New 8th FAQ

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2911

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#163 » Jul 13 2017 02:26

Well okay so they used shots there. Still just supports my interpretation and not that it modifies the weapons profile which is really more wishlisting than anything else imo.

User avatar
Unusualsuspect
Kroot'Ui
Kroot'Ui
Posts: 596

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#164 » Jul 13 2017 02:31

Found it (who needs to study anyway, right?)

GW's use of "shot":

Shooting Phase
3. Choose Ranged Weapon
". . . declare how you will split the shooting unit's SHOTS before any dice are rolled, and resolve all the SHOTS against one target before moving on to the next."

Definitely using the term shots there.

Can't find the Rapid Fire reference yet.

Core rules page 10:
The Death Guard player selects the unit of plague marines to shoot with. the plague marines will shoot with their boltguns, while the plague champion will throw a krak grenade.

The targets are 6" away, which is within range of the plauge marines' boltguns. These are Rapid Fire 1 weapons, and so each fires twice at half range or less. The death guard player therefore rolls 8 dice to see if the shots hit. The plauge marines ballistic skill is 3+ so 6 shots hit and the others miss.


Huh, I could have sworn the use of "shots" there was more clearly meant to be attacks, but the use of shots in a way not analogous to attacks seems like a viable reading.

Still, the natural reading is basically what I recalled it to be.



Edit: are we talking past each other at this point?

1. GW uses the term shot.
2. GW's use of the term shot includes using it as the equivalent of "attack" and using it as the equivalent of "shooting a weapon's attacks".
3. GW uses the term shot in the Fire Blade's Volley Fire ability.
4. Volley Fire does not explicitly distinguish between the potential meanings that GW uses.
5. While most people seem to be playing RAI as an extra attack, some people genuinely think (or hope) the RAW and RAI are on the side of extra shooting of the weapon.

6. Thus, a FAQ is probably a good thing.

I don't think it'd be terribly productive to discuss this further if the above 5 points can be agreed to (and I think I've laid sufficient textual support for 1, 2 and 4, which seemed to be the main issue of contention in this discussion, point 3 is self-evidence, and this thread's discussion and other discussions across other forums make point 5 pretty solid).

Once one gets to a point like this in rules discussions, I've often found that little good is derived from continuing a conversation where each side is talking and neither side is listening (because everything being discussed has already been weighed, measured, and either accepted or found wanting already).

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2911

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#165 » Jul 13 2017 02:56

Unusualsuspect wrote:Found it (who needs to study anyway, right?)

GW's use of "shot":

Shooting Phase
3. Choose Ranged Weapon
". . . declare how you will split the shooting unit's SHOTS before any dice are rolled, and resolve all the SHOTS against one target before moving on to the next."

Definitely using the term shots there.

Can't find the Rapid Fire reference yet.

Core rules page 10:
The Death Guard player selects the unit of plague marines to shoot with. the plague marines will shoot with their boltguns, while the plague champion will throw a krak grenade.

The targets are 6" away, which is within range of the plauge marines' boltguns. These are Rapid Fire 1 weapons, and so each fires twice at half range or less. The death guard player therefore rolls 8 dice to see if the shots hit. The plauge marines ballistic skill is 3+ so 6 shots hit and the others miss.


Huh, I could have sworn the use of "shots" there was more clearly meant to be attacks, but the use of shots in a way not analogous to attacks seems like a viable reading.

Still, the natural reading is basically what I recalled it to be.



Edit: are we talking past each other at this point?

1. GW uses the term shot.
2. GW's use of the term shot includes using it as the equivalent of "attack" and using it as the equivalent of "shooting a weapon's attacks".
3. GW uses the term shot in the Fire Blade's Volley Fire ability.
4. Volley Fire does not explicitly distinguish between the potential meanings that GW uses.
5. While most people seem to be playing RAI as an extra attack, some people genuinely think (or hope) the RAW and RAI are on the side of extra shooting of the weapon.

6. Thus, a FAQ is probably a good thing.

I don't think it'd be terribly productive to discuss this further if the above 5 points can be agreed to (and I think I've laid sufficient textual support for 1, 2 and 4, which seemed to be the main issue of contention in this discussion, point 3 is self-evidence, and this thread's discussion and other discussions across other forums make point 5 pretty solid).

Once one gets to a point like this in rules discussions, I've often found that little good is derived from continuing a conversation where each side is talking and neither side is listening (because everything being discussed has already been weighed, measured, and either accepted or found wanting already).

I agree on all of that. Continuing this discussion doesn't do any good.
I think though RAI is clear since it gets more often used in place of "attacks" compared to the places it gets used for "shooting a weapons attacks" and it also fits the way Fireblade used to work.
My policy is, if you can't win the RAW argument without question, go with RAI. If RAI is not clear, ask your opponent what he thinks. No point in arguing over something like that in the middle of the game.

