40k draft FAQ & DA

[dtse]

And we can jink now if a blast accidentally finds its way over to us from the primary target. That's good

[DA_WarM]

So I'm confused, what exactly is the FAQ on Gets Hot doing? Wording isn't too clear.

If I understand correctly, if a "Gets Hot" weapon is twinlinked (apart from blast weapons) you must roll a "1" and on a reroll another "1". Can anyone confirm my understanding?

[dtse]

No. If just second roll is a 1 you get hot. Even if first roll was not (but it missed, like rolling a 2).

 

So for example

 

Plasma talons on black Knights

 

First roll 2 - miss

 

Twin link roll 1 - gets hot

 

Armour save

[DA_WarM]

Then it's worse than what I thought.   GW must not like us to do that...I'll stop rerolling 2s in that case.

[ronin_cse]

The squadron being counted as a unit is pretty dumb. The Silence (Abductor) squadron takes 2 different types of flyers, So you're forced to a use one or two aircraft in a way that isn't meant to be played.

 

They just have to arrive on the board as if they were a squadron, once they arrive they can act as independent units.

https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com/bloggings/756

 

I would have to agree with Diavlo, first draft, to me would indicate that this isn't final and can still change. The fact they encourage comments would further his belief.

 

Chmur's point is that although they very well may clarify their answers based on feedback they probably won't change anything since they aren't actually changing any rules with the FAQs (with the exception of the 2 erratas). Basically don't get your hopes up for any of the answers to change other than wording.

[Brother dean]

So I'm confused, what exactly is the FAQ on Gets Hot doing? Wording isn't too clear.

If I understand correctly, if a "Gets Hot" weapon is twinlinked (apart from blast weapons) you must roll a "1" and on a reroll another "1". Can anyone confirm my understanding?

No. If just second roll is a 1 you get hot. Even if first roll was not (but it missed, like rolling a 2).

So for example

Plasma talons on black Knights

First roll 2 - miss

Twin link roll 1 - gets hot

Armour save

Then it's worse than what I thought. GW must not like us to do that...I'll stop rerolling 2s in that case.

That is the way it has always been intended. They have corrected the poor wording in the second part of the paragraph that seemed to indicate you needed two 1s in a row.

[ronin_cse]

Then it's worse than what I thought.   GW must not like us to do that...I'll stop rerolling 2s in that case.

 

I seriously doubt they decided to clarify this rule simply because they don't like Dark Angels :p

[dtse]

Can you actually elect to not reroll if you are twinlinked? It's still odds in your Favor to hit and kill something but that's an interesting thought

[Chaplain Lucifer]

The twin linked rule has a "may" so you can settle for the first result.

Anyway. These are draft FAQs so I'm not losing my head if something looks wrong. Can't be worse than playing without FAQ

[DarkAngeal]

The twin linked rule has a "may" so you can settle for the first result.

Anyway. These are draft FAQs so I'm not losing my head if something looks wrong. Can't be worse than playing without FAQ

I think you are wrong with the wording, CL, last time I checked it said, "if a shooting weapon has the twin linked special rule... it rerolls all failed to hit rolls."

It's not optional, you can't just not reroll the twos.

Edit:

(The only exception to this is blasts, which give the option to reroll based on if you are satisfied with the scatter)

[Chaplain Lucifer]

Maybe I am wrong.;) I am away from the rulebook and previous editions have a may... My excuses if I am not 100%

[Interrogator Stobz]

But if you don't want to risk getting hot then don't shoot. Why would you not re-roll, you want the other guy dead.

 

I preferred the 'needs two 1s in a row' interpretation, but the new one seems a little fairer (only in relation to the game, getting hot on a real weapon makes no sense as we would have no Black Knights left after a very short period of heavy shooting at the practice range).

[dtse]

I never liked how you can die to gets hot. Surely 40000 years from now we could fix somehing like that. Would prefer if it just meant you couldn't shoot that turn or something non lethal

[ValourousHeart]

And with RWSF you cannot take a single flyer...

So if i want a single DT i autolose...

