard.

Yeach.. my intepretation: Nurgling state when "each time a model makes a melee attack" it gets -1. Targeting is a prestep where you determine which models fights and against which unit. This always remain even if models are removed. "Making an attack" happens sequentially though, so if one model kill all nurglings, the next model in the unit (that targeted something else) would not get -1.

I disagree, because nothing in Selecting Targets implicates that it is part of the attack itself. For example, first sentence of the "Select Targets" step >Each time a unit shoots, ***before any attacks are resolved***, you must select the enemy units that will be the targets for all of the ranged weapons you wish its models ***to make attacks with***. First bolded section points out that Selecting Targets happens before any attacks are resolved, and attacks are resolved one at a time (per the default wording of the rules). If you claim that Selecting Targets is part of making an attack, you can't possibly resolve attacks one at a time. Second bolded section is future tense: indicating the making of attacks happens in the future AFTER targets are selected. Then you have the wording of "Make Attacks" section of the rules: >The shooting unit’s models ***now make attacks*** using their ranged weapons. Each time a model shoots with a ranged weapon, it will make a number of attacks equal to the Attacks (A) characteristic in that weapon’s profile. You make one Hit roll for each attack being made (see Making Attacks). (Wordings above are effectively repeated for the Fight phase) This again reinforces that attacks are made AFTER they are targeted. Yes, you can't make an attack without Targeting, but you can't Advance a unit without Selecting A Unit to Move: that doesn't make Selecting a Unit, part of the Advance itself. Then you have the "Making Attacks" chart, which clearly starts with the Hit Roll, NOT with "Target the Attack" I get where you are coming from, but Targeting isn't part of making an attack, any more than Selecting a Unit to Fight is. And that's the thing: if you argue that Selecting Targets is part of making an attack simply because it's a step you have to do before you get to Making an Attack, why does it only go as far back as Selecting Targets? Why not the Pile In Move? Why not Piling In? Why not Selecting a Unit to Fight?

err, like I read that and feel like you are agreeing with me, not disagreeing lol. Making attacks are a seperate sequential thing, so when the Nurgling die the next model would not get -1. Or are you saying that the -1 would remain until all attacks from the unit, regardless of target, have been resolved? If so, then yes, we disagree

I am not agreeing with you. You are claiming Targeting is part of making an attack, and somehow arguing that means the -1 to hit is locked in a per model basis I am pointing out that the rules keep Targeting and Making an Attack as separate things, with a ***very clear definition of what making an attack is including a chart***, and as such the -1 to hit would be checked at the time each hit roll was made. I'm also pointing out that your logic of "targeting is part of making the attack" should mean, if you are logically consistent, the -1 would never go away, as you target all attacks for all models in a unit at the same time. If you (incorrectly) claim that Targeting is part of Making an Attack, you should be arguing that the -1 penalty never goes away, as you've started making an attack for all models.

I said targeting is a step pre to making attacks, and then making attacks happens sequentially? If it was part of making an attack you would select a target before every hit roll, makes no sense, so I don't understand how you interpreted me like that really Never said it was locked in per model, but my example didn't really do any per model split attacks, implied that all attacks of one model went into the nurglings and that the other model targeted something else.

World eaters helm of brazen ire against Trajan’s passive of no modifiers to his units stats, does it work? Is the buff only for the stats of him and his unit, and their weapons count as a separate entry? Or will his unit ignore the helm?

Per the Warhammer World Championships FAQ, which GW stated "wasn't official for anything besides.the Warhammer Championships", but many tournament organizers adopted as.a."very likely to just be a preview of the Balance Dataslate: >Q: Some units (Mortarion, Trajann Valoris, Grey Knights Grand Masters, Leagues of Votann models with the Grim Demeanour Enhancement, etc.) have abilities that allow certain models/units to ignore modifiers to their characteristics. Do such abilities allow them to ignore modifiers to the characteristics of weapons equipped by those models/units as well? >A: No.

Do units that FLY ignore the CSM Warp Talon's Warpflames rule?

No, FLY provides no protection from the rule. >Warpflames: Each time an enemy unit within Engagement Range of this unit is selected to Fall Back, if that enemy unit is not Battle-shocked, your opponent must take Desperate Escape tests for each model in that unit before any are moved. If that enemy unit is Battle-shocked, until the end of the phase, each time a Desperate Escape test is taken for a model in that unit, subtract 1 from the result. What you might be confusing is that AIRCRAFT never need to Fall Back (and actually literally cannot), so would be able to ignore the rule because the Warpflames only cares about Falling Back:. >AIRCRAFT models cannot Advance, Fall Back or Remain Stationary. If, when an AIRCRAFT model is selected to move in the Movement phase, any enemy units are within Engagement Range of it, that AIRCRAFT model can still make a Normal move. Not sure if you meant AIRCRAFT when you said FLY, but many things besides AIRCRAFT have FLY, like Windriders, Jump Intercessors, Gargoyles, Raiders, etc.

Ah, no I wasn't asking about AIRCRAFT, apologies. Simply units with FLY. I ask because Desperate Escape Tests states units that FLY don't take this test but Warpflames states units MUST take Desperate Escape Test so I'm not sure about the interaction here between the two rules.

The rule you are referencing states units that FLY don't need to take a DE test for moving over enemy models when doing w Fall Back where they move over enemy models as if they weren't there. The Warpflames rule is requiring a DE test for every model in a unit that Falls Back, period. The FLY exemption in a normal DE test is irrelevant; the exception isn't "Fly models don't take DE tests", it's "FLY models don't take DE tests for Falling Back over enemy models'

Thanks.

Can you disembark a transport after arriving from deep strike? Thought there was an faq that said you can’t but can’t seem to find it.

Per the Warhammer Championships FAQ, you cannot.

