Max_Dammit Posted December 27, 2008 Share Posted December 27, 2008 mine is English, but i'm dutch not Spanish, as far as i know there is a SW dex in Spanish, and in French and in German, they all translate everything on tv so most people are not that good at English Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1821322 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted December 27, 2008 Share Posted December 27, 2008 Yeah theres a spanish codex.... strangely enough theres even a whole thing for space wolves on the GW spanish website. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1821395 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vassakov Posted December 27, 2008 Share Posted December 27, 2008 We appear to have won on Dakka. On the Blood Claws headstrong issue, I think that you guys are pretty much correct on this and we will most likely reverse this ruling in the next iteration of the FAQ. Also, you are quite right. Assault and Charge are different things. An assault is a close combat being fought, and a charge is a special type of movement that allows an assualt to occur. However, because of GW's inconsistant wording a degree of flexibility and interpretation is needed on these issues. To be honest, I really can't be bothered to argue with someone who is going to try and rules lawyer an old codex just to eke out some pitiful advantage, despite the reading of the rules as they stand. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1821481 Share on other sites More sharing options...
roosterpfunk69 Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 corrrect me if I am wrong.. but isn't this a BIG DEAL because the guys at Dakka Dakka write the official FAQ. (One of the guy s at my store pointed this out to me.) If this is true.... this will become official. My uess is that GW doesn't make a new FAQ before the release of the new Codex. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1822776 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WG Vrox Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 If this is true.... this will become official Since it appears the INDY GT circuit will be using these rules, I don't know how more offical they can get other than GW posting them on their FAQ. WG Vrox Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1822804 Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 Since it appears the INDY GT circuit will be using these rules, I don't know how more offical they can get other than GW posting them on their FAQ. well the official GW faq says that hvy weapon on a termi WGBL is ok and legal , while at the same time some GT bann it . being legal for a GT doesnt automaticlly make a ruling an official one for all tournaments . Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1822806 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobman Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 I skimmed through this and pardon me for being blunt but, if this isn't official does it matter? Except of course someone said it will be a precursor to the official. And as an aside anyone got a 'reasonable' way to explain that BC get +2 on counter? Other than the true grit argument which didn't work for me. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1822994 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 True grit has nothing to do with it man. Counter states they get the charge bonus.... beserk charge replaces that bonus with double the normal bonus. It probly wouldnt except that counter states that its "exactly" as if they had assaulted. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823004 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfLordLars Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 And as an aside anyone got a 'reasonable' way to explain that BC get +2 on counter? Other than the true grit argument which didn't work for me. Two answers. Simple Answer - The rules say that counter gives you +1 as though you had charged. BC's get +2 attacks rather than +1 on the charge. Clear and simple. Explained (fluff) answer - Blood Claws are eager for battle, to put it mildly. When they charge, they throw themselves at the enemy, fight tooth and nail, and are out to prove their valor. When they see the enemy charge at them, I would imagine it would get their blood up just the same (if they are ready for it, thus the leadership test), and they would throw themselves at those who would charge them. Either way, they fight as hard and furiously as they can. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823007 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 Anyone notice that Crimson Devil decided to through his to cents in over there and it got the thread shut down? *sighs* Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823014 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfLordLars Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 .. and that surprises you? Nice to see Dr. Thunder and I do share similar opinions on some issues though. :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823028 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 You know I dont even think for some people that its a RAW issue. Im sure there are people out there who are honestly confused... after all counter attack is given us by the FAQ and it never worked like this before without wargear. However I think some people on the circuit, or in groups wholl use this might be as tired of seeing "UbeRRR L337!!!111One!!" Bloodclaw lists as I am of hearing about the stupidity of orkish cover save troopers. That being the case theyre making a push to stop what they see as an abuse of an otherwise reasonable rule. I dont want to be punished for over use of a single sided tactic so I argue against it, but still I think I can see where they are coming from. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823043 Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPetersson Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 Anyone notice that Crimson Devil decided to through his to cents in over there and it got the thread shut down? *sighs* He obviously didn't bother reading the bit about it not being a place to argue... Oh well, I really don't understand how it can be so difficult to accept that somethings are both RAW and RAI whether you like it or not... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823210 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venter_Of_Russ Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 As best I can tell, the only way to reasonably attempt to deny blood claws +2 attacks on the counter charge is to state that it's against the spirit of the rules. Trying to say that it's written as them not getting the bonus is petty; Games Workshop has shown a tendency for as long as I can remember to use synonyms and word changes. They have never been incredibly clear in their classifications. I've called games workshop's questions line and asked two separate agents there; both advised me that not only to berserk charge and counter attack stack, but the wolf pelt also stacks. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823368 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Devil Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 Anyone notice that Crimson Devil decided to through his to cents in over there and it got the thread shut down? *sighs* He obviously didn't bother reading the bit about it not being a place to argue... Oh well, I really don't understand how it can be so difficult to accept that somethings are both RAW and RAI whether you like it or not... Wow, lots of love for me here isn't there. After some consideration I decided to re-engage with this thread. If for no other reason than it seems to upset Wolflordlars. :) @ Grey Mage: Care to point to the locked thread? After reading your post I went and looked and it was still open. To your points about "counts as". If they wrote Counter Attack "Counts as a charge move" then I would agree with you. "Exactly" and "Count as" are not the same thing. @ LPetersson: Yes I did miss that. I don't think the +2 on counter is RAW or RAI. I think it is an oversight. Lets be clear. I accept I could be wrong on this. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823466 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venter_Of_Russ Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 Does the GW rules calrification hotline have no authority? Because they gave me a very clear answer when I asked them... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823477 Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Betrayed_Spacewolf Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 call 8 more times and recorde your answers Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823483 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Devil Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 Read the quote in my sig. If GW's rules hotline was ever consistent they would have more authority. Call twice and you'll get three different answers. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823486 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfLordLars Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 Wow, lots of love for me here isn't there. After some consideration I decided to re-engage with this thread. If for no other reason than it seems to upset Wolflordlars. :) As long as it keeps folks talking. Just because I dont agree with someone (or in your case, like to give you crap on a regular basis) doesnt mean I dont like them. :P Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823489 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 Anyone notice that Crimson Devil decided to through his to cents in over there and it got the thread shut down? *sighs* He obviously didn't bother reading the bit about it not being a place to argue... Oh well, I really don't understand how it can be so difficult to accept that somethings are both RAW and RAI whether you like it or not... Wow, lots of love for me here isn't there. After some consideration I decided to re-engage with this thread. If for no other reason than it seems to upset Wolflordlars. ;) @ Grey Mage: Care to point to the locked thread? After reading your post I went and looked and it was still open. To your points about "counts as". If they wrote Counter Attack "Counts as a charge move" then I would agree with you. "Exactly" and "Count as" are not the same thing. @ LPetersson: Yes I did miss that. I don't think the +2 on counter is RAW or RAI. I think it is an oversight. Lets be clear. I accept I could be wrong on this. That would be the thread that is linked to in the very first post of this thread CD. @ Ventor, unfortuneatly they are just some guys who have alot of time to read the rules ande sit around on their hands.... so no, they have no official word. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1823576 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobman Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 I don't really want to get into this again but people say no +2 as it says +1 in the rulebook, then I point to the 'exactly as charged' part and voila 2 different opinions. I wondered if anyone had a way of persuading someone else other than just saying I'm right your wrong. Remember most gamers jump at the chance to say they're wrong! bobman out Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1824250 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarl Kjaran Coldheart Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 what i thought was funny was my buddy who playes chaos actually stopped me when i told him the rule, and deadpan said: anybody who cant figure that out themselves is a moron. wolf lord kieran Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1824455 Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 I don't really want to get into this again but people say no +2 as it says +1 in the rulebook, then I point to the 'exactly as charged' part and voila 2 different opinions. I wondered if anyone had a way of persuading someone else other than just saying I'm right your wrong. Remember most gamers jump at the chance to say they're wrong! bobman out the problem is that the sw codex is old . it will never work well 2 ed later . the second problem is that GW told people that codex >rule book . what is ok with stuff designed for 5th ed , but when you get something like SW [or the INQ armies] you end up with +2A on counter attack by RAW etc. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1824746 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Dammit Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 the problem is that the sw codex is old . it will never work well 2 ed later . the second problem is that GW told people that codex >rule book . what is ok with stuff designed for 5th ed , but when you get something like SW [or the INQ armies] you end up with +2A on counter attack by RAW etc. But in the end there isnt a thing in our dex that cant be fixed by a good FAQ, but the dont do a good one, so we use our old dex the best way we can, even if it means going RAW. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1824748 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grantyr Greymantle Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 I assume there is a plan to send this out when finished as a proposed official FAQ - maybe even grease the interminably stuck GW publishing wheels? If they're too busy to do it on their own, maybe they'd like to borrow the hard work and insight of those here in the Fang until they finally release our Codex (whenever that might be)? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/155704-warhammer-40k-inat-faq-version-20-released/page/3/#findComment-1832381 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.