http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=600005&pIndex=1&aId=3400019&multiPageMode=true&start=2

Boo-yah, thanks for the heads up!

Oh sweet baby jeebus, thank you.

Pretty mild changes so far.

Techmarines and Mekboyz can repair Hull Points, that's pretty neat.

Sweeeeeeeeeet!

DEAR LORD INVASION BEAMS! NIGHT SCYTHES REJOICE!

Not only is that supersonic transport now playable, but the passengers can disembark after it has moved up to THIRTY SIX INCHES! ARE YOU KIDDING ME? I play Necrons, and if anyone would actually ever roll in the floor laughing their ass off, I'd do it right now.

The only restriction is if it moves over 24" the disembarked unit can only fire snap shots! Oh how terrible! Every other transport moves 6" before the guys disembark. These guys have to move 'only' 24" for the passengers to be able to shoot normally.

Additionally, Whip Coils are now a 'set value modifier' meaning they modify target's initiative to 1 after every other modifier has been added, making it a lot stronger, as suspected.

Additionally, Warscythe is +2 strength, AP1, armour bane (2D6 pen), making it (keeping it) the best close combat weapon in the game. No AP3 nerf to it, no initiative nerf to it, nothing.

Farseers are Mastery Level 1, Swarmlord is 2

Winged Hive Tyrants are Flying Monstrous Creatures, Winged Daemon Princes are Jump Monstrous Creatures

Yay consistency!

TAU Battlesuits can no longer take Target Locks, which means they cannot split fire between the suits. This is a massive hit to Broadsides.

Interestingly a lot of SM "any friendly..." abilities have been reworded to only work with units from the same Codex.

Is anyone else confused by the wording of combat squads (I'm reading it in the BA one) as the very first question/answer of the eratta?

So now I have to declare if I'm combat squadding before DEPLOYMENT, rather than when I get out of a drop pod. It's not very clear, but if I combat squad a unit in a drop pod (and it says they can both embark the same transport), then neither counts against my number of units for reserving, since it's "mandatory" to reserve both?

Or something? So confusing!

IG clarifies orders/creed/straken can only be issued to codex:IG units.
I guess a lot of special charectors/effects only affect their own codex now.

Is it just me or did nothing gain the Skyfire rule?

lord_blackfang wrote:Pretty mild changes so far.

Techmarines and Mekboyz can repair Hull Points, that's pretty neat.

Now I can finally use my Techpriest without feeling completely like I'm giving my opponent extra points!

Hydra's did.

I've not found anything else relating to it so far.

No 'flakk missile' options either :(

The Dark Eldar FAQ is awful, just awful, fails to address a lot of things, it has contradictory errata and amendments, a lot of the decisions they have made are not in the best interest of the codex IMO.

It comes off as rushed and poorly executed.

I am repulsed by reading this document.

Anything with an area of affect only affects its own codex now, as far as i can tell.

lord_blackfang wrote:Pretty mild changes so far.

Techmarines and Mekboyz can repair Hull Points, that's pretty neat.

Hmmm, my Kan Wall might still have some life left in it yet!

@ RiTides

it's the same as before, the key word is "immediately". So you declare they're combat squading and then deploy them straight away.

grrr

This seems like quite an odd one for Blood Angels...

Page 23 – The Red Thirst.
Add “Independent Characters that have succumbed to the Red
Thirst can only join the Death Company, and units that have
also succumbed to the Red Thirst.”

As far as I can tell, that pretty much only applies to noone....

Snufflesms wrote:TAU Battlesuits can no longer take Target Locks, which means they cannot split fire between the suits. This is a massive hit to Broadsides.

I noticed this as well, unless there is a rule change somewhere that allows you to split fire. If not, its pretty fethed up :(.

Some Ork units have lost the Waaagh! and Mob Special Rule :(

Other than that dosnt seem too bad, like how you only use the toughness figure in brackets now.

lord_blackfang wrote:Is it just me or did nothing gain the Skyfire rule?

I don't mean to be pumping my own tires but I made something like 3 posts last night trying to calm people down and make them understand the weapons were already printed in the rulebook and that most likely nothing would gain skyfire and definately not interceptor.

Funnily enough, I don't think anyone even got the option to fire the Flakk Missile, which has skyfire in the rulebook.

Hydra's did.

Hydras didn't gain anything, and neither did the Hydra Autocannon. The gun already had skyfire in the rulebook, so this FAQ just makes the codex consistent with the new rules.

It also confirms Hydra Autocannons hit ground targets with 6's.

I can't help but notice In an Edition where they are moving away from lots of high AP melee weapons, Necrons (who were already doing decent from the changeover) got an AP1 weapon, an AP1 weapon that also rolls 2d6 to penetrate vehicles and is +2 to strength.

Meanwhile the only AP2 melee weapon in the Dark Eldar codex anymore is Demiklaives, which GW don't even make a model to represent.

Not to mention Necrons are also the fastest army in the game thanks to the Night Scythe's 24 inch disembark.

I dunno who deserves the bigger slow clap, GW's rules morons, or me for thinking they might get it right for once.

Well Kharn just get a bit nerfed. Gorechild now counts as a power axe with an extra D6 armor pen.

So I1 Kharn

Charax wrote:
Winged Hive Tyrants are Flying Monstrous Creatures, Winged Daemon Princes are Jump Monstrous Creatures

Yay consistency!

I'll go you one better. A winged DP from Codex: CSM is Jumping, but a winged DP from Codex: Daemons is Flying.

lord_blackfang wrote:I'll go you one better. A winged DP from Codex: CSM is Jumping, but a winged DP from Codex: Daemons is Flying.

...What?

Oh that's just not cool.

Therion wrote:DEAR LORD INVASION BEAMS! NIGHT SCYTHES REJOICE!

Not only is that supersonic transport now playable, but the passengers can disembark after it has moved up to THIRTY SIX INCHES! ARE YOU KIDDING ME? I play Necrons, and if anyone would actually ever roll in the floor laughing their ass off, I'd do it right now.

The only restriction is if it moves over 24" the disembarked unit can only fire snap shots! Oh how terrible! Every other transport moves 6" before the guys disembark. These guys have to move 'only' 24" for the passengers to be able to shoot normally.

Yeah, its nuts but the counter is that Night Scythes can't hover which means they've got that limited mobility of always having to zoom. In some cases this is going to be a pain in the butt.

However, yeah, disembarking after 36" is pretty crazy even with that negative.

Isnt Flakk an option for any missile launchers? It says that the weapons in the codex are functionally the same as the rule book.

If so Missile HWTs are still going to be my go to guys.

Therion wrote:
Hydras didn't gain anything, and neither did the Hydra Autocannon. The gun already had skyfire in the rulebook, so this FAQ just makes the codex consistent with the new rules.

It also confirms Hydra Autocannons hit ground targets with 6's.

Well *excuse* me for not getting my Rulebook yet cause of Royal Mail being lazy.

Also I find no explicit references to "Hydra Autocannons hit ground targets with 6's."

Page 51 - Hydra Flak Tank, Hyda Autocannon.
Add the Skyfire special rule to the Hydra Autocannon's type.

Page 51 - Hydra Flak Tank, Auto-Targeting System.
Replace this entry with "Target units cannot claim a Jink save against shots fired by the Hydra."

lord_blackfang wrote:

Charax wrote:
Winged Hive Tyrants are Flying Monstrous Creatures, Winged Daemon Princes are Jump Monstrous Creatures

Yay consistency!

I'll go you one better. A winged DP from Codex: CSM is Jumping, but a winged DP from Codex: Daemons is Flying.

There's an easy answer to that! Codex Chaos Space Marines is so good that they don't need the vector strikes from their DPs! It was a carefully planned balance move.

Also I find no explicit references to "Hydra Autocannons hit ground targets with 6's."

It's because you haven't read the rulebook. If your weapon has skyfire, you hit skimmers and flyers and flying MCs with normal BS, but you hit ground targets with 6's. Skyfire makes a weapon an anti-aircraft gun. Anti-aircraft guns are not used to effectively kill for example enemy infantry, and this rule represents that well.

Compel wrote:

Therion wrote:
Hydras didn't gain anything, and neither did the Hydra Autocannon. The gun already had skyfire in the rulebook, so this FAQ just makes the codex consistent with the new rules.

It also confirms Hydra Autocannons hit ground targets with 6's.

Well *excuse* me for not getting my Rulebook yet cause of Royal Mail being lazy.

Also I find no explicit references to "Hydra Autocannons hit ground targets with 6's."

Page 51 - Hydra Flak Tank, Hyda Autocannon.
Add the Skyfire special rule to the Hydra Autocannon's type.

Page 51 - Hydra Flak Tank, Auto-Targeting System.
Replace this entry with "Target units cannot claim a Jink save against shots fired by the Hydra."

If you have Skyfire and don't have Interceptor, you can only Snap Fire at targets other than Flyers, Flying MCs, and Skimmers.

Man, Incubi took a massive hit to the balls, not being able to hurt Terminators in close combat unless you buy squad leader with a demiklaive, which GW handily makes no figure for.

Not even the Decapitator has AP2 in close combat, so it looks like our best bet is to run and hide whenever Tinmen appear.

Drunkspleen wrote:I can't help but notice In an Edition where they are moving away from lots of high AP melee weapons, Necrons (who were already doing decent from the changeover) got an AP1 weapon, an AP1 weapon that also rolls 2d6 to penetrate vehicles and is +2 to strength.

I can see what you're saying but let's keep in mind there's normally zero to two of those in a Necron army and they're wielded by guys with WS4 and 3 attacks.

The Tyranid Faq didn't fix anything for us, but also leaves a few questions unanswered. Like, what AP are boneswords? They "ignore armor saves" in the old book, but that's it.

Therion wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:I can't help but notice In an Edition where they are moving away from lots of high AP melee weapons, Necrons (who were already doing decent from the changeover) got an AP1 weapon, an AP1 weapon that also rolls 2d6 to penetrate vehicles and is +2 to strength.

I can see what you're saying but let's keep in mind there's normally zero to two of those in a Necron army and they're wielded by guys with WS4 and 3 attacks.

...riding chariots with quantum shields. They are solitary models, but very mobile. I played a 1k doubles game this week that was brutal and hilarious. Two Overlords scooting from corner to corner, dropping models (including a Razorwing) like a baseball bat drive-by.

Nalathani wrote:The Tyranid Faq didn't fix anything for us, but also leaves a few questions unanswered. Like, what AP are boneswords? They "ignore armor saves" in the old book, but that's it.

Then you have your answer. They ignore armour saves, it's not exactly ambiguous.

Hey they finally fixed Ork Tankbustas. If a vehicle isn't within range or LOS now you get to choose your target normally (about time).

Also Flashgitz got 'ignore cover' added to their shots since 'Gitfinda' is now a pointless piece of gear.

Agamemnon2 wrote:Man, Incubi took a massive hit to the balls, not being able to hurt Terminators in close combat unless you buy squad leader with a demiklaive, which GW handily makes no figure for.

Not even the Decapitator has AP2 in close combat, so it looks like our best bet is to run and hide whenever Tinmen appear.

The whole FAQ is just awful, some examples:

They clarify Tormentor Grenade Launchers to be a leadership test in the errata, then proceed to change wordings in the amendments and refer to it once again as a morale check

They failed to address the Shadowseer's Veil of Tears ability, even though they did so in the Eldar FAQ and only had to copy and paste the answer across

They failed to address flickerfields, which as a 5+ Invulnerable save are largely useless with all moving Skimmers getting a 5+ save from their Jink

They said to Ignore the entry for a Voidraven's unit type, now the Voidraven technically has no unit type (not even Vehicle)

just lazy, how could this be what they put out at a make or break time like the new edition?

why did they change the ork waaaagh, in the fact that now just about only half benefit from it D:

Agamemnon2 wrote:Two Overlords scooting from corner to corner, dropping models (including a Razorwing) like a baseball bat drive-by.

They can't really do that the same way anymore since they move only 12" in the movement phase now instead of 24" like in the 5th. Sweeping attacks are done against a unit you moved over in the movement phase.

Drunkspleen wrote:
They said to Ignore the entry for a Voidraven's unit type, now the Voidraven technically has no unit type (not even Vehicle)

just lazy, how could this be what they put out at a make or break time like the new edition?

That is very clearly covered in the rulebook.

And on top of that they're much, much better about putting out FAQ revisions, so I'm sure we'll see some updates rolling out soonish.

Here's what's confusing me. New wording:



Old wording:

Combat Squads

Units with this special rule that include ten squad members have the option of breaking down into two five-man units, called combat squads. For example, a ten-man Sternguard Veterans squad can fight as a ten-man unit or break down into two five-man combat squads.

The decision to split the unit into combat squads, as well as which models go into each combat squad, must be made when the unit is deployed. Both combat squads can be deployed in separate locations. The one exception to this is a unit that arrives by Drop Pod - the player can choose to split such a unit into combat squads when it disembarks.

If you decide to split a unit into combat squads, then each combat squad is treated as a separate unit for all game purposes from that point.

I think this is a change. It specifically takes away the drop pod exemption, and says it must be "immediately before deployment" and it effects "calculating the total number of units in the army, and the number of units you can place in reserve".

So if I combat squad a unit in drop pod, I could choose to put both in the drop pod (neither counting towards the number of units in the army), or deploy either 1 or both and have the drop pod come down empty. Allowing me to count 0-2 units towards the number in my army?

I think I'm reading that right?

Also think not directing missile launcher entries to the main rulebook was just an oversight, true of other things like chainfists too, I think.

Joey wrote:

Nalathani wrote:The Tyranid Faq didn't fix anything for us, but also leaves a few questions unanswered. Like, what AP are boneswords? They "ignore armor saves" in the old book, but that's it.

Then you have your answer. They ignore armour saves, it's not exactly ambiguous.

Not ambiguos, but certainly silly. A peice of bone can cut through Terminator armor when a monomolecular weapon that creates a distortion field around it can't.

MoD_Legion wrote:

Snufflesms wrote:TAU Battlesuits can no longer take Target Locks, which means they cannot split fire between the suits. This is a massive hit to Broadsides.

I noticed this as well, unless there is a rule change somewhere that allows you to split fire. If not, its pretty fethed up :(.

Can someone confirm if you are now allowed to split fire by default in 6th edition? Because if this isn't the case, I can't see why GW would remove target locks.

Personally they were required for broadsides (and piranhas when I used them).

yakface wrote:That is very clearly covered in the rulebook.

And on top of that they're much, much better about putting out FAQ revisions, so I'm sure we'll see some updates rolling out soonish.

It is, but also, it's evidence of how poorly they wrote this document, all they had to do was copy paste the answer from the Razorwing (which even it was pretty lazy) which said

"Ignore this entry - Refer to the Profiles section in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook"

instead, we just got

"Ignore this entry"

It's a symptom of the broader problem, even if the solution to this immediate issue is obvious.

Daston wrote:Some Ork units have lost the Waaagh! and Mob Special Rule :(

Other than that dosnt seem too bad, like how you only use the toughness figure in brackets now.

In the Codex I have, those units didn't already have the rule.

I think it's because there are two versions of the codex, one has included some corrections from the 5th edition FAQ.

I don't see any clarity on allies... I was hoping to have confirmation that if one wants Tau allies, you must take a commander (not an ethereal) and a unit of fire warriors, rather than any troop unit (i.e. kroot). Those are their normal restrictions, so I'm guessing they still apply as allies.

Same with black templars and an emperor's champion- I'm assuming that must be the HQ selected for them as an ally?

Stupid royal mail, I want my rule book.

I am curious / a bit disappointed about this lack of Flakk Missiles thing.

I was actually hoping that most squads with missile launchers could pay the same points as a lascannon (equivalent) upgrade to get the flakk missiles.

Maybe they will, in a later FAQ revision after everyone goes out to buy shiny new flyers?

The iconic Tau ability of being able to use a Target Lock to split the fire of their battlesuits has been amended to be a superfluous piece of wargear that does nothing.

Meanwhile in Longfangs land...

Heck there's even a new USR in the rulebook for splitting fire of one model away from the rest of his unit, they couldn't just make the Target Lock grant that?

Compel wrote:
Maybe they will, in a later FAQ revision after everyone goes out to buy shiny new flyers?

Sounds like a brilliant GW sales strategy. They essentially do this with every new edition already, so I wouldn't be surprised at all. Let's end the edition of Razorbacks and start the edition of flyers. Give it a year and everyone has bought all the flyers they'll ever need and then they can be nerfed to oblivion by some new army book with tons of anti-flyer special rules (Tau? Eldar?) or just a new version of the core rules.

Looking at the Deamons and CSM faqs...Aaaaaaannnd GW screwed us again!...

Seriously making Gorechild count as a Power Axe?!..., the most Fearsome and dangerouse fighter of all times strike at Init 1?...

Screw you GW, screw you

MoD_Legion wrote:

Snufflesms wrote:TAU Battlesuits can no longer take Target Locks, which means they cannot split fire between the suits. This is a massive hit to Broadsides.

I noticed this as well, unless there is a rule change somewhere that allows you to split fire. If not, its pretty fethed up :(.

Yes, This is messed up. There is a new USR called split-fire and it could have just as easily been FAQ'ed that Target Locks gave that Special rule. This Hurts the Tau across the board and boosting Stealthsuits and Fire Warriors abilities just doesn't compensate. Yeah GW, Two light units with S5 weapons does not equal Crisis, Broadside and Hammerhead Target Lock nerf.

lord_blackfang wrote:Is it just me or did nothing gain the Skyfire rule?

Yeah, I noticed this. Seems like the Sky Ray was supposed to be upgradable to an AA platform. Oh well, I have 2+ cover Stealthsuits now. I don't want to even get started on how the new rapid fire/relentless combo with the 2d6 assault move has made the crisis suits weaker due to S 7 plasma rifles able to move up 6" and still fire full range. Jet-packs should have been 3" or 6" + d6" assault.

At least my Blacksun Filters help the whole squad now and completely negate night fight. (Gotta Look at the positives and believe that the Tau aren't getting boned for another edition)

Chaplains have AP4 power mauls wtf!

What is left that is commonly available that can strike at initiative and be AP2? I thought for sure they'd be one of them. Most AP2 things seem to be striking at I1 now.

Anyone else notice that Tau can no longer split fire? Target locks now "have no effect"

EDIT: You have, I rage posted!

Drunkspleen wrote:
It is, but also, it's evidence of how poorly they wrote this document, all they had to do was copy paste the answer from the Razorwing (which even it was pretty lazy) which said

"Ignore this entry - Refer to the Profiles section in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook"

instead, we just got

"Ignore this entry"

It's a symptom of the broader problem, even if the solution to this immediate issue is obvious.

Well as someone who has actually attempted to FAQ the entire game system, it is a pretty herculean effort and there is lots and lots of room to screw up.

Still, this initial FAQ offering is WORLD's better than the 4th to 5th transition, and GW is also much better about putting out timely updates, so I feel much, much better about this first round of FAQs than previous edition changes.

Awesome, not only are tyranids the only army that can't have allies, we're the only army that can't use the emplaced weapons on a bastion. what the crap GW? What the crap?

RiTides wrote:Chaplains have AP4 power mauls wtf!

What is left that is commonly available that can strike at initiative and be AP2? I thought for sure they'd be one of them. Most AP2 things seem to be striking at I1 now.

The demiklaive is the only one I've explicitly found written down in the documents so far. Well, whoop-de-doo.

dude this f'in rocks, my Ravenwing bikes are T5 proper now, not t4(5) wooooooooooooooooooot, that means it take str10 to pop my characters

DW are now obscenely good now, ap2 everywhere cyclone launchers that are now treated as heavy 2 missile launchers (so can buy skyfire) 3++ stormshields can be spammed too (but thats boring), DW just became a mid to top tier army in one fell swoop

Charax wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:I'll go you one better. A winged DP from Codex: CSM is Jumping, but a winged DP from Codex: Daemons is Flying.

...What?

Oh that's just not cool.

Seeing as one is far more expensive than the other, one had to be thrown the bone.

yakface wrote:
Still, this initial FAQ offering is WORLD's better than the 4th to 5th transition, and GW is also much better about putting out timely updates, so I feel much, much better about this first round of FAQs than previous edition changes.

I think the only real oversight is the exclusion of the Flakk Missile. If it's a new weapon option in the rulebook, why does absolutely nobody have access to it? Surely there's no chance it would be a weapon only for the upcoming Chaos Space Marines or Dark Angels later this year?

Awesome, Ezekiel is mastery level 1...

So Aspiring Sorcerers don't seem to have a Mastery Level but can exchange the power they're required to buy for a roll on one of the tables. Does this mean they can't use it or do they have a default mastery of one?

Therion wrote:

yakface wrote:
Still, this initial FAQ offering is WORLD's better than the 4th to 5th transition, and GW is also much better about putting out timely updates, so I feel much, much better about this first round of FAQs than previous edition changes.

I think the only real oversight is the exclusion of the Flakk Missile. If it's a new weapon option in the rulebook, why does absolutely noone have access to it? Surely there's no chance it would be only a weapon for the upcoming Chaos Space Marines or Dark Angels later this year?

They usually don't add upgrades through FAQ's and Errata's unless it was missing, it'll likely start showing up as upgrades later on.

tedurur wrote:Awesome, Ezekiel is mastery level 1...

Mastery level is equal to the number of powers a psyker was already allowed to use each turn. If the psyker could only use one power, then he's mastery level 1.


On a completely unrelated note: So Hydra Autocannons can now only snap fire on non-flying targets? Ooooh, suck it IG players!

streamdragon wrote:Awesome, not only are tyranids the only army that can't have allies, we're the only army that can't use the emplaced weapons on a bastion. what the crap GW? What the crap?

Y'know, not using the emplaced weapon on a bastion kinda makes sense to me - I can't see how you'd teach a Hormagaunt to pull a trigger...

In a perfect world, Tyranids would get their own Fortifications, along the same vein as the spire chimneys and suchlike that Forge World have already produced.

yakface wrote:

tedurur wrote:Awesome, Ezekiel is mastery level 1...

Mastery level is equal to the number of powers a psyker was already allowed to use each turn. If the psyker could only use one power, then he's mastery level 1.

Not for Tyranids!

I assumed all missile launchers would have access to Flakk Missiles, similar to how previously you could fire Krak/Frag missiles it's just giving you a third option.

(Which is good as otherwise I have no anti-flyer stuff in my army).

we're the only army that can't use the emplaced weapons on a bastion.

Is there actually a rule like that? A specific rule that says everyone can fire the fortification weapon / battlefield emplacement by engaging with it, unless they're Tyranids, in which case they're screwed?

yakface wrote:

tedurur wrote:Awesome, Ezekiel is mastery level 1...

Mastery level is equal to the number of powers a psyker was already allowed to use each turn. If the psyker could only use one power, then he's mastery level 1.

I wonder how this gels with the Mark of Tzeentch, as the CSM codex does state that a model with the Mark of Tzeentch may use up to two psychic powers a turn. But the FAQ doesn't state that the Mark of Tzeentch increases your mastery level. So is the MoT only good for the increased invulnerable save?

Dysartes wrote:

streamdragon wrote:Awesome, not only are tyranids the only army that can't have allies, we're the only army that can't use the emplaced weapons on a bastion. what the crap GW? What the crap?

Y'know, not using the emplaced weapon on a bastion kinda makes sense to me - I can't see how you'd teach a Hormagaunt to pull a trigger...

It's not supposed to be about "what makes sense", it's supposed to be about game balance. If tyranids want to buy a building to put units in, we pay a premium for weapons we can't even use. We don't get a price reduction for the Bastion or Fortress of Redemption or even the guns on the Aegis Line or whatever. (my stupid book still isn't here)

Agamemnon2 wrote:In a perfect world, Tyranids would get their own Fortifications, along the same vein as the spire chimneys and suchlike that Forge World have already produced.

In a perfect world, GW would give two craps about Tyranids.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Therion wrote:

we're the only army that can't use the emplaced weapons on a bastion.

Is there actually a rule like that? A specific rule that says everyone can fire the fortification weapon / battlefield emplacement by engaging with it, unless they're Tyranids, in which case they're screwed?

Read their FAQ:

Q: Are Tyranid units inside buildings (ie the Bastion) subject to instinctive behaviour tests? Further, are they able to manual fire emplaced weapons? (p33)
A: No to both questions.

Steamdragon wrote:

Therion wrote:

we're the only army that can't use the emplaced weapons on a bastion.

Is there actually a rule like that? A specific rule that says everyone can fire the fortification weapon / battlefield emplacement by engaging with it, unless they're Tyranids, in which case they're screwed?

Read their FAQ:

Q: Are Tyranid units inside buildings (ie the Bastion) subject to instinctive behaviour tests? Further, are they able to manual fire emplaced weapons? (p33)
A: No to both questions.

Strange as it sounds, that still means the weapons can fire on auto-mode (whatever that's called) if the Nids are inside the building.

Also, that FAQ doesn't cover weapon outside of buildings, so if you get to a gun in an Aegis line for example, technically I guess you can still fire that.

Read their FAQ

There's an easy answer to that. GW knows that Tyranids have been dominating the tournament circuit in the 5th and therefore don't need the additional crutch help of allies or fortifications in the 6th.

Also, that FAQ doesn't cover weapon outside of buildings, so if you get to a gun in an Aegis line for example, technically I guess you can still fire that.

I think the weapons in the Aegis Defence Line are classified as those emplaced weapons, but I can't be sure. I get my book in 30 minutes.

Voodoo_Chile wrote:I wonder how this gels with the Mark of Tzeentch, as the CSM codex does state that a model with the Mark of Tzeentch may use up to two psychic powers a turn. But the FAQ doesn't state that the Mark of Tzeentch increases your mastery level. So is the MoT only good for the increased invulnerable save?

It doesn't need to be FAQ'd because it's spelled out in the rulebook that the number of powers you can cast per turn = your Mastery Level.

lord_blackfang wrote:

Voodoo_Chile wrote:I wonder how this gels with the Mark of Tzeentch, as the CSM codex does state that a model with the Mark of Tzeentch may use up to two psychic powers a turn. But the FAQ doesn't state that the Mark of Tzeentch increases your mastery level. So is the MoT only good for the increased invulnerable save?

It doesn't need to be FAQ'd because it's spelled out in the rulebook that the number of powers you can cast per turn = your Mastery Level.

Ah thank you, I was confused as the FAQ specifically states a Chaos Sorcerer has a Master Level of one, but if it is based on number of powers able to cast then I'm satisfied.

streamdragon wrote:

Dysartes wrote:

streamdragon wrote:Awesome, not only are tyranids the only army that can't have allies, we're the only army that can't use the emplaced weapons on a bastion. what the crap GW? What the crap?

Y'know, not using the emplaced weapon on a bastion kinda makes sense to me - I can't see how you'd teach a Hormagaunt to pull a trigger...

It's not supposed to be about "what makes sense", it's supposed to be about game balance. If tyranids want to buy a building to put units in, we pay a premium for weapons we can't even use. We don't get a price reduction for the Bastion or Fortress of Redemption or even the guns on the Aegis Line or whatever. (my stupid book still isn't here)

Agamemnon2 wrote:In a perfect world, Tyranids would get their own Fortifications, along the same vein as the spire chimneys and suchlike that Forge World have already produced.

In a perfect world, GW would give two craps about Tyranids.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Therion wrote:

we're the only army that can't use the emplaced weapons on a bastion.

Is there actually a rule like that? A specific rule that says everyone can fire the fortification weapon / battlefield emplacement by engaging with it, unless they're Tyranids, in which case they're screwed?

Read their FAQ:

Q: Are Tyranid units inside buildings (ie the Bastion) subject to instinctive behaviour tests? Further, are they able to manual fire emplaced weapons? (p33)
A: No to both questions.

They do give a crap about nids, they had there 40 mins of fame in 4th and 3rd nidzilla and ultra custom builds respectivly, GW royally ballsed up the 5th dex and the nids players have been badly treated since (was it 2 years to get the tervigon?), it does suck i agree, and the new FAQ where pods autodie if it hits impas terrain is very harsh (mainly due to marines not having the same nerf)

lord_blackfang wrote:

Voodoo_Chile wrote:I wonder how this gels with the Mark of Tzeentch, as the CSM codex does state that a model with the Mark of Tzeentch may use up to two psychic powers a turn. But the FAQ doesn't state that the Mark of Tzeentch increases your mastery level. So is the MoT only good for the increased invulnerable save?

It doesn't need to be FAQ'd because it's spelled out in the rulebook that the number of powers you can cast per turn = your Mastery Level.

So Ahriman is level 4 mastery? (Staff + Mark)

Works for me!

it does suck i agree, and the new FAQ where pods autodie if it hits impas terrain is very harsh (mainly due to marines not having the same nerf)

Psst, thats the SPORE MINE CLUSTER, completely different from the transport.

Voodoo_Chile wrote:

yakface wrote:

tedurur wrote:Awesome, Ezekiel is mastery level 1...

Mastery level is equal to the number of powers a psyker was already allowed to use each turn. If the psyker could only use one power, then he's mastery level 1.

I wonder how this gels with the Mark of Tzeentch, as the CSM codex does state that a model with the Mark of Tzeentch may use up to two psychic powers a turn. But the FAQ doesn't state that the Mark of Tzeentch increases your mastery level. So is the MoT only good for the increased invulnerable save?

Spirit Stones increase your mastery level by 1 (practically confirmed by Eldrad's FAQ entry, but not explicitly stated), so it's perfectly logical that the MoT would do the same (especially given the fact that the Establishing Mastery Level section in the rulebook says to take rules that let you cast multiple powers into account.

It's an assumption, but it's not a massive one

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:

Voodoo_Chile wrote:I wonder how this gels with the Mark of Tzeentch, as the CSM codex does state that a model with the Mark of Tzeentch may use up to two psychic powers a turn. But the FAQ doesn't state that the Mark of Tzeentch increases your mastery level. So is the MoT only good for the increased invulnerable save?

It doesn't need to be FAQ'd because it's spelled out in the rulebook that the number of powers you can cast per turn = your Mastery Level.

So Ahriman is level 4 mastery? (Staff + Mark)

Works for me!

it does suck i agree, and the new FAQ where pods autodie if it hits impas terrain is very harsh (mainly due to marines not having the same nerf)

Psst, thats the SPORE MINE CLUSTER, completely different from the transport.

he is mastery level 5 old chap, thanks to the staff of ahiriman

Sisters won the FAQ war here.

Our Acts of Faith work on Allies (IC's or Squads).

Our Auras and Powers from ICs work on allied squads (6" Fearless bubble and Jacobus' +1 Attack and FNP).

gonna see some nasty IG combinations here.

Formosa wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:

Voodoo_Chile wrote:I wonder how this gels with the Mark of Tzeentch, as the CSM codex does state that a model with the Mark of Tzeentch may use up to two psychic powers a turn. But the FAQ doesn't state that the Mark of Tzeentch increases your mastery level. So is the MoT only good for the increased invulnerable save?

It doesn't need to be FAQ'd because it's spelled out in the rulebook that the number of powers you can cast per turn = your Mastery Level.

So Ahriman is level 4 mastery? (Staff + Mark)

Works for me!

it does suck i agree, and the new FAQ where pods autodie if it hits impas terrain is very harsh (mainly due to marines not having the same nerf)

Psst, thats the SPORE MINE CLUSTER, completely different from the transport.

he is mastery level 5 old chap, thanks to the staff of ahiriman

I wish, but the FAQ listed him as PM3, So it's likely from the staff itself, with the mark giving him the boost up to 4.

Oh god... waaagh!... the hit applies even if you reroll thanks to the Fleet that Waaagh! grants. I think this is the first time I've ever seen a rule allow the reroll to have an effect?

*sounds of Morse code beeping in the background*

This just in: Games Workshop releases a series of ill-thought out, inconsistent and contradictory FAQ's.

News at 11!

(/old-timey radio voice)

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I wish, but the FAQ listed him as PM3, So it's likely from the staff itself, with the mark giving him the boost up to 4.

Again, he was only able to cast 3 power previously so his mastery level is 3.

The Mark of Tzeentch was never cumulative with his Staff's ability, the Staff's ability simply trumped the benefit provided by the MoT.

yakface wrote:Hey they finally fixed Ork Tankbustas. If a vehicle isn't within range or LOS now you get to choose your target normally (about time).

I wonder how long after sending that to the printers did they think "Wait... that makes Tankbustas useless? Should we have changed that?".

yakface wrote:On a completely unrelated note: So Hydra Autocannons can now only snap fire on non-flying targets? Ooooh, suck it IG players!

Hydras are now deligated to an anti-aircraft role.

IMHO, this is a good thing, as they are dirt cheap. This means that you won't see IG armies with 6-9 hydras hiding behind chimeras any more. I always thought it was rather dumb when all their anti-aircraft guns were pointed on ground targets.

Now, heavy support in IG will be split to hyrdas, Russ', and artillery.

ah just checked FAQ says ari is lvl 3 so it would be 4 with the mark awwww

ZebioLizard2 wrote:So Ahriman is level 4 mastery? (Staff + Mark)

That would be bad ass. Eldrad and Tigarias are level 3.

labmouse42 wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:So Ahriman is level 4 mastery? (Staff + Mark)

That would be bad ass. Eldrad and Tigarias are level 3.

Again, people don't seem to be comprehending what Psychic Mastery level is. You don't get to take Mastery level and then add other rules that allow you to cast additional powers.

As explained in the rulebook, in older codexes (ones that don't list mastery level) psychic master level is equal to the number of powers the model was already allowed to cast.

Ahriman was previously allowed to cast 3 powers so his mastery level is 3.

This isn't rocket science.

yakface wrote:
Hey they finally fixed Ork Tankbustas. If a vehicle isn't within range or LOS now you get to choose your target normally (about time).

Also Flashgitz got 'ignore cover' added to their shots since 'Gitfinda' is now a pointless piece of gear.

thats pretty good. But the question I have after reading:

Nob bikers are only instagibbed by S10? AND they can still take cybork/FNP rolls even from powerfist attacks? Did I read that right?

carmachu wrote:

yakface wrote:
Hey they finally fixed Ork Tankbustas. If a vehicle isn't within range or LOS now you get to choose your target normally (about time).

Also Flashgitz got 'ignore cover' added to their shots since 'Gitfinda' is now a pointless piece of gear.

thats pretty good. But the question I have after reading:

Nob bikers are only instagibbed by S10? AND they can still take cybork/FNP rolls even from powerfist attacks? Did I read that right?

You did, but I think you'll find the new wound allocation rules does reign them in a bit.

carmachu wrote:

yakface wrote:
Hey they finally fixed Ork Tankbustas. If a vehicle isn't within range or LOS now you get to choose your target normally (about time).

Also Flashgitz got 'ignore cover' added to their shots since 'Gitfinda' is now a pointless piece of gear.

thats pretty good. But the question I have after reading:

Nob bikers are only instagibbed by S10? AND they can still take cybork/FNP rolls even from powerfist attacks? Did I read that right?

Yes you got that right. Bikes have real toughness bonuses now. So you need S10 weapons to instagib them, and only S10 weapons ignore the 5+ FNP.

yakface wrote:

labmouse42 wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:So Ahriman is level 4 mastery? (Staff + Mark)

That would be bad ass. Eldrad and Tigarias are level 3.

Again, people don't seem to be comprehending what Psychic Mastery level is. You don't get to take Mastery level and then add other rules that allow you to cast additional powers.

As explained in the rulebook, in older codexes (ones that don't list mastery level) psychic master level is equal to the number of powers the model was already allowed to cast.

Ahriman was previously allowed to cast 3 powers so his mastery level is 3.

This isn't rocket science.

well that must be wrong, as a sorceror is lvl 1, mark give him an extra casting, by that logic since he could only cast once before the mark does nothing other than add to his inv save.

plus the FAQ now over rules Ari's rules and give him a mastery level, Eldrads FAQ also states it includes the bonus to his mastery level but Ari's doesnt, logical conclusion is that is was intentional and he gains +1 for the mark.

OR!!!!! its just another case of GW no being consistent

yakface wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I wish, but the FAQ listed him as PM3, So it's likely from the staff itself, with the mark giving him the boost up to 4.

Again, he was only able to cast 3 power previously so his mastery level is 3.

The Mark of Tzeentch was never cumulative with his Staff's ability, the Staff's ability simply trumped the benefit provided by the MoT.

Damn, guess I have to be placated by the fact that Thousand Son Psykers can now purchase the cheapest power and get rolls in the books powers.

yakface wrote:As explained in the rulebook, in older codexes (ones that don't list mastery level) psychic master level is equal to the number of powers the model was already allowed to cast.

This puts him in line with the other 2. It seems that the most powerful psykers in the universe are listed as level 3.

Formosa wrote:

yakface wrote:

labmouse42 wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:So Ahriman is level 4 mastery? (Staff + Mark)

That would be bad ass. Eldrad and Tigarias are level 3.

Again, people don't seem to be comprehending what Psychic Mastery level is. You don't get to take Mastery level and then add other rules that allow you to cast additional powers.

As explained in the rulebook, in older codexes (ones that don't list mastery level) psychic master level is equal to the number of powers the model was already allowed to cast.

Ahriman was previously allowed to cast 3 powers so his mastery level is 3.

This isn't rocket science.

well that must be wrong, as a sorceror is lvl 1, mark give him an extra casting, by that logic since he could only cast once before the mark does nothing other than add to his inv save.

plus the FAQ now over rules Ari's rules and give him a mastery level, Eldrads FAQ also states it includes the bonus to his mastery level but Ari's doesnt, logical conclusion is that is was intentional and he gains +1 for the mark.

OR!!!!! its just another case of GW no being consistent

Yes, its a case of GW not being consistent. Sorcerers should be Mastery Level 2.

But regardless, a Mark does NOT add to the listed Psychic Mastery Level.

Oh hey, notice they've never quite clarified the AP for Boneswords - RAW shenanigans are going to be fun for a while as Tyranid players stress the 'ignore armour saves' part rather than 'counts as a power weapon'.

RiTides wrote:Chaplains have AP4 power mauls wtf!

What is left that is commonly available that can strike at initiative and be AP2? I thought for sure they'd be one of them. Most AP2 things seem to be striking at I1 now.

Tyranid Boneswords

Rules wise they count as an upgrade not a weapon and they had no mention in the FAQ.

I5 Tryanid Primes Om Nom Nom nom

Boneswords ruleswise count as an upgrade that causes all the tyranids close combat attacks to ignore armor, they don't count as a weapon themselves.

Only downside is that no AP value means no +1 or +2 to the damage charts to vehicles. :/

DarkStarSabre wrote:Oh hey, notice they've never quite clarified the AP for Boneswords - RAW shenanigans are going to be fun for a while as Tyranid players stress the 'ignore armour saves' part rather than 'counts as a power weapon'.

Ignores armour saves. No ambiguity.

Joey wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:Oh hey, notice they've never quite clarified the AP for Boneswords - RAW shenanigans are going to be fun for a while as Tyranid players stress the 'ignore armour saves' part rather than 'counts as a power weapon'.

Ignores armour saves. No ambiguity.

Which if the book states there is ambiguity, it counts as AP3.

Any word on when we're likely to see the Forgeworld updates?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Joey wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:Oh hey, notice they've never quite clarified the AP for Boneswords - RAW shenanigans are going to be fun for a while as Tyranid players stress the 'ignore armour saves' part rather than 'counts as a power weapon'.

Ignores armour saves. No ambiguity.

Which if the book states there is ambiguity, it counts as AP3.

Wonder how many of you remember when people argued til blue in the fact that Tyranids with say, Scything Talons and Rending Claws could only benefit from the abilities of one or the other, not both in 5th edition due to the way the multiple special weapons rules were worded. Every Tyranid player knew this was not the case (they were in effect functioning identical to 3rd and 4th edition Tyranids) but people still insisted up to the point where the FAQ came out and said that.

I expect people to kick off about Boneswords. Really, I do.

Hrmm... Logan Grimnar seems to have lost any utility with his special axe that allows him to choose between two profiles. Both a frost axe and powerfist (the two he can choose from IIRC) are unwieldy.

I don't have my book with me at the moment... the grey knight halberd acts as a special force weapon... how does that interact with AP and initiative as a force halberd/axe with the rulebook and special GK halberd rules?

I don't have my book with me at the moment... the grey knight halberd acts as a special force weapon... how does that interact with AP and initiative as a force halberd/axe with the rulebook and special GK halberd rules?

Unusual force weapon as noted in the FAQ, thus it uses it's own rules and has AP3

O.0 Praetorians gaining +1 str on their melee weapons, ignoring armor of course but what is this unwieldy business? I'm not getting my rulebook for a little while still.

warboss wrote:Hrmm... Logan Grimnar seems to have lost any utility with his special axe that allows him to choose between two profiles. Both a frost axe and powerfist (the two he can choose from IIRC) are unwieldy.

I don't have my book with me at the moment... the grey knight halberd acts as a special force weapon... how does that interact with AP and initiative as a force halberd/axe with the rulebook and special GK halberd rules?

All NFW are AP3 'unusual' Force Weapons, which just means they also still follow the special rules in the codex. So even though the Nemesis Hammer is AP3, it is also AP2 because it follows the rules for Thunderhammers simultaneously.

Prodromus wrote:

RiTides wrote:Chaplains have AP4 power mauls wtf!

What is left that is commonly available that can strike at initiative and be AP2? I thought for sure they'd be one of them. Most AP2 things seem to be striking at I1 now.

Tyranid Boneswords

Rules wise they count as an upgrade not a weapon and they had no mention in the FAQ.

I5 Tryanid Primes Om Nom Nom nom

Boneswords ruleswise count as an upgrade that causes all the tyranids close combat attacks to ignore armor, they don't count as a weapon themselves.

Only downside is that no AP value means no +1 or +2 to the damage charts to vehicles. :/

There is one other thing (consisting of multiple things) that strikes at initiative and ignores armour with, well, everything.

Nurgle Daemons and MoN Chaos Marines at Tally of Pestilence level 20 . That is just going to be oh so dirty.

Kurgash wrote:O.0 Praetorians gaining +1 str on their melee weapons, ignoring armor of course but what is this unwieldy business? I'm not getting my rulebook for a little while still.

Please stop asking for the rules. Wait until you get home or wherever and get to your rulebook.

RiTides wrote:I don't see any clarity on allies...

Except the clarity who benefits from special rules, yes.

pretre wrote:Sisters won the FAQ war here.

Our Acts of Faith work on Allies (IC's or Squads).

Our Auras and Powers from ICs work on allied squads (6" Fearless bubble and Jacobus' +1 Attack and FNP).

gonna see some nasty IG combinations here.

Won? More than this. They seem to be the only ones to share.

The only bit I saw to borrow anything from an ally is Shrikes "unseen..." , yes?

Makes detachments self containing, as it should be.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Joey wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:Oh hey, notice they've never quite clarified the AP for Boneswords - RAW shenanigans are going to be fun for a while as Tyranid players stress the 'ignore armour saves' part rather than 'counts as a power weapon'.

Ignores armour saves. No ambiguity.

Which if the book states there is ambiguity, it counts as AP3.

Only the internet could claim that "ignores armour saves" means anything other than ignores armour saves.

Is it just me or did tau just get shafted?

No AA on skyrays
Target locks removed (WHY?)
Battlesuits have to pay for night vision

No benefits at all? :(

Also woah! massive nerf to chaplains! crozius as a power maul now, my brother plays dark angels and hes not gunna be happy, esp since he cant equip his with power fists or lightning claws

Joey wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Joey wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:Oh hey, notice they've never quite clarified the AP for Boneswords - RAW shenanigans are going to be fun for a while as Tyranid players stress the 'ignore armour saves' part rather than 'counts as a power weapon'.

Ignores armour saves. No ambiguity.

Which if the book states there is ambiguity, it counts as AP3.

Only the internet could claim that "ignores armour saves" means anything other than ignores armour saves.

So what does it count as for affecting vehicles than? AP2? AP1? All the other (with few exceptions) "Ignores armor saves" have gained actual AP stats, so I believe it was just a mistake on their part.

No benefits at all? :(

Stealth suits have a permanent 4++ and can get to 2+ in cover?

yakface wrote:
You did, but I think you'll find the new wound allocation rules does reign them in a bit.

I've noticed you can still wound spread, and you don't even need different wargear, you just need to have an IC to LOS

Woah yeah... and sniper teams!

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
So what does it count as for affecting vehicles than? AP2? AP1? All the other (with few exceptions) "Ignores armor saves" have gained actual AP stats, so I believe it was just a mistake on their part.

Well it's not AP1 or 2 so you have your answer. It may have been a mistake not to give it an AP value but it doesn't need one.

"Page 49- Shadowseer, Veil of Tears"
"Replace the second and third sentences with: "the shadowseer, and all models in her unit, have the stealth and shrouded special rules".

I wonder if it was supposed to mean third and fourth sentences. Fourth sentence is the spotting distance rule; second sentence states that it works like a warlock power.

Still laughing at the new Warscythes. Average armor penetration of 14, and then get +2 on the vehicle armor chart.

Hahaha.

Joey wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
So what does it count as for affecting vehicles than? AP2? AP1? All the other (with few exceptions) "Ignores armor saves" have gained actual AP stats, so I believe it was just a mistake on their part.

Well it's not AP1 or 2 so you have your answer. It may have been a mistake not to give it an AP value but it doesn't need one.

AP3 than, gotcha.

...nope! Not an error. Sentence two is formally replaced in the FAQ.

seeker missiles hit flyers on a 2+, surly thats a buff? mind you, you need to hit it on 6 with marker lights

Platoon command squads can give orders to Company command squads. That makes perfect sense.

I see that Death Guard bikers are now T6 and as the T value in parenthesis have been removed I presume that they are now completely immune from S based instant death?

Palindrome wrote:Platoon command squads can give orders to Company command squads. That makes perfect sense.

Is there nothing more unintentionally funny than a GW FAQ?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Joey wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
So what does it count as for affecting vehicles than? AP2? AP1? All the other (with few exceptions) "Ignores armor saves" have gained actual AP stats, so I believe it was just a mistake on their part.

Well it's not AP1 or 2 so you have your answer. It may have been a mistake not to give it an AP value but it doesn't need one.

AP3 than, gotcha.

(!(AP1 | AP2))!=AP3.
Treated as AP3 on vehicle damage chart, sure. But still ignores armour saves.
Honestly I can't see this being a problem outside of the internet.

Edit: Reading fail

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Palindrome wrote:Platoon command squads can give orders to Company command squads. That makes perfect sense.

Is there nothing more unintentionally funny than a GW FAQ?

They always could.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RiTides wrote:

yakface wrote:Mastery level is equal to the number of powers a psyker was already allowed to use each turn. If the psyker could only use one power, then he's mastery level 1.

Yak, I've seen you say this a few times, and I think it's wrong. See the BA faq:

Q: What mastery level is a Blood Angels Librarian? (pg 46)
A: Mastery Level 1. And Epistolary is Mastery Level 2. They both know 2 powers.

The BA codex says a normal librarian can use one power each player turn, while an epistolary can use two powers each player turn, but both are only mastery level 1.

So, that seems to illustrate that Mastery Level does not equal the powers that can be cast per turn (assuming you meant player turn).

Librarian can cast one spell per turn, so he's Mastery Level 1. Epistolary can cast two spells, so he's Master Level 2. What's the problem here?

Did I miss something---or are DoA armies restricted by the 1/2 reserve rule? I don't see an exception in the FAQ...

streamdragon wrote:Awesome, not only are tyranids the only army that can't have allies, we're the only army that can't use the emplaced weapons on a bastion. what the crap GW? What the crap?

Not manually, but Bastions have an automatic fire mode at BS2.

Formosa wrote:seeker missiles hit flyers on a 2+, surly thats a buff? mind you, you need to hit it on 6 with marker lights

Yeah, I was pretty happy with that, Just a shame about the skyray itself and other markers being so hard to hit with :(

There used to be a somewhat quirky line about it too. Something like. "In reality, the platoon command squad isn't *ordering* the company command squad, they are simply politely requesting that his senior officer gets a move on."

Definite straw grasping here, but how does the signum interact with the 'shooting at flyers' rules?

pg 88 Chaos Codex.
A model with the mark of tzeentch may attempt up to two psychic powers per turn.

Core rule book pg 66.
in older codex's, Mastery may be written out longhand in the form of a special rule that allows them to use more than 1 psychic power per turn - the number of psychic powers that can be used per turn is their mastery level..

Mark of Tzeentch gives a mastery level. (as would epistolary). There is no other way to read that.

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM! GLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!


=[

I'm surprised that the GK psychic powers weren't updated with new effects (a la the new USRs). Not that it's that bad, but it would have been nice if Shrouding granted the... you know... Shrouded special rule.

Also, did anyone else notice that "Bolster Defenses" can now target non-ruins? That actually makes it a bit more useful, especially with the 5+ nerf to cover.

P.P.S: The BT FAQ is really punishing. They reversed the "EC can be your required HQ ruling," and the vows are all terrible now (Suffer Not still doesn't stack with furious charge, Accept Any Challenge is just an extra attack, Abhor the Witch is just a slightly better Deny the Witch, and Uphold is basically unchanged).

Snufflesms wrote:TAU Battlesuits can no longer take Target Locks, which means they cannot split fire between the suits. This is a massive hit to Broadsides.

What the EFFF!

Why would they do this? That was key to a possible Tau army. Now I might not even bother.

AgeOfEgos wrote:Did I miss something---or are DoA armies restricted by the 1/2 reserve rule? I don't see an exception in the FAQ...

Looks like it

@Joey- You're right, that's a reading fail on my part, I blame lack of sleep.........

Hmm. Quite a kick in the nuts.

-Kharn the Betrayer now goes at Ini 1.

-Abaddon the Despoiler gets owned by regular PF/TH terminators

-Daemon Princes are not flying MCs...despite the fact that in the WD battlereport he was picked -precisely- because he was a flying MC with vector strike.

-No word on agonizers or Vext's scepter, so they must be AP 3 and therefore night-useless.

-Wyches didn't get any revision and are now bad tank hunters in a codex that doesn't need more AT.

-No word if Mark of Tzeentch increases Warp Charge, though it by all definitions should.

-Skyfire is pathetically limited. Have fun dodging missiles, Chaos Daemons, Nids, CSM and other low-volume-of-fire armies.

Honestly, my gaming group could have done this better, given how long they had.

I seriously hope that armies get some sort of AA then...right now, it's all about who can field the most flyers that can only be hit on 6s...

Imperial Guard FAQ wrote:Q: Can Ministorum Priests or Techpriest Enginseers be taken as the mandatory HQ choice? (pg 96)
A: No. You will need to take another model to be your warlord.

I'm guessing that applies to taking IG as allies, too? Warlords must come from the primary detachment, but since it says the mandatory HQ choice, that probably covers them as allies, too.

Time for some house ruling

delighted to see stealth suits getting a buff.. Long overdue!

Just to be clear, the FAQ doesn't state that the Stormraven is a flyer. Is it not? Or is that only listed in the main rulebook?

Just wondering (as im waiting for my local store to open so i can get my book) Has the GK Psyfleman dreadnought become useless? Cannot find if the Autocannon itself is a AA gun now and only snap fires at ground targets..or am i simply being paranoid.And if my fear is correct..Man do i have alot of Dreadnoughts to sell lol.

Book didnt get delivered today. :(

Have the stormtalon rules changed then?

Autocannons are not skyfire. Only the IG Hydras have skyfire autocannons.

space wolves with acute senses is stupid now, what outflanks except scouts and the warlord trait, if you roll it? Otherwise I think TWC just got nastier too, but that just me

Same with 90% of the Tau army with Acute Senses.

Xca|iber wrote:Just to be clear, the FAQ doesn't state that the Stormraven is a flyer. Is it not? Or is that only listed in the main rulebook?

Every vehicles type seems to be looked up in the main rulebook now.
Like the vehicle upgrades, who are also moved to the rulebook.

1hadhq wrote:

Xca|iber wrote:Just to be clear, the FAQ doesn't state that the Stormraven is a flyer. Is it not? Or is that only listed in the main rulebook?

Every vehicles type seems to be looked up in the main rulebook now.
Like the vehicle upgrades, who are also moved to the rulebook.

Thanks. My rulebook isn't going to arrive until next week (hopefully that soon ).

lord_blackfang wrote:Is it just me or did nothing gain the Skyfire rule?

This is something I noticed. Same thing for Interceptor. Looks like I'll be investing in a load of swooping hawks but how on earth are Eldar going to deal with flyers at range? I'm pretty disappointed with the FAQs so far but another thing I've realised is that I'm actually not going to learn these rules quickly - there's a LOT of stuff in that rulebook.

Perhaps I'm blind, but where are we supposed to get our vehicles hull points from if not our FAQ's? I see nothing anywhere stating what has what for HP's.

I don't think the idiotic changes to Chaos (Kharn at I1, AP3 Daemon Weapons) matter all that much because that book - if you can call it that - will be replaced in a couple of months anyway.

Thimn wrote:Perhaps I'm blind, but where are we supposed to get our vehicles hull points from if not our FAQ's? I see nothing anywhere stating what has what for HP's.

The back of the rulebook?

Xca|iber wrote:Just to be clear, the FAQ doesn't state that the Stormraven is a flyer. Is it not? Or is that only listed in the main rulebook?

In the main book. It's a flyer

Thimn wrote:Perhaps I'm blind, but where are we supposed to get our vehicles hull points from if not our FAQ's? I see nothing anywhere stating what has what for HP's.

It's in the rulebook.

Edit: Ninja'd!

No FAQ update for witch blades. Poopy.

Was really hoping that they would retain their strength 9 against vehicles, (for a minimum roll of 10) as opposed to the strength 3 + 2D6 that they are now (for an average roll of 10).

Otherwise, good to see GW make an attempt at a timely FAQ/errata update.

Some interesting things in these to parse through, that's for sure.

Meh.

FAQ changed bloodletters Hellblades from power weapons to power swords.
SO much axecution potential lost.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I don't think the idiotic changes to Chaos (Kharn at I1, AP3 Daemon Weapons) matter all that much because that book - if you can call it that - will be replaced in a couple of months anyway.

True, they've not even bothered keeping to the same format as the other Codex FAQs (which all have V1.0 in the link itself). Just to clarify - Typhus' weapon seems...odd. Daemon Weapon and Force Axe. Mrr?

How are Necrons buffed by this FAQ? Oh, let me count the ways!

- Command barge is a chariot (can attack in CC without disembarking, +1 to armor save, d6 strength 6 hammer of wrath hits when you charge)

- war scythes are specifically Ap 1

- Night Scythes can move super far and still disembark models, without scatter

I'm sure there's more than just those in there, but maaaaaan. As a Necron player I'm in two minds, on one hand, cool, on the other, it is blatantly unfair to other armies. I hope V2 comes soon and addresses more.

ColdSadHungry wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:Is it just me or did nothing gain the Skyfire rule?

This is something I noticed. Same thing for Interceptor. Looks like I'll be investing in a load of swooping hawks but how on earth are Eldar going to deal with flyers at range? I'm pretty disappointed with the FAQs so far but another thing I've realised is that I'm actually not going to learn these rules quickly - there's a LOT of stuff in that rulebook.

You do realize swooping hawks can't hurt Flyers right? They can't assault them, their guns are useless against them, the grenade pack can't affect them since it's a blast, I mean, you can throw a single Haywire grenade per turn up to 8 inches, needing a 6 to hit and try to kill them, but I really think you might want to re-think this.

So Kharn is now I1 cause he has an axe, but Dante and Astorath at both still I5? That's both lame and unfair. Both of their weapons even have Axe in the name.

So I guess my World Eaters will be lead by a Daemon Prince now.

For the moment (until the new codex drops) Typhus is actually pretty good.

His Manreaper gives +D6 attacks, +1S, AP2, has the new force weapon rules, is poisoned (so he wounds on a 4+ against T5+, and with the new poison rules he wounds on a 3+ or 2+ rerollable against T4 and under), not to mention that he's now natural T5, still benefits from Destroyer Hive, cannot fail psychic tests, and can generate two better psychic powers than the ones he currently has (like from Pyromancy or Telepathy), and can still use his Force Weapon Instant Death ability in the same turn.

Typhus + Epidemius lists seem like a pretty lulzy combo right now.

Dr. Delorean wrote:How are Necrons buffed by this FAQ? Oh, let me count the ways!

- Command barge is a chariot (can attack in CC without disembarking, +1 to armor save, d6 strength 6 hammer of wrath hits when you charge)

- war scythes are specifically Ap 1

- Night Scythes can move super far and still disembark models, without scatter

I'm sure there's more than just those in there, but maaaaaan. As a Necron player I'm in two minds, on one hand, cool, on the other, it is blatantly unfair to other armies. I hope V2 comes soon and addresses more.

Yeah I keep feeling like Necrons went from a fairly good codex to a bit silly. Add haywire and gauss weapons to the list of things that just took a huge buff.

Give Typhus both fiery form and invisibility and watch him go to work.

Yes, a Necron Phalanx (or Veiltek Immortals) that Nemesor grants Tank Hunters to is going to be pretty lulzy

Xca|iber wrote:I'm surprised that the GK psychic powers weren't updated with new effects (a la the new USRs). Not that it's that bad, but it would have been nice if Shrouding granted the... you know... Shrouded special rule.

That's a time honored tradition for GW, in the same vein that Dark Angel Scouts didn't actually have the scout ability faq'ed in.

As a side note, Logan Grimnar is not boned in close combat. After coming home and looking at the codex, his axe of morkai does NOT function as a frost axe but a frost blade... so he still gets to attack at I5 as an option.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Griever wrote:

Snufflesms wrote:TAU Battlesuits can no longer take Target Locks, which means they cannot split fire between the suits. This is a massive hit to Broadsides.

What the EFFF!

Why would they do this? That was key to a possible Tau army. Now I might not even bother.

I'd hold off regardless till a new codex comes out with its requisite new plastic models.. but it is strange that they took away that ability yet made a new special rule granting it that they could have just faq'ed onto the wargear to make it work perfectly well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sephyr wrote:Hmm. Quite a kick in the nuts.

-Kharn the Betrayer now goes at Ini 1.

-Abaddon the Despoiler gets owned by regular PF/TH terminators

How did Abby change for the worse?

Daemon Weapon = AP3

H.B.M.C. wrote:Daemon Weapon = AP3

Yeah, I realized that and came to edit it but you're too quick! That is indeed a kick to the groin for him.

This Tyranid FAQ seems on par with the initial draft of the last one.

kirsanth wrote:This Tyranid FAQ seems on par with the initial draft of the last one.

Confusing, conflicting, undoubtedly bound to be altered to make no sense and then altered again six months down the line?

H.B.M.C. wrote:Daemon Weapon = AP3

But the Manreaper is AP 2 due to being a Force Axe.

Or is it? The FAQ says it is a Daemon Weapon and a Force Axe. How do you combine those two together? Throw out the weaker of the two stats inherent for each weapon?

DarkStarSabre wrote:Confusing, conflicting, undoubtedly bound to be altered to make no sense and then altered again six months down the line?

All that with some salt added for the wounds.

And a bag of chips.

Perhaps even a partridge in a pair tree.

WarOne wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Daemon Weapon = AP3

But the Manreaper is AP 2 due to being a Force Axe.

Or is it? The FAQ says it is a Daemon Weapon and a Force Axe. How do you combine those two together? Throw out the weaker of the two stats inherent for each weapon?

I think H.B.M.C was responding to the post about the Abaddon nerf.

And as to your question, I think it just has both AP values. With nothing else to go on, the weapon has all of the stats that it's given, but since AP2 carries with it all the effects of AP3, it can be treated as an AP2 weapon for simplicity.

Am I missing something or did they break Thrakka's Prophet of the Waaagh?

You can no longer charge after running, but it still gives automatic six rolls when running. So I guess you'll be calling the Waagh! to climb buildings and contest objectives.

DarkStarSabre wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Joey wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:Oh hey, notice they've never quite clarified the AP for Boneswords - RAW shenanigans are going to be fun for a while as Tyranid players stress the 'ignore armour saves' part rather than 'counts as a power weapon'.

Ignores armour saves. No ambiguity.

Which if the book states there is ambiguity, it counts as AP3.

Wonder how many of you remember when people argued til blue in the fact that Tyranids with say, Scything Talons and Rending Claws could only benefit from the abilities of one or the other, not both in 5th edition due to the way the multiple special weapons rules were worded. Every Tyranid player knew this was not the case (they were in effect functioning identical to 3rd and 4th edition Tyranids) but people still insisted up to the point where the FAQ came out and said that.

I expect people to kick off about Boneswords. Really, I do.

DarkStarSabre, where are you getting the 'counts as a power weapon' bit? I can't find anything in the Codex or FAQ that uses those words.

DarkStarSabre wrote:Oh hey, notice they've never quite clarified the AP for Boneswords - RAW shenanigans are going to be fun for a while as Tyranid players stress the 'ignore armour saves' part rather than 'counts as a power weapon'.

Boneswords were never listed as power weapons in the codex. Also the wording is not "ignore armor saves", but "No armor saves can be taken against wounds.....", so no armor saves and effectively ap -. Of course that was probably just to make up for getting boned in just about every thing else.

Synapse did get easier to maintain, as it now test on the unit's start of movement instead of the players start of movement.

Lash Whips got a bump, as they now assign a fixed I1 regardless of enemy bonuses.

I.B.: Feed got a boost, +2A on the charge and are no longer rage baited. Fex, non-Prime Trygons and Hormigaunts are going to be a lot more popular since they don't need synapse control any more.

I.B.: Feed got a boost, +2A on the charge and are no longer rage baited. Fex, non-Prime Trygons and Hormigaunts are going to be a lot more popular since they don't need synapse control any more.

The FAQ ruled that you no longer get rage on feed, and that you're uncontrollable still.

So..Typical tyranid ruling.

Jidmah wrote:Am I missing something or did they break Thrakka's Prophet of the Waaagh?

You can no longer charge after running, but it still gives automatic six rolls when running. So I guess you'll be calling the Waagh! to climb buildings and contest objectives.

Yeah, it would appear as if (unless something else changes) this has seriously nerfed Waaagh! as a whole since Fleet is now pretty damn useless.

Dr. Delorean wrote:How are Necrons buffed by this FAQ? Oh, let me count the ways!

- Command barge is a chariot (can attack in CC without disembarking, +1 to armor save, d6 strength 6 hammer of wrath hits when you charge)

- war scythes are specifically Ap 1

- Night Scythes can move super far and still disembark models, without scatter

I'm sure there's more than just those in there, but maaaaaan. As a Necron player I'm in two minds, on one hand, cool, on the other, it is blatantly unfair to other armies. I hope V2 comes soon and addresses more.

There is one more....Whip Coils got a big boost:

"As a set value modifier, the Whip Coil effect is applied after all other modifiers. If the model is effected by another set value modifier, roll off to see which is applied first at the start of each fight sub-phase"

So now you add all bonuses to your initiative, then apply the reduction to I1 for the Whip Coils....and if you run into Eldar Banshees it's now a die roll to see who gets to apply their effect on the combat.

It says Typhus is only mastery level one but in the Amendments it says he can pick two abilities, does he just get to cast one while being able to have two to choose from. Also it says a daemon prince may not shoot two diffrent psychic powers, does that mean his mastery level doesn't increase or just he's limited to a single attack.

WOW from what I can tell Tyranids have no weapon that has the skyfire rule, no allies and no hope no hope at all.

Am i reading this right?


Drahzar could challenge another guy, then leave him off in challenge-land while he wades through the mooks instead?

I'm glad they left Demiklaives as AP2 , at least, though less thrilled that Klaives didn't get lumped in as unusual power weapons (and this get the 5+ inv parry from being powerswords). It would have made sense..

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

I.B.: Feed got a boost, +2A on the charge and are no longer rage baited. Fex, non-Prime Trygons and Hormigaunts are going to be a lot more popular since they don't need synapse control any more.

The FAQ ruled that you no longer get rage on feed, and that you're uncontrollable still.

So..Typical tyranid ruling.

I think you miss read. Feed still gives you rage, and only prevents you from shooting.Since most of the Feed bugs aren't used for the guns any way, that is not a big deal.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
looks like heroic intervention got nerfed even as started to look good. No HoW attack on arrival, so they won't get the nice free attack.

MDizzle wrote:WOW from what I can tell Tyranids have no weapon that has the skyfire rule, no allies and no hope no hope at all.

Basically, yeah. 6th is bad for 'Nids, pretty much all around.

Although, there is a certain lulz factor that units with Instinctive Behavior - Feed actually get a huge benefit from being outside of synapse. +2 attacks for being outside of Synapse range and failing my Ld check? Hm...

6 full squads of Hormagaunts. Take a flyrant and make sure they're way away from the troops to start... Sprinkle with Carnifexes and Trygons.

Did they put power blades from warp spiders in the BBB? Right now they aren't PW but give an extra attack and ignore armor saves (unlike banshees who have pw).

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

I.B.: Feed got a boost, +2A on the charge and are no longer rage baited. Fex, non-Prime Trygons and Hormigaunts are going to be a lot more popular since they don't need synapse control any more.

The FAQ ruled that you no longer get rage on feed, and that you're uncontrollable still.

So..Typical tyranid ruling.

page 2 of tyranid FAQ: A unit who Feeds is subject to the Rage special rule.

How's did we lose rage again?

Edit: ninja'd

so I haven't recieved my rule book yet and was reading the FAQs and noticed that ll the suspected flyers got changed to unit type flyer in the FAQ except for the Stormraven can someone with the rulebook confirm this for me doese this mean that the Stormraven is staying a fast skimmer and is not a flyer?

As far as I can tell it rolls as:

Are you Xeno, and not Necrons?

Feth you.

MDizzle wrote:WOW from what I can tell Tyranids have no weapon that has the skyfire rule, no allies and no hope no hope at all.

They have Flying MC's which can Vector Strike Aerial units, not really needing it when you can smack them like that, kinda like chaos daemons now.

page 2 of tyranid FAQ: A unit who Feeds is subject to the Rage special rule.

How's did we lose rage again?

Misread it, sorry, didn't have my coffee at the time.

As far as I can tell it rolls as:

Are you Xeno, and not Necrons?

Feth you.

Tau did alright considering most things, stealth suits are finally able to be considered in a serious manner now.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

MDizzle wrote:WOW from what I can tell Tyranids have no weapon that has the skyfire rule, no allies and no hope no hope at all.

They have Flying MC's which can Vector Strike Aerial units, not really needing it when you can smack them like that, kinda like chaos daemons now.

page 2 of tyranid FAQ: A unit who Feeds is subject to the Rage special rule.

How's did we lose rage again?

Misread it, sorry, didn't have my coffee at the time.

*hands you a cup* Been there, done that. Made a fresh pot. Now let's weep together for the fact that a prime STILL cannot join a unit of warriors in a pod... Can he at least outflank with them now?

Charax wrote:Farseers are Mastery Level 1, Swarmlord is 2

Winged Hive Tyrants are Flying Monstrous Creatures, Winged Daemon Princes are Jump Monstrous Creatures

Yay consistency!

Even better: Codex: Daemons Daemon Princes are Flying MCs. Yay consistency for things that are supposed to be the same thing!

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

MDizzle wrote:WOW from what I can tell Tyranids have no weapon that has the skyfire rule, no allies and no hope no hope at all.

They have Flying MC's which can Vector Strike Aerial units, not really needing it when you can smack them like that.

As has already been pointed out, there are two flying MC units: Harpies and Flyrants. An important note is that vector strike isn't a normal close combat attack, and thus the MC can't use Smash.

Harpies are S5 and do not have rending claws. They are thus unable to hurt anything more than armor 11 (remember vector strike hits the side armor apparently).

Flyrants are S6 and can not take rending claws. They are thus able to glance AV 12 (valkyrie/vendetta, for instance) only on a 6.


Neither of those units has better than a 3+ save, and neither one has an invulnerable save. This means that both are subject to the usual krak spam from ground troops, or the lascannons on the aforementioned valkyrie/vendetta. Even if they tried to take down other flyers, they would very commonly be pulled out synapse. Iin the case of the harpy the Ld10 test isn't horrible, I grant, but for the Flyrant it means not being where Synapse might be needed.


Granted, it looks like Synapse is about to become a detriment to some blocks on certain turns.

Page 48 – Sanguinary Priests, Blood Chalice.
Change first sentence to: “All friendly units chosen from Codex:
Blood Angels within 6" are subject to the Furious Charge and
Feel No Pain special rules”.

That's massive. A lot of people were saying that Sanguinary Priests would be allied with everyone before this FAQ. I like the fact they've restricted most of the army-wide powers only to units of the same codex, it really stops a lot of the more ridiculous ally combinations being broken. That plus the Hydra nerf, plus all of the stuff in the rulebook, really bring a lot of armies back into contention.

streamdragon wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

MDizzle wrote:WOW from what I can tell Tyranids have no weapon that has the skyfire rule, no allies and no hope no hope at all.

They have Flying MC's which can Vector Strike Aerial units, not really needing it when you can smack them like that.

As has already been pointed out, there are two flying MC units: Harpies and Flyrants. An important note is that vector strike isn't a normal close combat attack, and thus the MC can't use Smash.

Harpies are S5 and do not have rending claws. They are thus unable to hurt anything more than armor 11 (remember vector strike hits the side armor apparently).

Flyrants are S6 and can not take rending claws. They are thus able to glance AV 12 (valkyrie/vendetta, for instance) only on a 6.


Neither of those units has better than a 3+ save, and neither one has an invulnerable save. This means that both are subject to the usual krak spam from ground troops, or the lascannons on the aforementioned valkyrie/vendetta. Even if they tried to take down other flyers, they would very commonly be pulled out synapse. Iin the case of the harpy the Ld10 test isn't horrible, I grant, but for the Flyrant it means not being where Synapse might be needed.

At the flyer speed, the Flyrant can get to wherever he needs to be, although honestly if you're using him for synapse control that seems to be a waste. You're also forgetting both of those have weapon options that will let them hunt flyers very effectively: the harpy can have a twin-linked venom cannon, and the flyrant has twin-linked devs and/or his own venom cannon for support. Since they're also flyers, they don't suffer from the BS1 syndrome, which makes the twin linked devs quite nice for all but the heaviest flyers, and even then having a half decent chance at getting a glance or two.

Granted, it looks like Synapse is about to become a detriment to some blocks on certain turns.

edit: Somehow my entire post disappeared but the quote remained...

You're forgetting the gun options for both, and being flyers aren't subject to the "only hit on 6." The harpy has an option for a twin-linked venom cannon, and the flyrant has either the venom cannon or twin linked devourers. The venom cannon can outright pen most vehicles, and the devs can have a decent chance of removing one or two hull points, depending if you take one or two pair. Also, if you're using your flyrant for synapse support, you're not getting the most out of him, but he's fast enough to get someplace to patch holes in enemy lines if your other synapse is taken out.

Basically every aura in the game got that change. Except the KFF

streamdragon wrote:

MDizzle wrote:WOW from what I can tell Tyranids have no weapon that has the skyfire rule, no allies and no hope no hope at all.

Basically, yeah. 6th is bad for 'Nids, pretty much all around.

Although, there is a certain lulz factor that units with Instinctive Behavior - Feed actually get a huge benefit from being outside of synapse. +2 attacks for being outside of Synapse range and failing my Ld check? Hm...

6 full squads of Hormagaunts. Take a flyrant and make sure they're way away from the troops to start... Sprinkle with Carnifexes and Trygons.

What will be hilarious is Foot Tyrants and the way Tyrant Guard behave when the Tyrant dies. They're at Rage++!

Ascalam wrote:As far as I can tell it rolls as:

Are you Xeno, and not Necrons?

Feth you.

Orcs are fine too. No fearless wounds, movement so you're guaranteed assault in turn two and bikes are T5.

Can someone please explain how lash whips work now?

Lots of changes to restrict powers and then they left Epidemius alone? Add him + some ablative Plagebearers to a Nurgle Chaos Space Marine force... He even still moves FNP to 3+ despite base FNP going to 5+, so that's gonna be a pretty big boost to Plague Marines. Going to be real interesting playing against that. Kill Epi (which means killing his Plaguebearer entourage) before the Tally gets to the magic numbers and the CSMs roll over you.

Stoffer wrote:

Ascalam wrote:As far as I can tell it rolls as:

Are you Xeno, and not Necrons?

Feth you.

Orcs are fine too. No fearless wounds, movement so you're guaranteed assault in turn two and bikes are T5.

Yeah it's pretty much:

Are you Dark Eldar or Tyranids?
If yes, than go feth yourself.

What about Eldar sir?
People still play Eldar?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

skarsol wrote:Lots of changes to restrict powers and then they left Epidemius alone? Add him + some ablative Plagebearers to a Nurgle Chaos Space Marine force... He even still moves FNP to 3+ despite base FNP going to 5+, so that's gonna be a pretty big boost to Plague Marines. Going to be real interesting playing against that. Kill Epi (which means killing his Plaguebearer entourage) before the Tally gets to the magic numbers and the CSMs roll over you.

I've been thinking through some Daemons + CSM or Daemons + Guard in my head and that was the first thing that popped up.

Maybe I'm an idiot, but aren't CSM and Daemons Allies of Convenience and therefore don't benefit from from each other's special rules?

If not, this is broken, and I've got some Nurgle models to purchase

Sad to see they didn't take this opportunity to fix Chaos Daemons broken deployment.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

MDizzle wrote:WOW from what I can tell Tyranids have no weapon that has the skyfire rule, no allies and no hope no hope at all.

They have Flying MC's which can Vector Strike Aerial units, not really needing it when you can smack them like that, kinda like chaos daemons now.

page 2 of tyranid FAQ: A unit who Feeds is subject to the Rage special rule.

How's did we lose rage again?

Misread it, sorry, didn't have my coffee at the time.

As far as I can tell it rolls as:

Are you Xeno, and not Necrons?

Feth you.

Tau did alright considering most things, stealth suits are finally able to be considered in a serious manner now.

Apart from the drones you use to keep stealth suits alive now lose stealth :( Any team with drones can be shot at from long range.

Stoffer wrote:

Ascalam wrote:As far as I can tell it rolls as:

Are you Xeno, and not Necrons?

Feth you.

Orcs are fine too. No fearless wounds, movement so you're guaranteed assault in turn two and bikes are T5.

Waagh is now useless as you can't run and charge, trukks can't disembark unless driving very very slowly, KFF nerfed, Snikrot is now useless...

No fearless wounds and T 5 bikers (they were anyway unless someone was shooting an S8 + antitank gun at them) doesn't really compensate.

We got some minor buffs, and a heaping helping of feth you.

DE are even worse off.


Turn 2 guaranteed assaults aren't that guaranteed. Did you look at the missions?

Footslogging lists are quite definitely not getting a turn 2 assault.

Images on the web seem to say they're Blood Brothers. Regardless, Epi says "all models ... friends and enemies ... anywhere on the table".

Edit: Err, thats for taking tally. But still the benfits go to "friend and foe".

Griever wrote:

Stoffer wrote:

Ascalam wrote:As far as I can tell it rolls as:

Are you Xeno, and not Necrons?

Feth you.

Orcs are fine too. No fearless wounds, movement so you're guaranteed assault in turn two and bikes are T5.

Yeah it's pretty much:

Are you Dark Eldar or Tyranids?
If yes, than go feth yourself.

What about Eldar sir?
People still play Eldar?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

skarsol wrote:Lots of changes to restrict powers and then they left Epidemius alone? Add him + some ablative Plagebearers to a Nurgle Chaos Space Marine force... He even still moves FNP to 3+ despite base FNP going to 5+, so that's gonna be a pretty big boost to Plague Marines. Going to be real interesting playing against that. Kill Epi (which means killing his Plaguebearer entourage) before the Tally gets to the magic numbers and the CSMs roll over you.

I've been thinking through some Daemons + CSM or Daemons + Guard in my head and that was the first thing that popped up.

Maybe I'm an idiot, but aren't CSM and Daemons Allies of Convenience and therefore don't benefit from from each other's special rules?

If not, this is broken, and I've got some Nurgle models to purchase

They be battle brothers. I already have a tallyman/Typhus list made..

Well, Nurgle Bikers sound interesting now. Ha.

Waagh is now useless as you can't run and charge, trukks can't disembark unless driving very very slowly, KFF nerfed, Snikrot is now useless...

No fearless wounds and T 5 bikers (they were anyway unless someone was shooting an S8 + antitank gun at them) doesn't really compensate.

Waagh still grant's fleet, which can reroll an assault dice. Trukks give you 6" + 6" + 2D6, an alright distance at least.

The KFF is back to what it was in 4th, not exactly minding this to much.

Poor snikrot though, that one does hurt..Course Green Tide and Battlewagons still do okay, green tide thanks to the fearless thing has gotten Far Better for me.

