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.

Tri wrote: in the case of BS6-10 the model will always roll their second roll since the first is discounted hit or miss (unless they are using a TL-Weapon in which case roll to hit as normal). This may not be rerolled for any reason... B6 hits on a 6; B7 hits on a 5+; B8 hits on a 4+; B9 hits on a 3+; B10 hits on a 2+

Yeah, good point, had a bit of a brain fart there lol.

So anyway, I'll remove the part about BS6-10 and start working on it. v1.9 out tonight or tomorrow

180 question ...I remember mentioning something about a critical mass in another thread. Now where did I put my radiation suit?

Keep up the good work Gwar! .

A-P wrote:Keep up the good work Gwar! .

Don't worry I will

Also, the FAQ has been updated to Version One Point Nine, with a whopping one hundred and eighty questions!

Enjoy!

Gwar! wrote:

Tri wrote: in the case of BS6-10 the model will always roll their second roll since the first is discounted hit or miss (unless they are using a TL-Weapon in which case roll to hit as normal). This may not be rerolled for any reason... B6 hits on a 6; B7 hits on a 5+; B8 hits on a 4+; B9 hits on a 3+; B10 hits on a 2+

Yeah, good point, had a bit of a brain fart there lol.

So anyway, I'll remove the part about BS6-10 and start working on it. v1.9 out tonight or tomorrow

A BS6-10 model would still re-roll to hit on a 2+ against the cloak on a hit. Only on a miss is it at the different values.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:A BS6-10 model would still re-roll to hit on a 2+ against the cloak on a hit. Only on a miss is it at the different values.

Aye, so the part about BS6-10 was misplaced. In any case, I have cleared it up and just made it nice and generic

The file isn't showing anything in Preview on Mac OSX, just small icons in the middle of the pages saying "pdf".

Shrubs wrote:The file isn't showing anything in Preview on Mac OSX, just small icons in the middle of the pages saying "pdf".

Have you updated to the latest version? Does it work with another MacOS viewer?

Sorry for asking ya to check, but I don't have a Mac

Gwar! wrote:Have you updated to the latest version?

Yes, and I've tried it on both my machines. So it's not a machine specific problem either

Gwar! wrote: Does it work with another MacOS viewer?

Hm, that defeats the purpose of having a Mac... To explain: it has pdf built into the OS. Anyway, I tried it with another app and got the message "The document “Unofficial Codex Space Wolves FAQ v1.9.pdf” could not be opened. Cannot find cross-reference table.".

I downloaded Acrobat and that is able to show it. However, mac users will usually not use Reader so before officially publicing the faq you might want to think about creating it with another application :(

Shrubs wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Have you updated to the latest version?

Yes, and I've tried it on both my machines. So it's not a machine specific problem either

Gwar! wrote: Does it work with another MacOS viewer?

Hm, that defeats the purpose of having a Mac... To explain: it has pdf built into the OS. Anyway, I tried it with another app and got the message "The document “Unofficial Codex Space Wolves FAQ v1.9.pdf” could not be opened. Cannot find cross-reference table.".

I downloaded Acrobat and that is able to show it. However, mac users will usually not use Reader so before officially publicing the faq you might want to think about creating it with another application :(

Hmm, thanks for the info. I'll look into it, but it wont be rapid, as I do not use Mac (and only occasionally use Ubuntu). Apologies for the inconvenience :(

Gwar! wrote:Hmm, thanks for the info. I'll look into it, but it wont be rapid, as I do not use Mac (and only occasionally use Ubuntu). Apologies for the inconvenience :(

Sorry for the bad news. If you want me to test something, just PM.

I read through it; very thorough work, thanks for the effort.

I tried viewing the FAQ's PDF on my Mac earlier and ran into problems, but I just figured that it was due to some weird Acrobat 9 feature which Preview didn't support. It's really obnoxious that Acrobat 9.2 disables the print-to-PDF option to get rid of whatever that feature might be.

Gwar!, your FAQ is an impressive bit of work. It's enough to make one start betting beers over whether GW's eventual FAQ document breaks the half page mark for admitted errata.

solkan wrote:I tried viewing the FAQ's PDF on my Mac earlier and ran into problems, but I just figured that it was due to some weird Acrobat 9 feature which Preview didn't support. It's really obnoxious that Acrobat 9.2 disables the print-to-PDF option to get rid of whatever that feature might be.

Gwar!, your FAQ is an impressive bit of work. It's enough to make one start betting beers over whether GW's eventual FAQ document breaks the half page mark for admitted errata.

I just hope GW's legal team contact me before a GW faq that has content suspiciously identical to mine pops up

Also, Start using a proper OS

Gwar! wrote:

solkan wrote:I tried viewing the FAQ's PDF on my Mac earlier and ran into problems, but I just figured that it was due to some weird Acrobat 9 feature which Preview didn't support. It's really obnoxious that Acrobat 9.2 disables the print-to-PDF option to get rid of whatever that feature might be.

Gwar!, your FAQ is an impressive bit of work. It's enough to make one start betting beers over whether GW's eventual FAQ document breaks the half page mark for admitted errata.

I just hope GW's legal team contact me before a GW faq that has content suspiciously identical to mine pops up

Also, Start using a proper OS

GW legal team " WAIT you can't write any of that it already been published"
Box packer "So what do i do?"
GW legal team " Well pick the opposite response that way its different"
Box packer " but it'll be the wrong"
GW legal team "How can it be wrong if we say its so?"
Box packer "... fine just so long as my name isn't on it"