Force Weapons

[Melissia]

I don't see it in the latest FAQs, boreas.

 

DH force weapons will strip the enemy of all remaining wounds rather than apply instant death. So they're still fully and utterly awesome. All you have to do is make ONE wound and they will one-shot a monstrous creature. So give them a good psychic power and a bolt pistol to go along with the force weapon, and you're golden.

[boreas]

Nids FAQ:

 

http://uk.games-workshop.com/news/errata/a...yranids_FAQ.pdf

 

It's the first paragraph: Tyranids within Synapse range as described above (inculding the Synapse creature itself) are not affected by the Instant Death rule.

 

Phil

[Melissia]

Nids FAQ:

 

http://uk.games-workshop.com/news/errata/a...yranids_FAQ.pdf

 

It's the first paragraph: Tyranids within Synapse range as described above (inculding the Synapse creature itself) are not affected by the Instant Death rule.

 

Phil

DH force weapons as described in the codex do not use the instant death rule. Codex superscedes the rulebook,in this case, and there is no faq taht updates the DH force weapon to instant death.

[boreas]

Ah, now I understand, you meant with DH/WH force weapons, not force weapons in general... Yeah, I tend to play with newer rulesets (ig, my forceweapons cause ID as per the Rulebook, my Ass-cannons are Heavy 4 rending, etc...). I find it's less confusing for other players. And quite frankly, I feel that whenever the main rulebook publishes a universal rule, be it for how a weapon works or other USR, it should supercede codecies unless specifically noted (as the seraphim's special Hit and Run is). That's because other rules, both from the main rulebook and other codecies, are usually balanced by taking into account those universal rules. I know DH/WH are getting the shaft from GW on many things (after all, I was one of those who started the "complaints" after the last FAQ publications) and that many players are using little details like that to "get back" at the game in general. Yet I don't feel it's courteous to my opponents to "surprise" him with my "special" force weapon. And I don't feel like explaining before every game how "my" Force Weapon is not like other Force Weapons. That would be met by raised eyebrows and explainig how my codex is outdated seems whiny...

 

Phil

[Melissia]

The main rulebook says this on the subject matter:

 

The psychic powers available to our models are not discussed further here, but are described in detail in the Codexes, where you will find complete rules for individual powers. The following general rules explain how psychic powers are employed. Exceptions to these rules are covered in the Codexes.

(amusing how they use the wrong word for Codices)

 

WH/DH force weapons are said to be a Psychic Power (and if used, you cannot use any other psychic powers, ergo it must also be a psychic opwer of its own) and thus how they work is described in detail in the C:DH/C:WH codex. Also, you can cconsider it an exception to the Force Weapon rule.

[Imperialis_Dominatus]

In the Codex: Inquisition (whenever they get around to it) I'm sure they'll change Force Weapons to what they are in the rulebook. Which will mean that, as most of the things you'd use a FW against are immune to ID (MCs mostly, some characters), a powerfist on some line sarge is gonna be a better option- instagib characters and some anti-MC punch.

 

But for now, you Inquisition types get Force Weapons that are worth it. Hooray!

[boreas]

The main rulebook says this on the subject matter:

 

The psychic powers available to our models are not discussed further here, but are described in detail in the Codexes, where you will find complete rules for individual powers. The following general rules explain how psychic powers are employed. Exceptions to these rules are covered in the Codexes.

(amusing how they use the wrong word for Codices)

 

WH/DH force weapons are said to be a Psychic Power (and if used, you cannot use any other psychic powers, ergo it must also be a psychic opwer of its own) and thus how they work is described in detail in the C:DH/C:WH codex. Also, you can cconsider it an exception to the Force Weapon rule.

 

I understand your use of RAW. Yet, I do not believe in RAW. In the BRB, Force Weapons cause Instant Death. In their Codex, Nids in Synapse are immune to Instant Death. Hence, Nids in Synapse are immune to Force Weapons.

 

Now, can one get around this by using the wording in the DH/WH codecies instead of the universal wording. Is that right by RAW? Yes. Is that right by RAI? I don't, personnally, think so. I won't play it so, as I would perceive it as giving me an unfair advantage and that would ruin part of my pleasure playing the game.

