Page 1 of 2

Warhammer 40K INAT FAQ version 2.1 (FINAL) Released!

PostPosted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:55 pm
by Matthias
This is the final version (v2.1) of the Independent National Warhammer 40,000 Tournament FAQ (INAT FAQ), produced primarily for AdeptiCon 2009.

As promised, we have taken all the feedback that we received from a variety of sources across the internet regarding the initial 2.0 release and we have done our best to incorporate as much of it as we could.

Barring any major spelling or formatting issues (which is always a possibility despite all the cross-checking) this will effectively be the FINAL version of the INAT FAQ for before Adepticon 2009 in April.

Please note that several rulings (some rather major) have been changed or reversed since the 2.0 version due to feedback. Rulings in the 2.1 document that have been significantly altered from the 2.0 version have been denoted as such with a plus sign ( + ) before the question # and have their answer text colored red (just like last year) to make it easy for you to spot what has been changed.

This document WILL be in effect for all 40K events at AdeptiCon, so its highly recommended that all attendees who plan to play in a 40K event look at the sections relating to general gameplay and your particular army. This FAQ will be used by the rules judges to resolve rules disputes.

Click here to download the INAT FAQ ver 2.1 now!

Note: This document is, of course, entirely unofficial, but we believe that it provides a valuable tool for tournament organizers and 40K players in general to use to resolve some of the thorny issues that pop up during play. It isn`t meant to replace the GW FAQs in any way - in fact, the questions answered in the GW FAQs are not addressed in this document.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:18 am
by getupandgo
The picture on page 9 of the orks running from the pathfinders makes me happy.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:17 am
by Generalissimo_Fred
Adepticon 09 - the year old codices died. If there is one thing to gain from this faq it is any old codex is screwed because of the incessent use of RAW to the Nth degree. Grey Knight assault cannons are 3rd edition relics and C'tan can be instant killed by new weapons. Newer codex trumps old and armies that have not had their Codex rewritten get shafted.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:42 am
by Cptn_Snuggles
Fred - what else stands out?

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:34 pm
by Brian
5th edition '08 killed the old codices.

The INAT FAQ is more like an epitaph.

Although Witch Hunters and Space Wolves are doing just fine so even the previous statements are generalizations.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:40 pm
by Janthkin
Generalissimo_Fred wrote:Adepticon 09 - the year old codices died. If there is one thing to gain from this faq it is any old codex is screwed because of the incessent use of RAW to the Nth degree. Grey Knight assault cannons are 3rd edition relics and C'tan can be instant killed by new weapons. Newer codex trumps old and armies that have not had their Codex rewritten get shafted.


Grey Knights Force Weapons are also 3e relics, and are much more useful than the new ones that inflict "Instant Death."

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:03 pm
by Generalissimo_Fred
Eminently less desireable than an assault cannon that is H4 rending, but nice try.

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:32 pm
by Ed
Space Wolves end up being very very odd. They get cheap 3+ stormshields and can get the new varieties of landraiders/landspeeders, but they have ancient wargear and unit rules.

If Space Wolves take a vanilla Land Raider, does it use the new Machine Spirit?

I know the crux of the blame lies at GW's feet, because of their ridiculous inconsistency and refusal to fix glaring problems between codexes that now span 3 editions of the game.

Ed

PostPosted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:33 pm
by Janthkin
Generalissimo_Fred wrote:Eminently less desireable than an assault cannon that is H4 rending, but nice try.

For a stand-alone GK army? Yeah, although rending is not what it used to be. But it makes the GK Master an excellent addition to any Imperial force. As a bonus, he's got the better psychic hood, too.

More to the point, how is it any worse than last year? GKs weren't using the "good" assault cannons then, either, were they?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:06 pm
by pheobus29
Question on Epidemius (Epi).
In the team tournament there is a rule that says affects only carry over to like armies. I'm paraphrasing here. Epi's abilty affects the table, and explicitly says that the tally goes up when say an opponent's Plague Marines kill models, and furthermore that those Plague Marines also benefit from Epi's tally.

So, does Epi's abilty aide the enemy but not an allied Nurgle Marine force?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:00 pm
by Matthias
Any casualty inflicted by ANY model bearing the Mark of Nurgle (regardless of codex) count towards the Tally of Pestilence. This means that if you field Epidemius in a Chaos Daemons list and your Coalition partner (or an enemy player) is fielding Nurgle Space Marines from the Chaos Space Marine, all kills count and all units benefit from the Tally as it grows as long as Epidemius is on the table.

There are a couple of FAQ clarifications in the AdeptiCon INAT FAQ on page 26.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:00 am
by stormboy97
What about kugath the nurgle graeter daemon, he has a ranged poison attack, what str do you use for rerolling to wound purposes, his 6 or what?

PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:49 pm
by Turtle
it has no strength, so he gets no rerolls at all

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:52 am
by Werty
You may want to address the Chaos Dreadnought issue that has popped up. Particularly since Goatboy over at BoLS is planning on using it at your event. Click here for BoLS article. I personally haven't seen a good argument with a solid rulebook quote for a dread to not be able to see all around itself. I'd love to have Chaos dreads be more predictable too, as I play CSM. But, I just don't see it. Make your own call though.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 3:03 pm
by Arander
I'd like to second this. There's quite a long list of comments on the BOLS blog post, some for it, some against. Since it's fairly obvious that this will come up during games at Adepticon, I think its best the rules council be made aware and hopefully post their take on it before the event begins.