LVO 2019 Warhammer 40k Events Update

Hey everyone, Reecius here with a MASSIVE update for the LVO 40k events!

LVO and ITC Updates

Since the LVO 2018, we’ve been working on some projects to help facilitate a smooth and enjoyable tournament experience for the LVO and the ITC in general. As the global community of organized 40k players continues to grow, the needs of the participants become ever more sophisticated. It’s exciting to see things develop and evolve in this regard! Each season we take steps forward in both growth of participation and in offerings. We also want participants to have the most enjoyable experience possible at the LVO – or any ITC event – and so desire to get these out for you with plenty of time before the big event.

As always, participation in the ITC at local events does not require any of the following, but we provide them as tools for those TOs that choose to use them at their discretion. Check with your local organizer for information on how the guidance presented here will be implemented at your local events.

BCP List Uploader

Part of the tournament process is establishing baselines, such as baselines for participant conduct, baselines for terrain interpretations, as well as guidelines for the awesome new list uploader the fine gentlemen over at BCP have made for the community! Here’s the document for you to use as your list basis, and below is a great video explaining how to use it!

Your list must be uploaded for the LVO 40,000 Championships no later than 7:00pm PST, Friday the 25th of January, 2019 through the Best Coast Pairings app. No new rules materials will be allowed into the event that are released on or after January 8th, 2019.

The deadline to submit ITC Scores for this season is 11:59PM EST on Monday February 4th, 2019. Events after this point will not count for scores in the 2018 ITC season.

ITC Code of Conduct

We’re also rolling out our ITC Code of Conduct. This document is a guideline that has been built through the contributions of hundreds of Tournament Organizers from around the world with the aim of standardizing sportsmanship expectations – and what will happen if they are violated. These standards apply at any ITC events that choose to use them, and while discussing punishments and penalties is never fun, the goal is to provide a clear system of expectations so players can come to events confident that they will have a fair and an enjoyable experience.

LVO Terrain Guidelines

Terrain is one of the most important parts of a miniatures game, but one that is sometimes tough to standardize since so many of us have slightly different terrain interpretations based on local traditions. Additionally, as we have terrain that in many cases is significantly different than what players may be used to in their local areas, we wanted to roll this guidance out to set a common understanding for how we choose to play terrain at the LVO in order to facilitate fun and fair games. You can read the LVO/ITC General Terrain Guidelines here. We also plan on having guides for terrain placement at the LVO available for attendee reference, with further explanations to make it easy to focus on playing the game and not figuring out how the terrain works. The guideline linked above will be in place, and we have included some illustrative examples to help clarify intent in the article content below. The content below is not the whole thing, so make sure you read the whole document!


We make two modifications to the normal Ruins rules for our events. We have a type of Ruin at our events that is not commonly seen and so requires some extra explanations. We refer to a Ruin with all four walls and a roof which form an enclosed space as an Enclosed Ruin. Enclosed Ruins use the normal Ruins rules but with one house-rule we add to them for ease of play:

  • Units with the Fly keyword may not end their movement inside of an Enclosed Ruin unless they would normally be able to pass through the walls of a Ruin if they did not have the fly keyword, such as Infantry.

There are some rule interactions that create bad play experiences with models trying to fly into an enclosed ruin without this clarification. For example: Per RAW, a Flyer (such as a crimson hunter) would be able to end its move inside of an Enclosed Ruin if it completely fit inside, seeming to fly “through” the walls of the ruin unharmed. This causes frustrating model placements and abuses of the wobbly model guidance, and is not the intent of how our terrain is meant to be used, and is the reason why this rule is in effect.

Here is an example of an Enclosed Ruin we typically use.

And, here are some examples of normal Ruins that would NOT use the Enclosed Ruin house-rule that are commonly seen at our events:

These are not Enclosed Ruins because the walls and roofs do not form an enclosed space. If in doubt, discuss it with your opponent prior to playing the game and, of course, you can always call a judge.

Some of our buildings have natural openings in them that are quite large. If a model can naturally fit in to a ruin with such an opening, they may enter regardless of unit type. Example: the Knight in the picture below can actually walk into the Ruin in question and can therefore enter into it as it is not moving “through” the walls.

Additionally, there has been some confusion in the past on what types of buildings can be entered into versus which ones cannot.

The above buildings would be treated as Enclosed Ruins and can be entered by units that can typically pass through the walls of a Ruin such as Infantry. If the terrain piece has doors built into it, it is intended to be able to be entered by units that could typically enter a ruin. They’ve been designed to have a removable top but when you have a volunteer corps building them, they sometimes get glued together on accident. In the case you can’t put models inside of them because the building has been glued shut, or simply don’t want to bother with opening it up, place the models on the roof and declare where their actual position is to your opponent.