 

I think one of the better things GW could do is publish an official Wargear book. Until then, I'll play it this way: if a piece of wargear is described in the BRB, I use it that way (as per FW). If not, I use what's in my codex (as my Psychic hood not having a 24" range). Even my Ass-cannon, I will use as per codex now that the BRB confirms them to be so (I was using them as Heavy 4 rending since I thought the Heavy 3 was a previous ed. thing).

 

Phil

[Melissia]

The thing is, the BRB also differs in stats for some Sisters units, but it says to use teh codex if the stats in the codex differ-- according to the BRB, there's no difference between a Sister Superior and a Veteran Sister Superior statswise, for example. There's probably also many other stats there that are different from faction to faction in the rulebook, but would you say they intended to update those units, or that it was a mistake they haven't FAQed yet?

 

Yeah, the codices are outdated. So GW should update them. Until then, I say they intended to have the codices supercede the rulebook given that they themselves stated that they do.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Now, can one get around this by using the wording in the DH/WH codecies instead of the universal wording. Is that right by RAW? Yes. Is that right by RAI? I don't, personnally, think so. I won't play it so, as I would perceive it as giving me an unfair advantage and that would ruin part of my pleasure playing the game.

 

Unfair advantage? Remember, you pay at least 145 points to get the damn thing on a decent character, and plus the near-mandatory bodyguard (plus their squad weapon) and a few choice bits of wargear on the Grandmaster (sacred incense, a power weapon for that +1A, maybe a psycannon), you are looking at easily 300 points, maybe 400 points on a single non-scoring squad of Terminators. Yes, they are arguably the sexiest Terminators in 40k (relic blades for Ultras have turned out to be more trouble than they are worth, NFW is still awesome), but you shell out for them. A few plasma cannons or a good charge from a Rending/power weapon unit and they are lost.

 

4th edition wasn't that long ago, it's not like people weren't used to having their Hive Tyrant, Daemon Prince etc force-weaponed by a blinged-out Epistolary. Considering that our army isn't especially powerful to begin with (lets be honest, horde armies like Orks are now insanely efficient for points, and 5th edition has only reinforced the emphasis on lots of Troops), it seems a small concession. He's only I5, most multi-wound targets he'll be assaulting will at least be able to hit back, if not hit ahead of him.

 

I would hardly count using the RAW interpretation for the GM's force weapon ability as 'broken' or 'game-changing' ; in fact, it would be a small step in the direction of bringing the rules into line with the fluff. I mean, Grandmasters are supposed to be pretty much gods among psykers, and warriors without peer. Making their force weapons slightly better than a Chaos Sorceror's or SM Librarians seems fluffy and logical to me. Stacking up our PAGK Troops against Chaos and SM infantry produces the same progression; superior in a few aspects, but expensive by comparison. And don't forget the GM himself isn't immune to ID, so he can be force-weaponed back just as brutally.

 

Anyway, despite our own opinions, GW has made it explicitly clear that in a rule dispute, Codex overrides. GW had the opportunity to grant us the new assault cannon, and nerf our Grandmaster's force weapon (cos no one takes the Inquisitor force weapon), and they passed. Instead, we are stuck with the junk 3rd edition version for the AC (which pushes me towards the plasma cannon+incinerator combo, when I'm not taking the Hellfire-pattern), but our GM can still fry virtually anything in the game. Fair trade in my book.

[boreas]

I understand your opinion. I have a bit more that 2600pts of pure GKs (1 GM, 13 termies, 40 GKs, 3 Dreads, 2 LRs). I know they are overpriced. I know we lack some gear upgrade. Yet, as noted above, I personnally would not feel right about using FWs as per my codex. No matter of fluff can bring this around. Is Tigurius a better psyker than a GW? Or an Inquisitor? That's a matter for another debate. I already noted that by RAW you are right (Force weapons confer an additionnal psychic power(p. 50, 2nd col., 4th par.), exception to psychic power rules are covered in codexes (p. 50, 1st col., 1st par.)). But until they clarify that the =I= weapons are not force weapons but something else (warp-destroying, soul killing?), I'll use the description of FWs as written in the BRB as for me GW wants FWs to be played that way. Just the same, I'll use the new description for thunderhammers. I'll be writing to GW by mid-October (see thread in =I= forum), and that will be one of the things I'll want clarified!

 

Until then, sent as many daemons as possible back to the warp!

 

Phil