Tyranid Rules Fix

[The Swarmlord]

Hi, I have several questions about rules involving Tyranids. Recently, I purchased a Swarmlord/Flyrant kit with the purpose of making a Flying Tyrant. My question is:

The Codex does not state (there is no rule) that if I choose to add wings, I lose a set of arms. Likewise, Armybuilder allows me to build a Tyrant that has wings, a bonesword/lashwhip, AND a heavy venom cannon. The flying option is an ARMOR (carapace) upgrade, not an ARM/WEAPON upgrade.

My question is: If I customize my Flyrant to have wings and two sets of arms (bonesword/whip. heavy venom cannon) is it tournament legal?

Next: This is a question that revolves around grammar, and depending on its interpretation determines a squad of Warrior's equipment. A Tyranid Warrior's equipment options state:

"One Tyranid Warrior in the brood may exchange its devourer for a venom cannon."

 The next line states: "

The entire brood may exchange its devourers for Deathspitters, etc."

Upon asking Battlegrounds tournament judges, they ruled that it is not legal to run a brood of Warriors equipped with Deathspitters and one venom cannon. I disagree with this ruling completely. Grammatically, if this ruling were true, the rule must be rewritten to say:

"The entire brood MUST exchange its devourers" for Deathspitters, etc, and there would need to be a separate rule excluding the option of a venom cannon if Deathspitters or another gun is taken.

The way I interpret "The entire brood may exchange its devourers" means that the entire squad has the option of exchanging its equipment, but that the entire squads equipment does not need to be universal (entirely one gun).

This interpretation is incredibly important due to the bonesword pack release, where it should be possible to have warriors with boneswords, deathspitters, and a venom cannon all in the same squad.

To back up my claim: The codex itself visually depicts a squad of warriors with both Deathspitters AND a venom cannon in the same squad. (PG 78, bottom right squad) If this equipment is ineligible, the game creators are falsely advertising equipment selections.

Next: Army builder allows you field warriors equipped with dual Boneswords, wielding Deathspitters simultaneously, with one warrior in the squad with a Venom Cannon and bonesword pair.

I'm willing to fight this rule fix all the way to GW.

[Ed]

.

[Benjamin]

I don't have a Tyranid codex on me, so I'm going with what I'm reading here.

Heh. If it's a grammar battle with Sam you want, I can tell you that you're bringing a knife to a gunfight.

I think I already know what he'd say. It doesn't say "The entire brood, except for the aforementioned Warrior." There's no exception to "the entire brood" granted, whether you believe it "may" or "must". Furthermore, you're implying a connection from one sentence to the next. If a model doesn't have a devourer to trade, then the entire squad cannot upgrade, as one model is unable.

Two tips for the future, though. When it comes to rules, never *ever* cite Army Builder. Ever. It's a good tool for helping to build lists, but it's far from perfect. Also, don't cite the pictures in the rulebook either, even if the picture shows a real model. My Chaos Marine codex shows a picture of them killing things, and that never happened on the table.

[keithb]

You are correct about the Hive tyrant,  You can have bonesword, lashwhip, and a heavy venom cannon AND wings.

However, with the warriors. You are not reading it correctly.  It does state, the entire squad may (meaning optional),  Must would imply that ALL warriors ALWAYS have to upgrade.  The fact that is says "May" does not mean that each warrior has the option, just that the entire squad has the option.

I don't believe this should block you from taking the other upgrade, but you might have to eat 5 points.

[Loranus]

I don't even see what the confusion about the flying Hive Tyrants is. You can Choose to Have wings you don't lose a set of arms is correct that is because it is an Optional Upgrade that specifically says you can take one of these. You can take wings as long as you do not take any of the other options your only allowed to choose one from. Example: Can't have Armoured Shell and Wings.

So Yes if you do that you have a 255 point Hive Tyrant with wings, bonesword/lashwhip, and a Heavy Venom Cannon and its tournament legal.

Next: This is a question that revolves around grammar, and depending on its interpretation determines a squad of Warrior's equipment. A Tyranid Warrior's equipment options state:

"One Tyranid Warrior in the brood may exchange its devourer for a venom cannon."

 The next line states: "

The entire brood may exchange its devourers for Deathspitters, etc."

