New swag of 40K FAQs

[Tuatara]

GW just updated a fair number of the FAQs for 40K.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=600005&pIndex=1&aId=3400019&multiPageMode=true&start=2

Chaos players may be miffed a little (nerfs for Lash & Warptime among other things).

[Lazarus]

nothing new or good for me.

[Sectiplave]

Necron FAQ confirmed basically everything in their favor Glad to see Mindshackle scarabs used against single model units do indeed then attack themselves. Going to have to try out a command barge too, sweep attacks now ignore vehicles cover saves  

Those in the know on Dakkadakka noticed there are no new updates to the Black Templar or Tau FAQ's included in this spree, could be a hint that they are next inline for a new codex, they both damn well need it!

nothing new or good for me.

Didn't like the Tyranid FAQ or are you just over that army at the moment?

[NeckFace]

welp, at least Shadow in the Warp effects psykers in vehicles again :|

[Lazarus]

bring back 4th ed nids i say.

[juiced]

one day i will read an ork FAQs that gives tank busters the tank hunters rule

[Tuatara]

Those in the know on Dakkadakka noticed there are no new updates to the Black Templar or Tau FAQ's included in this spree, could be a hint that they are next inline for a new codex, they both damn well need it!

I noticed that when dowloading them too. Last year when many FAQs were released, Grey Knights vwas not amongst them, so there could be some merit to that rumour.

[daemion]

these r the same faqs i dwnloaded last week prety much alomg with sum 'fake' rules i found...

[Sectiplave]

I keep hearing rumors about that new set of rules being true, and GW wanting to establish those as the core 40K rule set for the next 8+ years while they work on more expansions based off one solid rule book and get all armies codex "balanced" out based on the stable core rules. This is so they can focus more on releasing models and making monay!

I've skimmed it and at a glance I say go for it, as for GW having a master over all plan and getting their arses into gear, well yeah maybe it's true. The more viable armies and models the more sales they should effectively make right?

[daemion]

i jst hope the rules r true ones... they r awsum.

[Sectiplave]

i jst hope the rules r true ones... they r awsum.

Yeah it looks like a leap in the right direction, I'm going over it again just now. It looks like it enables people to play larger point games in the same time frame, for GW this equates to more models sold if your 'average' 2 hour game game bumps from 1750/1850 to 2000/2250. And having greater overall balance there should be more viable unit choices, again this would likely lead to more models sold as you would be more able to diversify your list, especially if troops are give more ability.

Also as a Necron play with crappy army wide I, I'm happy with escaping a sweeping advance being a set number to roll instead of based of difference in I, I was finding if my average opponent rolled 3 it was then impossible to escape, basically currently I4 auto sweeps crons on a 4+ not exactly balanced.

It makes business sense and would follow in the foot steps of other companies like Privateer who have been hugely successful. These are the reasons I am reading the whole thing, and actually think it has the possibility to be legitimate.

I'll go eat a tablespoon of internet rumor salt just so I don't get too carried away.

[Shaun]

Noticed that Blood angels "blood lance" psychic power does not need to roll to hit, thats handy.
No Necron scarab farms conga lining but overall Necrons were treated well.
Grey Knight halberds with their 2+ initiative are unaffected by modifiers, ie necron wraiths will not whip down halberds to initiative 1.  GK will get initiative 3 with the halberd.
When firing a turbo-penetrator round at a vehicle the vindicare can add D3 to the total for each 6 rolled on the 4
armour penetration dice, makes him a little more reliable I guess.
Not too bad overall unless you are chaos they got treated badly whats up with that?  Space wolves, Necrons and BA get let off rolling to hit with their psychic powers and chaos still roll to hit?

[Sectiplave]

Yeah there are a few contradictory pieces in there, very inconsistent approach to psychic powers rolling to hit. Someone pointed out this is appears to be a German play test 6th Ed rule set from March 2011. So hopefully things would be more consistent in this regard in the final product. Personally I think all such attack types should have to roll to hit or not, otherwise it's blatantly picking on certain armies. This maybe intentional for balancing, but it certainly seems to favor what people already consider to be strong armies.

It is interesting to note many unit types have had movement adjustments. With some updates to the Tyranid codex this could make them pretty scary. With the rapid-fire changes I would seriously consider running swarms of Warriors and Gauss Blaster Immortals, and troops in general seem to be viable with some greater danger of exploding transports dishing out critical hits. Interesting to hear the Monolith may become a single structure point super-heavy giving it a -3 on the penetration table, that would put it on par with it's old days of near invulnerabilit y.

The more it sinks in, the more I like the sound of it all personally, it still needs some refining obviously, but the frame work of it all sounds like it adds tactical depth while having a smoother game to play overall, that's a massive win-win for a core rules update, players couldn't really ask for more.

