FAQ Letter Challenge!

[Morticon]

'ordinance barrage'.

barrage says blast, ordinance says blasts use large.

 

Yup yup- both of which need blast in their profile to count as large blast is the issue.

 

 

 

So, my 2nd letter is out- this time to Matt Ward, I will do one again next Monday as a friendly reminder.

 

How is everyone elses coming along?

[shatter]

'ordinance barrage'.

barrage says blast, ordinance says blasts use large.

 

Yup yup- both of which need blast in their profile to count as large blast is the issue.

 

 

No, man. I don't think that's true.

 

Barrage weapons, 3rd paragraph, 1st sentence pg 32.

 

"All barrage weapons use blast markers and consequently use the rules for blast weapons..."

 

ergo, barrage = blast

 

 

Ordinance weapons, last sentence left panel pg 58.

 

"Unless their profile specifies otherwise, all ordinance blast weapons use the large blast marker."

 

ergo, ordinance + barrage (blast) = large blast

 

The whirly's launcher doesn't specify otherwise. It's a conventional ordinance (& barrage) weapon.

 

 

I agree it takes a few steps while browsing the rules to get all the consequences of the rules, ord' n' brg and this will be a frequently asked question of GW. But I don't think it's errata-worthy as the rules at present, while clumsy, do make ordinance barrage weapons use the large blast marker.

[igotsmeakabob!!]

But the Vindicator isn't ordnance barrage.

[liberate_tutame]

I'll only say it once. Anyone who thinks that the Vindicator doesn't use a large blast marker is an idiot.

[shatter]

hehe, this time we were talking about whirlwinds. some forgot I think. :)

[jhartlauer]

I'll be sending one. I'm going to include the Blood Lance rules. The people I play with want to arguee that you have to draw a line in any direction then roll 4D6. The powere states "Extend a stright line, 4D6" long, from the Libraian's base in any direction-....". To me this sounds like you would roll 4D6" then pick the direction. Am I wrong?

[shatter]

Your interpretation is more literal than theirs. You win... more arguments with your friends.

 

The power doesn't even appear to need an actual target. It's like a random length line 'template' in a direction of your choosing which suggests an attached squad could target and shoot something unrelated to the stuff the libby's lance hits.

 

Their insistence than you pretty much declare a target 1st is an assumption they're making that isn't actually in the rule.

 

Good luck? :sweat:

[igotsmeakabob!!]

hehe, this time we were talking about whirlwinds. some forgot I think. ;)

Some would be me ;)

[jhartlauer]

Thanks for the clairification, it's frustrating when people want to use RAW when it favors them and RAI when it doesn't. I'm still going to mention something about it in the letter anyway. ;)

[vahouth]

We might have something here guys.

It seems that GW has removed the BA FAQ from the site.

I'm guessing that it won't be long now untill we see a new one. ;)

[Morticon]

Their insistence than you pretty much declare a target 1st is an assumption they're making that isn't actually in the rule.

 

From Blood Lance:

 

" This is a psychic shooting attack"

 

From rules:

 

"using a psychic shooting attack counts as firing a ranged weapon. So, for example, the psyker must be able to see his target unit.."

 

 

 

However please feel free to send whatever you think needs clarification as well as the stuff listed!!! Its a great way to make sure we get what we asked for!

 

Cheers!

[JamesI]

Their insistence than you pretty much declare a target 1st is an assumption they're making that isn't actually in the rule.

 

From Blood Lance:

 

" This is a psychic shooting attack"

 

From rules:

 

"using a psychic shooting attack counts as firing a ranged weapon. So, for example, the psyker must be able to see his target unit.."

 

 

 

However please feel free to send whatever you think needs clarification as well as the stuff listed!!! Its a great way to make sure we get what we asked for!

 

Cheers!

 

Also, the FAQ clarification for Jaws of the World Wolf makes it pretty clear that this is what GW intends. Blood Lance is a shooting attack, so you need to see a target unless told otherwise.

[Morticon]

Just sent out two more.

 

1 to games development and 1 to MW.

 

Additionally, I asked MW if he would be able to answer any of our questions in an unofficial capacity, until such time as an FAQ is released.

 

We'll see what happens.

 

If you havent sent a letter in yet, its not too late.

Your voice will be heard, and it will make a difference!

 

Thanks!

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Keep up the good work Mort!

 

:P

 

0b :)

[shatter]

Their insistence than you pretty much declare a target 1st is an assumption they're making that isn't actually in the rule.

 

From Blood Lance:

 

" This is a psychic shooting attack"

 

From rules:

 

"using a psychic shooting attack counts as firing a ranged weapon. So, for example, the psyker must be able to see his target unit.."

