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.

P.80 Wrecked: Used the terminology of disembarked.

p.80 Explodes: Does not use the term disembarked, but also does not state that it does not happen.

In the immediately following paragraph, it refers to the passengers from a destroyed vehicle (which includes wrecked *and* explodes) as being 'now disembarked'.

If the passengers were embarked, and are 'now disembarked', they had to disembark.

Is it me or do the Chaos Icon rules in the chaos daemons FAQ and csm FAQ make no damn sense?

The question is 'do they scatter if landing next to one of the icons' and the answer says

"yes, if the icon says it works for all friendly models' so basically YES it does scatter even if the icon says it works for all friendly models.

And then it has another line about it also scattering if the icon says it only work for certain models from it's respective codex.

lol or did I just misread something? Cuz that just made no sense to me they could've just said that they wont work for each other.

It's almost certainly written to be compatible with new icons in the impending new CSM codex. The current answer is basically a longwinded way of saying "yes, they scatter", for the current codex, but leaves open the possibility that we're going to see icons with different rules soon.

A question. Because of the new Faq's, will Njal's Vengeful Tornado Affect flyers now? I think not.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

Phydox wrote:
Wait till Kharn sees what the faq did to Gorechild.

There were no actual changes.

Yup. Though I hear Astorath and Dante both dropped by to visit him and they all had a a grand old time burning GW designers in effigy! And some not in effigy.

 Pyriel- wrote:

They didn't. An archon joining a Codex: Eldar Harlequin unit with Eldrad is still a Codex: Eldar unit and can be fortuned.

My bad, I was to optimistic after reading things like nobz not being characters etc to think common sense would remove the ridicule of immortal 2++/++ archon bombs.

Q: Do Dark Eldar allies count as Eldar for the Farseer psychic
powers Fortune and Guide? (p28)
A: No.

 Slayer le boucher wrote:

 Pyriel- wrote:

They didn't. An archon joining a Codex: Eldar Harlequin unit with Eldrad is still a Codex: Eldar unit and can be fortuned.

My bad, I was to optimistic after reading things like nobz not being characters etc to think common sense would remove the ridicule of immortal 2++/++ archon bombs.

Q: Do Dark Eldar allies count as Eldar for the Farseer psychic
powers Fortune and Guide? (p28)
A: No.

I don't believe that quote covers the mechanic that makes the combo work. You cast the powers on a squad like harlies chosen from the ELDAR codex and simply have the archon join it. IIRC, the IC rules make him part of the squad exactly as if he were a full time member. The faq is addressing casting it on a DE squad which is superfically similar but different in the key important aspect.

Just found out veil no longer is 2d6" to see them.... I don't know why, but this makes me so happy. Now they just have a 4+ cover save in the open, which I'm more than happy to FRFSRF to death.

Had a game where my IG literally couldn't do a thing to them, since I had to get within 12", and even then, it was no guarantee that most of my unit could see them. I'm going to have fun getting revenge for this one...

I wonder if they'll come out with those little paragraph replacement stickies that they used to come out with in white dwarf issues for FAQs. The main rulebook certainly needs them to be even remotely useful now. Pick up games are going to be a nightmare unless everyone's got an open internet connection and three FAQs open.

DE are good... Huskblade is just mandatory now, in every Archon, wich means Orb will have to make an apearance...

Orkz got some nerfing, why in hell a rockit atached to a stick have AP - instead of AP3? The boom is even better (S10 instead of 8).

Dark Angels gained the most absurd dread in years: Venerable Dreads with modern profiles, for +25 points o.O

Chaos got a lot of nice stuff too, GW is clearysaying "we prefer to see marine players winning, preferably the players from the last codex"

Anyway, everything looks well worked, and very balanced (as we can expect from GW).

 daedalus-templarius wrote:
So for "Look out sir", it seems like you always have to allocate wounds out to models before you take any saves, is this correct?

Your unit has all the same saves and a character in the lead; you now have to LOS all wounds out before taking any saves at all?

This seems like it would significantly bog down the game.

I don't expect people will actually play LOS on a unit with all the same saves differently than the book says. They had an elegant solution the first time and it doesn't change any possible result.

 Sephyr wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

Phydox wrote:
Wait till Kharn sees what the faq did to Gorechild.

There were no actual changes.

Yup. Though I hear Astorath and Dante both dropped by to visit him and they all had a a grand old time burning GW designers in effigy! And some not in effigy.

