A letter to GW.

[Alun]

Alright, having been an avid Grey Knights player for a good few year now, I was bitterly dissapointed with GW recent GT Final house document - yes, the ruling regarding Force Weapons. For you that don't know of the ruling, GW ruled that all Force Weapons inflicted Instant Death, thus, taking one major bonus the Inquisition had over other armies. So, I have written a letter to GW, and fingers crossed will get an answer. This is what I have written:-

 

Hello Mr Joyce,

Having been a customer of Games Workshop ever since the late 80s I have never found a negative reason to write in to your company, up until now. I am not writing to complain or have a go, just to understand a few things regarding the Final GT House Rules document. Namely, rules regarding Daemonhunters/Grey Knights. I am a hopeless romantic when it comes to 40k and enjoy playing as the under dog, which a Daemonhunters army is rumoured to be (a point I may not agree on ).

 

In the House Rules document, all force weapons were deemed to inflict instant death:-

 

45) Does a Force Weapon kill Eternal Warriors outright or does the instant kill rule apply (which Eternal Warriors are immune to)? No, Under 5th edition ALL Force Weapons cause instant death therefore do not kill Eternal Warriors outright.

 

I think you can imagine my disappointment as the Daemonhunters (and WitchHunters) codex state otherwise. I can fully understand if all Force Weapons when making 5th edition were meant to inflict Instant Death, but after GW went on record stating that codex rules trump - well again I'm sure you can imagine my reaction to the ruling (and many other Grey Knight players). I'm sure you'd agree, the fact that our codex rules for force weapons has been different to that of the rule books has been a great relief to us, and gives us a fighting chance - up until now of course.

 

Initially, when I first saw the ruling, I thought to myself, well If GW have taken this away from us, they must have given us some thing in return. I was wrong:-

 

131) For Daemonhunters, what should be the point’s cost of a Land Raider Crusader, and what profile should a Grey Knights Land Raider Crusader use for the Assault Cannon? For the Throne of Skulls Grand Tournament you must take it as ‘Rules as Written’ and use the point’s cost and stats as printed in the Daemonhunters Codex.

 

You can imagine my disappointment. Taking something away because we have to follow the rule book rather than our own codex, then stating for another example that we have to take it as 'rules as written' and follow the rules in our codex.

 

Maybe I wouldn't have said anything, after all this is only a house ruling for a GT. Unfortunately it's still a document from GW which for many players and tournaments in the future will act as a precedent for making rules. I'll be taking part in a tournament over the weekend in Bristol, unfortunately I won't be taking my Grey Knights because the tournament organizers will be using your document as their rules.

 

1. Why when writing the House Rules was it deemed necessary to change a codex specific rule?

 

2. If it was deemed necessary to change a specific codex rule, why wasn't it deemed necessary to change all codex rules which are different to others i.e. assault cannons (and others)?

 

3. What are the chances the ruling will be reversed regarding Daemonhunters and WitchHunters so they can actually use the rules GW wrote for them in their respective codices.

 

4. If indeed a Nemesis Force Weapons rules is meant to be different than it's codex rules, why wasn't it/hasn't it been faq'd in the official Daemonhunters/WitchHunters faq document.

 

I thank you in advance for the time you will take to answer the questions - or pass them on to the right people who will in turn answer the questions.

 

Alun Evans.

 

A Grey Knight player who still has faith in GW.

[Primarch Corax]

Andy Joyce is not the guy you want to contact. He handles events at GW.

[Grand Master Tyrak]

For you that don't know of the ruling, GW ruled that all Force Weapons inflicted Instant Death, thus, taking one major bonus the Inquisition had over other armies.

 

Call it a Nemesis Weapon and you're allowed it. After all, the Eldar Diresword uses exactly the same wording and they get to keep it. ^_^

[Alun]

1. Yes, it is Andy Joce as it states so in the House Ruling + have been told to e-mail him, he may not answer back, but he will send it on to the right people.

 

2. Yes I can call it Nemesis Force Weapon, but that didn't help any Grey Knight players in the GT final and isn't helping Grey Knight players in up-coming tournaments that are using the GT house rules as the basis for their rules. If it was as easy as that Tyrak I wouldn't have bothered. Anyway, a Diresword is not a Force Weapon - bad comparision.

[ArmouredWing]

Initially I was a little dismissive on the first skim over this but when I took the time to actually read this properly I can't help but agree with the points that have been raised. GW really have let themselves down with the contradictory rulings they've made for the ToS final in regards to GK's.