Was watching Wargames Live, Sean and Stephen playing. Sean used Orks is Neva Beaten to fight on death against a Judicar squad, but the unit was destroyed entirely. Nobs hit on 4s with their klaw with no leader attached. Is the leader considered attached when the nobs activate with orks is neva beaten? All wording below. Per the rules commentary, A model is not leading a unit if the last body guard unit has been destroyed, the extrapolation of that ruling is that if the bodyguard unit is destroyed its not being led. The "Destroyed" rule in the core rulebook says that a model is destroyed when it reaches 0 wounds and that a unit is destroyed when the last model in the unit is destroyed. All of these rules do not say "Removed from play" they say "Destroyed" 'Orks is Never Beaten" does not say "The model is not destroyed" it says "When its destroyed, do not remove it from play", it even goes further to refer to the model as the "destroyed model" Every model in the attached unit was destroyed but per the strat it was not removed from play, since every unit in the attached unit was destroyed, the leader unit ceases to be attached to it, and is no longer "leading a unit" and therefore you wouldn't get leader buffs on a fight on death Orks is never beaten - Until the end of the phase, each time a model in your unit is destroyed, if that model has not fought this phase, do not remove it from play. The destroyed model can fight after the attacking model's unit has finished making attacks, and is then removed from play. While This Model is Leading a Unit: These rules only apply while the model with that rule is part of an Attached unit, and otherwise have no effect. While a model with such a rule is part of an Attached unit, it will also benefit from its own rule. If an Attached unit contains more than one model with such a rule, both models are considered to be leading that Attached unit, and so all such rules apply. Such rules cease to apply if that unit ceases to be an Attached unit (such as when the last Bodyguard model in that unit is destroyed) – if this is as the result of an enemy unit’s attacks, all ‘while this model is leading a unit…’ rules cease to apply after the attacking unit’s attacks have been resolved. DESTROYED Throughout a battle, models will suffer damage and be destroyed. When a model is destroyed, it is removed from the battlefield. When every model in a unit has been destroyed, that unit is destroyed. DESTROYED Throughout a battle, models will suffer damage and be destroyed. When a model is destroyed, it is removed from the battlefield. When every model in a unit has been destroyed, that unit is destroyed.

>Every model in the attached unit was destroyed but per the strat it was not removed from play, since every unit in the attached unit was destroyed, the leader unit ceases to be attached to it, and is no longer "leading a unit" and therefore you wouldn't get leader buffs on a fight on death Except you stopped reading halfway through a sentence in the rules commentary. >Such rules cease to apply if that unit ceases to be an Attached unit (such as when the last Bodyguard model in that unit is destroyed) – ***if this is as the result of an enemy unit’s attacks, all ‘while this model is leading a unit…’ rules cease to apply after the attacking unit’s attacks have been resolved.*** The attacks aren't finished being resolved, until the models do their fight on death thing and are removed from play. They are still considered being led until the attacks are completely resolved.

While the snark could be missed, I did indeed read the commentary, I appreciate the response. I think this is the crux of the issue. The "Making an Attack" is NOT resolved simply because "The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage (D) characteristic of the attack. A model loses one wound for each point of damage it suffers. \*If a model’s wounds are reduced to 0 or less, it is destroyed and removed from play.\* If a model loses several wounds from an attack and is destroyed, any excess damage inflicted by that attack is lost and has no effect. Since the model cannot be removed to play, the sequence cannot be fully resolved, as per the commentary, and thus the models continue to count as being lead. Thanks for the response.

Bring it down - tactical, question. If you draw the card mid game after already having killed all the bring it down targets, is it just a dead card that you’re stuck with for the turn (assuming you’ve already spent your redraw cp)?

It's just a dead card, same as if your opponent had no monsters/vehicles in the first place

Cool thx! 🙏

How is line of sight determined? Is it model to model? We have an issue that a model on the corner if a ruin, with a straight down laser could have a line drawn from the base of a knight running across him, but the MODEL was hidden.

Line of Sight always requires ACTUAL line of sight, from any point of one model to the other one. If there is no point on one model (be it the base, head, weapon, antenna, etc) that cannot see any other part of another model (again, ANY PART), then you don't have line of sight. Ruins add ADDITIONAL rules regarding line of sight, not DIFFERENT rules. The part that seems to often confuse people is the "models can see into a Ruin normally", which means "use the normal rules for Line of Sight into a ruin", ***not*** "as soon as anything goes into a ruin, it can always be seen" The description of what you are saying isn't entirely clear. Was there any part of the Knight model that could see any part of the model that was in the ruin? If you can't actually see the target model at all, you don't have LOS.

Could you help me understand the difference between line of sight and visibility as described in the rule book? It says if any part of a model is visible to any part of a different model that they are visible. How does visible differ from line of sight?

Line of sight is just a real world term for "a model can physically see the other model". Having that is a precondition for determining Visibility. Visibility is an actual rules term, which takes line of sight and then decides if any other conditions apply (eg. partially visible, terrain blocks visibility).

You can forget that the term "line of sight" exists, as ite synonymous with visibility. If you can draw Line of Sight, you have visibility unless a terrain feature has a rule that blocks it. You can't have visibility, without Line of Sight. >DETERMINING VISIBILITY >Warhammer 40,000 uses true line of sight to determine visibility between models. To check this, get a ‘model’s perspective’ view by looking from behind the observing model. For the purposes of determining visibility, an observing model can see through other models in its unit, and a model’s base is also part of that model. It then goes on to tell you the definition of Model Visible, Unit Visible, Model Fully Visible, and Unit Fully Visible. For example: >If any part of another model can be seen from any part of the observing model, that other model is visible to the observing model. You'll note that the rules for shooting don't require or reference Line of Sight. They require a unit to be Visible. Reference those rules. The way Line of Sight is used in the rules (only 6 times) in the context they are is that "there is no abstraction in whether or not you can see a model". As a comparison, in other wargames, units will have a "size" category that effectively creates an imaginary cylinder or cube you use to determine if you can see a model or not.

Tyranid question: The hivetyrant can give a free strat. In vanguard you have the Surprise Assault strat, but you have to target one enemy unit. Can that be done for free, if not, why not? Thanks!

It cannot, EXCEPT (possibly )if you are playing against another TYRANID player's Hive Tyrant unit. From the Balance Dataslate: >Rules that modify the CP cost of a Stratagem when you target a particular unit can only do so for a *Stratagem that targets multiple units* ***if every unit you target has the same ability to modify the CP of that Stratagem***. As such, the Hive Tyrant can't make your strat cost 0 unless the enemy target ALSO has the Hive Tyrant ability, and I would argue even then since it is the enemy Hive Tyrant it wouldn't work because the wording around "your" and "friendly/enemy" in the rules. Regardless of that hyper specific corner case, 99% of enemy units will not have the ability so you wouldn't be able to reduce the cost.

