Lantz’s Antzwers: Skimming A Familiar Challenge
Me again. Here to answer your rules questions. Today we have a flyer question and, appropriately, two Chaos Space Marine questions. Since the new codex for the CSM was recently released, I’m not shocked by the amount of CSM questions I’m getting. Again, if you have a 40k rules question or just want an argument settled in your gaming group, drop me a line (email address is at the bottom of this post.) Whether it be in an email response or posted here, I will answer any and all questions. I’m going to streamline things a little more so I can get more questions in without boring you all to death. So let’s get to it, shall we?
“What if I have multiple champions of Chaos in my unit that have to challenge? Does my opponent get to pick which one he accepts? If he accepts does he have to fight them all in a gauntlet of challenges? If he accepts one and refuses another does he go to the back of his unit and not participate in combat?” ~Tad L.
To answer this question, please open your Chaos Space Marine codices to p28. Under the Champion of Chaos special rule, second paragraph states, “A model with the Champion of Chaos special rule must always issue and accept a challenge whenever possible.”
So when is it possible? Look to the BYB on p64. Under the Issuing A Challenge section, second paragraph states, “To issue a challenge, nominate a character in one of your units locked in the combat to be the challenger.”
Answer: A pretty open and shut case; you choose one of your Champions to issue a challenge. Any other Champions will automatically participate in the rest of the combat.
“Can I land my flyer or Skimmer on my friend’s fortification?” ~Anonymouse
This is a tricky one. If your enemy’s occupying their fortification, I think it’s obvious you can’t land on that fortification as you can’t be within an inch of enemy units. However, what happens if it’s unoccupied? Your units can get inside; it’s essentially neutral ground.
Answer: Honestly I’m having a hard time finding quotes in the book to justify this one way or another, but based on the fact that your infantry can occupy/get on top of enemy fortifications if they’re unoccupied, I don’t see a reason why a Flyer/Skimmer couldn’t end up on one as well.
“What is a combat familiars initiative step for C:CSM?” ~Doug H.
If we look to the Combat Familiar entry on p67 of the CSM codex under Chaos Rewards you’ll see it reads as, “A model with a combat familiar makes two additional Strength 4 AP- Melee Attacks. The combat familiar is always assumed to be on the same base as its master. If you wish to represent it separately you can. However, the model itself plays no part in the game; if the model gets in the way, simply move it to one side.”
What I take away from this is intent, but the question for how this intent is interpreted is up for debate. To start as a basis, the argument for the model’s Initiative is pretty solid. The rules state the familiar doesn’t really exist, is typically on the same base as its user and states that the user makes two additional attacks suggesting that that they would simply be added to his/her profile.
On the other hand, there is a lot of Initiative 10 extra attacks going on in 6th Edition and this has merit as well. The largest reasoning for this argument to me is the points cost. 15pts for two S4 AP- attacks seems pretty steep for base initiative and would be a well-rounded points cost if it were Initiative 10 to me. But an argument against this reasoning would be the Plasma Pistol…why in the hell does GW consistently think this thing is worth 15pts?
Answer: I feel there’s just too much against the Initiative 10 argument. As I’ve said before, 40k is a passive ruleset and on average won’t go in your favor. My answer is the model’s base initiative until we get an official ruling otherwise.
And that’s it for now folks. Stay tuned and keep those emails coming to sinaura40k(at)gmail(dot)com