DISQUS

SoonerBrian · 1 year ago

This was not just a cop-out. This was a nerf. Aside from that, it was a poorly-written nerf. They might as well let a retarded monkey bang on a keyboard and publish it as an official FAQ.

I could have lived with the response Jervis gave a month or so ago. He basically said refer to rules as written for each codex. That sucked because Dark Angels didn't get the new toys, but at least they got to keep their old stuff. Hey, our Devastator Squads can score. Cool. And while we didn't get the benefit of the expanded transport capacities of vehicles, and we didn't get to split our squads after they came in via drop pod, at least it made sense because we could just read the rule in our codex. The idea is "well, I was happy with this book 5 minutes before I read the new Space Marine book, so I guess I shouldn't be upset they didn't change it. "

Well, that's no longer the case. Not only did they give the politician-style answer of "use it if your friends say okay" (which really is a cop-out, as I can do anything if the opponent agrees, including adding demons to a Nidzilla army or throwing beer bottles at the scenery), but they also modified the codex. They didn't even do a good job. They changed Combat Tactics to remove the scoring advantage Dark Angels had, but they forgot to similarly change the seperate "Ravenwing Combat Tactics" rule 4 pages later. So now our Landspeeders still score, but our Assault Marines don't. (Now, at this point, I know some jackass is going to pop up and say that it's all intentional. I have some wonderfully priced seaside property in Nebraska to sell you, son.) They removed the sentence stating that squads held in reserve can't be split into combat squads, yet then go on to say that squads coming in via drop pod can't be split into combat squads upon deployment because... because squads in reserve can't be split.

Overall, it was a piss poor effort. Their FAQ doesn't even jive with itself. At least before they released it, the rules made sense. Now even the rules integrity of the codex itself is broken. Crap crap crap. I'll just use the regular SM codex for my Dark Angels from now on. The Ultra-Angels option looks pretty attractive. The only thing I'll miss is the Master of the Ravenwing, but hey, in friendly games, I don't see why people wouldn't let me use it. (Now someone will chime in and say *they* wouldn't let me use it, and I'll say that that person isn't my friend.)

It's pathetic.

Mac · 1 year ago

You can use the White Scars hero on a bike as a basis for Master of Ravenwing..no nice jetbike or 14armour land speeder though :( but it does give you scoring bikes, flanking dedicated transports and hit-and-run..not bad...hmmm

Zaarin7 · 1 year ago

My read on it is this:

"Hi, hears my DA army. Here's my list straight by my codex. Here's my list with point value and equipment rules from the vanella codex. Which one do you want to play?"

I really see this working, especially in a tounament scene.

"Did you bring your Tournament list?", says the oganiser.

"Which one?", says the player.

Or maybe do this. Write up both lists. Put "1,2,3" on top of one and "4,5,6" on top of the other. Let the almighty d6 decide. That makes about as much sense as anything we are ever going to get out of GW. And I go back to Rouge Trader and WHFB 3rd.

VonKoeder · 1 year ago

Personally i think there are enough players on here that it should be a Player FAQ. I travel a good bit and try to get pick up games. I would be willing to bet we would bump into each other more often then not. If it is so easy to fix then i say fix it here. I would be more then willing to use any FAQ offered from this site or a few choice others as "official" for pick up games. If they became popular enough the might even make it into some tournaments or at least a style of tournament.

My vote is for universal war-gear and transports for all SM.

This is the ball bring lobbed in to the court at BOLS.

Anyone care to play?

Mac · 1 year ago

I'm in..Universal Wargear and Transports
(I think this should include Grey Knights too...)

VonKoeder · 1 year ago

Universal war-gear and transports for all SM. This would include downgrading hoods combat shields etc. to the new rules of course - I have no issue with that.

Kyle · 1 year ago

Look, I know it looks really crappy on paper, but from a gaming perspective I think the position lends quite a bit to friendly games, especially if it is applied across the Chapters of renown codices.

Making players talk out the sticky issues before a friendly game has a lot of tangible benefits. It forces issues to be brought out in the open early and resolved through discussion rather than heated in game argument. It ties both players to establishing reasonable ground rules. And more importantly, it helps build meaningful connections through greater social interaction.

I echo the sentiments though, that this is completely unworkable for a competitive environment. That does not mean it is bad. GW should be forced to establish its own rules for GW run tournaments, but similar standards can be applied across the board. A great deal of the most recent FAQs were lifted from the Adepticon FAQ, which in 4th Edition was comprehensive and valuable. These kind of FAQ rulings by GW encourage gaming clubs, stores, and conventions to produce and publish their own FAQs. An act which has similar benefits to forcing players in a friendly game to pre-resolve issues. Overall I'm just for more involved participatory rule clarification and development rather than the traditional "word delivered unto us from on high" style.

Tim · 1 year ago

nice reply... much calmer than mine

Blackwolf · 1 year ago

The problem is that tournament play (no matter what GW tries to believe) is anything but friendly play. It can be fun for both players you can be friendly at a tournament but you are there to compete for prizes.

You do not need to FAQ,Errata or even write new rules for friendly play people will just make it up as you go. Even the 12 year old's that people complain about do this when they play with their buds, and the games are a blast to watch however they throw out most of the rules and just have fun.

Kyle · 1 year ago

That's exactly the argument. With regard to tournament play. The ruling encourages gaming groups and organizers to either deal with arguments piecemeal or establish localized FAQs through cooperation and discussion, something I whole heartedly approve of.

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

'...use the Most Important Rule...'
Cop out.

Game Thug · 1 year ago

Hear hear!

A golden opportunity to fix a problem, and instead they exacerbate it.

Wraithcannon · 1 year ago

No kidding, what an absolutely lazy craptastic answer. Why not just say "We officially don't care what you do, just keep buying models."

NeilBrimelow · 1 year ago

I have been playing 40k for close to 18 years. I have spent untold amounts of money, and have purchased every army in the game, some of them several times over.

I have put up with GW for most of those years, and I actually thought that they were coming around, and seemed to actually care about their CUSTOMERS, and then they literally tell me to go "F" myself with that Dark Angels FAQ.

How hard would it be for GW to update the few Space Marine codexes to account for the changes with "Ultramarines" codex?

Give me a weekend and I'd have everything typed up, balanced, and ready to go.

I've said it before, and I've said it again:

There is no reason, at all, for Storm Shields to operate differently for different Space Marine Chapters, at least not in the same manner as the current problem: I.E. Dark Angels only get 4+inv. save in CC, where the Smurfs get a 3+inv. for shooting and CC.

If, for example, the Dark Angels Storm Shield offered a 2+inv. save in cc ONLY, then I would have no problem, as the Dark Angels had set a precedent for favoring close combat, etc.

However, the Storm Shield previously was the same for ALL chapters. GW changed the very definition of what a Storm Shield did and significantly increased it's effectiveness.

There are some other minor tweaks to the "Ultramarines" codex, but one of the other big changes was in the transport capacity of the Land Raider.
Sure, two extra models, is really not a big deal, but it's the principle. After decades of fluff firmly establishing the STC were virtually the same for ALL codex chapters, it's insane to now say that the Dark Angels are using the older, crappy Land Raiders, and that the STC was updated to fit two more models, and the Dark Angels have to wait YEARS for the "uprgaded" Land Raiders to "arrive." (I.E. with the release of the new codex)

Once again, how hard would it be to integrate the new "Ultramarine" rules in with the other, seemingly forgotten Legacy chapters (I.E. Space Wolves)?

Answer: It could be done in a fortnight, and there is NO EXCUSE. NONE.

As for some of the posters below stating that 40k is not designed for tournament play, I'm sorry, have I been playing a different game for the past 18 years?? I have played against the absolutely most ruthless S.O.B.'s for the past 18 years in tournaments across the county and although in the past, the rules were a real pain in the ass, (and I come from second edition), there is no possible way anyone can tell me that GW has not crafted 40k over the past 18 years to become a tournament game. If GW wanted to "ignore" the tournament circuit, they would have simply released a slightly more streamlined version of second edition, and not that POS third edition that threw the baby out with the bath water.

I will state this with most certainty. GENERAL MOTORS AND FORD are almost bankrupt. Iceland, the COUNTRY, is almost bankrupt. TRILLIONS of dollars of wealth have been annihilated worldwide in the past few weeks. GAMES WORKSHOP, this is NOT the time to play your bullshit games with your customers.

Take down all of the space marine chapters FAQs, and hire some drone to put in some overtime this weekend and re-release the FAQ's and make your customers HAPPY, as they might not have much money to spend on $50 bits of plastic for much longer.

Matthew_Rider · 1 year ago

That was inspired, and I totaly agree

Ive only been playing for 8 years, and never collected dark/blood angels, but I certainly see were your coming from. Telling us just to use the "have fun" rule is basicly saying "we love ultramarines"- not that Im surprised

As an Iron Hands player my army is almost forgotten by GW- in fact there isnt even a HQ choice for us anymore- the Master of the Forge is NOT the same as an Iron Farther- and theres not even any Bionics available in the codex

Arg I could rant for hours about GW

Gyroscope_of_Time · 1 year ago

Agree totally with the above. I cannot believe that GW think people will buy this; the mere idea of Dark Angels/Blood Angels being limited to the same but yet somehow inferior weaponry is proposterous. And the idea of it being alright to use the vanilla weaponry rules if "thats ok with your opponent" is beyond belief. Combine this with "if there is a debate, simply knock one point of a units cover save" (of which i have already played numerous 12 year olds who abuse this to kingdom come) and you have the makings of a set of rules that will eventually make tournements unplayable.

I honestly believe believe that by the time of the next set of rules, a game of warhammer 40k will not require dice or tape measures: all you and you opponent have to do is agree how well units do in combat/shooting or how far they move.

HsojVvad · 1 year ago

True about GM and Ford. It looks like I will be affected by this, so will be having less money now. I will be really looking to where my money is going.

All I am looking for where to put my money. Seeing how inconsitent your guys are now, I was ready to get the Black Reach box set. But seeing how the FAQ situation is being handled, I am on the fence now of looking at other Game Sytems and keep reading that Privateer Press is good.

So do I give them a shot or do I keep my money to my Beloved Tyranids and Dark Angels? You tell me GW what would you like?

V · 1 year ago

Actually Storm Shields weren't the same across the board for a long time now. Daemonhunters had and still have storm shields that only protect from one attack and give +1 A (as it is a one handed weapon). DA players only seem to care when their stuff is on the line.

NeilBrimelow · 1 year ago

Actually, I am not even a Dark Angels player right now, but I am still angry at the inconsistency and the "F-U" attitude from GW.

As for the Storm Shields and Daemonhunters, you must remember that Daemonhunters was a third edition codex, and also not a space marine codex.

As I said before, I don't care if certain Space Marine chapters have different ways they use the storm shield, if that had been established previously. GW simply changed the stats of the storm shield across the board, for most of the non-codexed armies, but screwed over everyone else because they were too lazy to spend the weekend necessary to properly do FAQs.

Tireofthiscrap · 1 year ago

I guess F.A.Q. means Flagrantly Abhorrent Quality.

Culial · 1 year ago

What a crock...

Blackwolf · 1 year ago

So each tournament should decide what to do for their tournament?? Too bad there are not any offical GW tournaments that will need to address this question. Yet another reason why you could not pay me to go to the GT's anymore. 5th edition is a great game for fun but sucks for tournaments.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

I've been told that the War Machine tournaments scene is pretty good. I'll have to pick up that game.

Stad · 1 year ago

It was a nice start, but definite cop out. Howhard would it have been to say - transport capacities have changed. Here they are.

I wish chaos got the same treatment. Seems our landraiders have no machine spirit... it could have been defaulted to demonic possession with extra attach.

