Warhammer {{{40k}}} Quest - Blackstone Fortress

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.

**Lord Damocles**

spiralingcadaver wrote:
Thanks, GW.

What that sort of stuff makes me wonder is, are those errors because...

...of last-minute changes that didn't get caught?
...multiple people made assumptions or skimmed?
...GW sometimes doesn't bother to test their content?

White Dwarf containing garbled nonsense? Imagine my shock.

**Not Online!!!**

Lord Damocles wrote:
spiralingcadaver wrote:
Thanks, GW.

What that sort of stuff makes me wonder is, are those errors because...

...of last-minute changes that didn't get caught?
...multiple people made assumptions or skimmed?
...GW sometimes doesn't bother to test their content?

White Dwarf containing garbled nonsense? Imagine my shock.

Wait so Erm...
.

wtf did i just read!?!
Accessability vs working tight ruleset?
Therefore working tight ruleset equal bad for accessability?!?

Wtf.

**spiralingcadaver**

Yeah... it's like GW never got to the 21st century w/ gaming. There's, uh, a lot of hubris and assumptions in there. Then again, I guess that explains how the rules got where they are.

Also, Damocles, 100% in agreement with you on FAQ vs. errata. FAQ entries should be nearly completely unnecessary for seasoned players, and have little to no impact on the game: they are correcting a lack of clarity. Errata are correcting mechanical failings. They're just plain different categories of fixing play experience.

**Yodhrin**

JJ articles - the Kirby Preambles of game design.

**H.B.M.C.**

spiralingcadaver wrote:
Also, Damocles, 100% in agreement with you on FAQ vs. errata. FAQ entries should be nearly completely unnecessary for seasoned players, and have little to no impact on the game: they are correcting a lack of clarity. Errata are correcting mechanical failings. They're just plain different categories of fixing play experience.

The problem is that GW often uses FAQs not to correct things but to outright change things. Worse, they sometimes use fluff justifications to explain away rules issues.

I will never forget the 3.5 Chaos Codex FAQ that stated that some Khornate rule (it's been a while) couldn't make you fly faster as "being angry doesn't make a Jetpack faster", ignoring the fact that the rule (Daemonic Flight) was not specifically jump packs but also covered big wings.

Drove me up the wall.

**kendoka**

Everybody can make mistakes but I hate the absence of FAQ & Errata (see https://yaktribe.games/community/threads/collected-errors-typos-in-the-book-of-judgement.9166/) and GW high command stopping their rules writers from admitting poor editing and actual errors.

Painfully obvious in the Necromunda debacle, where obvious errors are explained as being correct (using lame excuses).

**AndrewGPaul**

spiralingcadaver wrote:
See Tavis75's comments: one of the weapon stat lines isn't usable, and a scenario special rule precludes a result on the scenario table.

As HBMC says, the one available page tells me nothing. Do you and Tavis75 have advance access to the magazine?

**Tavis75**

AndrewGPaul wrote:
spiralingcadaver wrote:
See Tavis75's comments: one of the weapon stat lines isn't usable, and a scenario special rule precludes a result on the scenario table.

As HBMC says, the one available page tells me nothing. Do you and Tavis75 have advance access to the magazine?

Yep, my subscription copy arrived on Monday.

The event table one seems pretty clear-cut as an error (seems they copied the standard event table and just added a new scenario specific event in the middle without checking whether the rest of the events made sense).

I may be missing something with the Ogryn but he has a "Shield Bash" attack, and being a retinue character has a list of actions he can make in various circumstances, which never include the shield bash. Had a look through the rules in case there was some special case where he would use it and couldn't see anything, but it's possible I missed something.

**Not Online!!!**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
spiralingcadaver wrote:
Also, Damocles, 100% in agreement with you on FAQ vs. errata. FAQ entries should be nearly completely unnecessary for seasoned players, and have little to no impact on the game: they are correcting a lack of clarity. Errata are correcting mechanical failings. They're just plain different categories of fixing play experience.
The problem is that GW often uses FAQs not to correct things but to outright change things. Worse, they sometimes use fluff justifications to explain away rules issues.

I will never forget the 3.5 Chaos Codex FAQ that stated that some Khornate rule (it's been a while) couldn't make you fly faster as "being angry doesn't make a Jetpack faster", ignoring the fact that the rule (Daemonic Flight) was not specifically jump packs but also covered big wings.

Drove me up the wall.

Wasn't there also the infamous common sense ruling on Dogde in reaction to psy. As in use the background?

And then the psy power sometimes had multiple depictions... Like, Am i now allowed to dodge or not?
Or am i only alowed to dodge the bile of a nurgle sorcerer but not the lightning gascloud from slaanesh/ tzeentchian sorcerer?

Not Online!! sometimes is an old boy...

**spiralingcadaver**

Ugh, really? Man, in a game with hive mind dinosaur bugs and missile machine guns and barbarian mushroom men and magic and space travel is the high seas of literal space hell that's been around for, what, a third of a century, with any number of retcons, they'll really pull "interpret it based on common sense lore"?