Terrain pieces such as the one above lacks any doors and is not intended to be entered into. Treat them as impassible terrain.

Bottom Level Openings in Ruins that Block LoS

Our second (and final) modification to Ruins is one most of you are already familiar with, but one we wanted to add some clarification to. We treat the openings on the first floor of Ruins as being opaque, even if you can actually draw LoS through them. This is for windows or openings that are fully enclosed, not partially open on one side. Again, this is a deviation from the BRB but we choose to play them this way as much of the terrain we have has openings in them which (if played with true LoS) would not provide a sufficient amount of cover for a fun and fair 8th edition game of 40k.

This ruin is an example of what this rule applies to. The windows highlighted in red which would normally allow LoS through them, but at our events would be treated as opaque as they fulfill the criteria listed above:

  1. The openings are entirely on the bottom floor.
  2. The openings are enclosed on all sides (i.e. it is a whole window frame).

Assaulting into Ruins

Due to the nature and amount of multi-level ruins we have at the LVO, we chose to use a different method of assaulting into them than is presented in the recent FAQs. This is a conscious choice to deviate from the FAQ in order to facilitate smooth, more enjoyable games. We included a few pictures to help illustrate these concepts.

The Lychguard declare a charge against the Terminators, roll for it, and can make the charge with the distance rolled.

However, the models won’t stand on their own without falling.

Place the models as close to their true position as possible and then count those models that would have been able to make it within 1″ of enemy models (assuming part of their base could have fit on the upper level) as being in combat. Those models that would not make it up a level would not be able to attack in melee as they would not be within 1″ of an enemy model or a friendly model within 1″ of an enemy model.

Cargo Containers

We have a LOT of Cargo Containers at the LVO. Like, hundreds and hundreds of them, haha. So, it is important to be clear on how to correctly use them. We treat Cargo Containers as hills for all intents and purposes. It occasionally comes up how to complete Charge actions against models standing on them.

In the instance a model rolls high enough to make the charge, but their model won’t fit on the Cargo Container, simply place the models as close as possible just as you would with a normal hill.

These terrain features are common at our events and not intended (or designed) for models to be placed on them (typically models cannot stand on them). Treat them as impassible terrain.

Huge thanks to the literal hundreds of people that contributed to this! It wouldn’t be possible without everyone’s help and input.

Let us know if you have any questions in the comments section below and we look forward to hosting you at the biggest and best LVO yet!

And remember, Frontline Gaming sells gaming products at a discount, every day in their webcart!



About Reecius

The fearless leader of the intrepid group of gamers gone retailers at Frontline Gaming!

104 Responses to “LVO 2019 Warhammer 40k Events Update”

  1. AllHail December 16, 2018 5:38 pm #

    The BCP App doesn’t run on all phones, for example it won’t run on my Android phone. My phone is old and not from a major brand, but I don’t think the BCP App is doing anything super intense so I’m kind of confused by this. I’m not going to LVO so it’s not important for me right now, but do you have any plans for accommodating people who don’t have access to the BCP App?

    • Pablo Martinez December 16, 2018 11:56 pm #

      A friend, TO, judge, bystander, stranger, or significant other with the proper phone required can enter the information for you. At the Iron Halo we had over 100 people register this way and dozens of people gave us this, or similar reasons for why they could not enter their list. Everyone was helped and accomodated.

  2. Paul McKelvey December 16, 2018 6:02 pm #

    Bcp is available for android version 5 or higher. We need that version for parts of the app to work. Check to see if you can update your system version. You will also receive the option to upload your list via email when we upload the roster of players.

  3. Steven pampreen December 16, 2018 6:39 pm #

    This is great guys. Really fantastic. I love the pictures and the explanations.

    I like to think flying serpents into enclosed buildings caused that rule change. Haha

    • Reecius December 16, 2018 6:40 pm #

      Thanks, bro!

      And that may or may not have had an impact on that ruling =P

    • SaltyJohn December 16, 2018 8:21 pm #

      We can neither confirm, nor deny, the inspiration for the “Pampreen Rule.” Wait…

  4. Venkarel December 16, 2018 7:51 pm #

    From the CoC, “A player may never take an action that would put the hobby of Warhammer in disrepute.” That seems to be a very large category. For example, someone could be following the rules but perceived as harming the game (Tony anyone).

    • SaltyJohn December 16, 2018 8:33 pm #

      Correct. You can follow the rules of the game, and still, break the Code of Conduct. Another example would be, the rules of Warhammer 40k do not state you may not verbally abuse your opponent. By being verbally abusive you are however breaking the Code of Conduct.

