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.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/03/03/new-gathering-storm-ii-faq/

It’s fair to say that the recent Gathering Storm II: Fracture of Biel-Tan shook things up a fair bit.

As well as some pretty seismic progressions in the Warhammer 40,000 narrative, it also gave players of Eldar armies of all types a fundamentally different way to use their armies.

Since the book’s release, with such major changes to the way that three whole armies can be used, we’ve had a few questions sent in, and our studio rules team have the answers for you in a new FAQ covering some of the more unusual rules interactions from the Strength from Death rule in particular. Here you go:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Gathering_Storm_II_v1.0.pdf

We’d also like to say a big thanks to the AdeptiCon tournament team* and all of you out there in Facebook land who helped us compile a question list so we could get an FAQ out to you quickly.

(*They also run a great event, you should go.)

TRANSPORTS
Q: How do the models/units with mixed Factions work? Can
units that share at least one Faction start the game embarked on
a Transport?
A: Ynnari models have two Factions (except in the
case of Yvraine, the Visarch and the Yncarne, who only
have one). You must consider both of their Factions to
determine their levels of Alliance and which Transports
they may be embarked on at the beginning of the
game. For example, an Eldar/Ynnari unit shares the
same Factions as other Eldar/Ynnari, but is of different
Factions from (though Battle Brothers with) Dark
Eldar/Ynnari and Harlequins/Ynnari. An Eldar/Ynnari
unit can therefore only begin the game embarked if it is
embarked on an Eldar/Ynnari vehicle.
Note that Yvraine and the Visarch can begin the game
embarked on Ynnari vehicles (regardless of those
vehicles’ other Factions).


That is a big one. Basically it seems like it does not matter if your models all gain the Ynnari faction, they still retain their old faction and cannot embark unto transports that do not have both faction from what I understand.

What a crazy, crazy rule...

That shafts more than a few things. So no sticking wraithguard in raiders :(

looks like DE are now relegated to Archons.

Edit: it's almost like they thought 'how can we make people use Dark Eldar and Harlequin models' and then dropped the ball/spliff and went.... 'naaaah, screw them'.

:(


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Out of interest, are people usually playing Soulburst as once per player or per game turn?

The only reason I'm not a fan is it kinda goes against the way they handle their other game. Granted 40k doesn't have KEYWORDS but in AoS if your a Ironjaw or a Savage Orruk you're still an Orruk. Or if you're a Tzeentch Daemon or a Khorne Mortal you're still Chaos (that's 3 factions there by the way).

Basically what I thought, other than the vehicle thing, DE are just the red headed step child of Eldar now :/

After playing Eldar, DE, Corsairs and Harlequins DE is a 2 on a scale of 10 (eldar being the top, Corsairs 9 and Harlequins an 7).

Im glad this was out in a timely manor.

zerosignal wrote:
That shafts more than a few things. So no sticking wraithguard in raiders :(

looks like DE are now relegated to Archons.

Edit: it's almost like they thought 'how can we make people use Dark Eldar and Harlequin models' and then dropped the ball/spliff and went.... 'naaaah, screw them'.

:(


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Out of interest, are people usually playing Soulburst as once per player or per game turn?

Harlequins are much better than everyone gives them credit for. They are for sure a solid Mid tier if not higher Mid tier.

Edit: Once per Player turn Literally on page 17 it says "Whenever a rule refers to "a turn" it always means "players turn' unless it specifically refers to 'a game turn'.

Edit2: Spelling

Hear that sound? That's the sound of every Ynnari player throwing away their Harlequin and Dark Eldar at once and going back to pure Eldar.
Very strange ruling, but it prevents the crazy combo army Ynnari was. Now it's... sort of nothing? I doubt anyone will use them now, it's not worth losing PFP/battle focus.

 Mymearan wrote:
Hear that sound? That's the sound of every Ynnari player throwing away their Harlequin and Dark Eldar at once and going back to pure Eldar.
Very strange ruling, but it prevents the crazy combo army Ynnari was. Now it's... sort of nothing? I doubt anyone will use them now, it's not worth losing PFP/battle focus.

Oh... Bikes+psychic+Wk's+WWP D-scythes are still a huge thing.

Sure 6 Units of Scatbikes are not that strong.... until they all shoot you 2 times in 1 turn, with a WK shooting 2x then they shoot you in your turn too.... Had a game (I took Melee WK) and I had a turn 1 charge with it b.c x2 movement.

Im still taking my 3 units of harlequins (2 troupes in Starweavers) and a unit of Skyweaver.

They literally used the exact same justification I gave when the question on transports was brought up. What that means is they really need to get transports out there from or armies that don't have them (Cult Mech and Skitarii).