  

 

This might come across as rude, but you need to learn to think outside of the box. The FAQ does not say if you take a single flyer with your RW you auto lose. It says that if your entire army has to start in reserves and has no option to enter play during turn 1, then you auto lose. So field 2 RWSF... And have your compulsory FA choices be your 1-2 flyers... Then put your second HQ and you have just fielded your flyers in your pure RW army and didn't auto lose.

 

And while the person asking the question mentioned the RWSF, the answer didn't address the question with regard to the RWSF, but rather in a broader sense. I would not expect to find an answer to what "or deployed as normal" means outside of the DA FAQ.

 

And we can jink now if a blast accidentally finds its way over to us from the primary target. That's good

Sweet... I personally thought that they would merge Go to Ground and Jink into the same mechanic... But I can live with this change.

[Chmur]

On gets hot issue - I will post the following as I already got into heated debate previously on facebook on the FAQ matter and don't want these forums to get as toxic as FB often does - I simply do not understand how anyone could've ever ruled that you need 2 consecutive rolls of 1 to get gets hot result. I might be new to the game, and it might be the lawyer in me talking, but no matter how I read the rules, it seems very clear... What I think causes the confusion is that the paragraph "Gets hot and rerolls" is often perceived as special rule and not an explanation to what happens when these two rules meet. Because, following the (imho) straightforward logic.

 

Gets Hot - any to hit roll of 1 gives GH result

 

Twin Linked - any failed to hit rolls (may) be rerolled

 

Reroll rules - you must keep second roll result even if it's worse

 

Put the three principles above to practice and you get absolutely without a doubt the rule that any reroll of 1 is Gets Hot. What the specific paragraph on GH and rerolls does is, it protects the TL player from having to save a wound from the first result. Try to read the paragraph as it's written (since, in conjecture with what I said above and how the rules should work, it clearly is), but think of it's wording as "you do not suffer a wound from 1 on first roll unless you roll 1 on the same dice on second roll" and note how that is different from the current interpretation of "you suffer a wound only if first and second roll is 1" 

 

The wording is poor in rulebook and could be interpreted either way, on it's own. If you take into consideration the 3 single rules I prefaced all this with, I wouldn't think there'd be any doubt as to how it should be treated. A final roll of 1 is a wound...

 

This is why I am glad we had the FAQs. Not sure how laws are treated where you guys live, but FAQ for these rules are basically what we have here oftentimes, that is when the law-making body of the country issues "clarification on intent behind law" for certain bills passed. GW here basically explain what they meant with the rules, but they are not changing any rules per say.

[Loar]

Only fighters, aka our nephilim jet fighter will be keeping skyfire from the death from the skies book. Our dark talon becomes an attack flyer, which upsets me because I feel it should be a bomber. But alas I don't make the rules, I just play the game

So is that a mandatory book for everyone to buy and know the rules for in order to play the game now? I thought it was another of the zillion supplements GW publishes that I can just choose to ignore if I don't want those options/campaigns/etcetera in my games of 40k.

This is from the GW site in the description of the Death From the Skies book:

Death From the Skies is a must-buy for Warhammer 40,000 players – the 160-page hardback contains new rules for Flyers that completely replace those found in Warhammer 40,000, with datasheets including new Agility, Combat Role and Pursuit Value characteristics and options for fielding Flyer Wing units, with their own leaders. On top of this, the book introduces the Dogfight phase – detailed combat between Flyers is now possible!

So even though its a supplement its not optional as it replaces the current rules for flyers in 40k.

Dogfight phase, just another phase to forget about during your turn. I forgot about the psychic phase a couple of times last night playing with my Tyranids.

It may replace those rules, but it only does that when you use it, it is still a supplement. Escalation, Planetstrike, the original Death from the skies supplement, etc. all replaced a ton of rules from the 6th ed codex, but again it was a still a supplement and was not required or mandatory for the base game (although they merged portions of these supps into what became 7th ed).

Until the BRB gets updated in a 8th or 7.5 ed format that includes these new rules it is not a mandatory part of the game (the rules get replaced only if you use the supplement).

FYI the rumor mill has mentioned an updated BRB may be coming later this year, which easily could include these rules, but until then this can be ignored in normal games if you don't want to play with it

[Harleqvin]

I would have to agree with Diavlo, first draft, to me would indicate that this isn't final and can still change. The fact they encourage comments would further his belief.

