Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m470041a_FAQ_ImperialGuard_2009.pdf

Just making sure people know.

Oh, and just to say "I told you so":

Q. Can an Imperial Guard officer issue orders during his opponent's turn?
A. No. You may only issue orders during the Shooting phase of your own turn.

Q. If you take two Astropaths or two Officers of the Fleet, do their +1/-1 to reserve rolls stack?
A. No. The advantage of having multiples of these Regimental Advisors is that you can still gain the benefit of the Telepathic Relay/Intercept Reserves rules should one Astropath/Officer of the Fleet be killed. The confusion created by having so many advisors simultaneously vying for a Commander’s attention negates any potential benefit.

Q. Are hotshot lasguns considered lasguns for ‘First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire?’
A. No. Whilst lasguns are robust weapons ideally suited for firing continuous volleys, hotshot lasguns cannot sustain such a high rate of fire.

Q. Do Hellstrike Missiles use the large blast template or are they non-blast ordnance?
A. They are non-blast ordnance weapons.

I was right on all 4 of these when they were first asked.

GW: Saying "I Agree with Gwar!" since September 2009
In fact the only ones I was not correct on are the "'Hunter" Codex Questions, which as usual is an FAQ pretending to be Errata. Oh well.

Hmm looks like you forgot to add the LRBT to your I told you so?

R3con wrote:Hmm looks like you forgot to add the LRBT to your I told you so?

Actually, If you notice my edit, I did state that the Inquisition ones are FAQ's pretending to be Errata again.
Just because I am always right, doesn't mean I am a douche.

Well, that's why we put up with you Gwar; you're just right most of the time.

Looks like they actually answered a good many burning Q's! I agreed with Gwar on all but #2, but that's OK. I'm in the FAQs are rules camp... but whatever.

Homer

Oh my gosh, they actually answered a question about Grey Knights!

Valkyries and Vendettas have one access point on
each side of the hull and one at the rear.

I guess that implies that the wings aren't part of the hull, eh?

*ducks*

daedalus wrote:

Valkyries and Vendettas have one access point on
each side of the hull and one at the rear.

I guess that implies that the wings aren't part of the hull, eh?

*ducks*

That's actually a pretty good catch.

They hit some of the big ones, they didn't answer the "What is the haul" question :/

BlueDagger wrote:They hit some of the big ones, they didn't answer the "What is the haul" question :/

Well, they might not have outright said it, but typically few things extend beyond the point of their sides..

Nice catch on the hull with the access points. I have always been split on this issue. I really do not care as long as there is a right way to play it. As of now I would have to say wings are not hull according to the new FAQ. Better for me. But it almost still feels dirty and underhanded.

Realistically, I'd be inclined to give the wing hit to someone in most cases, but otherwise it's so hard to find a place to put that thing where it doesn't deal with dangerous terrain checks.

Gwar! wrote:
Just because I am always right, doesn't mean I am a douche.

No, but saying things like that sure does though...

That being the key point. To unwieldy that way. So away from my rule book at the moment. Does this mean a valk can enter the board from 6" and still fire all guns? I know they clarified a ton but was this covered somehow. I would check if I was near my book. Thanks.

Sha1emade wrote:That being the key point. To unwieldy that way. So away from my rule book at the moment. Does this mean a valk can enter the board from 6" and still fire all guns? I know they clarified a ton but was this covered somehow. I would check if I was near my book. Thanks.

Depends. Can a land raider?

Age old question as to where you measure the "hull" of the vehicle. I have never had a problem letting a LR move on 6", as I feel that is what was intended. In some ways, perspectives mostly, the valk's foot print is larger or smaller than a land raider. I think spirit of the game you should and most places allow. Would be nice to get a real answer on this one. Was hoping the FAQ wording might help.

Gwar!: I told you so boards will simply end you up in gak from either a MOD for causing a disturbance or frmo other people seeing this as a waste of a good thread.

To be honest, people can read without you having to dictate it to them.

To be honest, this thread just seems like a short way to grab some attention.
Any possibly not all good attention either.


On another note here, i was actually right about the LRBT (only thing i would argue)



but not all bad things!
GW actually came up with a good FAQ for once.

JD21290 wrote:Gwar!: I told you so boards will simply end you up in gak from either a MOD for causing a disturbance or frmo other people seeing this as a waste of a good thread.

To be honest, people can read without you having to dictate it to them.

To be honest, this thread just seems like a short way to grab some attention.
Any possibly not all good attention either.

I am not trying to inflame anyone. I am just trying to make sure everyone knows that the FAQ is out, and that I am a Beacon of perfection </joke>

Seriously, can't you people take a joke

Gwar! wrote:I am not trying to inflame anyone. I am just trying to make sure everyone knows that the FAQ is out, and that I am a Beacon of perfection </joke>

Seriously, can't you people take a joke

Jokes are funny because they are unexpected, they violate our expectancies for any given situation. When something occurs almost exactly like is expected, it's not really a joke.

You're allowed to do what you want for attention and adulation, but you're really not in a position to start a thread like this and claim it's a joke.

Polonius wrote:You're allowed to do what you want for attention and adulation, but you're really not in a position to start a thread like this and claim it's a joke.

The point of this thread is to inform people that the new Guard FAQ is out. The Joke is me saying "I told you so". It seems no matter what I do now I always have people derailing my threads, and no it is not my fault, because I do not derail them.

Gwar! wrote:

Polonius wrote:You're allowed to do what you want for attention and adulation, but you're really not in a position to start a thread like this and claim it's a joke.

The point of this thread is to inform people that the new Guard FAQ is out. The Joke is me saying "I told you so". It seems no matter what I do now I always have people derailing my threads, and no it is not my fault, because I do not derail them.

Like this?

Nurgleboy77 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:
Just because I am always right, doesn't mean I am a douche.

No, but saying things like that sure does though...

Thanks for pointing it out though.

Gwar! wrote:

Polonius wrote:You're allowed to do what you want for attention and adulation, but you're really not in a position to start a thread like this and claim it's a joke.

The point of this thread is to inform people that the new Guard FAQ is out. The Joke is me saying "I told you so". It seems no matter what I do now I always have people derailing my threads, and no it is not my fault, because I do not derail them.

Gwar, you have a list of people that agree with you in your sig. You constantly talk about how you are right all the time. Do you really expect people, many of whom you know for a fact find you distasteful, to see a post like that as a light hearted jest and not a public affirmation of your own superiority?

If the whole "Gwar is always" right aspect of your persona is just meant as high camp or an elaborate, andy kaufman style bit, than well done, but that runs the risk of you becoming the guy nobody listen to, because you never know when they're secretly joking.

As for derailing threads, post your point, post your ideas, stop with the subtle jabs and put downs, crank the arrogance down from a 9 to a 6, and I guarantee people will have less problems with the way you post. Look at your initial post: the url, followed a sentance about wanting us to know. Then, the rest is all stuff about you being right. We're really not supposed to gather from that that the thread is about the rulings, and not you?

I am not trying to inflame anyone. I am just trying to make sure everyone knows that the FAQ is out, and that I am a Beacon of perfection </joke>

Seriously, can't you people take a joke

There was a thread about the FAQ previous to this one.
This one was not needed.

Jokes are funny Gwar, this just seems like a desperate cry for attention mate, i would drop it like its hot


And lets face it, your not allways right, but you fething right 99% of the time

JD21290 wrote:There was a thread about the FAQ previous to this one.
This one was not needed.

Jokes are funny Gwar, this just seems like a desperate cry for attention mate, i would drop it like its hot


And lets face it, your not allways right, but you fething right 99% of the time

Oh, I didn't know there was already a thread (I cant seem to find it )

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/255128.page

Made a fair bit before this one, has allways been on the front page, hard to miss really.

Keep in mind Gwar that i have managed to prove you wrong

He is after he edits his posts...

I have to say that I'm pleasantly surprised.
That was a fantastic FAQ, especially by GW standards.
They really hit all the points of contention except the hull of Valks.
Relatively minor...

Leman Russ Battle Tank as a Unit DOES NOT EXIST!

May i also note that you were wrong here aswell
As the Faq has just stated, you can take a LRBT

0-1 Leman Russ Battle Tank for either WH or DH armies.

Glad to see fair play won over minutiae.

Must have been what they Intended after all then.

*pokes MGS*

Beat you to that one