Dante was already there from my POV. Astorath definitely got the shaft this round though. Everyone agreed that Astorath had a unique power weapon. Now at least he can take out terminators. If only he actually had eternal warrior as well ....

rogueeyes wrote:

 Sephyr wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

Phydox wrote:
Wait till Kharn sees what the faq did to Gorechild.

There were no actual changes.

Yup. Though I hear Astorath and Dante both dropped by to visit him and they all had a a grand old time burning GW designers in effigy! And some not in effigy.

Dante was already there from my POV. Astorath definitely got the shaft this round though. Everyone agreed that Astorath had a unique power weapon. Now at least he can take out terminators. If only he actually had eternal warrior as well ....

No one takes out terminators in close combat in sixth anyway. Just use your cheap, numerous, ap2 shooting that every codex even vaguely competitive has access too instead.

Dunno if this has been said yet:

Tau FAQ wrote:
Page 30 – Armoury, Disruption Pod.
Change the last sentence to read “A vehicle with a disruption
pod has the Shrouded special rule against any weapons firing
from more than 12" away.”

3+ cover save on Tau Vehicles! 2+ if moving flat out! woohoo!

gigasnail wrote:

 ironicsilence wrote:

 Hazardx987 wrote:

Q: If a unit disembarks from a destroyed vehicle during the enemy
turn, can it Charge in the Assault phase of its own turn? (p80)
A: No, unless the vehicle in question was an Assault Vehicle.

CRAP!!!

For some reason I don't think a squad of CSM or Marines would just sit there and not charge the Monstrous Creature/Walker/Wych Squad/Boyz Mob/... that blew up their transport, do you?

this rule doesnt make any sense to me. Is having your transport blown up thus forcing you to disembark really any different the not having the transport blown up and deciding the disembark? Either way I should be able to assault on the next turn

i agree, this makes no sense. at all.

It make a lot of sense... Player turns are a mechanic used by the rules to clarify the action who is happening at the same time. The "first player" just represent a guy with a slight advantage in terms of time and reaction.

That rule dont mean your marines will "sit there and not charge the enemy" it means the unit is busy trying to get out of the wreck/crater alive. In the next Player Turn, they will act as if they had just disembarked, because in the "real time", that is exactly what they where doying...

So, tell me how it dont make sense that, if you had just disembarked from your shine Rhino you could not assault, but if your Rhino was exploded/wrecked, them you can assault after disembarking...

About the "Assault Vehicle", it is weird to assault from a destroyed Land Raider and not from a destroyed Rhino, but it start to make sense when you think about open topped vehicles (like ork trukks).

I see Kaldor Draigo took a nerfhammer to the face...

except that's exactly what it means, you are sitting there, twiddling your thumbs, for your next turn, and then your opponent's next shooting phase. getting a transport trashed takes the unit it carried out of the fight for too long. assault already has been nerfed to hell and back; it didn't need this additional kick in the jimmy.

if they wanted this mechanic in the game, have it apply if you fail the pinning test when the truck blows or something. this is 40k, we're talking about post-humans in power armor that want to carve your face off with a chainsaw, fungus warriors, and evil space fairies on hoverboards. realism or logic have no place in a discussion of 40k rules.

Onlinemph wrote:
I see Kaldor Draigo took a nerfhammer to the face...

How is that?

Ok wtf, really? they removed the S10 vs Psykers and Daemons as well? wtf GW. 275 fething points.

gigasnail wrote:
except that's exactly what it means, you are sitting there, twiddling your thumbs, for your next turn, and then your opponent's next shooting phase. getting a transport trashed takes the unit it carried out of the fight for too long. assault already has been nerfed to hell and back; it didn't need this additional kick in the jimmy.

Well, yeah. That's what was going to happen if their transport WASN'T destroyed. Why should they get a benefit from having the vehicle they were in blown up? That makes no sense at all. Throwing your transports into the line of fire, hoping to have them blown up so you can assault next turn? That's so gamey and stupid it doesn't bare thinking about.

dunno what the hell i was thinking, this FAQ wouldn't change the length a squad has to wait to assault in 6th. looks like i fail at kindergarten math. sorry folks, nothing to see here ~

 Kaldor wrote:

gigasnail wrote:
except that's exactly what it means, you are sitting there, twiddling your thumbs, for your next turn, and then your opponent's next shooting phase. getting a transport trashed takes the unit it carried out of the fight for too long. assault already has been nerfed to hell and back; it didn't need this additional kick in the jimmy.

