Goatboy’s 40K: FAQ First Thoughts

40k-codexes-20

Hey here is Goatboy again with a big list of the biggest things from the recent FAQ dump by GW.

There are a lot of good things, some enh things, and a few armies that feel very sad things.  Still overall I am happy GW finally released them and hopefully these changes will be part of the new edition and will let us players easily transition to new landscape that is the new 40k.  With that – let’s get this list started.

 

40kFAQ-header

 

gscult-hybrid-tntGenestealer Cult got a lot of nerfs. Servo Skulls stop their initial Ambush as well as the mean ole GreyFax.  This is pretty dang big as a very cheap unit option now can invalidate an army’s formations first turn.  This formation also took a big hit as you can’t add other HQ units to the Subterranean Uprising and utilize the 2d6 to roll for cult ambush.  They answered how HQ units attached to units don’t come back if they meld back into the shadows as well which was suspected based on how other rules interactions work.  But overall this army took it pretty hard.

99550108167_imperialknightheadvi01

Imperial Knight arm weapons also took a big hit. There is a middle safe zone now based on their 90 degree arc for shooting. This is pretty weird as before they said they can shoot everywhere so this change is pretty rough.  Still, just pay attention, move accordingly and don’t get blocked out by throwing the fury of the Emperor at the enemy.

alpha_legion_livery

No more double duplicating Cultists for the Alpha Legion.  Cuz obviously those guys were wrecking everything.

servo-skull

Servo skulls and old Inquisition rules are still around. – Oh Yeah!

Pirahna

Final true answer on the Piranha factory for the Tau.  You can’t go on and off in the same turn.

praetorandapothecaries

More iteration that Apocatheries can’t take other weapons.

 

superfriends

Another hit saying that everyone loses their chapter tactics if they join another Marine unit from a different army.  It makes me think the other armies will get “chapter” tactics instead of just army rules.

99070109003_DeathwatchWatchmaster01

Deathwatch lost a lot of stuff with changes to their rules.  No more shooting your meltagun and missile launcher.   The Angelius Beacon thingie now works like all other Beacons – it has to start on the table top.  Oh and all your kill teams can’t take a dedicated transport.  A lot of kind of nerfs to the newest expensive Marine army (Buddy is playing them so we sending me unhappy texts on Friday).

447px-Pink-Horror

Daemons still get the primary psychic focus and daemonic psychic focus powers.  Chaos Space marines still have to take one even though they get one for having a Mark.  News at 11 – most sorcerers will never be marked unless they have to be (Thousand Sons).

valkyrie_v02

Oh and they fixed the random Valkyrie formation in Imperial Agents so at least that is usable.  Which is great as it lets that army get a flyer – that they normally never took anyway.

 

That seems to be some of the bigger ones I cared about.  Right now I am just waiting on 8th to finally come into play and hopefully usher in a new dark age of 40k – with the Chaos God of Hope that is the Emperor fighting the Chaos Gods of evil and despair.  I don’t suspect will see bubble universes but it does feel like a crazy new age of 40k is coming – most likely with still complicated rules and maybe an easier way to build armies.

~ What most surprised you in the NEW FAQs?

  • Wolfman UK

    How did some people think the above was legit anyway?

    • ILikeToColourRed

      which ones?

      the deathwatch relic beacon lacks the sentence saying it has to be on the table at the start of the turn

      alpha legion gives a rule where you roll to place an identical unit in reserve to the unit destroyed (cultists only)
      -they can also take a formation for cultists that has the same rule but with a different name – why would they not stack?

      • MClay01

        Wasn’t the alpha legion rule part of a formation that was different than the cultist formation? I would think only minis selected as part of a formation benefit from that formations rules and that formations rules were not intended to spill over into other formations.

        • Koonitz

          That is normally true. However ‘decurion’ style detachments, such as the Alpha Legion Insurgency Force and others (like the Gladius Strike Force or the Necron’s Decurion detachment) all have rules stating that formations as part of the detachment benefit from both their formation rules AND the detachment rules, where applicable.

