http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=1000018&pIndex=1&aId=3400019&multiPageMode=true&start=2

several v1.1 ones up...

.. get readin' folks !

Page 49 – Fateweaver, Oracle of Eternity.
Change the first sentence to read “Because of the incredible
prescience of the Oracle of Tzeentch, Fateweaver and all
friendly units chosen from Codex: Chaos Daemons within 6" reroll all failed Armour, Invulnerable and Cover saves.”

ooohhh,,,,,

CHAOS SPACE MARINE DAEMON PRINCES ARE FLYING MONSTROUS CREATURES!

Q: If mindshackle scarabs are used against a model with a force
weapon or a weapon which allows the wielder to inflict Instant Death
with a successful Leadership test, can the Necron player force the enemy
model to utilise this ability? (p81)
A: Yes.


*shock*

Q: Is there any way to embark back onto a Night Scythe?
A: Yes – follow the rules for Embarking on page 78, treating
the Night Scythe’s base as its Access Point. Note that this is
possible despite the Night Scythe being a Zooming Flyer.



hooray !

And that may change in two weeks time. You never know!

Dark Eldar - Page 42 – Shadowseers, Veil of Tears.
Replace the last three sentences with the following: “The
Shadowseer, and all models in her unit, have the Stealth and
Shrouded special rules.”

Finally


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And Huskblades are AP2, as are Klaives. Hello Termies

Great catch, reds8n!

Q: If Chaos Daemons are allied to Chaos Space Marines, do they roll
for scatter if Deep Striking within 6" of a Chaos Icon carried by a
Chaos Space Marine model? (p73)
A: If the wording on the Chaos Icon’s description refers to ‘all
friendly units’, then yes. If not, then the Chaos Icon only
affects the specific units referred to in its description.

More or less.

Rest is good, though I think that part will probably have to be FAQed still.

Woohoo! My Commissars won't execute my Librarians who attach to my blob squads!

I see that more as "We don't want to rewrite this in a month" than IDK.

Page 410 – Reference, Profile, Codex: Grey Knights, Paladins.
Change unit type to Infantry.
Page 411 – Reference, Profile, Codex: Space Wolves, Wolf Guard.
Change unit type to Infantry.
Page 413 – Reference, Profile, Codex: Orks, Nob.
Change unit type to Infantry and add the following Designer’s
Note:

Page 413 - Reference, Profiles
Add the following Designer’s Note:.
Designers Note: Wolf Guard, Nobz, Nobz Warbikers, and Crisis
Shas’vre that lead a unit (for example an Ork Nob leading Ork
Boyz, a Wolf Guard leading Grey Hunters) have the unit type
Infantry (Character).

This is crazy, they just massively reduced the usefulness of Look out Sir....

This one just makes it easier for people who cant' read to understand:

Page 16 – Shooting Phase, Look Out, Sir
Delete “(or unsaved Wounds)” from the first paragraph.

This is the one that makes look out sir less useful:

Page 16 – Shooting Phase, Look Out, Sir
Change the second sentence of the second bullet point to:
“Determine which model in the unit is closest to the character,
and resolve the Wound against that model instead.”

And flying Nid MC's are dead....Oh well, fun while it lasted

Page 426 – The Game Summary, Transport Vehicles and Their
Passengers, Explodes (Other Effects).
Change the entry to read “The unit takes a number of Strength
4 AP – hits equal to the number of models in the unit.
Surviving passengers are placed where the vehicle used to be
and must take a Pinning test.”

No more disembark from the summary for Explodes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here ends the Signum debate:

Q: Can the BS1 of a Snap Shot ever be modified by special rules that
modify the BS of a model’s Shooting attack (such as Tau markerlights,
Space Marine Signums or Sergeant Telion’s Voice of Experience)? (p13)
A: No.

Q: Does the Tempest’s Wrath psychic power affect Flyers? (p37)
A: No.

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

Doesn't removing 'Character' from Paladins/Wolf Guard/Nobz Mobs make things a bit more realistic, rather than all of these squad members falling over one another to save each other's lives?

 reds8n wrote:
Q: Does the Tempest’s Wrath psychic power affect Flyers? (p37)
A: No.

We knew that though. It doesn't say Flyers on it. Did they rule on Njal's stuff?

Charax wrote:
CHAOS SPACE MARINE DAEMON PRINCES ARE FLYING MONSTROUS CREATURES!

This, 1000 times this!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Doesn't removing 'Character' from Paladins/Wolf Guard/Nobz Mobs make things a bit more realistic, rather than all of these squad members falling over one another to save each other's lives?

Yes, it was silly and we knew it would be FAQ'd.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Q: Does a model with an Unwieldy weapon Pile In at its normal
Initiative step and then fight at Initiative step 1? (p22/23)
A: No – it Piles In and fights at Initiative step 1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Q: Can blast markers hit a model that is not in the attacker’s line of
sight if they do NOT scatter? (p33)
A: Yes, as long as the target enemy model for the blast
weapon is within the firer’s line of sight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This is surprisingly comprehensive.

I will note that the starter set rules for Chosen lists them as 'Characters'. With any luck this error won't be in the upcoming Chaos Codex requiring more FAQ'ing.

Thats a poorly written FAQ on MSS. Reason being that the new rules dont simply require a LD test, they require the expenditure of a warp token and then a test. So now the way its written, even if you have no warp tokens left, Necron players will be arguing that MSS can do it without the the need for the token because the faq doesnt say they have to spend a token. My argument would be that since models are required to spend the token, and no model simply makes a LD test (sans GK which may be their only exception), that MSS cannot activate Force weapons on anyone...like I said...poorly written FAQ to MSS...

Q: If passengers disembark from a Transport that has suffered a
Shaken or Stunned result, do they still suffer these effects in their
next Shooting phase? (p80)
A: Yes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Q: If a unit disembarks from a destroyed vehicle during the enemy
turn, can it Charge in the Assault phase of its own turn? (p80)
A: No, unless the vehicle in question was an Assault Vehicle.

It looks pretty good so far, though I'm only on page 2 of the Rulebook FAQ

So it's easier to assault from a Land Raider that's exploding than a Rhino that's exploding. I guess that makes sense***.





***Note: Does not actually make sense.

Q: Can you deploy the Aegis Defence Line sections in two or more
groups of two or more sections apiece (this way, they will still be in
base contact with at least one other section)? (p114)
A: No – the Aegis defence line sections must be deployed in
an unbroken chain, though they can be connected end-toend
such as in the example shown on page 114.

12thRonin wrote:
I see that more as "We don't want to rewrite this in a month" than IDK.

True, hadn't thought of it that way.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Doesn't removing 'Character' from Paladins/Wolf Guard/Nobz Mobs make things a bit more realistic, rather than all of these squad members falling over one another to save each other's lives?

Yah, but it was funny to imagine.

Also:
Q: Does a model that uses the Wings of Sanguinius to charge an enemy
unit in the Assault phase gain the Hammer of Wrath special rule?
p(63)
A: Yes.

Oh snap! They make it sound like it is player turn for the tabling thing:

Q: If you leave combat airspace with all of your Flyers and have no
other models on the gaming board at the beginning of your
opponent's turn, do you automatically lose the game? (p122)
A: Yes.

Q: If all of my units are either Flyers or embarked upon Flyers, will I
automatically lose the game as there are none of my models on the
gaming board at the end of Turn 1? (p122)
A: Yes.

Q: Do units that are transported in a vehicle that MUST start in
reserve count towards the number of units that can be placed in
Reserves? For example, must I count the units in a Drop Pod or
Valkyrie towards the 50% of units I can place in Reserves? (p124)
A: No.

 pretre wrote:
Q: Can you deploy the Aegis Defence Line sections in two or more
groups of two or more sections apiece (this way, they will still be in
base contact with at least one other section)? (p114)
A: No – the Aegis defence line sections must be deployed in
an unbroken chain, though they can be connected end-toend
such as in the example shown on page 114.

Wow, didn't see that coming...

Q: Which missile launchers have access to flakk missiles? (p57/415)
A: Only those that specifically have an option to take them as
an upgrade in their army list.

DE Incubi weapons are now AP2 as are Huskblades.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
So it's easier to assault from a Land Raider that's exploding than a Rhino that's exploding. I guess that makes sense***.





***Note: Does not actually make sense.

It makes perfect sense, clearly assault vehicles propel them out the front in the first place so when it explodes it does so much more potently.

Tau got target locks back:

Page 28 – Armoury, Target Lock.
Replace this entry with “A model with a target lock can shoot at
a different target to the rest of his unit.”

One wonders why they lost Target Locks in the first place...

Q: If a model with a lash whip is slain by enemy models not in base
contact and at a higher Initiative step, when do the enemy models that
were initially in base contact and affected by the lash whip (and
therefore reduced to Initiative 1) actually fight? (p83)
A: The effects of the whip coils/lash whips take place at the
beginning of the Fight sub-phase and last until the end of the
Assault phase, so the affected models would still fight at
Initiative step 1 that turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
One wonders why they lost Target Locks in the first place...

That's easy. FAQ error.

Page 48 – Leman Russ Battle Tank, Lumbering Behemoth.
Replace this entry with the following: “A Leman Russ follows
the rules for Heavy Vehicles on page 83 of the Warhammer
40,000 rulebook.”

Alright, extra guns are now hilarious and worth it.

Page 85 – Wolf Priest, Wargear.
Replace “Crozius arcanum (power weapon)” entry with
“Crozius arcanum (power maul).”

Solved that problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Q: Does a character with Saga of the Hunter pass on his Outflank and
Stealth special rules to a unit he joins before deployment? (p64)
A: Yes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ooh and this is fixed:

Q: Can I attempt to use a Rune Priest’s runic weapon, a Wolf Tail
Talisman and make a Deny the Witch roll to nullify an enemy psychic
power?
A: No. You can only make a single attempt to prevent an
enemy psychic power, so choose your method carefully.

