New IG FAQ clarifies IG induction

[ripath]

It's not particularly good news for us.

 

IG vets are not inductible.

And it appears that you can't get a leman russ squadron, either. You are, in fact, limited to exactly one LR battle tank only. No variants. sad.gif

I have to agree with number 6. Its not the fact that we lost something that no longer exists, Its just how GW seems to give nothing new to the ordos. Also the fact that the ordos haven't gotten anything in such a long time is what makes this faq so disappointing. GW set up the Inq arguably to best function when using allies to cover for the large gaps in the codex. However, with this faq limiting the allies section as much as the old codexes is unbelievable. It is one albeit sad and disheartening thing to update codexs that have not been waiting as long as the ordos. It is another thing entirely to make it so that the newer codex things can't be taken by an ordos parent list. That is what I am disappointed not because my army isn't getting any updates before squats at this rate but because GW has only gone further to keep the gap between new codexs and old.

[boreas]

Is it just me that doesn't really care? Considering the allies rules, I'd rather use an IG parent list anyways!

 

Let's look a the DH codex. With the price of troops and elite, I would not put more than 2 squads of PAGK, an elite =I= and a GKGM (with GKT retinue) anyways. I would not put Land Raiders as the cost would be prohibitive and would not leave place for anything good from the IG codex. So, better to use the IG parent list and get the whole LR list, the valkyries, the HQs and advisors, possibly Creed to outflank a squad of GKs...

 

Now, let's look at the WHs. I could get: a canoness w/celestians, celestians, 2 SOB troops and a squad of dominions. That's up to 50 sisters, 6 faith points. I still get the LR variants, valkyries, etc. The only thing I might miss is the exorcist. And quite frankly, with the number of meltaguns I can pack in this army (use veterans w/3 meltaguns as troops. they are cheap and easily "count as" IST fluff-wise), I don't need the randomness.

 

I agree that the FAQ didn't let us play with all the new toys. Considering that our codex is so old the first print was possibly in latin, that's yet another slap from GW. But really, I think we can turn the allies rule around and still get everything we need!

 

Phil

[SamaNagol]

Considering SW only just got a new dex now, given the original was first published on the walls of a cave in eastern europe painted with vegetable dye and blood, DH can't really complain too much. The Dark Eldar players might hear you.

 

If the problem is people just want better Storm Troopers/Vets then that's not really a valid argument. I think the FAQ is fair.

[Eddie Orlock]

I think he meant that IG Advisors subtracting from their opponents' reserve rolls made Drop Pod/Daemon armies come on so late (6+ on Turn 2... eww) that it was like fighting half an army the entire game.

i did indeed mean this :P, seeing those across the board basically means you have to footslog or hope you can win 1vs2

This would be advantageous in kill point games, perhaps, but given that most missions in fifth are objective based it would present the guard player with the substantial possibility that the hostile forces would arrive on turn five and that the guard player would have insufficient time to drive them from the markers and un-contest the objectives.

[boreas]

Or it could give the IG player time to spam the objective to prevent any DS near them!

 

Phil

[Gornall]

Or it could give the IG player time to spam the objective to prevent any DS near them!

 

Phil

 

Yup... you give a smart IG player 3+ turns to spread out, you'll soon find yourself without a place to even think about putting a drop pod, let alone try to do actual deepstrikes.

[Captain Hajime]

Uh did I miss something Why can't we have Vets they are troops now. I saw nothing in the FAQ that would limit us from taking Vets they are just a troop choice.

[Eddie Orlock]

Uh did I miss something Why can't we have Vets they are troops now. I saw nothing in the FAQ that would limit us from taking Vets they are just a troop choice.

You mean other than this FAQ replacing the 'Ard Boyz FAQ that allowed it in the first place?

[Captain Hajime]

Uh did I miss something Why can't we have Vets they are troops now. I saw nothing in the FAQ that would limit us from taking Vets they are just a troop choice.

You mean other than this FAQ replacing the 'Ard Boyz FAQ that allowed it in the first place?

 

So let me get this straight, Vets are not basic troops then? is that the wording we are hanging up on? Simularly then I can take Basic Terminators, but not Assault Terminators from Space marines, Or a Basic Dreadnaught but not a Venrable Dreadnaught.

