Jump to content

GK FAQ is out


synack

Recommended Posts

I'm failing to see any issues here.

other then nid auras being the only ones in the game that dont target but are still treated as if they did ? you dont play nids right ? can you explain why is one aura that doesnt target working and the other one isnt ? wasnt 5th ed the ed that was suppose to be about streamlining and no more 4 different version of same named rules ?

 

But that's the thing. GW wasn't wrong; They were perfectly correct in their interpretation. As the rule stood, that's exactly the correct response. They changed how it worked simply because the mechanic of it was proving to be an issue, not their interpretation of the rule.

and yet somehow they never do that to sm armies . Why did they FAQ BT and DA half way through the editions when the whole time they were saying codex >FAQ>rule book . Chaos as a dex only made sense when stuff couldnt get fixed in FAQs [ok it never made sense , but at least GW could say that it was] . If they FAQ stuff because of points costs and efficiency why arent they FAQ IG or SW stuff that was undercosted from the very begining ?

Either FAQ are there to clear rules [which they arent because GW is making same effects do two different things depanding on an army your playing . priotizing the buffing of meq armies ] or they are here to because of game play balance problems [which means they would have to deal with the over priced stuff and not nerfing armies that are already "balanced"].

Q: Can models in Terminator armour embark onto an

Inquisitorial Chimera? (p51)

A: Yes.

 

Q: If a walker is the target of Unyielding Anvil, from

the Grand Strategy special rule, can it claim objectives

even though it is a vehicle? (p22)

A: Yes.

 

WHAT THE HELL! XD Terminators in chimeras and scoring walkers.........................what is this world coming to...............

 

thanks

antique_nova

This FAQ strikes me as silly and unintuitive in the extreme.

 

Follow me here:

 

The dreadknight was never intended to benefit from the "walker doubles it's strength" rule for DCCW, they just gave it two so it would have +1A and a NFW.

 

"a pair of Falchions" is one weapon that is a NFW and grants +1A

 

If both of these are true, why would they give the dreadknight a pair of doomfists when Falchions do exactly the same thing for it without the extraneous and potentially confusing "dead" verbiage in the rules?

 

Don't misunderstand, I'm thrilled to see an FAQ out this quickly and even more thrilled to see a clear and comprehensive definition of daemons. (which will really piss off some chaos players at my local GW, but that's what they get for trying to argue that a daemon isn't a daemon)

I just find some of the rulings (or lack thereof) to be as confusing and nonsensical as the rules which originally led to the question.

 

Take Falchions for example. The Big Internet Debate seemed to be whether the +1A in the codex constituted a special rule that was applied in addition to the 2 ccw rule, or simply a restatement of that rule. FAQ comes out and says "Hah! You're BOLTH* wrong! A pair is actually one weapon,** but it has a special rule that grants an extra attack."

 

*yes, that was intentional

** not to be confused with "a pair of lightning claws," which, though written by the same author, does indeed mean two such weapons and does indeed grant +1A for 2ccw in addition to it's special rules.

Q: Can models in Terminator armour embark onto an

Inquisitorial Chimera? (p51)

A: Yes.

 

 

Why is everyone surprised by this? Models in Terminator armor have been able to ride in chimeras since third edition. They take up two spaces in it like they do in everything else. Don't believe me? Check the old codices.

Furthermore, a FAQ was not needed on that point. Or at least, not in the sense that Falchions needed it where the RAW was genuinely unclear. The RAW has always been crystal clear about Terminators riding in Chimeras. The only thing this FAQ really changes is spelling it out in big bold letters for those who didn't think that the RAW was correct.

Ok big question here. Does the Vindicare's turbo-penetrator round still roll all it's dice against a monolith? By the old faq'd ruling, which I think was in the old Deamonhunter's FAQ he could. Now that that ruling is gone, are we back to only rolling one die against it?

I checked the witch hunter's FAQ just to make sure and there isn't any mention in there about it.

Beautiful. I was expecting the FAQ to take much, much longer for the codex. I'm with number6, I'm only surprised on the DCCW ruling. Everything else is spot on. ;)

 

The way I have seen the turbo penetrator working is 3 (for sniper) + 4D6 + D3 for however many rends you get. = total of 39 possible. I would like to know how it works against a monolith or wave serpent though.