Big boost for Nids actually....So much information to process:

Q: The rulebook says that you halve your Attacks characteristic if
you perform a Smash attack. However, if a Monstrous Creature has
an uneven number of Attacks, (3 for example), but has charged that
turn, does it receive the bonus Attack for charging before or after
halving its Attacks? (p42)
A: You halve the model’s Attacks characteristic first, then
apply any additional modifiers. In the example above, the
model would halve its Attacks first (rounding up to 2), then
receive a bonus Attack for charging.

So many attacks on a Warpspeed Crushing claw tervigon...

Q: Flyers are entitled to choose whether or not to use the Skyfire
special rule at the start of each Shooting phase. Can Swooping
Flying Monstrous Creatures also do this? (p49)
A: Yes.

Woot! I cans shoot down flyers!

Wow, the Eldar one is just weird. Warlock squads are still Characters, Fuegan gets smash, some powers are usable on Overwatch while some arent despite being "always on", Banshee exarch with Axe doesn't actually have an Axe instead she's required to take and pay for an Executioner, RoW and RoW cancel each other out, Banshees now explicitly have a Power Sword so they really and truly aren't supposed to fight Terminators, Star Engines only boost 6" now for same cost

They passed on addressing power weapons though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Looks like they addressed specific PW exceptions but left the big one (DCA) alone.

No more triple-layer psyker protection for allied Guard blobs!

Banshees have power swords now. Hope no one converted axes.

Well, LR sponsons are going to make a big comeback. Big as in plasma cannon big.

Page 31 – Incubi, Klaives.
Replace this entry with: “Klaives have the following profile:
Range S AP Type
Klaive - +1 2 Melee, Two-handed


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ooh, Lady Malys got nerfed. She just can't be targeted now.

"HEY! GREY KNIGHT PLAYERS! GO FETH YOURSELVES!" - GW

Q: Is a Nemesis force halberd treated as a force axe that grants the
wielder a +2 Initiative bonus (and who therefore fights at Initiative 3)?
(p54)
A: No. The Nemesis force halberd follows the rules for
Unusual Force Weapons, meaning that the wielder strikes at
their normal Initiative +2 and at AP 3

Its not like halberds were listed as Axes or anything before... OR WAIT! THEY WERE!

Commissars won't execute Rune Priests!

Page 32 – Commissars, Summary Execution.
Change the first sentence to read “If the Commissar has joined
a squad chosen from Codex: Imperial Guard and it fails a Morale
test, the Commissar will summarily execute the squad’s current
commander – this is the Imperial Guard model in the squad
with the highest Leadership value.”

Also, Glaive Encarmines now can be axes or swords and Dante has an axe.

 Happygrunt wrote:
"HEY! GREY KNIGHT PLAYERS! GO FETH YOURSELVES!" - GW

Q: Is a Nemesis force halberd treated as a force axe that grants the
wielder a +2 Initiative bonus (and who therefore fights at Initiative 3)?
(p54)
A: No. The Nemesis force halberd follows the rules for
Unusual Force Weapons, meaning that the wielder strikes at
their normal Initiative +2 and at AP 3

Its not like halberds were listed as Axes or anything before... OR WAIT! THEY WERE!

Since 6th came out, the common consensus was that all NFW were Unusual Force Weapons except Daemonhammers. The FAQ now makes that explicit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Black Templar Typhoons are fixed.

 pretre wrote:

 Happygrunt wrote:
"HEY! GREY KNIGHT PLAYERS! GO FETH YOURSELVES!" - GW

Q: Is a Nemesis force halberd treated as a force axe that grants the
wielder a +2 Initiative bonus (and who therefore fights at Initiative 3)?
(p54)
A: No. The Nemesis force halberd follows the rules for
Unusual Force Weapons, meaning that the wielder strikes at
their normal Initiative +2 and at AP 3

Its not like halberds were listed as Axes or anything before... OR WAIT! THEY WERE!

Since 6th came out, the common consensus was that all NFW were Unusual Force Weapons except Daemonhammers. The FAQ now makes that explicit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Black Templar Typhoons are fixed.

Let me simmer in my rage for a bit. I don't see the problem with making halberds axes. It didn't break anything.

Page 49 – Fateweaver, Oracle of Eternity.
Change the first sentence to read “Because of the incredible
prescience of the Oracle of Tzeentch, Fateweaver and all
friendly units chosen from Codex: Chaos Daemons within 6" reroll
all failed Armour, Invulnerable and Cover saves.”

I think someone already posted this, but jsut to reemphasize!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Happygrunt wrote:
Let me simmer in my rage for a bit. I don't see the problem with making halberds axes. It didn't break anything.

Except for the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Daemon Weapon got upgraded.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Q: There is no Dark Angels vehicles reference section at the back of the
rulebook. Does this mean I should use the Codex: Space Marines
vehicle reference section instead (meaning my Venerable Dreadnoughts
are now Weapon Skill and Ballistic Skill 5 for example)? (appendix)
A: Yes.

I think this means that I'm sitting out 40K 6th entirely or at least until most of the codices are updated!

I am only seeing the old ones -_-

Ghaz isn't horrible now?

Page 58 – Ghazghkull Thraka, Prophet of the Waaagh!
Change the third paragraph to read “Furthermore, for the
duration of the Waaagh!, all friendly Ork Infantry units
automatically count as rolling a 6 if they Run, and models with
the Slow and Purposeful special rule exchange it for Relentless
instead. All non-fleeing friendly Ork units become Fearless for
the duration of the Waaagh!”.

Relentless means S&P can fire overwatch, I guess...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alpharius wrote:
I think this means that I'm sitting out 40K 6th entirely or at least until most of the codices are updated!

Why?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Leth wrote:
I am only seeing the old ones -_-

Refresh.

 Alpharius wrote:
I think this means that I'm sitting out 40K 6th entirely or at least until most of the codices are updated!

And why is that ? (truly curious, as this FAQ makes me want to try 6th edition)

 pretre wrote:
Oh snap! They make it sound like it is player turn for the tabling thing:

Q: If you leave combat airspace with all of your Flyers and have no
other models on the gaming board at the beginning of your
opponent's turn, do you automatically lose the game? (p122)
A: Yes.

Q: If all of my units are either Flyers or embarked upon Flyers, will I
automatically lose the game as there are none of my models on the
gaming board at the end of Turn 1? (p122)
A: Yes.

Q: Do units that are transported in a vehicle that MUST start in
reserve count towards the number of units that can be placed in
Reserves? For example, must I count the units in a Drop Pod or
Valkyrie towards the 50% of units I can place in Reserves? (p124)
A: No.

It's not explicit. The first question situation would mean you have no models on the table at the end of the game turn, as well.

However, the third question is a change, right? I thought previously units embarked on flyers (not drop pods) did count.

How are you guys getting them? I still see only V1.0 FAQs.

Finally!

Q: What type of power weapon is a burna in combat? (p45)
A: A burna is an unusual power weapon when used in close
combat, therefore it is AP3.
Q: Can a burna be used to shoot in Overwatch and be used as a power
weapon later in the same Assault phase? (p45)
A: No.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 RiTides wrote:
However, the third question is a change, right? I thought previously units embarked on flyers (not drop pods) did count.

They just made it easier to do an all embarked list and then told you you would lose.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How are you guys getting them? I still see only V1.0 FAQs.

Same -_-

Ha!

Q: Can Ork boarding planks, grabbin’ klaws and wreckin’ balls target
Zooming Flyers? (p93)
A: No.

The rulebook FAQ is down already

 Leth wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How are you guys getting them? I still see only V1.0 FAQs.

Same -_-

Clear cache, Ctrl-Refresh, etc so on.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
How are you guys getting them? I still see only V1.0 FAQs.

yep same, no idea where these are.

Wow. They pulled all of them.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Good thing I downloaded them all.

 pretre wrote:
Wow. They pulled all of them.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Good thing I downloaded them all.

They must have. I don't even see the BRB or v1.1 on any of them

Any chance for a hook up?

Yeah, sorry to everyone who I told to keep refreshing. Looks like they are pulled.

I think they changed them back. The direct links still work though:

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570037a_Blood_Angels_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570047a_Necrons_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570047a_Necrons_v1.1.pdf

Only 3 I had open before I stupidly hit refresh on my page.

On a positive note, I hope they are not done updating them yet. They cover some of the big items but I was expecting more.

Wow, didn't expect them to pull them. I wonder why they did it. The Rulebook one was actually really good. I didn't get the chance on the rest...

Does anyone happen to have the URLs to each individual FAQ doc still in their history?

Because I'm guessing it will still work and if so you should paste them here.

Those of you not seeing them, clear your browser cache and try again.

Why on earth would the pull them?

 Leth wrote:
Any chance for a hook up?

Unlikely. I can't access any dropbox type places from work and I doubt Lego wants me attaching them.

 pretre wrote:
Wow. They pulled all of them.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Good thing I downloaded them all.

Damn, I only got the main rulebook, the IG one and the BA one.

rigeld2 wrote:
Those of you not seeing them, clear your browser cache and try again.

aaaannnd they are back again. lol

Sweet. That was more then a little confusing and ever so slightly infurating.

Back up now for me

 yakface wrote:

Does anyone happen to have the URLs to each individual FAQ doc still in their history?

Because I'm guessing it will still work and if so you should paste them here.

Gotcha!

Main Rulebook:
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1490286a_40K_Rulebook_v1.pdf

BA one:
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570037a_Blood_Angels_v1.1.pdf

GK one:
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570043a_Grey_Knights_v1.1.pdf

IG one:
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570044a_Imperial_Guard_v1.1.pdf

All of these changes via FAQ will make gaming with the regular gamer/pickup gamer at the LGS a nightmare.