 

 

 

However please feel free to send whatever you think needs clarification as well as the stuff listed!!! Its a great way to make sure we get what we asked for!

 

Cheers!

 

*chuckle* My bad for stating it like fact. I only meant one can argue other silly things for the power.

[Mattsama]

I'm sorry! I just got back onto the board after some work related <_< so I'll get it out and into the mail ASAP.

 

I intend on including the very heated "Since the USR for Feel No Pain does not specifically identify it as a save, can Lemartes take a wound, fail his armour save, gain Fury Unbound, and then ignore the wound through Feel no Pain?"

 

In my local club we're split in an odd direction. The RAW rules lawyers say yes you can, but I (the BA player) refuse, since it's not the RAI. Unless FAQ says you can, I would frown heavily upon someone doing this...

[Demoulius]

ugh still havent sent the damn letter :lol: so many thigns that id like to get cleared up...maybe i should write them down first :)

[Morticon]

I'm sorry! I just got back onto the board after some work related :) so I'll get it out and into the mail ASAP.

 

I intend on including the very heated "Since the USR for Feel No Pain does not specifically identify it as a save, can Lemartes take a wound, fail his armour save, gain Fury Unbound, and then ignore the wound through Feel no Pain?"

 

In my local club we're split in an odd direction. The RAW rules lawyers say yes you can, but I (the BA player) refuse, since it's not the RAI. Unless FAQ says you can, I would frown heavily upon someone doing this...

 

 

Mattsama - i found a loophole in that loophole.

 

If you follow that ruling to the letter of the law, it means that Lemartes does in fact drop down to 1 of his 2 wounds, he just ignores the first.

 

This means that the next time he suffers an unsaved wound, he will be on 0 wounds and is removed from play.

 

Your opponent CANNOT argue that he gets the special ability without having suffered a wound- therefore you're safe. Its as if he had allocated the first wound and failed anyway.

This actually works out to your benefit in the long run, since pass or fail on the FNP, he would have one less wound.

[Mattsama]

I want to include, but don't know if its already covered somewhere else so I'm asking now.

 

"If a Psychic Hood is on an character embarked on a transport, is range measured from the hull similarly to the auras from a Blood Chalice?"

 

And the follow up, "If so, does this also extend to Furious Dreadnoughts with the Librarian Upgrade embarked on a Stormraven Gunship?"

[Beast_of_Amareo]

Count me in too. Do you mind though if I copy paste more or less your letter Mort?

[mysteriousmaskedmystery]

i know there are things i would like corrected, but there are things in C:'nids i think need to be addressed first. i'm surprised how long the FAQ process is taking. it's not as though it's a significant investment on their part to post a new .pdf. if they were even remotely quick in addressing issues i could even understand them changing old decisions in light of later play testing and what not.

[Morticon]

Count me in too. Do you mind though if I copy paste more or less your letter Mort?

 

 

Go for it bruv !! The more the merrier.

[JamesI]

i know there are things i would like corrected, but there are things in C:'nids i think need to be addressed first. i'm surprised how long the FAQ process is taking. it's not as though it's a significant investment on their part to post a new .pdf. if they were even remotely quick in addressing issues i could even understand them changing old decisions in light of later play testing and what not.

I included Nid questions on the letter I sent.

[Morticon]

i know there are things i would like corrected, but there are things in C:'nids i think need to be addressed first.

 

 

While I wont debate the fairness of what should or should not come first, thats entirely unrelated to the issue at hand and the drive we're undertaking.

Additionally, BnC being power armour and this being the BA forum of that power armour forum - its not really our concern and really serves no purpose in this thread.

 

That being said, for every nid player that doesnt play BA and writes in to ask for our FAQ, I'd be happy to do the same for them.

[Demoulius]

im getting ready to send in the letter, have added a few things:

 

Commander Dante is not listed as having Eternal warrior. Is there are particular reason for this?

 

Does captain Tycho’s deadman’s hand grant him an extra attack in close combat? It is listed as wargear but the description seems to bet hat its a special rule.

 

Do you have to pick your powers before each game or do you have to write them down when making the list?

 

Why cannot captains take the following pieces of wargear: artificer armour, Glaive Encarmine, astartas grenade launcher. For a chapter that has been around since the time of the heresy and has special troops with it walking around youd guess that captains could do the same?

 

Can the Sanguinary Noviate take upgrades like power weapons or meltabombs?

 

The Sanguinary priest gets an Chalice of Blood when he upgrades to terminator armour. Is this a normal Blood Chalice with a different name?

 

some of these issues arose on the forums and some during the games that i played. should i add them? also should i list the B&C during the explanation why im sending the letter?