New 40k FAQs released today!

[Masked Thespian]

FAQs for the core rulebook and all Codexes have been released/updated today, over at the Warhammer Community website.

[Deraj]

There's nothing game-changing in these, most clarifications seem pretty obvious, but there have been some small changes that I love. The fact that dreadnoughts got +2 attacks across the board is amazing, and magma cutters actually became useful.

[Waaaghpower]

A few things are a little bit game-changing. Deathwatch has been kicked in the teeth, by disallowing the Shotgun/Boltgun combo, nerfing the Beacon Angelis, and disallowing Dedicated Transports for units in formations. It's really frustrating, considering I spent a lot of time modeling my DW Vets with that weapon loadout.

Anyone else notice how lackluster the FAQs for recent supplements are? No explanation for how the Inquisition formations work with dedicated transports, no explanation for many of the Traitor Legion questions.

[BigToof]

I'm actually impressed that they caught a lot of small things:
Tau Riptide Earthcast typo is fixed.
You can take a single Lhaemian as HQ for Dark Eldar.
Drop pods thankfully ruled sensibly.
Genestealer cult DOES have to worry about servo-skulls in setup but not afterwards.
Sadly enough GSC does count as moving but NOT in infiltrate/first turn.
Hilariously enough you get to SHOOT in deployment if you roll 5's on the Cult Ambush roll.
Superfriends fixed (thankfully) so no taking three different SM Captains to make an Uber-star.  (they have to use Dark Angels for that...)

FAQs for the newer publications will come out later?

Still, surprised, so faith kind of renewed?

Best,
-BT

P.S.  Best thing ever is putting ALL of them into one zip file.  My mouse finger thanks you.

[Masked Thespian]

A few things are a little bit game-changing. Deathwatch has been kicked in the teeth, by disallowing the Shotgun/Boltgun combo, nerfing the Beacon Angelis, and disallowing Dedicated Transports for units in formations. It's really frustrating, considering I spent a lot of time modeling my DW Vets with that weapon loadout.

Here's the thing, though.  I've spent an awful lot of money on the recent Deathwatch release and I'm not disappointed by the FAQ in the slightest.  I never thought that the Shotgun/Boltgun combo was supposed to be legal, nor that the Beacon Angelis should be allowed to be used in the way that has now been disallowed.

Dedicated Transports aren't disallowed for units in formations, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from; there are only two entries in the FAQ that discuss Transports: The first of which states that unit entries without Dedicated Transport entries can't take Dedicated Transports (which makes perfect sense), and the second of which states that Kill Teams that feature Terminators can't take a Rhino or Razorback Dedicated Transport and Kill Teams that feature Bikers and/or Vanguard Veterans can't take Rhinos, Razorbacks, or Drop Pods as Dedicated Transports (which also makes perfect sense).

About the only entries that took me off-guard were that you can now give a Deathwatch Watch Captain in Terminator Armour a Storm Shield, which was something I assumed was not an option due to the way the unit entry was written, and that Watch Captains and Librarians in Terminator Armour with Combi-weapons get Special-Issue Ammunition, but since they both give me extra options (and pretty decent ones at that) I'm not unhappy in the slightest.  I guess I am a little bit disappointed that the Deathwatch can't use the Imperial Space Marine or the Warhammer World exclusive tanks, but seeing as I wasn't ever going to paint my ISM up in Deathwatch colours, and don't yet own the WW exclusive tanks, it's not a terrible loss.

I'm actually very happy with the FAQ, especially as it's provided clarity on the Thief of Secrets (which is something I've been eager to try out) and that I no longer have to maintain my stance that certain things are supposed to work in a certain way, because the FAQ has ruled that they do work in that way.

P.S.  Best thing ever is putting ALL of them into one zip file.  My mouse finger thanks you.

Agreed.

[Waaaghpower]

"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."

So no, you can't take transports for Kill Teams.


I can *sort of* see your point with the Boltgun/Shotgun, but if that's the case, why is Boltgun/Special Weapon and Combi-Weapon/Shotgun still legal?


As for the Beacon Angelis, I also wouldn't mind, except that it uses the same wording as the Icon of Chaos, and the Icon of Chaos is actually allowed to work on the turn that it arrives.

[Masked Thespian]

"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."

So no, you can't take transports for Kill Teams.

I don't think you're parsing the question right here.  I'm reading it as:

"Q: It’s not specifically stated that anything other than Veterans can take a Dedicated Transport. The assumption is that Terminator units 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."

The question here is asking if Terminators, who don't otherwise have a Dedicated Transport entry, can take a Dedicated Transport.  They can't.

All Kill Teams, on the other hand, MUST include a Veteran squad, which gets access to a Dedicated Transport as part of its unit entry, therefore the Kill Team which they then become a part of has that Transport (subject to the other limitations that the FAQ brings up).

I can *sort of* see your point with the Boltgun/Shotgun, but if that's the case, why is Boltgun/Special Weapon and Combi-Weapon/Shotgun still legal?