Upon asking Battlegrounds tournament judges, they ruled that it is not legal to run a brood of Warriors equipped with Deathspitters and one venom cannon. I disagree with this ruling completely. Grammatically, if this ruling were true, the rule must be rewritten to say:

"The entire brood MUST exchange its devourers" for Deathspitters, etc, and there would need to be a separate rule excluding the option of a venom cannon if Deathspitters or another gun is taken.

The way I interpret "The entire brood may exchange its devourers" means that the entire squad has the option of exchanging its equipment, but that the entire squads equipment does not need to be universal (entirely one gun).

This interpretation is incredibly important due to the bonesword pack release, where it should be possible to have warriors with boneswords, deathspitters, and a venom cannon all in the same squad.

To back up my claim: The codex itself visually depicts a squad of warriors with both Deathspitters AND a venom cannon in the same squad. (PG 78, bottom right squad) If this equipment is ineligible, the game creators are falsely advertising equipment selections.

Next: Army builder allows you field warriors equipped with dual Boneswords, wielding Deathspitters simultaneously, with one warrior in the squad with a Venom Cannon and bonesword pair.

I'm willing to fight this rule fix all the way to GW.

I'm not a judge and so this holds no weight but this is kinda insulting and an unsportsmanlike Jab at the tournament judges.

The rule in the book as you put it

The entire brood may exchange its devourers for:

Rending Claws          Free
Spinefists                Free
Deathspitters           5 Points Per Model
An Additional Set of Scything Talons              Free

All the mumbo Jumbo you put up there is more confusing because let me point out how they did the
Grey Knights Close Combat Weapons.

Any model may replace his Nemesis Force Sword with any of the following:
Nemesis Force Halberd or Daemon Hammer                        Free
A Pair of Nemesis Force Falchions                                    5 Points

This would say let you put in 2 Halberds a Daemon Hammer and 2 Force Swords.

Yours specifically points out that the entire squad if they want Deathspitters must exchange Devourers and cost 5 points more per a model.

I don't have page 78 or 79 in the PDF I am looking at right now its missing in every PDF I have looked at but its probably there in the Hard Copy you have in your hands so I will point out another photo with a Squad of Tyranid Warriors that you Can Not build in Army Builder but they have a picture of is on page 68 at the Top they have a set of 3 Tyranid warriors one with Rending Claws, one with Deathspitter, and one with a Devourer. The photos are more of a Graphical viewing of how they look Put together and Painted than to clarify rules. Again I don't have page 78 in front of me so I can't tell what type of picture it is.

Games Workshop has not posted anything in the Tyranid FAQ concerning Tyranid Warriors and Upgrades so It is left to the Judges at each Tournament to judge accordingly. The Judges at Battlegrounds also consult the INAT Faq for rulings not clarified in the GW Faqs but nothing is specified in there either.

Army Builder itself is not Supported by Games workshop and is produced by Lone Wolf Development. And even then THEY don't make the Warhammer 40k Module for Army Builder that is handled by http://www.ab40k.org/ who are constantly updating and changing stuff in the Module but even then things they put in are wrong.

Example: If you put a Thunderfire Cannon in a Space Marine army and look at the Army List they print the ruling stated that hits are randomly rolled between gun and Crew. Army Builder states on a  1-4 Crew is Hit on a 5-6 gun is hit. If you look at the Rule book on page 55  its the Opposite on 1-4 the Gun is hit and on a 5-6 the Crew is hit.

Army Builder has flaws and this is why Lists must be Double Checked and Brought to tournaments with your codex and the rulebook and then any arguments after that are decided by the judges.

[Benjamin]

I don't even see what the confusion about the flying Hive Tyrants is.

Check out the model closely and you'll see it. He's concerned in a roundabout way about the model being WYSIWYG.
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1460211a

Also, Swarmlord, you should know the odds of Sam reading this are like zero percent. He's never on the forum, regardless of how much I tell him to check it.

[Ed]

My dot reply was better then all yours.

[Benjamin]

My dot reply was better then all yours.

I thought it was a supreme example of minimalist reply.

[Achillius]

I think I'm with Swarm on this one.
If a model does not have a devourer it cannot upgrade it to a deathspitter no?
The way I read this it says, you may swap to the other weapons but if you do, everyone in the brood eligable for the swap e.g. has a devourer, needs to make the change.

