Jump to content

FAQs Updated!


TheHarrower

Recommended Posts

So we're supposed to what? Not take anything GW says as truth because people don't want it to be true?

 

James.

 

Voice of a troll customer services agent =/= voice of GW.

 

They are people with their own opinions. Only the opinions of the developers count, which is what goes into the FAQ.

 

If you really want a definite answer, go to UKGD and ask Mat Ward personally. Be wary, though. Even then, people won't believe you until it is in type.

As we all know (and have recently seen, look at the email GW sent me where most of the answers were changed in the FAQ and the phone messages two different posters got different results) until its in a FAQ its not official.

 

I don't think we should all be limited to sword wielding Sanguinors just because GW made the model in a different edition that way. If GW wants to limit us all to sword wielding Sanguinors they need to tell us that in rules sources (like they did with Dante and Mephiston).

I've been around since 2nd as well, and to be honest I've never had to go to the lengths of ringing GW for a rule, most of them just make sense.

 

@Xenith: You're in luck there! I am actually going to uk games day! I'm going to be hunting down Mr. Ward for a special signature in my BA codex, so I'll ask ( and then probably be flamed whatever I find out and answer :| )

 

James.

I've been around since 2nd as well, and to be honest I've never had to go to the lengths of ringing GW for a rule, most of them just make sense.

 

@Xenith: You're in luck there! I am actually going to uk games day! I'm going to be hunting down Mr. Ward for a special signature in my BA codex, so I'll ask ( and then probably be flamed whatever I find out and answer :| )

 

James.

Tell Mr. Ward to get whatever the answer is into the FAQ as no tournament or play group is going to accept "some one online says they asked Matt Ward and he said..."

Isn't it a sad world where one gamer wouldn't take anothers word? Still I feel that's a subject for another time. The trust issues have probably stemmed from arguments like this one! :P

 

I'm lucky to be a part of a club with a membership of about 80 that never really has this problem. We all just think about what's fair to the opponent and then play a hard game within the limits of sportsmanship. I think that's why I won't remodel stuff really, I'd rather my opponent had a good game than spend my days wondering how hard I can stuff them with the latest meta ^_^

 

Anyway, I'll let you all discuss this one out as I'll be playing it my way anyway :)

 

James.

The way I see it, the four power weapon profiles seem reasonably well balanced against each other. If somebody wants to model their Sanguinary Guard with lances/spears and play them as such, I don't see the problem. Honestly, I think it could end up a really cool modeling opportunity (that I may take advantage of, even if they rule it to be swords/axes only).

 

I really wish GW would just make a list of every possible weapon profile (melee and ranged) in each codex and append it to the back of the FAQ. It would prevent so many arguments.

It seems the ruling to me is based on a pretty heavily adopted rate of power axes in armies now, meaning Dante can survive them.

 

That aside, goodbye Dante, I won't be using your Golden agility and knifelike drive into enemy lines anymore now. Too much of a risk at that pointcost to potentially get fisted by one of the Sergeants with a fist in almost every squad of my local playgroup. IG he's still going in though!

 

One would think that the oldest Blood Angel, and indeed one of the oldest space marines, still-alive would have the martial prowess from all his years and countless battles to swing his axe (the same axe and pistol combo he's used for a VERY long time, and countless amount of battles) faster than a novice (Read: Newly grown) marine trained in swordmanship and put to (let's say his 10th total) battle. Or that they'd at least give him Eternal Warrior if Papa Smurf has it.... *grumble* Oh well!

 

I like the other answered questions though. No more paladin shennagins, anti-stormraven psychic abuse, and LoS's from silly positions. Can't wait to head to my group and say "HA! I was right about the psychic abuse and LoS stuff, common sense (situational sense) prevails!"

So much can be done to counter those fists though. Remember, challenges can only be done with characters that are in range at the time of challenge.

 

If dante is out, he doesnt count. Also, if hes escorting a squad with a PW, then let the PW take care of the fist.

 

Its just a different application

I must say, I agree with daboarder on this one. I also believe the writer of this FAQ just didn't even consider someone would go out of his way to model everything with spears or mauls instead of the usualy weapons.

 

 

Such reasoning was the same thing for the debate that lead people concluding that because Dante, Astro, and the SG didn't have their weapons called out like the Blood Maul was that they must all be unusual power weapons which in hindsight we now know is incorrect.

 

Continuing the same line of reasoning for the SG now seems like an obvious mistake.

There are now two pages of very unedifying arguments about the meaning of the word 'Therefore' and whether there are 'Glaive Mauls' -obviously not, glaives are edged weapons in anybody's dictionary. There might be Mauls Encarmine, though again I very much doubt anyone on the design team intended it. Trying to bend the rules like that is just gamesmanship.

 

Surely there were rather more interesting points in the FAQs than this?

They have? Oh that's pretty good actually, I was always a bit bleh about how to fit my army together if everything went a bit awry and I ended up with my ics raging around refusing to join units! :P

 

James.