They need to address where Corsairs fall on the allied matrix with Ynnari. It stands to reason that they would be Battle-Brothers, but it isn't concrete.

No one seemed to notice that you can now disembark out of a wrecked vehicle and soulburst assault, and they cleared up (to me) that if you kill a unit, and get a soul burst, you can assault into another unit. All of that is a big deal.

zerosignal wrote:
That shafts more than a few things. So no sticking wraithguard in raiders :(

looks like DE are now relegated to Archons.

Edit: it's almost like they thought 'how can we make people use Dark Eldar and Harlequin models' and then dropped the ball/spliff and went.... 'naaaah, screw them'.

:(


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Out of interest, are people usually playing Soulburst as once per player or per game turn?

Properly boned Dark Eldar is far superior to them being relevant to merely be taxis to make Craftworld Eldar even stronger (Archon still, I admit).

 Prodigalson wrote:
No one seemed to notice that you can now disembark out of a wrecked vehicle and soulburst assault, and they cleared up (to me) that if you kill a unit, and get a soul burst, you can assault into another unit. All of that is a big deal.

Q: If a unit is embarked on a Transport, and the Transport
is wrecked, is the disembarking unit allowed to perform a
Soulburst action?
A: Yes (as long as they pass their Pinning test).


That is technically to clarify that your unit is on the table when the model is effectively killed and as such can soulburst because it's within 7 inches of the removed transport. Now Soulburst allows for 3 actions, charge, shoot or move. If you came out of a non-assault transport, I do not think it gives you permission to charge if you normally would not be able to.


Q: If one of my units destroys a unit with a shooting attack, can
I then use a Soulburst to charge a different unit with that unit?
A: No – follow the normal rules for eligible targets of
the charge.


That clarification here gives weight to my explanation above. It's basically telling you to follow normal rules for charging when it comes to shooting at a unit. It should be safe to say that you follow all normal rules for charging in that case you should do so for all cases.

 Prodigalson wrote:
No one seemed to notice that you can now disembark out of a wrecked vehicle and soulburst assault, and they cleared up (to me) that if you kill a unit, and get a soul burst, you can assault into another unit. All of that is a big deal.

My local played this, it was heavily debated online.



?!?!?! QUESTION

Can my Int 4 unit without assault nades charge (a normal charge) kill the unit, then soulburst charge into cover (becoming Int1) now swing again?

Voldrak wrote:

 Prodigalson wrote:
No one seemed to notice that you can now disembark out of a wrecked vehicle and soulburst assault, and they cleared up (to me) that if you kill a unit, and get a soul burst, you can assault into another unit. All of that is a big deal.

Q: If a unit is embarked on a Transport, and the Transport
is wrecked, is the disembarking unit allowed to perform a
Soulburst action?
A: Yes (as long as they pass their Pinning test).


That is technically to clarify that your unit is on the table when the model is effectively killed and as such can soulburst because it's within 7 inches of the removed transport. Now Soulburst allows for 3 actions, charge, shoot or move. If you came out of a non-assault transport, I do not think it gives you permission to charge if you normally would not be able to.


Q: If one of my units destroys a unit with a shooting attack, can
I then use a Soulburst to charge a different unit with that unit?
A: No – follow the normal rules for eligible targets of
the charge.


That clarification here gives weight to my explanation above. It's basically telling you to follow normal rules for charging when it comes to shooting at a unit. It should be safe to say that you follow all normal rules for charging in that case you should do so for all cases.

Further more.

Q: If a unit is embarked on a Transport, and the Transport
explodes, are the survivors from that unit allowed to perform a
Soulburst action?
A: No.
The previous question was allowing the unit to soul burst in general after they disembark, this answer tells us they can't soul burst from the destruction of their own vehicle.

The FAQ basically says that if the Tranports I wrecked, you get to Soulburst off it because you have to disembark before "finally" considering the vehicle destroyed. So the unit was on the board to benefit.
SInce Explodes makes you remove the vehicle first, the FAQ clarified that it does not provide a Soulburst.
Makes perfect sense (for RAW anyway)

 Hulksmash wrote:
The only reason I'm not a fan is it kinda goes against the way they handle their other game. Granted 40k doesn't have KEYWORDS but in AoS if your a Ironjaw or a Savage Orruk you're still an Orruk. Or if you're a Tzeentch Daemon or a Khorne Mortal you're still Chaos (that's 3 factions there by the way).

Yes and no. There are lots of battalions that use multiple keywords. TZEENTCH and MORTAL don't necessarily jive with TZEENTCH and ARCANITE as one example.

Like mentioned above - the ruling is good in that it keeps armies from just being taxis.

zerosignal wrote:
That shafts more than a few things. So no sticking wraithguard in raiders :(

looks like DE are now relegated to Archons.