 

So does that also mean we can only take Hellhounds and nother the newer Fast attack. Speaking of which in that case for Sentiels, which is the basic one the Scout or the Armoured?

[Hellbreaker]

So does that also mean we can only take Hellhounds and nother the newer Fast attack. Speaking of which in that case for Sentiels, which is the basic one the Scout or the Armoured?

 

I suggest you read the FaQ on that one.

You can take both types of Sentinel.

Only 1 Standard Leman russ.

IG platoon.

IG command squad.

 

That's it.

 

Cheers!

[Captain Hajime]

So does that also mean we can only take Hellhounds and nother the newer Fast attack. Speaking of which in that case for Sentiels, which is the basic one the Scout or the Armoured?

 

I suggest you read the FaQ on that one.

You can take both types of Sentinel.

Only 1 Standard Leman russ.

IG platoon.

IG command squad.

 

That's it.

 

Cheers!

 

I could have sworn it say the bit about the Sentiels [which I missed] the Russ and about Iron first but first says refer to the Allies section of the witch hunters, which says 0-1 Fast attack, 0-1 HQ, 0-2 Troops, O-1 Elites.

 

A. You may include any of the inducted units

from Codex: Imperial Guard that are listed in the

‘By the authority of the immortal Emperor of

Mankind…’ rule with the exception of Armoured

Fist Squads – these no longer exist as a separate

unit entry. Note however that all Imperial Guard

Infantry Squads can now take a Chimera

transport if they so choose. You may include any

of the normal options from these units allowed in

Codex: Imperial Guard so yes, you may include

special characters that replace Platoon

Commanders. Inducted Sentinel Squadrons can

be either Armoured Sentinel Squadrons or Scout

Sentinel Squadrons. Also note that as the list

states you are limited to 0-1 Leman Russ Battle

Tank you may not include any other types of

Leman Russ such as the Demolisher, Executioner

etc.

Games Workshop, 2009, Codex: Imperial Guard FAQ, Page 2.

[Eddie Orlock]

A. You may include any of the inducted units

from Codex: Imperial Guard that are listed in the

‘By the authority of the immortal Emperor of

Mankind…’ rule with the exception of Armoured

Fist Squads – these no longer exist as a separate

unit entry. Note however that all Imperial Guard

Infantry Squads can now take a Chimera

transport if they so choose. You may include any

of the normal options from these units allowed in

Codex: Imperial Guard so yes, you may include

special characters that replace Platoon

Commanders. Inducted Sentinel Squadrons can

be either Armoured Sentinel Squadrons or Scout

Sentinel Squadrons. Also note that as the list

states you are limited to 0-1 Leman Russ Battle

Tank you may not include any other types of

Leman Russ such as the Demolisher, Executioner

etc.

Games Workshop, 2009, Codex: Imperial Guard FAQ, Page 2.

At the risk of a head injury banging against this brick wall:

"BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE IMMORTAL EMPEROR OF MANKIND..."

The following units may be used in a Witch Hunters army

...

TROOPS

...

Imperial Guard Infantry Platoon

Imperial Guard Armoured Fist Squad

...

FAST ATTACK

...

Sentinel Squadron

Rough Rider Squadron

 

HEAVY SUPPORT

...

0-1 Leman Russ Battle Tank

Codex: Witch Hunters, pg. 26, selected excerpts from the side bar Titled "BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE IMMORTAL EMPEROR OF MANKIND..."

 

The Induction List does not grant access to all Guard Troop Types. Only those listed. If it's not listed on page 26, or expressly mentioned in a FAQ, no dice. There is no more allowance for veterans than there is penal squads.

[Xelloss]

Have you noticed the part about "orders cannot be given to allies" is in the FAQ part, not in "Errata". Thus, as it is contradictory with the codex rule "may be given to any friendly unit", this part can be ignored... After all, it was clearly said previously Errata are corrections of the rules whereas FAQ are just HQGW's house rules...

 

An other thing can be added : as the list of the induced units are FAQ as well, and thus need your opponent approval, you can as well ask him if you can add penal legion or vets in your own "house-ruled" list. As usual, just doing it to maximize the efficiency of your army without bothering at least some fluff explanation will probably result in your opponent's refusal. But technically your house-rule is as legal as the FAQ.

