Jackalwolf Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 Damn guys massive shocker from over heresy30k. A member shared fw answers to questions that are clear cut and not a 'that's how we play it' or 'roll a dice'. I'll share the full answers later since I'm out but here's the link: http://heresy30k.invisionzone.com/index.php?/topic/9661-forgeworld-answers-via-mail-about-inferno/&do=findComment&comment=180641 Affecting us in particular: - Huscarls can take Great frost blade - No, never a terminator can have hit and run from the Pale Hunter row, any unit with at least one model in Terminator armor of any kind loses the ability - And wait for this.,, the Kharybdis is not classed as a drop pod so we can take it in the Pale Hunter Row. That's a shocker imo and gives significant more flexibility to the rite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atia Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 I'll just ignore that point about Deathshroud. They have said in the past that you CAN CHOOSE between cata and tartaros, the models clearly have tartaros and NOT indomitus, this would be just a big nerf for them so I call nurgle on that comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackalwolf Posted March 18, 2017 Author Share Posted March 18, 2017 The illustrious lady Atia. Thanks for the quality content in war of sigmar and battle bunnies. I understand your point. Imo they're clearly in Tartaros but I think they are walking away from the option to choose one or either at least since in the new sekhmet it's so clearly stated they can vs all the other examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atia Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 The illustrious lady Atia. Thanks for the quality content in war of sigmar and battle bunnies. I understand your point. Imo they're clearly in Tartaros but I think they are walking away from the option to choose one or either at least since in the new sekhmet it's so clearly stated they can vs all the other examples. Howdy and thanks =) While true, it's obvious the Deathshroud rules got copied and pasted from their first entry over and over again - back than Tartaros = Indomitus = all other non cataphractii types. So it should be either "only Tartaros" or "Tartaros or Cataphractii". Good for me - rules are just a framework and my bunnies are fine with Deathshroud Cataphractiis. Regarding the Sekhmet - that's also a doubtful answer. I doubt they loose their combi bolters and run around with twin-chainfists ...^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackalwolf Posted March 18, 2017 Author Share Posted March 18, 2017 Yes, we should take it with a grain of salt, but considering how well constructed and clear cut the answers are I wouldn't be surprised if an official faq is on the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runefyre Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 · Hidden by Brother Tyler, March 19, 2017 - No reason given Hidden by Brother Tyler, March 19, 2017 - No reason given The invisibility ruling is BS. Link to comment
Excessus Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 The Sehkmet equipment answer is highly ridiculous and together with a few other answers throws a shade of insincerity over the whole thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purge the Daemon Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 The Sehkmet equipment answer is highly ridiculous and together with a few other answers throws a shade of insincerity over the whole thing... Oh I thought Sekhmet really needed a free attack and the ability to alternate between lighting claws and power fists at any time for 0 cost..... I'm honestly not sure what some of these responses are cause some seem ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ncarnadine Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 Yeah, no. E-mail replies haven't been legitimate rulings for a long time now and I don't see why that would change over these. Some of these answers wouldn't surprise me, but some are pretty out there, and some have had previous, contradictory responses (from e-mailed questions!). These might as well be house rule clarifications that you can choose to use. That said, I'd still keep e-mailing them big question lists. Eventually they'll compile answers for the most commonly asked questions & suggestions for a real FAQ or red book update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLACK BLΠFLY Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 So Sekhmet must have three arms each... Flesh Change ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrowmaster Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 It's absolute nonsense, Gorgon's are flat out stated in the FAQ and the red book to have gorgon armour and this gives them standard. It seems like the answers are all in this vein of ridiculousness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLACK BLΠFLY Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 Most of them are the RAW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlo Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 Emails aren't official, but hopefully we'll get a damn FAQ soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infyrana Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 I just hope that when they go over and FAQ these Q&A's they don't go to these latest e-mail replies and use them as answers. I'm with Atia as soon as I read the comments on the Deathshroud... that sealed the fate of the validity of that e-mail response to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athrawes Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 For me it was the no hit magnus+invisibility stack, and the Sekhmet getting a free paired lightning claw/powerfist/chainfist for extra attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlo Posted March 18, 2017 Share Posted March 18, 2017 You can't really blame them for the invis thing IMO - rules as written it's exactly as it should be (though awful). It's the other things that contradict what has been said previously that are worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Asvaldir Posted March 19, 2017 Share Posted March 19, 2017 Honestly indominus pattern terminator armor shouldn't even exist in 30k since it just creates confusion over some unit entries. Plus it's straight up worse then both of the other terminator armor types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olsol Posted March 20, 2017 Share Posted March 20, 2017 Honestly indominus pattern terminator armor shouldn't even exist in 30k since it just creates confusion over some unit entries. Plus it's straight up worse then both of the other terminator armor types. couldn't agree more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athrawes Posted March 20, 2017 Share Posted March 20, 2017 And this is why answers from FW email responses are meaningless, they contradict each other. http://i1088.photobucket.com/albums/i327/nickfayette1/17361802_10154514023904001_6638120772818383122_n.jpg http://i1088.photobucket.com/albums/i327/nickfayette1/17264717_10154514023909001_4323747755367376025_n.jpg +++++ Please note, this is not me saying that Sekhmet getting to choose their powers is gospel, I'm using this response to show that FW rules email responses are nothing more than a helpful interpretation from the guy responding. Not indicative of a a FAQ inbound, and certainly not the final ruling. This is just another in a long line of contradictions from FW, because it's never the rules department responding. It is always just the guy answering emails trying to help by giving his impression of the answer to your question. So please, leave your biases at the door, and just accept that these email "answers" are pretty much equivalent to some groups house rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLACK BLΠFLY Posted March 20, 2017 Share Posted March 20, 2017 Haha wait til sturguard sees that email... lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronin_cse Posted March 20, 2017 Share Posted March 20, 2017 Honestly indominus pattern terminator armor shouldn't even exist in 30k since it just creates confusion over some unit entries. Plus it's straight up worse then both of the other terminator armor types. Or they should just make actual rules for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLACK BLΠFLY Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 In 40k there is a relic suit of indomitus armor that converts to 2++ for one turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Withershadow Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 What rules would make Indomitus not a worse Tartaros? Extra shooting phase or BS bonus for improved targeting systems? Rerolls against poison/rad due to more efficient shielding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cryptix Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 I'd say give them reroll to hit rolls of 1. Represents the more advanced targeting servos. Course that's a load of :cuss but it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slips Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 I'd give indomitus native deepstrike and/or augur scanners natively. Gives them a unique niche that the other suits wouldn't have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.