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.

So... that was fast. What the heck is going on? Reading through it now, points of interest as they come...

Find it at the usual place:

The Linky

Could somebody email a copy? Can't open the link at work.

thanks

For ze vork blocked !

Good find BTW !

Wow. Props to GW again for such speedy FAQ work!.

What a strange new development for GW. This is change I can believe in!

Notables:

*You're allowed to have better than a 1+ save again.

"Page 66 – Special Rules, What Special Rules Does It Have
Change “[...]the effects of multiple special rules[...]” to
“[...]the effects of different special rules[...]”Add “However,
unless otherwise stated, a model gains no additional benefit
from having the same special rule multiple times.” to the end of
the first paragraph."

Page 69 – Extra Attack
Add “Unlike most special rules, the effects of multiple Extra
Attack special rules are cumulative.”

*Should end the Stackable Special Rules debate in WFB YMDC

Reference Section – The Lore of Shadow, Okkam’s
Mindrazor
Change “[...]when rolling To Wound with[...]” to
“[...]for[...]”

*End of Okkam's Mindrazor debate now?

*Hexes and Augments do not require LOS.

Q: Can I measure distances and ranges at any time and for any
reason? (p6)
A: Yes.

*End of debate.

Q: Do Stomp or Thunderstomp hits benefit from any other special
rules, equipment or magic items of the model that inflicts the hits?
(p76)
A: No.

*Sorry Carnosaur lovers.

Q: Does a bolt thrower require two or more crew remaining to fire?
(p111)
A: No.

*Nice to have the clarification

I think GWs finally figured out the power of the intrawebz. Yay!

no VPs for created units, I'ma gonna be spamming me some Raise Dead!

To be more precise:

Q: Some models can be ‘created’ by spells or special rules during the game. Are such units worth any victory points if destroyed? (p143)
A: No, unless their rules specifically say otherwise.

Don't the rules for Raise Dead say the unit is worth 50 points? I may be remembering an obsolete 7th edition FAQ though.

That's one hell of an erretta list!

From what I read, you are still not allowed to have better than a 1+ save. You can have equipment that would normally put it lower than 1+ (IE, if you have Chaos Armor and a barded steed, you can still take an enchanted shield even though normally it would give you a 0+ save. However, you would still only have a 1+ save)

@skyth. You are correct. What I meant by my comment was that previous to this Errata, it was believed that you couldn't have lower than a 1+ save period (so no 0+/-1+ saves, etc). You just could never practically roll better than a 1+.

All this quick feedback stuff from GW...

It is amazing!

Cloud this be... the new face of GW?

(And thanks to reds8n for helping out those of us behind a work firewall!)

I think the way it was originally written was a very clumsy way of trying to say that a "1" always failed.

This opening line to a 6 page document that was required so soon made me chuckle a little bit:

'Although we strive to ensure that our rulebooks are perfect, sometimes mistakes do creep in.'

Darn it, characters get Look Out Sir! against spell templates. Back to the anti-slann drawing board.

Jin wrote:@skyth. You are correct. What I meant by my comment was that previous to this Errata, it was believed that you couldn't have lower than a 1+ save period (so no 0+/-1+ saves, etc). You just could never practically roll better than a 1+.

I believe you still can't have better than a 1+ save period. For instance, if you have the above character (Chaos Armor, Barded Steed, Enchanted shield) and you get wounded by a strength 5 attack, you need a 3+ to save as opposed to a 2+ to save (Like you would have last edition)

This is a great FAQ. Very impressed.

@Skyth - ah, I get what you're saying, now. I'm leaning toward Zad Fnark's interpretation of the ruling in question, in that they meant that you can't roll better than a 1+, practically speaking. Heh. I think they're going to need another FAQ on this .

Sweet can overrun even if I charge a unit that gets destroyed in the magic phase. That's screwed over my stegadons so many times. Yay they made it official, the new scrolls are fairly useless!

*Sorry Carnosaur lovers.

Doesnt really matter since you cant stomp anything that really has more than 1 wound except characters on foot (Which the lord can handle)

Tournament organizers will *need* to specify if your opponent can see your roster or not. There isnt really a rule about it anymore and the FAQ states players can just decide how they want to play.. which could lead to arguments!

While I would still prefer some of the more obvious things get fixed BEFORE release, it's good to see the quick action they took on this. Unlike the wait for the Tyranid FAQ.

Jin wrote:@Skyth - ah, I get what you're saying, now. I'm leaning toward Zad Fnark's interpretation of the ruling in question, in that they meant that you can't roll better than a 1+, practically speaking. Heh. I think they're going to need another FAQ on this .

Agreed. I think the armor save answer was the weakest point in what seems to be a generally strong document.

RZ

MunkeyKungFu wrote:This opening line to a 6 page document that was required so soon made me chuckle a little bit:

'Although we strive to ensure that our rulebooks are perfect, sometimes mistakes do creep in.'

Kinda like how they said in White Dwarf that they liked the way the game worked, then went on to explain how they changed everything but the name?

I like the change to Purple Sun of Xereus. I had a feeling from the very beginning that was the way it was meant to be played, but it was so very very poorly worded.

"Reference Section – The Lore of Death, The Purple Sun
of Xereus
Change “[...]Any model touched by the template must[...]” to
“[...]Any model under, or passed over by, the template
must[...]” in the fifth sentence."

I don't really see how that's a change... I thought that's how people were already playing it!

Shows what I know...

Cheers reds8n for the download linky.

Interesting stuff, obviously more gremlins than first believed got into the machine.

With the original wording, if even the barest edge of the template touched the a small portion of the model--it'd have been vulnerable. Now it actually has to be under or passed over by!

Kanluwen wrote:With the original wording, if even the barest edge of the template touched the a small portion of the model--it'd have been vulnerable. Now it actually has to be under or passed over by!

More to the point, given that you place the template touching the casting wizard before moving it, he'd hit himself when he cast it.

I thought you could place the template anywhere on the table (unless you roll a "misfire" on the artillery dice to see how far it moves, in which case you place it on top of the caster)?

RiTides wrote:I thought you could place the template anywhere on the table (unless you roll a "misfire" on the artillery dice to see how far it moves, in which case you place it on top of the caster)?

Reread the rules on "Magic Vortex" spells - you start by placing the template touching the caster.

ALSO NOTE THAT EACH OF THE ARMY FAQs HAVE BEEN UPDATED TOO!

BTW I shouted on purpose.

i dont see any army faqs changed since the 14th. do you?