I wasn't too happy with a lot of 40K 6th to begin with, and they seem to really be amping up the Change For Change's Sake quotient with a lot of this...

Wait hangon... The IG FAQ says last updated 24th July. Is that the current (new) one?

Surprised on the doom scythe death ray. Did not see that one coming

Also they nerfed LOS as it is now the closest to the person taking the test, not anyone within 6

Here are direct links to a few of them:

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570038a_Chaos_Daemons_v1.1.pdf

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570044a_Imperial_Guard_v1.1.pdf

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1490286a_40K_Rulebook_v1.pdf

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570039a_Chaos_Space_Marines_v1.1.pdf

Agree, I see 1.0 only?

 yakface wrote:

Does anyone happen to have the URLs to each individual FAQ doc still in their history?

Because I'm guessing it will still work and if so you should paste them here.

This is all of them

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1490286a_40K_Rulebook_v1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570036a_Black_Templars_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570037a_Blood_Angels_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570038a_Chaos_Daemons_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570039a_Chaos_Space_Marines_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570040a_Dark_Angels_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570041a_Dark_Eldar_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570042a_Eldar_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570043a_Grey_Knights_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570044a_Imperial_Guard_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570047a_Necrons_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570048a_Orks_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570049a_Sisters_of_Battle_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570050a_Space_Marines_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570051a_Space_Wolves_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570052a_Tau_Empire_v1.1.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2570053a_Tyranids_v1.1.pdf

The argument about having skyfire and so being able to fire the death ray at flyers looks set to continue, although more one sided.

Edit: relic bllades have their own profile now.

smUrfsrUs wrote:
The argument about having skyfire and so being able to fire the death ray at flyers looks set to continue, although more one sided.

It specifically says it cant hit them in the faq

Also all the two wound units(including paladins) lost character status

@Alph

I'm not seeing the issue. The FAQ's are actually pretty solid and are clearing up 90% of the issues that were being bounced around right after the rulebook release. And it's no different than 5th edition which also had a ton of FAQ's. So I'm curious as to why you think this is a nightmare?

 Alpharius wrote:
All of these changes via FAQ will make gaming with the regular gamer/pickup gamer at the LGS a nightmare.

I wasn't too happy with a lot of 40K 6th to begin with, and they seem to really be amping up the Change For Change's Sake quotient with a lot of this...

Strange, I actually thought this was one of the best FAQ rounds GW have ever done - almost everything I have read makes sense and makes the game seem more "real" and logical. No more shifting wounds around on nobz like crazy, and no more hitting flyers with your skimmer.

But it is weird that the update is dated almost 1½ month old - anyone care to guess at why?

 Leth wrote:

smUrfsrUs wrote:
The argument about having skyfire and so being able to fire the death ray at flyers looks set to continue, although more one sided.

It specifically says it cant hit them in the faq

Yes, i read it and thought straight back to one of the arguments about having skyfire ment you weren't snap firing. This is also the reason I said it would be more one sided.

Glad they clarified some flying mostrous creature rules, that was getting stressful for a while ahah.

Wow so many straight out changes to the rulebook. I am really digging it, I am seeing a lot of problems just getting out and out solved. Gonna need to re-tool some lists

 Alpharius wrote:
All of these changes via FAQ will make gaming with the regular gamer/pickup gamer at the LGS a nightmare.

I wasn't too happy with a lot of 40K 6th to begin with, and they seem to really be amping up the Change For Change's Sake quotient with a lot of this...

Alph, this is the same as it has been since 3rd edition with FAQs. I don't mean to be mean, but you have just been down on 6th the entire time. It really isn't the end of 40k.

smUrfsrUs wrote:

 Leth wrote:

smUrfsrUs wrote:
The argument about having skyfire and so being able to fire the death ray at flyers looks set to continue, although more one sided.

It specifically says it cant hit them in the faq

Yes, i read it and thought straight back to one of the arguments about having skyfire ment you weren't snap firing. This is also the reason I said it would be more one sided.

Except that the Necron FAQ says explicitly that the Death Ray can't hit Zooming/Swooping flyers.

 Gorlack wrote:
But it is weird that the update is dated almost 1½ month old - anyone care to guess at why?

Because they wrote it 1.5 months ago?

Man, no love for the orks. no bomb squigs, or any other equipment can be used against flyers :(

but they didn't say anything about the mad dok not being able to cybork up allies so I guess that's still cool.

rigeld2 wrote:
Except that the Necron FAQ says explicitly that the Death Ray can't hit Zooming/Swooping flyers.

Its not in the necron one, its in the main rule book.

sirlynchmob wrote:
Man, no love for the orks. no bomb squigs, or any other equipment can be used against flyers :(

Did you not expect grabbing flyers to be FAQ'd? C'mon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Having read through them all, I think the absence of a ruling on models with straight power weapon in their description is very telling.

They changed banshees and a couple others to Power Sword, but not DCA in either codex.

 pretre wrote:

 Gorlack wrote:
But it is weird that the update is dated almost 1½ month old - anyone care to guess at why?

Because they wrote it 1.5 months ago?

Well fair enough but why not upload it faster then? That's what I am wondering about.

But now that I have you. You wrote this:

 pretre wrote:
Looks like they addressed specific PW exceptions but left the big one (DCA) alone.

Which big one (DCA) is that?


Cheers

Looks like all the 'Skies of...' disembarking type abilities were fixed. That's nice.

Did anyone see anything about Blood Lance and Jaws against Flyers?

Looking good.

Would just like them to release the quick reference sheets now.

reps0l wrote:
Did anyone see anything about Blood Lance and Jaws against Flyers?

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

 pretre wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
All of these changes via FAQ will make gaming with the regular gamer/pickup gamer at the LGS a nightmare.

I wasn't too happy with a lot of 40K 6th to begin with, and they seem to really be amping up the Change For Change's Sake quotient with a lot of this...

Alph, this is the same as it has been since 3rd edition with FAQs. I don't mean to be mean, but you have just been down on 6th the entire time. It really isn't the end of 40k.

True - I was down on 6th to begin with. It seemed that they decided to throw the baby out with the bath water going from 5th to 6th.

Maybe they felt they 'had to' in order to justify a new edition.

Maybe Mr. Ward just wanted to put his stamp on things.

I'm just not a fan.

So, I'll bow out of this conversation now - sorry for the distraction!

Monoliths can no longer receive jink saves.

Q: Does a weapon that hits automatically, still hit automatically when
making a Snap Shot? (p13)
A: Yes.

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

Is it just me or do these 2 FAQ's contradict each other? The first says auto-hit weapons auto-hit on snap shots, the second says auto-hit weapons can't be snap shot.

It's just you. One is psychic powers and one is weapons/abilities.

 pretre wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
Man, no love for the orks. no bomb squigs, or any other equipment can be used against flyers :(

Did you not expect grabbing flyers to be FAQ'd? C'mon.

ya I was expecting it, but it was just so much fun and orky, I was holding on to some hope they'd be allowed

Necronic Angel wrote:
Q: Does a weapon that hits automatically, still hit automatically when
making a Snap Shot? (p13)
A: Yes.

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

Is it just me or do these 2 FAQ's contradict each other? The first says auto-hit weapons auto-hit on snap shots, the second says auto-hit weapons can't be snap shot.

Snap shots can be used for other things than to hit flyers.

Necronic Angel wrote:
Q: Does a weapon that hits automatically, still hit automatically when
making a Snap Shot? (p13)
A: Yes.

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

Is it just me or do these 2 FAQ's contradict each other? The first says auto-hit weapons auto-hit on snap shots, the second says auto-hit weapons can't be snap shot.

I think the BRB states Any shooting attacks which do not use a ballistic skill cannot be fired as a snap shot (page 13 maybe?). Makes more sense when you include that.

Oh yean, that too

Verses wrote:
Glad they clarified some flying mostrous creature rules, that was getting stressful for a while ahah.

Yeah, I'm so glad the 'Hard to Hit if Grounded' debate can finally be put to bed.

It is now explicitly grounded == gliding. But FMCs gained Skyfire while swooping, and that makes me very happy.

 pretre wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
However, the third question is a change, right? I thought previously units embarked on flyers (not drop pods) did count.

They just made it easier to do an all embarked list and then told you you would lose.

Not if you're in drop pods

 Leth wrote:
Surprised on the doom scythe death ray. Did not see that one coming

Also they nerfed LOS as it is now the closest to the person taking the test, not anyone within 6

Thank goodness... the "anyone within 6" was really the worst thing about 6th ed. I'm a lot happier with it without that!

They nerfed/fixed whip coils/lash whips to only be at start of fight phase but last until end of fight no matter what.

 Gorlack wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
All of these changes via FAQ will make gaming with the regular gamer/pickup gamer at the LGS a nightmare.

I wasn't too happy with a lot of 40K 6th to begin with, and they seem to really be amping up the Change For Change's Sake quotient with a lot of this...

Strange, I actually thought this was one of the best FAQ rounds GW have ever done - almost everything I have read makes sense and makes the game seem more "real" and logical. No more shifting wounds around on nobz like crazy, and no more hitting flyers with your skimmer.

But it is weird that the update is dated almost 1½ month old - anyone care to guess at why?

Real and logical? like markerlights making FMC take grounding tests?

Is it just me, or have they stuck an erroneous number in the answer and ended up contradicting themselves:

Q: If a model makes a Pile In move which brings it into base contact
with a model with a lash whip, does it then fight at its normal
Initiative step or must it wait until the Initiative 1 step? (p83)
A: It fights at its normal Initiative 1 step.

smUrfsrUs wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Except that the Necron FAQ says explicitly that the Death Ray can't hit Zooming/Swooping flyers.

Its not in the necron one, its in the main rule book.

