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.

 Ghaz wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Up until the 7th edition book, Deathwing could be an army. Yeah they're a company, but a strikeforce could be sent in to deal with traitors and hunt the Fallen.

Fluffwise, the Deathwing don't do the hunting. That's the task of the Ravenwing, to find and flush out the Fallen for the Deathwing to then either capture or kill. If anything, the rules finally match the fluff.

Except the Deathwing are used as shock troops that hunt the Fallen. Their whole purpose is to teleport in and disrupt the enemy, exactly what Turn 1 and Turn 2 Deepstrike used to allow them to do.

Sure, the Ravenwing flushed them out, but then again Grav guns are rare and those are everywhere on the tabletop. Are you really going to applaud GW for matching the rules to the lore?

So you're saying that the rules shouldn't be influenced by the fluff at all, or even contradict it? Should a humble lasgun be more powerful in the game than a bolter, because fluffwise the bolter is a superior weapon

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Up until the 7th edition book, Deathwing could be an army. Yeah they're a company, but a strikeforce could be sent in to deal with traitors and hunt the Fallen.

Fluffwise, the Deathwing don't do the hunting. That's the task of the Ravenwing, to find and flush out the Fallen for the Deathwing to then either capture or kill. If anything, the rules finally match the fluff.

Except the Deathwing are used as shock troops that hunt the Fallen. Their whole purpose is to teleport in and disrupt the enemy, exactly what Turn 1 and Turn 2 Deepstrike used to allow them to do.

Sure, the Ravenwing flushed them out, but then again Grav guns are rare and those are everywhere on the tabletop. Are you really going to applaud GW for matching the rules to the lore?

So if someone played dark eldar they are a raiding party and not really war fighters. So if I was playing dark eldar amd said I want to play a raiding party you have to chase me to the other side of the board or I get away with your stuff, you would agree? I do want to play dark eldar and dark eldar are raiders. It is cheating but its what I want.

Having no models on the board means you lose, if you place no models on the board for 1 full turn you lose. You can house rule it so you can not put any models down til you want but the offical rules are clear place atleast 1 model down or you lose.

@Ted Nugent - Look, I get your opinion on the matter isn't going to change, but that wasn't the point. You asked for a reason why it was changed and I gave you one.

You evidently feel passionately about this, and I don't, so I'm going to let this conversation drop here.

You can still run a pure Deathwing army without auto-losing T1 using Unbound.

Yes, Unbound I know. That evil things. The point is you can still legally field that all Terminator Deathwing army if you want, you just can't Deep Strike T1.

 Ghaz wrote:
So you're saying that the rules shouldn't be influenced by the fluff at all, or even contradict it? Should a humble lasgun be more powerful in the game than a bolter, because fluffwise the bolter is a superior weapon

I'm saying you shouldn't use the reasoning that the rules now match the fluff, because the rules have never matched the fluff, it's always been inconsistent.

Change the Deathwing rule and reason it however you want, but don't use that excuse. Otherwise, Ghaz should be an absolute beast and not the poor sad sack he is now. Same for Azrael, Asmodai, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

OgreChubbs wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Up until the 7th edition book, Deathwing could be an army. Yeah they're a company, but a strikeforce could be sent in to deal with traitors and hunt the Fallen.

Fluffwise, the Deathwing don't do the hunting. That's the task of the Ravenwing, to find and flush out the Fallen for the Deathwing to then either capture or kill. If anything, the rules finally match the fluff.

Except the Deathwing are used as shock troops that hunt the Fallen. Their whole purpose is to teleport in and disrupt the enemy, exactly what Turn 1 and Turn 2 Deepstrike used to allow them to do.

Sure, the Ravenwing flushed them out, but then again Grav guns are rare and those are everywhere on the tabletop. Are you really going to applaud GW for matching the rules to the lore?

So if someone played dark eldar they are a raiding party and not really war fighters. So if I was playing dark eldar amd said I want to play a raiding party you have to chase me to the other side of the board or I get away with your stuff, you would agree? I do want to play dark eldar and dark eldar are raiders. It is cheating but its what I want.

Having no models on the board means you lose, if you place no models on the board for 1 full turn you lose. You can house rule it so you can not put any models down til you want but the offical rules are clear place atleast 1 model down or you lose.

Your point? I don't care if it's the official rules, it's a bad decision because it flies in the face of the lore and it nerfs an already weak army. Pure Deathwing weren't beating up Eldar in tournaments, this ruling only hurts casual players.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
You can still run a pure Deathwing army without auto-losing T1 using Unbound.

Yes, Unbound I know. That evil things. The point is you can still legally field that all Terminator Deathwing army if you want, you just can't Deep Strike T1.

You don't need to do this. Put Dreads in Drop Pods. Drop Pod Assault still comes down T1. You don't get tabled. Bound, Deathwing only.

 KhorneontheCobb wrote:
I find it extremely weird that they said Belial's deep strike ability does not confer to other units because "an IC's abilities does not confer to a unit unless specifically stated otherwise"

Belial's ability literally says "belial and his unit does not scatter when arriving from deepstrike reserve"

Like- are they changing his rule so that he has to deepstrike solo, or is it just lazy writing where they didn't even bother to look at his rule and gave their standard answer?