It is only for clarification. it said so specifically on the post that they only want to make things perfectly clear. Not change new things.

And we can jink now if a blast accidentally finds its way over to us from the primary target. That's good

No. Currently that question was answered with "After" so they need to give the correct answer as "After" is not an answer that makes any sense with the non targeted unit being able to Jink.

So I'm confused, what exactly is the FAQ on Gets Hot doing? Wording isn't too clear.

If I understand correctly, if a "Gets Hot" weapon is twinlinked (apart from blast weapons) you must roll a "1" and on a reroll another "1". Can anyone confirm my understanding?

It's always been that way. You always take the final result with rerolls, not the before and after result. So if you roll a 3, or a 2, or a 1, and miss, twinlink makes you reroll with normal shooting. If your reroll is a 1 you then trigger Gets Hot not before.

The issue that may need to be asked, but i donIt think that ever was, is if Twin-linked/Hatred/Preferred Enemy works for a reroll if the Plasma Cannon di roll for Gets Hot rolls a 1 can you attempt a reroll. In past edition they allowed, but I don;t know about this edition. (edit - I missed the Q about if Preferred Enemy allowed a reroll on 1 for gets hot with blast weapons. It was a No. It's not a "To hit" roll. So that would answer that one. lqtm. =[D> )

Can you actually elect to not reroll if you are twinlinked? It's still odds in your Favor to hit and kill something but that's an interesting thought

Normal roll to hit, you must reroll. Twin linked, Hartred, Preferred Enemy, you must reroll (twinlinked reroll if you miss, H & PE if you roll a 1 you reroll.)

However Twinlinked on Blast markers you "May" reroll if you didn't get a direct hit result on the scatter di.

Only fighters, aka our nephilim jet fighter will be keeping skyfire from the death from the skies book. Our dark talon becomes an attack flyer, which upsets me because I feel it should be a bomber. But alas I don't make the rules, I just play the game

So is that a mandatory book for everyone to buy and know the rules for in order to play the game now? I thought it was another of the zillion supplements GW publishes that I can just choose to ignore if I don't want those options/campaigns/etcetera in my games of 40k.

This is from the GW site in the description of the Death From the Skies book:

Death From the Skies is a must-buy for Warhammer 40,000 players – the 160-page hardback contains new rules for Flyers that completely replace those found in Warhammer 40,000, with datasheets including new Agility, Combat Role and Pursuit Value characteristics and options for fielding Flyer Wing units, with their own leaders. On top of this, the book introduces the Dogfight phase – detailed combat between Flyers is now possible!

So even though its a supplement its not optional as it replaces the current rules for flyers in 40k.

Dogfight phase, just another phase to forget about during your turn. I forgot about the psychic phase a couple of times last night playing with my Tyranids.

It may replace those rules, but it only does that when you use it, it is still a supplement. Escalation, Planetstrike, the original Death from the skies supplement, etc. all replaced a ton of rules from the 6th ed codex, but again it was a still a supplement and was not required or mandatory for the base game (although they merged portions of these supps into what became 7th ed).

Until the BRB gets updated in a 8th or 7.5 ed format that includes these new rules it is not a mandatory part of the game (the rules get replaced only if you use the supplement).

FYI the rumor mill has mentioned an updated BRB may be coming later this year, which easily could include these rules, but until then this can be ignored in normal games if you don't want to play with it

The problem is the enhanced and digital edition of the codices have the new rules for the Flyer units listed, and not the old ones to my knowledge. Does anyone have evidence to show that they Digital Codices (Ebook/Enhanced/Gamer Editions,) have both listed? I swore it was shown somewhere that the digital editions were already augmented having only the new datasheets for Flyers.

[Master Avoghai]

On gets hot issue - I will post the following as I already got into heated debate previously on facebook on the FAQ matter and don't want these forums to get as toxic as FB often does - I simply do not understand how anyone could've ever ruled that you need 2 consecutive rolls of 1 to get gets hot result. I might be new to the game, and it might be the lawyer in me talking, but no matter how I read the rules, it seems very clear... What I think causes the confusion is that the paragraph "Gets hot and rerolls" is often perceived as special rule and not an explanation to what happens when these two rules meet. Because, following the (imho) straightforward logic.

