Faith & Fury FAQ now live!

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I have emailed the FAQ team, (first time I have actually ever done so)

 

Below is an extract from my email, If others want to email them (40K FAQ <40kfaq@gwplc.com>) I think that the solution I have suggested below is a nicely balanced fix, which is easily made to the FAQ. Perhaps if others suggest the same, they may be more likely to take notice?

 

 

 

 

The situation now, as of the FAQ, leaves Black Templars lacking in some key areas, namely:

             

• Black Templars are the only successor chapter to lack access to any of their founding chapter’s relics via a stratagem.
• Black Templars have fewer stratagems than any of the chapters. (The fact that Crimson Fists have double the number we do is particularly noted.)
• Black Templars lack access to Special Issue Wargear
• Black Templars lack access to a stratagem which allows a character to take two warlord traits.

 

I was always taught however, that simply moaning about a problem doesn’t really help the situation. I would therefore suggest the following amendment to the first paragraph of the Designer’s Commentary:

 

To be clear, although the Black Templars are an Imperial Fists successor Chapter, they deviate significantly from its tactics and doctrines, and as such we have provided a bespoke, dedicated set of rules to represent them on the tabletop in Faith & Fury. They cannot make use of any of the rules found in Codex Supplement: Imperial Fists [except for Special-Issue Wargear Relics List and the following stratagems and their associated relic and warlord trait lists:

 

• Champion of Blades
• Sentinel of Terra
• Gift of the Phalanx]

 

Simply adding that line to the FAQ document, would, in my view, balance things out nicely between the chapter supplements, and correct the imbalances I have discussed above, this seems to me to be a fix which can be easily employed without having to produce anything more than an updated FAQ.

[Medjugorje]

I would agree in most points - but we dont need any other relics because we have our own (without spending even more CPs on it)...

I think that shouldnt be complained about. The rest is definitly correct - in addition the lack of model support is the most unpleased thing in here.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I agree on model support, and to an extent relics.

However, none of those can be changed by a mere FAQ, these can.

[Brother Tyler]

The link to the Psychic Awakening: Faith and Fury FAQ (v 1.0) has been added to the resources.

[Acebaur]

I would agree in most points - but we dont need any other relics because we have our own (without spending even more CPs on it)...

I think that shouldnt be complained about. The rest is definitly correct - in addition the lack of model support is the most unpleased thing in here.

Have you seen the banner of staganda? That has Black Templars written all over it.

[ST.Lazarus]

I did expect us to be in the same slot as the crimson fists. I.e that we got our special rules but also acess to the strategems and specialist equipment from the imperial fist book.

Edited January 7, 2020 by ST.Lazarus

[Marshal Reinhard]

I'd have only expected it if were actually included there.

[Hadda]

 

I have emailed the FAQ team, (first time I have actually ever done so)

 

Below is an extract from my email, If others want to email them (40K FAQ <40kfaq@gwplc.com>) I think that the solution I have suggested below is a nicely balanced fix, which is easily made to the FAQ. Perhaps if others suggest the same, they may be more likely to take notice?

 

 

 

 

The situation now, as of the FAQ, leaves Black Templars lacking in some key areas, namely:

             

• Black Templars are the only successor chapter to lack access to any of their founding chapter’s relics via a stratagem.
• Black Templars have fewer stratagems than any of the chapters. (The fact that Crimson Fists have double the number we do is particularly noted.)
• Black Templars lack access to Special Issue Wargear
• Black Templars lack access to a stratagem which allows a character to take two warlord traits.

 

I was always taught however, that simply moaning about a problem doesn’t really help the situation. I would therefore suggest the following amendment to the first paragraph of the Designer’s Commentary:

 

To be clear, although the Black Templars are an Imperial Fists successor Chapter, they deviate significantly from its tactics and doctrines, and as such we have provided a bespoke, dedicated set of rules to represent them on the tabletop in Faith & Fury. They cannot make use of any of the rules found in Codex Supplement: Imperial Fists [except for Special-Issue Wargear Relics List and the following stratagems and their associated relic and warlord trait lists:

 

• Champion of Blades
• Sentinel of Terra
• Gift of the Phalanx]

 

Simply adding that line to the FAQ document, would, in my view, balance things out nicely between the chapter supplements, and correct the imbalances I have discussed above, this seems to me to be a fix which can be easily employed without having to produce anything more than an updated FAQ.

 

 

I agree with your assessment and have emailed the FAQ time. Hopefully they will change their minds.

 

-- Hadda

[Sete]

This was expected.

Feels like we only got half a supplement. Maybe there is a good reason for it.

Maybe we will get the rest with our IC next edition.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Sete! You're back? Edited January 24, 2020 by Brother Adelard

[Sete]

Sete! You're back?

I was never gone ;)

Just went back to lurking. My frustration with faith and fury (along with RL issues) overwhelmed me, and so I decided to step back a bit for a couple months. I will be lurking mostly until new edition hits.

Decided to have a look at the LVO reveals (ghazzy looking mighty fine, hopefully Helbrecht and Yarrick feud wont be completely forgotten for Ragnar), and see if the FAQ had hit.

Edited January 24, 2020 by Sete

[Schlitzaf]

I mean; Crusader Squad issue aside. I actually think our supplement awesome. Only thing we didn’t get that tbf wish we did. Was Biker Crusaders. We still our vigilus detachment for sword brothern. Our characters got a nice buff.

[Sete]

Just mentioning back to Adelard post on what we are missing.

My assumption would be if something else would be released next edition (since these rules seem to be made with the next edition in mind) new units, with the missing stuff would make sense. :)

It's all conjecture of course.

Edited January 24, 2020 by Sete

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

You are back again... just ruined my weekend.

[Medjugorje]

Just mentioning back to Adelard post on what we are missing.

My assumption would be if something else would be released next edition (since these rules seem to be made with the next edition in mind) new units, with the missing stuff would make sense.

It's all conjecture of course.

I think the tactic article about Black Templars was wrong because they had the new edition in mind so far. And maybe those "I strike always first" abilities could be very good in next edition. We have a lot of them. 

[Schlitzaf]

Medj always fight first abilites are actually amazing for us; because of Devout Push. Sense we will not be charging a lot of the time.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

It was slightly nice to hear that the DA also didn't get a strat to put two WL traits on one character.

 

That'll teach the traitorous swine for what they did to the Ophidium Gulf.

[Acebaur]

I hate to break it to you, but there is no next edition. GW has made that clear with the launch of 8th and how they've handled AoS. They aren't going to make sweeping huge changes. If we get a new rulebook it will literally just be a reprint with the updated matched play rules in it. Perhaps a few other minor things from any changes they decide to test in the Spring FAQ. 

[Medjugorje]

Medj always fight first abilites are actually amazing for us; because of Devout Push. Sense we will not be charging a lot of the time.

why.

 

1. if you dont charge with any unit (just pile in by devot push). the enemy cannot intervene and so we hit first because its our turn

2. If one unit charges and our "devot push" unit is in combat - the first charging unit must be done and then the enemy can intervene.

3. If more of our units will charge - same as point 2.

 

There is NOTHING good in it in the Black Templar turn... and in the enemy phase you just have 3" which your enemy must go into this trap... so its toooo situational.

 

by the way. I was on a 30 men tournament yesterday. I didnt play BT but I think if I had I would be as successfull like i was with iron hands successors. Especially in my last game I fought against Imperial Fists with Executioners and Thunderfire cannon list... If we take this list with our 4++ and 5+++ its amazing... + Impulsor Devot Push Intercessors which take all Thunderfire cannons in first turn.

[Medjugorje]

I hate to break it to you, but there is no next edition. GW has made that clear with the launch of 8th and how they've handled AoS. They aren't going to make sweeping huge changes. If we get a new rulebook it will literally just be a reprint with the updated matched play rules in it. Perhaps a few other minor things from any changes they decide to test in the Spring FAQ. 

 i heard the opposit from a gametester (better said one of my best friends talked with him) - the changes from 8th to 9th editon are much higher then expected. Not as big as from 7 to 8 but not just 8.2

[SydonianDragoon404]

I'm hoping for either a kill team style system for shooting or an apoc style damage phase to get rid of "alpha strike I get first turn you're done" play style. Also a heavier penalty for falling back from combat. All of this assuming you're right medj. Time will tell. 

 

Is there really much more discussion to be had on the FAQ for F&F? 

Edited January 26, 2020 by SydonianDragoon404

[AlmightyWalrus]

Assuming that Devout Push works the way it has been hypothesized in this thread, wouldn't that mean that we can guarantee that a unit can get in from Deep Strike, assuming it's 9.000...1 inches away from the enemy? Deep Strike, pile in 3", consolidate 6" and you're in combat directly from Deep Strike bypassing Overwatch.

 

Possible return of the Thunder Hammer/Storm Shield Terminators with a vengeance? You can splurge a lot of CP on further stratagems (+1 to hit, stopping fallbacks, fight again, and so on) to make the Terminators be a real headache for the enemy.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Assuming that Devout Push works the way it has been hypothesized in this thread, wouldn't that mean that we can guarantee that a unit can get in from Deep Strike, assuming it's 9.000...1 inches away from the enemy? Deep Strike, pile in 3", consolidate 6" and you're in combat directly from Deep Strike bypassing Overwatch.

 

Possible return of the Thunder Hammer/Storm Shield Terminators with a vengeance? You can splurge a lot of CP on further stratagems (+1 to hit, stopping fallbacks, fight again, and so on) to make the Terminators be a real headache for the enemy.

But you consolidate after you fight? So no.

[Acebaur]

Assuming that Devout Push works the way it has been hypothesized in this thread, wouldn't that mean that we can guarantee that a unit can get in from Deep Strike, assuming it's 9.000...1 inches away from the enemy? Deep Strike, pile in 3", consolidate 6" and you're in combat directly from Deep Strike bypassing Overwatch.

 

Possible return of the Thunder Hammer/Storm Shield Terminators with a vengeance? You can splurge a lot of CP on further stratagems (+1 to hit, stopping fallbacks, fight again, and so on) to make the Terminators be a real headache for the enemy.

After more thought on it and discussion with others I don't believe you get to consolidate if you can't be chosen to fight.

[AlmightyWalrus]

Aw, rereading the Fight! phase rules I'm forced to agree. Shame.