I suspect that Belial and his unit still get the no-scatter deep strike since it specifies "and his unit" under Belial's ability. However, he cannot confer the Deep Strike rule onto a unit without that rule (so no deep striking Tactical Marines, for example). This makes sense, really, as otherwise that rule would be worthless unless you DS Belial solo (which is a really dumb idea).

 ZergSmasher wrote:

 KhorneontheCobb wrote:
I find it extremely weird that they said Belial's deep strike ability does not confer to other units because "an IC's abilities does not confer to a unit unless specifically stated otherwise"

Belial's ability literally says "belial and his unit does not scatter when arriving from deepstrike reserve"

Like- are they changing his rule so that he has to deepstrike solo, or is it just lazy writing where they didn't even bother to look at his rule and gave their standard answer?

I suspect that Belial and his unit still get the no-scatter deep strike since it specifies "and his unit" under Belial's ability. However, he cannot confer the Deep Strike rule onto a unit without that rule (so no deep striking Tactical Marines, for example). This makes sense, really, as otherwise that rule would be worthless unless you DS Belial solo (which is a really dumb idea).

Don't put it past them, the "Hungry for Blood" rule KDK has was FAQ'd and STILL does nothing.

Not the right place for this argument, I realize, but the Hungry for Blood Rule allows them to assault on any turn they arrive. Including turn 1. Feel free to not play it that way if you choose, but the rule is functional. That is all.

What's Hungry for Blood?

It's the formation special rule for a kahrydbis + 20 berzerkers. Says they can assault the turn the disembark. There was a huge thread about that when it came out

I can imagine what that was about........and how long it went on for.

It was covered HERE (so no need to restart it here) and didn't really go on that long.

 Ghaz wrote:
It was covered HERE (so no need to restart it here) and didn't really go on that long.

There was a thread just about the fist too : here.

 Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote:
Not the right place for this argument, I realize, but the Hungry for Blood Rule allows them to assault on any turn they arrive. Including turn 1. Feel free to not play it that way if you choose, but the rule is functional. That is all.

which doesn't override the restriction of entering from deepstrike/reserves, as turn has nothing to do with assaults being denied.

RAI, obviously they meant to be allowed to assault. RAW, they're missing permission to assault after deepstriking.

edit: But yes, not the right place for this discussion.

Can anyone summarize the new witchfire powers FAQ for me? Am I correct in reading that if a witchefire power doesn't have a shooting profile, then the power hits automatically? I'm thinking of the Technomancy witchfires that strip hullpoints off vehicles and how great they would be if they were maledictions and not witchfires...

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Can anyone summarize the new witchfire powers FAQ for me? Am I correct in reading that if a witchefire power doesn't have a shooting profile, then the power hits automatically? I'm thinking of the Technomancy witchfires that strip hullpoints off vehicles and how great they would be if they were maledictions and not witchfires...

that's correct. But also note they cannot be used as snap shots.

Just a heads up: per the GW Facebook page, Blood Angels will be the next FAQ.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Just a heads up: per the GW Facebook page, Blood Angels will be the next FAQ.

Doesn't surprise me, IoM bias as usual

I reckon after BA it will be Craftworld Eldar.

 Frozocrone wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Just a heads up: per the GW Facebook page, Blood Angels will be the next FAQ.

Doesn't surprise me, IoM bias as usual

I reckon after BA it will be Craftworld Eldar.

They appear to be getting all the Space Marines factions out of the way at once. My guess would be Grey Knights after Blood Angels.

Oh yeah, forgot about Grey Knights...

Might do AM after GK, just because IoM.

 Frozocrone wrote:
Oh yeah, forgot about Grey Knights...

Funny how that happens these days. How soon we forget!

Makes sense though, they are handling all of the SM type issues with ICs and formations. It will be interesting to see if they try any balancing. My guess is NO.

 Frozocrone wrote:
Oh yeah, forgot about Grey Knights...

Might do AM after GK, just because IoM.

Well, it kind of makes sense to do all IoM at the same time rather than splitting it up. If I was in scheduling the FAQs, I would do all IoM, then Chaos, then start with the Xenos races.

Is there anything they could FAQ (not Errata) that would make GK viable again? Or do we have to wait for whatever supplement is going to give them their Formation Detachment?

 Frozocrone wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Just a heads up: per the GW Facebook page, Blood Angels will be the next FAQ.

Doesn't surprise me, IoM bias as usual

I reckon after BA it will be Craftworld Eldar.

Hmm.


What will we see first? A new CSM codex or their FAQ?

For those who haven't seen it, the AoS FAQ is now live on games-workshop.com. Hopefully some of the earlier 40k FAQs will be revised and live soon.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Just a heads up: per the GW Facebook page, Blood Angels will be the next FAQ.

Doesn't surprise me, IoM bias as usual

I reckon after BA it will be Craftworld Eldar.

Hmm.


What will we see first? A new CSM codex or their FAQ?

Considering the recent leak said CSM codex next year with the new edition, probably the FAQ.

Blood Angels is up. It's a quick read.

They errata'd BA scouts as well as the dreadnoughts.

link: https://www.facebook.com/1575682476085719/photos/pcb.1640089679644998/1640088706311762/?type=3&theater