The Main Rule book one implies it based on the line rulings.. the Necron one explicitly says that the Death Ray can't hit Zooming/Swooping flyers.

 ruminator wrote:
Is it just me, or have they stuck an erroneous number in the answer and ended up contradicting themselves:

Q: If a model makes a Pile In move which brings it into base contact
with a model with a lash whip, does it then fight at its normal
Initiative step or must it wait until the Initiative 1 step? (p83)
A: It fights at its normal Initiative 1 step.

That's a typo. Check the necron faq.

Q: If a model makes a Pile In move which brings it into base contact
with a Canoptek Wraith with whip coils, does it then fight at its
normal Initiative step or must it wait until the Initiative 1 step? (p44)
A: It fights at its normal Initiative.

I play so infrequently now that every time I look to set up a game it's all new... not sure if that's good or bad... but it's starting to feel tedious.

Some of these rulings are and now I'm more confused than ever as to what to do with my converted Sanguinary Guard miniatures...

So much for Fateweaver and Tsons! : O

 Acardia wrote:

 Gorlack wrote:


Strange, I actually thought this was one of the best FAQ rounds GW have ever done - almost everything I have read makes sense and makes the game seem more "real" and logical. No more shifting wounds around on nobz like crazy, and no more hitting flyers with your skimmer.

Real and logical? like markerlights making FMC take grounding tests?

It's damn annoying to get hit in the face with a flashlight when you're flying apparently


Btw, Pretre mentioned that they hadn't resolved the big question about power weapons. Since my group hasn't experienced any "big question" regarding power weapon (except boneswords, which are now FAQ'd), I was just wondering what he meant by that?

Cheers

 Gorlack wrote:
It's damn annoying to get hit in the face with a flashlight when you're flying apparently

There's a reason that people get arrested for shining laser pointers at aircraft.

Btw, Pretre mentioned that they hadn't resolved the big question about power weapons. Since my group hasn't experienced any "big question" regarding power weapon (except boneswords, which are now FAQ'd), I was just wondering what he meant by that?

They did not say whether you can freely convert models with power weapons to any kind of power weapon. The lack of a ruling here is very telling as they further changed a number of units to have specific power weapons but left some alone and had some change to just power weapon. It seems clear (although it will still be debated) that you are free to model whatever you want.

 pretre wrote:

Btw, Pretre mentioned that they hadn't resolved the big question about power weapons. Since my group hasn't experienced any "big question" regarding power weapon (except boneswords, which are now FAQ'd), I was just wondering what he meant by that?

They did not say whether you can freely convert models with power weapons to any kind of power weapon. The lack of a ruling here is very telling as they further changed a number of units to have specific power weapons but left some alone and had some change to just power weapon. It seems clear (although it will still be debated) that you are free to model whatever you want.

In other words, if you can upgrade to a Power Weapon, you get to choose whether its a Sword, Axe, or Lance (as modeled) right? Sorry, I'm a simpleton and need things clearly spelled out.

Tau Disruption Pods now give SHROUDING.

That's a 3+ cover save (jink + shrouding) if the vehicle moves and the firer is more than 12" away and a 2+ cover save if the vehicle moved flat-out!

It's back to being the best 5 point vehicle upgrade in the game.


Hmmmm, mech tau seems really interesting now.

Here is a big one:

Q: Do you get to Pile In twice in Fight sub-phase if you fight at two
different Initiatives (i.e. a Techmarine with servo-harness)?
(p22/23)
A: No. You Pile In once, at your highest Initiative step.

YOWZA Ghazgul makes slow and purposeful just relentless on the turn he wagghhss !!!!!

 pretre wrote:
[

Btw, Pretre mentioned that they hadn't resolved the big question about power weapons. Since my group hasn't experienced any "big question" regarding power weapon (except boneswords, which are now FAQ'd), I was just wondering what he meant by that?

They did not say whether you can freely convert models with power weapons to any kind of power weapon. The lack of a ruling here is very telling as they further changed a number of units to have specific power weapons but left some alone and had some change to just power weapon. It seems clear (although it will still be debated) that you are free to model whatever you want.

Ah thanks. We always played it like that, had no idea it was a controversial ruling.

Any other big things this FAQ missed? Seems very comprehensive to me.

reps0l wrote:
In other words, if you can upgrade to a Power Weapon, you get to choose whether its a Sword, Axe, or Lance (as modeled) right? Sorry, I'm a simpleton and need things clearly spelled out.

That is my contention. That there is an allowance if you upgrade or have power weapon in your entry (and have not been faq'd to a specific type of power weapon like Banshees have), you can model any power weapon type legally.

 Leth wrote:
YOWZA Ghazgul makes slow and purposeful just relentless on the turn he wagghhss !!!!!

Don't see how that helps much. Means you can overwatch, and consolidate and sweeping advance.. but its not like Meganobz were going to catch anyone. You can run your meganobz on that turn... but if you're slogging meganobz, something's gone wrong.

So it looks like they haven't covered the question regarding whether or not passengers placed from an exploding vehicle count as disembarking or not for the purposes of assaulting.

They really need to get that answered because RAW those models placed after an explosion CAN assault and it makes players NOT want to shoot at vehicles in certain cases because they know there's a chance if they explode the vehicle they'll free the squad up to be able to assault when it wouldn't be able to before.

Also, this questions is all screwed up:

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

I think they meant SWOOPING FMC's not GLIDING.

 yakface wrote:

So it looks like they haven't covered the question regarding whether or not passengers placed from an exploding vehicle count as disembarking or not for the purposes of assaulting.

They are not disembarked.

Page 426 – The Game Summary, Transport Vehicles and Their
Passengers, Explodes (Other Effects).
Change the entry to read “The unit takes a number of Strength
4 AP – hits equal to the number of models in the unit.
Surviving passengers are placed where the vehicle used to be
and must take a Pinning test.”




Automatically Appended Next Post:
I actually mentioned that a couple pages back. It removes the argument that the summary overrules the rule section.

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures.[...]

"Gliding" Flying Monstrous Creatures ?! ...
That doesn't make sense : I guess that's a typo mistake and they actually mean "Swooping" Flying Monstrous Creatures

I may have missed something, did they finally address boneswords?

What needs addressing? I thought BS were perfectly clear.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 yakface wrote:

Also, this questions is all screwed up:

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

I think they meant SWOOPING FMC's not GLIDING.

E-mail the FAQ address. That should be an easy fix.

Yep anything that ignores saves in its description, continues to ignore all armor saves

Yeah, they specifically did not FAQ all of those. Example: They faq'd a bunch of power weapons in Codex: Eldar but not mirror swords or power blades.

Not sure if this is new now or not, but Smoke Launchers and Kustum Force Fields don't work against Impaler Cannons.

It is magenta, isn't it?

 pretre wrote:
It is magenta, isn't it?

Hah, sorry, I meant from 5th to 6th.

 pretre wrote:

 yakface wrote:

So it looks like they haven't covered the question regarding whether or not passengers placed from an exploding vehicle count as disembarking or not for the purposes of assaulting.

They are not disembarked.

Page 426 – The Game Summary, Transport Vehicles and Their
Passengers, Explodes (Other Effects).
Change the entry to read “The unit takes a number of Strength
4 AP – hits equal to the number of models in the unit.
Surviving passengers are placed where the vehicle used to be
and must take a Pinning test.”

Yeah, the point is this is the same question that has existed since 5th edition...we all know that you're not disembarking the models via the disembarking rules, but it seems really unlikely that GW would actually rule that these models don't count as having disembarked from the vehicle for the purposes of assaulting. Because like I said, if you don't rule that way it makes exploding vehicle a detriment, which makes no sense, as players will actually want to not shoot the vehicle to keep a unit locked inside it in some cases.

Oh yeah, sorry if I wasn't clear. I just meant that they closed that one loophole that was argued as to it being disembarking.

I'm not sure if they intended it to beneficial, but they just made it a bit closer to the raw that they didn't disembark, so can assault.

 pretre wrote:
It is magenta, isn't it?

No. It's pink.

I could have sworn I saw it ruled you couldn't assault out of an exploded vehicle unless it was an assault vehicle. I'll double check.

Here:

Q: If a unit disembarks from a destroyed vehicle during the enemy
turn, can it Charge in the Assault phase of its own turn? (p80)
A: No, unless the vehicle in question was an Assault Vehicle.

Ruled similarly on shooting:

Q: If passengers disembark from a Transport that has suffered a
Shaken or Stunned result, do they still suffer these effects in their
next Shooting phase? (p80)
A: Yes.

I think intent is pretty clear here....But RAW is still that they could assault because of word choice.

Broodlord still boned 1/3 of the time with rolling on the Biomancy chart. :(

So am I right in understanding that tesla no longer arcs to flyers since only things that roll to hit work now?

It was really fun to shoot fateweaver and just arc to the entire rest of the army :/

 ruminator wrote:

 pretre wrote:
It is magenta, isn't it?

No. It's pink.

"When changes are made, the version number will be updated,
and any changes from the previous version will be highlighted in
Magenta."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hulksmash wrote:
I could have sworn I saw it ruled you couldn't assault out of an exploded vehicle unless it was an assault vehicle. I'll double check.

Here:

Q: If a unit disembarks from a destroyed vehicle during the enemy
turn, can it Charge in the Assault phase of its own turn? (p80)
A: No, unless the vehicle in question was an Assault Vehicle.

Ruled similarly on shooting:

Q: If passengers disembark from a Transport that has suffered a
Shaken or Stunned result, do they still suffer these effects in their
next Shooting phase? (p80)
A: Yes.

I think intent is pretty clear here....But RAW is still that they could assault because of word choice.

Yeah, they specifically ruled explode to not be a disembark with their errata, so it bones up RAW still.

 yakface wrote:

Tau Disruption Pods now give SHROUDING.