TedNugent wrote:Well, Nurgle Bikers sound interesting now. Ha.

And since Epi at 20+ gives "All attacks from Followers of Nugle ignore armor saves" that should effect Hammer of Wrath too I'd think.

I'm not sure about Green Tide. Now not only are you fighting against Dangerous Terrain tests and tripping over models but now you can't multi assault.

I thought charging only gives +1S now instead of +1A? So why does Venomthrope, Spore Cloud, remove the +1A from charges?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Waagh is now useless as you can't run and charge, trukks can't disembark unless driving very very slowly, KFF nerfed, Snikrot is now useless...

No fearless wounds and T 5 bikers (they were anyway unless someone was shooting an S8 + antitank gun at them) doesn't really compensate.

Waagh still grant's fleet, which can reroll an assault dice. Trukks give you 6" + 6" + 2D6, an alright distance at least.

The KFF is back to what it was in 4th, not exactly minding this to much.

Poor snikrot though, that one does hurt..Course Green Tide and Battlewagons still do okay, green tide thanks to the fearless thing has gotten Far Better for me.

Still have to deal with the Disorganised charge rule though..

Hmm.

Looks like i'm going to have to really rethink my lists to work around the damaged tissue... No bad thing, i suppose..

My DE are pretty much relegated to a shooty army, which isn't where i wanted my Coven assault list to go. Some serious rethinking there too. I bought DE to play a fast, fragile assault army, and that no longer seems to be possible, despite 2/3 of the book being designed for that.

TedNugent wrote:I'm not sure about Green Tide. Now not only are you fighting against Dangerous Terrain tests and tripping over models but now you can't multi assault.

I played Tremorcons with Writhing World C'tan, half the time against enemies they made it so I could only charge one unit at a time due to positioning. At this point anything that changes those two aren't exactly going to hurt my green tide anymore than that.

I don't feel like Orks did too bad really.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/456724.page

Orks also got three perfectly viable fliers, Manz that laugh at powerweapons, Stormboyz getting I10 attacks, less mishaps, and a higher chance to succeed in charging after deep striking, deff rollas no longer being useless against skimmers, and orks being the best at snap-firing. We weren't doing much else in the first place.

So, if the sky is falling, us orks are going to punch it.

matphat wrote:I don't feel like Orks did too bad really.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/456724.page

Completely agree with this post. Orks came out pretty well.

Dark Eldar FAQ wrote:
Page 25 Poisoned shooting weapons.
Change the fourth sentence to read "These weapons cannot damage enemy vehicles".

Now, it may be that I'm not a native English speaker, but far as I can tell, the 4th sentence in the DE codex for poisoned shooting weapons already said that... So did they just wanna rub it in that our splinter weapons can't hurt any vehicle? Or do they want us to really take out the sentence that reads, "These weapons cannot damage enemy vehicles" to "These weapons cannot damage enemy vehicles", just so it drills into our head that we can't damage an enemy vehicle with our poisoned shooting weapon?

I'm less upset but more like... amused...

Listen, DE, you can't hurt enemy vehicles in case you were trying to poison them before!

Nope, you can't!

Just when i got used to doing DOA lists...............................................
Epic Fail, GW. Epic Fail.

Jidmah wrote:Orks also got three perfectly viable fliers, Manz that laugh at powerweapons, Stormboyz getting I10 attacks, less mishaps, and a higher chance to succeed in charging after deep striking, deff rollas no longer being useless against skimmers, and orks being the best at snap-firing. We weren't doing much else in the first place.

So, if the sky is falling, us orks are going to punch it.

Well said.

We'll just have to adapt

I've got my rant out. Now to sit down and really go through the ork dex and figure out new ways to beat face...

*puts his mek goggles on*



My DE, however, are still well and truly boned, but they will be prettiest underpowered army on the field

RIP Nids for 6th, looks like new hobby time for me. Whatever.

60mm wrote:RIP Nids for 6th, looks like new hobby time for me. Whatever.

Why exactly are people claiming nids so bad in this edition? I mean I've seen worse for DE at this point!

Haven't gone through all the FAQ stuff yet, but some of this royally sucks, other stuff is expected. What's the point of Daemon Princes being FMCs in the CD book, but just jump MCs in the CSM book-cost shouldn't be an issue-it's pure dumbassery at its worst. Kharne at I1 is also fethed up. The big one-my BT are considering shelving themselves or becoming shooting only. What the hell-AACNMTO grants RAGE now? No more PE? And all for only 50 additional points going from an AMAZING 50 points to a pretty big pile of crap. Can you see the gesture I'm giving you GW? Cuz I'm doing it as hard as I can.

I'll still play that CD/CSM combo I've been drooling over, but my BT hate GW now. Maybe I'll ally them with my CFs for some secondary chapter shooting fun.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

60mm wrote:RIP Nids for 6th, looks like new hobby time for me. Whatever.

Why exactly are people claiming nids so bad in this edition? I mean I've seen worse for DE at this point!

People think that fliers and allies may rule the world?

Zyllos wrote:I thought charging only gives +1S now instead of +1A? So why does Venomthrope, Spore Cloud, remove the +1A from charges?

You're thinking of Furious Charge. Furious Charge isn't a rule mechanic and it isn't on every unit, it only applies towards units with the Furious Charge USR. If your unit does not have Furious Charge you do not get the Furious Charge bonus.

Charges give +1A just like 5E.

Damn so Nemesis weapons are only 3Ap (except for hammer, MAY BE) damn thats good for purifiers but a huge nerf for termies...

Must be nice to be on the GW staff to have about as much consideration for these faqs as a student hammering out a late night term paper. What really makes it sad is that the 8th Fantasy faqs paid a great deal more attention to armies getting transitioned over compared to this.

I know most people probably don't give two feths about IG armies not being able to take non-mandatory HQs as leaders, but I actually enjoyed this rule for Fluff armies and set a nice precedence. I may still ask my gaming group if they will allow me to continue this trend, but such is the way of things I guess.

CaptainJay wrote:I assumed all missile launchers would have access to Flakk Missiles, similar to how previously you could fire Krak/Frag missiles it's just giving you a third option.

(Which is good as otherwise I have no anti-flyer stuff in my army).

This (imo), as you replace the old ML weapon profile with the new one in the rule book. Instead of just having Frag and Krak, the profile now gives the option of Flakk missiles.

On an unrelated note T6 Nurgle bikers!

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

60mm wrote:RIP Nids for 6th, looks like new hobby time for me. Whatever.

Why exactly are people claiming nids so bad in this edition? I mean I've seen worse for DE at this point!

Both were already marginal lists, but Nids much more so, they are armies that if anything needed to be given advantages in these FAQs to get them in line with some of the other stuff out there and they didn't get it.

It's silly to talk about who got it worse, neither army is in a good position right now, and these FAQs show GW really doesn't care that that is the case.

P.S: the supposedly super agile Dark Eldar flyers are less maneuverable than this thing (I really think the DE flyers and the Eldar one to come should have got Vector Dancer)

Goldshield wrote:
Must be nice to be on the GW staff to have about as much consideration for these faqs as a student hammering out a late night term paper. What really makes it sad is that the 8th Fantasy faqs paid a great deal more attention to armies getting transitioned over compared to this.

Actually a better analogy would be a student hammering out a term paper the night before its due only to find out later its been extended. All the faqs that Ive seen have 'last update 15 June 2012' so they could of reread them all and made adjustments.

That would be because they weren't Marines..

GW has a hard-on for marines.

The new flier rules to explain the top-turret a bit though. Lousy for anti-ground shooting arc, but ideal for frying other fliers..

Atleast DE can take an ally to fill to level some of its weaknesses. NIDs are just up a creek.

Colfax wrote:

Goldshield wrote:
Must be nice to be on the GW staff to have about as much consideration for these faqs as a student hammering out a late night term paper. What really makes it sad is that the 8th Fantasy faqs paid a great deal more attention to armies getting transitioned over compared to this.

Actually a better analogy would be a student hammering out a term paper the night before its due only to find out later its been extended. All the faqs that Ive seen have 'last update 15 June 2012' so they could of reread them all and made adjustments.

Ah I see this now... that just makes this a little more sad.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

60mm wrote:RIP Nids for 6th, looks like new hobby time for me. Whatever.

Why exactly are people claiming nids so bad in this edition? I mean I've seen worse for DE at this point!

DE at least have a shooty build, even if it's boring to play.

Nids remain lacking assault greandes, wound allocation makes their charges difficult, their best slots remain crowded, many good, expensive units remain vulnerable to ID with no solution in sight, and their list of CC weapons that can deal with 2+ armor got drastically shorter.

Holy crap...Flash Gitz now ignore cover.
They have suddenly gotten a hell lot cooler ^^

Stupid ass Necrons. This edition had a lot of potential. Every ruling seems to be a big buff for them.

Holy messed up quotes Batman!

Marrak wrote:You're forgetting the gun options for both, and being flyers aren't subject to the "only hit on 6." The harpy has an option for a twin-linked venom cannon, and the flyrant has either the venom cannon or twin linked devourers. The venom cannon can outright pen most vehicles, and the devs can have a decent chance of removing one or two hull points, depending if you take one or two pair. Also, if you're using your flyrant for synapse support, you're not getting the most out of him, but he's fast enough to get someplace to patch holes in enemy lines if your other synapse is taken out.

I'm not forgetting them, they're just not that good. S6 for Devourer is the same str as their Vector Strike, so you're still rolling 6s just to glance. (After using your stellar BS of 3, mind you.) The Heavy Venom Cannon is literally the only weapon I can think of that still gets a penalty to the damage table. Sure, it'll glance (assuming you can hit with your BS3 and no twin link) fairly easily, but the HT/Harpy will run out of wounds before enemy fliers run out of HP it seems. I'm not saying it's not possible, just that our anti-air is probably the worst in the game. (Which is sort of ironic, considering the number of "flying" units we have...)

And I'm aware the Hive Tyrant isn't usually used for main Synapse. My point was when (not if) your other synapse goes down, if your HT is off chasing flyers shooting up your other stuff, they're not plugging that hole. (Although again, that might not really matter much anymore...)

MDizzle wrote:Can someone please explain how lash whips work now?

Lash whips are a set modifier now. According to the FAQ, this comes AFTER all other modifiers. So a Lash Whip against a Force Halberd goes like this:

Halberd boosts GK I to 6.
Lash Whips drop him to 1.

Against something else that sets the initiative of a model (e.g.: a Banshee Mask setting them to I10), you roll of for priority.

TedNugent wrote:I'm not sure about Green Tide. Now not only are you fighting against Dangerous Terrain tests and tripping over models but now you can't multi assault.

You can still multi-assault, you just don't get any charge bonuses for doing so. And both units get to Overwatch fire at you... So you CAN, it's just going to hurt...

Stoffer wrote:Orcs are fine too. No fearless wounds, movement so you're guaranteed assault in turn two and bikes are T5.

Orks are sort of in a middling place, again. Some of the buffs are nice, some of the nerfs are pretty sucky. Overall I don't think we really gained or lost ground; we'll probably still be that oddball middling army that either curb stomps their opponent, or ends up basically tabled by the end of turn 2, maybe turn 3.

Nob bikers though... oh man are people going to hate them even more now... I also might be willing to give MANz a try now. Too bad I can't get them an invulnerable without Grotsnik though; my group doesn't play SCs often and I don't really like him anyway.

Sephyr wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

60mm wrote:RIP Nids for 6th, looks like new hobby time for me. Whatever.

Why exactly are people claiming nids so bad in this edition? I mean I've seen worse for DE at this point!

DE at least have a shooty build, even if it's boring to play.

Nids remain lacking assault greandes, wound allocation makes their charges difficult, their best slots remain crowded, many good, expensive units remain vulnerable to ID with no solution in sight, and their list of CC weapons that can deal with 2+ armor got drastically shorter.

Oh I know all this, but people are making it sound they got even worse.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Holy crap...Flash Gitz now ignore cover.
They have suddenly gotten a hell lot cooler ^^

Flash Gitz are cooler, but unfortunately they're still in the over stacked Heavy Support slot.

Thunderfrog wrote:Stupid ass Necrons. This edition had a lot of potential. Every ruling seems to be a big buff for them.

About time we get back from trash tier.

streamdragon wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Holy crap...Flash Gitz now ignore cover.
They have suddenly gotten a hell lot cooler ^^

Flash Gitz are cooler, but unfortunately they're still in the over stacked Heavy Support slot.

Play 2k points.... you can buy BW for your gitz!

whembly wrote:

streamdragon wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Holy crap...Flash Gitz now ignore cover.
They have suddenly gotten a hell lot cooler ^^

Flash Gitz are cooler, but unfortunately they're still in the over stacked Heavy Support slot.

Play 2k points.... you can buy BW for your gitz!

But at 2k points my BW is probably toting 20 shoota boyz! (I didn't think about the double FOC thing. Guess my Komandos suddenly became Gitz... )

First thing, does anyone owning the SM iBook know if it's been updated with the FAQs? This will give us a clue as to whether GW are really embracing the digital frontier.

