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.

Not a fan of this FAQ. It kind of cemented that there is only 1 way to build a half way competitive DA list, and that's with a Land Raider Crusader with a Standard of Devastation in it surrounded by Bikes and Land Speeders. I think they are intentionally making 6th edition a pure shooty edition with no hope for assault style armies.

I am really confused about the sargent not being able to take weapon changes. Do you guys think this is a mistake or intended? And will this be enforced in tournies etc?

 Holy~Heretic wrote:
I am really confused about the sargent not being able to take weapon changes. Do you guys think this is a mistake or intended? And will this be enforced in tournies etc?

Personally I think it was mistake. In a friendly game I would not enforce it.

Ugh the Sgt. FAQ is really annoying! It was definitely (IMO) an oversight to prohibit Sgts from taking TH/SS or tlLC

Given that all other terminator assault squads can TH up the sergeant and that the box set comes with 5 thss arms, its a safebet that its an oversight

I was kinda hoping for the new FAQ to make the Nephilim/Dark Talon playable :(

 Flinty wrote:
Given that all other terminator assault squads can TH up the sergeant and that the box set comes with 5 thss arms, its a safebet that its an oversight

I agree on this but what other effect would this new wording have other than to prevent the Saergent from taking the TH/SS?
The new wording was added to both the command squad and the normal death wing squad. They had to think about it twice before writing it.

I am annoyed with these errata-ed entries (less than the PFG techmarine in vehicles though)

Mythantor wrote:
I was kinda hoping for the new FAQ to make the Nephilim/Dark Talon playable :(

And this ^^

The DWCS doesn't have a Sargent so it doesn't really effect them in that regard.

 Blaggard wrote:
The DWCS doesn't have a Sargent so it doesn't really effect them in that regard.

True! So, I will use my TH/SS seargent as a model part of the command squad!
Thanks for pointing this out.

 paqman wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
Given that all other terminator assault squads can TH up the sergeant and that the box set comes with 5 thss arms, its a safebet that its an oversight

I agree on this but what other effect would this new wording have other than to prevent the Saergent from taking the TH/SS?
The new wording was added to both the command squad and the normal death wing squad. They had to think about it twice before writing it.

The change was made so that a model with TH/SS could take a CML.

 Happyjew wrote:

 paqman wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
Given that all other terminator assault squads can TH up the sergeant and that the box set comes with 5 thss arms, its a safebet that its an oversight

I agree on this but what other effect would this new wording have other than to prevent the Saergent from taking the TH/SS?
The new wording was added to both the command squad and the normal death wing squad. They had to think about it twice before writing it.

The change was made so that a model with TH/SS could take a CML.

Ha! I see!
I had a CML ready but not added to a TH/SS model yet while waiting for this ruling.
Thanks again for pointing this out. It hadn't been obvious from my point of view but it is now that I re-read it.

^ *Could* take a CML????

 Deuce11 wrote:
^ *Could* take a CML????

Yes "could" take a CML. Pre-FAQ it was argued that since you replaced "all" weapons with TH/SS then you had to lose the CMl.

I find the PFG ruling frustrating, not because I'm mad keen on PFGs, but just because it seems to contradict the BRB. I hate having to remember stuff like that...




Automatically Appended Next Post:
More than made up for by the RW Command Squad addition though. I guess they needed to shift more boxes of Black Knights!

Well, 40k is a set of rules, with codices full of exceptions!

Oh, yeah, I don't really mind that part, but I don't much like further exceptions in FAQs.

Hektik wrote:
Not a fan of this FAQ. It kind of cemented that there is only 1 way to build a half way competitive DA list, and that's with a Land Raider Crusader with a Standard of Devastation in it surrounded by Bikes and Land Speeders. I think they are intentionally making 6th edition a pure shooty edition with no hope for assault style armies.

You mean a Ravenwing list with an LRC supported by PFG Techmarine on a bike and 5-man RCS with the Banner?

The PFG nerf was coming, but you still can mount a PFG tech on bike behind it, just a little more tricky but still viable. This does mean Helldrakes got a stealth buff vs DA, no more LRC of 4++. :(

Well the Deathwing Assault ruling is a blow, so much for pure Deathwing in 6th Edition.

5-man RCS is huge. Why would you complain about paying 40 points for Black Knights when the alternative is... 42 Points in the Fast attack slot?

Vast Stasis Anomaly got nerfed slightly, but I don't know anyone who uses it or ever will.

Asmodai got a bolt pistol. Yay! Still unplayable rubbish.

Strangely, no ruling on the RW command squad being unlocked by Bike Techmarine.

It is absolutely ridiculous to deny the DW sergeant the ability to take a TH/SS. I really hope it is poorly worded and they are gonna fix it sooner or later.

About the Deathwing Terminator Squads I think that the "replacing their storm bolter and power fist with..." means that the Sergeants cannot take a Storm shield / Thunder Hammer anymore, as well as anything else you've said.