That's a 3+ cover save (jink + shrouding) if the vehicle moves and the firer is more than 12" away and a 2+ cover save if the vehicle moved flat-out!

It's back to being the best 5 point vehicle upgrade in the game.


Hmmmm, mech tau seems really interesting now.

I play Tau too, and this just seems way too good. Moving flat-out to block LOS to squads that have already fired is incredibly broken if the vehicle gets a 2+ cover save. Piranhas are also ridiculous now and very resilient.

 Rivet wrote:
DE Incubi weapons are now AP2 as are Huskblades.

Didn't someone who interviewed Phil Kelly say that he said "Husk blade users will be very happy soon", when 6th came out and people complained?

That's my boy. Hope he does the CSM book justice.

Page 71 – Vehicles, Difficult and Dangerous Terrain.
Change the final sentence to “A vehicle that fails a Dangerous
Terrain test immediately suffers an Immobilised result from
the Vehicle Damage table, including losing one Hull Point”.

That´s new to me, loosing the hullpoint, too.

My poor Landraiders want Dozerblades. ^^

So if they removed character from nobs does that mean they have no leader for los unless it's a special character or can we designate a nob to be the leader for purposes of los?

You don't get a leader in a unit of nobz.

Leman Russ is now heavy?

GUNFIRE, HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Unless its a special character then. Well that stinks I figured they would fix that but I also figured they would let us choose a nob to be a "Sargent" type nob for the squad.

 wowsmash wrote:
Unless its a special character then. Well that stinks I figured they would fix that but I also figured they would let us choose a nob to be a "Sargent" type nob for the squad.

Did you miss part of the FAQ?

Designers Note: Wolf Guard, Nobz, Nobz Warbikers, and Crisis
Shas’vre that lead a unit (for example an Ork Nob leading Ork
Boyz, a Wolf Guard leading Grey Hunters) have the unit type
Infantry (Character).

So, it looks like the Doom Scythe is pretty bad at AA, since you can only shoot the destructor and can't do anything with the death ray. Kinda sad since this was its primary roll in my army list, since anti tank is covered by guass and it only does 1 wound max to a monstrous creature. I guess its ok against terminators though.

reps0l wrote:

 wowsmash wrote:
Unless its a special character then. Well that stinks I figured they would fix that but I also figured they would let us choose a nob to be a "Sargent" type nob for the squad.

Did you miss part of the FAQ?

Designers Note: Wolf Guard, Nobz, Nobz Warbikers, and Crisis
Shas’vre that lead a unit (for example an Ork Nob leading Ork
Boyz, a Wolf Guard leading Grey Hunters) have the unit type
Infantry (Character).

I think he means that one nob could lead a unit of nobs.

On the plus side, you can't challenge anyone in these full squads anymore.

Ah but that address nobs leading boys not nobs leading other nobs.

Right, but where in the Nob squad entry does it have any model that has the Character subtype? It doesn't.

Yea now a unit of nobs cant protect your characters from challenges anymore. Looks like I have to up the size of my nob bikers now. Then again painboys are still characters I guess so that is something.

 Brometheus wrote:

 Rivet wrote:
DE Incubi weapons are now AP2 as are Huskblades.

Didn't someone who interviewed Phil Kelly say that he said "Husk blade users will be very happy soon", when 6th came out and people complained?

That's my boy. Hope he does the CSM book justice.

Yeah that's because the DE players who are complaining wanted an AP2 option. Specifically there was a large body of voices who wanted agonizers to have the AP2 so their wyches could mow down Terminators. Instead GW upped the Huskblade option and the Incubi weapons. Problem solved IMO, but I'm sure you'll stll find a storm of tears if you look for it.

 Blackgaze wrote:
Leman Russ is now heavy?

GUNFIRE, HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Mmmmmm, Demolisher Heavy Flamer BBQ

 morgendonner wrote:
So am I right in understanding that tesla no longer arcs to flyers since only things that roll to hit work now?

It was really fun to shoot fateweaver and just arc to the entire rest of the army :/

I suppose so, since the CCB can't sweep attack a flyer either. The big question would be can you arc from a flyer to ground units. Heh. And why would it work one way and not the other.

Some of these are funny.

Q: Do hits by Tau markerlights, or other items of wargear that cause
hits but do not inflict damage, require a Swooping Flying Monstrous
Creature to take a Grounded test. (p49)
A: Yes.

Shoot it in the eye to blind it!

I wish they would have clarified if Seeker missiles hit fliers at BS5 from markerlights or still BS1

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Blackgaze wrote:
Leman Russ is now heavy?

GUNFIRE, HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Mmmmmm, Demolisher Heavy Flamer BBQ

Isn't the demolisher an ordnance weapon? So you'd still have to snap shot other weapons anyway.

 crazyK wrote:
Some of these are funny.

Q: Do hits by Tau markerlights, or other items of wargear that cause
hits but do not inflict damage, require a Swooping Flying Monstrous
Creature to take a Grounded test. (p49)
A: Yes !

That's asinine. There are no other words to cover how stupid that is.

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 crazyK wrote:
Some of these are funny.

Q: Do hits by Tau markerlights, or other items of wargear that cause
hits but do not inflict damage, require a Swooping Flying Monstrous
Creature to take a Grounded test. (p49)
A: Yes !

That's asinine. There are no other words to cover how stupid that is.

You mean 'That's asinine' doesn't cover it.

As I said earlier, blinding pilots is a real problem in real life, not sure why it wouldn't be a problem with flying monsters.

 MightyGodzilla wrote:

Yeah that's because the DE players who are complaining wanted an AP2 option. Specifically there was a large body of voices who wanted agonizers to have the AP2 so their wyches could mow down Terminators. Instead GW upped the Huskblade option and the Incubi weapons. Problem solved IMO, but I'm sure you'll stll find a storm of tears if you look for it.

This is the best option in that HQ characters get an ap2 at initiative choice that costs alot of points and additionally there is a dedicated unit that both visually and fluffwise should be able to take on terminators (with the added benefit being that the unit was rarely taken before). I'm glad that GW opted to side with reason and not the chicken little wailing that went on in that thread calling for a ubiquitous weapon to be ap2 for no reason other than they wanted every character to kill terminators and everything else with a one-size-fits-all weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 crazyK wrote:
Some of these are funny.

Q: Do hits by Tau markerlights, or other items of wargear that cause
hits but do not inflict damage, require a Swooping Flying Monstrous
Creature to take a Grounded test. (p49)
A: Yes !

That's asinine. There are no other words to cover how stupid that is.

You haven't read the reports of teens/terrorists trying to distract/down airliners with handheld lasers?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:
As I said earlier, blinding pilots is a real problem in real life, not sure why it wouldn't be a problem with flying monsters.

Suspension of disbelief similar to how the proper way of killing a giant vehicle is by running at it and swinging a chainsaw at it with the oldest and most experience officer you have as opposed to pressing a button and killing it from 2,000ft away. I always attribute decisions like this to the fi part of scifi.

Necronic Angel wrote:
Q: Does a weapon that hits automatically, still hit automatically when
making a Snap Shot? (p13)
A: Yes.

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

Is it just me or do these 2 FAQ's contradict each other? The first says auto-hit weapons auto-hit on snap shots, the second says auto-hit weapons can't be snap shot.

I agree that they do contradict one another.

I think what they are trying to do is differentiate between weapons that use the hit mechanic but just always pass the test and weapons that just don't use the normal hit mechanic (or explicitly can't be used as snap shots). Unfortunately that's not at all what they wrote.

They don't conflict. The first one doesn't give the ability to use snap shots to weapons that hit automatically, it just says that if an auto-hit weapon can snap shot it can still hit automatically.

 ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:

Necronic Angel wrote:
Q: Does a weapon that hits automatically, still hit automatically when
making a Snap Shot? (p13)
A: Yes.

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

Is it just me or do these 2 FAQ's contradict each other? The first says auto-hit weapons auto-hit on snap shots, the second says auto-hit weapons can't be snap shot.

I agree that they do contradict one another.

I think what they are trying to do is differentiate between weapons that use the hit mechanic but just always pass the test and weapons that just don't use the normal hit mechanic (or explicitly can't be used as snap shots). Unfortunately that's not at all what they wrote.

They don't conflict because not all Snap Shots are directed at flyers. If a Vehicle Cruises and you Snap Shot from the fire point with an auto-hit weapon, you still auto-hit.

 Kevin949 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Blackgaze wrote:
Leman Russ is now heavy?

GUNFIRE, HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Mmmmmm, Demolisher Heavy Flamer BBQ

Isn't the demolisher an ordnance weapon? So you'd still have to snap shot other weapons anyway.

SHOOTING WITH HEAVY VEHICLES: For the purposes of determining which weapons a Heavy vehicle can fire (and at what BallisticSkill),Heavyvehicles are
always treated as having remained Stationary.

And the second one is direct relation to flyers and nothing else.

 pretre wrote:
They don't conflict. The first one doesn't give the ability to use snap shots to weapons that hit automatically, it just says that if an auto-hit weapon can snap shot it can still hit automatically.

So if the first statement doesn't imply that auto hit weapons can snap shoot, and then the second implies that they cannot snap shot, the first statement would be totally worthless. I think your interpretation doesn't make sense because it makes the first statement comepletely irrelevant.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Blackgaze wrote:
Leman Russ is now heavy?

GUNFIRE, HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Mmmmmm, Demolisher Heavy Flamer BBQ

Isn't the demolisher an ordnance weapon? So you'd still have to snap shot other weapons anyway.

SHOOTING WITH HEAVY VEHICLES: For the purposes of determining which weapons a Heavy vehicle can fire (and at what BallisticSkill),Heavyvehicles are
always treated as having remained Stationary.