So if a model is upgraded to a venom cannon it no longer has the devourer. Then the entire brood may then exchange their devourers, spinefists, talons or claws leaving the one without a devourer with his venom cannon, because he cannot.

The Venom cannon can therefore always be in a squad, its just a question of what everyone else has, which by the way this is worded must be the same.

If BG say you can't do this, then for their tournies that's it. without INAT or GW FAQ's they have to make a decision, and that may not always be the one we want  .

Cheers,
Alan

[Ed]

My dot reply was better then all yours.

I thought it was a supreme example of minimalist reply.

oh once I read he questioned Sam i stop reading, but i thought it was worth my time to post something.

[The Swarmlord]

@ Ed: ...

@ Ben: To lighten the mood of this thread, I'd like to edit that I'm bringing a Claw to a Gunfight. I'm tyranid, after all.

@ Loranus: It was not my intention to be insulting or unsportsmanlike, and if that undertone or association came across in my rant, then I apologize to the BG judges. In regards to the warrior issue, the BG judge's ruling was respectful, fair, and polite, traits that are always to be appreciated and shown courtesy. My disagreement may be aggressive, but it was not meant to be disrespectful.
This topic is frustrating and upsetting, partially due to the release of the Flyrant kit with a perceived WYSIWYG problem. The trade-off of a set of arms could cripple the potential of the Flyrant. For an expensive model, cost wise and points, it's crushing to see this issue. My intention is not to jab at the judges, but to see how other's interpret these rules, and whether the 40k community thinks differently of it. Often the BG judges consult the community on very specific out-of-place rule calls. I felt that others might think the same as I do about this rule fix, and it would be worth getting up on the soapbox for awhile.

@ Achillius: I agree with you, and I view the Warrior issue similarly. I see the upgrading of the squad as the order in which the rules are printed in the codex. To visualize it: the squad starts with devourers, one may be upgraded to a venom cannon, then the entire brood (that remain) may be upgraded to Deathspitters. In regards to when it comes to BG's final ruling, I must humbly agree on this matter. For their tournies that is simply how it goes: preferred ruling or not, it's their tourney.

P.S: In regards to PG78, it depicts a photo mock-battle of Hive Fleet Behemoth fighting Space Marines on an ice planet. (Macragge?) It just didn't make sense the codex would depict a battle set up with WYSIWYG issues.

As for Army Builder, point taken.

[Benjamin]

Don't get too discouraged about the issue. There are two things you should know.
1) Sam has been wrong about 40k before. So far, I count twice ever. One of those was an INAT ruling, so that hardly counts, but I still I count it.
2) It really depends on how and when you ask him. If you ask before/after a tournament, the exchange can be much freer.

This is definitely a case wherein GW's unclear rules strike again. What amazes me is how consistently GW can write a rule that's crystal clear to two polar opposite arguments. I've argued from what I believe would be Sam's POV, but I actually don't think the upgrades are a big deal. But I'm not a strong rules guy at all. I get the jist, I go with my guts.

About the WYSIWYG issue, you can ask TOs before any event if your model is okay. Typically, if you're using a model out of the box like you plan to, there's no big deal at all. Everyone understands the limitations of GW boxes. You likely will be allowed to use the model with all upgrades purchased, even if the model can't display them all. Personally, I'd rather see a cool model across the table than one that is 100% accurate.

[Swarm Lord]

I have played 40k in many different venues and this is the first time I have seen this issue.  This issue definately affects me as well since I have a squad of 3 warriors with death spitters and 1 barbed strangler.  Looks like I have to build another warrior to cover myself...

[Sam]

Asking before the tournament is definitely the way to go. In the absence of a clear FAQ ruling on this exact subject, I went to the Ork FAQ. There, they explicitly allow the Nob to upgrade his choppa to a power klaw before the entire mob trades in their sluggas and choppas for shootas, creating a mob with a whole bunch of shootas and one power klaw. With that as precedent, I believe that having a venom cannon and deathspitters is legal. If someone has a specific rule that prevents this (beyond just grammar arguments), please let me know. Otherwise, it's legal for Saturday.