Because it's clear that GW doesn't understand the intent behind the question.  The question was asked with the intent being, "We've found this loophole that, amongst other things, allows you to take a Bolter and a Shotgun.  Are all versions of this loophole intended?" and the question answered was, "Can you take a Bolter and a Shotgun?"

I feel that it's clear that this is a loophole that was clearly unintended, yet exists due to the way the Codex is written.  The fact that GW have ruled that Bolter/Shotgun isn't allowed implies that Bolter/anything else isn't allowed either, but I'm sure there will be rules lawyers out there who will argue the toss.

As for the Beacon Angelis, I also wouldn't mind, except that it uses the same wording as the Icon of Chaos, and the Icon of Chaos is actually allowed to work on the turn that it arrives.

Games Workshop have never been consistent with how things work between different Codexes.  Back in 4th Edition it was possible to have three different Storm Shields on the tabletop that each had a different ruleset: the 4th Edition Dark Angels Storm Shield rules were different from the 4th Edition Space Marine Storm Shield, and both were different from the 3rd Edition Daemonhunters Storm Shield (that carried over into 4th Edition).

A Codex is designed as a single entity with a particular mindset in mind.  GW has proven over the past 21 years that they will not errata things to match other Codexes for the sake of having a unified ruleset, rather preferring that each individual Codex is as close to the initial intended mindset instead.

[Waaaghpower]

See, I think the difference is you're interpreting the rules given, I'm taking them at face value.
If we trim out the unrelated parts, the FAQ says
"Q: Can Kill Team combinations take a Dedicated Transport within the limitations dictated by the types of models in the squad?
A: No."

Maybe the wrote in an awkward way, but that's what the rule says. If you have a Kill Team combo, it cannot bring a dedicated transport.


As for the Boltgun/Shotgun... I disagree, but I see your point and don't really have a counter argument besides "They could have just said that". (Or Errata'd the book so that you can't swap your chainsword for a Boltgun.)


Lastly, I really don't think the problem is with internal consistency vs. Consistency with other codices. This isn't the same as having two different versions of Storm Shields or two varieties of Inquisitor in two different books. The Beacon Angelis was a unique piece of wargear with unique rules - There was no reason it had to be consistent with other similar gear, because it wasn't that gear. There was a precedent for the Beacon to work immediately, too, because other wargear from different books works in the same way.
It's just a pretty big nerf to a codex that was already middle-of-the-road.

[Masked Thespian]

See, I think the difference is you're interpreting the rules given, I'm taking them at face value.
If we trim out the unrelated parts, the FAQ says
"Q: Can Kill Team combinations take a Dedicated Transport within the limitations dictated by the types of models in the squad?
A: No."

I'm taking them at face value, too.  The problem comes from the fact that the way the question is worded means that both of our interpretations are potentially correct.  Both of us are able to make our arguments simply by removing words from the FAQ entry and not adding any in.

My interpretation of that FAQ entry has two pieces of evidence behind it: Veterans do have a Dedicated Transport entry implying they can bring it along when bought as part of a Kill Team, and each Kill Team entry specifies that the 10 model limit excludes Dedicated Transports, implying that Dedicated Transports taken as part of a Veterans squad can be taken.  That's two pieces of evidence in favour of my interpretation and I can't see any in support of yours.

Lastly, I really don't think the problem is with internal consistency vs. Consistency with other codices. This isn't the same as having two different versions of Storm Shields or two varieties of Inquisitor in two different books. The Beacon Angelis was a unique piece of wargear with unique rules - There was no reason it had to be consistent with other similar gear, because it wasn't that gear. There was a precedent for the Beacon to work immediately, too, because other wargear from different books works in the same way.
It's just a pretty big nerf to a codex that was already middle-of-the-road.

There's just one problem with this:

There was no reason it had to be consistent with other similar gear, because it wasn't that gear.

There was a precedent for the Beacon to work immediately, too, because other wargear from different books works in the same way.

These two lines are directly contradictory.  Saying that it doesn't have to be consistent with other gear, then saying that there is precedent due to items from other books is a contradiction.  I agree that the Beacon Angelis has unique rules, but just because another piece of wargear from another book works in a superior way, that doesn't mean the Beacon gets to act in that similar, superior manner.

[Waaaghpower]

I'm going to ignore the transport thing for now, because it's just a matter of interpretation - You're assuming vagueness implies permission, I disagree, but without more clear information we can't exactly come to an answer here.

For the other thing, though, you're twisting around my words to infer meaning that isn't there.

My first statement is to establish that there is nothing implying that the relic has to work exactly like any other piece of gear. It doesn't say "This functions like a Teleport Homer", it lists its own unique rules.

My second statement was to establish that the rules it has weren't unprecedented - I didn't ever say it has to work like the Icons because the two are linked in any way. It works the way it does because that's how its rules are written - I just wanted to establish that the rules CAN work that way.
For a comparison, the rules for Grav weaponry don't actually allow for cover saves to be taken by vehicles, because they bypass the usual damage system. However, this had no precedent in the rules, and was thus clearly a mistake.
The relic, though, has a precedent, meaning that the wording of its rules WASN'T a mistake. Or, at least, there was no reason to believe it was.

So, yeah. Two distinct, non-contradictory statements.