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.

Like the title says.

Blood Angels

Dark Eldar

The few changes:

Blood Angels FAQ wrote:
Q: What happens to an embarked Dreadnought that
suffers an Immobilized result from the hit when the
Stormraven it is embarked in Explodes? (p38)
A: It is Destroyed as it is unable to disembark.

Dark Eldar FAQ wrote:
Q: Does the Crucible of Malediction affect vehicles that
are also psykers? (p60)
A: No.


Q: Does every psyker in a unit of psykers, which are in
range of the Crucible of Malediction when it is opened,
have to take a Leadership test? (p60)
A: Yes. The notable exceptions to this are units with the
Brotherhood of Psykers special rule. These units just
take a single test, and will loose a single model if
failed.

puma713 wrote:
Q: Does every psyker in a unit of psykers, which are in
range of the Crucible of Malediction when it is opened,
have to take a Leadership test? (p60)
A: Yes. The notable exceptions to this are units with the
Brotherhood of Psykers special rule. These units just
take a single test, and will loose a single model if
failed because we can still milk some sales out of the new GK codex.

Fixed it for you.

Need to keep all you marine kids happy, right?

You know, the reasons of why I still have a 40k army are starting to dwindle.

I never bothered taking the crucible because I never though it would take out whole squads and auto-win games like many seemed to expect.
I do think it's a bit odd that it does NOTHING to vehicles. I at least expected a glancing hit if failed for psychic vehicles or something...
But hey...

Thanks GW for solving absolutely nothing with these FAQs. The CoM questions were pretty obvious, to be honest. Except the Librarian Dreadnought, that fething pisses me off.

puma713 wrote:Like the title says.

Dark Eldar FAQ wrote:
Q: Does every psyker in a unit of psykers, which are in
range of the Crucible of Malediction when it is opened,
have to take a Leadership test? (p60)
A: Yes. The notable exceptions to this are units with the
Brotherhood of Psykers special rule. These units just
take a single test, and will loose a single model if
failed.

This raises more questions. Like where/when and how you "loose" the model? Do we loose it like we would an arrow? Fire it from a trebuchet? Or is it implying we need to re-glue the model because it is now loose? And if more than one becomes loose during play, how does that interact with this ruling?

Blood Angels FAQ wrote:
Q: What happens to an embarked Dreadnought that
suffers an Immobilized result from the hit when the
Stormraven it is embarked in Explodes? (p38)
A: It is Destroyed as it is unable to disembark.

I don't understand why they let legitimately unclear rules fester interminably (Deffrolla, anyone) and then "clarify" rules like this, which already lack any discernible ambiguity. What happens to embarked passengers who cannot perform an emergency disembarkation is, in my opinion, already clear as can be.

Jbuckmaster wrote:

puma713 wrote:Like the title says.

Dark Eldar FAQ wrote:
Q: Does every psyker in a unit of psykers, which are in
range of the Crucible of Malediction when it is opened,
have to take a Leadership test? (p60)
A: Yes. The notable exceptions to this are units with the
Brotherhood of Psykers special rule. These units just
take a single test, and will loose a single model if
failed.

This raises more questions. Like where/when and how you "loose" the model? Do we loose it like we would an arrow? Fire it from a trebuchet? Or is it implying we need to re-glue the model because it is now loose? And if more than one becomes loose during play, how does that interact with this ruling?

Coffee. Coffee everywhere.

Well played.

BuFFo wrote:Need to keep all you marine kids happy, right?

The Blood Angel ruling doesn't seem particularly beneficial to marines seeing as how the dread is ruled as destroyed. Are there any active issues with Blood Angels that they didn't address yet or that have crept up more recently? I haven't really played much 40k this year and don't frequent YMDC much any more.

warboss wrote:

BuFFo wrote:Need to keep all you marine kids happy, right?

The Blood Angel ruling doesn't seem particularly beneficial to marines seeing as how the dread is ruled as destroyed. Are there any active issues with Blood Angels that they didn't address yet or that have crept up more recently? I haven't really played much 40k this year and don't frequent YMDC much any more.

He appears to be upset that a 20point upgrade no longer could be interpreted to be able to remove multiple whole Grey Knight units instantly, unreliable as it may be.