 

However, I do think that clarity is on the way and this will not be a problem for an awful lot longer as long as the GK/DH release is put out in plenty of time for the '09/'10 ToS season.

[Alun]

Well that's the thing. If the house ruling had said all force weapons inflict instant death but they had upgraded things like the assault cannon to have rending, then obviously it would still be dissapointing, but understandable. The fact this didn't happen is why I decided to write in.

[boreas]

Just sad... Athough I think that all Force Weapons in the game should work the same, I also think that all similar wargear should be the same (cost, stat and rulewise). Thus, I wouldn't mind our FW to cause instant death, but I'd want our Land Raiders, storm shields and other gear to be the same.

 

Mind you, if we had some special wargear that would not be a Force Weapon and that would remove a model instantly, it would be ok... But confusing universal rules is not a good idea for all gamers' sake.

 

Now, I'd be happy to relay your letter to someone at GW's developpers team since it's very well written and respectful. I won't give out any email adress, though!

 

However, I do think that clarity is on the way and this will not be a problem for an awful lot longer as long as the GK/DH release is put out in plenty of time for the '09/'10 ToS season.

 

Are you keeping juicy rumors from us? :P

 

Phil

[Alun]

Thanks Phil, but I don't think it'll be necessary. I've had Andy Joyces e-mail address from a person who knows him and he thought that Andy was the best person to get hold of - well he knew Andy could make sure it gets to the correct people if he couldn't answer it himself.

[Wolf's Bane]

Thanks Phil, but I don't think it'll be necessary. I've had Andy Joyces e-mail address from a person who knows him and he thought that Andy was the best person to get hold of - well he knew Andy could make sure it gets to the correct people if he couldn't answer it himself.

 

please, keep us update from any news you get.

 

A very respectful letter, a thing to admire.

 

Thank you very much!!

[Grand Master Iapetus]

Assuming you are speaking to the UK GT since evidently the US ones appear to be off for this year. Could you post a link to the FAQ, as with most things on the website - it is a little challenging to find...

 

The copy I found on the web, however - the Force Weapon entry was only found in the Space Marine section - not in the general rules and not in the Daemonhunter / Witchhunters section.

 

Regarding your letter - I would certainly send it to the organizer, but I wouldn't hesitate to copy other's higher up in the organization...

[Alun]

Tell me about it. There a warhammer world web site now. Here's the link to where all the house tules for the GT are. Just checked the Fore Weapon rule is deffinetely General Rules. It's rule number 46.

 

http://warhammerworld.typepad.com/warhamme...ews/events.html

[Rommel44]

Thnx for writing the letter dude, because I looked at the 5th faq for us and it looked like they didn't do anything for us. I do have some quick questions that need answered though and it would be much appreciated :lol:

 

*Its probably a stupid question but how did our NFW change exactly and what does it mean for us?

 

*Does our LRC actually have an Assault Cannon the fire 4 shots instead of 3

[Alun]

GW went on record saying that if a codex specific rule is different from the 5th edition rule book, then the codex rule trumps the rule book. Inquisition codecies have their own rules for force weapons in that they don't cause instant death (they follow the same principle as 4th edition) and so different from their space marine brothers force weapons who instead inflict instant death in 5th. Because of this, our assault cannons are heavy 3, as that is what's stated in our codex (and the rule book for that matter).

 

Technically we still follow the rules for force weapons that are in our codex, but GW have now started a precedence with their rules (even though they are house rules), and taken things away from us but still leaving us with other stuff.

[Grand Master Iapetus]

Alun - thanks for posting the link. Several things struck me as odd...since I have only *dreamed* of getting to Warhammer World <_< but have not made it there as yet, I hope some of you chaps from across the pond can help me out here.

 

I had always assumed this was just another GW owned venue (like an uber Battle Bunker here in the US), but the website is outside of the main GW site. Are the rules posted there equal to an official FAQ, or do they just apply to the event or the venue?

 

In that case - it would have the same weight as the Adepticon FAQ (which IMO is a LOT more detailed and well thought out). IE: Used for that one tourney, but not neccesarily holding weight outside of that event.

 

And it is funny as several of you posted that there are references in several parts of the document to "Codex>BRB" on other items, but they specifically go out of their way to nerf force weapons - what gives?

