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.

New Space Marine Codex

Can the librarian use gate of infinity to exit close combat?

...no answer

Does Vulkan's chapter tactics ability cover allied units (witch hunters, daemon hunters)?

nooooooo answer


Those are only what I can think of off the top of my head. I suppose they want to "leave it up to us" to decide the more important rules questions, but quite frankly this FAQ is just disappointing.

Anything else I missed? Thoughts?

sorry if this thread already exists, but I didn't see it on the first page and since it's only like 14 hours old I figured nobody had started one yet

Or those questions weren't prevalent enough to warrant being included in the FAQ...

I'm sure if they get enough people asking them about it, it will be in the next FAQ update.

Seems to me that I have seen more threads on more forums regarding drop pod doors, calgars god of war rule, vulkan and sisters than I have on whether or not you get two re-rolls for two lightning claws...

In fact, I cant think of ever seeing a time when that lightning claw re-roll question was asked (not that it hasn't mind you).

FAQ's are by its own definition, for dealing with frequently asked questions.

If only we had a place to bitch about how crappy this FAQ was...
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/228360.page

good to know that GW is giving us difinitive answers to keep the game fun without the rules discussions every other turn.

oh sorry i fell asleep what did i miss?

Ahhh, BUT, Have you seen the new Eldar FAQ by the same author? I have a copy of it below.

...

ELDAR FAQ

Q. Are Eldar warlocks wearing robes or dresses?

A. Dresses, unless they are girls, then Robes.


Q. Why cant Phoenix Lords join other squads of Aspect Warriors?

A. Contractual agreements for appearances with the craftworld guilds.


Q. How many Guardians does it take to screw in a light bulb?

A. 2, unfortunately it takes an entire team of trained surgeons to get it back out again.


Q. What color are the Biel Tan Guardians suppose to be, Green with White, or White with Green?

A. Turqouise.


Q. If a squad of Guardians are killed in close combat and no one is there to hear it does it make a sound?

A. Orks.


Q. Why is there a an entirely Blank Page?

A.


















.

Joyous_Oblivion wrote:Or those questions weren't prevalent enough to warrant being included in the FAQ...

Of the stuff they included, I'd say there were a lot more prevalent, or at least more worthy of an actual FAQ than the no brainer crap they included.

They also forgot about God of War and no Retreat, issues with Drop Pods like LoS, etc.

look at half the questions they answer, the LC one doesn't even make sense, surely it was less prevalent than many that were left out.

I'm sure if they get enough people asking them about it, it will be in the next FAQ update.

When 6th ed comes out? That's how long it is between FAQ's.

How about all the drop pod issues that need answers, like where to put the models, on doors, 2 inches of door? of the portal? of the base?

Can you assault an open pod petal?

Do you have to open the petals at all? Can they be closed? Could you open just the one(s) needed?

Is the edge of the board immpassable terrain for a pod that is partially off board (moved) or is it a DS accident?

Can an inquistor with mystics fire at the pod, its occupants or both? What happens if the pod is destroyed? What is the timing? Would the marines take a pin test.

How far does a drop pod count as moving for firing it's weapon on the turn it DSes?

Or some other issues

Is a Medic in an Honor Guard a Veteran or not for the purposes of taking wargear?

Does the morale modifer from being asaulted from a Landspeeder storm stack if multiple units charge a single target from 2 or more of them?

What are Bolt Guns: do Sternguard Bolt pistols, stormbolters or heavy bolters get special rounds or not?

Augustus, a lot of your questions are black and white answers already, but I agree there are quite a few posted by you and others that should have been in there.

Joyous_Oblivion wrote:I'm sure if they get enough people asking them about it, it will be in the next FAQ update.

So we can start betting on which occurs first, new FAQs or the eventual inevitable heat-death of the universe?

Joyous_Oblivion wrote:Augustus, a lot of your questions are black and white answers already, but I agree there are quite a few posted by you and others that should have been in there.

Oh I agree, but if FAQs are meant also to adress some situations where intent it vague or in question, clarifications are not unreasonable? I assume you mean the Sternguard question most likely, that only bolters and combi weapons work, I agree. Is it clear enough that a sentence in the FAQ would have been unwaranted?

What's with the "Ah"?
Does the writer think they're FAQ'n Yodda?

Augustus wrote:Ahhh, BUT, Have you seen the new Eldar FAQ by the same author? I have a copy of it below.

...

ELDAR FAQ

Q. Are Eldar warlocks wearing robes or dresses?

A. Dresses, unless they are girls, then Robes.

.

Damn that ruined my strategy for the next tournament.

Or it could be that the questions not answered have blindingly obvious answers.

Hestan. No rules for Allies, ergo no need to FAQ. Except perhaps in Apocalypse, and if you are that desperate in Apocalypse...I suggest you consider another Hobby. Like Ultimate Fighting. I understand that is very competitve, and linked to Wargames in an extremely tenuous manner (both involve violence to some degree). And in the case of Inquisitorial stuff added in. Well, lets see. No. You lose your combat tactics, and instead all units gain this. It does not specify allied units, ergo it does not apply to allied units. Simples.