The Monolith's rule negates extra bonuses from affecting it, like Tank Hunters' +1 strength, the bonus Melta die, etc.

 

The 3 + 4D6 are not extras, they are the base armor penetration value of the Turbo Penetrator. However, the Rending dice are extras like the Melta die and are not used against the Monolith.

If both of these are true, why would they give the dreadknight a pair of doomfists when Falchions do exactly the same thing for it without the extraneous and potentially confusing "dead" verbiage in the rules?

 

Because dreadknights have fists not a pair of swords...?

I hope you guys are happy, I play Possessed CSM and Tau. My life is ruined.

If, as Tau, you can't stop an Inquisitor from getting to within 12" of your units, its not your life you should be worried about.

 

As for your Possessed, ONE codex out of the entire Games Workshop range of codices can now... What? Force a leadership check in melee to kill a model? Re-roll hits or wounds, depending on the attack type? If NFW and Preferred Enemy: Daemons ruins your life (because Psilencers are certainly nothing to worry about) then you need to reexamine things.

 

Its really not so bad that you need to get all an hero about it.

As for your Possessed, ONE codex out of the entire Games Workshop range of codices can now... What? Force a leadership check in melee to kill a model? Re-roll hits or wounds, depending on the attack type? If NFW and Preferred Enemy: Daemons ruins your life (because Psilencers are certainly nothing to worry about) then you need to reexamine things.

 

Its really not so bad that you need to get all an hero about it.

 

Go collect a chaos army, play it for a couple years, then come back and say this again.

As for your Possessed, ONE codex out of the entire Games Workshop range of codices can now... What? Force a leadership check in melee to kill a model? Re-roll hits or wounds, depending on the attack type? If NFW and Preferred Enemy: Daemons ruins your life (because Psilencers are certainly nothing to worry about) then you need to reexamine things.

 

Psyk-out Grenades are bigger.

 

Oh, your Possessed got Power Weapons from thier random roll? Initiative 1. Suck it. :P

As far as I'm aware, most Chaos players thought that Possessed Marines were terrible units long before Codex:GK came out.

 

Psyk-outs are also not as big of a benefit as they might initially seem, given how incredibly halberd-heavy the current GK metagame is.

As for your Possessed, ONE codex out of the entire Games Workshop range of codices can now... What? Force a leadership check in melee to kill a model? Re-roll hits or wounds, depending on the attack type? If NFW and Preferred Enemy: Daemons ruins your life (because Psilencers are certainly nothing to worry about) then you need to reexamine things.

 

Its really not so bad that you need to get all an hero about it.

 

Go collect a chaos army, play it for a couple years, then come back and say this again.

Ill skip that and get to the point:

 

I dont see a single unit mentioned in the list of demons that shouldnt be fluff wise and I see even fewer that wouldnt already have been screwed by CC with GKs. Those units already struggled hard against GK- the FAQ changes little if anything about the situation.

 

What it does do is perhaps push the last couple of buttons to get chaos the point where GW will produce a new one.

Psyk-outs are also not as big of a benefit as they might initially seem, given how incredibly halberd-heavy the current GK metagame is.

 

Psyk-outs also have the added benefit of making Empyrean Brain Mines uber, and virtually guarenteeing Sweeping Advance.

Psyk-outs are also not as big of a benefit as they might initially seem, given how incredibly halberd-heavy the current GK metagame is.

 

Psyk-outs also have the added benefit of making Empyrean Brain Mines uber, and virtually guarenteeing Sweeping Advance.

When considering Sweeping Advance, it does bear mentioning that almost every model classed as a Daemon is also Fearless.

I hope you guys are happy, I play Possessed CSM and Tau. My life is ruined.

I play Tau as well, and have for years. They're not bothered by this. There's a max of 2 of the funky anti-plasma wargear on the table. Nobody seems to take it anyway! :devil: And Tau have A LOT more going for them than pulse rifles.

 

Worry less. Play more. :devil:

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.