    • Venkarel December 17, 2018 8:40 am #

      The Tony example is followed the CoC and the rules except for this rule (which is subjective) which is a big difference from breaking other CoC rules and following the rules of the game.

      • Venkarel December 17, 2018 8:42 am #

        Edit: In the Tony example he was following….
        I do not know what drug I was on this morning but I need to find the person that broke in and gave it to me.

        • SaltyJohn December 17, 2018 8:54 am #

          6th bullet point under ITC Judging Philosophy. First sub-bullet:

          “In gaming terms, the social contract is the agreement between players to follow basic decency and adhere to agreements made between them as part of the game.”

          • Venkarel December 18, 2018 6:22 am

            So you seem to be indicating your problem with the “Tony” incident was that he broke his pregame agreement with Alex to play easy and casual? If that is so, and the agreement was witnessed, sure I agree with you. But if it was to do with him stopping Alex and the “damage” done to the game because it was on the front page of Twitch and the circuses uproar, then I disagree, as that part was entirely within the rules.

          • SaltyJohn December 18, 2018 7:59 am

            They made an agreement, he broke it to gain an advantage, that is not allowed in the Code of Conduct. The integrity of the game is important as well. You can disagree on that point if you like, but putting the game in disrepute through unethical behavior is also not allowed per the Code of Conduct. Whether or not I have an issue with what occurred isn’t relevant, what is relevant is whether that behavior is allowed under the Code of Conduct or not. It is not.

        • SaltyJohn December 17, 2018 11:27 am #

          “Verbal agreements between players that alter the rules, interpretation of rules, or the adjudication of disputes are binding and enforceable during the course of the game in which the agreement was struck. Both players must clearly announce their intent to enter into such agreements, and the players must also have a third party witness to such agreements.”

  5. Venkarel December 16, 2018 7:59 pm #

    ” A comprehensive ruling is a thorough review and investigation of the question in consultation with other judges, if present, and thorough review of all official material. A judge will leave the table and determine the result. Unless the judge chooses, time does not stop for the players while the question is investigated. Any rulings made after a thorough review are binding for that event in totality and should be noted by the judge and shared with all other present judges for consistency.” Should this not be shared with judges and players, perhaps a public google doc somewhere?

    • Reecius December 16, 2018 9:21 pm #

      That’s the goal, we’re working on the logistics

  6. Hotsauceman1 December 16, 2018 7:59 pm #

    Is doing a Haka Dance a violation of CoC or is that considered threatening the opponent?

    • Reecius December 16, 2018 9:19 pm #

      Only if it’s done correctly.

    • Pascalnz December 28, 2018 12:34 pm #

      Ask an opponent if you can….and don’t do a crappy job:).
      I can’t come this year, but if any other kiwis go, they will judge the heck out of you 😉

  7. Dan December 16, 2018 8:10 pm #

    Does anyone know where is this in the brb?

    A reminder of BRB rule: If during a combat that occupies multiple levels, and these levels are more than 3 inches apart in height, no consolidation is possible to ascend or descend levels unless the unit has the ability to consolidate more than 3 inches.

    • SaltyJohn December 16, 2018 8:30 pm #

      Page 183

      “6. Consolidate
      You may move each model in the unit up to 3″ – this
      move can be in any direction so long as the model ends
      the move closer to the nearest enemy model.”

  8. elphilo December 16, 2018 8:28 pm #

    In regards to list upload. I had a friend buy my champions ticket. He put it under my name at time of purchase but the email billed to is his. When the event goes live in bcp what should I do to make sure I’m in there in time for list upload?

    • Reecius December 16, 2018 9:18 pm #

      That’ll be a manual process. Just email us with the details and we’ll get it sorted 🙂

      • elphilo December 17, 2018 5:41 am #

        Email sent. Thanks!

  9. Ghostvalley December 16, 2018 8:39 pm #

    Love the terrain stuff, Reece. I play on the full field base at home, and have been using all the rules you list here from the get go. It just made sense at the time to us, however it always helps to see it in a document with examples. Cheers

    • Reecius December 16, 2018 9:16 pm #

      It’s mostly common sense stuff, so I’m glad it was easy to grasp!

  10. abusepuppy December 16, 2018 9:19 pm #

    I’m… not a huge fan of Enclosed Ruins as a concept, for exactly the same reason as not liking the “you can’t charge a unit on a ruin if there’s no space.” Enclosed ruins create noninteractivity for shooting armies- invulnerable “protection boxes” where units can jump in and be immune to all shooting. It’s not fun for the other player when your units are unchargable, and it’s not fun when they’re unshootable, either; I don’t think that ruling is doing the game any favors at all, nor are the existence of 100% enclosed terrain that block off all LOS but allow models to pass through them.

    • Reecius December 16, 2018 9:27 pm #

      You’re not wrong (although nothing on the board is actually unassaultable or unshootable). However, there’s one key point to take into account: we can’t change our terrain. It’s the culmination of years of work, tens of thousands of dollars spent and thousands of hours of labor. So, with that as a constant, the pivot makes sense.

      Also, be sure to read the rules about assaulting units in buildings, we make it as easy to do as possible.

      Also, anything that ignores LoS has no issues and the second+ levels of terrain are not LoS blocking.

      • abusepuppy December 16, 2018 10:50 pm #

        A unit that is COMPLETELY covering the second or higher floor of a ruin, as per the FAQ, cannot be assaulted- period. There is no legal way to complete the charge. And if you’re changing that, that’s great- I don’t think the rules should work that way.

        But then introducing the same problem, but for shooting units does no one any good. And sure, some armies have weapons that ignore LOS… but a lot of them don’t. Some of them literally have no such weapons at all, and some only have them in such small quantities (or such bad weapons) that they may as well not exist. One Thunderfire Cannon is certainly not going to kill the sixty Orks hiding inside that building 8″ away from me, so I might as well have no gun at all in that situation.

        I understand that you guys have terrain that can’t be changed, and that you want to make that terrain relevant to the game- but a ruling that completely disempowers whole armies and makes for situations that no one likes (which is a thing that has occurred at past LVOs with the “enclosed ruin” terrain) is not a step forward. There are other ways you could rule these pieces that would be less problematic for players and create fewer situations where the simple existence of a single terrain piece can invalidate an entire army’s strategy.

        • Reecius December 17, 2018 11:16 am #

          You are really exaggerating it, buddy, lol. We’ve been playing it this way, already, for the entire edition and it’s been fine. We just are now codifying it. Nothing really has changed.

          • abusepuppy December 17, 2018 11:29 pm

            I mean, “fine” insomuch as this exact issue (infinite protection boxes) was explicitly a problem at last year’s LVO.

            And it definitely is a change, because RAW jetbikes can fly into a ruin, but as per this they cannot if it’s an “enclosed ruin.” Ditto battlesuits, skimmers, and lots of other units. I don’t see any particularly good reason to prohibit models that are capable of moving into a piece of terrain (as per the rules) and can physically fit there from doing so. Yeah, there’s the weird corner case of a flyer or something entering such a piece, but it seems much more common that players are going to be frustrated by units that seem like they _should_ be able to enter such pieces not being able to.

          • Venkarel December 18, 2018 6:17 am

            I agree with AP which is weird to say. Basically your are exchanging one set of exceptions (actual flyers which are relatively rare) with another, in my my mind larger, set of exceptions (anything not infantry with fly). Basically, you are picking infantry as the winner, which is your prerogative as TO but lets not pretend that you are trying to get close to RAW, as if you were you would just you know… use RAW.

      • Hotsauceman1 December 16, 2018 11:25 pm #

        I personally feel with Enclosed ruins offering so much LoS blocking already, windows shouldn’t be.
        I play Tau and I dread when I won’t be able to shoot my opponent because he has a wooden box around him.

        • Reecius December 17, 2018 11:16 am #

          Well, that becomes really relative, you know? The melee player up against a shooting army probably wouldn’t share your sentiments.

          • Hotsauceman1 December 17, 2018 1:13 pm

            I just feel like creating a building where there can be no interactivity if the opponent does it right is not good.
            But maybe IDK what I’m talking about, the terrain at my store is garbage so IDK.

          • Reecius December 17, 2018 1:59 pm

            there is interactivity though, saying there isn’t is inaccurate. A big L shape structure cuts off all LoS from most of the table, for an army like T’au who don’t tend to go behind the other player it’s effectively the same thing. And we didn’t create these terrain rules, you know? GW did, we just added in one modification based on not wanting to have things fly into buildings that would crash in reality if they tried to do it. We didn’t set out to make this happen, we designed our terrain years ago, the rules just changed.

          • AllHail December 17, 2018 3:53 pm

            Any chance of a rule preventing units inside enclosed ruins from firing weapons that ignore LOS? In the same vein as units with Fly; if a flying biker can’t find a way into a enclosed ruin then how does a mortar find its way out?

          • Reecius December 17, 2018 6:31 pm

            The goal is to alter the game as little as possible. While not logical at all, that was a rule we decided to leave be as it didn’t create weird rules scenarios like Flyers flying into buildings.

          • abusepuppy December 17, 2018 11:31 pm

            >for an army like T’au who don’t tend to go behind the other player it’s effectively the same thing

            Speaking as a Tau player, it really isn’t. There is a massive difference between “this terrain piece blocks angles from some or most angles” and “this terrain piece cannot be moved into by your units (but can by the enemy) and there is no LOS into it from anywhere on the board.”

          • Venkarel December 18, 2018 6:28 am

            You are exchanging one rare set of “weird rules scenarios”, Flyers in buildings with a much much larger set of weird rule scenarios, no non infantry “Fly” models inside buildings.

      • happy_inquisitor December 17, 2018 12:51 am #

        I think the new Cities of Death terrain rules handle this a lot more elegantly – they make terrain significant without some of the totally non-interactive outcomes.

        If I have to shoot at a bunch of Boyz at -1 to hit and with +2 to their saves then at least that is a choice I have. The current ITC enclosed ruins rules basically mean I can do nothing.

        Now that we have the new rule on Fly and enclosed ruins a Tau player can’t even do a suicide mission with flamer crisis suits or gun drones to go get those Boyz. Nope, can’t go in and get them even if you want to. Just skip your shooting phase guys. It’s not like T’au have any other phases that they do any damage in.

        I do get the desire to avoid the non-interactive aspects of this in the assault part of the game but it seems to me you worked on fixing that while doubling-down on the lack of interaction in the shooting phase. Which is weird to me when you must have seen those new CA rules a while ago so you knew there were less binary and more interactive ways to make scenery relevant which would be coming out in print.

        • Reecius December 17, 2018 11:21 am #

          I see your point but it is a bit of an exaggeration, though. A LoS blocking terrain piece could accomplish the same thing if a unit is hidden behind it and then you use other units to zone out things like Crisis Suits. That’s nothing new. And, T’au have no LoS required weapons, too, and further, you can’t put objectives in Enclosed Ruins, so it’s really not all that bad. Plus, we’ve been playing it this way the entire edition and it’s been fine. If Ork Boyz are sitting in an Enlcosed Ruin all game, so what, lol? They’re not doing anything really useful. I get that people are having a reaction to new information but a lot of this is worst case scenario type stuff, which I get, but it seriously doesn’t come up much.

          • happy_inquisitor December 17, 2018 12:06 pm

            If it is just a wall or an L shaped ruin I can try to go round it. I may not succeed because my opponent has placed their models well but that is the game we play.

            My point was that you addressed some of the issue with non-interaction but not with other equally non-interactive rules. Its not a big deal but I really do think the new rules in CA make terrain meaningful without taking away that interaction- so are fundamentally better. I was not criticising having these rules in the first place when nothing better had been published, just questioning the need to continue with them now that there is something better.

          • Reecius December 17, 2018 12:40 pm

            I hear you man, and no hard feelings or anything.

            But, what is or is not better terrain rules is subjective to a degree (I’m sure not everyone agrees the CA terrain rules are better, etc.) and then of course you have the whole can of worms of not playing by the BRB terrain rules, etc. It’s certainly something we can look at for next season, though.

  11. rvd1ofakind December 16, 2018 10:01 pm #

    So is the assault change with wobbly an ITC thing or just an LVO thing?

    • Petey Pab December 17, 2018 12:00 am #

      “MASSIVE update for the LVO 40k events”

      People are of course more than welcome to use these changes, or the CoC but these are not ITC-wide requirements.

    • SaltyJohn December 17, 2018 7:23 am #

      Outside of the LVO I would still use those guidelines if I was playing on a table with the FLG produced ITC Terrain sets.

  12. Donthemagnificent December 16, 2018 10:27 pm #

    “Units with the Fly keyword may not end their movement inside of an Enclosed Ruin unless they would normally be able to pass through the walls of a Ruin if they did not have the fly keyword, such as Infantry.”

    Is there any way that you can extend this to being more than just infantry? I understand the plane. But, how can a custodes be all “kool-aid man”, while canoptek scarabs/arcanthrites can only scratch the walls? Another question is how does this effect things like Wraith flight or the Nephrekh Dynasty Code (whole army ignores terrain and models while advancing).

    Can Tau Crisis suits not enter these buildings at all? What about Spore Mines?

    I am sure that there are other examples. These are just some of the questions that I have for this ruling.

    Thank you for everything that you do.

    • rvd1ofakind December 16, 2018 10:39 pm #

      … are you gonna play Necrons in LVO, you beast of a man???

    • Reecius December 17, 2018 11:09 am #

      Custodes Bikers can’t do what you’re saying, buddy. So not an issue. It’s units with the Fly keyword that cannot normally go in to ruins which Bikers typically cannot. We just used an example of a Flyer, not as the only unit type.

      • Donthemagnificent December 17, 2018 11:15 am #

        I am referring to custodes guard/wardens/terminators. I apologize for the miscommunication.

        • Reecius December 17, 2018 11:26 am #

          I don’t have my rules in front of me but aren’t they Infantry? Wait, you’re talking about Custodes or Necrons? Not tracking you, fully.

          If you mean why can’t certain units go in to buildings? That’s GW’s call, we’re trying to stick to the BRB as closely as possible as that is the game most people play. The Fly thing we added in as it came up at a previous event and was causing issues with vehicles flying into buildings and such, it was silly.

          • Donthemagnificent December 17, 2018 11:36 am

            I was saying that Custodes guard are infantry that can “kool aid man” through the wall.

            Then you have issued like Necron Scarabs being unable to enter any of these enclosed buildings. (Fly/Swarm)

            Though, with it only modifying “Fly” as written above, units like Necron Wraiths (beasts) with Wraith form are unaffected.

            Then, there are entire armies that can ignore terrain and models regardless of fly. The example I gave for that was Nephrekh Dynasty necrons that advance. So a monolith, for example, could advance in to an enclosed building and hide.

            It is not that i am focusing on necrons, they just seems to have the most non-fly keyword units that act as fly would without the infantry keyword.

          • Reecius December 17, 2018 12:41 pm

            Yeah, we had discussed that prior to posting this and felt it was fine. Monoliths and such don’t fit in any of our buildings, in fact, I don’t think any of the Crons units do so it was deemed not worth notating.

          • Donthemagnificent December 17, 2018 2:02 pm

            Just wanted to make sure I understand this. Canptek Wraiths can enter these buildings due to a lack of the fly keyword and Canoptek Scarabs can not?

          • Reecius December 17, 2018 2:26 pm

            If you have the Fly keyword and do not have the ability to pass through the walls of a Ruin (Infantry, typically) you cannot end your move inside an Enclosed Ruin.

            Wraiths are a bit of an exception to the rule as they do not have the FLy keyword but can pass through walls. So, if they can end their move inside of an Enclosed Ruin and physically fit, then yeah. If Scarabs do not have the ability to pass through the wall of a Ruin then they may not pass through the wall of a Ruin…lol =P

      • rvd1ofakind December 17, 2018 11:20 am #

        It’s so stupid that infantry can walk through but swarm can’t…

        • Reecius December 17, 2018 11:23 am #

          I think the terrain rules in general need a tuneup, but, we’re trying to stick as close as possible to the book.

        • Nick Wenker December 18, 2018 8:50 am #

          Swarms not being able to go through walls despite being smaller and generally less powerful than infantry is probably the dumbest terrain rule in 8th edition among many dumb terrain rules. I wish they had just kept 7th edition rules. No idea what GW was thinking with 8th.

  13. Eldritchstormer December 16, 2018 11:50 pm #

    Can you deepstrike inside an enclosed ruin? Or does. Fly matter?
    I.e. swooping Hawks deepstrike v guardians via webway portal?

    What happens if a unit has fly but uses s strategem to deepstrike e.g. stormboyz in a tellyporta?

    • Reecius December 17, 2018 11:10 am #

      They’re Infantry, friend. No issues.

      • Venkarel December 19, 2018 5:41 am #

        OK so can a crisis suit or say drop pod deep strike inside of these as they are not infantry but are placed on the table not moved.

  14. WestRider December 17, 2018 12:38 am #

    “A player with non-standard dice (wherein each facing is not either a number or a number of pips corresponding to the numbers 1 through 6) may require their opponent to use standard dice for that game.”

    Should that be “…may be required by their opponent…”? As written, the player with the non-standard dice is the one with the choice here.

    • SaltyJohn December 17, 2018 7:11 am #

      Fixed it, thanks for catching that.

  15. Zweischneid December 17, 2018 12:51 am #

    So is the LVO gonna allow things like Warptime for non-Reserve-variants of Reinforcements like DMC Tzaangors?

    • rvd1ofakind December 17, 2018 1:14 am #

      They really shouldn’t as teleports are still reinforcements and reinforcements can’t warptime (this is easy to find).
      For proof that teleports are reinforcements read the auspex scan FAQ(can target teleports as a clarification not as an errata and the rule is “target reinforcements”) and just the reinforcements rule(Any unit set up mid turn is reinforcements – “set up” being used in every teleport rule)

      • Zweischneid December 17, 2018 1:52 am #

        Personally, I’d probably tend towards that version as well.

        Fact is, there’re literally thousands of posts, arguments, opinions, etc.. on Comp. 40K Facebook, Forums, Twitter, etc.., etc…

        Even if Warptiming DMC Tzaangors (and similar combinations following remove-from-field-and-re-deploy reinforcements like Da Jump, Gate of Infinity, Upon Wings of Fire, etc..) is ok at the LVO, it’d be helpful to know before lists are being written and submitted.

        Simple “yes” or “no” would be good to know.

    • SaltyJohn December 17, 2018 7:12 am #

      We answered this elsewhere. You may not use Warptime on a unit that has used the Dark Matter Crystal.

      • Zweischneid December 17, 2018 7:25 am #


  16. Chandler December 17, 2018 8:18 am #

    Good to see these clarifications and the code of conduct being implemented. Great job guys.

  17. Bahoom December 17, 2018 8:37 am #

    So, how does the new “enclosed ruins” rule affect smaller vehicles during deployment?

    For example: would I be able to deploy a thunderfire cannon inside of enclosed ruin if it doesn’t have a big enough door (knowing that It would never be able to move outside the ruin)?

  18. Derek December 17, 2018 9:03 am #

    I think the modification to the charges up a level / onto ruins is a mistake to go away from. You are basically allowing Hordes or swarms to have as many models in combat as that can make the elevation with no other requirement needed to be able to attack. In effect, giving a larger unit a larger charge range with no positioning penalty.

    • rvd1ofakind December 17, 2018 9:19 am #

      It also allows big models like mortarion to charge up ruins.
      I think this is a good change because I don’t like non-interactive situations. Which is why I don’t think enclosed buildings are a good idea since t’au exists

    • Reecius December 17, 2018 11:11 am #

      Re-read it, friend. You’re missing part of it.

  19. Ujayim December 17, 2018 9:04 am #

    Code of conduct should just be baseline ITC. Absolutely perfect.

  20. abusepuppy December 17, 2018 9:47 am #

    To be a stickler about things: the Tau list presented as an example doesn’t actually meet the ITC list requirements as detailed. It doesn’t list the cost of the upgrades for the units nor does it list the Ethereal’s wargear. If these are requirements that are going to be enforced across events- even if it’s just the Frontline events- it seems like you kinda need to be able to get the baby-size sampler army right, since the players are expected to do the same but with infinitely more complexity.

    • Reecius December 17, 2018 11:11 am #

      Leave a comment on the video, please. The creator can amend it if he made a mistake.

  21. David Noonan December 17, 2018 12:45 pm #

    Sometimes the rules above refer to “buildings,” and sometimes they refer to “ruins.”

    Are the two terms interchangeable? If so, why use both? (I know the core rulebook spends a lot more time defining rules for ruins.)

    It’s confusing to me because I’m looking at structures called “ruins” that are obviously intact, not ruined at all.

    If the two terms are interchangeable, a clarifying sentence at the beginning that says something like:

    “Ruins” is a catch-all for buildings and similar structures, whether they’re intact or not.

    • Reecius December 17, 2018 12:51 pm #

      Ah, good catch, we should stick to uniform terminology. I thought we had but must have missed a few.

      And Ruins are defined in the BRB.

      • Jason Wolfe December 17, 2018 10:47 pm #

        I have often say “let’s play everything on the table as ruins unless it is obviously a hill” and usually my opponent agrees. There are clear rules for ruins and hills, but everything else is a mystery.

        • Venkarel December 18, 2018 6:31 am #

          That is is not necessarily true. Everything that is not terrain defined by the rule book is just terrain. If it block LOS then it block LOS, you can move up and over it as long as you have the movement distance to do it etc. All of that is defined in the BRB.

  22. Trantatrus December 17, 2018 4:33 pm #

    Desperately need rules on basing. For example, between Tooth and Claw and Deathwatch Overkill, Genestealers have 2 different base sizes just printed within the last year or so, and it’s going back and forth. Many other units 2 different base sizes as well. We need a firm stance on it, even if it’s just “if the unit was sold with this base then it’s a legal size”.

    Anyway, great work Reecius and the team for the work you guys put in.

    • Reecius December 17, 2018 6:32 pm #

      Thanks! And yeah, hoping GW gives us a base chart as they do in AoS.

  23. -Casey H December 17, 2018 9:56 pm #

    Regarding models fitting between floors of ruins:
    “Example of a decorative element: back banner, sword arm raised, decorative nurgling on the shoulder or helmet, helmet plume etc.”
    Are wings included in the “et cetera” ?

    Like wings or floaters that are infantry sized models? Seraphim, scourges? Primaris Inceptors?

  24. Jeff Poole December 18, 2018 10:56 am #

    Hey Reece,

    I have 3 questions about list submissions:
    1) how should I indicate on my list who my warlord is and who has my “free” relic;
    2) how should I indicate that a detachment is a “specialist detachment” from Vigilus; and
    3) please confirm that I do not need to detail all the points for a unit’s wargear, just the total cost of the unit (as is shown in the example video and draft list linked in the article)

  25. Jon Starks December 18, 2018 11:20 am #

    You just made my day. Thanks guys!

  26. JimV December 18, 2018 11:52 am #

    It really makes no sense that swarms can’t enter an enclosed building.

    • Reecius December 18, 2018 11:59 am #

      Swarms can’t go through walls of ANY ruin, whether enclosed or not. That’s a GW rule, not something unique to a Ruin that has all 4 walls.

  27. Jon Starks December 18, 2018 1:05 pm #

    I have a couple questions,

    When measuring movement to the second floor or charge distances to a unit on the 2nd floor do we measure at an angle or measure the distance on the ground floor until under the floor then measure 3″ up like we did in 6th and 7th?

    Does it always count as 3″s when moving up a level or do we measure actual distance?

    The situation comes up sometimes. I just play it like 6th and 7th (unless they have fly) but newer players dont know about those rules, which makes it difficult to argue, so they measure vertically.

    Keep up the good work guys.

  28. Brian December 27, 2018 1:41 pm #

    So if LVO 2019 the last event of the 2018 season or the first event of the 2019 season?

    • Reecius December 27, 2018 1:48 pm #

      The Champs is the last event of the season, but some of the Sunday events lead off the Season.

  29. Paul McKelvey January 3, 2019 10:29 pm #

    The simplified list format has been updated to include how to display formations

  30. John Ru January 4, 2019 11:57 am #

    Thanks for this. This was a great read, and a good bit of discussion too!

    • Reecius January 4, 2019 1:04 pm #

      You are very welcome =)

  31. Hugh Murphy January 6, 2019 12:55 am #

    In regards to list submission it doesn’t state in the document but it is shown in the Video above that one can use the formatting from Battlescribe to upload to the BCP app. Will this be applicable for the LVO or do we need to go by the document’s formatting (eg Simplified or ETC)?

  32. Kevin Kent January 10, 2019 7:29 am #

    I can’t see the LVO 40k championships in the BCP app yet. Has it been posted?

    A couple of comments for the simplified formatting section of the doc:
    – the unit template shows [pts, pl ] but the example shows [2pl, 42pts]
    – based on the detachment line template, the example should have a space between the pts and the end square bracket (ie “…pts ]”
    – the template doesn’t show how to indicate multiple versions of the same upgrade (eg meltaguns). The video uses “x2 ” and “2x “, and the ETC examples use ” x2″

    Sorry to be picky – I notice these things and they weird me out.

  33. Bananathug January 10, 2019 11:27 am #

    I haven’t seen it anywhere else but how does the interrupt strat work vs relics like the Dark Eldar Mask or the Armor of Rus?

    • Eaux January 14, 2019 12:19 pm #

      Q: If a unit is under the effects of the Paroxysm psychic power,
      can the Counter-Offensive Stratagem be used on it?
      A: No, because it is not ‘eligible’ to Fight until every
      other unit has done so.

      Paroxysm is the same as the Vexator Mask. The unit would swing last. You cannot use the interrupt strat as they must still swing after everything else.

  34. Eaux January 14, 2019 12:07 pm #

    Do Psychic powers/WL traits need to be listed in lists?

    Yes, right?

    • Reecius January 14, 2019 2:08 pm #

      No, as you can switch those from game to game.

      The only thing that is locked in is who your Warlord is and what your free relic is and who has it.

  35. Leviticus Stroud August 6, 2019 5:39 am #

    I think the problem with the ‘Magic Boxes’ is that you are attempting to use the rules for Ruins to cover buildings that are ostensibly intact, and thus by definition not a ruin.

    In essence, these are ‘dilapidated buildings’ as per last edition, but there are no rules for those in 8th yet.

    I’d say that a better rule to put in place would be that if you can’t place models inside them (removable roof etc) then you can’t go inside them. Similarly, if you can go inside, you can only enter and leave them through appropriately sized doors and windows.

    A unit becoming effectively unkillable to some armies by sitting in one of these might be uncommon, but when it does happen it is a significant downer in terms of both fun and the spirit of fair play.

  36. Dode May 9, 2020 3:11 pm #

    From your terrain guidelines:

    “A reminder of BRB rule: Hills provide cover if your entire unit is in or on it and obscured from the viewpoint of the firing unit. Standing on a hill in plain sight of the firing unit provides no benefit to the unit being shot at.”

    Which BRB rule is that please? BRB p251 states:
    “Hills are always considered to be part of the battlefield rather than a terrain feature, and so models on top of them do not receive the benefits of cover.”


Leave a Reply to Hotsauceman1