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.

gorgon wrote:

Saldiven wrote:The SM Drop Pod is a vehicle. The Spod is not. The rules for IC's joining a unit held in reserve and using their dedicated transport do not apply to a Monstrous Creature that has a special rule that mimic SOME aspects of a transport vehicle.

Although now you're making a RAW argument in the context of an FAQ full of RAI answers.

The proper question is why GW had the *intent* to disallow Primes from joining spore-borne units. It's the only IC in the army, not overpowered, designed to accompany and buff units, and there's plenty of precedent for similar mechanics in other armies.

I think there's a lot of overreaction here, as most of the stuff that really works for Tyranids will still work just fine. However, IMO I think there are a few legitimate design and philosophy issues with the codex/FAQ.

Oh it is no contest that the Codex will work that is obvious simply because of the fact that Nid players WILL make it work but sadly builds are going to start becoming predictable and that will get us in in the end. . .

kill dem stunties wrote:If you take double reserve bonus and 5 or 6 pods, with 2 mawlocs you can destroy an entire ig parking lot in one turn ... surround with pods and all that cant be moved are destroyed.

Kinda gimmicky, but it can work.

Unless the IG player just keeps his stuff in reserve.

I dont understand how this makes lash whips.. bad? Every unit with a lashwhip is higher than I2. Yeah okay you cant combo it with a carnifex, so what? Wasnt everyone bitching how awful they were anyway?

Lysenis wrote:BRB states that a cover save can ONLY be taken against a Shooting attack, tell me where Spirit Leech is a shooting attack.

Point me please on EXACT quote from BRB where it is said that Cover Saves can ONLY be taken against a shooting attack? Maybe you think that if rules for Cover saves are written in shooting section, means that they can only be taken vs them? If GW say you can - then you can. And any way, Leech are ranged kind of "attack"

Wow this is a real b*tch slap to all the RAW Nazis. Good calls GW. Put em in their place.

penek wrote:Point me please on EXACT quote from BRB where it is said that Cover Saves can ONLY be taken against a shooting attack

Search YMDC, its been done.

As for Lash whips. . .

The army has no frag grenades, other than on Lictors and Carnifex. (yaay?)

Lash whips were a useful way to deal with assaults through cover. They still can, but not if the assaulted unit has any mod to Initiative.
That is not much of a change, but it is one.

Also the bit about SA can easily catch people.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Very interesting to see how many of the most contentious and hotly argued questions in YMDC recently were answered here by the creators with answers very different to the 'RAW' absolutes that were proffered as 'the truth' regardless of playability.

It suggests there is a very very strong disconnect between those most vocal and supportive of 'RAW' mentality and the thinking from the Games Workshop creative studio...

Personally, I think such a disconnect shouldn't be happening. GW has, each edition, removed more and more of the narrative elements of the game in an attempt to streamline 40k's playability. This makes the game much more "chess-like" in the sense that the game is very "rule-oriented" as opposed to the early RT eras "DM/Narrative-oriented" gaming style. Obviously, this trend provides incentive for "rules-oriented" players to convert over and come purchase more GW products. These kinds of players expect, in return, to be able to play 40k competitively (in the sense that you are competing - not talking about tourneys here) within a defined ruleset that is clear and easy to understand... and with the way the rules have been changing, what's the surprise? 40k has become more "gamey" and much less "story-ey", so what's with all the hate for people who were brought into the franchise on the promise of being able to play an actual game? (aka, being able to compete against other players).

The disconnect between what GW writes in its FAQs and what it releases in its codicies is somewhat disturbing, and I think my issue with your statement is that you imply (imho) that this disconnect is a perfectly okay thing, because the opinion of RAW gamers shouldn't have any weight. GW is making 40k a very rules-oriented game, and yet they repeatedly fail to write rules that stand up to any sort of scrutiny. As a relatively new player, how am I supposed to know that the DoM doesn't hit embarked units? If I didn't know about DakkaDakka or a similar site, I could only look at the rules as they appear in the relevant books (aka RAW). So why shouldn't RAW be followed, at least until they clarify something by releasing an FAQ? I'm not sure I understand what makes playing by the rules so god-damned awful.

Eh, that's just my rant for the day... sorry if it's a bit incoherent, I just saw a bunch of people quote this and talk about how great a statement it was. Everybody seems so obsessed with "sticking it to the RAW players" and I think that's an unfair attitude towards those of us that expect to be able to open the book and play it how the rules tell us to do so.

I don't mean to be offensive with any of this, sorry if it comes off that way. Also, this all comes from someone who agrees with most of the FAQ'd stuff, although I think the IC/Spod, SitW/Vehicle, and Lashwhip stuff was a little wonky.

PanamaG wrote:Wow this is a real b*tch slap to all the RAW Nazis. Good calls GW. Put em in their place.

Yea!

Down with people who follow the rules!


I think plenty of the FAQs are silly, but now I know that if I follow them I am a nazi that GW will put in my place.
Thanks for that.

Belphegor wrote:And for the Nid players complaining about shadows of the warp and transports. Get over it, really.

This is harsh. It's easy to over-react when your builds/tactics get messed up but this is GW answering a question everyone (I believe) had amiably resolved a while ago. It wouldn't be a problem but they seem to have come down on the opposite side of the coin contradicting the fluff and common sense. I'd imagine you'd be annoyed if GW released an errata and removed one of your army's special rules or builds.

That said, I'm sure it will all simmer down quite quickly and it is nice that GW are resolving a great many unnecessary and messy arguments.

EDIT @ Xca|iber: If you take a stroll through the 'You make the call' forums you'll quickly see just how in depth (over the top) people are prepared to go to argue one interpretation of the rules over another. Common sense and how you would like an opponent to play against you are replaced by the definition of individual words and so on. The proponents of 'Rules as intended' are happy to move away from this if it makes the game more playable, fun or interesting even if it means going against the rules. GW seem to agree with this stance and it is obviously rewarding to some posters to see that in many cases what the rules actually say is less important than what they convey; that it doesn't really matter how you play it as long as everyone has fun (and buys models). Because of this, it doesn't matter if you know all the rules as long as you can agree with your opponent one way or the other and have fun. Of course this makes it much harder to play competitively or against people who are prepared to bend rules in order to win which is why RAW advocates want everything set in stone and will fine-tooth-comb the books for mistakes or loopholes. Some even argue that this is the only way the game can be fun.

Anyway, to conclude: Playing by the rules is not bad but GW will never release a rule set that is completely objective.

You know what's really funny?

The BA Errata for the Sang Priest still doesn't fix anything, and they also forgot to include the Stenguard Hellfire Round Errata.

And yet GW are infallible who put rules "nazis" in their place.

I agree that it is totally unfair that spore pods can't take IC, but that is how I interpreted it before the FAQ. I wish the would have just made it a transport vehicle and then it would be allowed. I also think cover saves from doom is slowed, but understand on the whole vehicle issue.

My question is can Gargoyles, Winged Warriors, Parasite of Mortex, and Winged Rippers also deep strike because they all have the Winged Biomorph?

Grundz wrote:

daedalus wrote:Hooray for a sensible FAQ for 'Nids. I finally have a reason to expand my army.

because they are even worse now? XD

sig makes post

I'd rather the rules be slightly off by the designers than to look at the rules with such borderline autistic minutiae that it half the time breaks the game and the other half breaks the spirit by people with nothing better to do than to start that drama (and it also causes more drama in the sense it's not official, so everyone eternally argues. Whereas with gw it is so you can
like it or house rule it. )

.

Deadshane1 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:So shield gives youa cover save, brililant.

Still doesnt mean it can be used against glancing / penetrating hits, as you must be obscured to do that. Typical non-answer...

I lold.

BA "Errata and FAQ" is turning out to be a complete failure. They even nerfed the Demolisher! :(

BuZzZzJaY wrote:My question is can Gargoyles, Winged Warriors, Parasite of Mortex, and Winged Rippers also deep strike because they all have the Winged Biomorph?

Yes. IIRC, the whole issue with Harpies and Tyrants was in their MC classification. They should have made it clearer what that question was really all about.

..well this went well eh ?

THIS IS WHY YOU DON'T GET ANY DESSERT BEFORE SUPPER !

AND WHY YOUR FATHER DOESN'T LIVE WITH US ANYMORE.

ALL.

BECAUSE.

OF.

YOU.

Obligatory warning Pms and suspensions incoming it is then.