Does The Gate say it can be used that way? Because penny to a pound, if it could, it would.

How about you email them and ask them? Hows that for an idea?


Just at a guess the FAQ stands for the questions that the dev team has been...er.... frequently asked?

Have you asked them this apparent long list of questions that have been missed?

Augustus wrote:

Or some other issues

Is a Medic in an Honor Guard a Veteran or not for the purposes of taking wargear?

What are Bolt Guns: do Sternguard Bolt pistols, stormbolters or heavy bolters get special rounds or not?

according to the guy that answers the email questions:

No, the apothacary is not a veteran, and you can't give the champion any extra wargear either.

and the special rounds only work in the boltguns, none of the other weapons.

I also asked about GoI, and he said it can be used to leave CC

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Hestan. No rules for Allies, ergo no need to FAQ. Except perhaps in . . .

...the Daemonhunters and Witchhunters codecies? Where Sisters of Battle come from?

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:And in the case of Inquisitorial stuff added in. Well, lets see. No. You lose your combat tactics, and instead all units gain this. It does not specify allied units, ergo it does not apply to allied units. Simples.

UNfortunately, no its not. Thats YOUR interpretation of the rule.

Its says units lose combat tactics. and instead ALL units gain this. It doesnt say all space marine, or all non-allied units, it says all units in said army.

Now is it possible they hadnt considered allied units? Sure. But Because if they said units exchange combat tactics, dreads and landspeeders wouldnt be able to gain vulkan's ability. But unless there is a FAQ, it stands in current reading, yes sisters get it.

It'd be a chore to do but funny as all get out....compile a list of every Q&A we have seen on Dakka since 5e. Then have everyone that is a member on Dakka send in the same questions. A few possible things would happen:

A. Jon would crap himself.
B. We would get and email back that said, 'F U'.
C. We would actually get answers back
D. Maybe they would be FAQ'd?

LoL, wishful thinking...

Rymafyr wrote:It'd be a chore to do but funny as all get out....compile a list of every Q&A we have seen on Dakka since 5e. Then have everyone that is a member on Dakka send in the same questions. A few possible things would happen:

A. Jon would crap himself.
B. We would get and email back that said, 'F U'.
C. We would actually get answers back
D. Maybe they would be FAQ'd?

LoL, wishful thinking...

That would be the INAT FAQ, without the answers.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Or it could be that the questions not answered have blindingly obvious answers.

Hestan. No rules for Allies, ergo no need to FAQ. Except perhaps in Apocalypse, and if you are that desperate in Apocalypse...I suggest you consider another Hobby. Like Ultimate Fighting. I understand that is very competitve, and linked to Wargames in an extremely tenuous manner (both involve violence to some degree). And in the case of Inquisitorial stuff added in. Well, lets see. No. You lose your combat tactics, and instead all units gain this. It does not specify allied units, ergo it does not apply to allied units. Simples.

Does The Gate say it can be used that way? Because penny to a pound, if it could, it would.

I really hope this is a troll.

Did i not specifically say WH and DH? Both of those are the only allies that SM can take, and and both are legal. As someone has said, all the special characters say "lose combat tactics and get this instead" EXCEPT for vulkan who says "everyone with combat tactics loses it, everything in the army gains this" The distinction makes it so that units like dreadnoughts and land speeders that DO NOT have combat tactics also get the TL weapons. However, since there is no distinction for allies, they get it as well. RAW it works, but many players you play against say you're bending the rules, or will contest it based on sister's "obviously" being an exception. So while the rules say you CAN, it is not OBVIOUS, so should be FAQ'ed

Likewise with the GOI dilemna. Personally I think it's obvious that you can, others think its obvious that you can't. Perfect time for an FAQ? One would think...unless of course that one is GW. I'm guessing that their little disclaimer down at the end is a "there's more, we posted some obvious ones, but not some others" with a little wiggle room left in in case they decide to just leave it.

Also, the problems they stated ARE the ones that are obvious. "Does shrike get two rerolls or one?" Seriously? Who'da thunk it...

This FAQ is just a kick in the nuts. They may as well have just not put one up. Everything important was "left up to us to decide." Thanks GW, why not just leave the whole damned thing up to us, that way nobody's feelings will ever get hurt since EVERYTHING will just be houseruled amongst friends...

Augustus wrote:Ahhh, BUT, Have you seen the new Eldar FAQ by the same author? I have a copy of it below.

...