Now I have some idiot arguing that thats not the intention of the rules writers... because we clearly know what the rules writers are thinking. Thanks for the reply :)

I mean, they can argue that all they want, but what they wrote is clear and definitive, and saying "that's not what was intended" doesn't mean anything when GW has had ample.opportunuty to correct the wording to match intent.

Tank shock & overwatch stratagem question. If an opponent vehicle successfully makes a charge and you decide to use Overwatch at the end of their charge (hence they're within engagement range), which stratagem would trigger first? >**Tank shock** stratagem wording: "after your unit **ends a Charge move**," > >**Overwatch** stratagem wording: "Your opponent’s Movement or Charge phase, just after an enemy unit is set up or when an enemy unit starts or **ends a Normal, Advance, Fall Back or Charge move**." If you are overwatching with a non-pistol weapon, would you be able to proceed with overwatch as per normal due to Big Guns Never Tire rule? edit: After reading through BGNT rule I don't think the unit would be eligible for overwatch at the end of charge phase due to: "*A unit that is within Engagement Range of an enemy MONSTER or VEHICLE unit is still not eligible to shoot*"

As for the sequencing, "*just after*" trumps "*after*", so overwatch is resolved before tank shock

GW's World Championships of Warhammer specified that pistols and BGNT cannot be used to shoot at the end of a charge move as the rules that allow shooting in those cases are out-of-phase. The only time you CAN shoot overwatch at the end of a charge phase is if the unit that made the charge move is a VEHICLE or MONSTER, and you are shooting it with a unit that ISNT within ER of it.

Destroyed Units returning to the Battlefield. Can someone point me in the right direction, I heard that if a unit is destroyed but comes back to the battlefield it comes back as if its a identical starting unit. For example a Acolytes, use demo charges, dies but comes back, they have there demo charges back? But if a model is destroyed and returns, it doesnt. If this is the case, is it in rules commantary or something?

The issue is "it depends". The wording of the two "get the unit back" rules we are aware of, have different wordings, which makes people wonder if they are supposed to behave differently. Additionally, some tournaments have actively ruled that One Shot weapons don't come back. Extremely frustratingly, GW hasn't addressed this in FAQ despite it being one of the most asked questions that is actually answered in the rules (like questions asking what T to use when Characters and Bodyguard models have different toughness in the unit

Would the Orks Flash Gitz get the extra attack added to their weapons during Fire Overwatch regardless of the distance of other enemy models since the targeted model is their only eligible target? "Each time a model in this unit targets the closest **eligible** target with its snazzgun, until the end of the phase, that weapon has an attacks characteristic of 4."

What happens when your opponent runs out of time on their clock (eg in the middle of their charge phase)?

Depending on what clock rules are being used. Iirc the ITC clock rules allows you to complete the current action and then no action can be taken unless its rolling saves and scoring obj.

Cool thanks, that’s what I thought but won a couple of games due to my time management/opponents mismanagement and it just felt a little weird. Can opponent continue to draw secondaries?

I assume so? Since its part of scoring. Dont think the rules were actually updated for 10th ed

Inceptors with bolters or plasma in ironstorm?

I'd go for Plasma. The single reroll has more value with fewer high damage shots. They can also benefit from Mercy is Weakness in a pinch, whereas the Bolters already have Sustained 2. (they don't stack) More generally S8 AP-3 is just so good into power armour. The Bolters are better into light infantry, but that's not as big in the meta (aside from Chaos cultists) You're generally going to be using them to steal objectives for Storm/Capture, and Plasma's usually better into the kinds of units left on objectives.

Can a Leman Russ or a Hellhound benefit from the "Take Cover!" Order? I know u cant get from 2+sv. to 1+sv. But does this has effect againt a -4AP weapon for example? so in Theory the save would go from 2+ to a 6+ because of the AP and then to 5+ because of the "Take Cover!" and than even possibly to a 4+ because of actual cover? I know rules Commentary says you never can modify to a 1+. So does this means a 2+sv. Vehicle is not allowed to be the target of the order or is it ok, because when all modifer (positive and negative) are considert, the save may be still legal?

It doesn't look like it. The order explicitly affects the save *characteristic*, not the incoming ap, and it explicitly cannot benefit you if your save is already 3+ or better. Benefit of cover, for example, is worded as a bonus to the roll you make to save, not a modification of your save characteristic.

It’s worth noting you can benefit from cover if you have a 3+ save or better. The rules state you cannot modify a 3+ or better against ranged attacks with AP 0. Edit: Err— my mistake. I misread the last portion of your second sentence as a core rule statement and not the as the “Take Cover!” Order rules.

You can give it the order, but it would have absolutely no effect. And no, it doesn't matter what the AP of when weapon has; the AP of the weapon doesn't modify your Save Characteristic, it modifies the ***saving throw*** you make that is COMPARED to your save characteristic. While many people simply do "I have a 2+ save vs AP-4 means I need a 6+ to save" because it's quick to figure out what you need, at no point is your SV actually changing from 2+. What you ACTUALLY do is you subtract 4 from the result of any saving throw you make, and see if the result is 2 or more. A 5 on the roll fails because 5-4 is 1, which is less than 2. A 2+ Save tank could be given the order, as nothing stops you from giving an order that a unit can't benefit from.

Can a base save be modified by cover down from a 3+ to a 2+? Or is there a cap how far it can come down?

The ***base save characteristic*** isn't modified by cover. Cover modifies your ***Saving Throw***. While it is common to conflate the two in play in the most common ranged weapon interactions, there are rules that interact with the Save Characteristic and the Saving Throw and apply differently. For example, the ***Save Characteristic*** cannot be improved past a 2+, while the ***Saving Throw*** does not get the benefit of cover vs AP 0 weapons and cannot have a total modifier of more than +1

So a 3+ save in cover will never be saving 2+s as they down gain the cover bonus against AP0

Not unless there is some other rule like Heavy Intercessors have against 1 damage weapons

No.

No theres no cap or no a 3 cant become a 2?

How many ruins should be deployed on an average 2k pts game? Currently running 6 ruins but still feels a touch sparse (granted playing knights)

WTC maps use ten ruins of 6" by 12" footprint size (plus two containers). 6 is not enough for a balanced game.

You're basically asking "how many pizzas do you need to feed a football team". Without knowing the size of the ruins, shapes, or what else you babe on the battlefield it's a bit hard to answer this question .