 

I'm not sure how that ever happened, the FAQ used to tell you how to handle IC's that suffered from red thirst, but none of them COULD suffer from red thirst wo it was kinda pointless but ultimately harmless.

As it wasn't mentioned in this FAQ, would anyone like to guess what Force Weapon a Furioso Librarian is armed with (by that I mean what weapon comes in the box)? Or is this already quite apparent?

 

It looks like a halberd, which means it is treated like an axe.

 

No reason to pick anything else, really, the Axe is the superior choice for the dread, seeing as they ignore 'unwieldy'.

Im rather happy with the way the F.A.Q has gone for us. Though it is a shame that its causing the arguements it is. What i find most interesting is that the general consensus in my area is in favour daboarder's arguement, myself included. Sadly, again, its going to be a case of us all agreeing to disagree rather than us constantly debating it. Though i do have one question. Can anyone think of any other army that has had a special type of weapon F.A.Q'd where that weapon is capable of being one of a selection? If so this would be a good way checking to see what they have done with other said weapons. I would also like to point out that using the two examples given as evidence of GW saying they can only be those weapons is the weaker arguemnt (before i get flamed i know this wasnt the only arguement used, but it is the main one) If that were the case surely the F.A.Q would have included a line saying something like. "Glaives follow the same rules as power weapons *insert page no* with the exception of being limited to Swords and Axes " If the F.A.Q had read like that there would be no arguement. In all reality how difficult would it have been to word the ammendment in such a way?

 

In conclusion the two examples given and the use of the words There fore (depending on how you have interprted it) Can't really be used. The F.A.Q say's glaives follow the same rules as power weapons, while also being mastercrafted and two handed. It does not say any where that it is limited to just swords and axes. Personally (depending on my local clubs ruling) i will be following the rule as it is written, which clearly refers us back to the rule book. Until GW amend this, if they amend it, and insert specific text saying that they are limited to just those weapons types i find it difficult to interpret this rule any other way.

 

Also can anyone tell me in regards to dante, im assuming using his infernus is like using a chainsword and that it dosnt retain its AP value? Because that would just be silly.

Another little tidbit from the BRB FAQ:

 

Q: If a melee weapon ignores armour saves, such as a Tyranid

bonesword or Captain Tycho’s Dead Man’s Hand, is it treated as an

unusual power weapon and therefore AP3? (p61)

A: No – it ignores armour saves completely.

 

Q: If the Blood Lance or Jaws of the World Wolf psychic power

(or any beam power for that matter) passes through more than one

enemy unit, does my opponent get to make a Deny the Witch roll for

each unit affected? (p69)

A: No. The first unit affected by the psychic power can

attempt to Deny the Witch, but if that test is failed, every

enemy unit is affected as normal

As it wasn't mentioned in this FAQ, would anyone like to guess what Force Weapon a Furioso Librarian is armed with (by that I mean what weapon comes in the box)? Or is this already quite apparent?

 

It looks like a halberd, which means it is treated like an axe.

 

No reason to pick anything else, really, the Axe is the superior choice for the dread, seeing as they ignore 'unwieldy'.

 

That's what I thought. Cheers.

Im rather happy with the way the F.A.Q has gone for us. Though it is a shame that its causing the arguements it is. What i find most interesting is that the general consensus in my area is in favour daboarder's arguement, myself included. Sadly, again, its going to be a case of us all agreeing to disagree rather than us constantly debating it.

 

This! :)

 

It could all be worse, I know an Eldar player and he was saying that Howling Banshees are all ap3, even if they're the older models with axes, apparently their axes are just swords in disguise! :)

 

Overall I'm happy where the BA are at. More than anything I'm happy that other books have been upped in power (apparently Tau got a favourable FAQ) so that whiney xenos players can come closer to matching us!

 

This is actually the time I've waited for and longed for, where we aren't seen as super powered cheese (which we aren't to be fair). Things like picking out models in the unit on 6's get rid of our priests and so on, and the more the odds get stacked against us, the happier I am really! We've gone from "omg flying land raider cheese" to "Why aren't you playing grey knights" to "hey wolf guard and grey hunters are better you know" and that's the way I really like it.

 

Stack the odds further against us and you will see us rise against the mathhammer and achieve even greater glory! :)

 

That was a bit of a random rant, I apologise, but stand by it :)

 

James.

Main FAQ already got its first new tweak, posted new today 12 SEP--- the only tweak that really affects BA is locked velocity flyers must go 36" every turn from then on. 'Old' FAQ said it must move the same speed in inches that it moved last turn.

Just a thought I had with regards to the glaive argument.

 

The FAQ NEVER re-words or changes any of the rules in the codex, this specific question and its answer are SOLELY limited to the interpretation of that answer and how to implement it.

 

As such glaives are listed in the codex as POWER WEAPONS, not POWER SWORDS or POWER AXES as there is no change to this rule we can conclude that yes lances and mauls are perfectly viable in accordance with the rules on pg 61 of the brb.

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.