WarpSpawn Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Last time I looked, the GT FAQ also said scout bikers cannot turbo for their scout move, whereas pretty sure the rulebook FAQ says they can. The GT FAQ is certainly interesting and provides some guidance but i would not view it as conclusive proof in itself. My opinion on the Stalker Boltgun thing, probably not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmouredWing Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Not conclusive proof, true, but it certainly does give some official guidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praeger Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Actually Armoured that gives no proof or support at all. GT FAQ really is in essence home rules. Unless it has OFFICIAL GW on it then it is to be ignored when talking about official rules. And yes, before its pointed out I do realise that the GT is helped along by GW etc - however the ruling there are NOT official and should not be played as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordekiem Posted November 18, 2008 Share Posted November 18, 2008 Actually Armoured that gives no proof or support at all. GT FAQ really is in essence home rules. Unless it has OFFICIAL GW on it then it is to be ignored when talking about official rules. And yes, before its pointed out I do realise that the GT is helped along by GW etc - however the ruling there are NOT official and should not be played as such. yes it not not official GW FAQ, but alot of people (at least in my area) play by GT rules. So to alot of people this ruling is as good as a FAQ from GW. But I otherwise agree with you it is not a real solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Octavulg Posted November 19, 2008 Share Posted November 19, 2008 The GT FAQ also has the charming tendency to rule one way in one situation and another in the same situation in a different codex. EDIT: Best example? Guardsman medpacks could save plasma wounds. Space marine narthecium couldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmouredWing Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Actually Armoured that gives no proof or support at all. GT FAQ really is in essence home rules. Unless it has OFFICIAL GW on it then it is to be ignored when talking about official rules. And yes, before its pointed out I do realise that the GT is helped along by GW etc - however the ruling there are NOT official and should not be played as such. So there might not be 'rubber stamped' official ruling but it's good enough to me. We use them as a benchmark, rightly or wrongly and after all the GT rules are produced by GW for the GW GT/ToS and we all know that the tournie scene generally drives the game. It's better than spending an afternoon squabbling over, as I said previously, something that's not going to make a massive amount of difference to the game. If you want to nit pick over the wording then use something that is official, DICE IT OFF! Personally I'd have to say that if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then, well, I'll let you try and work out the rest..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadarn Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 I would personally feel that it should be allowed to fire both ways, however the wording is gloriously ambiguous and so it would come down to pre-agreement between friends, or going with the lesser of the two options against folks you don't know out of sportsmanship. Can't wait for the FAQ. What do we reckon, Christmas 2009? ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.