So did the SW FAQ answer your questions?

[Wolf Lord Hallbjorn]

If you guys want to say that Foehammer isn't a thunder hammer when thrown, then go right ahead. All of the people I regularly play with, as well as all of the staff at my local GW shop agree that it's a thunder hammer whether it's thrown, used in close combat, sat on, painted green, on fire, or whatever. I'm just curious about what those of you who say nay think it turns into when it's thrown. Does it magically turn into a chainsword in mid-throw or something?

[the jeske]

I'm just curious about what those of you who say nay think it turns into when it's thrown

in to nothing . the weapon has its own name with special rules [being thrown , what stat it uses etc] . yes a thunder hammer can stun stuff in hth because it is a melee weapon . no where in teh sw dex nor in the rule book does it say that what happens , if a melee weapon is used in hth . if a weapon can be used in both hth and shoting [like dark reaper phoenix lord weapon] there always is a separate set of rules for both . if the thrown part of the foe hammer discription doesnt mention that it stuns , then it means that it doesnt .

[JCarter]

I'm glad that the status of f-wolves was clarified and sad about the content of the clarification. To me, the best use of the wolves in conjunction with a character was to provide extra wounds. The FAQ, while allowing that for shooting attacks has negated it in close combat. With wolves, character and any unit they have joined being considered separate targets of attack, the opponent can ignore the wolves in allocating his attacks. Once this becomes clear, The use of wolf companions with probably decline into a rare occurrence. The rule about two PAX spaces for each wolf in a vehicle has already had some effect along that line.

 

As for retinues, it was predicted that retinues would disappear as the codices were rewritten; the handwriting was on the wall.

[Athalus]

I'm glad that the status of f-wolves was clarified and sad about the content of the clarification. To me, the best use of the wolves in conjunction with a character was to provide extra wounds. The FAQ, while allowing that for shooting attacks has negated it in close combat. With wolves, character and any unit they have joined being considered separate targets of attack, the opponent can ignore the wolves in allocating his attacks. Once this becomes clear, The use of wolf companions with probably decline into a rare occurrence. The rule about two PAX spaces for each wolf in a vehicle has already had some effect along that line.

 

As for retinues, it was predicted that retinues would disappear as the codices were rewritten; the handwriting was on the wall.

 

Well, its still useful for that initial charge getting into CC, because your lord is gonna take a lot of fire. Mine is on a TWM, in a group of TWC, and being able to soak up some of that silly fire power that they draw is often very helpful.

[SamaNagol]

I'm just curious about what those of you who say nay think it turns into when it's thrown

 

A ranged weapon with the profile given in the codex.

[Thunderpup]

Did i miss it in the FAQ, or did they not say anything about TWM and Strength? Does the base stat increase like toughness? In other words, is a Wolf Lord who takes a hammer a Str 9 (Strength added after weapon) or a Str 10? (strength added before weapon, Like the Thunder Hammer Calvery) :huh:

[JamesI]

Did i miss it in the FAQ, or did they not say anything about TWM and Strength? Does the base stat increase like toughness? In other words, is a Wolf Lord who takes a hammer a Str 9 (Strength added after weapon) or a Str 10? (strength added before weapon, Like the Thunder Hammer Calvery) :huh:

They said nothing about strength. Logical assumption is it has the same effect as Toughness (so strength 10 powerfists), but RAW is still strength 9 (due to the rulebook multiply before add). I highly doubt many players will try to claim mounted lords are strength 9 with hammers/fists after the FAQ.

[antique_nova]

they said it is intergrated to stats and the law of multiple before adding is during the game not before the game which is when the extra strenght is intergrated into the stats. So it's S10.

thanks

antiqu_nova

[Streamdragon]

If you guys want to say that Foehammer isn't a thunder hammer when thrown, then go right ahead. All of the people I regularly play with, as well as all of the staff at my local GW shop agree that it's a thunder hammer whether it's thrown, used in close combat, sat on, painted green, on fire, or whatever. I'm just curious about what those of you who say nay think it turns into when it's thrown. Does it magically turn into a chainsword in mid-throw or something?