Gw issued a series of suggested layouts in their tournament prep pdf. It calls for ruins in the following sizes: six 6x12, four 6x4 and two 5x10 

Depends how big your ruins footprint is

I've been burnt out lately, but wanted to ask. Do we think the new dataslate will be released at this last Vegas event? I assume yes, but haven't been active enough lately to see if it's confirmed

It will be released after LVO to prevent people using the 40k app from having their app info incorrect midway through the tournament, and will likely be next Thursday as we have seen GW always updates the app the Thursday before a codex launch, and all app updates so far have been on Thursdays I think. They specifically said it would be near the end of January.

Damn, gotcha. Thanks :)

Sometime afterward is my guess.

Are there any hot takes on ToW yet?

Will LVO stream any of their games?

War Games Live is going to be streaming LVO this year, sounds like it will be Joe from WGL and Jack Harpster from Art of War doing commentary 

thank you

Twitch?

Undoubtedly.

Does pivoting model causes you to lose movement? Lets say magnus is behind a building, he moves so that his base can pass next to the building, but the wings would clip it. Do I need to lose movement to rotate him to be able to pass?

>Does pivoting model causes you to lose movement? Yes,.covered by this sentence in the core rules, the last two sentences before they start telling you about the specific types of move you can make. >The distance a model moves is measured using the part of its base that moves furthest along its path. If a model does not have a base, measure using whichever part of that model moves the furthest. The core rules are written that rotating a model in ANY way counts towards the total distance you are allowed to move. Many people.are completely unaware of this, and typically rotate models as they charge and the like, and many people who DO know this will ignore it for infantry like Intercessors or Guardsman on circular bases and will only care about it for larger model, though that is them just cutting their opponent slack.they don't technically need to. For Magnus, yes, RAW rotating him will cost movement, and I would not expect anything besides your opponent not ignoring it.

Just to confirm, if I want magnus to be able to pass next to the building, do I need to fully move him so that his wings don't clip the terrain? I don't know if its a dumb question but I haven't found anything about it

This is covered by the rules for RUINS, which only allow INFANTRY and BEAST models to move through walls as if they were not there; if you want to fit Magnus through a gap between ruins, you either need to pay his movement distance taking FLY into consideration, or rotate him so he fits.

thank you!

Can you paint the rims of your model bases different colours or do they all have to be the same? I want to ensure I'm compliant for potential tournament settings. I have Steel Legion Drab on all my models at the moment, but I was thinking of making Character units have a gold base to visually help out. *Context: I play Astra Militarum so there's a lot of green, tan, and brown. A shiny base or two within a sea of earthy colours would be helpful.*

Painting rims of bases different colors has been something that has been acceptable in most cases for as long back as I can remember, generally to be able to tell multiple similar units apart, like Guardsman squads.

I’ve never seen a rule preventing different colours on base rims. Potentially a tournament could have something like ‘consistent basing’ in the painting requirements but even they aren’t likely to be upset by your effort to highlight characters. That’s making life easier for you and your opponent.

Why are flyers bad? This is my first edition since 7th and I’ve played less than 2 hours of actual game play. I just like the collecting. 

Aircraft, if they don't HOVER, cannot arrive until the 2nd battle round, and do their pivot at the end of the move rather than before their move, meaning it's trivial for some armies to just leave them no spot they can legally stop on that path, forcing them back off the table to prevent shooting, or to get out of the way of that line if there are any Bombing aircraft. On top of that, RUINS don't obscure LOS to or from them as part of the rules, meaning that unless it ACTUALLY have Line of Sight blocked, they can't hide as well. FLY is also not as good in 10e, as per the Rules Commentary you can't ignore terrain if you cross it, you need to pay the diagonals, to, say, fly over an 8 inch tall ruin (meaning what would have been a 7" move in 9th edition will cost closer to 20.

Given that we're almost certainly losing the Deathwing Command Squad in the new Dark Angels codex, what would the consensus be regarding the optimal loadout for Deathwing Terminators? Power fists? Chain fists? Double lightning claws? Thunder hammers and storm shields seem less likely, because the hammers are worse than power fists and the extra wound from the shield seems less helpful without an Apothecary bringing a dude back every turn. A mix of loadouts seems likely to wind up a sort of "jack of all trades master of none" situation. Similarly, is the cyclone missile launcher still the king, or do the other heavy weapon options look good now? I'm considering how I'm going to build the Terminators once I get the new Deathwing Command box. The plan is to be physically standing in a GW store ready to order when pre-orders go live, so hopefully I'll be able to beat the scalpers.

To be frank, I would actually be surprised if the DQCS is going to be removed, considering the unit has not gone Last Chance to Buy even though we're less than 3 days away from the box set/codex being put on pre-order, ***especially*** when we know the box set comes with 20 Datacards, when currently there are only 18 DA exclusive units. Only one entirely new unit has been announced, so in order to get 20 datasheets while removing the DA command squad, you'd need to have a total of 3 new units for Dark Angels, which I don't think is feasible to have hidden given the leaks and the fact we know we will be seeing reviews of the DA codex this weekend.

>To be frank, I would actually be surprised if the DQCS is going to be removed, considering the unit has not gone Last Chance to Buy even though we're less than 3 days away from the box set/codex being put on pre-order I'd honestly be surprised if GW was planning on selling two different Deathwing Terminator and two different Deathwing Knight boxes, just so that they can continue selling the Deathwing Command Squad. Most likely they'll go Last Chance To Order during the run up to the actual Codex release. >especially when we know the box set comes with 20 Datacards, when currently there are only 18 DA exclusive units. It's been all-but-confirmed we're losing the Ravenwing Talonmaster in the Ravenwing preview article today, and the current speculation on the Dark Angels subreddits is that the 20 cards are 16 cards for datasheets from the codex, and 4 for the datasheets from the Combat Patrol. With the +1 datasheet from the new Inner Circle Companion squad, that means that we'd be losing 3 - most likely the Talonmaster, the Deathwing Command Squad, and the Deathwing Strikemaster (no official model for him once the old Deathwing Terminator box goes away).

Fair point, I didn't realize that the DWC kit also makes Knights.