[daboarder]

if they excpect the force wea[pons to work like that i hpope they atleast intend to support the bolter is a bolter is a bolter is a bolter argument which they currently havent.

[Dragons]

Okay.. I wasn't at the tournament so I don't know how they called it but 'ALL Force Feapons' does not include 'Nemesis Force Weapons' as they are a beast of a different color.. Similar, but different. I saw nothing in the House Rules that contradicted this. AS WRITTEN the Nemesis Force Weapon still slays outright as it is NOT a 'Force Weapon'.

 

Now.. If the judges called it the other way at the tournament.. that's their choice.. but WAR (including the linked house rules) makes no changes to our NFW's

 

Would still be nice to get some love sooner rather than later though. :P

 

-Dragons

[Captain Malachi]

Dragons, a NFW wielded by a grandmaster is a force weapon. In fact, by your logic it definately causes instant death, after all the rules in the DH armoury are for daemonhunter force weapons, not nemesis force weapons, so therefore the nemesis force weapon takes its rules from the rulebook, not the codex.

 

It's a force weapon, don't try and cheat. I disagree with the ruling as much as the rest of you, but being a complete rules lawyer like that is just a bad way to play.

[KingDeath]

Dragons, a NFW wielded by a grandmaster is a force weapon. In fact, by your logic it definately causes instant death, after all the rules in the DH armoury are for daemonhunter force weapons, not nemesis force weapons, so therefore the nemesis force weapon takes its rules from the rulebook, not the codex.

 

It's a force weapon, don't try and cheat. I disagree with the ruling as much as the rest of you, but being a complete rules lawyer like that is just a bad way to play.

 

Meh, was pretty certain that this point was faqed and the instant death ability of Nemesis Force Weapons

ignores eternal warrior and similar rules. Problem is that i cant find the faq in question :P

[boreas]

Well, it would be very easy for your opponent to argue that there is a little table in the rulebook under Nemesis Force Weapon. The rightmost column is for "Force Weapon". And for the GKGM's Nemesis it says "yes" as in "yes it's a Force Weapon". Now, your Inquisitor's Force Weapon has a whole set of Rules in it's description. The Nemesis Force Weapon's description just says it's a Force Weapon...

 

This whole rule discrepancy is really ridiculous on GW's part and only leads to aggravation between players (except in friendly circles where house rules can get around that). But at a tournament, I say expect flak...

 

Phil

[Dragons]

It's a force weapon, don't try and cheat. I disagree with the ruling as much as the rest of you, but being a complete rules lawyer like that is just a bad way to play.

 

 

Calling me a cheater isn't very polite now... I dissagree.. it most certainly is NOT a Force Weapon.. If it was.. all of my PAGK's would be able to use it to AMAZING effect! But they can't because the Nemesis Force Weapon works differently than a Force Weapon.

 

I can see some MORE dissagreements in tournies.. but as the rules for it are WRITTEN in our Codex.. and it's called a NFW.. I think that until there is more clarification or <gasp> New Codex.. I'll be using RAW.. And in a tournie that dissagrees.. well.. house rules are their rules and I'll abide.

 

-Dragons

[Grand Master Tyrak]

Meh, was pretty certain that this point was faqed and the instant death ability of Nemesis Force Weapons

ignores eternal warrior and similar rules. Problem is that i cant find the faq in question :)

 

It was FAQ'ed, but not specifically. Our Nemesis Force Weapons "Force Weapon" ability when wielded by the Grand Master was FAQ'ed to be the one written as in the Codex. After all, it is essentially the rules for DH NFWs plus the rules for DH Force Weapons. The force weapons in our Codex do not cause Instant Death, they remove all wounds. Thus, they ignore Eternal Warrior, and so does an NFW wielded by a Grand Master.

[Alun]

@ Dragons = unfortunately, it is a Force Weapon, regardless of the Nemesis part in front. That's not the problem. Even if it were just called a force weapon we would still follow the rules in our codex as our rules are in our codex, so in essence we can call it the sword of ultimate smittiness and it makes absolutely no difference, it's still a force weapon just with extra rules.

 

You're quite right in saying RAW dictates we play it as our codex says we play it, (and to think GW have said we should) and quite right too. Untill we're updated or it's faq'd then it's the rules in the codex that need to be followed. Hence the problem with what the GT house ruling does. They encompased all Force Weapons under the same umbrella. But it's a house rulling for the GT, that aren't used outside the GT everyone cries. Unfortunately it is used by others. I'd hazard a guess most GW stores would use it as their house rules, gaming clubs will use it as their house rules, tournaments will (and have used it) as their house rules already.