Matthew_Rider · 1 year ago

I hate it when people say that

Chaos get Daemons, the best troop choices in the game like plague marines and beserkers, (even more important now,) the defiler, and it would make sense that Imperial tanks and Equipment is better than Heretic stuff- Eg- A machine Spirit would be much more accurate than a blood crazed Daemon

Vindur · 1 year ago

well at the end of the day the rules u claim u want for your iron hands LR should have a similar basic frame then different upgrades. the LR have been around just as long as each other.

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

The Imperium has better resources to modify and build new ones, it's a slow process, yes, but we can still make new ones, I'm not so sure Chaos have quite the same facilities.

Forbino · 1 year ago

Well, they stated that "if you have to use these rules to have fun" not that you should use them, so it should cut both ways. If the DA need the new wargear, they should be prepared for their opponents to want them to take stat downs on chaplins, librarians, scouts, and limited range hoods in the name of "having fun"

Nicholas_S · 1 year ago

I agree. It would only be fair to take the good updates with the bad updates.

Ivellos · 1 year ago

I read the News and got all excited, but then when I read the FAQ... Seriously? Why can't they let them get at least a few of the options officially? I'm sure they just did it so people would just open their wallets and start another SM army. Blah, not asking for much but a few of the options would have been cool.

Chris · 1 year ago

Total Cop out. Their "solution" is retarded. It's insulting as a DA player to get this as the official response.

darrrrren · 1 year ago

gotta hand it to GW, a total cop out but at the same time great marketing decision. now all the DA players can buy the new goodies, integrate them, playtest them with friends (that agree to the new units/wargear... which will be close friends only)... then take them painted up to a tourney as part of their army only to get shut down and not allowed to run them. thanks GW, you really made my day.

-disgruntled DA player.

Docrailgun · 1 year ago

Wow... and people wonder why GW staffers don't come out of their caves much. At least they did SOMETHING... but mostly they get flamed.

They can't win, can they?

Blackwolf · 1 year ago

I will defend the staffers when they at least do something but in this case they did exactly nothing.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

I defend staffers and GW decisions all the time. I think the price hike was totally fair and that the company actually did LESS than they needed to do. I think their new pricing plan (especially with black reach) is incredible.

This nonsense is retarded. JUST RETARDED. We have been telling them in countless emails and to their face that we need these things officially addressed in codex's or the tournament scene will suck.

So after GT chicago has record low attendance (with about 10 of us in TOWN with the weekend off boycotting it) they give us this giant middle finger. Basically they are saying "we don't care about tournaments and our writers are not talented enough to balance the game so we won't try".

Taffeh · 1 year ago

It couldnt sound like 'sitting on the fence' more if they took a laptop and sat on a fence to write it!

SERIOUSLY! I wanna know which plonker wrote that text!

A couple of playtested games, DA vs new Smurfdex of a variety of different builds (Standard company, mixed, Deathwing, ravenwing, Death-Raven) and you would of had your answer if DA are currently underpowered!

No ruleslawyers or silly powergaming kid is going to allow this! It gives those who crave unfair advantages the option to take an unfair advantage!

-A Dark Angels player since Codex: Angels of Death.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

It's just more of them showing that they don't understand how many players (mostly in the states) treat rules for games. As a whole we DO NOT like house rules. We want to play tournament style games even against our friends. When we get together to play poker we play texas hold'em BY THE BOOK not some crazy "one eyed jacks are wild" table rules.

By refusing point blank to give us official rules they are telling "Tournament Gamers" that they do not want our business. I think I'm gonna take a look at WarMaching now.

valhallan42nd · 1 year ago

Or that they're say that rather than reinvent the wheel, they're going to keep things as they are.

Imagine the uproar if they did a reprint of the DA codex and forced ya'll to rebuy it. They couldn't either way.

Culial · 1 year ago

If a re-printed DA codex sorted this whole (GW created) mess, I'd buy the damned thing! Something needs to be done about this, and as Blackwolf said above "[...] in this case they did exactly nothing"

And I get the whole Plastics=Profits bit, but after writing-off my latest army, why the Hell would I run out and buy another to compensate?

This is pure idiocy.

Matt Varnish · 1 year ago

Maybe with all the robes and other frippery it takes up the extra 2 slots in the vehicles? For blood angels players you could say the US-Sized cupholders for the blood chalices take up the room :)

jk guys, I know it sucks that they don't go with a "living document' concept, but the poster had it right that said that DA should then take the hits to chaplains, and so on if they are to benefit from the new wargear stats.

cavalier1864 · 1 year ago

I completely agree. Basically what they are saying is that they think that the players at individual tables should determine what makes proper game balance individually. Allowing the DA access to all of the new goodies without any changes would really be unbalancing, imho, but on the other hand DAs are generally only played by experienced players who should understand that and take their own steps to make the fight fair. Here is a good rule of thumb that some friends and I have used in the past:

Allow the additional unit slots at an "Extra Troop Capacity" upgrade cost of +15 points
Allow the use of new wargear at an added cost of +5pts universally
Allow the use of new infantry units at an added cost of +2 points per model
Allow the use of new vehicles at an added cost of +(5% of base vehicle cost)
Otherwise go with the codex for all remaining units/upgrades/stats

We have used these guidelines in the past to create new armies from disparate codices, and I think that it adds balance to the flavorful armies without breaking the bank.

For example, adding a Veteran Squad to the Death Korps of Krieg list (specifically the one from Seige of Vraks) doesn't sound too bad until you think of the ramifications of that decision. Thus allowing the use of the unit at an added cost of +2 points per model (plus the modifications for Die Hards as well) and it puts things back into balance.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

Your right, they need to give new goodies AND make other changes to balance it. It isn't actually that hard. It's actually VERY EASY thanks to... MATHEMATICS!

Any decent game designer should be able to balance a codex purely in excel in a few hours. Making subtle changes like this isn't that tough. I'm very very serious.

Culial · 1 year ago

:-|

I for one would happily adopt the disadvantages along with the Ultra-Advantages, otherwise it would just be cheating...

Hey, you never know, it might even justify having two different grades of DA Chaplain; Standard as the Ultramarine Codex, Interrogator Chaplains buffed (in comparison) with increased points to justify it? because at present, you're buying a wound - nothing more, nothing less (unless you're not using a 'Wing' Character, who buff the whole army’s Ld, in which case why are you playing DA in the first place?)

Andrew · 1 year ago

You guys are completely missing the point.

GW have always said, no matter how enthusiastically some of you try to ignore it, that their systems are NOT tournament systems. That while they have tournaments for the fun of people playing with their wardollies, that it's not a tournament system.

The most important rule has always been the most important rule. This has been consistent for the twenty years 40k has been going. Their games are purely there as a framework for punters to enjoy playing with their toys in their garages with their mates.

It is that philosophy that we see here - again/still - in evidence. Is it so hard for you guys to get it through your heads? Even when they use small words and speak slowly?

The term, for the slow kids up the back, is Staying on mission. NOT a cop out. NOT fence-sitting. NOT doing nothing.

rockdeity · 1 year ago

You don't have to play tourneys to want some unambiguous rules. Why have rules at all if they aren't important?

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

If GW could they wouldn't have books. We would all buy models, paint them, set them up on $200 dollar tables and shout WAAAAAGH at each other then go home.

MarcusZ · 1 year ago

bruhahaha, very nice image you are creating in my head! Thanks for making my day better :)

marcus

Blackwolf · 1 year ago

Problem is that even though the game is for fun there is a large segment that enjoys the compettion a tournament gives and no matter what they say that is the reason they have tournaments (to make more money they want to appeal to that segment). So by not giving a definitive answer they are ignoring a large part of their customer base.

Personally I don't care how they rule it at my house it will be played for fun and I gave up on going to GW run events a while ago because 5th edition is not a competive rule set so tournaments aren't fun unless they are local where you can have your own set of FAQ/Erratas that are used. I still go to out of town stuff but I call the judges before to clarify issues first and if I don't like the rules I stay home and paint instead.

Massawyrm · 1 year ago

They gave a definitive answer. Some people just don't like it.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

This is the VERY DEFINITION of not being definitive. Definitive means to define... they are refusing to define it officially and instead making players define what is legal at the table top.

They do not trust their game designers to do the work, so they instead want customers to make the decision.

JohnOSpencer · 1 year ago

We're the ones playing the game, why shouldn't we make the decision?

Would you have preferred their original response of "No, you can't use any of the new goodies from the Space Marine Codex"?

nurglespuss · 1 year ago

Indeed! Oh no!! Games workshop gave players a 'choice' how terrible, we NEED to be told what to do, all the time...

Seriously, as the more astute players have pointed out, its not a tournament oriented game, in the case of a tournament, the organisers can give clarified answers in their tourny rules pack.

Yay! Go choice!!

NOON · 1 year ago

What I think is the problem is different focuses between players. Some players just grabed the models cause they looked cool, or because their freind played, or some other reson. I personally read every bit of background material I could find and then bought Battle for Macaggre. Why I don't like this is that it makes no sence whatsoever that the generalist Smufs can get awsome SHEILDS the the assault basted, knight looking orkmarines get jyped. It should be the other way around. Anyway alot of players want this and other issues RESOLVED, in WRITING. Some official document that says somthing like "All stormshields are created equal." Oh wait, Games Workshop is British baised. No offence to Tommies, but (I checked this) the vast majority of American players want the universal wargear and the universal holding capasity and basically (here it comes) EQUALITY among Marines. Before you argue against that, remember that the website you're on is from Texas. That is one of the states in the US. Anyway, there are players like me who don't like this kind of answer because it goes compleatly against what we joined the hobby to do. And for those who support this answer, would it really hurt you if there were universal stuff. You could just choose not to listen. I don't plan on boycoting 40k over this, however. I'll just play with another army for a while untill the lads in the workshop get thier heads on strait.

Steve · 1 year ago

I'ld take that argument 1 step further... we don't want equality in non-nilla SMs thats the point. Where the new C:SM annoyes the hell outta me is where the 'all rounders' do better then the specialists.

FAQ's should be pushing all marines towords the old trait system: identical basic armies with specific differences forming the advantages/disadvantages logical from their background.

Then there's the whole question of cheating... I use wolves, I don't expect everyone I play to know the difference between puppies and smurfs and can't be bothered to clarify that I use Rhino's from C:SM since S:SW actually has no entry for them beond a 50pts cost... do I use that cost with equipment from new S:SM, does that mean I use that cost with equipment from olf C:SM's 50pt rhino or do I just dodge the issue and use 35pt rhinos.
It's not that I mean to cheat by now raising the this issue eveytime I start a game I just don't want to have to have a debate before I play.
That's why we all need FAQs to be DEFINITIVE, discussing house rules is fine so long as you don't have to spend 30 mins every game deciding on what everything does

Brother_Marius · 1 year ago

Pretty much hit the nail on the head... why do we need to be spoon fed a FAQ for something that is common sense?
3rd and 4th ed is when the spoon feeding started... never saw this crap in 2nd, people just followed the god aweful clunky rules and liked it... yeah we loved it! (sits back down on his rocking chair to yell at kids to get off his lawn)

TPR Trewevas · 1 year ago

Well, to be fair, people ignored a fair amount of the rules in both Rogue Trader and 2nd edition. I think that Warhammer might have to return to a more home-style game and forget about tournaments. Is anyone interested in working on an alternative to the official rules? I have been pouring over the RT rules and am reminded of much that was worthwhile.

Massawyrm · 1 year ago

You keep using that word - I do not think it means what you think it means.

They DEFINITIVELY say that it is not legal - and then reaffirm their company policy of "it is your game, do what thou wilt." Go back and re-read the piece then answer this question: "Can I legally use the new Codex rules in my old codex?" The answer is in there.

Lovecraft · 1 year ago

I thought the FAQ was very clear about it.

To quote from it:

"Strictly speaking you should always use the rules from your own codex, and this is the default solution you must use if you and your opponent can't come up with a better one."

Words like "strictly" and "must" seem pretty definitive to me. You use the DA Codex rules. If you and your opponent agree that you can do something different than you can do that, but otherwise you have to chose which codex to use.

I'm not saying it's the best answer they could have given, but they were clear about it.

I do agree with this rule. I play BA (and their mini codex) and find it fine that I get some gear my other SM playing friends don't. Now they get some different and better stuff as well. I was excited by the new stuff in the new SM Codex so I built a "codex" BA army, taking out my Baal and the Death Company and Adding in some Sternguard and a Thunderfire (which is a pain to assemble). I'll play whichever army suits my mood at the time. Seems like a lot of the non-codex players just want to have their cake and eat it too.

Don · 1 year ago

It very clearly says that you must get your opponents permission to use equipment from the new SM codex. So, if you think someone in a tournament will likely say "NO!" (which in most cases they will) then don't make your list with this new equipment....In my opinion, if you bring a non codex list with equipment from the new codex to a tourney and one of your opponents does not agree with your use of said equipment (for balance reasons) then you must forfeit that round....assuming that the tourney rules have not specifically allowed for these changes of course.

Bruce the Shark · 1 year ago

Tournaments are for the cheese-mongers anyway. What the hell are you, freaking Miniatures Olympians? And people wonder why the tournament powergamers are teh suxxor.

Fun is the only game. Cheeseballs, take your hankies and go snivel in the corner. You nearly ruined the game with the 3rd/4th editions tournament focus, so sod off now.

Wankers.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

You see, you can choose to not go to tournaments and to not use the new rules. Some of us like tournaments, we aren't telling you to update from 2nd edition are we?

The reason tournaments are for "cheese-mongers" is because GW refuses to fix the game so that specific "power builds" don't exist. They refuse to balance power level's in FAQ's and fix the cheese issue.

Then again, I'm betting you hate it when people play different than you. Why must fun be the only game? Who made that rule up? Why is that high horse always being flogged in defense of a bad ruleset?

My queen has a laser beam and can shoot your king dead. It's fun, so that's the new rule for chess. Don't ask me to fix the rules that would make you cheesy.

Hatchett · 1 year ago

That's rad.
They're all just fackin' wankers!
Cheer's, Bruce!!
"JUST a BITE!!"

Fulminata · 1 year ago

GW can claim all they want to that their systems are not tournament systems, but as long as they officially sponsor tournaments they are tournament systems by default.

Tournaments are a huge part of the GW marketing plan and to not support those tournaments with rules that work in a tournament setting is a clear case of trying to have your cake and eat it too.

I'm not even a tournament player, and have no desire to be one, yet I can recognize the value and importance of having a clear set of rules that can stand up to tournament play.

ross · 1 year ago

Thats it. You got it.

Rottenbob · 1 year ago

Huh what about us punters that dont have any friends close by anymore that can play in thier garages what if the tourny circiut was their only option? Not everyone can play with thier mates so do they just quit all together?

Steve · 1 year ago

fence-sitting is an opt out of making an actual decision... if your trying to say that that is not what has happened here then you have to be stupid or biased as hell

also- GW just masivly broke the most important rule in releasing that FAQ: how many people here seem to be enjoying its release? In 1 step GW have seemingly annoyed every non-smurf SM player... either directly or through fear of what rubbish they'll release next.

I wouldn't wish this pile of rubbish on my worst enemies... but since I'm a puppy and DA's are my blood sworn enemy I'll just have to go with sympathy

Tim · 1 year ago

I read the FAQ. It says... nothing but discuss it with your opponenet and if you can't come to an agreement... use your codex as written.

I try to be upbeat about things, I try to rationalize what others were/are thinking when you cannot get a straight answer or when the answer just does not make sense.

I play Dark Angels, I love Dark Angels, however this FAQ/ERRATA is not worth the paper to print it on or the electricity to get the pixels to come up on the screen.

Games-Workshop has insulted a portion of it's customers with this document. The differences in the new marine codex and the DA codex demand a rules clarification from the creator of the books. The FAQ/ERRATA may have quoated the rule book but in terms have created a situation where it reverts back to the old problem of named characters. Unless it is a very friendly game who is going allow any perceived advantage?

Does anybody have an EMAIL address we can (send) bombard to complain?

I gotta go... taking this personally... love the game... felt slighted at no FAQ.. and now Games-Workshop has, in my opion, insulted me as a veteran player and longtime customer.

I am not pleased.

Game Thug · 1 year ago

You can reach Jervis Johnson at:

jervis.johnson@games-workshop.co.uk

Tim · 1 year ago

thank you for the email address... I have that one here as well, but was...distressed at the time about reading the FAQ... go figure... I was upset...


thank you again,


Tim

Massawyrm · 1 year ago

While it certainly reads "COP OUT" it is entirely in tune with what they've said. The various Angels and the Templars AIN'T GETTING FAQ'D. That simple. What they've officially said in the FAQ is that NO - YOU ARE NOT GETTING FAQ'D. HOWEVER, if you want to play with it, ask your friends.

I am fortunate enough to be able to play in one of the greatest play environments I've ever seen. These guys EMBRACE fun play...while all still attending tournaments. Beardy players tend not to find games so readily as players who run fun, experimental armies and pieces. Last week I brought a sideboarded Spined Chaos Beast as a HSC just to have some fun with it if anyone would let it fly. Everyone I asked lit up and said "PLAY IT! I wanna see what it does." It was a hell of a lot of fun. I don't think I'm going to have much trouble getting my Blood Angels updated wargear...

faultie · 1 year ago

WTF? Did they really bother releasing that?

Q: "Can I use this?"
A: "Yes, if so. No, if not"

In all honesty, this didn't need to be FAQ'd. The Errata/FAQ is to look at if you have a problem that needs a definitive answer. This is not a definitive answer. This is simply you and your opponent agreeing on a solution, which you should try to do before resorting to going off and looking up the FAQ, which, in this case, tells you to do the same thing.

I don't care one way or the other about who gets what wargear. I just think that this was a waste of time.

B_Steele · 1 year ago

As a Blood Angels player for like fifteen years, I find this answer somewhat unsatisfactory. It is good that they at least recognise it is an issue, but they really could do better than "Ask your opponents."

I don't even want the new toys (Redeemer, Forge, etc.), I just want things like wargear and vehicle definitions (PotMS, transport cap, etc.) to match up and make sense across the board so we don't have to ask "Are you playing a Black Templar successor chapter, or is that a Codex Chapter that uses Black templar models?"

I know in my local tourney circuit we are going to put out a petition to see whether or not the Codexed chapters will be using "current definitions" of named Wargear and Vehicle Traits. While it will still mean we don't get the new goodies (I don't want them anyway...I have my own fun stuff), it will eliminate the whole "which type of Storm Shield is that, again?"

I suggest you do the same. As the FAQ says: ask your opponents. :)

-Bry

d40k · 1 year ago

Cop Out Deluxe!!!

It like me asking if an UltraSmurf can take Dante and a Death Company...meh

RobK · 1 year ago

I read the FAQ, and re-read it. Since FAQ stands for "Frequently Asked Questions", one might assume they intend in the answer to make the same question less frequent by satisfying the questioner. Not so in this "FAQ".
It is a poor evasion of the question. What was needed here was an actual ruling for tournaments, where total strangers will meet over a table for the first time - not knowing each others' playstyle, house-rules, or stances on wargear. On the surface, I'm all in favor of the new stress on old-style fun war gaming, and less on tournaments with "gotcha" rulings. Ever since the Standard Bearer article in White Dwarf, all I've been able to get out of this is an escape clause of why they don't need to write better rules.

I myself am not a huge fan of the "win-at-all-cost" tournaments that have been growing in popularity. However, what was needed here was an answer, not an excuse. I play mostly Apocalypse games for fun, but if I did need a long winded diatribe on how to play for fun, it would not be delivered by the likes of GW staff.

All this FAQ did was blame the consumer. Apparently, we are the reason the game isn't making any sense or being any fun.

Mike · 1 year ago

When i looked at the comments section, i thought i'd clicked on a link to warseer since everyone is bitching so much. As someone above said, they gave an answer, you guys just don't like it. And let's face it, any answer would have gotten the same responce from either the same poeple or from a different section of the populous. If they'd said "stick to your own codex" would everyone have been happy? If they'd said "use whatever you want and use this FAQ to justify it" would everyone have been happy. If they'd even said "we will be releasing a pdf with little stickers to put in your dark angel book to bring it in-line with the newest codex" the dark angel players would still have been outraged and complaining that GW in it's infinite wisdom (and i work for GW, let me tell you, upper management are idiots!) just wanted you guys to rebuy your book! What they have done is said that it's up to individual players/tournament organisers/opponents to work out how to integrate the two books together.

We don't live in a perfect world, but what GW have allowed you guys to do is say to your opponent "look GW have said that i should discuss with you what i can and cant use" and your opponent will either say "screw you for painting your army green" (in which case i'd suggest not playing him) or "yeah, thats fine, i hadnt even considered that some of your stuff is still better than the new book" (in which case where's the problem?)

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

They did NOT give an answer, they told you to ask someone else.

Question: Can I have a hot dog?
Answer: Ask your mother.

faultie · 1 year ago

Nice analogy!

Tim · 1 year ago

What players are asking for is difinative a rules clarification. It makes sense for one item to work within the rules one way regardless of who uses it. If... if the item works differently for different people then there should be some reason within the rules as well as the fluff.

I ask you Mike, representative and employed of Games-Workshop, why in the design of the game does Dark Angels Storm Shields work differently than Ultramarine Storm Shields?

Now there are several answers that come to the top of my head:

Money -- There is not enough profit in it due to the constraints of running a company. It takes time to re-do a product. Games-Workshop is first and formost a company that has created a product to sell to the public. In doing so they make money for selling goods. People have invested in the company so the company must look out for the investments of the stockholders.

Time -- There is not enough time to fix it. It takes an enourmous amout of resources, which costs the company in time and money, to go back and re-do the codex , playtest and to come into line with the new rules. Time lends itself to money.

Decisiveness -- Pg 2 of the rules tells us the number one rule is to have fun. However, the FAQ itself has a question about Azrael taking a company champion when he takes a command squad. The answer was "no" becasue Azrael is not a company master. Intersesting response.

The answer to the question responds with "rules as written." Azrael is not called a company master therefore he cannot take a company champion within his command squad. So... whoever wrote the answer went the lazy route. They simply said that if it wasn't written that way you cannot do it. In fact the FAQ says strictly you should use your codex. Well... when two codex's say two different things over the same item questions arrise. Instead of making a decisive choice the FAQ just went with the wording not the spirit of the game. So... the most important rule of the game in having fun, which is the spirit of the game, is disregarded in favor of the wording. It is also lazy... I don't need to decide... the book says it can't be done unless both parties agree.

I don't know -- I work for the company, but are not privy to this information. I am NOT trying to abuse you Mike. My point is that to many people within the company spoil things by leaking them. Intentional or not is not the point. Games-workshopp keep things to themselves so they can generate sales. Thats what they are suppose to do. SEE ABOVE

I might add that that the future might hold something for The DA Codex and they are trying to keep it low profile. I don't think there is much merit to this however.

Loss of Heart -- I have read that there are people within the company of Games-Workshop that do not play the games that their company produces. It's just a job, a job that they do well at, a job that they love, but not a love of the game. You get to many people in an organization that are just doing their job and soon that is all that it is. A job that helps a company make an object, sell it, create a profit, and try to create the process over and over again into the future. Not much heart in that.

In saying there is loss of heart I can also add this. Where within your company are the people that do have the heart. Is their not one soul within any of the walls of where you do business that is willing to take the time on their own to help their customers with a problem?

I await your answer,

Mike · 1 year ago

That willingness to help customers with their problems rests soley with poeple like me who work in the shops and are the first point of contact between the customer and the hobby. Unfortunately that means that we get asked all the dificult questions like "why did GW do this?", "why did GW give that to them?" and we have no control over anything game related. Yes there are people higher up who dont play the hobby, and that sickens me. And it's funny, although i work in a store i still come on here as i hear more rumours through BOLS than through the official letters and memos.

I would have liked a more definitive answer too, but i have no control over these things. My point wasnt that their answer was amazing but that whatever they said people would be complaining and complaining doesnt get you anywhere, no thats wrong. Complaining in the right place mihgt, winging on here that its a bad answer wont do anything. Though winging on here that people are winging, whilst not getting me anyway will at least be heard by the right people.

I love this hobby, i love gaming, i love the background, i love collecting, modelling and painting so dont think i'm just an uptight high level GW employee telling you to shut up. Everyone has a right to their opinion, but the comments on here are going the way of warseer, who also have valid opinions, just ones i dont want to listen to so i don't go there.

I agree, GW does do a lot of stupid things (employing Gav Thorpe for so long, letting him write the dark elf book before he left after he screwed up the first one so much i want to punch him in the face, letting Gav Thorpe run the Storm of Chaos campaign etc etc) which is why i'm not pursuing a career with them, i was part time staff, my last day is next sunday.

And the above analogy doesnt hold. A more appropriate analogy would be them saying "no, unless your mother says yes"

Tim · 1 year ago

Thank you for the reply,

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

I'm still going to try to work with them so that I can try to ake more of a difference and try to influence certain decisions(this is basicaly part of my plan to get into the Studio) that way if I stay on this site and listen to the general view can try to change things. It's far fetched I know but a life is better than none at all.

Steve · 1 year ago

Quote from RobK: "I read the FAQ, and re-read it. Since FAQ stands for "Frequently Asked Questions", one might assume they intend in the answer to make the same question less frequent by satisfying the questioner. Not so in this "FAQ"."

Wow are you naive Rob thinking that there were answers; FAQs are just a list of the frequently asked questions you need to remember... an excellent aide memoire

Wyrm · 1 year ago

They really mistyped "the most important rule", which actually is: more money to GW whatever the consequences.
This would be fine, except for that whatever the consequences part.

Apart from stating the obvious (an STC is an STC is an STC), it is most disturbing for any non-marine player having to ask which SM ruleset of the 3-4-5 the opponent is using and having to learn all. Not learning in the sense of what is doing what, but in the sense of adapting at the table that THIS green land raider (captain, veteran, dreadnought, you name it) is using not the same rule as the green one BEFORE. Although it is the same model, has the same color, etc. And doing that every turn. At least the power armour stayed at 3+ save for all armies.
It is inconsistent to have a rulebook, which is overruled by the codices, which are overruled by the wargear book, which is overruled partly by the new book and which, then again by the newer codices.

But SM wargear is not a solitary example. In fantasy the Storm of Chaos book got disqualified, because "it is not a warhammer army book". Although it states on the cover Warhammer Armies: Storm of Chaos.
When Daemons of Chaos came, the Hordes of choas got disqualified, because it has daemons in it, which don't belong there. But look at this new shiny WD list. In it: Chaos Giant (see Beast of Chaos) and Hellcannon (see: Storm of Chaos, where the Hellcannon entry refers partly to: yes, you guessed it: Hordes of Chaos. Which is just replaced).

A power-gamer (I am considered one) can min-max every list, and if one has experience can win even with an underpowered army. Been there, done that. Now playing 40K only in Apocalypse (and these games involve lots of drinking :D )

Nevertheless, sales and marketing driven rules inconsistency and obvious incompetence is a shame from a company which prides itself with producing QUALITY.

Space Machines · 1 year ago

Hang on, if they'd really been going for "more money to GW" they'd have said "sure, use the new stuff, come buy this new codex, buy all our stuff, and then we'll redo your codex soon and you'll have to buy that too."

Instead they said "technically, no you can't use it, unless you agree beforehand with friends." An option that necessitates precisely no outlay of cash. When you look at it that way, it's a pretty crappy marketing decision from the point of view from making more money.

But it's quite a solid decision from the point of view of ensuring each Codex is self-contained, a principle that got us away from those awful 3rd ed era codexes that necessitated buying other codexes to use them. Urgh.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

I've talked to many people about this issue and I think the factor your missing is competence.

Games Workshop would actually make more money if they started using a living document system to keep the tournament system fluid and every army balanced against each other better. They could promote the hobby in a positive way by making sure multiple armies are all being advanced at the same time and creating an environment that is intuitive. This would motivate MANY people to make medium to small purchases.

They THINK they make more money when they force few people to make medium to large purchases (like whole new armies). They THINK this is the more money way. They haven't had competition in so long and so many people are heavily invested in GW that they believe we won't jump ship. They are polarizing players.

I am quickly running out of close friends to play with. I'm now down from about 10 to 3. None of us play armies that are anywhere near to being updated so none of us are buying any more models. We aren't going to spend any more money by buying new armies but we MIGHT spend more money on units that suck getting updated or becoming available.

Steve · 1 year ago

The important thing here is N00Bs... yes the game needs depth but it also needs to be understandable. Combat Shields are different to Storm Shields (understandable), but storm shield being different to Storm Shields is just silly. If different chapters use different rules then call them different things.

I think the worst change to happen to 40k since 2nd Ed is the division of weaponry: if you understood what an autogun, lasgun and boltgun were you were set since that was 95% of all the different weapons (no shoota, slugga, shiruken, rail rifle etc). This was made even simpler by the fact that basic troops choices had similar weaponry even when the name was different (autoguns, lasguns and yes even tyranid spike rifles were all idetical: S3 24")
In 5th edition you have to either collect an army or to have played it countless times to understand the differences... I'm often left feeling guilty when I spring a cunning trap using my special rules and instead of the opponent saying "oh gosh, didn't see that" you get "huh, I don't get how your doing that"

shakespear · 1 year ago

I see all the negative comments and I have to ask, "why do you guys continue to play?"

I would love to do something more rewarding but I cant get people in my area off GW!

Everytime I see articles here on "tactics" I have to laugh, they arent any! Its army selection, who has the newer codex and who goes first!

Overpriced good looking models with a neat background just cant compensate for a shitty game!

Look at FOW, its not a tournament driven scene, but the rules are tight and people have fun. Any questions are answered (officialy) on the forums.

Why cant GW take this step?

Tim · 1 year ago

I like the game... however I would like some specificity when it comes to the differences in the codice's regarding the same equipment.

I am passionate about my "hobby". It is more than just game to me. I know that is... weird. Some old guy spouting off about things that kids play... I'll never learn.

Mike M · 1 year ago

But in your Flames of War for those that do not know what FOW means. There are 3 time lines you can play and almost everyone I have seen playing the game in the southeastern US (AL,FL,GA) play LATE WAR games. Each timeline, Early Middle or Late. have rules for those and in some cases chnages the game intirely.

shakespear · 1 year ago

Ive been into FOW since it came out. Mid was more popular in the beginning now the focus has shifted in rules to late war so thats why its more popular

Blackwolf · 1 year ago

Actually the Tournament scene (that battlefront is pushing) is what is driving more players to the late war. FOW has a huge tournament scene patterned after GW. In fact battlefront's whole marketing plan is patterned after GW. Just like GW they bring on the new stuff so you gotta have it to compete.

shakespear · 1 year ago

Except they see where GW has failed. Costs are reasonable, hell Resin is cheaper!

I do hate the FOW tournament scene writing "unit history", very lame..

Blackwolf · 1 year ago

For the cost of resin FOW is incredibly overpriced. In truth it costs just as much money to play FOW as it does to play 40k.

shakespear · 1 year ago

German Krupp Kfz 70 Part code FOW-GE420 is $18

You can buy it in resin Part code SKU: FOW-GE426 for $11

You get two for both prices, yea real expensive.

I can get a complete 1500 point army for $200 in FOW or I can buy less than half of that in Marines

Joe · 1 year ago

Would it have better if they said, "Absolutely no, never ever never." It's a cop out, but they also can't just say, 'yes, take whatever you want.' If they do that, then they open the door for BT assault squads with 3+ invuls. Should DA chaplains be BS 4? Should DA librarians have a 24-inch psychic hood? For each 'go ahead and use the Land Raider Redeemer' there would at least one 'drop Scouts to WS3/BS3, but give them.....'

GW doesn't want to go the way of that other company, where there's countless pages of FAQ and errata. Sure, it makes it great in a tourney (assuming they've gotten around to answering your question and/or addressing your borken combo of doom), unless you have to spend 10 minutes digging through all the pages you printed out on the Friday before the tourney.

It's not the best answer, but it's better than nothing, and the alternative is to totally redo the DA codex, which won't happen for about 4 years.

Actually, the best answer is to eliminate all the variant codeci, and let you build each from the main SM codex with unit choices, special characters, and the like. But that would be less marinez! hurr! and that's not going to happen.

So, if all you BT, DA, and BA players want all the new toys to be legal, write GW and ask them to do away with your chapter codex. Personally, I'm keeping my SW codex and looking forward to BS5 Wolf Guard Leaders with heavy-2 CMLs, a Frost Blade, and a Storm Shield!

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

Yes. Saying "No they can't" is better than this. There were THEORETICALLY only two options.

1) Spend a few hours doing some game design statistically analysis in excel and then release an FAQ that brings the DA codex in line with the new one, makes options available and tweaks power levels and points cost so as to not cause the DA to be over powered.

2) Say no, it's as in the book, deal with it.

Option 1 is better (for sales AND player support) but 2 is acceptable as it defines the game and lets people know how it's going to be every game.

Their mysterious option 3 is "like we know. jesus do you think we write games for a living? ask your opponent JEEZ"

Tim · 1 year ago

nice answers... the yet unforseen option number three... so secret that if we told you we would have to kill you... so if you and your buddies get together... spin around twice in a clockwise direction... recant the canticle of absolution... all on one foot... with a deaf, blind, mute as a witness... you'll get your answer

Madrox6 · 1 year ago

They DID say no. Re-read it. Then they gave an OPTION for non tournament players to have fun and play it they're own way. So stop complaining about a lack of definition for tournament play.

Sixsystems · 1 year ago

This is turning into Magic: the Gathering. For those who didn't play- there were certain rare cards that could upset the balance of the game because not everyone had access to them (ergo rare). Wizards of the Coast (owners) decided that they would allow for several types of tournament play- some with all the cards, some with only the latest cards, some with a strange mix. It all was getting a little confusing and desperate when I dropped the game.

People got tired of M:tG and stopped playing much like I did. I wonder if GW will be heading in the same direction. Right now there are a lot of folks that are frustrated with the lack of support for their armies and are looking elsewhere. As I've mentioned in posts before, we players work very heard to make our respective armies look and play as good as possible. We deserve to have a company that loves the hobby just as much as the customer does.

Now, to the issue of the FAQ: I didn't bother reading it. Why? Because it won't solve anything until GW actually produces a codex for the players of the Dark and Blood Angels and everyone one else. I agree with Miggidy_Mack that all they have produced is a non-answer without having read the FAQ because that's exactly what they were going to do until they saw how sales were doing with the new space marine line. If it was going to sell, they would focus more attention on it- if sales appear to be a bit lean, they will give you a crappy FAQ that any middle school student could have produced in an afternoon.

So, I guess what I'm getting at is that I don't believe they said no. I believe they said no with an asterisk (no*). After all, if the economy gets better and sales pick up, they can always remove that asterisk or get rid of the "no" altogether...

Ranillon · 1 year ago

I did a comparison between the DA and new codex. It's not the case that the first has just as many of its own advantages as the second. In fact, the new book has roughly >3< times the advantages -- lower costs, better stats, new models, etc.

Ideally, every codex should be (or, at least, look) like it is about as powerful as the next. Not only is the new codex an improvement over the non-codex Sm chapter books, but more importantly perhaps it's an OBVIOUS improvement. When you are comparing different races power imbalances are harder to detect as you are comparing apples to oranges. Not so in this case -- the comparison is apples to apples.

In the past the various SM books were clearly just variations on the same basic units and wargear with tweaks here and there. The new book takes this and throws it out the window. It rendered all the other SM books obsolete (which is not the same thing as useless, just clearly outclassed). If nothing else being able to field nine or so additional units makes the other books look painfully dated.

A lot of the anger and frustration people feel ultimately comes from this, IMHO.

Steve · 1 year ago

Joe- everyone knows that people would complain no matter what the FAQ said... if the FAQ had said NO, use as per your codex (as it starts out) there would have been grumbles. Its the No but yes (or Vicky Pollard for all the Little Britain fans) answer thats annoyed most people; FAQs should end arguments. Period.

but yes, I agree that to be a puppy is glorious in its chaos... but look in you C:SW and just try to figure out the rules for rhino, razorback, wolf totem, bionics etc... how pissed would you be if a FAQ came out saying that we should use all wolf wargear as stated in the codex: so wolf totems are C:SM sacred standards, which don't exist and therrfore can't be used.....

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

Wow... just wow. So many of us have asked them to just DECIDE and tell us, instead they gave us a "we will never decide MUWAHAHAHA".

What a cop out. I'm so angry I can barely type without swearing. Well at least I have something to talk about on the podcast now.

Werk · 1 year ago

So GW basically tells us to do what we were already doing, great. Nice way of not *fixing* the problem.

So in effect, GW has taken the stance that new SM's get the cool stuff while nobody else gets such upgrades, even for identical equipment and vehicles, for no other reason than their codex isn't new enough.


I wish to god they would ****ing fire Alessio already.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

Is he the one that makes these decisions? We should make him take a math test. Make him prove he understands statistical analysis and how easy it would be to balance this game with a decent spreadsheet.

OptimusDerf · 1 year ago

The best thing at this point in time would be to just go back to 3rd when you used the Marine book in conjunction with the Dark Angel supplement. The excuse of not wanting to make players buy two books is crap, otherwise all the codexes (codexi?) would be included with the core rules. Besides, I'm sure the vast majority of DA players bought the new marine book anyway.

The only thing I like about this thing is that it's forcing them to double back on previous statements and, albeit grudgingly, admit that the Dark Angels and other 'chapters of renown' are actually Space Marines.

faultie · 1 year ago

"Codices"

Veahirin · 1 year ago

GW guy #1 : BARF!!!!!

GW guy #2: Hey, lets use that as the DA FAQ!

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

lol.

Tim · 1 year ago

thank you for expressing my frustration in humorous manner... I really ______ this FAQ/ERRATA document.

Anon · 1 year ago

Ok, I'm not gonna unleash a torrent of bile at GW, but I will say one thing: they seem to be getting too fond of telling us to make up the rules for ourselves. It smells of laziness. In a way its good that theyre respecting our intelligence and creativity and recognising that players often like to do their own thing. But rules are there to be broken. In other words, give us something to work from. If individual players want to throw out the official rules and do things differently, they will. But for goodness sake GW, give people something to work from, and some verdicts to clear up disagreements. We dont need to be told to figure it out for ourselves, and we dont buy the rulebooks for vague guidelines and advice

Anon · 1 year ago

Side note: the 5th edition rulebook seemed to strike the right balance - 'here are the rules, adapt them if you want'. But I think the recent FAQs, and the Apocalypse 'rules' for inventing datasheets allied armies and alternative missions, didn't.

BrassScorpion · 1 year ago

Great, spirited discussion here on a "hot" topic. Please remember, even if you're a bit angry about this, be polite to each other even when you disagree and keep it civil for the sake of readers young and old. Let's ensure everyone here on BoLS has fun discussing this even if you're not finding the new FAQ itself to be fun for you.

I have a gigantic Dark Angel army I just finished earlier this year and I'm just starting a new Codex Marines army so this topic definitely affects me even before I get to a game table. I'm really enjoying seeing so many different views on this issue.

I'll bet there are a lot more comments on this topic here by the end of the evening. Have fun!

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

From the Space Wolves FAQ:

===
Space Wolves Vehicles: Use the point costs and rules from Codex: Space Marines for Dreadnoughts, Land Speeders, Attack Bikes, Whirlwinds, Predators, Land Raiders and Vindicators. All of the different variants and options available to these units in a Space Marine army are also available to Space Wolves. The exception to this is the Venerable Dreadnoughts, which must be chosen from the Space Wolves army list (as detailed on page 7) , and not the Space Marines army list.
===

Really? REALLY? So you did this for space wolves and not for Dark Angels? I know the Space Wolves are an older codex but you DID prove you could do it. Why did GW choose NOW to not Copy and Paste answers?

Joe · 1 year ago

There is no entry for those items in the SW codex, just a line with the third edition SM point cost. They had no alternative in that case.

GW's design philosophy is that you should only need one codex to play your army. Personally, I think that's a great idea, but it also has some obvious flaws.

rockdeity · 1 year ago

er... of course they had a choice. They chose to have it defer to the main SM codex. It makes sense, unless something is unique to DA, they should have just said "refer to SM codex". Observe the dropped ball.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

Right, and SW have gone nearly 10 years without a new codex. How long before a new Dark Angels codex? Inquisition?

They drastically overhaul the game system and the marines in comparison to that balance. It's ok for them to drastically overhaul Dark Angels by having many of their units refer to the new SM book. While I am sure some people will complain I don't think it will be anyone who has actually READ the new SM book.

I don't know a single DA player in real life who didn't pre-order the new SM book as it is. Many of them wish they didn't have to change their army into "Green Marines" but they are doing it to stay competitive.

Sixsystems · 1 year ago

Orks waited 10 years. Its the latest trend, you see. All the cool armies are doing it. And since we all agree that DA are pretty cool, I'm afraid they will just have to wait a bit longer...

Steve · 1 year ago

Joe is right but he didn't put it very clearly: C:SW has only got 1 vehicle info in the codex: FAQ says we have to use Ven Dread from C:SW because it has actually got an entry...
Its still the same message- use as written, if written

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

LOL!

atreides · 1 year ago

Actually, I've got a question for you all... Where can you post a question that needs to be FAQ'd by GW? How do you get it to them? I don't dare post the issue here because the last place I posted it broke out into a flamewar twice over it and the "consensus" of opinion, while somewhat logical, is ultimately stupid (and not in a "you people who think this way are stupid" kind of way).

BrassScorpion · 1 year ago

As someone said, you can write to the studio in the UK with rules questions. You can contact the "rules boyz" here in the US. Contact info is on the GW website and usually in White Dwarf too.

faultie · 1 year ago

I'd personally suggest writing to the studio or WD. Judging from my past experience, the rules boyz are none-too-reliable. Depending on the "boy", you can get different answers for the same questions.

(Sorry BrSc. I'm not being argumentative, I'm just commenting from dozens upon dozens of contacts with so-called rules-boyz.)

Sixsystems · 1 year ago

I agree with Faultie- there is very little consistency with the Rules Boyz. Maybe if they didn't have an Orky name they wouldn't give us "information" that allows for games to descend into madness....

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

There is no place. They get their FAQ's from trolling the internet and asking the guys who run Adepticon.

atreides · 1 year ago

Well, then, where is somewhere they're LIKELY to find it? And how can one encourage them to answer?

Imperialsavant · 1 year ago

Well Guys, Jervis does invite you to write to him at WD as per the Standard Bearer Articles & I recently did so re a BT Query on Righteous Zeal & I DID get a reply that actually defined the rule under 5th Ed without any Grey Areas.
So why not all sent in your own FAQs on BA, Da, SW & BT & maybe they will get the "Message" at GW HQ by the sheer volume.

Barry H.

Tim · 1 year ago

I intend to... once my blood presure goes down... I even take meds for it and its up...

Herald of Nurgle · 1 year ago

I was holed up in the UK Games Day queues that I never got into my Seminar (y'know? the thing where they say about future releases)
Bloody GW

solkan · 1 year ago

Wow, I was expecting a completely different answer in the FAQ given the lead in. How come no one is characterizing the FAQ anwer as "If you're going to be a jerk and whine about it, the answer is 'No, use your own book.'"? That seems to be a perfectly fair answer to me.

Personally, I'm just happy for the FAQ's about drop pods and combat squads, even if there are still questions left for the C:SM book.

Don · 1 year ago

Without question, your summation of their ruling is accurate. If you cant come to a reasonable agreement use your own book.... This seems very clear to me.

Tim · 1 year ago

We can come to an agreement about anything with the rule on page two of the rule book. However, where is the consistency between like items? Where is the specificity to a gamers question? It was not addressed in the FAQ.

The FAQ said read page two, if you can agree go with it, if you can't agree with it then its the rules as written. The rules as written have two like items that work in different ways within the same set of rules. A question arises so the gamer goes to the rules maker an asks for clarification because neither player wants to cheat each other and play consistently instead oif having to address the isue every time it arises.

Augie · 1 year ago

So you have a bit of an issue if you want to play in tournaments...the answer wasn't liked, so bitch.

It's just a rule, man. Not like they chopped off the heads of a Space Marine and said you had to pay extra for a helmet sprue.

If everyone over at Warseer is so pissy, why keep playing? Please send all useless troops to me 'cause at current prices, I lucky to have one codex, nevermind two or three.

Forhekset · 1 year ago

What's the big deal? Nothing has changed.

Tim · 1 year ago

The FAQ changed... it said nothing before and now... in response to questions, trolling on the internet, or the return of Russ... they have said... if you and your opponent run into a problem and can agree then you can use it. If you cannot agree then it is the rules as written. The rules as written have like items that work differently because they were written in two different books... so... sombody asked and they have said... read the rule on page two of the rule book instead of making a tough choice and addressing the issue with clarity and specificity so that there is consistency on how things are used.

the best example is this... two terminators are standing side by side armed with a storm shield and thunder hammer.

One is a Dark Angel and the other an Ultramarine. They both take a blast from a plasma cannon template at the same time out in the open with no cover or going to ground.

The Dark Angels save is +5 invulnerble becasue of the AP 2 plasma negates his termie armour save of +2, his storm shield does nothing becasue it is written in his codex that storm shields can only be used in hand-to-hand combat to protect him.

The Ultramarines save is a +3 invlnerable becasue of the AP 2 plasma negates his termie armour save of +2, because his storm shield gives a +3 invulnerble save versus shooting and hand-to-hand (an improvment of 32% on a die 6) . The Ultramarine does not even need to use his termie +5 invulnerable save.

THAT IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE in how two like items work. It inspires questions leading with the word "why".

Players have a right to question the creators of the rules.
Why do they work differently? Is the answer becasue they were written in two different books at two differnet times by two different people?

We want Games-Workshop to make a clarification on their products.

shakespear · 1 year ago

The thing is, they dont care. They consider "tournament players" to be anyone who doesnt hug after every turn. They dont care about tournament players.

My question is, why dont people move on to games that are more rewarding?

You can have more "fun" playing a game that has clear rules that are supported by its company that you ever could playing "the most important rule is..."

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

Unfortunetly one of GW's clever tricks is that once they've got you hooked it can be fustratingly difficult to leave. I find the idea alone makes me feel guilty and gives me a kind of remourse.

Tim · 1 year ago

So... sitting here ranting and raving... to my ten month old and wife.... I know WHY they have to go with the rules as written when it comes to the Dark Angels on one issue.

Follow me for just a moment...

Let us assume we could use just the new storm shields as written for Dark Angels providing a +3 invulnerable save versus shooting and hand-to-hand.

If you play Dark Angels and use Belial you can take termies as troops. The most amount of models in termie armour is 47 but thats not important at this point. it will be at the end.

Dark Angel termies get Deathwing Assault meaning 5 sqauds arrive turn one. They scatter, but only have to survive one round of shooting and then could move and assault the next turn when the rest of your reserves could arrive.

You can also mix termie equipment within the squads so... all your squads could have all thunder hamers and storm shields or mixed stuff. The point is to make sure that the invulnerable save (if we use the new th+ss) of +3 is the majority so you can survive high AP incoming fire.

So... your entire army could compose of terminators all armed with thunder hamers and storm shields, 5 squads arrving turn one, with a +2 armour save and a +3 invulnerable save.

pretty abusive with only the change of one piece of equipment,

Indigo · 1 year ago

This is a great point. You could compare the difference between the storm shields in each book to the rules put into the armored company list from Chapter Approved book a few years back that weren't universally applied to all vehicles. Since the armored company could essentially become invincible once all the opponents high Strength weapons were taken out, they put in rules that were similar to the new 5th Ed grenade rules that only applied to the AC list in order to keep remotely fair.

Anyone who really thinks they didn't do any play-testing (and I'm not saying they did, I doubt it myself), play a game with one person using the all hammer and shield army above and see how fair it is (I'm curious myself), cus I guarantee you'd be getting stuff like that if they made the switch.

as far as a fluff justification, you could say that since the Dark Angels are the 1st legion, they have older equipment that doesn't work as well as the new stuff or that they don't hide behind their shields like smurfs. ;P

Tim · 1 year ago

thanks... although one moment of clarity does not make up for the rest of my rants... just read some of the others...

...must calm down... count to ten... strangle the first person to enter the room... go to the happy place...

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

While I definitely see your point about being able to field more, it doesn't address a myriad of other factors. All terminator armies have incredibly low model counts. Horde armies can still force them to make tons of armor saves.

Before this ruling came out we were all just assuming the new book was the way storm shields work now. I have played a couple of the ol'wing armies. Let me tell you, lasguns and bolter fire still kill terminators just fine.

Just fine. Having only 30-40 models with initiative 1 on the table is the disadvantage and 3+ invulnerable save doesn't change that.

Tim · 1 year ago

it was just a thought between medications... I htink that someone just does not want to take the time to address the issue. The reason for not addressing it is also not present. There are a ton of reason not address it.

My humble opinion is that it should be address... and I intend to do it.

slovak · 1 year ago

So M_M you're saying there's no difference in game terms between a 3+ Inv Save and a 5+ Inv Save?

That makes no sense. It's an enormous difference.

george · 1 year ago

They should have thought about that before changing how it works.

MeanAngel · 1 year ago

But the problem here is that Smurfs have better equipment for THE SAME PRICE. If Ultramarine TH+SS-equipped Termies were like +5-8 points each, then okay, no problem. But when they cost exactly the same ? That's bullshit.

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

Actualy all my troops have become more expensive and seeing as you need troops for a decent army list it isn't actualy that easy to fit in a 200 point termy squad, whatever they have.
For example say I want to take 3 ten man tactical squads with flamers and missile lauchers. Now those upgrades are free so it should come out all right on the points front:
440 points!
That's nearly a third of what ypu need to take for most games(1500) add the HQ and no matter how little you give him he's going to be an extra 100 points.
So just for the core of my army I have to use up over a third of my alowed points.
Yeah, we really can field huge numbers of those 3+ invunrables I have just over 2800 points of marines and I only have 3 storm shields and at my club I'm one of the only people who takes Assault termys, so I wouldn't worry about it if I was you.

Acme2468 · 1 year ago

I'm sick of all the Whining 'But I want all the special things I can do now AND the New stats for Equipment to go with it!'. Pick ONE Codex And play it. Or should SOB and Grey Nights get the new stats too? They use Marine Equipment after all.

FerociousBeast · 1 year ago

FAQs are supposed to fix issues for tournament and tournament-style play. If it's just a casual game among friends, we don't need any FAQs.

This "ruling" says that the unupdated Codex: Dark Angels cannot be used in tournaments. That is all that is significant. The rest of the stuff written there is useless. WE ALREADY KNOW ALL THAT.

So, no updated wargear or rules in tournaments. That's the ruling, ladies and gentlemen, and that's all.

Bruce the Shark · 1 year ago

As an added bonus, the top-notch, crack webteam at GW Canada have posted up a DARK ANGLES FAQ.

Morons.

Tim · 1 year ago

I went there and read the FAQ again... same FAQ... now back to our regularly scheduled rant.... sponsored by.... Games-Workshop... makers of the Dark Angel Codex where their marines with storm shields are inferior to to Ultramarines, Salamanders, Crimson Fists, Imperial Fists, Sable Swords, White Scars.... however we are all on the same side... must be something with Luther and the fact no one else knows about Luther...

sorry, just ranting to vent... I'll be fine with more medication...

Mike M · 1 year ago

Reading the new post for the DA has really let me down. Reading some of the posts I agree with them that the FAQ in question SHOULD NOT have been written. Why place this as an answer: Quote " ‘The Most Important Rule’ means that it’s impossible to give a black
and white answer to any question that may arise;
instead you and your opponent need to discuss
things and come up with the answer that makes both of you the happiest, keeping in mind that
having a good time is more important than
gaining a small in-game advantage. If for any
reason you can’t do this, then simply revert to the
default of using the rules from your own Codex. "

When a FAQ (((( IS )))) a set of black and white rules. Otherwise they wouldn't be a FAQ in the first place. We would just make up our own rulings and have Argument 40K if we goto a Games Day, Grand Tournement or just a local Rogue Trader. Yes, this game is supposed to be fun. Yes, people like playing the game more in a TOURNAMENT style of play over just throwing models on a table and rolling dice.


As this is just the first installment of rules that most likely coming out. ie Black Templars, Blood Angels and Space Wolves. Lets hope that GW sits down and actually THINKS for once and rework the FAQs to make more sense. Hopefully they will change this one, I also can't wait for the new Space Marine codex FAQ. Yes I see problems in it already but thats another story. lol

Psyberwolfe · 1 year ago

So sitting here reading the Rants. Wow. To talk about screw jobs let us start from the heady days of Rogue Trader where the DA wore all BLACK! After the Deathwing expansion of Space Hulk DA Termies were clad in bone colored armor. Need I say more? No chapter in this game has had a more spotted history of "yes you can/ no you can't" then the DA.

The DA have been the test bed army for "Stubborn", "Fearless" and saves for skimmers. The DA Codex has become a test bed for many other codeci.

As for the discussion at hand. If you want the new equipment then take your Green Marines and say they are from "The Order of new Codex Toy Envy" and use the new codex. Done.

Or you can be a real horses butt and push for the most stringent reading of the DA Combat Squad rule, which would indicate that Veterans, Scouts, Assault Squads, Ravenwing Bike Units, and Devastator Squads become scoring units when they break up into combat squads. Talk about a big middle finger to Kantor and his Sternguard.

Honestly these are TOY SOLDIERS. It is supposed to be fun. If you are not having fun then you are doing something wrong.

KhestraTheUnbeheld · 1 year ago

Shhhhh!! Lithium sales are going up! Don't rock the boat on them now!

Wombats · 1 year ago

Quoting the entire Most Important Rule in a FAQ?

What arrogance.

Like you'd be reading the FAQ if you were satisfied with the codex.

They didn't bother thinking about it writing their codex and they don't bother in the FAQ?

This is a sideways nod to any tournament beard who wants to gimp their Dark Angel opponent.

Nice work GW, the less money I spend with you clowns, the better.

Bravehart · 1 year ago

Just wondering - is there anything (legal issues sense) with players starting a "Living" rulebook to address the balance issues in 40k? It seems to work well with Bloodbowl and Epic.

Bravehart · 1 year ago

Sorry..."Living" rulebook as in set of rule clarification and updates (including point system) to address obvious deficiencies in the existing rules/codex, and may potentially be used as standard for non-GW sanctioned environments

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

I'm thinking about doing it. I'm going to start writing some living faq's over on the podcast website. If you have any questions you think should be in your armies email me at mack@dicelikethunder.com.

When our new podcast drops next week I'll talk more about it on the show.

Blood Reavers · 1 year ago

So if Blood Angels have a complete stand alone codex, and are not supposed to use the rules from any other codex, then we can't disembark or embark in our rhinos, razorbacks and landraiders since they are not listed with access points?

Excal · 1 year ago

eh...i'm kinda over this whole situation. as a Independent codex user, (BT) i have accepted the loss of some things. but i do have pride that as black templars, i can still have 2 heavy weapons in a terminator squad, my typhoon missle launcher is still twin-linked (read the rules for the new one, didn't like it that much), and my chaplains still kick arse and chew bubble gum. i'm just all meh to the whole thing...got tired of being disgruntled basically.

Space Machines · 1 year ago

Yeh, BT and SW players seem to be keeping quiet about this one, because their codexes remain superior! How many of the new plastic Crusaders can you fit in your army? ;-)

Mac · 1 year ago

This is a failure by GW. If they feel the new Storm Shield rules and LR capacity unbalances earlier codices why not do a simple points adjust?
I don't want the shiny new "toys" of the SM Codex, just consistent wargear and rulings...

I mean can I split a squad into combat squads after landing?
Can my Drop Pods carry more than 10 men?

This is insane...Not knowing if my opponent will accept the new rules means that my tactics will vary (as will IC placement) depending on what I am allowed to do.

I'd be happy if they were to turn around and say "For second and subsequent foundings of the DA you may use the SM Codex and the following special characters with the following abilities"

There's a 2 page pdf at most..and it could include Belial and Sammael as you wouldn't have access to the mixed Terminator squads and Ravenwing squads from the DA Codex thereby providing a balance there.

Caligula · 1 year ago

Ugh…people this is just ridiculous. Nothing should make someone this mad, at least not a RECREATIONAL GAME. Which means more to you? Winning games, or having a fluffy list? Why would you want everything to be retroactive? There’d be no point to even having separate Chapter ‘dexes! You wanted to be different and special and get your OWN book, and now you do and you complain that the rest of the marines got their new ‘dex too? NEW books gets the NEW stuff, and if you want it, you can pick the book up just like anyone else. Marines already get too much attention and now some players have the audacity to pull this tantrum? (Marines are my only army btw. Oh wait, and Necron, bew hew) Instead reissuing every other insignificantly divergent Space Marine chapter anytime ANOTHER new one is released, GW should be focusing on ACTUAL out-of-date ‘dexes (‘Nids, Dark Eldar, Inquisition, Necron, Guard). You knew what you were buying when you first picked up your book. You read it, played with it and (hopefully) had fun with it. You covered the cost in producing what you held in your hands THEN and THERE. Do people expect other authors to give away free updates to older books when they change their thoughts and opinions months or even years later? Please people, for the sake of the level-headed Marine players out there; stop being so damn irrational.

faolan_conall · 1 year ago

Most misleading paragraph on BoLS. Ever.

Basically we got a new FAQ that says "you're boned, go lick yourself till we next write one for you."

Claud · 1 year ago

This is the most IDIOTIC FAQ i've ever read...
Weren't FAQS made to clarify unclear points? They just made me EVEN more confused about which codex I must refer to.

Let me understand. It's up to my opponent to determine if my DA army follows DA or C:SM equips rules? How the hell will a DA player be able to build an effective list, without even knowing which rules he will be allowed to use?

Cm'on, I can't believe it.... it's just too much. GW is definitely taunting us...

Aulbath · 1 year ago

Ha,ha... guys, what a great way to start a new day reading through all the comments here.
You know what, the GW staff just had BoLS bookmarked and enjoys the collective nerdrage, while having a Guiness or two.

Some people should really loosen up a little.

Vindur · 1 year ago

It just added another rule to the list of things with, "ask opponents permission"

Gyroscope_of_Time · 1 year ago

Agree totally with the above. I cannot believe that GW think people will buy this; the mere idea of Dark Angels/Blood Angels being limited to the same but yet somehow inferior weaponry is proposterous. And the idea of it being alright to use the vanilla weaponry rules if "thats ok with your opponent" is beyond belief. Combine this with "if there is a debate, simply knock one point of a units cover save" (of which i have already played numerous 12 year olds who abuse this to kingdom come) and you have the makings of a set of rules that will eventually make tournements unplayable.

I honestly believe believe that by the time of the next set of rules, a game of warhammer 40k will not require dice or tape measures: all you and you opponent have to do is agree how well units do in combat/shooting or how far they move.

Borin · 1 year ago

They cost the same than before; but SM termies are not mixed as Dark Angels and also non scoring never.
An scoring mixed terminator unit it's completely unbalanced unless they get a big points increase.

Mac · 1 year ago

They may be mixed but can only be five termies in a choice rather than the ten >2 combat squads, plus the troops ability is only conferred from Belial.
I think you nay find that other characters in the SM Codex confer special rules too?
I'm wondering what your point is....

Space Machines · 1 year ago

I like how nobody complained when the Dark Angels Codex was released and was better than the SM Codex. I wanted my combat squads and uber-chaplains and bike-mounted armies and scoring terminator units (hell, i still want those ;-) goddammit! But we've had to wait, because each codex is self-contained and (shock! gasp!) different.

I've been playing 40k for 18 years now and I've never had recourse to use an FAQ - me and my mates just agree to disagree, or to try random shit out. I've got some Blood Angels buddies who have picked up a Redeemer, and a DA buddy who is going to get that new Scout Land Speeder when it's out, and we'll play them in our games just fine.

Oh, and those BA and DA armies? They're still pounding the crap out of my new Space Marines just fine, thank you very much.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

There were lots of complaints when that happened. Many SM players wanted rolling coffins (rhinos) to be cheaper for them too. They were even told (when asked about it) that Combat Squads was a "Dark Angels" thing and that normal space marines SHOULDN'T have it since they follow the codex astartes more closely.

Tim · 1 year ago

After some hours of sleep... I have, yet another, comment about the FAQ.

The most important rule is to have fun. The writer of this line and the comments about not getting bent out of shape are absolutly (sp?) correct.

I would like to use The Dark Angels with the Space Marine Codex. I don't what that exactly means when it comes to the rules. Games-Worshop says to ask you for permission.

May I use the DA Codex with the Space Marine Codex?

It is a simple question that completely changes the way the game is played.

If my opponent says "yes" then they are generally saying they don't care how the game is played.

If my opponent says "no" then they are generallly saying they do care how the game is played.

Games-Workshop has said, in their FAQ, to strictly use the the appropriate book. So... the answer to using the Dark Angels Codex with the new Space Marine Codex is "no" meaning that they do care how "their game" is played.

Why does the Dark Angels Codex (or the others) not work with the new Space Marine Codex?

Who can answer that question from Games-Worshop?

Psyberwolfe · 1 year ago

It does. It is called Apocalypse or it is called play your Green Marines using Codex Smurf.
I''ve played my Angels since Rogue Trader Days and this no suprise to me, and I am not bent out shape anymore. Yes the new stuff would be nice but whatever. I'll be playing them in a tournament at the end of the month and not a single ounce of the new toys will matter.
I went and asked the tournament judge, Minus 67, about the scoring combat squads issue and he said no. Cool his tournament. Something that I have begun to understand is that if one needs some parsed rules, and crap out of the most recent codex to win then they are a weak player.

Tim · 1 year ago

look... its about a standard that says this rule works the same way even if I go to anothe state or country... the way it works now is random dependent on where and who you are playing...

Bigred · 1 year ago

I do get the sense that starting wtih Apocalypse, and then moving on to the 5th edition rulebook (both of which seem to aim at "fuzzy rules" that will emphazise "fun-memorable" games) and now this we are seeing a pattern form.

We have heard for well over a year now, that the studio does not like the "hard-core" gaming scene, and apparently GW endures tournaments but don't really want the emphasis of the hobby to be there.

It looks to me like this isn't a random set of rulings that make organizing an airtight tournament more diffcult, but instead a deliberate policy aimed right at the heart of the hard-core touney scene.

As I'm a champion of narrative campaigns and gaming, I really don't have a beef here (I can play up or down as the situation warrants) but I could easily see GW start to mix in more narrative events in the future.

Hatchett · 1 year ago

I think that is hysterical.
"Back to the garages with you, bearders, till we write out rules for fun, narrative campaigns that SHALL be enjoyable! They WILL, dammit!!"
I am laughing at this thread. You can really tell here who plays for the joy and who plays to fill some dark, dripping cesshole in the ego...

Tim · 1 year ago

I wanted to post a comment to you Hatchett... but i don't know what to say....

thanks for posting

shakespear · 1 year ago

Then I ask GW, why are you currently selling $150 tickets to GRAND Tournaments? Why do you encourage Rouge Trader Tournaments?

If its all just for fun...

I never had more fun playing OTHER systems that have rules that dont generate arguements and have forums where I can get "official" answers to questions.

If you are playing for "fun", why even buy a codex or rulebook? Since rules, gameplay balance and such dont matter..

Hatchett · 1 year ago

Because half the fun, in the garage anyway, is being able to drunkenly argue for hours over the mutual misinterpretation of one line in the rulebook.
Of course, fifth doesn't leave much room for that, so I guess the fun is left with imbalanced lists and even stronger drink...
I would hate tournaments.
Unless, of course, they were narratives written by MiggetyMack!

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

I like narrative campains anyway seeing as I have slight obssesion with fluff (3 days for the marine codex). Though the narratives that one of the guys at pour sotre comes up with sometimes are ...strange.
Speaking of which we had a drop pod apocalypse battle at the store this weekend and it was the most unorganized battle I have ever seen. By turn 3 the good guys were in a circle around the middle with badies on all sides, thankfully an Imperial guard guy came on with 1500 points and we were joined by a Titan and by the end we had claimed back on half, but it wsa an objective mission so we lost though on the bright side my captain and termy sergeant with TH+SS were able to tear the cannon off one of the enemy baneblades and were able to immobiles it.

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

HAHA!

Snail · 1 year ago

I have just created a new group on Face book to start a petition to try and get Games Workshop to sort this out.

Here is the link:

http://www.facebook.com/groups/create.php?custo...

Please join and tell everyone else about this and get them to join..

Indigo · 1 year ago

Just Imagine what this thread would have looked like if the FAQ said you didn't have the option at all of using the new units or equipment stats from the new book for a non codex army.

KhestraTheUnbeheld · 1 year ago

People would have just shrugged their shoulders and driven on with their own respective Codices. It might have chapped a few folks' behinds a bit, but otherwise it'd be business as usual. At least then it would have been a definitive answer as opposed to making people resort to pleading to be able to use equipment that part and parcel should be the same across the Imperium, barring Chapter-specific equipment that isn't mass-produced on a Forge World.

In an era of a new edition of the master rules and the realigning of the previous Codices to accomodate, the last thing the player base needed to hear from GW was a wishy-washy non-answer.

slovak · 1 year ago

If you have to plead with anyone you're playing the wrong game. It's a game about war.

In the grim darkness of the far future, there is no pleading.

Raptor1313 · 1 year ago

It isn't really a clarification at all. We were told that there'd be no FAQ bringing gear up to spec, and this is a continuation of that policy. People were going to house-rule it if they wanted to and could get people to agree to it; this just means it's now GW's official stand on the matter.

That aside, part of being a successful company that stays in business IS listening to your customers and what they want. They've got a loyal fanbase, but a loyal fanbase is worth only so much. It's why people will complain, but get over it and buy again. However, you don't grow in revenue by just maintaining a fanbase. You want to grow the fanbase, and that means give people a reason to join. Part of it is evident in the new pricing scheme of Black Reach boxes. It is a PHENOMENAL deal. That's otherwise something like $300 in product, plus the important part of a $50 rulebook for $50. That was a stroke of genuis in the marketing department.

Stuff like the recent FAQ, though, and the issue with space marine gear is not such genius.

They're not just selling models; they're selling a long-running universe and the ability to play in it. They're selling a game, a social experience, and a tournament scene. You don't have to buy all of these things, but they (and probably some things I missed) make of GW's product line.

But when you make the customer feel alienated, that's when you start losing it. Companies tank because they think their customers want ABC when the customer wants XYZ. Bottom line? If you don't know what your customer wants and can't give it to them, they won't be your customer.

I think a lot of people would have preferred something that sounded more hard-and fast. We got a "No, unless you house rule it," which is...an answer, but it's really just re-stating what people were doing already when they were clamoring for something else. It's a failure to deliver to the customer.

And personally? I'd take the cons if it meant my BA and DA boys got uniform gear. The bulk of, say, the BA forum's complaints on Bolter and Chainsword are that if the marine is a Blood Angel, his storm shield is not the same as a Codex Space Marine's storm shield. That's it. There's no want for the new shinies. (Well, some, admittedly, but most would do without.) People just want to be less confused because one day the marines he fights have gear that does this, and the next day the next marines have the same gear that's radically different.

I agree that the problem needed a more in-depth fix, but for the most part I think it would be as simple as either changing the cost of gear (IE: My BA/DA Cyclone Missile Launcher on terminators is 20 and Heavy 1; but if it goes to Heavy 2 I will take it for 30. If I take a DA/BA Librarian, I will lose the WS and attack if he goes to Ld10 and costs 100 instead of 120 points. Maybe elite assaulty squads can either lose the ability to take a storm shield or jack up the price.)

I fail to see what's so unreasonable about this expectation.

Wraithcannon · 1 year ago

The Black Reach box set is cheap for one reason. To get the new players hooked with a cheap buy-in.

Drug dealers use the same tactic.

Once you've got em hooked, bleed em dry.

Blood Drinker Fan · 1 year ago

1. Net40k ?

2. Hey Flylords, can you please make some houserules for the other chapters (DA, BT, BA, SW)?

Happy DAplayer sick of whiners · 1 year ago

Why does something like this always turn into a whine fest?

Would you prefer to have massive changes to the DA codex, nerfing the stats on chaplains, scouts, librarians etc..., getting all the new toys etc...
and either
A) have to buy a new book (the SM one) to have it all fit and carry round a big FAQ
or
B) have to buy a new DA codex....

I bet if either of those happened a bunch of people would still cry out like this....


Dark Angels are different... deal with it- just as eldar can't take landraiders, marines can't take trukks and tyranids can't have tanks- they have positives, they have negatives- and they are pretty damn balanced

Steve · 1 year ago

I have been reading this discussion, after having a look at the FAQ in question, and i'm wondering why is everybody getting so het-up?
This "most important rule" is actually really easy to use. If, as it seems to me, the complaining is all about tournament play being adversely affected by different opponents saying 'yes' or 'no' to using the new SM toys with stand-alone codices, then one sentence in the player's info pack will sort everything out,
" DA/BT/DA/SW players may/may not use the new items (and costs) listed in the new SM codex."
Is that so difficult? BUt surely the players who use these armies do so because of the fluff that surrounds them and the unique mini's? Because the Chapters of Renown are NOT supposed to be 'better' than smurfs, just 'different'.
This FAQ is no cop-out, just a way to let the people who play have a greater say in how the game is played. Run some tournaments allowing all stand-alone SM's to use the new codex + their own codex, and we'll see just how viable that really is without seriously unbalancing the lists.

