ork codex faq & errata

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.

**reds8n**

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/warhammer_40000_orks_en.pdf#utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=40kORKFAQNov19&utm_content=40kORKFAQNov19

Q: Do Evil Sunz models that have a set value when they
Advance – like a Deffkilla Wartrike using the Fuel-mixa Grot
ability or a Deffkopta, due to Turbo-boost – also benefit from the
Red Ones Go Fasta kultur?
A: Yes, add 7" to their Move characteristic for that
Advance move in these cases.

**Kdash**

Page 101 – Kustom Boosta-blastas, Grot blasta
Change the Strength of this weapon to ‘3’

Well, that buff lasted long

Q: The Battlewagon’s Mobile Fortress ability says the
Battlewagon ‘ignores the penalty for moving and firing Heavy
weapons’, and its Open-topped ability says that ‘restrictions or
modifiers that apply to this model also apply to its passengers’.
Does that mean that an embarked unit also ignores the penalty
for firing Heavy weapons if the Battlewagon has moved?
A: No.

I like this clarification.

**Bitharne**

Kdash wrote:
Page 101 – Kustom Boosta-blastas, Grot blasta
Change the Strength of this weapon to ‘3’

Well, that buff lasted long

Haha...I was wondering if all blastas were S4 when I saw that. Woulda been hilarious

In spirit I’m keeping it though as my Kustom mad doc uses a grot for his pistol

**Mandragola**

Slight mistake with the scrapjet. It has two twin big shootas, only one of which is fired by a grot, but the FAQ treats it as if it’s only got one.

I think freebootas make for arguably a better shooty army than bad moons, if you want mek gunz. They can trigger the +1 to hit for other units if they kill something, and that seems pretty cool.

**Kdash**

And, finally, rip to all those planning on hiding Tankbustas in a battlewagon and shooting twice with them in 1 turn.

Q: Do Stratagems used on a Transport affect units embarked
within that transport? For example, if I use More Dakka! on
a Battlewagon, do any units embarked inside benefit from it?
In addition, can you use Stratagems on units embarked within
a transport (e.g. can you use Showin’ Off on a Bad Moons
Infantry unit embarked within a Battlewagon)?
A: No to both.

**lord_blackfang**

Pretty good FAQ. Looks like they're actually trying this time.

**the_scotsman**

Kdash wrote:
And, finally, rip to all those planning on hiding Tankbustas in a battlewagon and shooting twice with them in 1 turn.

Q: Do Stratagems used on a Transport affect units embarked
within that transport? For example, if I use More Dakka! on
a Battlewagon, do any units embarked inside benefit from it?
In addition, can you use Stratagems on units embarked within
a transport (e.g. can you use Showin’ Off on a Bad Moons
Infantry unit embarked within a Battlewagon)?
A: No to both.

Yeah if you want super crazy tankbustas, you gotta deep strike them and they're truly a suicide unit.

**tneva82**

Or hide them behind grot screen that got buffed

**zend**

Apparently in the grim darkness of the 40th millennium, there are no methods of long range communication so your soldiers can receive orders while embarked in a transport that's on the other side of the battlefield.

This is why I don't buy GW books. The stratagems clearly state a unit that has shot/can shoot. Open topped transports do not prevent passengers from shooting. They knew about their gakky "nothing can effect units embarked in transport" rule when writing this codex, so why the feth did they word the stratagems that way and expect people not to use them as written? Why can they just hire competent rules writers?

**Grimskul**

Nice! They even tried to make the Proppa Killy Warlord Trait into something that isn't just an inferior version of Might is Right.

Also, glad they clarified that in Loot It!, you can't go past a 2+ save, so none of the weird RAW shenanigans regarding somehow having 2+ invuln. save meganobz anymore.

**Fictional**

zend wrote:
Apparently in the grim darkness of the 40th millennium, there are no methods of long range communication so your soldiers can receive orders while embarked in a transport that's on the other side of the battlefield.

Sure there are, you just cant hear the orders over the sound of the engines and desperate praying/chanting/silent reflection.

**Grimtuff**

zend wrote:
Apparently in the grim darkness of the 40th millennium, there are no methods of long range communication so your soldiers can receive orders while embarked in a transport that's on the other side of the battlefield.

That's because they're in the 42nd millennium. Tech's been lost brah.

**Kdash**

Wait, i can't see the Ork FAQ on the community FAQ page.

Also, worth noting that all the Loyalist marine FAQs have been updated.

**CthuluIsSpy**

Kdash wrote:
Wait, i can't see the Ork FAQ on the community FAQ page.

Also, worth noting that all the Loyalist marine FAQs have been updated.

Their site is buggy.
Either hit F5, or sort it by A to Z or Z to A.

**insaniak**

That's... a lot of errata.

**Hulksmash**

insaniak wrote:
That's... a lot of errata.

10 items is a lot of errata? Huh....

**insaniak**

For a $70 book? Yes, it's a lot of errata. One or two errors sneaking through is understandable. 10 is somebody not paying attention.

**tneva82**

Hulksmash wrote:
insaniak wrote:
That's... a lot of errata.

10 items is a lot of errata? Huh....

Well it kinda is especially when there's lots of changes to how things work. Meganobz went from benefitting from loot it(even if one didn't use it for 2++) to not being at all, grot screen changed overall what kind of weapons it's good vs and what not etc(it went lot better vs stuff like avenger cannon or leviathan's guns, worse vs bolters etc).