 

The main problem with the Final GT house rules is that I'm not sure it was made by non-GW people. What I mean to say is, the 2nd/3rd round (can't remember) house rules document were made by a group of (well respected) players. There were some glaring mistakes with some of the rules, but it was more of a living document, and so you were able to go straight to the source. Rules were changed. Not so easy with this house rules unfortunately.

[Alun]

Well here we go, took a while to get a response, and here it is:-

 

Hi

 

 

 

Apologies for the delay in coming back to you, but there have been some developments at this end which have mitigated against contacting you until they have been resolved. I think the email you sent in highlights something which I have suspected for a while but have been unable to effect in the way I’d like to be able to; the delivery of an effective and efficient rules answering service to support our events.

 

 

 

For a while now, the Events team within GW has produced a House Rules Document (HRD) for each of the events, which has been used as a secondary source of rules info for avid gamers and hobbyists. As a relatively small team (of one!) within GW and with a calendar of events to deliver, it has always been somewhat of a challenge to maintain this service to the standard it requires.

 

 

 

It occurred to me that over time, there were some inconsistencies creeping in to the documents we produce; bearing in mind that these are produced by internal and external volunteers, what we’d actually succeeded in creating was the potential for significant changes to the rules to be introduced and accepted as the norm. They were being produced in tandem with the Official Errata and represented another layer of information to wade through before finding an answer to a query.

 

 

 

My role as an event manager is to facilitate the event rather than to circumvent the experts in this field; the games developers. Every HRD we put out was another opportunity for situations such as yours to arise due to the difficulty and sheer work load involved in checking every single rules query that the volunteers had answered. With a thriving venue to manage and a full calendar to deliver, the only reasonable course of action is to put it into the hands of the experts and focus on the delivery of the event.

 

 

 

To that end, from the 1st of June, Warhammer World Events will announce that we will no longer be offering a rules answering service; House Rules Documents will only contain any relevant information relating to the event, as well as the Standard Tournament Rules that players need to be aware of. Any rules queries that come in via email will be forwarded on to the Games Developers on the understanding that they may not be answered directly, but that they may feature in a future incarnation of an official errata document.

 

 

 

This keeps the rules being answered by the people who wrote them and gives customers a one-stop-shop for rules queries. Anything they produce will be considered official for all purposes and should be consistent across the board. Hopefully, this will do away with inconsistencies, but provide an appropriate response to the questions we get sent. During the events themselves, the refs will work under the assumption that the rules won’t cover every circumstance, so where they are in doubt about how to rule in a particular situation, they must use the Most Important Rule and dice off for it, so that the games can continue and avoid any bogging down in unnecessary argument.

 

 

 

I hope this helps clarify things for you. Please get back in touch if you need more info.

[ArmouredWing]

Wow...I'm not sure I can quite believe that response. This effectively means there is the possibility of massive inconsistancies throughout each and every codex which will be decided on the toss of a die. Effectively this puts the official GW tournie scene back a good few years compared with indie events which attempt to 'fix' friday afternoon rules.

 

It's bad news and I'm pretty sure this will affect the level of participation by the less well represented forces who have incompatible rulesets, GK's in particular.

 

....and reading the response again this really sticks out....

This keeps the rules being answered by the people who wrote them and gives customers a one-stop-shop for rules queries.

...Unfortunately this doesn't happen now as FAQ's have been made 'unofficial' and errata only covers what is effectively typos. The policy is that a codex is as it is, if a rule is out of date then tough, live with it.

 

It's a closed loop with no scope for request of info or response and dare I say it, it feels like the GW punter is being given the two fingers salute.

 

As the saying goes 'Caveat emptor' (buyer beware).

[number6]

During the events themselves, the refs will work under the assumption that the rules won’t cover every circumstance, so where they are in doubt about how to rule in a particular situation, they must use the Most Important Rule and dice off for it[....]

I love this. "The Most Important Rule" doesn't exist in the 5th edition rules set anymore. That rule has been replaced with wishy-washy "agree with your opponent or play RAW". I mean seriously. They don't even know that Alessio et al took this out of the game, apparently on purpose? (How long has 5th edition been available now? 11 months?)

 

Yet more proof that GW has less than zero understanding of the beast they've created.

 

This response isn't surprising in the least. But that doesn't make it any less disappointing.