User avatar
Overheal
Shas'Saal
Posts: 177

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#166 » Jul 13 2017 03:02

Glarblar wrote:Core rules page 10:
The Death Guard player selects the unit of plague marines to shoot with. the plague marines will shoot with their boltguns, while the plague champion will throw a krak grenade.

The targets are 6" away, which is within range of the plauge marines' boltguns. These are Rapid Fire 1 weapons, and so each fires twice at half range or less. The death guard player therefore rolls 8 dice to see if the shots hit. The plauge marines ballistic skill is 3+ so 6 shots hit and the others miss.

Which would have been consistent with the core rules if they had said 6 attacks etc. instead of shots. ugh. FAQ FAQ FAQ FAQ

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1308

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#167 » Jul 13 2017 06:18

Can we make a summary of this discussion about the Fireblade? It looks to me like...

1. RAW, the Fireblade gives certain weapons an extra shot at half range.
2. Whether "shot" means "attack" is uncertain but leaning toward the case that it does mean "attack."

I guess I could see how this could give Fire Warriors four shots at short range. (1*2)+1 versus (1+1)*2. However, there's absolutely no way this could give Fire Warriors RF2.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2911

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#168 » Jul 14 2017 06:42

Arka0415 wrote:Can we make a summary of this discussion about the Fireblade? It looks to me like...

1. RAW, the Fireblade gives certain weapons an extra shot at half range.
2. Whether "shot" means "attack" is uncertain but leaning toward the case that it does mean "attack."

I guess I could see how this could give Fire Warriors four shots at short range. (1*2)+1 versus (1+1)*2. However, there's absolutely no way this could give Fire Warriors RF2.

Summary?
Does "additional shot" mean:
- "additional attack (aka Rapidfire1 has 3 shots at half range)" or
- "improving the weapons profile by 1 (aka Rapidfire1 becomes Rapidfire2 at half range so has 4 shots)" or
- "shooting an additional time (aka shooting 2xAssault2 at half range etc.)"

Reason for confusion: "shot" is not a term used coherently in the rules (if at all, it's pretty rare) and apparently gets interpreted differently by different people despite most hints pointing towards it being equivalent with "additional attack".
Last edited by Panzer on Jul 14 2017 07:39, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1308

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#169 » Jul 14 2017 07:18

Panzer wrote: - "shooting an additional time (aka shooting 2xAssault2 etc.)"


This is the part that just can't be the case. I mean, it says half range. How could that possibly give more shots at full range?

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2911

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#170 » Jul 14 2017 07:37

Arka0415 wrote:
Panzer wrote: - "shooting an additional time (aka shooting 2xAssault2 etc.)"


This is the part that just can't be the case. I mean, it says half range. How could that possibly give more shots at full range?

Obviously at half range only. That's the translation for "additional shot" not "additional shot at half range". ;)
I'll edit the post to make it more clear though.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1308

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#171 » Jul 14 2017 07:49

Panzer wrote:Obviously at half range only. That's the translation for "additional shot" not "additional shot at half range". ;)
I'll edit the post to make it more clear though.


People other than you though have been saying Rapid Fire 2. That's not how it works, but otherwise I can see equal arguments for the (1+1)*2 or (1*2)+1 ideas.

Xanrag
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 62

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#172 » Jul 15 2017 10:31

New FAQ is up. We got some of what we wanted, but not as much as I'd hoped.

Giving Shield Drones a flat 5+ FNP makes them incredibly resilient if you can force the enemy to shoot at them, say by dropping down with a fusion commander, and also makes them a valid choice for drone protocols again. (I know this is only a faq for the shield drones in the FW book but this must be what they intend for all shield drones.)

https://www.warhammer-community.com/201 ... ge-post-2/

User avatar
Gragagrogog
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 361

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#173 » Jul 15 2017 11:16

Ye they added the feel no pain to both shielded missile drones and normal shield drones...

-black markerlight drones got stable platform back, no change in price they cost 7 point now

-They're messing with FW hammerhead variant keywords, looks like preparation for getting buffer from longstrike

-Tiger Shark can shoot the macro weapon, without any negatives (without not shooting other weapons like they told to some1 on facebook)

Also, this is funny:

Q: There are no datasheets for Firestorms, Great Knarloc,
Knarloc Riders, Mega-dreads, Battlefortresses or Grot Bomb
Launchers – are there datasheets I should use for these models?
A: Datasheets for these models will be published on the
Forge World and Warhammer Community websites.