Has the WFB orc and goblin one has changed as well ?

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1930217a_Orcs_&_Goblins_Version_1_1.pdf

Ouze wrote:
I don't understand why they let legitimately unclear rules fester interminably (Deffrolla, anyone) and then "clarify" rules like this, which already lack any discernible ambiguity. What happens to embarked passengers who cannot perform an emergency disembarkation is, in my opinion, already clear as can be.

Because what is legitimately unclear and what is not is really a very subjective matter. The fact is, the guy who is doing the GW FAQs is doing a much, much better job of updating FAQs now then previously and we should be happy about that. Its pretty clear that he's reading and pulling questions from the INAT as we put them out so (regardless of what ruling they go with) that personally makes me happy.

As for this question not being necessary, are you not aware that there is a fairly large group of people who believe that by the RAW models who are placed in the crater of an exploding vehicle do NOT count as having disembarked because the rules don't expressly say so? So its a completely 100% legitimate question that actually in some ways goes 'against' the RAW, but it is probably the way it should be based on how unlikely it is to happen.


And as for other people legitimately angry about the Crucible of Malediction ruling...first of all, the Brotherhood of Pysker rule was quite explicit that the whole point of it was to resolve stuff like this against a SINGLE model in the unit and not to lose the entire unit, so I don't know why people think the ruling was made simply to prop up grey knights...allowing one race (Dark Eldar) to have a tool to completely obliterate squads that goes against what their own special rules say would have been a terrible ruling, even if it would weaken the Grey Knights a tiny bit.

Second, as for the Crucible affecting psychic vehicles, the only psychic vehicles (Blood Angel Libby Dread & Grey Knight vehicles) do not have a Ld value...they only count as being Ld10 for specific purposes, and clearly based on this FAQ ruling, the Crucible was not one of those criteria. So if these models don't have a Ld value to test against, the 'RAW', some would say, for the Crucible was that the vehicle therefore could not pass its Ld test and therefore must be removed. Obviously this is an absolutely ridiculous interpretation that would have allowed entire GK transport vehicles to be automatically removed (presumably along with the models inside). There was simply no way they could have ruled this way.

So IMHO, this was a good update filled with good rulings.

Yep, suprisingly sensible rules answers there. Who'd have thought they would have defined an attack that only attacks psykers as a psychic attack as per Brotherhood of Psykers

I think most of us Knew the Eventual outcome of the Crucible ruling.

Now, what impresses me is that the FAQ has been updated again, fairly recently. I Hope they keep up the good work!

It seems that almost anything GW does these days is bound to trigger Pavlovian burst of nerd rage. Sure they could write clearer rules in the first place, but their current FAQ policy is at least a huge step UP from what they had previously.

puma713 wrote:

Q: Does every psyker in a unit of psykers, which are in
range of the Crucible of Malediction when it is opened,
have to take a Leadership test? (p60)
A: Yes. The notable exceptions to this are units with the
Brotherhood of Psykers special rule. These units just
take a single test, and will loose a single model if
failed.

So, seers council is not a notable exeption i take it. (?)

Nerivant wrote:

Jbuckmaster wrote:

puma713 wrote:Like the title says.

Dark Eldar FAQ wrote:
Q: Does every psyker in a unit of psykers, which are in
range of the Crucible of Malediction when it is opened,
have to take a Leadership test? (p60)
A: Yes. The notable exceptions to this are units with the
Brotherhood of Psykers special rule. These units just
take a single test, and will loose a single model if
failed.

This raises more questions. Like where/when and how you "loose" the model? Do we loose it like we would an arrow? Fire it from a trebuchet? Or is it implying we need to re-glue the model because it is now loose? And if more than one becomes loose during play, how does that interact with this ruling?

Coffee. Coffee everywhere.

Well played.

At the risk of perpetuating a stereotype, it was Tea in my case...

The above now surpasses Warseer's best effort, which also tickled me immensley

Might as well have read as this:

FAQ:

Can a xenos weapon work properly against Mat Ward's latest power creep army?