 

 

The Laser Lance of Eldar Shining Spears are S6 power weapons when they charge, but when shot use a different profile (range 6", S6, AP4, Lance)

 

If you're going to allow Arjac's Forhammer to stun when thrown (as a T.Hammer does in Melee) , then you'd have to allow the Laser Lance to ignore armor saves (as a P.Weapon does in Melee) when shot. This is clearly not the case as the shooting profile has an AP of 4.

 

 

Edit: You'd also then have to make the arguement for keeping the "Lance" special rule in Melee, which is clearly not the case!

[Thunderpup]

If you guys want to say that Foehammer isn't a thunder hammer when thrown, then go right ahead. All of the people I regularly play with, as well as all of the staff at my local GW shop agree that it's a thunder hammer whether it's thrown, used in close combat, sat on, painted green, on fire, or whatever. I'm just curious about what those of you who say nay think it turns into when it's thrown. Does it magically turn into a chainsword in mid-throw or something?

 

 

The Laser Lance of Eldar Shining Spears are S6 power weapons when they charge, but when shot use a different profile (range 6", S6, AP4, Lance)

 

If you're going to allow Arjac's Forhammer to stun when thrown (as a T.Hammer does in Melee) , then you'd have to allow the Laser Lance to ignore armor saves (as a P.Weapon does in Melee) when shot. This is clearly not the case as the shooting profile has an AP of 4.

 

 

Edit: You'd also then have to make the arguement for keeping the "Lance" special rule in Melee, which is clearly not the case!

 

I think that's a perfect example. Dang it! :lol:

[Wolf Lord Hallbjorn]

Everyone else can use it whichever way they see fit. As I said before, everyone I play with including the players and staff at my local GW shop all agree that it is a thunder hammer no matter what. We'll continue to play that way and in the unlikely situation that someone else comes along and doesn't agree, then I'll use it your way and still put Arjac in my list. Makes no difference to me in the end. I simply see it one way and you see it another.

[Gentlemanloser]

Clarifications of interest to me;

 

TW Toughness (And therefore S...)

Missing Frost Blades from WL/WGBL

F Wolves not being a Retinue (:) )

Arjacs Stubborn (Grrr, crappy ruling...)

Lucas's Cloak (Seriously, who thought it was a good idea to include so many "Only works if your squad is dead" abilites...)

Ragnar versus Berserk Charge (nice rulling in favour)

Logan's High King and Drop Pods. ;)

TWC Rending and Special Wepaons (/sigh... Just give them the TWM as wargear... Canis sucked anyway)

Multiple Rune Priest and Psychic Powers

Counter Attack and Furious Charge

 

Not Clarified;

 

Rune Priests hitting themselves with JotWW (It's hits everyone it touches on it's way through...)

Choosers blocking Outflanking from Infiltrate

Non IC's and Sagas (Multiple Ven Dreads with Saga of Majesty/ Multiple Iron Priests and Saga of the Iron Wolf)

 

Stupid Rulings (IMHO);

 

Remove from Play versus WWB? (What? That's one left field ruling that has a lot of implications...)

Njal Stormcallers powers. (Just rule them to work for the next enemy turn....)

Counter Attack and Defensive Grenades

 

On the whole, a fantastic FAQ! I hope all the rest follow this one's depths (it's too much to ask that Codexes *don't* require such in depth FAQs! :)).

[stinkenheim]

rune priests wouldnt hit themselves with the power as it isnt passing throug them. also flamer and other template armed models do not hit themselves when firing their weapon so why should a rune priest fall into a crack hes just made... if anyon knows its coming and can dodge out the way its the guy making it...