So they want out money for a FW index, from which most ppl use 1 or 2 unit max, and then say this.... pfff
Last edited by Gragagrogog on Jul 15 2017 11:51, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
shasocastris
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 964
Contact:

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#174 » Jul 15 2017 11:29

Gragagrogog wrote:So they want out money for a FW index, from which most ppl use 1 or 2 unit max, and then say this.... pfff

As long as I get the rules, I'm not super mad. I have lots of knarlocs and great knarlocs. I want to use them. I want my Tau all cavalry list!

Also, I'm going to have to experiment with Tigersharks now. They seem worth it.

Cheers!

User avatar
thesnailmaster
Shas'Saal
Posts: 134

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#175 » Jul 15 2017 11:31

Gragagrogog wrote:Ye they added the feel no pain to both shielded missile drones and normal shield drones...




Shame it currently only applies to the two FW riptides, I guess we can assume that GW will follow suit but its not guaranteed.

User avatar
Gragagrogog
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 361

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#176 » Jul 15 2017 11:39

shasocastris wrote:
Gragagrogog wrote:So they want out money for a FW index, from which most ppl use 1 or 2 unit max, and then say this.... pfff

As long as I get the rules, I'm not super mad. I have lots of knarlocs and great knarlocs. I want to use them. I want my Tau all cavalry list!

Also, I'm going to have to experiment with Tigersharks now. They seem worth it.

Cheers!


Ye, cheers for getting rules for it!

I don't mind paying for it(I did), it just seems like rly unnecessary milking, especially when they intent to release more books, presumably with rule updates for current models and getting to the same state as it was before, with the most current rules getting spread across multiple books. Oh, well... At least there are digital editions... Which you can't legally print out. :D

thesnailmaster wrote:Shame it currently only applies to the two FW riptides, I guess we can assume that GW will follow suit but its not guaranteed.


I think it is, they wouldn't change that and the hammerhead keyword it there was no communication between 2 FAQ teams (if it isn't done by the same ppl in the first place).

User avatar
Gragagrogog
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 361

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#177 » Jul 15 2017 11:48

Ah, missed something...

-Blacklight marker drones cost 7 points now, so they're cheaper, WS3+ instead of original 5+, otherwise the same now, nice

-FW hammerheads now cost 117 (same as normal one)
Last edited by Gragagrogog on Jul 15 2017 12:08, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
nic
Kroot'La
Kroot'La
Posts: 755

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#178 » Jul 15 2017 12:02

Gragagrogog wrote:Ye they added the feel no pain to both shielded missile drones and normal shield drones...

-black markerlight drones got stable platform back, no change in price

-They're messing with FW hammerhead variant keywords, looks like preparation for getting buffer from longstrike

-Tiger Shark can shoot the macro weapon, without any negatives (without not shooting other weapons like they told to some1 on facebook)

Also, this is funny:

Q: There are no datasheets for Firestorms, Great Knarloc,
Knarloc Riders, Mega-dreads, Battlefortresses or Grot Bomb
Launchers – are there datasheets I should use for these models?
A: Datasheets for these models will be published on the
Forge World and Warhammer Community websites.

So they want out money for a FW index, from which most ppl use 1 or 2 unit max, and then say this.... pfff


Blacklight marker drones are now 7 points. Add the 3 for the markerlight and they are exactly the same as normal marker drones, although with an amusing but probably useless WS 3+

The hammerhead variants all have a base cost of 117. That is a big points drop and makes my fusion cannon hammerhead rather less dead weight on the tabletop; 179 fully loaded including drones is much more reasonable.

Remora neither have nor need a Target Lock which effectively just makes them a few points cheaper. Still very skewed towards mobility at the expense of durability and firepower but that is what they are clearly intended to be.

As for the long-discontinued Kroot stuff, at least there is a glimmer of hope in that they will give us rules. Which is an improvement.

User avatar
nic
Kroot'La
Kroot'La
Posts: 755

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#179 » Jul 15 2017 12:10

As i read the revised rules for the Shield Drone and Shielded Missile Drone:

They have a 4++ against weapons targeting them but still not for Saviour Protocols

They now have a 5+++ against everything - whether direct attacks or Saviour Protocols.

So far it only applies to the FW Riptide variants but I think it is exactly what the Shielded drones needed to make them relevant and useful. If that gets applied generally I would be very satisfied (and swarms of shield drones would make a half-decent speed-bump unit).

User avatar
Gragagrogog
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 361

Re: New 8th FAQ

Post#180 » Jul 15 2017 12:19

nic wrote:Remora neither have nor need a Target Lock which effectively just makes them a few points cheaper. Still very skewed towards mobility at the expense of durability and firepower but that is what they are clearly intended to be.


This did not change anything, just clarify an ability they had. If it's not mentioned in unit size description or in wargear options, it's an ability they don't have to pay for, regardless of it's name.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests