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.

Xenith wrote:Woohoo, the Furioso libby can now take a frag cannon!

Q: Can a Furioso Librarian take additional wargear (such
as extra armour)? (p29)
A: No.

Unfortunately, this appears to me to explicitly say it can't. Not sure what made you think it can now take the Frag Cannon

(whether or not it is logical that it can't take the Cannon is an entirely different thing)

Come to think of it, they never gave CSM terminators relentless. I suppose no one worries about firing combi bolters at long range while moving anymore, though.

you're addign the distinction, not GW. the FAQ is saying squads in reserve cannot use combat squads while the drop pod has a specific exclusion to this general ruling under its own rules. the ruling makes no distinction between combat squading before deployement, during deployment, after deployment, coming in from reserve, on tuesdays, if your unit is painted aqua, etc... it simply says units placed in reserve can't combat squad. end of line. for better or worse, that's the ruling.

You are making an assumption.

You don't understand the ruling.

WHen do you decide if a unit is going to combat squad? During Deployment.

When do you decide if a unit is going to be held in reserve? During Deployment.

A unit that is combat squaded immediately acts as two separate units. You are still in deployment, which means those two separate units, can then be deployed or held in reserve.

All the FAQ says is that you cannot make the choice to deploy a unit using the Combat Squad rules if you have already placed the unit in reserve. It is to clarify the after effects such as units that can deepstrike, etc. that are still technically deployed at the time they arrive from reserve.

You are assuming one of two things; that there is a set order of decisions during deployment that doesn't exist, or that the FAQ wording is saying something that it is not. Either way, it is wrong.

This is awesome news for DA and Templar players. Finally, our codexes have some more options to work with now that some of the units got a boost and wargear has changed. Templars are going to be utter ball busters now. Here's why:

5 man termies squads with 2 cyclone MLs with tankhunters...you can take 5 of these units.
Buffed typhoons for 20pts cheaper than their vanilla counter parts
New PotMS makes our landraiders better
New PotMS makes our vindicators move 12" and fire the gun
New PotMS makes our predators able to split fire.
Our command squads get FNP for 15pts.
Our techmarines can now fix vehicles if they are in them.

Suddenly, the templars have some reliable shooting in their army...which opens up other builds for that codex.

Aw man, no necron lovin. :( Heh. Mostly I was hoping for power weapon/rending additions to some models. LoL

WHen do you decide if a unit is going to combat squad? During Deployment.

When do you decide if a unit is going to be held in reserve? During Deployment.

You may want to reread the combat squad rule. It says you choose to combat squad when the unit is deployed... not durning "deployment" itself. You also do not chose to "deploy" a unit into reserves in the reserves section of the main rule book you will find that if you chose not to deploy a unit it is in reserves, so its an inaction not an action.

So Gw's ruling here means that a unit definitely cant be split half in reserve half on the table. Now the question arises when the unit is actually deployed.. when it comes in from reserves, can you split it then? personally I think so... but then again thats how Ive thought of combat squadding for a long time.

A unit being unable to be split while still in reserves means no half walking in half in a razorback.

I really wish they would redo tyranids. The ruling on asome thigns was DUMB. Also the hive tyrans not being IC in tyrant guard is kinda dumb. but oh well.

Mahu wrote:You are making an assumption.

You don't understand the ruling.

WHen do you decide if a unit is going to combat squad? During Deployment.

When do you decide if a unit is going to be held in reserve? During Deployment.

A unit that is combat squaded immediately acts as two separate units. You are still in deployment, which means those two separate units, can then be deployed or held in reserve.

All the FAQ says is that you cannot make the choice to deploy a unit using the Combat Squad rules if you have already placed the unit in reserve. It is to clarify the after effects such as units that can deepstrike, etc. that are still technically deployed at the time they arrive from reserve.

You are assuming one of two things; that there is a set order of decisions during deployment that doesn't exist, or that the FAQ wording is saying something that it is not. Either way, it is wrong.

Unfortunately, the FAQ wording is just way too straightforward and cut and dry to wiggle out of this.

I say unfortunately, because I don't necessarily agree with the ruling.

Exact wording is...

A: No, because squads that are place in reserve may not break down into combat squads


There just isn't any interpretation to make.

Is your squad placed in reserve? Yes

May it break down into combat squads? No

If you "can't break down into combat squads" then I don't see how you can break down into combat squads, under any rationale

cgage00 wrote:Also the hive tyrans not being IC in tyrant guard is kinda dumb. but oh well.

If by "dumb," you mean "incredibly useful," then I'd agree.

Being able to dump Force Weapon hits on the Tyrant Guard is actually pretty useful. So is having a majority WS of 9 (for the Swarmlord + 1 Guard).

Shep wrote:Unfortunately, the FAQ wording is just way too straightforward and cut and dry to wiggle out of this.

I say unfortunately, because I don't necessarily agree with the ruling.

Exact wording is...

A: No, because squads that are place in reserve may not break down into combat squads


There just isn't any interpretation to make.

Is your squad placed in reserve? Yes

May it break down into combat squads? No

If you "can't break down into combat squads" then I don't see how you can break down into combat squads, under any rationale

agreed. the timing of combat squading makes no difference if the unit is being placed into reserve as the ruling is quite clear and concise. whether or not this was the intended effect, i have no idea but the ruling is clear when you don't add in your own baggage to obfuscate what is written.

Shep wrote:
Exact wording is...

A: No, because squads that are place in reserved may not break down into combat squads


There just isn't any interpretation to make.

Is your squad placed in reserve? Yes

May it break down into combat squads? No

If you "can't break down into combat squads" then I don't see how you can break down into combat squads, under any rationale

I agree (unfortunately), however here is something really curious:

The Dark Angels errata specifically removes the line from the codex that says Dark Angels units placed into Reserves cannot be split into combat squads...

...and then they go ahead and also include this FAQ answer.


I guess the one good thing about these FAQs is they've shown some willingness to update them with corrections, so we can only hope that this one gets clarified soon if it actually is a mistake (as it seems to be).

oh wow at not being able to combat squad in reserve. What an nonsense ruling. How was this even an issue? IN addition I now have to take dangerous terrain on my marines when out of a drop pod into terrain? Jesus this needs a clean up.

So side note but does anyone think this was done to help make up for the 4% they were down? DISCUSS!

(I loves me some conspiracy theories )

3+ Storm Shields and FNP-giving Apothecary. At last.

*Savours the moment...*

Kevin949 wrote:Aw man, no necron lovin. :( Heh. Mostly I was hoping for power weapon/rending additions to some models. LoL

Anyone know if other books will be Re-FAQed? Did GW do the Warhammer books all at once the other week or staged? It would be nice for the Necrons to have there rules brought up to the current edition and not two behind

I think these changes are made to probably increase the diversity of marine armies on the table? OR probably to bring the DA and BT codexes in line with the other marines without having to do a complete rewrite. I definitely will be bringing my templars out again. I also will be adding Typhoons to my army for sure. Just when I thought I was done adding to this army...it sucks me back in again.

Theduke07 wrote:oh wow at not being able to combat squad in reserve. What an nonsense ruling. How was this even an issue? IN addition I now have to take dangerous terrain on my marines when out of a drop pod into terrain? Jesus this needs a clean up.

Uh...didn't you always have to do that if you DS'd into difficult terrain it was treated as dangerous terrain.

padixon wrote:The Voidraven Bomber has gotten waay better

Q: Can a void mine be used regardless of the speed the
Voidraven Bomber is moving at in its Movement phase?
(p47)
A: Yes.
Q: A void mine is used in the Movement phase. How does
this effect what weapons can be fired by the Voidraven
Bomber in the Shooting phase? (p47)
A: The void mine does not count towards the number of
weapons a Voidraven Bomber can fire that turn.

They can do a 36" movement, drop a str 9 blast lance weapon that only scatters d6, and also get a 4+ cover save...

This made me happy

I really hope that this coaxes DA and BT players back to the game!

Awesome find.

Know what's funny? Yesterday I posted that they should redo 40k FAQs like in fantasy. I also was the first to post this on here and warseer because I had nothing to do but play with my phone while waiting for my wife to be prepped for delivering my new daughter. Totally off topic I know, just wanted to share.

they still haven't FAQ'd the wracks poisoned weapon upgrade.....

Sir Harry Flashman, VC wrote:

Kevin949 wrote:Aw man, no necron lovin. :( Heh. Mostly I was hoping for power weapon/rending additions to some models. LoL

Anyone know if other books will be Re-FAQed? Did GW do the Warhammer books all at once the other week or staged? It would be nice for the Necrons to have there rules brought up to the current edition and not two behind

Unless they're next after GK, then they don't need an update.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pyronick wrote:Anybody else notice that the bottom of Page 4 on the Vanilla Space Marines FAQ said Warhammer: Codex Vampire Counts!

Silly intern.

Hulksmash wrote:Maybe that's why it took so long to post them. They had lost 'em

Anyone checked the Vampire Counts book for these overdue FAQs?!?

Hulksmash wrote:So side note but does anyone think this was done to help make up for the 4% they were down? DISCUSS!

(I loves me some conspiracy theories )

I'll bite on the conspiracy theory. If you think back a bit when the Battlewagon upgrade kit became available, GW had not ruled on the Deff Rolla-Ram issue. Locally, sales were not particularly good with the kit. After GW made the FAQ ruling that Deff Rollas can be used in Rams, then local Ork players were buying up the GW kit. I'd imagine this was more than just a local trend.

Today, I was estatic with the new DA FAQ. So much so, I just returned from the FLGS to finish up the purchases for my DA army.

GW delivered on the rules and I opened up my wallet. Maybe GW is realizing minis alone don't drive sales; the combination of cool minis and good rules drive sales.

This means that DA and BT are not getting a new codex any time soon.

Hulksmash wrote:So side note but does anyone think this was done to help make up for the 4% they were down? DISCUSS!

(I loves me some conspiracy theories )

Maybe they were waiting for their quarterly and annual statements to release these.

Kevin949 wrote:

Theduke07 wrote:oh wow at not being able to combat squad in reserve. What an nonsense ruling. How was this even an issue? IN addition I now have to take dangerous terrain on my marines when out of a drop pod into terrain? Jesus this needs a clean up.

Uh...didn't you always have to do that if you DS'd into difficult terrain it was treated as dangerous terrain.

There was some disagreement as to how it should apply to transported units. This resolves that nicely, in a way that is consistent with the wording of the Deep Strike rules.

I am dusting off my DA and will be glueing on TH/SS tonight.

Beliel LC
Sarg TH/LS
Apoth TH/LS
Trooper -Cyclone TH/LS
Trooper- TH/LS
Trooper -LC

FNP and diversified. Plus they deep strike on turn one!

This was some of the best news I got today!! My newly started black templars just started hugging each other (in a non-heretical way) in happiness for having good land raiders and storm shields now! I wish rhino prices were cheaper, bolt pistols and CCW came standard on marshals and captains, but hey, their special rules make it worth spending the extra points. The templars are great now! We no longer need a new codex-this update was all that was really needed. Just a bit bummed about how they changed the holy orb is all. That's my only complaint. Oh, and the Signum. So 2 "blah" changes and a bunch of "Hell Yes!" changes

timetowaste85 wrote:This was some of the best news I got today!! My newly started black templars just started hugging each other (in a non-heretical way) in happiness for having good land raiders and storm shields now! I wish rhino prices were cheaper, bolt pistols and CCW came standard on marshals and captains, but hey, their special rules make it worth spending the extra points. The templars are great now! We no longer need a new codex-this update was all that was really needed. Just a bit bummed about how they changed the holy orb is all. That's my only complaint. Oh, and the Signum. So 2 "blah" changes and a bunch of "Hell Yes!" changes

lol, you still need a codex update but GW finally got around to doing what they should have done with the release of 5e marines. better late than never!