And ordnance weapons always require you to snap shot other weapons, it doesn't matter if you move or not. Trust me, I've gone over this with my monolith a bunch because I was so pissed that heavy didn't matter for it (in a substantial way, it does allow you to shoot all the gauss flux arcs if you move...whoopie!)

Here's what will really get you though, Vehicles have relentless...which means you count as stationary when shooting Heavy, salvo or ordnance weapons. But heavy does the same thing except it limits your movement speed. Kinda redundant...

Ok, can someone clarify this for me;

"Page 15--Shooting Phase, Mixed Saves
Change subheader to "Mixed Saves and Characters".
Change the first sentence to read "If the target unit contains several different saving throws, or at least one character..."

So previously, if I had a SM Chaplain running around with an Assault Squad (All 3+ saves) and he was the front guy I would;

Make all the saves together
Use LOS to dump off failed saves to anyone within 6"

Now, from my reading of that change--it doesn't matter if they have the same save--as it states "or at least one character". So now I need to LOS before saves are made--even if they share armor?




Night Scythe got even better. So, it will show up--suck up a unit that is about to get charged--shoot you--then if you destroy it, they go back into reserves. Heh.

 GreyHamster wrote:
They don't conflict because not all Snap Shots are directed at flyers. If a Vehicle Cruises and you Snap Shot from the fire point with an auto-hit weapon, you still auto-hit.

The reason you can't use those other listed attacks against flyers is because they can't snap shot. If auto hit weapons can snap shot in every other instance why wouldn't they be able to against flyers?

 ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:

 pretre wrote:
They don't conflict. The first one doesn't give the ability to use snap shots to weapons that hit automatically, it just says that if an auto-hit weapon can snap shot it can still hit automatically.

So if the first statement doesn't imply that auto hit weapons can snap shoot, and then the second implies that they cannot snap shot, the first statement would be totally worthless. I think your interpretation doesn't make sense because it makes the first statement comepletely irrelevant.

You have to use a BS to fire a snap shot. If you can do this and you can auto-hit, your snap shot auto-hits.

There are psychic shooting powers that auto-hit, but have no BS and therefore cannot snap shot.

 ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:

 pretre wrote:
They don't conflict. The first one doesn't give the ability to use snap shots to weapons that hit automatically, it just says that if an auto-hit weapon can snap shot it can still hit automatically.

So if the first statement doesn't imply that auto hit weapons can snap shoot, and then the second implies that they cannot snap shot, the first statement would be totally worthless. I think your interpretation doesn't make sense because it makes the first statement comepletely irrelevant.

It doesn't make it irrelevant if there are some specific exemptions that allow some auto-hits to be used as snap fire. Wall of Death for example.

 Kevin949 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Blackgaze wrote:
Leman Russ is now heavy?

GUNFIRE, HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Mmmmmm, Demolisher Heavy Flamer BBQ

Isn't the demolisher an ordnance weapon? So you'd still have to snap shot other weapons anyway.

SHOOTING WITH HEAVY VEHICLES: For the purposes of determining which weapons a Heavy vehicle can fire (and at what BallisticSkill),Heavyvehicles are
always treated as having remained Stationary.

And ordnance weapons always require you to snap shot other weapons, it doesn't matter if you move or not. Trust me, I've gone over this with my monolith a bunch because I was so pissed that heavy didn't matter for it.

So it's a win for the Executioner and Exterminator most of all, and a smallish boost to the Punisher. Adding Pask and 3 HB to a Punisher gives you 29 shots at BS4. Expensive, but interesting.

 Kevin949 wrote:
...I suppose so, since the CCB can't sweep attack a flyer either...

Am I missing something, what disallows them from doing so?

 pretre wrote:

It doesn't make it irrelevant if there are some specific exemptions that allow some auto-hits to be used as snap fire. Wall of Death for example.

I guess, but there are already very clear rules around that exception. And flamers are template weapons which have their own rules to hit, they are not normal shooting attacks that automatically hit.

I can't think of any other exceptinos in the rules, in codices or other FAQs where it explicitly says whether a weapon that auto hits can or can't be used as a snap shot. And the rulebook explicitly states the things that cannot be used as snap shots and IIRC it says nothing about auto hit weapons. So then the first statement only makes sense to me if they can actually snap shoot. But then that doesn't fit with the second statement which excludes all of those attacks because they can't be used as snap shots.

I don't know what the true intent was, but I don't think it's clear at all.

Target Lock's back online.

Since I'm one of the few templars players.

Q: Must the ‘Consolidate move’ towards the enemy for Righteous Zeal
be made in full? (p23)

A: Yes.

Q: Is the Abhor the Witch, Destroy the Witch vow taken instead of
normal Deny the Witch rolls? (p25)

A: Yes

Blarg...

 Cyrax wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
...I suppose so, since the CCB can't sweep attack a flyer either...

Am I missing something, what disallows them from doing so?

"Q: Can a character on a Chariot that is also a Skimmer make a
Sweep Attack against a Zooming Flyer? (p82)
A: No"

Well, time to put down my Paladin/Nob BFF army. It was fun while it lasted.

Snikrot was already dead, but now that Nobz and Paladins are garbage too, that's my three favourite units in the game gone.

I'll need to rebuild my entire army anyway, but this kind of sucks. There were ways to fix the wound allocation issues, but this is just overboard.

 pretre wrote:
Tau got target locks back:

Page 28 – Armoury, Target Lock.
Replace this entry with “A model with a target lock can shoot at
a different target to the rest of his unit.”

However, they did NOT add target lock for vehicles

They never took it away.

 Dave_Fay wrote:
Since I'm one of the few templars players.

Q: Must the ‘Consolidate move’ towards the enemy for Righteous Zeal
be made in full? (p23)

A: Yes.

Q: Is the Abhor the Witch, Destroy the Witch vow taken instead of
normal Deny the Witch rolls? (p25)

A: Yes

Blarg...

My buddy won't be terribly happy about that first one. Though he's not averse to getting into CC anyway, but sometimes you just don't want to move...or you move the wrong way (in the case of non-battlebrother allies that are enemies).

Happy to see Incubi get boosted. Still not enough to warrant taking them of course, but at least the DE once again have a dedicated melee unit for tackling terminators.

skarsol wrote:
They never took it away.

D'oh!!! Well, don't I feel silly now

Am I the only one that noticed that Bikes got Very Bulky (Count as 3 units) and therefore can now mount up into transports?

The first image I had was a squad of bikes bursting out of a Land Raider, clown-car style. Then I looked up and saw my Stormraven...

Yeah, Skies of Blood makes it suitably dangerous for Bikes to Deep Strike out of a Stormraven moving flat-out, but the coolness of that image is just so... cool!

Tau Disruption Pods now give SHROUDING.

That's a 3+ cover save (jink + shrouding) if the vehicle moves and the firer is more than 12" away and a 2+ cover save if the vehicle moved flat-out!

It's back to being the best 5 point vehicle upgrade in the game.


Hmmmm, mech tau seems really interesting now.

This is crazy

 Dave_Fay wrote:
Since I'm one of the few templars players.

Q: Must the ‘Consolidate move’ towards the enemy for Righteous Zeal
be made in full? (p23)

A: Yes.

Q: Is the Abhor the Witch, Destroy the Witch vow taken instead of
normal Deny the Witch rolls? (p25)

A: Yes

Blarg...

Yep, the first one there alone basically killed Lasplas squads and nerfed double CML Terminators hard. Furthermore, you can now shoot any non-vehicle Black Templars unit to have it run at you so you can assault it.

Why does GW hate Black Templars? First the AAC nerf and now this? At least we're rid of flippin' Target Priority.

Yeah. My Black Templars will now be running around as the Sons of Dorn that Wear Black and will be using the Space Marine codex. That's the final kick in the balls.

Hopefully a new Codex will drop next year. I guess we'll wait and see.

Oh no, nob/paladin abuse is gone.



Shame that your opponents might actually have some fun in friendly games.

 Brometheus wrote:
Oh no, nob/paladin abuse is gone.



Guess it's time for you guys to move to Necrons, then.

Following the rules is not "abuse", it's following the rules. Hardly surprising that you'd know where to find the violin...

Google?

Your attempt to insult (if there) is wasted. I don't care, my friend.

Oh, and.. Sparta. I am fully interested in actually seeing if there's a functional violin. Not being clever.. Truly interested.

Holy crap, some of these are game changing....so long Nob Bikers! hahaha

So the Monlith can't get jink saves now.

Wyches and DE players got a small boost---you can actually assault the following turn after your transport is wrecked;

Q: If a unit disembarks from a destroyed vehicle during the enemy
turn, can it in the Assault phase of its own turn? (p80)
A: No, unless the vehicle in question was an Assault Vehicle.

So--I'm assuming they meant for this to cover wrecked vehicles as well?

 Brometheus wrote:
Oh no, nob/paladin abuse is gone.



Shame that your opponents might actually have some fun in friendly games.

It's not a hard list to beat if you play decently enough. Lots of raw firepower is scary at first, but then you realize that they're about as mobile as a glacier. The only people who couldn't beat a Paladin/Nob doublestar army were the ones who insisted on fighting them head-on.

One major problem that I have is not just that Paladins and Nobz got nerfed, but that they're not worth taking at all anymore.

 Dave_Fay wrote:
Since I'm one of the few templars players.

Q: Must the ‘Consolidate move’ towards the enemy for Righteous Zeal
be made in full? (p23)

A: Yes.

Q: Is the Abhor the Witch, Destroy the Witch vow taken instead of
normal Deny the Witch rolls? (p25)

A: Yes

Blarg...

It's hard to keep hope alive aint it.....they just keep making it tougher and tougher on the Templars.

Hmmmmm Fafnir, I would have to disagree (about their worth) but we can have that discussion another time/place. I think Paladins and Nobz still have a lot to offer.

Q: Can ork boarding planks, grabbin' klaws and wreckin' ballz target zooming flyers?
A: No

Well, that answers that bit of cheese.

Q: Does a Nemesis Dreadknight armed with a Nemesis greatsword have
4 Attacks at Strength 10 that, because of the Nemesis greatsword, can
re-roll To Hit, To Wound and Armour Penetration rolls?(p54)
A: Yes.

 Brometheus wrote:
Hmmmmm Fafnir, I would have to disagree (about their worth) but we can have that discussion another time/place. I think Paladins and Nobz still have a lot to offer.

Come talk in the GK tactics thread about it I'm having a hard time seeing the benefit of Paladins over Terminators at this point.

It's even worse when you consider that Tactical and Assault termies are better than GK termies too.

timetowaste85 wrote:

 crazyK wrote:
Some of these are funny.

Q: Do hits by Tau markerlights, or other items of wargear that cause
hits but do not inflict damage, require a Swooping Flying Monstrous
Creature to take a Grounded test. (p49)
A: Yes !

That's asinine. There are no other words to cover how stupid that is.

I disagree. They simplified a ruleset that could easily get stupidly complicated with new releases. Now your rule of thumb is that if it hits, you take the test. I'll take that over them having to clarify every single piece of equipment forever.

Reecius wrote:Holy crap, some of these are game changing....so long Nob Bikers! hahaha

I just bought and painted a full 1850 paladin list. I'm not even upset, the fact that they're updating the game every few months makes me super happy

 AgeOfEgos wrote:
So the Monlith can't get jink saves now.

Where did you read that? I didn't see that in the FAQ.

DA venerable dreads finally get BS5

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 AgeOfEgos wrote:
So the Monlith can't get jink saves now.

Where did you read that? I didn't see that in the FAQ.

"Page 83 – Skimmers, Special Rules.
Change this sentence to “Skimmers that are not also Heavy
Vehicles have the Jink special rule”."

furbyballer wrote:
Q: Does a Nemesis Dreadknight armed with a Nemesis greatsword have
4 Attacks at Strength 10 that, because of the Nemesis greatsword, can
re-roll To Hit, To Wound and Armour Penetration rolls?(p54)
A: Yes.

Oh yeah, no more choosing between the fist or the sword!

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 AgeOfEgos wrote:
So the Monlith can't get jink saves now.

Where did you read that? I didn't see that in the FAQ.

Heavy vehicles can't jink.

 Maelstrom808 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 AgeOfEgos wrote:
So the Monlith can't get jink saves now.

Where did you read that? I didn't see that in the FAQ.

"Page 83 – Skimmers, Special Rules.
Change this sentence to “Skimmers that are not also Heavy
Vehicles have the Jink special rule”."

Well, crap. That kinda sucks for the mono.
Now I have to think of another way of getting the damned thing to survive

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Maelstrom808 wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 AgeOfEgos wrote:
So the Monlith can't get jink saves now.

Where did you read that? I didn't see that in the FAQ.

"Page 83 – Skimmers, Special Rules.
Change this sentence to “Skimmers that are not also Heavy
Vehicles have the Jink special rule”."

Well, crap. That kinda sucks for the mono.
Now I have to think of another way of getting the damned thing to survive

Leave it out of the game? Cant' get destroyed then! Hah.

 Fafnir wrote:
One major problem that I have is not just that Paladins and Nobz got nerfed, but that they're not worth taking at all anymore.

Pretty much. They're expensive as gak.

 Kevin949 wrote:

 Cyrax wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
...I suppose so, since the CCB can't sweep attack a flyer either...

Am I missing something, what disallows them from doing so?

"Q: Can a character on a Chariot that is also a Skimmer make a
Sweep Attack against a Zooming Flyer? (p82)
A: No"

Also on page 3 of the FAQ: "Only Snap Shots ... Therefore any attacks that use blast markers, templates, create a line of / area of effect or otherwise don't roll to hit cannot target them"

Just to point out the Incubi don't get that much of a boost. The only AP2 weapon is the Klaivex with Demiklaives used two handed. A big point investment and I would very much doubt that a squad could do enough damage to a Termie squad to avoid getting utterly annihilated once the strikes back happen.

Still I guess Drazhar gets a bit better forbids points.

 azreal13 wrote:
Just to point out the Incubi don't get that much of a boost. The only AP2 weapon is the Klaivex with Demiklaives used two handed.

Page 31 – Incubi, Klaives.
Replace this entry with: “Klaives have the following profile:
Range S AP Type
Klaive - +1 2 Melee, Two-handed

 undertow wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:

 Cyrax wrote:

 Kevin949 wrote:
...I suppose so, since the CCB can't sweep attack a flyer either...

Am I missing something, what disallows them from doing so?

"Q: Can a character on a Chariot that is also a Skimmer make a
Sweep Attack against a Zooming Flyer? (p82)
A: No"

Also on page 3 of the FAQ: "Only Snap Shots ... Therefore any attacks that use blast markers, templates, create a line of / area of effect or otherwise don't roll to hit cannot target them"

Well, chariot sweep attacks DO roll to hit...it's just not a standard to-hit roll.

oH Lordy to be correct on so many questions that have been argued here is valadating.

Only a weapon that auto hits, can hit flyers insted of using snap shots. Which weapons are those? I dont know of any weapon that auto hit? Anyone.

 quickfuze wrote:
Thats a poorly written FAQ on MSS. Reason being that the new rules dont simply require a LD test, they require the expenditure of a warp token and then a test. So now the way its written, even if you have no warp tokens left, Necron players will be arguing that MSS can do it without the the need for the token because the faq doesnt say they have to spend a token.

I call shenanigans on this There is no way to avoid the cost of Force. You must pay the charge and take the test, otherwise you are not following the rule. All the FAQ did was clarify that yes, the MSS controller can indeed choose to activate the Force ability of the weapon, thus forcing the psyker to pay the cost. If the charge does not exist then you can't pay the cost. Hence no successful activation.

 quickfuze wrote:
My argument would be that since models are required to spend the token, and no model simply makes a LD test (sans GK which may be their only exception), that MSS cannot activate Force weapons on anyone...like I said...poorly written FAQ to MSS...

Disagree. This FAQ answer seems to me to be perfectly in line with both the new Force USR and its interaction with MSS.

-Yad

 Dave_Fay wrote:
Since I'm one of the few templars players.

Q: Must the ‘Consolidate move’ towards the enemy for Righteous Zeal
be made in full? (p23)

A: Yes.

Q: Is the Abhor the Witch, Destroy the Witch vow taken instead of
normal Deny the Witch rolls? (p25)

A: Yes

Blarg...

That's what I have been saying for years now! At last they answered my weekly mail

I agree Yad no warp charge its a no go.

I love that people are so damn excited to see Nob Bikers, which were not really that big of a deal anyway, get nerfed in to the "Not worth the points" category AGAIN, while standard army builds from competitive armies still can do more killing and survive longer at less points and no one seems to give a damn.

I understand that the LOS rules were stupid and a huge PITA as they were pre FAQ 1.1, but I am totally lost as to why it's such a big reason to celebrate when a mediocre army gets one of it's few hard hitters nerfed into the ground.

Lungpickle wrote:
oH Lordy to be correct on so many questions that have been argued here is valadating.

Only a weapon that auto hits, can hit flyers insted of using snap shots. Which weapons are those? I dont know of any weapon that auto hit? Anyone.

A good number of the FAQs end up playing out how my group plays it. It's validating for me as well.

The only one that I feel validated about from YMDC is about Dante's Axe Mortalis.

Lungpickle wrote:
oH Lordy to be correct on intent on so many questions that have been argued here is valadating.

Fixed that for you.

Another change implied to how some people have been saying things should be played: Gun emplacement = emplaced gun. The FAQ refers to the weapons on the battlements of bastions/FoR as gun emplacements, while the BRB says they are emplaced weapons, meaning that those two terms mean the same thing.

 Maelstrom808 wrote:
Another change implied to how some people have been saying things should be played: Gun emplacement = emplaced gun. The FAQ refers to the weapons on the battlements of bastions/FoR as gun emplacements, while the BRB says they are emplaced weapons, meaning that those two terms mean the same thing.

Or meaning that someone screwed up. We still don't know.

Until they change it, we have to assume it's intended (which I think is the case.)

I'm happy paladins got nerfed, but nob bikers were OP too, imo. And more so, annoying to deal with ruleswise...

 pretre wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Just to point out the Incubi don't get that much of a boost. The only AP2 weapon is the Klaivex with Demiklaives used two handed.

Page 31 – Incubi, Klaives.
Replace this entry with: “Klaives have the following profile:
Range S AP Type
Klaive - +1 2 Melee, Two-handed

Well that's fething odd.

Downloaded v1.1 at 15.48 and it explicitly states they're Ap3. Just retried it and now they're AP2. Filenames and sizes are different too. Got the right one now though.

 RiTides wrote:
I'm happy paladins got nerfed, but nob bikers were OP too, imo. And more so, annoying to deal with ruleswise...

I still don’t see how they got TOTALLY Nerfed. Unless you are only fighting 2+ Save things and a few Hammers take care of that.

Back on subject:
I am happy they settled the Wolf Priest “Power Weapon” and Rune Priest “Force Weapon Issue. I don’t agree with it, but at least it has been settled.

 azreal13 wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Just to point out the Incubi don't get that much of a boost. The only AP2 weapon is the Klaivex with Demiklaives used two handed.

Page 31 – Incubi, Klaives.
Replace this entry with: “Klaives have the following profile:
Range S AP Type
Klaive - +1 2 Melee, Two-handed

Well that's fething odd.

Downloaded v1.1 at 15.48 and it explicitly states they're Ap3. Just retried it and now they're AP2. Filenames and sizes are different too. Got the right one now though.