 

outflank-chooser is just people trying to get an unfair advantage imho and im not surprised it didnt get included as it seems to have only been raised recently.

its highly likely that multiple IPs with Iron wolf saga would be against the rules (or at least the spirit of the rules) and isnt encouraging people to play space wolves with the whole individuality thingy....

 

I agree with Njalls powers, it would have been easier to apply the effects until then next SW turn

and CA vs Def grenades... really... they ruled (and rightly so as its a stupid idea) that units charging a squad with counter attack would not gain the bonuses from defensive grenades as well as the bonuses for charging...

 

 

On the whole i think the majority of answers were correct and were well explained. obviously there are some which seem odd, but hey... some you win some you lose

[HERO]

Ragnar does not confer his Insane Bravado's +D3 attacks on Counter-attack right? The standard +1 attack is all they get.

[SamaNagol]

Right, he just confers Furious Charge.

[rahl02]

Everyone else can use it whichever way they see fit. As I said before, everyone I play with including the players and staff at my local GW shop all agree that it is a thunder hammer no matter what. We'll continue to play that way and in the unlikely situation that someone else comes along and doesn't agree, then I'll use it your way and still put Arjac in my list. Makes no difference to me in the end. I simply see it one way and you see it another.

 

The only difference is that your adding an effect to a ranged attack that it doesn't have. It's like saying my Lascannon stuns whatever it just this automatically if it survives. It's just plain wrong. If there is no special affect listed after the assault/pistol/heavy # of shots you don't get it, you MUST use EXACTLY what's in that profile. It just said that it's a thunder hammer that can be thrown 6" then yes I would say yes it stuns the hell out of what it just hit. But they gave it a specific profile that must be adhered to.

[SamaNagol]

It's cool. That's how his local gaming group play it. That's fine.

 

In tournaments and in pick up games it needs an official ruling though. I think that the Eldar Laser Lance is the closest we will get to precedent.

[Valerian]

Well, I was away from the B&C for a few days and they've gone and released the new Space Wolves FAQ; very nice. It looks to be fairly comprehensive and covers most of the issues, but not all.

 

I'm happy with the Errata; they've included good changes for any second printings of the codex that they might make. These are the only "hard rules", and they are all appropriate and make sense. I'm especially pleased that they fixed the option for the Wolf Scouts so that I don't have to trade in Bolt Pistols for the Power Weapons; in fact, now I don't have to trade in anything, so a Wolf Scout with a Plasma Pistol could still fire his Bolt Pistol if he didn't want to risk an Overheat.

 

I've got just a few issues with the FAQ section, but am pleased with the rest of it:

 

1). Wasn't too pleased with the ruling for Fenrisian Wolves as wargear whereby they do not act as a Retinue. Would have been much better to allow them to act as ablative wounds for an Independent Character in close combat. No big deal, however.

 

2). Arjac Rockfist not granting his 'Stubborn' ability to anyone makes it a rather worthless special rule for him to have; it is more or less there for "fluff-only" now.

 

3). For the question regarding Rending and Special Close Combat Attacks for Thunderwolf Cavalry, they state that because the Thunderwolf Mount description says the two cannot be combined, that this applies to Thunderwolf Cavalry as well. That is fine, and does seem to meet the intent better than having two things that are supposed to be the same having slightly different rules/in-game effects. However, in parenthesis they state, "and Canis Wolfborn, for that matter", now I don't have my codex with me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure that I remember that Canis has Rending in his Profile, which means that he, at least, does have Rending Wolf Claws (just like Shrike has Rending Lightning Claws).

 

4). For the question dealing with Leaders of the Pack and psychic powers they ruled that you can take Njal Stormcaller alongside other Rune Priests, since there is no way for them to have the "same combination of psychic powers". However, I'm pretty certain that I remember the codex clearly states that Leaders of the Pack does not apply to Special Characters, so there is no need to even look at Njal in answering this question.

 

Everything else looks pretty good to me.