ELDAR FAQ

Q. Are Eldar warlocks wearing robes or dresses?

A. Dresses, unless they are girls, then Robes.


Q. Why cant Phoenix Lords join other squads of Aspect Warriors?

A. Contractual agreements for appearances with the craftworld guilds.


Q. How many Guardians does it take to screw in a light bulb?

A. 2, unfortunately it takes an entire team of trained surgeons to get it back out again.


Q. What color are the Biel Tan Guardians suppose to be, Green with White, or White with Green?

A. Turqouise.


Q. If a squad of Guardians are killed in close combat and no one is there to hear it does it make a sound?

A. Orks.


Q. Why is there a an entirely Blank Page?

A.


.

I vote for Augustus to be the new FAQ writer.

Ha! Thanks! I'm glad some have enjoyed my sarcastic attempt to say the Marine FAQ had some silly info in it and was poorly formatted.

thehod wrote:I vote for Augustus to be the new FAQ writer.

Ahh, one more point in the FAQ:

Q: Why do some Eldar infantry units fleet and not others?
A: They have have run out of the technology to make Loafer Lightener.

loafer lightener.....lol

The problem is that GW answers questions that they deem worthy. And they think we're all a bunch of beardy unsporting tourney players to even dare think that they ever meant that Vulkan would affect Sisters and other allies. And they're a mini company, so they don't care if the rules are tight, because tourney players aren't their entire customer base.

GW has generally shown a level of disdain in their FAQs. It got better in fourth (anyone remember the "Can Orks ride in a looted Rhino, which has a transport capacity of 10 marines?" from third, I think the answer was something like, "That's so ridiculously stupid, we refuse to answer it. But, the answer is yes."), and it's gotten worse again in Fifth.

They need to take the attitude that unless 50 drunk gamers agree, it needs answered. And if they get sick of writing 6 page FAQs for each codex, maybe they'll learn to tighten up their language in the future. Really, how many FAQs from the SM (hurr!) codex could be answered in a few sentences in the codex.

GoW: "Calgar is not subject (or is) to taking additional wounds if he chooses to pass the leadership test."
Sternguard: "Only bolters and combi-bolters can use the special ammunition."
Vulkan: "This only affects units selected from the SM codex."

And that's one of the problems with GW. Their written word skills are pretty mediocre. PP, otoh, writes excellent technical descriptions for their rules. So, people generally question the individual rules less, because it's expected that what they wrote is actually what they meant (unlike GW, where you're guessing if it was an oversight or intentional). Where PP has problems is with interactions - two or more events happen 'simultaneous' or contradict each other, etc.

Yeah, would it really kill GW to hire some Tourney play-testers to try and 'break' or 'exploit' the new rules (subject to some kind of NDA of course.)

dietrich wrote:
The problem is that GW answers questions that they deem worthy. And they think we're all a bunch of beardy unsporting tourney players to even dare think that they ever meant that Vulkan would affect Sisters and other allies. And they're a mini company, so they don't care if the rules are tight, because tourney players aren't their entire customer base.

See, that is something that I don't think GW gets. A tighter rule set would lead to a higher overall customer satisfaction level, not just tourney players. Which would lead to increased miniature sales............. But some people have the attitude that only tourney players care about the rules. Ahhh well.

GW doesn't care because they view themselves as a miniatures company that happens to make some rules. They really don't pretend otherwise...oh, except in their company name. People wonder why they don't produce side games anymore...it's because they see selling miniatures as more profitable than selling games, and those other games never pushed the amount of minis that their core games do.

However, the company's customers *experience* their products as games. And what really separated GW from the historicals side of the hobby (and fueled its growth) is that their products are easier for strangers to play, instead of something intended for friends to rules-lawyer in basements. So the apparent disdain Jervis expresses for pickup and tournament play will forever be puzzling to me. You wouldn't think that attitude would be in line with the desires of the people on the business side of the company, although they're probably too absorbed the particulars of plastics manufacturing these days to notice.

It's also important to note that GW views 40K as a game for pre-teen children, who probably won't pay attention to rules language. Heck, you're probably lucky if kiddies play with even half the rules in the book. From previous discussions here, the average age in the UK may be what GW thinks. But there's some differences on our side of the pond, as we've discussed before on this forum. Not that GW notices with their ever-UK-centric attitude.

chaplaingrabthar wrote:Yeah, would it really kill GW to hire some Tourney play-testers to try and 'break' or 'exploit' the new rules (subject to some kind of NDA of course.)

Because thats pandering to a minority, and the games aren't designed with tournament level of competitive play in mind? Perhaps?

Also, judging by the Internets, said players would only demand everything become AP3 and Assault 6.

I'd suggest that more than a minority of gamers think GW products suffer from poor editing and balance issues.

Now, I think some people have unrealistic expectations about game balance and rules tightness. I don't want to see their games look like Advanced Squad Leader.

But it's been pointed out to you before, a *better* level of balance and proofreading would harm no one playing only among close friends in basements, and improve gameplay for those interested in pickup or competitive games.

There's no downside for GW. Why would a company seek to limit the appeal of its products when they could appeal to more potential customers with only a little more effort?