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.

the GW space wolf FAQ is now "fixed" and reverses the hotly debated furious charge/counterattack ruling. counterattack simply grants you a +1 attack. it's a good thing they did they so soon because i was already eying my IG commander with a saw in hand wondering how to add a straken cybernipple and bionic arm... i would have posted this in the two week old SW faq thread but it was locked due to bickering.

Ha ha! The dumb bastards. Perhaps next time they'll get it right the first time.

Now this is news!

And quick too... Relatively speaking!

Well done to GW admitting a mistake!

Or just covering their asses.

Funny part is the old link works hehe.

Not surprised.

Well thats good to hear.. Counter and furious charge would be an absurd combo with a bunch of random things

Yeah played some cityfight last night, command center+ bloodletters = world of pain if they stack!

The fun thing is that GW thought it was fiiiine with Spaze Mareenz stacking Counter Assault and Furious Charge. It was quite OK when marines did it.

They changed it when they realized that other armies could use it as well (IG and Nids)....and being better at it too.

GW couldn't have their posterboys shown up, so in comes the correction.

Sigh

Good work, GW! Admirably quick response!

Joining the chorus of thanks to GW for quick turn-around! This is what we like, guys. Keep it up and customer morale (and thus brand loyalty/interest in purchase) will definitely rise.

Thanks GW! While Dakka can be a cynical place, its good to know that GW is willing to fix some mistakes.

Personally, GW has gotten much better in the last couple of years. 5th Ed has been really clear and its codexes have been bang on.

AdeptSister wrote:Thanks GW! While Dakka can be a cynical place, its good to know that GW is willing to fix some mistakes.

Personally, GW has gotten much better in the last couple of years. 5th Ed has been really clear and its codexes have been bang on.

I DARE you to read through the Tyranid threads.

It will make you want to end your own life. LOL.

Amazing how GW have such a fast turnaround on this, but still haven't been arsed to resolve the Deffrolla issue.

Simply amazing.

Well, I'm impressed. I was pretty happy with the FAQ as is, but even more so now that they've fixed the one thing I didn't really like about the first version. I honestly hope they keep this stuff up...though personally they could have avoided a lot of these issues if they wrote tight-enough rules in the first place, but for GW this is pretty damn good.

Kinda sucks to see them only just start this kind of thing...like it was said, what about the deffrolla issue? How come they can't rule one way or another with that one? And countless others.

Glad to see that Wolf Lords can take frost weapons now... that was a ridiculous oversight.

Fateweaver wrote:I DARE you to read through the Tyranid threads.

It will make you want to end your own life. LOL.

What's so bad about it (besides Pyrovores and WS3 Carnifexes)?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:I DARE you to read through the Tyranid threads.

It will make you want to end your own life. LOL.

What's so bad about it (besides Pyrovores and WS3 Carnifexes)?

Have a read through Gwar!'s FAQ and see all the problems. Here's a few to get you started...

Swarmlord cannot technically use any of its psychic powers because it's not a "Hive tyrant".
Doom of Malan'tai doesn't have a 3++ save because it's not a "Zoanthrope".
Deathleaper doesn't benefit from any lictor rules, because it's not a "Lictor".
Hive Guard don't actually guard anything because they're not MC anymore, so shieldwall doesn't do anything.
Spore Mines are just a mess.

*sigh*

unbeliever87 wrote:Swarmlord cannot technically use any of its psychic powers because it's not a "Hive tyrant".

RAW gone awry. The sheer fact that he has those powers means that the intent was to let him use them. To claim otherwise is idiotic.

unbeliever87 wrote:Doom of Malan'tai doesn't have a 3++ save because it's not a "Zoanthrope".

RAW gone awry. The sheer fact that he has a Warp Field means that the intent was for him to have a 3+(I) save. To claim otherwise is idiotic.

unbeliever87 wrote:Deathleaper doesn't benefit from any lictor rules, because it's not a "Lictor".

Three in a row? Now we're just at a wilful disregard to reading comprehension and logical deduction. The very fact that he was given those special rules indicates that it was intended to to use them.

This has long gone beyond the point of RAI - to claim that something cannot use a rule it has been given due to RAW is lunacy.

unbeliever87 wrote:Hive Guard don't actually guard anything because they're not MC anymore, so shieldwall doesn't do anything.

I assume you mean Tyrant Guard. All the 'Shield Wall' unit does is allow the Hive Tyrant to join the unit as thought it were an IC (despite its status as a Monstrous Creature). Once the Tyrant has joined the Tyrant Guard, the Tyrant Guard are prevented from Going to Ground. Unless I'm missing something, that's all the rule allows. Reading anything more into that is wishful thinking.

unbeliever87 wrote: Spore Mines are just a mess.

I haven't read those, so I won't contest that.

But do explain why they are so that I might better understand it.

unbeliever87 wrote:Have a read through Gwar!'s FAQ and see all the problems.

So have I, and most the problems aren't actually problems, just common sense issues.

Not trying to flame anyone just wanted to point out that common sense is kind of an uncommon trait now days. Hence all the rules that are written weird and the dicussions and rules lawyering that ensues afterwords.

UltraPrime wrote:

unbeliever87 wrote:Have a read through Gwar!'s FAQ and see all the problems.

So have I, and most the problems aren't actually problems, just common sense issues.

Agreed. RAW fundamentalists have problems where other people don't.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

unbeliever87 wrote:Swarmlord cannot technically use any of its psychic powers because it's not a "Hive tyrant".

RAW gone awry. The sheer fact that he has those powers means that the intent was to let him use them. To claim otherwise is idiotic.

unbeliever87 wrote:Doom of Malan'tai doesn't have a 3++ save because it's not a "Zoanthrope".

RAW gone awry. The sheer fact that he has a Warp Field means that the intent was for him to have a 3+(I) save. To claim otherwise is idiotic.

unbeliever87 wrote:Deathleaper doesn't benefit from any lictor rules, because it's not a "Lictor".

Three in a row? Now we're just at a wilful disregard to reading comprehension and logical deduction. The very fact that he was given those special rules indicates that it was intended to to use them.

This has long gone beyond the point of RAI - to claim that something cannot use a rule it has been given due to RAW is lunacy.

unbeliever87 wrote:Hive Guard don't actually guard anything because they're not MC anymore, so shieldwall doesn't do anything.

I assume you mean Tyrant Guard. All the 'Shield Wall' unit does is allow the Hive Tyrant to join the unit as thought it were an IC (despite its status as a Monstrous Creature). Once the Tyrant has joined the Tyrant Guard, the Tyrant Guard are prevented from Going to Ground. Unless I'm missing something, that's all the rule allows. Reading anything more into that is wishful thinking.

Ah, but you forget: Fluff =/= Rules, RAI =/= RAW. As much as it makes sense that these conflicts shouldn't exist, they fact is they do. The reason they exist, and the point that I was originally trying to make, is that the codex was not proofread or edited sufficiently.

Sledge me and my examples as much as you like, it doesn't make them untrue.

Now don't get me wrong, if I were to play against Tyranid player of course I would allow their Doom of Malan'Tai to have that 3++ save, of course I would allow their Tyrant Guard to protect their Hive Tyrant from shooting attacks, but that's essentially a house rule because neither are supported by RAW.

That's all I'm going to say on this matter, come over to YMDC if you'd like to discuss further.

No. That's stupid. Pure lunacy.

The Swarmlord is given those psychic powers by the rules, he can therefore use them. To say he has them but cannot use them is just... the mind boggles how anyone could realistically and with any true conviction argue that as the truth.

Saying otherwise isn't RAW, it's the purest form of rules lawyering.

unbeliever87 wrote:Hive Guard don't actually guard anything because they're not MC anymore, so shieldwall doesn't do anything.

The Hive Tyrant is not an IC, so the rule that says MC ICs can be picked out in shooting does not apply.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

unbeliever87 wrote:Hive Guard don't actually guard anything because they're not MC anymore, so shieldwall doesn't do anything.

The Hive Tyrant is not an IC, so the rule that says MC ICs can be picked out in shooting does not apply.

So people have said and it indeed sounds logical but my beef is, why the hell couldn't they have just said that in the shieldwall rule, in the way that they did with the last codex? For example, shield wall: the guard protect the Tyrant, all shooting wounds must be allocated to guard first or words to that effect. It seems to me that this latest codex seems to be almost deliberately ambiguous and misleading in places.

Steelmage99 wrote:The fun thing is that GW thought it was fiiiine with Spaze Mareenz stacking Counter Assault and Furious Charge. It was quite OK when marines did it.

They changed it when they realized that other armies could use it as well (IG and Nids)....and being better at it too.

GW couldn't have their posterboys shown up, so in comes the correction.

Sigh

It's extra funny since their interpretation was basically "it's LIKE an assault so it gets to use the special rules that trigger when an assault happens" but then said defensive grenades can't be used since it wouldn't be fair.

The big one I see is whether the Mawloc's "Imma Eat YOU!" attack thing is a shooting attack or not, and thus whether or not the targets can take cover saves.

As to "Why give a model a rule they can't use?" look at Gretchin with Mob Rule. There just isn't a good reason to charge for rules that are going to be that messy, even if the intent can be teased out.

Wehrkind wrote:The big one I see is whether the Mawloc's "Imma Eat YOU!" attack thing is a shooting attack or not, and thus whether or not the targets can take cover saves.

As to "Why give a model a rule they can't use?" look at Gretchin with Mob Rule. There just isn't a good reason to charge for rules that are going to be that messy, even if the intent can be teased out.

Perhaps, but I would think that your analogy completely falls apart with regard to the Nids entries sited above. There really is no 'teasing out' of intent that needs to take place. I think it's a fun academic exercise to point out these oddities in the codex, but to actually try to enforce them in a game, friendly or not, is sheer lunacy.

-Yad