          As such, the Lost and the Damned have their formation benefit of a unit coming back AND the Insurgency Force’s detachment benefit of a unit coming back, which has now been clarified that they do not stack.

          • MClay01

            I have never played a decurion list myself and did not know this. 8th is around the corner, but I’ll stack it in the brain files Incase I decide to attempt a decurion formation with my Biel Tan prior to GW’s fracturing which probably means my Aspects Warriors and Avatar are being discontinued.

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            Meaning, effectively, that the Alpha Legion decurion has one less special rule than the other Legions.

      • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

        this really sucks. It basically means the Alpha Legion’s biggest and most characterful bonus is just a mistakenly duplicated badly proof read rule. Thanks GW. Do they not even read their own books or playtest anything?!!!!

        • Davor Mackovic

          No. No they don’t.

    • Foxdonut

      I’m Terribly sorry i don’t know how i ever thought a knight could shoot forwards. Truly i am power gaming WAAC scum. i must have gotten the vapors thinking about physics.

      • Mike X (Official)

        Yeah, that’s pretty ridiculous. They should have at least a 112° outward arc.
        http://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/11e0d8d7de401f1254388f39c7c61e5f4242f234352a484f3d20a58736046e08.jpg

        • Ghaniman

          I just took a protractor and measured my models angle of fire, and it can literally only fire in a 100-120° arc facing forward.
          There’s no physical way for it to ever fire perpendicular to its side, and I’ve tried swiveling the multiple joints on the guns, and the hips to accommodate the non-barrel end of the guns, and only if you’re shooting at something in the sky will they ever get perpendicular.

          • Mike X (Official)

            That’s why I said at least 112°…

      • Luke Eaton

        http://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f775a28babe3949911e678bea4dde095443b36bf8832798af1a8b7b84eb1c51b.png In the IK FAQ, the question regarding the IK’s weapon arcs has two major issues.

        First issue: Why does the question-asker refer to the “Weapons on Walkers as being fixed forward?” Where is that written? Did Knights just get a nerf because someone asked a question that has no basis?

        Second issue: It seems that GW thought they’d “make it easier” on the players to understand their answer’s wording, so they used their graphics team to make the illustration below the question. In so doing, GW allowed a graphic designer to inadvertently make this ruling. Cleary, the graphics team doesn’t understand that the carapace has empty space underneath it.

        Simply remove the graphic, and the issue goes away.

        Thus, the proposal for events: The IK’s sponson-mounted weapons will have a 90 degree arc, but it will go 45 degrees inward, and 45 degrees outward. See my professional photo-shopping below.

        Thoughts/comments appreciated.

        • Raven Jax

          This is pretty much the exact way my playground has been doing it.

    • ZeeLobby

      Yeah… Some of the rules are just badly written (FAQs as well, but this is GW).

      • EnTyme

        Some of the questions were equally poorly worded (see the Kill Team DT question).

  • pompeyladBFP

    The deathwatch killteam dedicated transport is being read wrong, look at the question asked and the answer given.

    • ILikeToColourRed

      you cant take a dedicated transport unless everyone can get in it – ie. no razorback if you added a terminator to the squad

      • OldHat

        Because at that point it isn’t a transport, just a tank you got due to a rule. They want it to reflect the fluff that the unit actually uses the tank you paid for. 😉

        • Jason C

          Well, if it was just fluff, the guy on a bike would just ride along side. Or scout ahead providing intel. Also, night fighting rules wouldn’t just last a round. What if the sun just set? Is this the Little Prince planet?

          • OldHat

            Sure, but they have to balance fluff with gaming mechanics. This ruling is clearly that level of compromise.

    • Drew_Da_Destroya

      Q: It’s not specifically stated that anything other than Veterans can take a Dedicated Transport. The assumption is that all Kill Team combinations,Terminator units, etc. can take a Dedicated Transport within the limitations dictated by the types of model in the squad. Is this correct?
      A: No, but you can select Transports as Fast Attack
      options, for example, if you like.

      This is pretty straightforward. You can’t take a DT with a Kill Team Formation.