 

Best regards,

 

Valerian

[Athalus]

4). For the question dealing with Leaders of the Pack and psychic powers they claim that you can't take Njal Stormcaller alongside other Rune Priests (because he knows all 7 psychic powers). However, I'm pretty certain that I remember the codex clearly states that Leaders of the Pack does not apply to Special Characters, so this is a bad call. Can someone with their codex on hand verify this one for me?

 

Unfortunately under page 81, in the leaders of the pack ruling, it doesn't mention anything about special characters. Special characters, however, will not affect what SAGAS you choose, but will affect your wargear/powers, unless their is another passage I missed =).

[Ominous Anonymous]

Special characters don't count for Leaders of the Pack, so feel free to take Njal alongside 3 Rune Priests.

[Grey Mage]

4). For the question dealing with Leaders of the Pack and psychic powers they claim that you can't take Njal Stormcaller alongside other Rune Priests (because he knows all 7 psychic powers). However, I'm pretty certain that I remember the codex clearly states that Leaders of the Pack does not apply to Special Characters, so this is a bad call. Can someone with their codex on hand verify this one for me?

 

Everything else looks pretty good to me.

 

Best regards,

 

Valerian

No no no... they said you COULD take him, as 7=/=2. "....so no other rune priest could end up knowing the same psychic powers. Thus it is permitted to take Njal Stormcaller alongside other Rune Priests."

[Valerian]

4). For the question dealing with Leaders of the Pack and psychic powers they claim that you can't take Njal Stormcaller alongside other Rune Priests (because he knows all 7 psychic powers). However, I'm pretty certain that I remember the codex clearly states that Leaders of the Pack does not apply to Special Characters, so this is a bad call. Can someone with their codex on hand verify this one for me?

 

Everything else looks pretty good to me.

 

Best regards,

 

Valerian

No no no... they said you COULD take him, as 7=/=2. "....so no other rune priest could end up knowing the same psychic powers. Thus it is permitted to take Njal Stormcaller alongside other Rune Priests."

 

Oops. I had read that completely wrong. I misread it as them saying "thus it is not permitted". I will blame that on the fuzzy printout of the FAQ that I made due to needing a new printer cartridge : ).

 

Thanks GM. Regardless of what their conclusion was, it still shouldn't apply for any Special Characters, as they are not included in the Leaders of the Pack rule.

 

V

[Quillen]

No it says they can not takwe the exact same powers and then says Rune Priest A had Living lightning and something else and Rune Priest B had living lighting and something else. Since the had 2 different powers they were cool. Then it covered that Njal is a total exception so use him with no worries.

[Ullr Direfang]

3). For the question regarding Rending and Special Close Combat Attacks for Thunderwolf Cavalry, they state that because the Thunderwolf Mount description says the two cannot be combined, that this applies to Thunderwolf Cavalry as well. That is fine, and does seem to meet the intent better than having two things that are supposed to be the same having slightly different rules/in-game effects. However, in parenthesis they state, "and Canis Wolfborn, for that matter", now I don't have my codex with me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure that I remember that Canis has Rending in his Profile, which means that he, at least, does have Rending Wolf Claws (just like Shrike has Rending Lightning Claws).

 

well you are correct.... they still messed something up but o well.... Canis does have the rending special rule. but then so do TWC, just TWC don't have a TWM list as part of their war gear.... were Canis has fangir listed....

 

so they basically nerfed Canis and took a USR away from selected TWC....

 

I personally wouldn't run Canis (or any of the others really).... but now the thought will never cross my mind to take him.

[LPetersson]

1). Wasn't too pleased with the ruling for Fenrisian Wolves as wargear whereby they do not act as a Retinue. Would have been much better to allow them to act as ablative wounds for an Independent Character in close combat. No big deal, however.

 

Although I agree with you on this, it seems to be something that all armies are slowly losing.

Unless IG still have it in their new codex...

 

So really, it's just that we've had it so good for so long with WG retinues that some of us will be noticing it more now...