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.

Gwar! wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:So Games Workshop's FAQ is 'Wrong' and yours is right?

In a word, yes.

More specifically, Gwar's FAQ isn't 'right'... it's simply Gwar's FAQ.

Which basically just means that Gwar's rulings are 'correct' if you are choosing to use his FAQ. Whether or not his rulings over-ride those made in GW FAQ's is entirely up to you, the player choosing (or not) to use a home-brewed FAQ in your own games.

KillMaimBurn wrote:Possibly awkward
p49 codex blood angels Corbulo once per game.. ”any roll you have made”

1) Can Corbulo's rule reroll the dice for the roll off of who goes first (codex gives only the example of seizing the initiative)
2) Can the owner of Corbulo, if he is the one rolling the dice to see if there is another turn (p90 BRB) doesn't like the result (and hasn’t used his power all game, and is still alive)..can he reroll that,increasing the chances of cutting short or dragging a game on. (We're getting messy on that one elsewhere)

Yes, you can re-roll any dice. It's quite clear.

Teeef wrote:I have read through the posts and the FAQ and I think my questions aren't answered specifically.

DC Tycho. On page 41, after the fluff it gives stats. One line for Captain Tycho and one for Death Company Tycho. Then it has a note on the stats where in it states the line for DC Tycho is, "…following his induction into the Death Company." Because this note clarifies his stat line would this be considered a clarification and not fluff. In other words, is DC Tycho in the Death Company? Is he part of the Death Company like Lemartes? He is no longer Independent Character and he has rage and relentless so it would make sense that he rolls with the Death Company. Is GW being lazy and not placing his DC info in the DC section.

It really does not matter what the fluff says, the rules are clear. He is a Non-IC HQ Choice "Death Company Tycho" model. He does NOT join the Death Company.

He is no longer a Captain…it does not say DC Captain Tycho. Does he fill the HQ FOC? I am thinking the answer is yes but my gut is telling me the restrictions on the graphic design/layout and copy count issues are why this is not made explicit as opposed to intent.

Again, it is VERY explicit. He is an HQ in the Army List, he has no rule saying he does not take up the FoC Slot, so he does.

Blood Talons. Can I construe, "…follows the same rules as lightning claws." to mean they are Strength 6 LCs? It isn't clear to me that they are Power Weapons. It isn't explicit.

... How is "They are lightning Claws" not Explicit? The rules for LC themselves say they are PW, so Blood Talons also are.

And thanks for the FAQ efforts. At least your FAQ provides ANSWERS. I can highlight anything I don't agree with and hash it out with my opponent before the game regardless but is an awesome starting point. I wish GW would get a clue about what an answer is. Can you imagine a poker rule that said, "…if you and your opponent cannot agree on whether a full house beats two pair, draw a card, and the high card chooses." GW acts as if clarity ruins a game. To me arguing ruins a game.

I agree, which is part of the reason why I work at these FAQs

Hey. It's frequently asked questions...not frequently asked good questions!

Thanks. I was pretty sure Blood Talons would be PWs as otherwise they would be not so good. Tycho, also as I expected, however I am finding that "answer" to beg the question, "Why bother putting DC Tycho on the board?" He is dead to me. Sniff.

How bout this for brother corbulo... in random game length.. can you reroll the dice to end the game?

Twalks wrote:How bout this for brother corbulo... in random game length.. can you reroll the dice to end the game?

... This was just asked. Yes, you can re-roll ANY ROLL you want.

Consider this added to 1.2

Meh sorry guess I missed it reading through the pages.

insaniak wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:So Games Workshop's FAQ is 'Wrong' and yours is right?

In a word, yes.

More specifically, Gwar's FAQ isn't 'right'... it's simply Gwar's FAQ.

Which basically just means that Gwar's rulings are 'correct' if you are choosing to use his FAQ. Whether or not his rulings over-ride those made in GW FAQ's is entirely up to you, the player choosing (or not) to use a home-brewed FAQ in your own games.

I see, so specifically, when gwar says the Games Workshop FAQ is wrong, by that same reasoning, it's just wrong for him because he reads the caveat at the beginning of the FAQ which makes it clear they can be disregarded in your own games if you or your group agree to disregard them, despite the obvious contradiction of then going on to maintain a fastidious and some might suggest, suffocating devotion to the contents of the rulebook, despite 'The Most Important Rule' holding an entirely parallel position as caveat there.

I'm glad you've decided to weigh in as a moderator here and provide some clarity, since gwar's comments on things being right and wrong, posted repeatedly in a public forum, could certainly be read as being from the stance of believing himself 'in possession of the truth'. Perhaps starting all his sentences with 'in my opinion', we can agree this would go a good way to not sounding quite like the self proclaimed prophet come down off the mountain...

With regard use of the word 'ruling' as a noun; 'an authoritative decision, as one by a judge on a debated point of law.' gwar is not an appointed judge, he does not write the rules nor does he adjudicate in any recognised capacity to the extent where he can be said to be recognised as an authority. He is not therefore 'ruling' on something with his homegrown faq, he is giving his opinion.

I also agree the term 'home-brewed' is appropriate, perhaps this could be included in the title of the thread somewhere?

MeanGreenStompa wrote:I also agree the term 'home-brewed' is appropriate, perhaps this could be included in the title of the thread somewhere?

It already says that it's an unofficial FAQ in the thread title.

Please stop de-railing the thread. If you have legitimate questions for the FAQ, feel free to ask them. If you have no interest in using it, please just leave it for those who do.

Can a Stormraven Gunship fire one weapon via PotMS after moving Flat Out?

MasterSlowPoke wrote:Can a Stormraven Gunship fire one weapon via PotMS after moving Flat Out?

You know, this is a really, really good question. The first half of the rule seems to indicate you can, but then it goes to give a specific list of instances when PotMS comes into play, which does not include moving flat out, but does Include Cruising Speed.

My answer would be Yes, however, as the rule is very clearly stating you can fire "one more weapon than would normally be permitted" and then goes on to state that "therefore" you are able to fire one weapon at Cruising Speed, which would indicate that it applies to both being unable to fire and being able to fire no weapons. Consider this added

And here is one I found with the Stormraven. The Storm Ravens version of the "Assault Vehicle" rule says that when a unit disembarks, it "can launch an assault on the turn they do so (providing the Stormraven did not Deep Strike)." It does not say "can launch an assault on the turn they do so (providing the Stormraven did not Deep Strike that turn)." which means that if the Stormraven Deep Strikes at all, it's Assault Vehicle rule does not work. This doesn't affect the Land Raiders rule luckily as it is written in such a way that the unit inside itself is forbidden from assaulting at all that turn.

I'm getting a 404 error when I try to download the faq. Though I am at work on my blackberry and that may cause weirdness.

Xxanmorph wrote:I'm getting a 404 error when I try to download the faq. Though I am at work on my blackberry and that may cause weirdness.

It's working fine on my end, so it might be something on yours.

Thanks, I'll try from home later.

Gwar! wrote:

KillMaimBurn wrote:Possibly awkward
p49 codex blood angels Corbulo once per game.. ”any roll you have made”

1) Can Corbulo's rule reroll the dice for the roll off of who goes first (codex gives only the example of seizing the initiative)
2) Can the owner of Corbulo, if he is the one rolling the dice to see if there is another turn (p90 BRB) doesn't like the result (and hasn’t used his power all game, and is still alive)..can he reroll that,increasing the chances of cutting short or dragging a game on. (We're getting messy on that one elsewhere)

Yes, you can re-roll any dice. It's quite clear.

Quite clear. Until you encounter the wave of people saying they will no longer allow you to be the "A player rolls a dice"(p90) So in terms of more than one shot wonder.. does the end game mechanic need a; player A see if there is a turn 6 Player B turn 7, A roll off for who is allowed to roll the dice?, friendly discussion pre game?, actually a pelt of the doppelganger and in real terms useless..as an aside the battle missions book stipulates which player must roll the end of game dice.

Gwar! wrote:Consider this added to 1.2

KillMaimBurn wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

KillMaimBurn wrote:Possibly awkward
p49 codex blood angels Corbulo once per game.. ”any roll you have made”

1) Can Corbulo's rule reroll the dice for the roll off of who goes first (codex gives only the example of seizing the initiative)
2) Can the owner of Corbulo, if he is the one rolling the dice to see if there is another turn (p90 BRB) doesn't like the result (and hasn’t used his power all game, and is still alive)..can he reroll that,increasing the chances of cutting short or dragging a game on. (We're getting messy on that one elsewhere)

Yes, you can re-roll any dice. It's quite clear.

Quite clear. Until you encounter the wave of people saying they will no longer allow you to be the "A player rolls a dice"(p90) So in terms of more than one shot wonder.. does the end game mechanic need a; player A see if there is a turn 6 Player B turn 7, A roll off for who is allowed to roll the dice?, friendly discussion pre game?, actually a pelt of the doppelganger and in real terms useless..as an aside the battle missions book stipulates which player must roll the end of game dice.

Gwar! wrote:Consider this added to 1.2

...

El Facepalm. I did not notice that! Ok, well in that case, you can re-roll it if YOU are the one rolling it Who rolls it is up for the players to decide.

v1.2 available for Download.

So i had a question On Mephiston, he does not have the IC special rule, so he can not join another unit, however it also says that any HQ unit in the BA codex can take Honor Guard, does that mean he can have an Honor guard even though he does not have IC (the sanguinan host also does not have IC Special rule)

Sorry if this seems a simple question, i just am not 100% sure on how it would be ruled...

He is still an HQ so he still can take an honor guard (same applies to Sanguinor and DC Tycho).

Jack

Nightrave wrote:So i had a question On Mephiston, he does not have the IC special rule, so he can not join another unit, however it also says that any HQ unit in the BA codex can take Honor Guard, does that mean he can have an Honor guard even though he does not have IC (the sanguinan host also does not have IC Special rule)

Sorry if this seems a simple question, i just am not 100% sure on how it would be ruled...

Yes he can still take one, he just cannot ever join it.

Can Tactical squads and Assault squads (without jump packs) take a Land Raider as a Dedicated Transport?

airmang wrote:Can Tactical squads and Assault squads (without jump packs) take a Land Raider as a Dedicated Transport?

This is clearly covered in their respective entries. It says they may select ANY Dedicated Transport.

thanks! there was some question about it because it only references the one page of dedicated transports.

Gwar! wrote:

Nightrave wrote:So i had a question On Mephiston, he does not have the IC special rule, so he can not join another unit, however it also says that any HQ unit in the BA codex can take Honor Guard, does that mean he can have an Honor guard even though he does not have IC (the sanguinan host also does not have IC Special rule)

Sorry if this seems a simple question, i just am not 100% sure on how it would be ruled...

Yes he can still take one, he just cannot ever join it.

Curious about this (maybe this might be considered as a "rules change" or "clarification" if you decide to adopt it.

Since any HQ can "take" an Honor Guard, could Mephiston take one and become sort of like the Iron Priest + doggies unit from the SW codex? Not an IC with a retinue, but merely a multiple model unit? In this case, Mephiston hasn't "joined" the unit, but merely been purchased upon list building with the extra models as part of the total unit....

airmang wrote:thanks! there was some question about it because it only references the one page of dedicated transports.

Yeah, I see that now I suspect it refers to the first page as it spreads over 2 pages, but the rule is very clear, it says ANY, not "Any of the three on page 90" I'll stick this into 1.3 for sure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Saldiven wrote:Curious about this (maybe this might be considered as a "rules change" or "clarification" if you decide to adopt it.

Since any HQ can "take" an Honor Guard, could Mephiston take one and become sort of like the Iron Priest + doggies unit from the SW codex? Not an IC with a retinue, but merely a multiple model unit? In this case, Mephiston hasn't "joined" the unit, but merely been purchased upon list building with the extra models as part of the total unit....

No. There is absolutely no indication he becomes part of the Honour Guard Unit, nor is there any indication that an IC would form a Retinue with them. RaW, it clear and not unreasonable (Like Dreadnoughts with The Red Thirst never being affected by it), so as RaW it stays until GW issue an Errata.

so DC have rage... if corbulo joins them or another ic does do they lose it?

kitsunez wrote:so DC have rage... if corbulo joins them or another ic does do they lose it?

No. Nothing in the Rage USR says adding an IC stops it.

Gwar! wrote:

kitsunez wrote:so DC have rage... if corbulo joins them or another ic does do they lose it?

No. Nothing in the Rage USR says adding an IC stops it.

so giving those guys any sort of pistol besides what they start out with is silly since they can't fire it?

kitsunez wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

kitsunez wrote:so DC have rage... if corbulo joins them or another ic does do they lose it?

No. Nothing in the Rage USR says adding an IC stops it.

so giving those guys any sort of pistol besides what they start out with is silly since they can't fire it?

Huh? Rage doesn't affect shooting at all.

Gwar! wrote:

kitsunez wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

kitsunez wrote:so DC have rage... if corbulo joins them or another ic does do they lose it?

No. Nothing in the Rage USR says adding an IC stops it.

so giving those guys any sort of pistol besides what they start out with is silly since they can't fire it?

Huh? Rage doesn't affect shooting at all.

Sorry I re-re-reread it and I saw move towards closest enemy and was reminded of a something i saw elsewhere

Furious Charge adds +1 to the initiative and str.

Seth's chainsword makes him strike @ s8.

How would these two rules interact? Does he get s9 on the charge? Or is the weapon's str fixed at 8 regardless of other rules?