GW put out a new FAQ, the Nids and BA.
One thing I noticed aside from give simple yes or no answers to questions without trying to explain themselves with fluffly reasoning is that they really are pushing a sort of 'stack' like in MTG when it comes to assault and checks for area ranges. They set a good precedence that when the ability is used is when its checked. Example being furious charge being checked when the model makes his attacks. They stated that if the hive tyrant is killed before the guard go, they'll not get the furious charge or if a unit is in range of a priest and then charges and is out of range, they'll not get the furious charge because when they make their attacks they'd be out of range. It's also supported with acid blood being resolved at the end of each initiative step. Lashwip is strange to try and grasp a precedence from. Does it mean that negative effects are applied before additive effects?
Also they clarified that with Malan'tai using cataclysm if he suffers perils and takes a wound the str is determined after the wound is taken. This pushes more to the idea of a stack and triggered abilities. I really hope that in the next edition they start to give names to these terms to make the rules easier to figure out for ourselves. One thing that makes MTG a success was the consistency of rule wording and it'd be nice to see GW push in that direction too.
Another precedence continued is that psychic powers don't effect units in vehicles. Psychic scream will not effect embarked units and neither will Malan'tai's spirit leech. I know, I know, Malan'tai's isn't a psychic power but it is an area effect similar to other powers. It's nice to have both a psychic power with area effect and a non psychic power with area effect to have a solid "No" and "No" ruling on whether they effect embarked units.
The Nids FAQ can raise a question about Runes of Warding** in compairson to shadow of the warp. The FAQ states that embarked psykers are not effected by Shadow of the Warp. Are they effected by Runes** then?
The BA FAQ is pretty straightforward. I don't recall too many questions coming up in play with them other than being in range of the priest and when your bonus's are checked (which they answered; when its used). I am glad they clairified Decent of the Angels that they have to drop via jumpack to get the bonus and it doesn't transfer to their transport. I'm also happy they shut up the RAW people and vehicle's needing to be obscured to take a cover save and ruled on the side of the Mek Boy argument thus staying constant with their judgments.
Also, an interesting ruling is that corbulo's dice can't be used for first turn. With the removal of allies and this ruling I'm willing to bet that you won't see a tarot in the future Deamonhunters codex and they'll be keeping first turn a straight unmodified dice roll.
Over all I'm happy to see more straight answers and less answers that still leave the question half unanswered. I support the Doom's ruling. That's the one I'm most happy with after being molested so much by OST's Doom. I'm happy for the amount of precedence that can be pointed to for tournament organizers.
Now, sound off, what do you guys think? Anything cool I missed? Anyone play with spore mines so much that you needed half a page of answers for them? Anyone sad to know that there is some asshole out there yelling "RAW!" that they had to clarify Regeneration to just the wounds on the model and not the wounds taken over the course of the whole game?
**edit
Actually I think that on Furious Charge the two rulings are sort of opposite. BA need the power when they actually attack but Tyrant Guard need the power when they charge since they gain the special rule when the tryant dies. So this implies that you have to have furious charge both when you charge and when you actually attack to gain the benefits. That matters to BA since a second squad would not get the benefit if they enter the priests zone after the charge move.
ReplyDeleteThe not into vehicles stuff is very bad. They got lazy and instead of Errata for Spirit Leech specifically saying that it does not affect unit in vehicles, they acted like the rules already prevent it from affecting units. This means the Shadow also will not work so to be consistant they included that but I have a feeling very few people even considered that Shadows would not affect psychers in vehicles. That it should is pretty much a given as to how everyone has run the rules in 5th ed once the rulebook said measure to the tank when you need to measure to the unit inside. It should also imply that Hoods do not go into vehicles since it also asks you to measure range to the psyker with an area affect ability (neither are psychic powers). I doubt people will play that way most being not nid players will just say it is a Nid only. It does nothing to Runes since the wording there is just anytime a psyker uses a power since it is board spanning.
"With the removal of allies" um... that i do believe was decided to be an error as, GW themselves said the old codex was entirely still valid. Also, the foreign language versions still had it... though i am happy to end the debate on doom. Further, i do not see the shadow and the ghosthelm to even be similar, shadow is an outside unit effecting how a embarked unit executes an action. ghosthelm though, in no way effects the casting, it allows a ability of the embarked caster to get an additional save to perils that the embarked caster invoked both the emanating item and the psyker are in the same place, as well as the action in question all occur inside...i honestly see no basis for comparison...
ReplyDeleteI think he is confusing Ghosthelm for Runes of Warding (3d6 psycher checks and perils above 12) but I do not think it applies since it is trigger purely by taking the psycher test regardless of any mention of distance to model or such.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYeah, my mistake on the ghosthelm mix up. I didn't have an eldar codex handy for the exact wording, it was just a random thought. Hood is a good example for the kind of 'what now' thinking that I was going for with Runes.
ReplyDeleteAlso, they did something totally weird with allies saying both are valid and it's up to players and T.O's to decide which will be used for their event. That's a whole nother discussion though.
Thanks for doing this write-up CVinton, I had one in mind, but was trying to get over the insane amount of cry-babying on the web over the FAQs. Seriously, BA players drowning in their tears over the priest bubble and nid players ranting over how they think their codex sucks.
ReplyDeleteIt made me laugh because the FAQ changed nothing in how my Nid list generally runs and the BA FAQ would change nothing about how the better BA armies out there would work. The FAQ rulings were mostly predictable (except for Shadow in the Warp) and actually pretty fair.
What I think is funny is that the way these FAQS worked out is pretty much how folks at the FLGS had already been playing them, which means we at least aren't playing with the kind of douches that generated some of the dumber questions (as if you need clarity on whether Mephy and Sanguinor are independent characters or not, boob)... it also means we won't hear a whole lot of cry-babying or threats to sell armies like there have been on the net the last 72 hours.
I think powers that are a bubble effect really should be able to affect things because honestly metal is no protection against a power.
ReplyDeleteGW is really getting lazy