[number6]

Don't be silly, Xelloss. For all practical purposes, all parts of official GW FAQs are the legally acceptable rules changes and interpretations. It doesn't matter in what part of the FAQ document such things are found. GW has an impractical definition for "errata". To them, it is just changes in printed verbiage. In reality, nearly all of the FAQ questions themselves count as "errata" as well because they cement in place fuzzy rules interpretations.

 

The IG FAQ is the perfect example of this. Technically, by the strict RAW, you could argue that mortars are capable of homing in a master of the ordinance's shot. Ridiculous, of course, but by the literal RAW, possibly acceptable. The FAQ clears up that GW does not intend for it to work that way. You can call it a "house rule" if you like, but it IS GW's game, and they are saying that this is stupid. If you can find someone willing to allow the mortar-homing of the master of the ordinance in an actual game, I'll eat my hat.

 

Ergo, the entirety of GW FAQs stand as-is no matter how we might feel about that. There is no other practical way to treat them.

[Xelloss]

Quoted from the official GW site :

 

What's the difference between Errata and FAQs?

As it is rather obvious from their name, these documents include two separate elements - the Errata and the FAQs. In case you were wondering, 'Errata' is a posh (Latin!) way to say 'Errors', and 'FAQs' stands for 'Frequently Asked Questions'. It is important to understand the distinction between the two, because they are very different.

 

The Errata are simply a list of the corrections we plan to make on the next reprint of the book to fix the mistakes that managed to slip into the text (no matter how many times you check a book, there are always some!). These are obviously errors, for example a model that has WS3 in the book's bestiary and WS4 in the book's army list. The Errata would say something like: 'Page 96. Replace WS3 with WS4 in the profile of the so-and-so model'.

 

The Errata have the same level of 'authority' as the main rules, as they effectively modify the published material. They are 'hard' material. It is a good idea to read them and be aware of their existence, but luckily there are very few of them for each book.

 

The FAQs on the other hand are very much 'soft' material. They deal with more of a grey area, where often there is no right and wrong answer - in a way, they are our own 'Studio House Rules'. They are, of course, useful when you play a pick-up game against someone you don't know, or at tournaments (i.e. when you don't have a set of common 'house rules' with the other player). However, if you disagree with some answers and prefer to change them in your games and make your own house rules with your friends, that's fine. In fact we encourage you to shape the game around your needs and your taste. We firmly believe that wargaming is about two (or more!) people creating a gaming experience they are both going to enjoy. In other words, you might prefer to skip the FAQs altogether and instead always apply the good old 'roll a dice' rule whenever you meet a problematic situation.

 

- Games Development, November 2008

 

I don't mean FAQ are useless, but if people are not happy with them, they are not only approved to use their own houserules, but incited to do so.

 

I know the major drawback of this is houserules are often unbalanced in favour of the one proposing them, and this "advice" from GW is pretty much "we are incapable of doing playable rules, do them yourself and go to hell". But whining that you can't do something logical because it isn't written in stone isn't very blight either.

[Marid]

Don't be silly, Xelloss. For all practical purposes, all parts of official GW FAQs are the legally acceptable rules changes and interpretations.

 

I agree strongly with 6 here. To accept otherwise is to give up entirely on having any kind of global authority on rule corrections and interpretations.

[number6]

Xelloss, I wasn't claiming that GW doesn't endorse house-ruling between two agreeable parties. As you yourself note, GW itself strongly encourages this, even when it means breaking clear rules from the BRB. No disagreement there.

 

But that doesn't mean that GW's FAQs aren't themselves rules. They are. Breaking them can only be done by mutual agreement. You can't approach a game with an IG opponent and claim that anything outside of the Errata section is up for debate. For all practical purposes, it isn't. GW sets the standard, period, end of story.

[Drahazar]

It is nice they did a FAQ I wish they would have also added that the cost of chimeras and rhinos are reduced according to the new codex's. Would be cool if we could get the russ varients but ohe well at least we get about everything else. i wonder if that dose let us get the space marines characters and stuff that would be intereseting.

 

And I play Dark Eldar wych cult been playing since they where made i am crying over not haveing a new dex still. And my poor necrons both are third edition and its stupid they have not gotten to us yet.