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.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1610148a_FAQ_Lizardmen_V1_4.pdf


http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1900170a_FAQ_Tomb_Kings_v1_0.pdf

EDIT : Hmmm

seems to me that the Grey knight one has been tweaked a little too.

Q: Is Cleansing Flame a shooting attack or a close
combat attack? (p31)
A: A close combat attack


Q: What happens to an embarked Dreadnought that
suffers an Immobilized result from the hit when the
Stormraven it is embarked in Explodes? (p37)
A: It is Destroyed as it is unable to disembark


Q: Is a unit that assaults, or is assaulted by, multiple
units with rad or psychotroke grenades subjected to
the effects multiple times? (p60-61)
A: No

.. time to see if any of the others have been tweaked as well.


and the ork one too yes ..?

Q: If an Independent Character on a warbike joins
Snikrot’s unit before the game starts, can they still turn
up using the Ambush special rule? (p62)
A: Yes

...

The Hidden banner tweak is the only thing worth noting, really. All the other questions were kind of no brainers.

The Cold Blooded answer will save a few arguments, at least.

Q: What cover save does kustom force field give to a
vehicle within 6" of it? (p35)
A: 4+. Note that for a squadron of vehicles only those
within 6” of the custom force filed will count as
obscured

.... errr... okay...

.. not how we'd been playing it.. makes the kan wall a bit less viable.

Q: What part of a skimmer on a large oval flying base
is used to determine if it is in/on terrain or if it is on
friendly or enemy models? (p71)
A: Just the base itself.
Q: If a skimmer on a large oval flying base is wrecked,
and its base is completely surrounded by enemy
models, are all embarked models killed? (p71)
A: Yes.
Q: Can you ram a skimmer on a large oval flying base?
(p71)
A: Yes, you have to make contact with either the base
or the hull

holy crap

Q: Are a vehicle’s wings considered to be part of its
hull? (p60)
A: Yes

Minor additions to the marine one too.

It looks like the following FAQs were updated:

40k Rulebook
Cities of Death (a new FAQ, I think?)
Grey Knights
Orks
Ultramarines

Tomb Kings
Lizardmen

I'm surprised (and pleased) they went so far as to actually errata the points cap on the Hidden Dead banner.

Nice work on the TK stuff- I'll be glad to see an end to those particular Internet arguments...

Good catch, S8!

reds8n wrote:

Q: What cover save does kustom force field give to a
vehicle within 6" of it? (p35)
A: 4+. Note that for a squadron of vehicles only those
within 6” of the custom force filed will count as
obscured

.... errr... okay...

.. not how we'd been playing it.. makes the kan wall a bit less viable.

Any Kan in the unit that isn't within 6" will get a 5+ invulnerable save, though, and this is actually how I see most people play it.

I feel extremely vindicated about the Grey Knight FAQ :

Wyches get dodge saves against cleansing flame!

The CoD is pretty much from the recent WD.

Any Kan in the unit that isn't within 6" will get a 5+ invulnerable save

..they will.. ?

What changed in the Lizard FAQ?

reds8n wrote: The CoD is pretty much from the recent WD.

Any Kan in the unit that isn't within 6" will get a 5+ invulnerable save

..they will.. ?

Well, they'll get a 5+ cover as any unit within range gets that. Vehicles count as obscured as per the FAQ, which actually isn't a rules change at all and is RAW.

Admittedly the 5+ cover technically only works on wounds, but GW has abandoned that line of thought pretty clearly in recent books and such. Therefore, so be it.

I'll have to read the Kustom Force Field rules again for the exact wording, but I'm not thinking that this FAQ ruling allows the vehicle the 5+ cover save, Neconilis.

Also,

Q: If a Librarian embarked on a vehicle attempts to use
Vortex of Doom and fails his psychic test, what
happens? (p25)
A: Place the template over the vehicle the Librarian is
embarked in and resolve the hit against the vehicle’s
rear armor value. (Librarians. Dicks of the 40th Millennium! "Hey Einstein! Get the feth out of my Rhino if your going to fling that lightning gak around!")

MasterSlowPoke wrote:Q: Can you ram a skimmer on a large oval flying base?
(p71)
A: Yes, you have to make contact with either the base
or the hull

Uhh... what? I can ram a Valk with a Demolisher?