Some people on Dakkadakka have actually played a bunch of games using these rules already and have had nothing but positive things to say about the streamlining and more importantly the added tactical depth, it also looks like it will make people buy stratagem models etc. so it sounds very plausible at this stage.

Heck maybe 40K will progress enough not to be considered the less tactical GW game platform

[Tuatara]

I think I will start a line of speculation here by asking a seemingly innocuous question, but which is fraught with inuendo and supposition.

Why would all the FAQs that were changed be noted as 1.2 or 1.3 etc whereas the Necron FAQ is 2.0?

[Sectiplave]

That is a very good question actually now that I think about it, and it causes me to link a few ideas based on this.

I am a Necron player so have been very interested in the latest 40K codex which is the Necron Codex. The rumor thread over on Dakkadakka (which ended up being 90%+ accurate) the source was quoted as having stated that the Necron Codex was written with 6th Edition very much taken into consideration.

This could explain why Destroyers, Wraiths, Destroyer lords were changed to be jump-infantry from skimmers. And all further non-vehicle fast units were also based as Jump Infantry. The people following the thread thought this was kind of strange to start with, but had no choice to accept it as it was. Now looking at these 'supposed' 6th edition rules the changes start to make more sense. It could also explain Destroyers having the preferred enemy all rule when they are CLEARLY a unit that never ever wants to be stuck in close combat.

Maybe we haven't had our daily dose of salt today, but it could indicate that the Necron Codex and FAQ are 6th Edition ready (2.0) while the others will have further adjustments made to fit in with the new rule set.

[Lazarus]

just remember to save your 150-200 for the new 6th ed starter set. wonder what this time. Marines vs who??

[Sectiplave]

just remember to save your 150-200 for the new 6th ed starter set. wonder what this time. Marines vs who??

I'm still set for marines to paint, it really depends on who the Xenos army is, if it's them versus Necron's I'll be all for it

[Tuatara]

just remember to save your 150-200 for the new 6th ed starter set. wonder what this time. Marines vs who??

Bookies have Tau and Black Templars as the favourites by a smidgen.

It would almost be worth two poeple buying two sets together and then splitting up the contents.

[Sectiplave]

Only if they come with New Codexes to back them up, otherwise hell naw

[Lazarus]

who want to play tau even with a new book

[daemion]

remember when aobr came out? 110bux of pure value. me and monky bought 3 sets. i dought the new starter wil retail at less than 220... but i am so luving the 'fake' rules. i even got a bound copy to keep. oops. i mean i have read a printd off version that i saw. sumwhere. bout sum futeristic war. remember- 'in the not nice blackness of  distant time there is only counts as'..

[Sectiplave]

You should give those rules a play test and let us know what you think, the feedback so far has been generally very positive. Fingers crossed we get something on this level officially and with refinements around the middle of this year.

[Lazarus]

only 3 damo i bought 6  

Also Email me wink wink book

[Sectiplave]

I'm just going to link to a Dakkadakka discussion thread;

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/422519.page

It may or may not contain a link to what may or may not be a GW play test version of 6th Edition

[Lazarus]

that looks legit as  

Assault before shooting phase that's a big change.

new fleet sounds nice.

Overwatch is back (now this is a fake rule book)

sustained fire sweet

WTF 10" blast marker in standard 40k

I give up reading these rules sound crazy way to good to be made by GW.

[Sectiplave]

Assault before shooting phase that's a big change.

Yeah it is indeed, the unit being assaulted gets to make a defensive fire action also, over all it seems like a balance to the assault side of things.

HAHAHA! Yeah that's what everyone else is saying, these rules appear too good to be something GW could pull off, more like an old school 40K nerd has written it all. I only started playing in 5th, but I'm really hoping this is what we have to look forward to, would be a much nicer game to play.

[Tuatara]

Mmmm...Titans and other super heavies in 40K? ...mmm   Nice cold Tui anyone?

[daemion]

if true-please god let it be so- i think its a way to draw al the expansions together. . . of course it must be fake as its just to good. gw wouldnt give us this rule set that 90‰ of the 40k community think is the shizzle. did u find anything 4 yr own use laz?

[Tuatara]

Let's face it. It doesn't matter about it being fake....if the actual new edition is crap, everyone will just pull these rules out and start playing with them.

[Lazarus]

just had a flick over it, there is alot of old 2nd ed stuff in there so i think its to fake like above said its to good to be a GW rule set but if a company brought this out i think most would move over to thius rule set, but not like GW to make such major changes in the rules. 3/4/5th ed where all along the same lines just minor changes.