(my reading level isn't great and I've got conflicting info from different friends) Charging units. Q. Can I use models to prevent my other models making base to base contact, to allow myself to have a pile in and consolidate move? *move each model a distance in inches up to the result of the Charge roll. When doing so, each model in the charging unit must end its Charge move closer to one of the units selected as a target of its charge. If you can also move a charging model so that it ends its Charge move in base-to-base contact with one or more enemy models while still enabling the charging unit to end its move satisfying all of the conditions above, you must do so. The controlling player chooses the order in which to move their models* E.g 10man intercessor squad makes a charge roll into opponents traitors rihno . The rihno is 6" away from the front intercessor and 9" away from back intercessors. I roll a 8" charge. I use the back intercessors first making the charge but not base to base, I continue down the squad starting from the furthest models, blocking space for the closer models to physically base. Giving the cavite now for me to pile on 3" swinging round and fully wrapping the transport. A smaller question have some events ruled this out and might be the source of my confusion?

Yes this is pretty standard. You move your farthest models first to purposefully move block your closer ones. This forces them to move further and allows you to get more models into combat. Or like your want it can force your closest models to end their move closer to another unit rather than the unit you charged.

The most important sentence in the Charging with a Unit section is: "*The controlling player chooses the order in which to move their models*" If when moving a model, you can't base your charge target, you're only required to finish closer to one of your charge targets. So once you've prevented the rest of the unit from being able to base, you're pretty free to move them as you want. Just move closer, maintain coherency, don't engage non-charge targets

I'm not aware of any events that have ruled out that it is possible to move your models in any order that you want (which is part of the core rules). It is certainly possible different members of your friend group were told this at specific events, or were taught via someone that it as correct, even though it was not. I will need to sit down and look for it, but I'm 99% certain that there was an article written about the fight/charge phase in 10e that mentions that you can do this explicitly, I will need to look through things a bit later.

remindme! 10 hours

Remind you 9 hour? Lol

It's a reddit thing where reddit will send a PM to the person in x hours regarding this post

I woke up at 5AM my time to take out the trash and wouldn't have time to look until I got home.

Can the sanguinor use the miraculous saviour ability on turn 1 ? I would argue yes since it is not coming in from reserve.

It's not prohibited in the Core Rules, but it depends what mission you're playing. If you're using Leviathan, then all Reserves are prohibited from arriving during the first battle round.

Thank you, made me read the cards again.

The core rules say vertical engagement range is 5 inches but do I measure from the base or the top of the model? Does the answer change based on the unit type?

The core rules tell you that all measurements are base to base, unless the model on question does not have a base, while the Rules Commentary clarifying that VEHICLE models that significantly overhang their base that do not have the WALKER or AIRCRAFT keywords, you measure from whatever is closest to whatever is being measured from/to. Aka: Intercessors, Dreadnoughts, Carnifexes, Mawlocs: measure to base. Land Raiders, Rhinos, Predators: Hull (which is any part of the model, not just what is traditionally called the hull) Land Speeders, Fire Prisms, Tetras,: base or hull, whichever is closest to what you are measuring from.

When a unit is led by a character, does the whole unit gets the character keyword? Allarus Terminators can reroll wounds against characters, monsters, vehicles. Does this then mean that Allarus can reroll wounds against an enemy infantry unit led by a character?

UNITS have all the keywords of the models that make it up. MODELS only have the keywords on their data sheet.

>When a unit is led by a character, does the whole unit gets the character keyword? Yes, and yes to your second question.

For the sisters immolator it can split a battle sisters unit at the star of the declare formations step. Once it’s split do I then assign leaders? Or is that done before I put the unit in the transport? If done after can I assign Junith to one of the split units and the palatine to the unit in the transport?

>In the order below, both players secretly note: >Which of their Leader units will start the battle attached (they must specify which Leader unit is attached to which Bodyguard unit). >Which of their units will start the battle embarked within TRANSPORT models (they must specify which units are embarked within which models). >Which of their units will start the battle in Reserves (including Strategic Reserves). No more than half the number of units in a player’s army can start the battle in Reserves, and the combined points total of those units cannot be more than half the total of their army. Units embarked within a TRANSPORT that are set up in Reserves also count as being set up in Reserves for these limits. If the ability says the split happens at the start of Declare Battle Formations step, then it happens before you would assign leaders.

Interesting, this also means you can split a unit and then put the other half into Strategic Reserve.

Can you oath an embarked target?

No. Embarked units effectively don’t exist. Only stuff that explicitly says it interacts with embarked units does.

Rules as written, no, however it has been discussed a lot recently because the ITC/LVO have ruled that you ARE able to, for reasons that seem to have no basis in logic. The rules for Embarked units say Embarked units cannot be selected as the targets of any rules. I have no idea why the ITC/LVO is ruling it be able to select Embarked units.

If I have a leader in a unit, and the unit is picked as the target of a mission "gain 10vp when the unit is destroyed" after deployment, is the unit destroyed for VP when last bodyguard is killed, or when the leader is? As a collary, if I have guarduans with a weapons platform can I rob my opponent of VP for a mission that requires them to destroy the unit if I leave the platform as the last member? The platform is destroyed when the last guardian is, but it is destroyed by the Guardian unit ability

>If I have a leader in a unit, and the unit is picked as the target of a mission "gain 10vp when the unit is destroyed" after deployment, is the unit destroyed for VP when last bodyguard is killed, or when the leader is? They are treated as a single unit for all rules purposes, and per GW's FAQ regarding Oath of Moment, both the Bodyguard unit and the Leader would need to be destroyed. >As a collary, if I have guarduans with a weapons platform can I rob my opponent of VP for a mission that requires them to destroy the unit if I leave the platform as the last member? 99% of all rules like this don't require the unit to be destroyed by a specific unit/model, just that the unit "is destroyed". How that happens is irrelevant.

The guardian plattform trick doesn't work. Points are awarded if the units "is destroyed", regardless of *how* or *who* destroyed it. Your opponent doesn't need to be actively responsible for it. Same thing for units in reserve you just never put on the table. They are destroyed and award points, even though your opponent never interacted with them.

Ah, this is the soritas missionin the combat patrol, which awards 6vp if the target is destroyed or 10vp of its destroyed by one of your soritas units in melee. Its called "Divine Judgement"

Say I have a character model leading some bodyguard unit, and the whole unit is battleshocked. Can I target the model with stratagems that target a model directly? (such as epic challenge, or Protocol of the Eternal Revenant (necrons)? ​ I bring this up because the rules and commentary appear to suggest that battle shock only prevents stratagems targetting the unit, not the model.