2/3rds the time you'll miss.

Q: Can you Stomp or Thunderstomp a unit of Skinks that
contains Kroxigor? (p94)
A: No, a mixed unit has the troop type of Unique.

So, no Look Out, Sir! to characters(on foot) joining Skrox units since they are not the same unit type now?

Hur hur, they changed the banner so you can fit chariot units.

Wow, Arkhan is always lvl5 wizard until he loses the book.

I'm glad GW is trying to balance it up a bit

H.B.M.C. wrote:

MasterSlowPoke wrote:Q: Can you ram a skimmer on a large oval flying base?
(p71)
A: Yes, you have to make contact with either the base
or the hull

Uhh... what? I can ram a Valk with a Demolisher?

Yeah, as slow poke pointed out, they can move out of the way.

Yes, I understand the rules mechanic, I'm more talking about the absurdity of a tank ramming an aircraft.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yes, I understand the rules mechanic, I'm more talking about the absurdity of a tank ramming an aircraft.

Hydraulics.

It's The Answer.

heh. It is an odd one, HMBC.

However, the Valks and Stormravens were a contradiction before this. If there was a tank sitting on an objective, I could ram it with another tank, hoping to take it out.

If a Valk was sitting on an objective, not only could I not ram it, but I potentially couldn't move up to contest the objective since I have to stay away 1" away from the opponent's models. Also a lame game mechanic.

Some interesting stuff in this FAQ release. Also, there are some answers to some extremely dumb questions. I really hate GW. There are legitimate questions that need some answering, but instead they answer stupid ass questions like this one:

Q: If a Razorback armed with a lascannon and twinlinked
plasma gun suffers a weapon destroyed result,
does it destroy both weapons or just one? (p92)

A: Only one weapon – either the lascannon or the twinlinked
plasma gun.

lolwut? Why waste time answering a question like that...

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yes, I understand the rules mechanic, I'm more talking about the absurdity of a tank ramming an aircraft.

It truly is the Dark Millennium.

(The real answer is that flyers are mundane skimmers with a fancy base in 5th edition, and in the absence of some special rule, are capable of being rammed)

Q: If a Razorback armed with a lascannon and twinlinked
plasma gun suffers a weapon destroyed result,
does it destroy both weapons or just one? (p92)

A: Only one weapon – either the lascannon or the twinlinked
plasma gun.

lolwut? Why waste time answering a question like that...

That's just a copy/paste from every other codex with a Razorback, it took no time. And you'd be surprised how often that question comes up.

reds8n wrote:

Q: What cover save does kustom force field give to a
vehicle within 6" of it? (p35)
A: 4+. Note that for a squadron of vehicles only those
within 6” of the custom force filed will count as
obscured

.... errr... okay...

.. not how we'd been playing it.. makes the kan wall a bit less viable.

Not really. As long as half the unit is Obscured the whole unit gets the save. For some reason they felt the need to make sure people didn't try to claim the the save with just one of three Kans in range of the KFF.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yes, I understand the rules mechanic, I'm more talking about the absurdity of a tank ramming an aircraft.

Yeah I actually had my Valk rammed out of the sky by a Vindy the otherday....

Roll on 6th for proper flyer rules...

Glad to see they gave ruling for the Kans and KFF. People I know have been playing it forever that if one Kan was in range they got a 4+. We'd only recently started playing differently in Cali before I left.

RandyMcStab wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yes, I understand the rules mechanic, I'm more talking about the absurdity of a tank ramming an aircraft.

Yeah I actually had my Valk rammed out of the sky by a Vindy the otherday....

Roll on 6th for proper flyer rules...

On the other hand that was hilarious so I'm more than happy for it to stay that way.

e: There's no question of Kans getting a 5+ cover as long as 1 of the unit is in range, and 4+ if two or more are (and the individual Kan in 6 would still get a 4+ cover in the first scenario). The wording is exactly consistent with stuff like Shield of Sanguinius.

Corrode wrote: On the other hand that was hilarious so I'm more than happy for it to stay that way.

Damn those hydraulics!!

@Corrode

But the squadron rules specifically tell you when you will get a cover save so they wouldn't get the 5+.

Nice to see chariots can now be buried, but you can now also bury a horde of skeleton warriors and give them a standard. Surprise!