Huh, they probably changed it. That would explain why the new FAQs were gone for a little while.

Really disappointed that they didn't FAQ Broodlords to have BS 1 or BS 2 or something. It's not like it would have helped them enormously -- just made them slightly less useless. Just seems like another indication that GW's preferred approach to their poor quality Tyranid codex is to keep Tyranid armies as dull and one-dimensional as ever. :(

Yeah, there was a hiccup in there where the old ones were put back.

Q: If a model makes a Pile In move which brings it into base contact
with a model with a lash whip, does it then fight at its normal
Initiative step or must it wait until the Initiative 1 step? (p83)
A: It fights at its normal Initiative 1 step.

Wait lol? Normal or I1?

Normal. Remove the 1. It has been mentioned about 20 million times and is clear in later answers in the FAQ and in the Necron FAQ which has an almost identical answer.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
I'm happy paladins got nerfed, but nob bikers were OP too, imo. And more so, annoying to deal with ruleswise...

I still don’t see how they got TOTALLY Nerfed. Unless you are only fighting 2+ Save things and a few Hammers take care of that.

Back on subject:
I am happy they settled the Wolf Priest “Power Weapon” and Rune Priest “Force Weapon Issue. I don’t agree with it, but at least it has been settled.

I just looked through the SW FAQ I downloaded clarifies the Wolf Priest but not the Rune Priest. Did I miss something? I don't have my codex handy to see what the Rune Priest entry originally was.

To be fair, Rune Weapons weren't unclear before. Only Njal's has been changed to a stave though. The rest are unusual.

 Leth wrote:

smUrfsrUs wrote:
The argument about having skyfire and so being able to fire the death ray at flyers looks set to continue, although more one sided.

It specifically says it cant hit them in the faq

Also all the two wound units(including paladins) lost character status

I believe that this FAQ is a little messed up. It reminds me of when they wrote in a FAQ that Fearless models never take leadership tested (when they do).

The FAQ literally states that the reason a Deathray can not hit a Flier is that weapons that don't use their balistic skill can't ever hit a flier, which is wrong. A non-template weapon with skyfire can still hit a flier regardless of if it uses it's balistic skill.

Not according to the FAQ.

 pretre wrote:

reps0l wrote:
Did anyone see anything about Blood Lance and Jaws against Flyers?

Q: How do maelstroms, novas and beams – or indeed any weapon
that doesn’t need to roll To Hit or hits automatically – interact with
Zooming Flyers and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures? (p13)
A: Only Snap Shots can hit Zooming Flyers and Gliding
Flying Monstrous Creatures. Therefore, any attacks that use
blast markers, templates, create a line of/area of effect or
otherwise don’t roll to hit cannot target them. This includes
weapons such as the Necron Doom Scythe’s death ray or the
Deathstrike missile of the Imperial Guard, and psychic
powers that follow the rule for maelstroms, beams, and
novas.

The FAQ itself is misquoting the rules. Weapons CAN hit a flier without using snapfire. They just have to have Skyfire.

No, it is quoting the default rule. Skyfire is the exception to the rule.

Am I the only one that feels that the FAQ for Nids made them a bit more viable considering that we now have a unit that can assualt when coming in from reserve?

Also somone mentioned that Nids FMC got nerfed...how?

Shots resolved at a Zooming Flyer can only be resolved as Snap Shots
(unless the modelor weaponhas the Skyfire specialrule,as
described on page 42).Template, Blast andLarge Blast weapons
cannot hit Flyersin Zoom mode.

Skyfire -
Amodel with this special rule, or that
is firing a weapon with this special rule,
fires using its normal Ballistic Skill when
shooting at Flyers,Flying Monstrous
Creatures and Skimmers. Unless it also
has the Interceptor special rule, it can
only fire snap shots against other targets.


There is no permission for templates or blasts to hit flyers in Skyfire.

I'm just excited that FMCs can skyfire when swooping. Gives Chaos Daemons a massive boost. That one thing alone is huge for Daemon players.

 matphat wrote:
I love that people are so damn excited to see Nob Bikers, which were not really that big of a deal anyway, get nerfed in to the "Not worth the points" category AGAIN, while standard army builds from competitive armies still can do more killing and survive longer at less points and no one seems to give a damn.

I understand that the LOS rules were stupid and a huge PITA as they were pre FAQ 1.1, but I am totally lost as to why it's such a big reason to celebrate when a mediocre army gets one of it's few hard hitters nerfed into the ground.

^^^^ This

The already less than stellar Orks got kicked hard in their fungal jimmies! 6th had already mauled Green Tide, Kan Wall and KOS builds. Nobz were about it for semi-competitive Ork builds.

@Centurian99

Yeah it is. Absolutely huge since now you don't have to just survive flyers, now you can shoot those bastards down

Q: If mindshackle scarabs are used against a model with a force
weapon or a weapon which allows the wielder to inflict Instant Death
with a successful Leadership test, can the Necron player force the enemy
model to utilise this ability? (p81)
A: Yes.


*shock*

Q: Is there any way to embark back onto a Night Scythe?
A: Yes – follow the rules for Embarking on page 78, treating
the Night Scythe’s base as its Access Point. Note that this is
possible despite the Night Scythe being a Zooming Flyer.



hooray !

Hooray?
Becuse the necron cheese needed to be even more buffed


At least they killed of those ridiculous2++ reroll archon+eldrad bombs.


If the deamon weapon (chaos) is AP2 what is the GK inquisitor deamon sword then?

 Pyriel- wrote:

At least they killed of those ridiculous2++ reroll archon+eldrad bombs.

They didn't. An archon joining a Codex: Eldar Harlequin unit with Eldrad is still a Codex: Eldar unit and can be fortuned.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pyriel- wrote:

If the deamon weapon (chaos) is AP2 what is the GK inquisitor deamon sword then?

Less effective in the hands of a non-believer?

 pretre wrote:
To be fair, Rune Weapons weren't unclear before. Only Njal's has been changed to a stave though. The rest are unusual.

OK. Then I'm not missing anything, unless they were referring to Njal.

Rune Priests have a generic "runic weapon", similar to a Librarian's "force weapon", which can be modeled to be a sword, axe, staff, etc. I thought I'd missed something limiting it a specific runic weapon.

Time to convert and wolf up a sword bearing Librarian.

No, Runic Weapons are unique since they wound daemons on a 2+. So they are S: User and AP3. Njal is stuck with S:+2 AP4.

 kcwm wrote:

 pretre wrote:
To be fair, Rune Weapons weren't unclear before. Only Njal's has been changed to a stave though. The rest are unusual.

OK. Then I'm not missing anything, unless they were referring to Njal.

Rune Priests have a generic "runic weapon", similar to a Librarian's "force weapon", which can be modeled to be a sword, axe, staff, etc. I thought I'd missed something limiting it a specific runic weapon.

Time to convert and wolf up a sword bearing Librarian.

Just remember that the Runic Weapons on normal Rune Priests are unusual, so always S: User AP: 3.

 Pyriel- wrote:
At least they killed of those ridiculous2++ reroll archon+eldrad bombs.

Could always use a Phoenix Lord instead of an Archon anyway.

Phoenix Lord doesn't have an Invul of 2+.

furbyballer wrote:
Q: Does a Nemesis Dreadknight armed with a Nemesis greatsword have
4 Attacks at Strength 10 that, because of the Nemesis greatsword, can
re-roll To Hit, To Wound and Armour Penetration rolls?(p54)
A: Yes.

Yeah, I'm kind of WFT? about this. I understand the attacks and Greatsword benefits, but how is it strength 10? It still has to shoose between the Greatsword and the doomfist.

 pretre wrote:
No, Runic Weapons are unique since they wound daemons on a 2+. So they are S: User and AP3. Njal is stuck with S:+2 AP4.

LOL, I was so caught up in the type of weapon that I missed the fact that it's unusual. LOL, it's rare that my RP gets into combat that it's never come up.

 cuda1179 wrote:

furbyballer wrote:
Q: Does a Nemesis Dreadknight armed with a Nemesis greatsword have
4 Attacks at Strength 10 that, because of the Nemesis greatsword, can
re-roll To Hit, To Wound and Armour Penetration rolls?(p54)
A: Yes.

Yeah, I'm kind of WFT? about this. I understand the attacks and Greatsword benefits, but how is it strength 10? It still has to shoose between the Greatsword and the doomfist.

Attack with the Doomfist, get STR10. Because the sword benefits are tied to having it, not attacking with it, the Doomfist benefits.

 disel24 wrote:
Am I the only one that feels that the FAQ for Nids made them a bit more viable considering that we now have a unit that can assualt when coming in from reserve?

Also somone mentioned that Nids FMC got nerfed...how?

Your not talking about Ymgarls are you? They could already assault from reserve, it specifically says in the codex, didn't need an FAQ to say that. Unless your referring to something else...

He's referring to Ymgarls.

Someone explain this to me:

Q: Can a Doom Scythe’s death ray hit enemy Flyers and/or Flying
Monstrous Creatures? (p50)
A: The Death Ray can hit Flyers in Hover Mode (friendly or
enemy) and Gliding Flying Monstrous Creatures (friendly or
enemy). It cannot hit Zooming Flyers or Swooping Flying
Monstrous Creatures.

What rule can this possibly be based on? Why is this question even asked? The Doom Scythe can fire skyfire which means it can shoot at flyers without resorting to snap shots. The only Death Ray related question I would've asked is that if it shoots skyfire and the beam goes through a flyer does it still hit ground models behind the flyer too. Instead someone asks if it can hit flyers period, and the answer is without any explanation a no.

I get the feeling that as long as you get to ask the strangest questions from the devs you'll get absolutely non-ambigous rules overturned with atleast a 50% accuracy.