MoonPhoenix Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Hi all. Enjoy with new FAQ. http://www.blacklibrary.com/Downloads/Product/PDF/Warhammer-40k/7th-faq/Dark_Angels_v1.1_Oct14.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raztalin Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 ahhh at last - all singing from the same hymn sheet :) Thanks MoonPhoenix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoonPhoenix Posted November 21, 2014 Author Share Posted November 21, 2014 ahhh at last - all singing from the same hymn sheet Thanks MoonPhoenix Also pay attention, that now you don't need to upgrade LR to "Deathwing Vehicle" even if you take it as dedicated transport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bill Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 A land raider cannot be embarked upon itself, so does this now mean a PFG in a transport is effectively useless? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quixus Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 ahhh at last - all singing from the same hymn sheet Thanks MoonPhoenix Also pay attention, that now you don't need to upgrade LR to "Deathwing Vehicle" even if you take it as dedicated transport. Unfortunately not. The rule only says that any land raider may purchase the update, regardless whether it is purchased as a dedicated transport for a deathwing unit or not. The rules making the upgrade mandatory for certain units are still in effect: Deathwing Terminator Squads may select a Land Raider of any type as a Dedicated Transport (pg 104). This vehicle must be given the Deathwing Vehicle upgrade at additional cost. [...] Deathwing Knights may select a Land Raider of any type as a Dedicated Transport (pg 104). This vehicle must be given the Deathwing Vehicle upgrade at additional cost. And they still did not address the ambiguity with the Terminator Sgt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaplain Lucifer Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 That FAQ went very, very stealth... I didn't even notice a new one was up. I guess no more cool Lion's roar or PFG... It was a good run while it lasted. Good job on the SoD. Finally the "i" is dotted and people stop using it with storm bolters.. Bad bad job on the terminator sgt. That one needed more FAQ'ing than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaplain Lucifer Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Wait, PFG got even worse. It only works for the embark models.. it doesn't even apply to the Land Raider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother dean Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 That FAQ went very, very stealth... I didn't even notice a new one was up. I guess no more cool Lion's roar or PFG... It was a good run while it lasted. Good job on the SoD. Finally the "i" is dotted and people stop using it with storm bolters.. Bad bad job on the terminator sgt. That one needed more FAQ'ing than anything else. Wait! What? I just checked a week or so ago.. Also DW sarge.. Edit: Just mailed them this: Thank you for the update. To re-ask the biggest problem (to me) On the FAQ. Page 99 - Deathwing Terminator Squad, Options: Rule as Written, the Deathwing Sargent cannot use a Thunder Hammer / Storm Shield or a pair of Lightning Claws because he does not have a Powerfist to exchange. Is this the designers intent? I feel the errata should read: "...may replace his Storm Bolter and Power fist or Storm Bolter and Power Sword with: LCs... TH/SS.. Thanks guys, If you could fix this up in the next year then I might get a couple boxes of Close Combat Termies... Dean Hahn, Dark Angel since 1992.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoonPhoenix Posted November 21, 2014 Author Share Posted November 21, 2014 Unfortunately not. The rule only says that any land raider may purchase the update, regardless whether it is purchased as a dedicated transport for a deathwing unit or not. The rules making the upgrade mandatory for certain units are still in effect: Yep, you are right. I completlly forgot about this. Also DW sarge.. Edit: Just mailed them this: It seems that they wrote what they mean. Today FAQ only update printed version of codex to digital version. In iPad codex DW sergant also doesn't have option to get TH+SS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quixus Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 That FAQ went very, very stealth... I didn't even notice a new one was up. I guess no more cool Lion's roar or PFG... It was a good run while it lasted. Good job on the SoD. Finally the "i" is dotted and people stop using it with storm bolters.. Bad bad job on the terminator sgt. That one needed more FAQ'ing than anything else. Wait! What? I just checked a week or so ago.. Also DW sarge.. Edit: Just mailed them this: I hope you have more success than I did. I wrote them a similar email, about half a year ago and never got an answer besides the generic "we have received your email and will (maybe) get back to you." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother dean Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 That is my third email to them... First two worked about as well as yours did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoonPhoenix Posted November 21, 2014 Author Share Posted November 21, 2014 I hope you have more success than I did. I wrote them a similar email, about half a year ago and never got an answer besides the generic "we have received your email and will (maybe) get back to you." I wrote letter and got answer after two or three days. I think that you should wrote mails both to BL "contact@blacklibrary.com" and GW "Gamefaqs@gwplc.com". As for me, I got answer from "contact@blacklibrary.com" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aura_enchanted Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 · Hidden by Bryan Blaire, November 21, 2014 - Third Violation of Swear Filter Dodging Hidden by Bryan Blaire, November 21, 2014 - Third Violation of Swear Filter Dodging mutha----ers ruined our codex again. can they make up their bloody minds about what their going to do with the pfg?? like seriously here a little consistency would be nice. so now our codex is worse again; thanks for making an already lower end codex even more terrible. Link to comment