Secondly, I was just looking forward to playing Tau in the new edition, but no Target lock? That sucks a bit, but worse, no Skyfire/Interceptor for Skyrays?! What the hell? I mean it was only the first anti-aircraft weapon that they created AFAIK.

matphat wrote:I don't feel like Orks did too bad really.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/456724.page

Orkz will do okay, but the Orkz I liked playing will not. Shame, really.

On a whole though, these FAQs are really poorly done. A lot of stuff is rushed or doesn't really make sense in context. Really a bad way to handle the launch of a new edition.

Also, Necrons are ridiculous now.

Can't assault out of a webway portal? FFS

Sigvatr wrote:

Thunderfrog wrote:Stupid ass Necrons. This edition had a lot of potential. Every ruling seems to be a big buff for them.

About time we get back from trash tier.

you mean like they have been since re-release?

Here is the real statment that is true, DA DW got a huge buff from almost the entire new ruleset, same with RW its about time we get back from the trash tier

Fafnir wrote:

matphat wrote:I don't feel like Orks did too bad really.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/456724.page

Orkz will do okay, but the Orkz I liked playing will not. Shame, really.

On a whole though, these FAQs are really poorly done. A lot of stuff is rushed or doesn't really make sense in context. Really a bad way to handle the launch of a new edition.

Also, Necrons are ridiculous now.

Man I remember the FAQ that you wrote, it was awesome.
Definitely better than the ones that GW released which have been generally very positively received by the community.

Joey wrote:

Fafnir wrote:

matphat wrote:I don't feel like Orks did too bad really.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/456724.page

Orkz will do okay, but the Orkz I liked playing will not. Shame, really.

On a whole though, these FAQs are really poorly done. A lot of stuff is rushed or doesn't really make sense in context. Really a bad way to handle the launch of a new edition.

Also, Necrons are ridiculous now.

Man I remember the FAQ that you wrote, it was awesome.
Definitely better than the ones that GW released which have been generally very positively received by the community.

You don't have to be Ceasar to understand Ceasar. Just because I don't write the FAQs doesn't mean I can't tell when they're bad. It's like saying I can't tell a good movie from a bad one because I've never directed one. Or that I can't tell crap food from good food because I don't cook.

I expect them to do a good job with their product because I pay them to when I buy their products.

whembly wrote:

streamdragon wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Holy crap...Flash Gitz now ignore cover.
They have suddenly gotten a hell lot cooler ^^

Flash Gitz are cooler, but unfortunately they're still in the over stacked Heavy Support slot.

Play 2k points.... you can buy BW for your gitz!

play 2k points and you get 2 FOC's, nid issues evaporate when you have pretty much infinite FOC slots.
orks? well Im not looking forward to trying to pull boy casualties out of base to base and then pile in a ton of guys, several times per close combat, if anyone can figure out an easier way of doing this i'm all ears.

Fafnir wrote:

Joey wrote:

Fafnir wrote:

matphat wrote:I don't feel like Orks did too bad really.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/456724.page

Orkz will do okay, but the Orkz I liked playing will not. Shame, really.

On a whole though, these FAQs are really poorly done. A lot of stuff is rushed or doesn't really make sense in context. Really a bad way to handle the launch of a new edition.

Also, Necrons are ridiculous now.

Man I remember the FAQ that you wrote, it was awesome.
Definitely better than the ones that GW released which have been generally very positively received by the community.

You don't have to be Ceasar to understand Ceasar. Just because I don't write the FAQs doesn't mean I can't tell when they're bad.

I expect them to do a good job with their product because I pay them to when I buy their products.

The FAQs are free. Do you have a problem with the models or the ruleset?
If you have a problem with the models, demand a refund. If you have a problem with the ruleset, don't buy the book and get your friends to play 4th/5th edition, whatever.
In fact in a couple of months the rulebook will basically be free with the new starter set.

A couple of other musings;


It appears Monstrous Creatures get cover saves from area terrain or intervening models. At least, at this point--I see nothing under Monstrous Creatures that disallows this. I would think that Tyranid players would rejoice at this--a flying Tyrant that needs 6s to hit, can jink for a 5+ save in the open--- and can claim cover if any units are between it and the shooter seems a great deal more survivable. Potentially even greater if Night Fight is in affect--Jink + Night Fight + 2d6 run = a monstrous horror in your face in a hurry---that's really tough to kill.

Night Fight Scythe spam seems like a lot of fun as well. Can't assault me, I'll block assault lanes with my base---oh and if you get several hits on my Scythe, I'll declare Evade which gives me a 3++. Snapfire the next turn on Twin Linked Tesla isn't that big of a deal either...

At least in theory

Looks like Yarrick won't be helping anyone out but the Guard.

So unfortunately i haven't got the new rule book yet, so can someone tell me what the new rage rule is please

+2 attack rather than +1 when charging into assault.

Joey wrote:
The FAQs are free. Do you have a problem with the models or the ruleset?
If you have a problem with the models, demand a refund. If you have a problem with the ruleset, don't buy the book and get your friends to play 4th/5th edition, whatever.
In fact in a couple of months the rulebook will basically be free with the new starter set.

The FAQs are free, but a service provided as an extension to the codecies and rulebooks which are paid for, and are done in the interests of maintaining the game for the purpose of making the books and rules viable to sell/be bought. In other words, they fix an otherwise broken product.

Furthermore, I am justified in my criticism of 6th edition, as it is an indicator of the direction that the public community at large (ie, the people I primarily play with) will end up going in. You can no longer go to any public game and request an earlier edition.

And lastly, there's nothing wrong with pointing something out for what it is: poorly written and rushed.

I love the rule book, but the FAQs are terrible.

Fafnir wrote:

Joey wrote:
The FAQs are free. Do you have a problem with the models or the ruleset?
If you have a problem with the models, demand a refund. If you have a problem with the ruleset, don't buy the book and get your friends to play 4th/5th edition, whatever.
In fact in a couple of months the rulebook will basically be free with the new starter set.

The FAQs are free, but a service provided as an extension to the codecies and rulebooks which are paid for, and are done in the interests of maintaining the game for the purpose of making the books and rules viable to sell/be bought. In other words, they fix an otherwise broken product.

Furthermore, I am justified in my criticism of 6th edition, as it is an indicator of the direction that the public community at large (ie, the people I primarily play with) will end up going in. You can no longer go to any public game and request an earlier edition.

And lastly, there's nothing wrong with pointing something out for what it is: poorly written and rushed.

No, YOU think they're rubbish. Most people are hugely positive about the FAQs. Your mindset is to critisise everything GW do and you currupt everything to it. There are hundreds of points of information in the FAQs and you've picked on two or three and decided that they break the game.
The new rules editions make some things more viable, some things less viable. This is a concequence of a new ruleset. Everything can't be a winner...

Joey wrote:
If you have a problem with the models, demand a refund. If you have a problem with the ruleset, don't buy the book and get your friends to play 4th/5th edition, whatever.
In fact in a couple of months the rulebook will basically be free with the new starter set.

So people can't be upset because their armies changed? We've all done our part funding the company and it's not like we're going there with torches, people are just venting. Now, can we get back to doing that without that faulty logic of "you don't write FAQs therefore you can't complain"? If it bothers you that much, don't post.

On topic, it seems that at least there's a reason to take DE Reavers with Heat Lances and a Squad Leader. And Scourges, perhaps.

I'm still hoping Agonizers and Klaives will get AP2.

And, I don't really get the power axe. It's got the same penalties as a Power Fist without being even half as good?

Destrado wrote:

Joey wrote:
If you have a problem with the models, demand a refund. If you have a problem with the ruleset, don't buy the book and get your friends to play 4th/5th edition, whatever.
In fact in a couple of months the rulebook will basically be free with the new starter set.

So people can't be upset because their armies changed? We've all done our part funding the company and it's not like we're going there with torches, people are just venting. Now, can we get back to doing that without that faulty logic of "you don't write FAQs therefore you can't complain"? If it bothers you that much, don't post.

New ruleset. Things change. Venting is fine I suppose.

Joey wrote:

Fafnir wrote:

Joey wrote:
The FAQs are free. Do you have a problem with the models or the ruleset?
If you have a problem with the models, demand a refund. If you have a problem with the ruleset, don't buy the book and get your friends to play 4th/5th edition, whatever.
In fact in a couple of months the rulebook will basically be free with the new starter set.

The FAQs are free, but a service provided as an extension to the codecies and rulebooks which are paid for, and are done in the interests of maintaining the game for the purpose of making the books and rules viable to sell/be bought. In other words, they fix an otherwise broken product.

Furthermore, I am justified in my criticism of 6th edition, as it is an indicator of the direction that the public community at large (ie, the people I primarily play with) will end up going in. You can no longer go to any public game and request an earlier edition.

And lastly, there's nothing wrong with pointing something out for what it is: poorly written and rushed.

No, YOU think they're rubbish. Most people are hugely positive about the FAQs. Your mindset is to critisise everything GW do and you currupt everything to it. There are hundreds of points of information in the FAQs and you've picked on two or three and decided that they break the game.
The new rules editions make some things more viable, some things less viable. This is a concequence of a new ruleset. Everything can't be a winner...

After reading 9 pages of Faq's postings in here, the senses is that the FaQ's were written poorly. and I agree with that assessment.

I'm just glad thousand sons and Stormtroopers are now finally useful.

Therion wrote:. Anti-aircraft guns are not used to effectively kill for example enemy infantry, and this rule represents that well.

Above statement is anything but true. While it holds for the game historically these kinds of vehicles are VERY effective against infantry and lightly armored vehicles. But I digress. Good to see the FAWS up so quickly hopefully they keep them updates as necessary.

I like how Grey Knights all have unique force weapons, which IRRC means they're all AP3. This makes me giggle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6P_sXbQtgc&t=8m52s

Thaylen wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:

Snufflesms wrote:TAU Battlesuits can no longer take Target Locks, which means they cannot split fire between the suits. This is a massive hit to Broadsides.

I noticed this as well, unless there is a rule change somewhere that allows you to split fire. If not, its pretty fethed up :(.

Can someone confirm if you are now allowed to split fire by default in 6th edition? Because if this isn't the case, I can't see why GW would remove target locks.

Personally they were required for broadsides (and piranhas when I used them).

The really bizarre thing is they removed Target Locks from the infantry armoury, but didn't remove them from the vehicle armoury or Commander Shadowsun.

How are DE nerfed? I mean they lost some edge but they are hardly unusable/broken.... aside from that damned WWP ruling... heres hoping for v2 in the near future....

RogueRegault wrote:

Thaylen wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:

Snufflesms wrote:TAU Battlesuits can no longer take Target Locks, which means they cannot split fire between the suits. This is a massive hit to Broadsides.

I noticed this as well, unless there is a rule change somewhere that allows you to split fire. If not, its pretty fethed up :(.

Can someone confirm if you are now allowed to split fire by default in 6th edition? Because if this isn't the case, I can't see why GW would remove target locks.

Personally they were required for broadsides (and piranhas when I used them).

The really bizarre thing is they removed Target Locks from the infantry armoury, but didn't remove them from the vehicle armoury or Commander Shadowsun.

Not really it is actually expected, remember this edition vehicles are papper thin, if they allowed to split fire 3 crisis suits would anihilate your oponents meq.

chaos0xomega wrote:How are DE nerfed? I mean they lost some edge but they are hardly unusable/broken.... aside from that damned WWP ruling... heres hoping for v2 in the near future....

Overwatch hurts wychs more than most units. Wychs taking 2, 3 or even 4 wounds when they are assaulting is a huge nerf, not only to their combat strength (they rely on striking at near full strength thanks to their high Initiative) but also their assault range (higher variance, slightly less than 5th with a likely further loss of range from overwatch). Wychs also no have no answer to 2+ armour, where as before they could engage with an agonizer and 4+ dodge.

Wychs were one of the main ways you could get away from venom spam.

WWP was another one.

Both these options are much less effective in 6th than they were in 5th.

The speed bonus that DE have in general has been diluted with giving all vehicles a flat out move. While they can still move farther, the difference has been reduced.

Essentially venom spam is really the only solid option left. We'll see if a hellion build gets added to that, but never the less certainly many options have been made weaker.

Therion wrote:

It's because you haven't read the rulebook. If your weapon has skyfire, you hit skimmers and flyers and flying MCs with normal BS, but you hit ground targets with 6's. Skyfire makes a weapon an anti-aircraft gun. Anti-aircraft guns are not used to effectively kill for example enemy infantry, and this rule represents that well.

Hah, tell that to the infantry and tankers during WWII who went up against the German 88's, or those quad 20mm anti-aircraft guns. Yeah, I KNOW 40K isn't reality, but that's not exactly a valid explanation as to why it's that way. I don't have a problem with it, since I'm pretty sure it was done for game balance purposes, but it probably means that Hydras will not be seen as much on the battlefield since their utility for taking out lighter armored units is now severely limited as compared to what it was before.