Edit: it's almost like they thought 'how can we make people use Dark Eldar and Harlequin models' and then dropped the ball/spliff and went.... 'naaaah, screw them'.

:(


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Out of interest, are people usually playing Soulburst as once per player or per game turn?

So, in the end... this is really Codex Eldar buffs... with special guest Archon (making Wraith Guard extremely over-powered), and Suicide Khymaere. Got it. Hey, its how I have been using it.

 Galef wrote:
The FAQ basically says that if the Tranports I wrecked, you get to Soulburst off it because you have to disembark before "finally" considering the vehicle destroyed. So the unit was on the board to benefit.
SInce Explodes makes you remove the vehicle first, the FAQ clarified that it does not provide a Soulburst.
Makes perfect sense (for RAW anyway)

That's not true at all, nowhere in the FAQ does it say that. The FAQ actually reads that the unit that disembarks can still qualify for further soul bursts upon a successful pinning check. It doesn't say you get to soul burst from the wreck. The issue stems from whoever wrote the question, whom wrote it in as unclear a way as any GW rules designer. Reread it in an objective manner, it isn't answering the question "Does the wreck trigger a soul burst upon the disembarking occupants?" it simply tells you the unit can qualify for soul burst only after a successful pinning check. You have to remember multiple SB actions can trigger from multiple directions even simultaneously at any point which is why the questions need to be written painfuly specific or they aren't all that useful.

 Prodigalson wrote:
No one seemed to notice that you can now disembark out of a wrecked vehicle and soulburst assault, and they cleared up (to me) that if you kill a unit, and get a soul burst, you can assault into another unit. All of that is a big deal.

The FAQ specifically disallows you from charging when you're under a condition that prevents you from doing so. Like, for example, disembarking from a wrecked vehicle. So yes, you can Soulburst on disembark, but not the Charge option, unless you had the option to Charge for some other reason (open topped, etc.)

Q: Using a Soulburst, can a unit make a charge when they
would normally be prohibited from doing so (e.g. after arriving
from Deep Strike, after Running, after Regrouping, etc.)?
A: No (with the exception that a unit that is locked in
combat but no longer has any models in base contact
with an enemy model may do so).

As for the Kill > Soulburst > Assault, I assume you're talking about HtH, since the FAQ also specifically prevents you from charging a target other than the one(s) you shot.

Q: If one of my units destroys a unit with a shooting attack, can
I then use a Soulburst to charge a different unit with that unit?
A: No – follow the normal rules for eligible targets of
the charge.

Seems more to deny crazy combos, rather than focus on fluff logic. Much in the same way as deleting the option for pink horrors to have access to daemonology with their popping ability. It's kinda the same style of decision.

Not sure why this is bad for DE, if anything its good for people that purely play DE. Now warriors can do something after their transport is wrecked, Incubi can get into a new combat to stay safe from shooting, Reavers get to move more, Heat Lance Scourges can run away or shoot again after taking out a vehicle. etc.

PfP is decent late game, but it takes 3 turns to become worthwhile, and by that time SfD would have paid for itself.

Its not BAD for DE... but once again... Ynnari book, competitively speaking, is Codex Eldar 2.0, oh yeah... with a couple new friends.

It literally just makes Wraithguard much better thanks to their new BFF, while making everything good either better, or a lateral move.

DE on their own are buffed by SfD, but not so much as to become seriously competitive. In fact, I bet you well meaning Ynnari players will just look up one day and realize they kept dropping the DE/Harli parts of their army, until they were suddenly Eldar players. :-p

Sharing the transports at least allowed a few fun, alternative army builds.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Its not BAD for DE... but once again... Ynnari book, competitively speaking, is Codex Eldar 2.0, oh yeah... with a couple new friends.

It literally just makes Wraithguard much better thanks to their new BFF, while making everything good either better, or a lateral move.

DE on their own are buffed by SfD, but not so much as to become seriously competitive. In fact, I bet you well meaning Ynnari players will just look up one day and realize they kept dropping the DE/Harli parts of their army, until they were suddenly Eldar players. :-p

Sharing the transports at least allowed a few fun, alternative army builds.

I guess I'm just a little annoyed that most people seem to be focussing on and judging the book by what it does for Eldar, the strongest faction, rather than what it does for the other weaker factions. The Long War for example spent the whole time joking about how OP it made Eldar, and barely mentioned DE or Harlequins.
I don't own any Eldar at all, I only have DE and a handful of Harlequins, so is my army now OP? I doubt it.
Now people complain that the FAQ made the book pointless because now they can't put Eldar in Raiders. Well, I don't have any Eldar and I have no problem getting access to Raiders (except for my Harlequin characters, and there are easy work arounds for that anyway). So is it pointless for me the the other DE players out there? Obviously not.

Go ahead and make your points about why you think this isn't a good ruling, but I don't think you can really write off the whole book just because it doesn't improve a top-tier army by as much as you wanted.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm obviously not annoyed with you or aiming this at you.

Colonel Cabbage wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Its not BAD for DE... but once again... Ynnari book, competitively speaking, is Codex Eldar 2.0, oh yeah... with a couple new friends.

It literally just makes Wraithguard much better thanks to their new BFF, while making everything good either better, or a lateral move.

DE on their own are buffed by SfD, but not so much as to become seriously competitive. In fact, I bet you well meaning Ynnari players will just look up one day and realize they kept dropping the DE/Harli parts of their army, until they were suddenly Eldar players. :-p

Sharing the transports at least allowed a few fun, alternative army builds.

I guess I'm just a little annoyed that most people seem to be focussing on and judging the book by what it does for Eldar, the strongest faction, rather than what it does for the other weaker factions. The Long War for example spent the whole time joking about how OP it made Eldar, and barely mentioned DE or Harlequins.
I don't own any Eldar at all, I only have DE and a handful of Harlequins, so is my army now OP? I doubt it.
Now people complain that the FAQ made the book pointless because now they can't put Eldar in Raiders. Well, I don't have any Eldar and I have no problem getting access to Raiders (except for my Harlequin characters, and there are easy work arounds for that anyway). So is it pointless for me the the other DE players out there? Obviously not.

Go ahead and make your points about why you think this isn't a good ruling, but I don't think you can really write off the whole book just because it doesn't improve a top-tier army by as much as you wanted.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm obviously not annoyed with you or aiming this at you.

No insult taken. :-) I knew what you meant.

Incidentally, i'm not complaining Eldar didn't get buffed enough. That was sarcasm, as they're generally too good to begin with, so any buffs to them are comical. No, I meant I am disappointed the book didn't do more for creating a true, new, hybrid army, because I thought it actually helped DE and Harlies see much MORE table time, competitively, by mixing them with the already great Eldar. Personally I wanted an excuse to buy five Raiders, just because they look so cool. :-p

It's strange that people thought that anything but CWE would end up being the most broken option for Ynari. I mean, all three factions got the same benefits, so if you slide the bar up 3 points (arbitrary value) then they all end up in the same spot relative to eachother. Of course CWE are at the top of the heap. For me, I won't touch this book with an infinite length pole, every bit of the mechanics involved in this release are bad for the game and imbalanced and it only serves to piss off opponents and frustrate them. Think of how upsetting overwatch and interceptor still remain for some armies, now consider that this army while it is winning OR LOSING gets multiple free actions that don't exist to other factions of even the same race?

Horrible, horrible rules. "Oh hey tempestus scion player, I just blew up your over priced taurox prime with my criminally undercost warpspider aspect shrine unit, now I get to make a free out of sequence action killing those overpriced scions that disembarked before I make another free assault phase move back out of sight. Oh and if you manage to gain line of sight to them in your turn, I get to make another free 2d6 move wasting your only shooting action, while if you manage to kill anything of mine, I'll get even more free out of sequence actions. Hope this is fun for you!"

The problem with DE is there firepower, Poison and Dark Lances are not good.

As someone with 15K + DE and that has play for years, Poison/Dark Lance combo sounds good on paper, but it just isnt....

Dark weapons lock amount of Shots and has 0 TL, it is over costed as well. Having 15-20 DL's in an army doesnt really do alot, they are terrible as AT. The best use for them is doubling out Tau Suits :/ other size spaming Dis-Cannons is much better (3 shots S5/AP2 vs 1 S8/AP2 with no TL).

DE believe it or not has a hard time with Vehicles, DE uses Haywire for that and DL's if it "has" too.

The Problem with poison is bad AP sv anything that it wounds other than Orcs..... Yes aaginst T5 and higher it still wounds on 4's, but with again Dis-Cannons and even Shredders (if it wasnt for the lack of range) does that better, sense 99% of high toughness things are T5 or T6 a Dis-cannon/Shredder still wounds on 5 that are ap2 or 4's that has shred.

Poison also still hurts T3 with 4's, so nids/tau/ig you still need 4's and you dont break armor ever.

Yes Ynnari is better for DE over all and I would use it for DE, but the sad fact is that DE is one of the worst armies and it is extremely hard to want to play them when you have Eldar.....
Just 1 example, look at Firedragons vs Trueborns, Fire Dragons are 3+ and 5 special weapons for less points than the DE at 5+ armor 4 special weapons... Melta vs Lance.
Now look at the bikes. 16pt DE 5+ armor poison weapon vs 3+ armor with S4/AP5 Rending....

With Khymera spam, Incubi that can charge out of Raiders even when they pop, DE did get a boost.