FAQs for every codex - finally!

A review of Rules of Engagement from earlier encounters.
User avatar
Val'Sitsor
Shas'Saal
Posts: 128

FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#1 » Jan 20 2017 10:43

GW releases final versions of FAQs.
Except new ones, like Deathwatch and Genestealer there isn’t much new, but still. Some of rules shenanigans were nerfed.

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'La
Posts: 681

Re: FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#2 » Jan 20 2017 12:50

I'd like to reiterate that this is what proper rule clarifications look like.

Getting an email from a gamesworkshop employee about rules clarifications has never been an acceptable form of FAQ. Ever. In fact, the most recent "email from gamesworkshop" about the Combined Firepower special rule was 110% wrong and should have never entered serious discussion.

Getting information from a codex in a different language is also not rules clarification.

As always, the Golden Rule should be adhered to whenever rules are in question but an FAQ does not exist for that question. Ask your group of friends or Tournament Organizer for help, or see to unofficial FAQs like ITC for assistance in clear up confusions.
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Posts: 1786

Re: FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#3 » Jan 20 2017 01:47

I'm just happy that the Firestream Wing formation got 'fixed' again. First the BRB FAQ forbids their reserve shenanigans, then the Tau FAQ allows it again for them specifically and now it's finally forbidden again. :D

User avatar
Overheal
Shas'Saal
Posts: 89

Re: FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#4 » Jan 20 2017 02:16

The Pulse Bomber starts with a Pulse Bomb? Capital idea!

What's the deal with them talking about Ordnance weapons on a Riptide though? The IA isn't an Ordnance profile weapon...

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Posts: 1786

Re: FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#5 » Jan 20 2017 02:35

Overheal wrote:The Pulse Bomber starts with a Pulse Bomb? Capital idea!

What's the deal with them talking about Ordnance weapons on a Riptide though? The IA isn't an Ordnance profile weapon...

The IA becomes an Ordnance weapon when you use its Nova profile.

User avatar
Vector Strike
Shas'La
Posts: 784

Re: FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#6 » Jan 20 2017 03:43

AnonAmbientLight wrote:I'd like to reiterate that this is what proper rule clarifications look like.

Getting an email from a gamesworkshop employee about rules clarifications has never been an acceptable form of FAQ. Ever. In fact, the most recent "email from gamesworkshop" about the Combined Firepower special rule was 110% wrong and should have never entered serious discussion.

Getting information from a codex in a different language is also not rules clarification.

As always, the Golden Rule should be adhered to whenever rules are in question but an FAQ does not exist for that question. Ask your group of friends or Tournament Organizer for help, or see to unofficial FAQs like ITC for assistance in clear up confusions.


But when you're discussing rules on the internet, e-mails are indeed some source of intention of the team because, as we're seeing now, FAQs take a lot of time to show up and sometimes put an end to discussions (if they do ti at all).
The Combined Firepower by those e-mails was wrong, but the overwatch/interceptor usage of Multi-tracker was right, as was Gargantuan creatures firing every weapon they have at whatever target they want.
If we don't use e-mails as temporary answers to hotly debated topics, noone will agree on the internet. Threads will take 20 pages of stupid circular discussions.

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'La
Posts: 681

Re: FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#7 » Jan 20 2017 05:49

Vector Strike wrote:
AnonAmbientLight wrote:I'd like to reiterate that this is what proper rule clarifications look like.

Getting an email from a gamesworkshop employee about rules clarifications has never been an acceptable form of FAQ. Ever. In fact, the most recent "email from gamesworkshop" about the Combined Firepower special rule was 110% wrong and should have never entered serious discussion.

Getting information from a codex in a different language is also not rules clarification.

As always, the Golden Rule should be adhered to whenever rules are in question but an FAQ does not exist for that question. Ask your group of friends or Tournament Organizer for help, or see to unofficial FAQs like ITC for assistance in clear up confusions.


But when you're discussing rules on the internet, e-mails are indeed some source of intention of the team because, as we're seeing now, FAQs take a lot of time to show up and sometimes put an end to discussions (if they do ti at all).
The Combined Firepower by those e-mails was wrong, but the overwatch/interceptor usage of Multi-tracker was right, as was Gargantuan creatures firing every weapon they have at whatever target they want.
If we don't use e-mails as temporary answers to hotly debated topics, noone will agree on the internet. Threads will take 20 pages of stupid circular discussions.


GW emails has never been a source of information because they are often wrong and too easily faked. I wasn't joking when I said no one takes them at face value. People in the past have often sent in emails about the same topic and gotten different responses. They've never been reliable and never will be reliable.

FAQs used to be non-existent as I am sure you know. FAQs coming out so quickly is a new thing for GW and comes as a welcome surprise. I would like to point out, if you'll care to acknowledge it, that the email you had posted (I think it was you) was extremely far off the mark so much so that it seemed almost fake based on the dialogue between the two people in said email.

Also, just because it was right on one topic (which wasn't that big of a controversy anyway), doesn't pull away from the point that GW emails are not a source of rule clarifications.

This message board claims to take extreme pride in getting accurate and exact information on everything Tau. So you can imagine why I was so disappointed to see pretty much everyone clinging to that email as definite proof. (it broke rule #2) I even suggested in those threads that we should build lists and tactics around the idea that it was NOT shared USR and etc. I argued that it was a waste of time because the email wasn't proof and that we should instead look to unofficial groups like the ITC to figure out a proper way to rule. If none of that was acceptable, then be sure to double check with your opponent before using this rule with all USR shared.

Unfortunately, no one cared to listen and the thread continued in that direction. Then people started to post tactics and cadre lists with that interpretation in mind.

Literally dozens of threads and hundreds of hours spent on the wrong information because this forum allowed its own rules to lapse. Extremely disappointing.
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

CommanderDeathrain
Shas'La
Posts: 31

Re: FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#8 » Jan 21 2017 02:58

I'm fine with our FAQs
They haven't really nerfed us but clarified how our rules work.
I love the ruling for coordinated fire power as that's how I was playing it as otherwise it was stupid lol.

Hawkins
Shas
Posts: 21

Re: FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#9 » Jan 21 2017 07:51

I'm kind of disappointed that they haven't offered clear clarification on whether Tau characters can take multiple signature systems.

The 40k main rules FAQ states:
Q: How many relics/artefacts can a single model be
equipped with?
A: A model can only be given a single relic or artefact
unless specifically noted otherwise.


And Commanders are worded with:
May take items from the Signature Systems list.


This still implies that applicable Tau characters can take multiple signature systems, but I just know that i'll come up against a that guy who will take issue, and a clear clarification in the FAQ would have saved some trouble.

Stranger In T'aun
Shas'Saal
Posts: 26

Re: FAQs for every codex - finally!

Post#10 » Jan 21 2017 07:57

Hawkins wrote:I'm kind of disappointed that they haven't offered clear clarification on whether Tau characters can take multiple signature systems.

The 40k main rules FAQ states:
Q: How many relics/artefacts can a single model be
equipped with?
A: A model can only be given a single relic or artefact
unless specifically noted otherwise.


And Commanders are worded with:
May take items from the Signature Systems list.


This still implies that applicable Tau characters can take multiple signature systems, but I just know that i'll come up against a that guy who will take issue, and a clear clarification in the FAQ would have saved some trouble.

I'll offer up a counter-that-guy argument: Signature Systems are not relics or artefacts. They are Signature Systems. Nothing in the rules defines them as relics that I can see.
Edit: also, codex trumps BRB.

Return to “Archival Datacore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest