Wednesday, September 12, 2012

And the verdict is...

by Anonymous Foodie

If anyone missed it, GW dropped their rulebook FAQ over the weekend.  So what's it entail?
A lot of the questioned asked were, it seems, asked by people who weren't sure how to read.

Q: "Do I lose the game if I don't have models on the table?" 
A: "Yes"
Q: "What if I have stuff alive, it's just in reserves?"
A: "Yes, that still means you have nothing on the table, so you lose."
Q: "But what if I start the game with everything in fliers, which have to be in reserves?"
A: "Then you have nothing on the board, and you lose.  Your opponent thanks you."

There are, however, a couple of things worth noting.  A few "ambiguities" were cleared up.  Yes, weapon emplacements are separate targets from a bastion, the ground, or the anti-matter taking up the same space.  You can shoot it.
No, a Grounded FMC is not still up in the air, dodging bullets with uncanny grace.  It's on the ground, usually writhing in pain.

A few things took a turn for the interesting.

Heavy skimmers can't Jink (here's looking at you, Necrons).
FMC's can Skyfire.
FMC's that are gliding, or fliers that are hovering, *can't* opt to skyfire.
Psychic powers can't overwatch, but can Snap Fire during your own shooting phase.
Fliers (and FMC's) can only ever be hit by a Snap Fire.  Nova's, Beams, and other such goodies can't touch this (que MC Hammer).
FnP *can't* be taken vs insta-death effect wounds, even if you're an Eternal Warrior... but you don't die instantly, so that's a plus.
Beam powers are only Denied by the first unit they touch, after that it's free game.

There's more, but by nature of you being here in the first place, I'll go ahead and assume you can find and read the thing for yourself.

So how's it look, all told?  A lot of it, as I said earlier, was simply a reiteration for those who didn't read things before asking why something was broken.  There were a couple of actual errata style changes (that were in the FAQ, not the errata, oddly enough), and otherwise a handful of good useful answers.  There were also a few clarifications that I suppose were needed if you read deeply enough into a few sections to dig a hole, but went along with the common sense idea (apparently it was necessary to tell us that assault grenades eliminate the initiative penalty for assaulting through cover).
As far as I can tell (and I'm sure others could give more... but that's what the comments section is for), there are only 2 things that could potentially need an FAQ ruling.

A) Can Destructor overwatch?  Psychic powers can't, but Warlock powers aren't *really* psychic powers.  Another readthrough by someone who *cough* owns the codex may be helpful here.

B)  Are glaives encarmine axes or swords?  Guess we'll never know.  Sorry, Sandwyrm, but at least those Cultists do look boss.

Scratch all that then - it seems that all of these (and more) were fixed with updated army FAQ's to boot.  And Incubi and Huskblades just became AP2.  This really is a good day.

I guess this calls for some serious kudos... the question remains, though, is there anything unanswered?  No system is perfect, so I'm sure there's something somewhere... and I'd be interested to know what it is... back to the comments!


  1. I thought they ruled on the glaives as being WYSIWYG, so swords are swords, and axes are axes. Could be wrong, but I remember it somewhere.

    1. So they were... the BA specific FAQ got updated to include that one... thanks!

    2. They also said that psychic powers (of any kind) can be fired in overwatch. See BRB and Eldar FAQs.

  2. Any word yet on whether or not dudes like Logan Grimnar, who have special axes (oops, sorry, I mean "blades", strike at an unwieldy I1 or their usual 5 (or better)?

    1. Dante and Astorath's Axes were specifically called as such and slapped with an unwieldy special rule.

      In the IG FAQ it reads that the scout rule has no effect on Valkyries and Vendettas. Did that remove their ability to outflank? I hope not...

    2. Wolf FAQ says Logan's weapon still does what its rule says, even though it looks like and is named as an axe, i.e. he can choose to count it as as power-fist (at I1) or as a frost blade (not axe) (at normal initiative).

  3. I think it's wicked sweet that they made incubi and the huskblade Ap2. My questions is why did they give vector dance to the razorwing and then take it away???

  4. They didn't answer if nids could use Aegis defence line weapons. The semantics RAW means we can can but not the 'emplaced guns' in a Bastion/building although we can use the 'gun emplacements' or whichever way round that goes.

    They did also answer if a Broodlord can use psychic shooting spells - no, but more importantly does he get to re-roll them as he can't use them - still no! Now this annoys me as they already set the precedent that if you rolled a spell you couldn't use because it was beyond your mastery you got to re-roll, which seems fair. Therefore why not allow a Broodlord the same courtesy?

    I don't agree with this and I think a designer's note to explain the justification might be nice but then you have this comment on the FAQ page:

    'The FAQs on the other hand are very much 'soft' material. They deal with more of a grey area, where often there is no right and wrong answer - in a way, they are our own 'Studio House Rules'. They are, of course, useful when you play a pick-up game against someone you don't know, or at tournaments (i.e. when you don't have a set of common 'house rules' with the other player). However, if you disagree with some answers and prefer to change them in your games and make your own house rules with your friends, that's fine. In fact we encourage you to shape the game around your needs and your taste.'

    So really, what is the point of FAQs anyway?

    1. People like official answers. FAQs are answers from the designers of the game, and thus hold more weight than 16 random people arguing on the internet.

      That last comment is just there to let you know that if you don't want to use the faq answers at rules, you don't have to. Just like they say in the rulebook that you don't have to use universal special rules if you don't want.
      Or really how they let you know that you don't have to use whatever rules you don't want to, or make them up to forge a narrative.

    2. Standard rules create unified communities. Choose-Your-Own-Rule leads to arguments and fragmented communities.

      Which is just there to let you know that this stuff does matter. Because we don't all play in the basement with the same 2-3 friends every time. :P

    3. FAQ's have always been "soft material". Erratas are true changes, FAQ's are just "GW's answers". But they're available to everyone, and come from the company that made the game, so for ease people use them (unless you want to have a discussion over 3-4 pages of questions before each game, which is another way to handle it).

      As far as Nids go, both of these just clarified what was already there. Weapon Emplacements =/= Emplaced Weapons. Nids are barred from using one, not the other (nor both). Just because the names are similar does not mean they are the same thing. Frag Grenades and Plasma Grenades are only a word apart, but have completely different profiles.
      Same with the Broodlord - he has BS0, so he can't use anything that requires a roll to hit. In no way was there any real question about whether or not he could re-roll useless powers, people just hoped that he could. The rules are very clear on what situations you re-roll powers for.
      Unfortunate? Sure... but nothing forces you to trade in two completely useable powers for a random chance of one (or more) that won't work. The random charts are always a gamble. It could be great for him to swap, or it could be useless.

  5. They still didn't answer so many questions on Chariots in close combat..

  6. Outflanking units that cannot make it onto the board due to enemy units being in the way.

    1. 1" rule - if you can't maintain legal distance, the unit is destroyed.

  7. Interested news, looks like Stelek is trying to convince people that DE ravager shoot flyers at full BS due to word on aerial assualt in the FAQ.

    Page 45 – Ravagers, Aerial Assault.
    Replace the entry with the following:
    “Aerial Assault: Due to the largely open construction of its decks
    and the sophisticated targeting matrices used by its crew, a
    Ravager that moved at cruising speed may fire all of its weapons
    using its crew’s full Ballistic Skill.”

    Even though i am a DE player and would love it.I don't think they can, because whenever you shoot at a flyer you must snap fire,which sets you BS to 1.

    Idk I think he might be full bs himself, but there are a lot people giving their thoughts on it. What do you guys think.

    1. It was a bad loophole that certain people were trying to fit their ungainly big heads through. "Oh, my guy flies faster, so he can fire better, yep!". Makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

      The FAQ clearly states that *only snap shots can hit fliers*. So if you're not firing a snap shot, you *can not* hit a flier. If you want to pursue that line, you could just as easily say that a Ravager going more than 6" can now NEVER EVEN TRY to hit a flier, instead of having a 50/50 chance (with all 3 lances intact).

    2. Exactly! Where is my shut the h#$% stick?


out dang bot!

Recent Favorites

All-Time Favorites