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.

Did anyone ask them to clarify the situation where according to RAW, Exorcists are only able to fire in a 45 degree cone straight up because the barrels of the weapon are the pipes on the organ, which point straight up and are weapons on a vehicle that are fixed in place?

Because the last time someone asked them to clarify the situation, their "clarification" supported that ridiculous thing that is.

If anyone asks it, please make it clear that according to the actual rules as they exist, it's very, very clearly spelled out that the Exorcist can only shoot at targets directly above itself, and the problem isn't really a clarification in the rules as written, but the fact that this is an utterly ridiculous situation that presently exists and that it absolutely requires a special exemption from the rules.

Soooooo...anything new about this whole thing?

They said it would take awhile to go through all the posts.

 Kanluwen wrote:
They said it would take awhile to go through all the posts.

Fair enough, as they got over 2000 questions. While there are duplicates, thats like 600% more questions they have to answer than they have ever done before in any FAQ, combined.

 Orock wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
This is drifting off topic into the realms of YMDC.

I'm confused. This thread is about pktentially eliminating many of ymdc situations by having a possible clear and consice FAQ made by gw. It's only natural and probably healthy to bring things like these up, as they are prime candidates for said future FAQ. Best to brainstorm and discuss a bunch of ideas in one thread than each and every one having its own thread.

It is absolutely the purpose of the thread to suggest a question, and for someone to say that is answered on Page XX and does not ened to be queried.

However I felt it necessary to intervene because there was a developing argument about whether the question needed to be asked or not. That should be resolved in YMDC, then the question can be posted here or not, as applicable.

Has GW given any timeline for publishing of these FAQs?
Have any been released?

 Ratius wrote:
Has GW given any timeline for publishing of these FAQs?
Have any been released?

Given the number of questions and just how much they'd have to fix to resolve it they may just decide that 8th edition is a better avenue.

Well we're coming up on 2 years since 7th was released, so 8th should be out any day now.