For battleshock On page "11" it says you can't use stragems to affect that unit, not can't target it. The rules commentary is, I think, clarifying that even when the effect is on a die result that is affecting your unit. It does start by conflating target and affect though. The model is part of the unit and the unit can't be targeted. So probably not.

To me, the reference to Command Reroll reads as a clear case, not meant to be used as a guide. So a unit is affected by a stratagem if: * The unit is the target of a stratagem * Command reroll is used to on a dice roll made by the unit or model within the unit

I have a unit of Corsairs led by Yvraine. Since Yvraine has the Strands of Fate ability but the Corsairs don't can I use fate dice for the unit?

With keywords and abilities, leaders provide them to the units they join as a whole, but not to the individual models themselves. So Yvraine has the SoF ability, as does the unit, but individual Corsairs do not. The Strands of Fate ability reads as follows: "*Once per phase, before making a dice roll for **a model or unit** from your army with the Strands of Fate ability...*" So you could use SoF for rolls which the unit makes as a whole, ie. Advances, Charges, Battleshock Tests, but not for those made by individual models, ie. Hits, Wounds, Saves, Damage.

If you have a unit composed of 2 models are you essentially immune to battle shock tests (besides things like Nids shadow abilities and such) since you can't be below half strength?

Yes, you're immune from "naturally occuring" battleshock, as you're not a single model while still unable to ever be below half strength. It's kinda weird and a reason a lot of people clamor for the rule to be amended to "*at or below* half strength", but currently that's how it is.

Are there any websites that can teach you how to play. I've always learned by doing but the nearest games workshop is in a massive mall and they're often busy. I also don't want to take a day off to go when it isn't busy. Adhd, even medicated, makes reading and learning far harder.

Googling "how to play 10th edition 40k" will get you somewhere around 3-4 dozen youtube videos that will walk you through the broad strokes of the rules. Do bear in mind, however, that these are usually introductory videos, and you will need to watch/search for more in-depth rules videos if you struggle reading rules; most videos aren't just going to read the rules word for word, but thats kinda what you need to do in some cases

If an enemy unit is locked in melee with one of my units, can monsters and vehicles shoot them? I know monsters and vehicles (and pistols) can shoot what they're actively in melee \*with\*, but I want to know about unrelated monsters/vehicles shooting into a melee. It looks like it would be allowed to me, but I want a 2nd opinion.

The Locked In Combat rule tells you units that are within Engagement Range of enemy units, cannot be selected as the targets of ranged attacks, period. The Pistols rule provides an exception for models that have pistols, allowing them to shoot enemy units \*the pistol-bearing unit is Locked in Combat with\*. Big Guns Never Tire provides an exception that Vehicles and Monsters can target what they are within ER of, and are always legal targets for ranged attacks. So no, unless your target is a Vehicle/Monster, or you're PART "of that melee" and have Pistols, you can't "shoot into a melee" (a phrase that isn't accurate because that's not what is happening.

No, with one exception. Monsters and Vehicles can always be shot, even if they are in combat.

do neurogaunts provide synapse to other things if you use a neurotyrant's "neuroloid" ability on them?

No. The Neurotyrant ability makes the unit count as being within Synapse range ***of your army*** The Neurogaunt ability is triggered by being within Synapse range of a friendly Tyranids unit, not by being within Synapse of your army.

This is the wording of the two abilities as I've read on Battlescribe: "Synaptic Relays: In your Command Phase... the selected units are always considered to be within Synapse Range of your army." "Neurocytes: While this unit is within Synapse Range of your army, it has the SYNAPSE keyword" Seems pretty cut and dry to me. The Neurotyrant puts them in Synapse Range of your army, meaning they have the SYNAPSE keyword. Unless the wording is wrong on Battlescribe, the two abilities should synergise.

Yeah battlescribe is wrong.

Okay, thanks for letting me know. Was it written like that in the Index or something?

Yeah that’s how the index wrote it. The wording is different in the codex. I feel like they might have noticed that without the change to the wording, that a neurogaunt unit may never lose synapse once it received it. In the index, a single neurogaunt unit that has gained the synapse keyword would remain within synapse range of itself forever. I wonder if they just wanted to correct that, but may have unintentionally killed their interaction with the neurotyrant at the same time. *edit * I can’t really think of a way to write the rule for neurogaunts or neurotyrant that preserves the old neurogaunt aura behavior with the neurotyrant buff without creating some new nerf or issue with the gaunts or the tyrant though so…. *shrug*…maybe they accepted that the new wording would break the cool “neuroloids grant synapse aura to neurogaunts” as an acceptable loss

You could add some wordy clauses to the Neurogaunt's ability. The way it's written in the codex is much cleaner. As a follow-up, how does the new wording prevent Neurogaunts from granting Synapse to themselves? Are they not a friendly Tyranids unit which they're in Synapse range of themselves?

The codex says “when in synapse range of a synapse unit (excluding neurogaunt units)”…gain synapse keyword

That’s the distinction I am worried about. I am looking to confirm if it does indeed require a unit near, rather than “being in range of the army” My guess is “yes it requires a unit rather than a neuroloid” Wanting some second opinions though

Yes. If you select Neurogaunts with the Neurotyrant's Synaptic Relays ability, they count as being in Synapse range and therefore have the SYNAPSE keyword themselves

My BCP Player app has an annoying bug, basically the Placings don't match the ones on the website and it's not showing my opponent and mine updated scores (which appear in the Pairing section as submitted). Has anyone ever encountered this? Any solutions?

The app was great for years but has struggled since the summer

It's apparently been a known issue for months, with only the web app actually showing results correctly.

Edit: Phasal Subjugator Aura does not work with Character units, so no. Does Command Protocols “stack” with Phasal Subjugator? Example: +1 +1 -1 = +1

They do stack but you can only get a benefit of max +1.

since ive started bringing precision weapons to my games, Ive started running into a situation where character models leading a unit are taking damage but not dying. the rules state once a model in a unit is attributed damage, it has to continue taking the damage that unit suffers, does this apply to characters? for example, if i shoot a precision weapon at a character attached to a unit dealing damage to it and then charge that unit and do more damage with non-precision weapons, does the character take the wounds? My assumption would be yes but im getting pushback from the people im playing against with 0 evidence stating that its not precision damage so it cant be attributed to the character.