  • Majere613

    The Alpha Legion ruling is plain wrong. Not only is the ruling terribly worded (‘these rules do not interact in any stackable way’ doesn’t explain how they do interact) but taken at face value it means that one of the main rules of the Alpha Legion’s formation doesn’t do anything. At all.
    I don’t think anyone involved actually bothered to notice that the Lost and the Damned formation was the only way to get Cultists, or stopped to consider what that meant.

    • ILikeToColourRed

      is genuinely the most stupid ruling i’ve seen them make in a while

      • Drew_Da_Destroya

        Kill Team Formations not getting transports is pretty dumb, too.

    • TenDM

      Yeah, they clearly worded it in a way that meant you’d get both, but that was just GW being awful at phrasing/proof reading their rules. Ideally they would have given the Formation a replacement bonus, or just proof read it before printing, but it’s a mistake that needed to be fixed.

      • ZeeLobby

        I blame some of this on the speed of releases. I feel like they’re more concerned with getting stuff on shelves than polishing. Could just be a rush to 8th tho

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          GW are a weird company. So much attention and perfectionism to some aspects of what they do, and such a random slapdash or neglectful approach to other things, often made worse by thoughtless FAQs and ‘fixes’. Bizarre.

          Look at how FW will spend months to write a fantastic book, with great artwork, and then never release an FAQ that would take ten minutes to write that would help everyone and make us feel we weren’t ripped off. I simply don’t understand them.

          • ZeeLobby

            In the end I think it all circles back to one thing. Money. Now that they’re publicly traded, they must produce profits throughout the year. It’s become more of an issue to produce quantity over quality in order to keep up their current profit rates.

    • kingcobra668

      Doesn’t it just mean you get two rolls but can only ever produce one unit?

      • sonny2dap .

        That’s my reading, both rules grant you a roll but you can’t lose one unit and then have two units placed in reserve.

      • euansmith

        Twin-linked Cultist Respawning!

      • Walter Vining

        two rolls is stacking. pick one or the other.

        • kingcobra668

          No it isn’t.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            this discussion shows how great GWs rule writing is! Now we need an FAQ for the FAQ…

    • I think it was an honest mistake and the Games Designers didn’t realize that the LatD formation was the only way to get cultists.
      They obviously write a lot of this stuff pretty hastily without checking it.
      Plus codex’s are full of Copy + Paste stuff from previous editions that is irrelevant now. Take the stikkbomb chukka for instance. It’s clear no one proof read that.

  • Yout Elling

    To everyone complaining about the Alpha Legion rules… have you not read Angel’s Blade? It’s the same in there same rules in detachements and formations. None stack.
    Its garbage but just deal with it.

    • Djbz

      There is a difference.
      The Angels blade strike force at least gives the rules to the command and auxiliary choices (assuming you’re using the demi-company as core)
      While the Alpha Legion one literally does nothing

  • Simon Chatterley

    In my opinion the main complaints I’ve see about this FAQ were all abuses of the rules anyway. Bringing 2 units back for every 1 lost was not what it said. Also bolters and shotguns on deathwatch..I fully understand why you want all the special ammo and Flamers as well but again, no.

    Some of the comments on the GW Facebook thread were beyond childish and reminiscent of why they quit the first time. This is a game and a hobby and if you are screaming about rules then honestly I envy you because you must not have anything else to worry about in your life.

    Sorry for soapbox moment, I’ll get down now.

    • TenDM

      But that’s the frustrating part. Potentially 2 units back for 1 is exactly what it said. Different name = different rule unless the rule specifically states otherwise. It’s one of the most fundamental principals of the game. We all want to play by the rules, which means until the FAQ we had to play it that way.
      We shouldn’t have to awkwardly ask our opponents to house rule in common sense.

      • Rob brown

        trying to abuse formation rules is the most sickening thing about this game at the moment. Instead of these being an interesting way to bring models to the game they are being stacked and tortured into perverse combinations that would make fulgrim weep.

        As if I would ever play against someone who claimed you can bring back cult independent characters or gain formation benefits to units not in the formation – and I play stealer cult.

        Our group has decided to just drop formation rules. You can take the models for structure but no cheesemongered rules.

        • Julien Huguenin

          Getting SOMETIMES two units of cultists is far from gamebreaking (i’m not even sure it’s good), and a fluffy and fun way to play Alpha Legion. They should have left them play it like that.

          • Rob brown

            Then don’t worry about it. If it requires 20 pages of forum wrangling and it’s not that good then don’t let it get you down.

          • Michael Cuttell

            I couldn’t agree more. They’re just cultists. I saw a game where a guy got 9!! free cultist units (finished with 6 more than he started with) and still lost the game. It was hilarious fun and not even close to overpowered. Try to remember the other Alpha Legion rules. First turn shroud is good, but gone after first turn. Warlord kill denial is fun, but not powerful. Outflank for cultists, chosen and CSMs…really good…but it really just adds up to them being GeneCult light. We’ve had to much fun with it in my group to drop it. We’ve house-ruled it in.

        • Munn

          I feel sorry for anyone in your area that plays 40k and wants to be good at the game.

          • Rob brown

            Why, because I want to play the game, rather than go ten rounds of forum tennis to ‘game’ the rules first? Being good at W40k is not the same as being good at finding obscure and corner case rules exceptions that require a FAQ to stop people blagging.

      • ZeeLobby

        Some people just don’t get this. They think that house ruling should be mandatory for any game. Sounds crazy to me, but they’re out there…

    • Drew_Da_Destroya

      The Deathwatch are literally spec-ops armed to the teeth veterans. Why wouldn’t they sling a shotgun on their backs to handle situations where those are more useful than bolters?

      • Simon Chatterley

        Because GW didn’t say they could.

        If the books and fluff were anything to go by a single Space Marine would win battles by himself rather than dying to the first lasgun shot they take. But it’s a game with a ruleset and we have to follow it.

        • Drew_Da_Destroya

          But the ruleset does allow it. It’s being specifically disallowed now, by the FAQ.

          • Jason C

            It seems like a mistake. (It would have to be an errata anyway since it is explicitly ALLOWED by the rules.) And you could still take a shotgun for the Bolter then swap the CCW for ANY OTHER RANGED WEAPON! I guess a Storm Bolter/Shotgun combo is preferable? (That guy above you clearly has NOT looked at the actual DW wargear rules, but felt the confidence to contradict you.)

          • Drew_Da_Destroya

            Between this and disallowing DTs in the Kill Team formations (despite those formations specifically mentioning DTs), it seems like they didn’t really put much thought into this FAQ.

  • euansmith

    Bring out new OP faction
    Sell many units
    FAQ rules to re-establish a modicum of balance
    Repeat

    • kingcobra668

      I guess people shouldn’t be so ready to jump on the bandwagon ever other week.

      • ZeeLobby

        Well it’s fine as it was several months before it was fixed, perfect timing for bandwagoners to pick up the new Eldar characters (I mean how could they make Eldar any worse?)

    • TenDM

      Say what you will, at least they replaced the rolling on piles of money while laughing at the players phase with the FAQ phase.

      • euansmith

        With the new accelerated release schedule, the rolling on piles of cash phase has had to be dropped from the main business model and repackaged as a Specialist Game. 😉

        • ZeeLobby

          LOL!

        • NovaeVox

          Sweet, new board game. Something like… Golden Grav-Chutes!

    • petrow84

      Build an Ork Trukk from scratch.
      Build a Grabbin klaw on it
      Park 1,5″ away, between the two firing arcs of a Knight.
      Repeat 4 times, on the other lance mates.
      Congrats, you just stopped an entire Knight formation in their tracks.

    • stinkoman

      As always, the competitive player will be taken advantage of because they can. It’s funny, I’ve been out of the game since 2012 and nothing has changed (besides the base size of my BAs).

  • Christopher Cromer

    The imperial knight weapon arc really bothers me. You can’t eve fire both weapons at the same target anymore. It’s pretty ridiculous and makes them kinda unusable imo. But a wraith knight can fire 360?

    • wong40k

      Frak WK OP Cheese

    • ZeeLobby

      Eldar clearly needed a power boost!

    • OldHat

      I mean, there is only one variant of the normal Knight with two weapons and provided you aren’t shooting at something tiny, you can target it (units that are spread out, tank hulls, etc). No, it doesn’t make sense, but also functionally I don’t think it will be too killer.

      • euansmith

        “Right lads, Melta Gunners, form conga line! CHARGE THE KNIGHT’S FRONT ARC!”

        • petrow84

          Thou shalt not step out of the shadow of its crotch, lest thou shalt be shot to smithereens!

      • generalchaos34

        the funny part is the model doesn’t even move that far to the sides. They should move the whole arc 30 degrees or more inward

    • Mandragola

      “But Eldar can do it” is never a valid argument. Eldar can do anything they want. That’s the point. If other armies could do the kind of things that Eldar could do… well that would just be weird.

  • Jerin Price

    I know almost nobody here plays Dark Eldar, but if you want ridiculous, they ruled exactly opposite on the shadowfield/FNP interaction as they did on the everything else/FNP interaction. Because Dark Eldar are just too powerful right now and need special attention to how they can’t have nice things.

    • ZeeLobby

      I “played” dark Eldar, haha. Just waiting on 8th at this point to see if anything can be salvaged.

    • Commissar Molotov

      At least Raider riders don’t have to “snap fire” after jinking now.

    • Djbz

      Does it ever matter?
      In my experience the shadowfield always fails against the first strength 6+ hit (So no FNP, and dead character).

  • petrow84

    I like that they addressed the outrageous cheese regarding the KFF, that now affects enemy models. That will show those cheesy-beardy Orks, and their OP codex! oh, wait…

  • Patriarch

    I disagree that the Genestealer Cult took a major hit with this FAQ, it shouldn’t really change how people were using it.

    The ruling doesn’t say Independent Characters don’t return after a unit Returns to the Shadows and then Cult Ambushes again; they can still do that. The FAQ ruling is specifically about the “Numbers beyond counting” rule which replaces a few dead cultists in the big formation. What they are saying is that if your Patriarch is killed, you can’t withdraw his bodyguard unit then return it with a brand new alive Patriarch. I can’t believe anyone would try to claim that’s how it should have worked.

    A Cult infiltration and sneak attack is pretty much what servo skulls are meant to warn against, it would be really weird if they didn’t do that in the game.

    Purestrains quite clearly can’t be joined by anything which isn’t a Patriarch, and the Broodcoven formation doesn’t contradict that anywhere.

    I think there is lots of precedent for external Characters invalidating a unit/formation’s special deployment rules if they don’t share a formation, so the IC’s screwing up Subterranean isn’t a surprise.

    • Walter Vining

      ICs as part of the unit wouldn’t return. wow

  • mathhammer

    My tyranids can regenerate spore mines/gargoyles through the endless swarm type rules, but the mines have to walk on,
    boo hisss

    • Davor Mackovic

      So do the Gargoyles unless they deep struck themselves. Since Spore Mines deep strike I can’t see the reasoning why they have to walk on though.

      OH well. Next time GW tries and say they have a “premium” product. LOL.

  • David

    My complaint with the faq is having rulings on for example drop pods and LOS in the SM faq but not in the BA faq meaning they don’t officially apply to BA even though I’m assuming the intention is for every army.

    • Roughneck

      It’s assumed by Games Workshop that any general Space Marine equipment ruling applies to all marine armies i.e the dreadnought basic attacks FAQ early last year

      • David

        Except that faq explicitly specified that it applied to codex blood angels codex space wolves and codex grey knights

        The space marine faq does not specify it applies to BA. I am also not aware of any printed assumption to that effect. In fact since they needed to print an explicit faq I would say that doesn’t exist

        • Roughneck

          When they did the original dreadnought FAQ upping it’s attacks everyone moaned it just applied to vanilla, then GW said it applied to all dreadnoughts making wolves players happy for the murderfang being deadly

          • Davor Mackovic

            So how come Chaos Space Marine players didn’t get it? Same thing, just because of a different name? It should go all ways not just certain ways you want.

          • Roughneck

            Chaos players don’t have dreadnoughts but Hell Brutes, simple reason really. Know your codex?

    • Walter Vining

      and its people like this that ruin it for the rest of us…..OF COURSE IT APPLIES

  • Roughneck

    And the bols 8th edition make your own rumour mill and act as if it’s fact continues in another article.

  • Walter Vining

    the CA thing isn’t a nerf, its how its supposed to be. In order to use CA you have to infiltrate. Its not that hard.

    • Commissar Molotov

      Yeah, but it’s 180 degrees from the previous Ghosar Quintus FAQ on infiltration.

      • Walter Vining

        and yet being a draft, we all knew that there was a possibility of a change so why complain about it?

        • Davor Mackovic

          Because people said that the Draft wouldn’t change. Funny they are not trumping their own horn now eh?

  • Parthis

    Seems like an overly negative review of the FAQs, focusing on the stuff some armies lost as opposed to the clarifications that cement the intent of certain armies.

    Deathwatch as an example; these are good, needed “nerfs” that simply stop people bending the rules to gain an advantage. Deathwatch are also the only Marines with Cyclone Missile Launching Thunderhammer and Stormshield Terminators.; a positive clarification that was deliberately left out here.

    • Roughneck

      Welcome to BoLs

    • generalchaos34

      agreed, although the dedicated transport thing is a bit…odd, especially considering that they actually mention dedicated transports in each of the formations

    • Davor Mackovic

      Thing if, the changes didn’t clarify anything. They should have been Errata not FAQs. They basically changed the rules, not clarifying anything.

  • Raven Jax

    Really the only one that annoyed me, at least, is that you can’t upgrade a Captain to a Chapter Master in a Gladius Strike Force or other formation. If that was their intent, they should have kept them as separate entries in the codex, like last edition, not make it seem like Chapter Master is a 40 pt upgrade for Captain.

    The current codex makes it seem like upgrading Captain to Chapter Master is the same as upgrading Sergeant to Veteran Sergeant.

    • petrow84

      Hey, Crusader Squads still don’t fit into the scheme of the Gladius Strike force, and Helbrecht, chapter master of the largest fleet-based chapter in the Imperium still awaits his orbital bombardment to be added…

  • thereturnofsuppuppers

    bleh bleh bleh

  • Michael Cuttell

    Where is the update on how a Bloodthirster summoned using Blood Tithe points works? It was in the draft and then dropped in the official ruling completely. No clarification, either way.

  • Drew_Da_Destroya

    Q: Can a Veteran be equipped with both a Deathwatch shotgun
    and a boltgun? This seems possible since they can take items
    from both the Ranged Weapons and Special Weapons list.
    A: No.

    What the hell? This definitely seemed like it was intended. I’d like to hear their reasoning. Guess you can’t do Boltgun/Sniper Boltgun either.

    Q: Are the Banebolts of Eryxia intended to be distributed by
    the character to any squad he joins? All models in a unit must
    fire the same special issue ammunition – if you give a Captain
    Banebolts of Eryxia, and he chooses to use them, no other
    model in the squad can fire their bolt weapons using special
    issue ammunition, unless this relic was intended to spread to
    any unit the character joins, or is otherwise an exception to
    that rule.
    A: No.

    So I guess this means that Banebolts are as useless as we all thought they were, since they’ll prevent the rest of the squad from using their ammo, too.

    • Drew_Da_Destroya

      Q: It’s not specifically stated that anything other than Veterans can take a Dedicated Transport. The assumption is that all Kill Team combinations,Terminator units, etc. can take a Dedicated Transport within the limitations dictated by the types of model in the squad. Is this correct?
      A: No, but you can select Transports as Fast Attack
      options, for example, if you like.

      WTF! So no Drop Pods in a Black Spear Assault Force, ever. That’s super dumb.