Ohhh already written my bad...

Get used to it, this is 40k and you play DAs. GW should include free lube with every codex.

The PFG affects every model within 3", whether friend or enemy, EXCEPT the transport if you are in one. So much fail in this that I am now a sad panda. 9-(

DA faq is this?

I like the PFG FAQ ruling. It seems counter intuitive to me to put a piece of equipment inside a vehicle and it suddenly has a larger area of effect.

 Azrell wrote:
Get used to it, this is 40k and you play DAs. GW should include free lube with every codex.

so true, unless you play Ravenwing, whereupon you can offer it to your opponents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I just realised you could have used the pre-nerf Vast Stasis Bomb on things like Wraithstars and Tervigons or Paladins in conjunction with the Stasis grenade to insta-kill them. Derp.

Asmodai Asmodean wrote:

 Azrell wrote:
Get used to it, this is 40k and you play DAs. GW should include free lube with every codex.

so true, unless you play Ravenwing, whereupon you can offer it to your opponents.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of some pimply haired man applying lube to my... Nevermind.

Also, I am not really that worried when I face Ravenwing. Bikes aren't so great.

 Scipio Africanus wrote:

Asmodai Asmodean wrote:

 Azrell wrote:
Get used to it, this is 40k and you play DAs. GW should include free lube with every codex.

so true, unless you play Ravenwing, whereupon you can offer it to your opponents.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of some pimply haired man applying lube to my... Nevermind.

Also, I am not really that worried when I face Ravenwing. Bikes aren't so great.

Yeah cause DW termies are...

whill4 wrote:
I like the PFG FAQ ruling. It seems counter intuitive to me to put a piece of equipment inside a vehicle and it suddenly has a larger area of effect.

I understand why they did that. AV14 with a 4++ is very powerful. Especially since there is a distinct lack of str8+ in armies now that its an infantry based edition. I'd say it even crossed into OP territory, however a Bigmeks KFF works this way. So now we have two similar pieces of wargear that don't work the same while embarked in a vehicle. If any other wargear exists which works similar to these we now have to ask if it will or will not work while embarked in a vehicle. Very sloppy.

Especially when the same piece of equipment placed OUTSIDE The vheicle still works on the vehicle. So you stick the TM on a bike with a 5 man Knight squad and youre good to go anyway....

In addition to the sergeant shenanigans, would that also mean that, like it is now, an apothecary cannot take a TH/SS? It says that it must replace the power fist with the narthecium and then it says that any model may replace the power fist and SB with a TH/SS. I would assume that you cannot have an apothecary with a TH/SS now too, as the previous entry said "May replace all weapons with a TH/SS." Not sure a narthecium is considered a weapon so I would imagine this actually hurts the apothecary option too.

But I may be wrong.

And on the topic of the sgt. I imagine that this is, once again, a rules oversight. Effectively we have gained CMLs on out TH/SS but then lost a viable challenge option for our sergeants... I would prefer it the old way if this is true, as the CML guy usually just hangs in the back anyway. In a friendly game I can't imagine anyone being opposed to you keeping your sgts with their TH/SS because that rule is written poorly... again... and makes no logical sense.

- VardenV2

 VardenV2 wrote:
In addition to the sergeant shenanigans, would that also mean that, like it is now, an apothecary cannot take a TH/SS? It says that it must replace the power fist with the narthecium and then it says that any model may replace the power fist and SB with a TH/SS. I would assume that you cannot have an apothecary with a TH/SS now too, as the previous entry said "May replace all weapons with a TH/SS." Not sure a narthecium is considered a weapon so I would imagine this actually hurts the apothecary option too.

But I may be wrong.

And on the topic of the sgt. I imagine that this is, once again, a rules oversight. Effectively we have gained CMLs on out TH/SS but then lost a viable challenge option for our sergeants... I would prefer it the old way if this is true, as the CML guy usually just hangs in the back anyway. In a friendly game I can't imagine anyone being opposed to you keeping your sgts with their TH/SS because that rule is written poorly... again... and makes no logical sense.

- VardenV2

But it's not. This brings the Termies into line with every other unit in the Codex. Troopers have different options than their Sgt in every case. The Apothocary always gives up a weapon, whether PA, bike, or Termie the Narth isn't a weapon and replaces one of your weapons. This isn't how it used to be, but this is a new codex and new edition. If your Apoth doesn't have a Narth then you don't have an Apoth so no FnP for you. "Viable challenge option" when did a model with a 2+/5++ AP3 attack at I4 become an unviable challenge option? Just because you don't like the change doesn't mean it's poorly written, it's just not written in the way that you want it done. As I've said before if you *really* need a challenge taker in your DW squad suit up a Int-Chap or a Libby, you can still have your TH/SS and now you have better Init and more Wounds