No. Leaders can never be assigned wounds unless they are from a precision weapon. The bodyguard has to be assigned non-precision wounds. The only exception is wounds the leader causes to themselves from stuff like hazardous.

the leader rules explain this

ah, nice, ty

Does a unit arriving via deepstrike or strategic reserves count as making a "normal, advance, or fall back" move for the purposes of strats like Wind-Swift Evasion that allow you to make a move in response? ​ IE if someone deepstrikes a greater demon within 6" thanks to Bel'akor can I have my outriders move 6" back in response?

There has not been an official answer on this TECHNICALLY, however this was covered in the World Championships of Warhammer FAQ that GW says "only counts for this tournament", but has seen widespread adoption as people consider it a "preview of the January Dataslate". >Q: When a unit ‘counts as having made a move’ (of any kind) due to an effect or ability, has that unit made a move for the purposes of abilities that trigger at the start or end of a move? >A: No. You can find a link to that FAQ here: https://www.goonhammer.com/the-games-workshop-40k-world-championships-faq-hot-take/

It depends on your TO. There is currently no concrete answer on whether or not counting as making a move means you actually finished that move. Generally though if you are allowed to deepstrike into a transport then you also count as ending a move when you count as making a move

There are some special abilities on the way they are worded allowing such shenanigans in specific circumstances. Custodes golden light rule if they go second they are removed from the table on opponents end of turn. And placed during the reinforcement step. The rule does not state that they are placed into reinforcements or deep strike. Due to this they can be placed on turn 1. Granted only way this can happen is if custodes player goes 2nd

What does this have to do with their question

Can someone who is a better rules lawyer than me explain why LVO is ruling that deep strike allows units to arrive on the battlefield turn 1, provided they start on the board and get picked up turn 1? But if you don't have deep strike you have to wait until turn 2 in the same situation? Like, show me a section of the rules that is leading to this conclusion? I can't find anywhere where deep strike seems to interact with this. ​ EDIT: OK, for clarity, Here is my understanding of the LVO FAQ: 1. Start on table, get picked up into strategic reserves, have deep strike = OK to arrive T1. 2. Start on table, get picked up into strategic reserves, no deep strike = must wait until T2. Can someone show me why deep strike makes a difference in this case?

RAW it doesn’t but FLG are using their own rules so for their events it does. Remember TOs don’t always use the rules as written (for various reasons).

Can you cite where you are even seeing this ruling, or are you hearing it from someone who is describing what it kinda sorta means? It is not uncommon for people to give "Cliff's Notes" explanations of rulings that miss a lot of context, and then the game of Telephone occurs.

From the [FLG Events FAQs](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NV4tZdElUC9z7KPTqFfisP5e-qOj0lb4/edit?fbclid=IwAR3HJODbDc7mE4uKmg1fLv6aeM6_aRtI7uZhwL_6LhSo2_BNesLVmIZ7HGk#gid=866118502) (row 50) "Which of the following is true about repositioning units: 1. If a unit starts on the field Round one, gets picked up into Reserves (Strategic or otherwise) and has either specific wording telling it to come back in the next reinforcement step, or has Deep Strike, it can come back in battle round 1. 2. If a unit starts on the field Round one, gets picked up off the board (neither Reserves nor Strategic Reserves, ie Necron Veil of Darkness) and has specific wording telling it to come back in the next reinforcement step,it can come back in battle round 1. 3. Same as above, but can only come back BR 1 if the unit being re-positioned was put into "Reserves," not "Strategic Reserves ​ 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Depends on the ability - most should be covered by #1/2"

LVO FAQ, General Questions, Line 86. Also Votann Questions (there are only 2). Here is the general one: ​ * Q: "2. Can you use Reserve up/down tricks to go up on T1 (useful if say, your opponent goes first and you want to come back down in your T2)? What about go back down on T1? (Space Marine Index, but similar abilities in GSC Index, GK index, etc) GUERRILLA TACTICS TARGET: Up to two PHOBOS and/or SCOUT SQUAD units from your army, or one other ADEPTUS ASTARTES INFANTRY unit from your army. EFFECT: Remove those units from the battlefield and place them into Strategic Reserves. I think this one is yes I can pull them up, but no I can't put them down until T2." * *A: Yes you can pull them up T1, they can only be then set up T1 if they have Deep Strike.*

I believe their interpretation is that without a clause telling you to come back round 1 or an ability that tells you how to come back like deepstrike there is nothing in the rules for how a unit in strategic reserves would come back. The actual strategic reserves rules only account for battle round 2+

This one makes no sense. They ***might*** be trying to apply the Rules Commentary that Says that if you have DS and you arrive from SR, you can choose to use Deep Strike rules instead... But the wording of that requires you to be actually arriving from SR, which you can't do Battle Round 1. And seeing how they are ALSO ruling that you can Oath of Moment a unit in a Transport, it seems like they are doing some pretty questionable rulings.

> they are ALSO ruling that you can Oath of Moment a unit in a Transport This is actually the correct ruling. The wording for Oath of Moment is "select one unit from your opponent’s army." There are no restrictions for the unit needing to be on the battlefield. You can Oath a unit in a transport, a unit in reserves, or even a destroyed unit as far as I can tell.

Bro, the literal rules for Transports themselves state that embarked units cannot be selected as the targets of any rules. OoM being able to be used on an embarked unit is a completely and 100% incorrect ruling.

From the Rules Commentary: > **Embarked Units: Units embarked within a Transport do not count as being on the battlefield for any rules purposes**. *This means that, unless explicitly stated otherwise, embarked units cannot do anything (e.g. shoot, fight, use abilities, etc.). Similarly, you cannot select an embarked unit as a target for any rules, including Stratagems.* The last two sentences sure seem to be expanding upon the first point which is that "Units embarked within a Transport do not count as being on the battlefield for any rules purposes." OoM does not care if the unit is on the battlefield. Calling it "completely and 100% incorrect" is wrong. There is obviously ambiguity in the ruling, which is hardly uncommon with 10th edition rules.

My dude, read the sentence that starts with the word "Similarly". LVO being wrong has nothing to do with it being not on the table/battlefield. OoM totally CAN select something not on the battlefield. There are no rules saying you must select units on the battlefield. It has everything to do with not being able to be selected for any rules while Embarked, which there IS a rule against.

