Brother Maikel Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 New FAQ's just dropped... most relevant for us is that Grand Strategy can officially not be used on non-GK units. Also, tanks can no longer shoot guns emplacements, but any model firing a gun emplacement is considered stationary for shooting purposes. Everything else seemed to be of minor interest... mostly clarifications or corner cases that don't affect us. DA got some substantial improvements through errata though. What do y'all think? Anything interesting I missed? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 most relevant for us is that Grand Strategy can officially not be used on non-GK units. Could see it coming, but BOO! I'm surprised we didn't get our FOC changes limited to 'Primary Detachment Only'. DA got some substantial improvements through errata though. Don't you mean substantian nerfs? HB not working with Standard of Dev. PFG inside a transport only working on that vehicle, and not a bubble from the hull. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3355621 Share on other sites More sharing options...
boreas Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 Well, maybe GW is getting the idea that allies were not such a good thing. They really will have to do something about that next time around (2017?). Make the rules for allies available in some scenarios or whatnot. Right now, it's just all over the place... I swear my mother now puts Necrons in her apple pie and my favorite pizzeria offers Tau as a topping Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3355641 Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswanick Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 Well, maybe GW is getting the idea that allies were not such a good thing. They really will have to do something about that next time around (2017?). Make the rules for allies available in some scenarios or whatnot. Right now, it's just all over the place... I swear my mother now puts Necrons in her apple pie and my favorite pizzeria offers Tau as a topping Meanwhile, in my locale, we have to run special tournaments with Allies required to get some people to try new things... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3355646 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 And poor Daemons... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3355649 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Maikel Posted April 23, 2013 Author Share Posted April 23, 2013 DA got some substantial improvements through errata though. Don't you mean substantian nerfs? HB not working with Standard of Dev. PFG inside a transport only working on that vehicle, and not a bubble from the hull. Huh? They specifically called out Hurricane Bolters as one of the things that does work with a Standard of Devastation. Along with regular bolters, twin-linked bolters, and the bolter part of combi-weapons. The Power Field thing is a bit of nerf, true, but now they can take Ravenwing Command Squads of up to 5 bikers, and Deathwing Terminators/Command Squads can give their Cyclone bearer a TH/SS Also, Courage of the Lion no longer screws with psychic tests. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3355683 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 Heavy Bolter. ;) Terminator Sarges can't swap out thier P Sword/S Bolter though. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3355770 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fibonacci Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 I don't think most people included Heavy Bolters in the list of weapons affected by the banner of "forget you" anyway. But they left out Stormbolters from the list and that suprized me. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3355784 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethernitas Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 poor daemons - still no faq for their flaming chariot :\ Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3355825 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 And Musk got nerfed (minimum 1), and AoC get it by your own Warpstorm. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3355939 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reclusiarch Darius Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 New FAQ's just dropped... most relevant for us is that Grand Strategy can officially not be used on non-GK units. I knew this was coming. Ah well, Purifiers and Paladins are still great targets for it. Kinda kills my Ally builds now though. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3356018 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Master Caloth Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 It never made sense to me that TGS should effect non-GKs in the first place. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3361571 Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnImA8 Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 It never made sense to me that TGS should effect non-GKs in the first place. Not that it makes much difference, but I think that TGS makes a lot of sense with non-GK's (including allies, but especially Inq units). Commanders have to do a lot of planning and coordination before entering an engagement, and assuming that GM's take lead as battlefield commanders then their tactical acuity would be reflected in any unit that fights under their coordination. You could suppose that allies wouldn't choose to operate under the command of the primary detachment's leadership prior to the engagement, but that contradicts the facts that they agreed to ally in the first place and had to have coordinated with each other on what their priorities and tactics would be... More to the actual game effect: I think that this hurts non-coteaz Inquisition lists quite a bit. Now running an Inquisitor for that tri-plasma cannon squad, or 2 for some Crusaders/Death Cult Assassins, greatly reduces the number of scoring units we can have... granted this also means that people who do take GMs are incentivized to take more Paladins and Purifiers... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3362095 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Master Caloth Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Well, I haven't been able to pull it up as I have been traveling from Washington to Virginia, what is the exact wording? Depending on it, it could be a case of it working not working on non-GK CODEX units, allowing it to effect our INQ units. And as to your first part of reply, we have no battle brothers in the matrix, at best we only get allies of convenience. At no point would hey necessarily place themselves under the GM's command, merely agree that the current situation warrants them working together, and at worst, that they are only temporarily setting aside their own enmity toward the GKs due to what is obviously considered a much more immediate and dire threat. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3362252 Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndigoJack Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Here's the exact wording: Page 22 – Grey Knight Grand Masters, Grand Strategy Change the second sentence to “Roll a D3 and choose that many friendly Infantry, Jump Infantry, Monstrous Creature or Walker units in your army chosen from Codex: Grey Knights (but not models with the Independent Characterspecialrule, Inquisitorial Henchmen Warbands or Grand Master Mordrak’s unit of Ghost Knights).” So same wording as before, except that now it only applies to units from C:GK (with the exceptions listed both above and in the codex). Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3362267 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reclusiarch Darius Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 More to the actual game effect: I think that this hurts non-coteaz Inquisition lists quite a bit. Now running an Inquisitor for that tri-plasma cannon squad, or 2 for some Crusaders/Death Cult Assassins, greatly reduces the number of scoring units we can have... granted this also means that people who do take GMs are incentivized to take more Paladins and Purifiers... Except 'Grand Strategy' never applied to Warbands, so there is no change. Also, by definition, if you are taking Henchmen Warbands, you are taking Coteaz. It's not even a question. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3362334 Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnImA8 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Well, I haven't been able to pull it up as I have been traveling from Washington to Virginia, what is the exact wording? Depending on it, it could be a case of it working not working on non-GK CODEX units, allowing it to effect our INQ units. And as to your first part of reply, we have no battle brothers in the matrix, at best we only get allies of convenience. At no point would hey necessarily place themselves under the GM's command, merely agree that the current situation warrants them working together, and at worst, that they are only temporarily setting aside their own enmity toward the GKs due to what is obviously considered a much more immediate and dire threat. Hmm... yea I see that you're right. Both the Rulebook description of Allies of Convenience and the fluff for the GK's secrecy and tendency to show up out of nowhere seem consistent with what you're saying. lol I'll still hold my reservations about that though, since I don't think that their conception of Allies of Convenience really makes sense: Desperate Allies should be born out of moments of desperation like in the heat of an engagement (which is what they propose Allies of Convenience are), whereas AoC's should be more coordinated and enduring but without the trust and faith that Battle Brothers have... Just my gripe about realism in 40k though, so what's new More to the actual game effect: I think that this hurts non-coteaz Inquisition lists quite a bit. Now running an Inquisitor for that tri-plasma cannon squad, or 2 for some Crusaders/Death Cult Assassins, greatly reduces the number of scoring units we can have... granted this also means that people who do take GMs are incentivized to take more Paladins and Purifiers... Except 'Grand Strategy' never applied to Warbands, so there is no change. Also, by definition, if you are taking Henchmen Warbands, you are taking Coteaz. It's not even a question. Good point about TGS: I guess that goes to show how often I use Henchmen. And no... nowhere in the definition of Henchmen Warbands is Coteaz a requirement. It may go against your own personal ideas of how a list should be designed, but there are plenty of others who like normal Inquisitors... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3362378 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reclusiarch Darius Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 Hmm... yea I see that you're right. Both the Rulebook description of Allies of Convenience and the fluff for the GK's secrecy and tendency to show up out of nowhere seem consistent with what you're saying. lol I'll still hold my reservations about that though, since I don't think that their conception of Allies of Convenience really makes sense: Desperate Allies should be born out of moments of desperation like in the heat of an engagement (which is what they propose Allies of Convenience are), whereas AoC's should be more coordinated and enduring but without the trust and faith that Battle Brothers have... Just my gripe about realism in 40k though, so what's new The whole Allies system is a mess. We work with what we have though. IG don't want or need our buffs, they're perfectly strong on their own and what they do compliments our stuff really well. Good point about TGS: I guess that goes to show how often I use Henchmen. And no... nowhere in the definition of Henchmen Warbands is Coteaz a requirement. It may go against your own personal ideas of how a list should be designed, but there are plenty of others who like normal Inquisitors... I like normal Inquisitors too. I use my TDA Inquisitor, and regular Prescience Inquisitors all the time as auxilary HQ's. If I could though, I'd put a short blurb before the Henchmen army list entry saying 'pro-tip; always take Coteaz with these guys'. Its not my personal ideas, its GW's. They explicitly made it impossible to get scoring Henchmen, or indeed multiple Henchmen squads below 2k, without him. I agree its dumb design to force SC's onto people, but them's the breaks. Coteaz is broke anyway, just on his point cost and abilities alone. Even if he did nothing for Henchmen, he'd be an amazing HQ. With the unlock tied to him and him alone, he's an auto-include in any non-pure Knight list. Hell, even pure Knights like his Mastery 2 Divination, hammer and 2+ armour. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3364566 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 And Seize reroll. Let alone his "haha fliers what?" rule. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3364606 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reclusiarch Darius Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 And Seize reroll. Let alone his "haha fliers what?" rule. Seize re-roll is more for lulz, it really doesn't impact most games. But yeah, double intercept is gold. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/274489-april-2013-faqs/#findComment-3364638 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.