Quixus Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 If you take Dante or Draigo in an allied detachment, do they change make Sanguinary Guard/Paladins troop choices? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axagoras Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Yes because they are form old codexs, and it doesnt differentiate between primary and 2ndary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quixus Posted August 22, 2013 Author Share Posted August 22, 2013 So it has not been errataed yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fibonacci Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3180055a_Grey_Knights_v1.4_APRIL13.pdf http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3030012a_Blood_Angels_v1.3_FEBRUARY13.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkGuard Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3180055a_Grey_Knights_v1.4_APRIL13.pdf http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m3030012a_Blood_Angels_v1.3_FEBRUARY13.pdf What/where exactly are we supposed to be looking at in them? A bit of help and direction would be a lot more useful than chucking a couple of links up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Res Ipsa Loquitur Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Neither of those helps that I can see, Fibonacci. As things stand, I think Axagoras is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fibonacci Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 He asked it it had been changed in an errata. I showed him where to find the errata. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam13n Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 It is very unlikely that they'd errata it. However when BA and GK get new codices you can bet that there'll be a "Primary Detachment" addendum to the "X as Troops" FOC Modifiers. To be honest, GW were really pro-active with FAQs until the last batch. We were getting updates every other month (it seemed) but there hasn't been an update since April (except for the tiny FAQ for Eldar) I know I've submitted quite a few things that really need sorting out and get the lovely "will be considered for inclusion in the next FAQ" reply, then nothing, no update for 4 months. It's starting to feel like they can't be bothered to fix any of the obvious misprints and obvious omissions (probably because it doesn't net them any money, you've already bought the codex, the fact that it's not finished is therefore irrelevant :P ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Its more likely to do with the rate at wich their putting out suppliments and new books at this point- theyll fix it once theyve gotten alot of this creative steam out and can look at the whole picture, instead of having us complain that theyve changed their mind three times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam13n Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 I can understand that with balance issues, but the glaring omissions - like the Tau bomber that can never actually drop a bomb and the Flamer Chariot that can't move and shoot. These things need fixing, not balancing. If they are really focussing that much on producing unnecessary supplements that they can't also produce a FAQ update once every couple of months (where necessary) then that reeks of poor prioritisation skills. Make sure the rules at least work first, then you can add stuff to them. Otherwise 40k will end up a horribly convoluted and confusing mess full of terribly worded rules that will never be fixed or balanced. Enough off-topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Otherwise 40k will end up a horribly convoluted and confusing mess full of terribly worded rules that will never be fixed or balanced. Trying to put me out of the job eh? I think this questions been fully answered though, so we can call it good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.