**Ghaz**

insaniak wrote:
For a $70 book? Yes, it's a lot of errata. One or two errors sneaking through is understandable. 10 is somebody not paying attention.

They sort of answered this on the Facebook post announcing the FAQ today:

REDACTED wrote:Why dont they just get it right 1st time instead of releasing a codex that id wrong?

Warhammer 40,000 wrote:A good question and one that is worth answering!

So, we have an internal rules team and around 20 playtesters. Lets say, they all play 3 games a week with a new Codex. That's around 40 games being played a week. So, perhaps 100-120 games get played in the playtest period. They catch LOADs of things that need tweaking, and discuss points values, how rules work together, the way they interact with various enemies etc.

Release day rolls round. We sell (picking a number out of the air) 50,000 copies of Codex: Orks. That means 50,000 games being played on day one. Maybe another 50,000 games being played day 2.

In 2 days, the community has played 100,000 games or more, against every possible enemy, and every possible scenario. They spot a few things our playtesters didn't (it's a vast and complex game after all!) and pass it on to us at 40kfaq@gwplc.com.

Our rules writers, eager to make sure everyone's gaming experience is as good as it can be, take those questions and produce these FAQ documents.

For our rules team and playtesters to get through 100,000 games, they would need to play 3 games a week for almost 5 years. We reckoned you guys didn't want to wait that long, you see!

**Tyranid Horde**

All those errors must be because of all that plugging that they'd release the codex during orktober

**insaniak**

Ghaz wrote:
insaniak wrote:
For a $70 book? Yes, it's a lot of errata. One or two errors sneaking through is understandable. 10 is somebody not paying attention.

They sort of answered this on the Facebook post announcing the FAQ today:

REDACTED wrote:Why dont they just get it right 1st time instead of releasing a codex that id wrong?

Warhammer 40,000 wrote:A good question and one that is worth answering!

So, we have an internal rules team and around 20 playtesters. Lets say, they all play 3 games a week with a new Codex. That's around 40 games being played a week. So, perhaps 100-120 games get played in the playtest period. They catch LOADs of things that need tweaking, and discuss points values, how rules work together, the way they interact with various enemies etc.

Release day rolls round. We sell (picking a number out of the air) 50,000 copies of Codex: Orks. That means 50,000 games being played on day one. Maybe another 50,000 games being played day 2.

In 2 days, the community has played 100,000 games or more, against every possible enemy, and every possible scenario. They spot a few things our playtesters didn't (it's a vast and complex game after all!) and pass it on to us at 40kfaq@gwplc.com.

Our rules writers, eager to make sure everyone's gaming experience is as good as it can be, take those questions and produce these FAQ documents.

For our rules team and playtesters to get through 100,000 games, they would need to play 3 games a week for almost 5 years. We reckoned you guys didn't want to wait that long, you see!

That's fair. I expect it would have taken at least 70000 games for someone to notice that the banner bearer couldn't take one of the wargear options that comes standard on the model...

**lord_blackfang**

Many players catch most of those errors on the first read-through though, before any games are even played. A lot of the poor rules wording makes it obvious that GW don't really know how their own rules work, nor do they encounter common situations on the table during playtesting.

For example, the original Grot Shield rule makes it obvious that either nobody at GW ever tried firing an anti-tank weapon at grot-screened Orks, or they did and none of them read the rule properly to realize that each lascannon shot kills D6 grots per RAW.

Frankly, I consider it a huge leap forward that the rules developers even understood some of the rules issues sent to them.

**Ghaz**

They also answer some questions where the answer is obvious for the majority of players (e.g., the question if Mek Guns and Killa Kans benefit from a Clan Kultur).

**Charax**

GW believe that every single person who buys a codex plays a game with that codex on the same day?

**insaniak**

Charax wrote:
GW believe that every single person who buys a codex plays a game with that codex on the same day?

And that playing games is the only way to spot errors in the rules, apparently.

**Binabik15**

So the playtest period is actually 3 weeks with 20 guys? Well, I guess we can be happy that it's not just Jervis losing to someone else a couple of times.

**Carnikang**

The Big FAQ also had a few items changing how some units enter the battlefield. Sprocysts, Meiotic Spores, and the -squints- "Shiftshroud of Alanssair" now let you deploy on the board anywhere when deploying (9inches away from enemies of course).

What is the Shiftshroud for? Rangers?

**insaniak**

Binabik15 wrote:
So the playtest period is actually 3 weeks with 20 guys? Well, I guess we can be happy that it's not just Jervis losing to someone else a couple of times.

I would very strongly suspect that those numbers were just pulled out of the air to illustrate the point, rather than being representative of actual process.

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

It's not something that should be accepted. I have a certain predilection towards finding errors in things - there are books in the 40K RPG line that you would not believe how they looked before I got to them, and that's not bragging - so I am wired to find these sorts of errors (hell I just proofread an entire book about start-up companies!), but this sort of stuff isn't as hard as some people are making it out to be.

insaniak wrote:
For a $70 book? Yes, it's a lot of errata. One or two errors sneaking through is understandable. 10 is a day ending in Y for a GW publication.

That's better.

And I'm honestly not surprised there's more.

**Da Butcha**

I suppose that a lot of the playtesters may not get the Codex in the final form, but in the form of printed pages or a text-heavy/format-light pdf or something. So it might be harder to spot some of these errors if they aren't in a final, edited format.

That's the only excuse I can think of for not noticing that the Goff-specific Warlord trait was markedly worse than the generic one on the facing page.