**Not Online!!!**

spiralingcadaver wrote:
Ugh, really? Man, in a game with hive mind dinosaur bugs and missile machine guns and barbarian mushroom men and magic and space travel is the high seas of literal space hell that's been around for, what, a third of a century, with any number of retcons, they'll really pull "interpret it based on common sense lore"?

Granted that is old.
As in first 3 editions old.
The only thing that has changed is the Hybris of GW.
As in it increased

**parakuribo**

I've just emailed White Dwarf. May take a few days, but I'll copy the response here.

**OrkPlayer137**

Does the new White Dwarf have cards for the Ogryns or just printed rules inside? I usually prefer the electronic version, but might buy the print one if it has cards this time.

**Mr_Rose**

Printed rules. The only card on it is the download code for Gotrek & Felix in Total Warhammer II

**OrkPlayer137**

Mr_Rose wrote:
Printed rules. The only card on it is the download code for Gotrek & Felix in Total Warhammer II

Thanks! Very helpful.

**parakuribo**

I tip my hat to Kevin Outlaw on BoardGame Geek:

I've fired them the question about shield bash. So hopefully they will address that at some point.

EDIT: They have confirmed it's a misprint (never!) and that shield slam is just an extra weapon action that unlocks when he inspires, so you can use it in the same way as the battle maul weapon action. I'm still trying to establish whether he's supposed to go up to 3 actions as well, as other retinue characters get an extra action when they inspire.

EDIT 2: And they say that he stays at 2 actions. However, I'm not convinced. They used the argument that ogryns are slow on the uptake, ignoring the fact that the other ogryn does get an extra action when inspiring.

EDIT- Got an email about them. You only get Discovery cards from the event table that expedition. You can thank me later.....

**parakuribo**

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/09/29/coming-soon-grym-watchers-abominable-intelligence-sporty-saurus-and-an-action-figure/

Basically:
1.New cards that ratchet the difficulty(you'll need the extra boxes).
2.The minis that came with BSF and Escalation.

Personally, I expect both boxes to sell out, but only to be used as proxies for Renegades and cultists.....

**Voss**

Whaat? GW is doing a sensible thing and releasing the renegades AND new cultists in stand alone boxes?

Inconceivable!

Though I note the Servants box is just half of the renegades and includes 1 marine, 1 psyker and 2 of the random stuff (ur-ghul, bots, beasts, dark mech)

Still... one of those and two of the newer cultists' box may well be a purchase.

**Kanluwen**

I'm sure there's absolutely no reason at all why the Servants box contains what it does...

Spoiler:

Blackstone Fortress contained doubles of that frame.

**Voss**

Kanluwen wrote:

Blackstone Fortress contained doubles of that frame.

Yes? I'm aware.
I just would've liked both frames in the stand alone box as well.

**BrookM**

Would've rather loved to see the heroes of Escalation go on sale on their own, but alas.

**MajorWesJanson**

BrookM wrote:
Would've rather loved to see the heroes of Escalation go on sale on their own, but alas.

They did, at Barnes and Noble US, with a bunch of extra cardboard and cards. Lacked the 40k rules datasheets though. Great price even, paid $38 for the Combat Arena box with the 5 models.

https://m.barnesandnoble.com/w/toys-games-warhammer-40000-combat-arena/33834794

**Crimson**

Will these mean that they remove the silly limits on how many of these units you can include in 40K?

**Voss**

Crimson wrote:
Will these mean that they remove the silly limits on how many of these units you can include in 40K?

What limits? Just use them as chaos cultists. Only problematic model is the guy with grenade launcher.

**Crimson**

Voss wrote:
Crimson wrote:
Will these mean that they remove the silly limits on how many of these units you can include in 40K?

What limits? Just use them as chaos cultists. Only problematic model is the guy with grenade launcher.

They have their own datasheets and those have limits on how many units you can take. The rules allow only taking the amount that comes in one BSF box.

**Voss**

I'm aware. But they aren't really distinguishable from cultists, so use them as cultists. All the problems go away.

**Lord Damocles**

I like how the Community article says

All of these models also have rules for Warhammer 40,000 and would make a great addition to a Chaos army...

But you can't make a non-Auxiliary detachment because there are no HQs; and you can't just add the units to another Chaos detachment
The Ur-Ghuls can't be used in Chaos armies
The Spindle Drones are only half a unit
The Beastmen are only half a unit
The Negavolts are only half a unit

Sure, you can buy two boxes, but then you still can't make an actual detachment.

**Tastyfish**

Assuming the datasheets in this box aren't updated to allow larger units in 40K

**Not Online!!!**

parakuribo wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/09/29/coming-soon-grym-watchers-abominable-intelligence-sporty-saurus-and-an-action-figure/

Basically:
1.New cards that ratchet the difficulty(you'll need the extra boxes).
2.The minis that came with BSF and Escalation.

Personally, I expect both boxes to sell out, but only to be used as proxies for Renegades and cultists.....

Wait they listened? When is the September wd out?

**Aeneades**

September White Dwarf is already out.