 

Gets Hot - any to hit roll of 1 gives GH result

 

Twin Linked - any failed to hit rolls (may) be rerolled

 

Reroll rules - you must keep second roll result even if it's worse

 

Put the three principles above to practice and you get absolutely without a doubt the rule that any reroll of 1 is Gets Hot. What the specific paragraph on GH and rerolls does is, it protects the TL player from having to save a wound from the first result. Try to read the paragraph as it's written (since, in conjecture with what I said above and how the rules should work, it clearly is), but think of it's wording as "you do not suffer a wound from 1 on first roll unless you roll 1 on the same dice on second roll" and note how that is different from the current interpretation of "you suffer a wound only if first and second roll is 1" 

 

The wording is poor in rulebook and could be interpreted either way, on it's own. If you take into consideration the 3 single rules I prefaced all this with, I wouldn't think there'd be any doubt as to how it should be treated. A final roll of 1 is a wound...

 

This is why I am glad we had the FAQs. Not sure how laws are treated where you guys live, but FAQ for these rules are basically what we have here oftentimes, that is when the law-making body of the country issues "clarification on intent behind law" for certain bills passed. GW here basically explain what they meant with the rules, but they are not changing any rules per say.

I think that, though behing interesting your explanation just doesn't consider the wordin that states that the weapon gets hot if the second result ALSO gives one.

 

The use of "also" necessarly includes a repetition. It includes that both result must be identical.

 

You argue that your understanding of the rule allows to consider that if you obtain a 2, then a one, your weapons gets hot. However in this case, there is no repetition, the 2 results are not identical. Hence it enters in contradiction with your process.

 

To be understood the way you suggest, the correct wording should have been : the weapon gets hot ONLY IF the second roll gives a one. This wording clearly means that a one obtained on the 1st roll is ignored and cover both cases :

- you obtain a one then a one

- you obtain a "non one" miss then a one

 

But most important : the process you explain in the beginning of your post is the one we used to proceed since the v3. We never needed any additionnal wording to do so because we did apply the process you've described and it did work. The said process was simple and understood by everyone and it worked without any bug.

Hence if such paragraph was added to the Get hot rule it was for a simple reason : rule changing.

 

NOW AND IT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT OF MY REPLY PLEASE DO NOT HIT ME WITHOUT HAVING READ IT :lol:

 

I don't bother if it was one or another. If I gets hot more often, I'll take it with a smile and it won't prevent me to play my 24 BK ;)

 

What I'm just saying is that I absolutely do not believe in the theory stating that it was rule abuse of an ambiguous rule.

The rule wasn't ambiguous. At all.

 

BUT the rule was clearly broken. 1/36 chances to gets hot is a joke, particularly when you have a 3+ save after that....

 

Moreover it was totally unjustified in a balance way : the process we used to apply since v3 was fine. Why introducing a new one?

That's why I think it just made some of us think that we did not read the rule well and that there actually was an hidden meaning : GW could not have changed something that worked for something totally broken...

 

But they actually can they do it regularly ... They actually managed to make armoured DW totally unplayable though it was perfectly fine and worked well without any abuse. They can make such mistake

 

I do think that GW intended to make gets hot only happening on a double one but they just realized they gave an unjustified bonus and they just profited from the FAQ to correct it.

 

Now whatever rule it is (double one or second one) I'm fine with that :yes:

[Brother dean]

You are right, it never was ambiguous.  "You must keep the result of the re-roll even if it is worse than the first result."

 

It is your faulty reading of the Twin Linked rule that is leading you astray.  I know because I read it that way for a long time but the part you are missing is that it is ONLY speaking about the first roll, not the second.  The part they are trying to clarify with their example is that if you roll a 1 then roll a 1 you do not take TWO gets hot wounds, only one. 

[DarkAngeal]

The very fact that we are having this debate illustrates the ambiguity in the wording. The fact is that it creates a polarization of the two possible interpretations and that either you agreed with one reading of the rule or the other. Luckily they released an FAQ on the matter, forever putting the debate to rest. Attempting to argue about weather or not it needed to be FAQ'ed is far from the issue and distracts completely on discussion of how this FAQ affects our codex.

I don't know what all questions we got submitted regarding our codex, any ideas what we can expect when our turn rolls round?

[Master Avoghai]

To me, the 2 main changes concern the scout moves after seize and the flyers that can attack other flyers with blast weapons. Like I've said, the gets hot clarification wont't change anything for me : the BK will pass from incredibely good to very very good :D I'll conitnue to role the plasma talons model per model anyway (a pain when you have 24 :lol: )

 

Seize before scout is a very good new as it will allow us to be even more reactive to the opponent. I won't fear to expose some models and also I will be able to be more offensive turn one if I see that I manzged to seize the initiative.

 

Blast on flyers also means that my dark talon will become a must have in many of my lists. I was often dubious to take it because, though the potential strength D was interesting (and actually the S10 too) I was always disapointed to spare points in a flyer that couldn't help me to rule the sky... Now I can do both. However, it makes our Nephilim even less useful and more pricey...

[Harleqvin]

To me, the 2 main changes concern the scout moves after seize and the flyers that can attack other flyers with blast weapons. Like I've said, the gets hot clarification wont't change anything for me : the BK will pass from incredibely good to very very good I'll conitnue to role the plasma talons model per model anyway (a pain when you have 24 )

Seize before scout is a very good new as it will allow us to be even more reactive to the opponent. I won't fear to expose some models and also I will be able to be more offensive turn one if I see that I manzged to seize the initiative.

Blast on flyers also means that my dark talon will become a must have in many of my lists. I was often dubious to take it because, though the potential strength D was interesting (and actually the S10 too) I was always disapointed to spare points in a flyer that couldn't help me to rule the sky... Now I can do both. However, it makes our Nephilim even less useful and more pricey...

If they have Skyfire.Don't forget that thye have changed how the flyers work. All new Data sheets in "Death from the Skies"

[ValourousHeart]

Blast on flyers also means that my dark talon will become a must have in many of my lists. I was often dubious to take it because, though the potential strength D was interesting (and actually the S10 too) I was always disapointed to spare points in a flyer that couldn't help me to rule the sky... Now I can do both. However, it makes our Nephilim even less useful and more pricey...

You should go read Death from the Skies before you give misinformation.

They changed a lot about how flyers work in the game.

Instead of every flyer just being a skimmer that moves faster and is hard to hit... They broke them down into combat roles.

 

They define them in the book slightly different, but essentially they gave us FIGHTERS, BOMBERS and ATTACK PLANES/HELECOPTERS.

Or to put it into real world terms... F-14s, B-1s, and A-10s / Apaches

 

Our flyers have different roles from each other, the Talon is an attack plane, whereas the Nephilem is a fighter.

 

The Talon doesn't get sky fire, but does get a lot of bonuses that make it even better at dealing with ground targets.

For example it is usually BS5 and it jinks on a 3+.

 

The Nephilem gets a number of bonuses that make it better at dealing with aircraft.

The biggest bonus is that most of the aircraft that people felt were better than the Nephilem aren't fighters now... So they will be easy pickings for the Nephilem.

The next bonus is that most results on the dogfight table cause you to have to snap fire.... Except that the Nephilems missiles never have to snap fire in a dogfight.

 

This supplement did a lot for us... Don't be so hasty to dismiss it.

[Master Avoghai]

Like said before : unless we go 8th edition and that the change are implemented within, DftS is nothing more that a supplement that you are free to ignore. It's just like the cityfight, fortress supplements.

 

I hardly see people buying a book just to include a new phase here... Man it's already difficult to make people buy a codex in order to play his army... I really doubt people wil get the book in order to add a new phase that seem to annoy everybody.

 

Some may do it in your area and it's fine... But unless the ETC include the flyer phase in their next qualification, I simply can't imagine people considering it as part of the main rulebook here... Unless GW changes the rulebook of course :rolleyes:

[Isiah]

I would agree with MA here. There is no way I'm shelling out on yet another book to game with. Air rules need to be rolled into the rumoured 8th Edition - or else many people will just not bother with them.