Answer: No. Numerous Grey Knight models have invoked the "Mat Ward Wrote Me" Clause in which they receive benefits from being something in one case, but then are not considered that when it comes to negative situations.

I was expecting and amendment to the Court of the Archon to make the new advanced orders into a legal, playable unit. I guess they are happy with releasing 2 completely pointless models though

yakface wrote: The fact is, the guy who is doing the GW FAQs is doing a much, much better job of updating FAQs now then previously and we should be happy about that. Its pretty clear that he's reading and pulling questions from the INAT as we put them out so (regardless of what ruling they go with) that personally makes me happy.

Fair enough, perhaps I should stop dwelling on rules controversies of Christmas Past. The rapidity of FAQ releases is certainly nice.

Gorechild wrote:I was expecting and amendment to the Court of the Archon to make the new advanced orders into a legal, playable unit. I guess they are happy with releasing 2 completely pointless models though

Why is it not a legal playable unit?

So....the anti psyker thing that affects 'units' of Psykers affects all units apart from current FOTM SALES Marines?

IG, Eldar and Tyranid players shake their head in disappointment.

reds8n wrote:Has the WFB orc and goblin one has changed as well ?

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1930217a_Orcs_&_Goblins_Version_1_1.pdf

Not sure, since I'm not on a home computer, but I think so. Certainly, I don't remember the shaman on a spider question from before. The rest seems like touch-ups on questions already answered, though.

yakface wrote:

Gorechild wrote:I was expecting and amendment to the Court of the Archon to make the new advanced orders into a legal, playable unit. I guess they are happy with releasing 2 completely pointless models though

Why is it not a legal playable unit?

Because there's no Sslyth or Lhamaean model and you need at least 1 of each. GW is literally selling half a unit.

Except, as pointed out, the mechanics of the GK "units of psykers" are different from other units of psykers.

Eldar seer councils are all indvidual psykers that use their own powers, but are in a unit. Psyker Battle Squads explicitly are treated as one massive psyker for things like Perils of the Warp. Grey Knight Squads are explicitly not treated as one giant psyker, but likewise not a collection of indvidual psykers.

Different rules result in different rulings.

yakface wrote:
And as for other people legitimately angry about the Crucible of Malediction ruling...first of all, the Brotherhood of Pysker rule was quite explicit that the whole point of it was to resolve stuff like this against a SINGLE model in the unit and not to lose the entire unit, so I don't know why people think the ruling was made simply to prop up grey knights...allowing one race (Dark Eldar) to have a tool to completely obliterate squads that goes against what their own special rules say would have been a terrible ruling, even if it would weaken the Grey Knights a tiny bit.

It could also slow a DE vs GK game down immensely as that is potentially a lot of LD tests to roll and keep track of.

So if all Pyskers are "Pyskers" now.. does that mean that the culexus assassin gets an assault 25 weapon if he's within range of 3 8 man pysker units? They didnt have the pysker special rule before but apparently they are indeed pyskers as per the DE FAQ

Kirasu wrote:So if all Pyskers are "Pyskers" now.. does that mean that the culexus assassin gets an assault 25 weapon if he's within range of 3 8 man pysker units? They didnt have the pysker special rule before but apparently they are indeed pyskers as per the DE FAQ

Until they actually say otherwise, I'd say yes.

lord_blackfang wrote:

yakface wrote:

Gorechild wrote:I was expecting and amendment to the Court of the Archon to make the new advanced orders into a legal, playable unit. I guess they are happy with releasing 2 completely pointless models though

Why is it not a legal playable unit?

Because there's no Sslyth or Lhamaean model and you need at least 1 of each. GW is literally selling half a unit.

As Blackfang said, a court consists of something like 1-5 Ur-ghul's 1-2 Lhamaean 1-3 Sslyth and 1-3 Medusae. So without one of each model you can't make a legal unit.

WarOne wrote:

Kirasu wrote:So if all Pyskers are "Pyskers" now.. does that mean that the culexus assassin gets an assault 25 weapon if he's within range of 3 8 man pysker units? They didnt have the pysker special rule before but apparently they are indeed pyskers as per the DE FAQ

Until they actually say otherwise, I'd say yes.

except for the part where it says they are treated as a single psyker.....