Quixus Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 I wrote letter and got answer after two or three days. I think that you should wrote mails both to BL "contact@blacklibrary.com" and GW "Gamefaqs@gwplc.com". As for me, I got answer from "contact@blacklibrary.com" Ah, my mistake then, I guess. I only wrote to Gamefaqs@gwplc.com. And I just realized that the email went out in September, not half a year ago. Brother Dean, did you send your email to blacklibrary? If not you may want to do that as it sounds nicer than mine. And please keep us informed if they answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SvenONE Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 So dumb. This is the faq that lived on the gw site before it moved to BL. Not sure how or why the previous one was even released in the first place. Give it up brothers, we're not seeing any meaningful changes until a new codex is written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interrogator Stobz Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 It is a little disheartening to witness another incredibly poor attempt at rules writing; at least they produce the "Best Citadel miniatures in the world" ;) I guess they got 3/4 ok on things that aren't really a problem, but the 1/4 PFG ruling is just bad and will continue to be bad until a new dex :devil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother-Sergeant Bohemond Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 I didn't notice any substantial changes from the last time I read the FAQ?? The PFG still works if you are outside a vehicle though ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interrogator Stobz Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 For a bit there the PFG worked in vehicles again, using the Hull for measurements just like nearly every other bit of wargear in the game. Now it only protects the squad inside (WHY would they write it like that? they can't be targeted anyway, very poor choice of wording for rule makers). Anyway, it's back to using a Libby or techie on a bike to keep DW Raiders alive a bit longer To me it was a far better aesthetic look to have all our critters inside our LandRaiders instead of that one dude trailing along behind to add protection. There are so many ways to abuse things in the game that a little leeway on the PFG wouldn't have broken anything... more than they are anyways stobz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultra Magnus Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 On the plus side it clarified the standard of devastation and Lion's Roar issues which I felt folks were gerrymandering to the detriment of RAI and common sense. On the down side, well, pretty much everything else. I like how in a game filled with Captain :cuss and other insane nonsense, it was the PFG from the army least fielded competitively that they went after. With leadership and vision like this, they should run for Congress... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shabbadoo Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Wait, PFG got even worse. It only works for the embark models.. it doesn't even apply to the Land Raider. And considering that models embarked in an enclosed vehicle are not even in play, or subject to any in-game effects, the PFG does literally nothing in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lorne Walkier Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Wait, PFG got even worse. It only works for the embark models.. it doesn't even apply to the Land Raider. And considering that models embarked in an enclosed vehicle are not even in play, or subject to any in-game effects, the PFG does literally nothing in this case. If said transport is destroyed, they are effected. They all get hit with str 4 hits right? Not sure if the PFG helps out with that though... Also what if the PFG was in a Land Speeder? The PFG could help out in a open top transport a bit.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bill Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 GW staff: Maybe if we yell "FORGING A NARRATIVE" really loud they will miss the fact that we suck at writing rules. If anyone catches on we will call him a dirty min-maxing WACer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isiah Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 Hmmm ... We are the Unforgiven. Unwanted and almost probably Unloved by GW :p But we grind on regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother dean Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 Hmmm ... We are the Unforgiven. Unwanted and almost probably Unloved by GW But we grind on regardless. We ground on through the pamphlet years and then the test bed years... this current 'dex is but a mild annoyance in the pricing department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJD Posted November 22, 2014 Share Posted November 22, 2014 The PFG faq just makes no sense to me. If it was so over power to need to be nerfed why is no one running it competitively. Why not leave it to work as it does in the BRB. Oh well back to running a Libby on a bike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.