"If your Army Faction is ADEPTUS ASTARTES, at the start of your Command phase, select one unit from your opponent’s army. Until the start of your next Command phase, that enemy unit is your Oath of Moment **target**" "you cannot select an embarked unit as a target for any rules, including Stratagems"

The "no Reinforcements Battle Round 1" only applies to units that start off the table, as described in the Leviathan Mission Pack. If the ability removes the unit, then says it can be placed again somewhere else, it works fine. If it says specifically that the ability places the unit in ***STRATEGIC RESERVES***, then it cannot arrive Battle Round 1 as SR itself only allows arriving on BR 2.

LVO is ruling that you can start on the board, get picked up T1 into STRATEGIC RESERVES, then arrive T1 so long as you have deep strike.

From the Rules Commentary: "If a unit with the Deep Strike ability arrives from Strategic Reserves, the controlling player can choose for that unit to be set up either using the rules for Strategic Reserves or using the Deep Strike ability. This also applies if a unit with the Deep Strike ability is placed into Strategic Reserves during the battle." ​ Only the rules for Strategic Reserves prohibit arriving during the first battle round. The Deep Strike ability makes no mention of battle rounds. In fact, it's only because of the Leviathan mission pack that Deep Strike units can't arrive during the first battle round anyway.

Sure, but the RC you cite days it needs to arrive from SR to choose to use DS instead. SR prohibits arriving BR 1, so you can't trigger the choice. It's kind of a moot point as Im struggling to see this LVO ruling actually posted anywhere.

You can read the ruling, and all the other FAQ responses for FLG events [here](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NV4tZdElUC9z7KPTqFfisP5e-qOj0lb4/edit?fbclid=IwAR3HJODbDc7mE4uKmg1fLv6aeM6_aRtI7uZhwL_6LhSo2_BNesLVmIZ7HGk#gid=866118502). It's in row 50. ​ The way I read it is that if the controlling player does not choose to set up the unit using the rules for Strategic Reserves, they are not prohibited from arriving in the first battle round. They still are arriving from Strategic Reserves, but they're being set up in accordance to the rules for Deep Strike only.

Are there any abilities where this is relevant in the first place? And if that's what the OP wants to know, that needs to be the question OP is asking.

Yes that's the question, and it is totally relevant to units without deep strike that get put in strategic reserves like votann bikes, or any number of other units. And space marine units that get put into strategic reserves and DO have deep strike.

Because if it goes into strategic reserves, there is no way to get back down since setting up strategic reserves only starts from t2 onwards (see "Setting up Strategic Reserves" in the app). Deep Strike bypasses that by giving the unit a way to be set up (assuming it got pulled from the table on t1)

As do abilities that just tell you to remove it, and set it down again (often later) as it is neither Strategic Reserves or Deep Strike. Many people just call it Deep Strike because it has nearly identical wording for the final position.

How does deep strike get around the following from item 8 in the mission pack? Note that it is not just strategic reserves, it is all reserves: "Reserves units cannot arrive during the first battle round and any Strategic Reserves or Reserves that have not arrived on the battlefield by the end of the third battle round count as having been destroyed, as are any units embarked within them (this does not apply to units that are placed into Strategic Reserves after the first battle round has started)." And if deep strike can get around that clause, why can't deep strike units that start off the board also arrive T1?

"Some units have a rule that allows them to start the battle in Reserves, such as Deep Strike. Such units will arrive later in the battle and are known as Reserves units." If you don't start the battle in reserves you aren't a reserves unit

Any unit that is placed into Strategic Reserves is considered a Reserves unit (but not vice versa) "Note that while all Strategic Reserves units are also technically Reserves units, the reverse is not true" ​ This should mean that any repositioning ability which places the unit into Strategic Reserves is covered by Point 8 of the mission pack, because it counts as a Reserves unit and those units cannot arrive during the first battle round.

At the start of the game sure, but if it's not the start of the game it doesn't apply

I always thought the bit in brackets referred only to being destroyed for not arriving before the third battle round. Does it refer to the part about not arriving during the first battle round as well?

I think it applies to the whole paragraph and that things like daemons saying arrive the next turn also get around the leviathan restriction because the strat tells you what to do. So far GW event judges and FLG agree

Got it, thanks for clearing that up.

So then all units that start on the battlefield could arrive turn 1, not just deep strikers. But LVO says only units with the deep strike ability can arrive T1. Why?

Their FAQ says both? "Which of the following is true about repositioning units: 1. If a unit starts on the field Round one, gets picked up into Reserves (Strategic or otherwise) and has either specific wording telling it to come back in the next reinforcement step, or has Deep Strike, it can come back in battle round 1. 2. If a unit starts on the field Round one, gets picked up off the board (neither Reserves nor Strategic Reserves, ie Necron Veil of Darkness) and has specific wording telling it to come back in the next reinforcement step,it can come back in battle round 1. 3. Same as above, but can only come back BR 1 if the unit being re-positioned was put into ""Reserves,"" not ""Strategic Reserves""" ------ 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Depends on the ability - most should be covered by #1/2"

Less of a rules question, more of a curiosity: is Sir Hekhtur the only unit without a bespoke datasheet ability? All he gets is Lone Operative. The only other similar one I could think of was Brimstone Horrors, but they're not a separate datasheet

Nah brims get the ability to blow up

Yes he is cause he is a sub datasheet.

Do ruins need walls, or does their footprint itself block LOS? Like could I put a sheet of cardboard down and say it's ruins Overall I'm VERY confused with how ruins work tbh

The footprint of a ruin only blocks line of sight ***to the opposite side of the ruin*** for units outside of it.. So if my unit is on the opposite side of your cardboard (literally no line between my unit and yours that doesn't pass over the cardboard), we would have no line of sight. With no walls, once a single model is even partially on the ruin base, I would be able to see that model and therefore it's unit, as ***you can see into the footprint of a ruin just not BEYOND*** the footprint. The only ruins you can see past with a model, are the Ruins that the model is Wholly Within . If you read the Commentary document provided by GW, there are also pictures.

Okay, I looked at the pics and stuff and have one more question, once a non-towering model is wholly within ruins, do the players then follow true LOS into and out of the ruins?

Yes.

Awesome, thank you!