Well, yeah. That's what was going to happen if their transport WASN'T destroyed. Why should they get a benefit from having the vehicle they were in blown up? That makes no sense at all. Throwing your transports into the line of fire, hoping to have them blown up so you can assault next turn? That's so gamey and stupid it doesn't bare thinking about.

Taking transports for assault troops at all is actively harmful now. I think people are trying to find any way around having the majority of assault armies in this game becoming useless in sixth. It seems like with every codex, edition, and FAQ GW just puts another nail in the coffin of the assault phase. I don't blame people for trying to be gamey to get around it, assault armies make up a significant portion of the games playerbase, GW is basically just telling people to put their armies in the dumpster with rules like these.

It's also not gamey since it's explicitly what the rules said to do before this FAQ. If they didn't want people "gaming the rules" they would have hired a designer that is even vaguely competent. They didn't they hired Matt Ward.

yeah, it was more this trend i am annoyed about.

i dunno how i misread the FAQ though, seriously. /shameface

At least assault vehicles ignore the restrictions. So good news! When your battlewagon blows up and kills half your mob, you can still assault!

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
At least assault vehicles ignore the restrictions. So good news! When your battlewagon blows up and kills half your mob, you can still assault!

It really only hurts rhinos. Every other transport commonly used by assault units is open topped or an assault vehicle. Why blood angels even exist anymore as a codex is beyond me. Grey knights and then sixth, someone really hates redmarines.

Wow. Incubi Klaives are AP2

LOL I was the only person to say nial has the stave in his hand but everyone said its unsual weapon (which is true at the time)

Cool that GW ruled it as i have thought

Personal favorite highlights of the Eldar update.

Q. If a Farseer joins a unit that includes a Warlock with the Embolden
power, does he get to re-roll failed Psychic tests? (p26)
A. Yes – the presence of the Warlock obviously helps the
Farseer to concentrate.

Q: Do Haywire weapons, vibro-cannons and D-weapons (D-cannon,
wraithcannons, etc.) affect fortifications in the same way they do
vehicles? (var)
A: Yes.

Page 31 – Howling Banshees, Banshee Mask.
Replace this entry with the following:
Banshee Mask: In the first round of an assault, a model wearing
a Banshee mask has Initiative 10, even if it charged through
difficult terrain. Furthermore, defensive grenades cannot be
used against a charging model with a Banshee Mask.

The most fun nerf i see is the one to Ghazgull "profet of waaagh!!" SR...

Last edition it was a incredible ace in the last turn, and added a nice sense of "final blow" to big hordes. Now it will be used as fast as possible, maybe at the third turn, just for that auto 6 on the run...

Apparently, another warboss will have to declare a waaagh!! in that last turn...

 Blackmoor wrote:

And a couple of other notes:
To the person who said that purifiers are better than paladins has never played that match-up before. I have played against 2 purifier armies at tournaments in the last 3 weeks with my Draigowing and Paladins win every time. It is all about 2 wounds with a 2+ save and it does not matter if you can spread the wounds around or not. They just can't do any damage while the paladins psycannons are killing a lot of Purifiers.

Of course Paladins will beat Purifiers when you pit the two armies against each other, but that doesn't make Paladins the better army. In most other matchups, Purifiers have a lot more versatility that makes them overall much more viable. A single good matchup does not make a list better than another.

As far as demolisher cannons, why are you getting shot with them? They have a 24” range so just stay 30” away. When then come close hit them with all of your psycannons with prescience and you should be able to take them out or at least stop them from shooting.

This strategy works until you go against BA Vindicators, at which point, they're the ones out-ranging you.

Also, you underestimate the value of the stormbolter. Sure, against the big scary targets, it's not particularly valuable, but you need it to help move off the basic infantry that often comes in numbers too large for just Psycannons alone to remove. On a unit that relies on its massive, steady torrent of fire to move units off the table to make up for its terrible mobility, losing models to attrition is a big deal.

I think many of the most used Leman Russ variants took a big hit simply looosing Lumbering Behemoth and gaining Heavy instead. Before they could move 6"+D6" and 6" in the shooting phase, now it's just always 6". Before they could move and fire ordnance and another weapon at full BS and then snap fire the rest, meaning that they could also fire a plasma sponson on the move or two when stationary. Now they can never use heavy flamers or plasma cannons when equipped with a battle cannon or demolisher cannon. The only variants that got a buff is the Executioner (plasma) and Exterminator (autocannon).
I am really glad that I painted up an Executioner turret for my Russ with plasma sponsons, or otherwise it would be completely useless.