Cheers
Steve

Daddy · 1 year ago

+++ yeah DA's are now diff enough that I switched to vanilla marines when that crappy codex came out. I play Ravenwing and while I loved the ability to have bigger squads but the loss of "jink" saves was big, didn't mind paying 5pts for an invul sav for my speeders! When I play now I still use the old codex, no one has a problem as its "underpowered" now. I don't see that but its the general view around here. Most of the new options in the SM codex mean nothing to me ie land raider? never use em! I just would like to see a toning down of the power race that makes GW put more and more juice into every new SM army codex released. I play for fun when its not fun I have other interests in life that take up my time funny thing I learned to play warhammer because of the last round of "GW ruined the game!" mind you that was when they released 3rd edition and we all felt that way! :D

DaveFromPortal · 1 year ago

I can see exactly what both sides of this argument are saying. I do think this was a cop out on some level. However, you have to look at it from a historical perspective. Hear me out...

Anyone who's been in this hobby for any significant amount of time knows that with a new set of rules comes a new set of Codices. The first codex to normally be redone is the Space Marines (not Ultramarines as most people are saying) because the vast majority of players in the world play them. The Marine codex then sets the precedent for all the other codices after it in both format and quality. The other Marine chapters get their love shortly after and, normally, overshadow and outdo the Marine codex in every way. How is this any different?

Now as for the FAQ, I agree. Either everything should have been changed or nothing should have been changed. What I don't hear from anyone arguing the point of changing weapons and equipment is the changes to characters. Coming from a Black Templar and Blood Angels background I think, and whole-heartedly agree, that if equipment is getting changed... all the stats should, too. I want all my chaplains, librarians, and scouts to line up exactly the same as the Marine codex. No questions asked.

So some may ask "Why didn't they just do it and get it over with?"

Look at it this way: Games Workshop makes one of the best set of war games in the world (Privateer Press isn't very good, so whoever told you that was lying.) They produce some of the most beautiful models for war gaming in the world. They've been around for 30 years and have countless fans. BUT, in the end, Games Workshop is a business. They need to make money. If everything in a series of four codices changed over night in an FAQ they would lose buckets of money.

I'm sorry, but I don't think that would be a good idea. The game is about having fun. FAQ's are only used in tournaments to clarify rules disputes.

Since when did the hobby revolve around tournaments?

Fulminata · 1 year ago

I don't play Marines of any flavor right now, and I'm not a tournament player, but I have to respond to some of these comments.

1) When over 50% of the fluff, pictures and special characters in the book all feature Ultramarines, I think it's fair to call it the Ultramarine Codex, whatever it actually says on the cover. I don't, but I'm not going to correct those who do.

2) The DA Codex was the most recently updated Marine book, so it isn't likely to be updated again for several years. I think it's fair for DA players to wish for some attention between now and then.

3) If you read the entire thread you'll see that more than one poster has said they'd be fine with taking the bad stuff along with the good.

4) How, exactly, would GW lose buckets of money by updating four codices overnight? We're not talking about burning existing stocks of books and reprinting them here. We're just talking about pdf updates.

5) I've heard people on both sides of this issue say that FAQs are only useful for tournaments. Where is that coming from? I've never played in a tournament and I use FAQs all the time! They help clarify rules and make sure that everyone's on the same wavelength without having to spend hours before the game determining how every vague rule is going to be interpreted.

6) The hobby doesn't revolve around tournaments, but a significant portion of GW's marketing plan sure does, so it's fair to expect them to support tournaments with a reasonable set of rules. Besides, I reject the idea that only tournaments require a tight set of rules.

I play for fun, and clear and consistent rules are more fun. Nothing can spoil a game faster than two people realizing half way through that they've interpreted an important rule differently.

Mac · 1 year ago

I'm in total agreement here. As I've said before I only want standard wargear across the SM/DA/BT/BA etc
If that means reducing stats for chaplains/librarians and adjusting pts for vetererans I'm okay (not necessarily cool) with it.

Either that or release some characters that we can use with the new SM Codex with flavour for these chapters and I'll use that codex instead.

And it's not about tournament play, I play at several LGS for fun on the weekends and the FAQs are used and they work the same way every time. Not this one and I think that is the point here. It changes every time based on your opponent.

Anon · 1 year ago

Very true. Me and my gaming mates run across a problem like this almost every game. It's our own fault for not learning the rules better, but I see your point about how it disrupts the fun.
Also, an observation about game balance: I'm primarily a 'fluff' player, I'm not really in it for the win, but I still like the game to be as balanced as possible. Insisting on balanced armies isn't about power gaming (as some here seem to think) it's just about wanting a fair fight so that the game's outcome isn't obvious from turn 1.
And clear cut rule saren't just for tournaments, you're right. GW stores abide by most of the same guidelines and feature a generally competitive style of play, often with unknown opponents. So unless you have a lot of friends who play 40k and will play 'most important rule 40K', or you live near a gaming club, clear and consistent rules are very important.

Mac · 1 year ago

Just a thought....
If we apply "The most important rule" that means I can use Belial and Sammael from the DA codex in a SM Codex army right? Or Baal Predators...
After all I just need to ask if it's okay and my opponent has to say "Yes you can"

How about a proper answer like "No" or "Wait 12 months" or even better " Here's a pdf update for your codex boys and girls."

WarHamster · 1 year ago

i really don't get the fuss. if you want the new goodies for DA/BA, tell your opponent that in turn you'll downgrade your psychic hoods.
a point that hasn't been brought up at all is the locator beacon. having GW tell us that you only use your own codex rules should stop other people from using your own locators, amirite?

Tynskel · 1 year ago

I think you guys are missing the point.
This update was intended to do two things.
1st: Grant Access to the Space Marine Gear- vehicles, and cross platform weapons: ie. Land Raider PotMS and transport capacity/pts, storm shields, Razorback options ect..... But not rules- making the chapters unique.
2nd: Continue to drive sales. If you already have not bought the Space Marine Codex, now you are encouraged to buy it to read the wargear.

I like this ruling. This allows for the chapters to continue in their unique way, but levels the playing field. Blood Angels and Dark Angels have better scout, hence Elites. Dark Angels still have Terminator Troops, and Blood Angels still have Bad Ass Flying Vets!

The gear makes sense that it transfers rules wise.

Mac · 1 year ago

Yes and DA's supposedly "unique" incendiary castellan missiles are now standard for all SM Chapters..well SM Codex ones anyway..

I'm sure a character that makes terminators count as troops will be released next in a White Dwarf for the SM codex. After all they have one for bikes already that any chapter can take.

Seems to me that they could have placed all the chapters in one book with different characters to provide different traits. Problem solved.

LLPaulJ · 1 year ago

Blood angels have had incendiary castellan missiles since their new codex. They haven't been unique for a while.

Nicholas_S · 1 year ago

Aren't Vanguard Veterans now better than Blood Angels Assault Veterans, due to the 'Heroic Intervention' rule?

Jump Pack equipped Veterans were always unique to Blood Angels and their successors.

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

Noticed the price points wise on the Vanguard? and that's without jump packs and they can only use heroic intervention if they have jump packs.

wingzed · 1 year ago

You all keep forgetting this is still a business. Cost, cost, cost.

Just agree with your mates the things that you can change. 12 in a land raider, no problem, storm shield 3+ Inv save, sure why not. If it unbalances things I'm sure they'd tell you.

If you are hell bent on tournaments then contact the organisors before hand.

It's only a game ;o)

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

Reading the stuff above I wan to ask how many people actually play codex chapter?
Now how many of you used Traits?
If you used traits you were not a serious codex chapter and if you did you had disadvantages to take aswell.
My point is that now this codex is showing all those divergent chapter players that just because we are codex and 'normal' does not mean that we are in some way inferior to chapters that suffer from mutations, have terrible secrets or who like to wage war in their own way and not as guilliman stated.
Thepoint is that if you diverge from the standard that should give you an advantage and a disadvantage comapred to the standard and I think that in previous editions the disadvantage has been pretty much non-existent.
Effectively this our turn with the parcel of Superior Codex and you cannot deny that all you others have held it aswell it's just our turn now. Stay calm it will come back to you.

Steve · 1 year ago

Dunno bout the angels but puppies have some major disadvantages
basic bolter marine- 18pts
basic termy with SB PF- 48pts
- no teleport deep strike
much worse, more expensive bikes and assault marines
no librarian (rune priest has 1 defensive psychic power)
very rare Ld10
unusable techmarine (iron priest), no servitors

... for all that we get a few combat bonuses. then the new codex SM comes out and 'counter attack' becomes widely available at +3pts (16+3=19... 1 point more, but only taken when needed) and a whole lot of characters with WS6 (where only SW special characters have WS6 and even then that has special explainations)

Advantages only outweigh disadvantages in very special situations... personnally I think most puppies are only non nilla thanks to the sheer joy of a 15 man Blood Claw charge (<60 attacks... bliss)- lovin' the LR crusader

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

Counter attack is thrown around in our codex?
Where? this is not critisism I really would like to know.

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

Also, 60 attacks! small advantage. I'm not suprised that they're 18pts and what's SB? If you have a problem with the techmarine couldn't you just not take one.
With leadership we're still at 8 most of the time it's only Chaos who have all 10s but they don't ATSKNF

LLPaulJ · 1 year ago

Sweet! I was worried that they'd bash dark angels apothecaries with the nerf stick, the way they did with codex: space marines.
Terminator or bike squad ignoring one failed save per turn ftw!

Walsh · 1 year ago

Suck it marine players, bwahahahahaahaha

Random_Guy · 1 year ago

Okay then lets be objective about this. All you DA and BA players are obviously upset that you don't get the new toys or points and standardization of the equipment. So lets look at this the other way around, as a marine player what do I not get by using my codex?

HQs
Company Master- in both DA and the BA codexes, they can have more than 2 weapons, doesn't sound like much but I'd quite like a captain with twin lightning claws and a storm bolter.

Chaplains- DA and BA players can enjoy 3 attack chaplains who strike at I5 for the same points as my generic one with 2 attacks at I4.

Librarians- With all the psykers turning up in the new codex and eldrad appearing in nearly every eldar army, I think the unlimited range on your psychic hoods is really quite nice.

Command Squads- You can make command squads with the older style of apothecary which in some situations is more useful, than just feel no pain. Plus your company champion receives a 5+ invulnerable save not just a pointless 6+.

Troops
Well apart from the fact that BA can get assault squads as troops and DA can get termies and ravenwing bikers, BIG advantages in 5th ed with only troops scoring.

Tactical Marines- Okay so the new marines get a 10 point break on tactical squads when we fully upgrade them, what happens if we don't want to do that? I have a tactical squad with 10 bolters, now under the new Marine rules that isn't great. I end up paying 10 points over the cost of the dark angels for my tactical squads. Please don't tell me that 10 bolters isn't a good setup, it's a setup that I've used a worked for a while now. Also what about a 5 man squad, DA and BA players get the option of taking special weapons in these squads. Is that fair?

Elites
Techmarines- So for 25 points extra you get an extra attack and wound, sure you lose the ability to bolster defenses, not a terribly great ability, but probably making the points about right. So that's out of the way lets see, you get the techmarine without him taking up a precious elites slot in your list and he gets the option of taking a rhino, razorback or drop pod. Then he can have his 4 plasma cannon armed servitors who don't go into mindlock for less points than mine. Nice little unit considering it still doesn't take an elites slot, 2 less than mine does!

Terminators- Okay so deathwing terminators don't get 3+ invulnerable saves from shooting but you can have your assault cannon on a unit otherwise armed with lightning claws. Why can't I have that? BA players get their terminators cheap as well, it includes the death company model, but you pay no additional points for him.

Scouts- Okay so we get these as troops, but that's not really a comparison to deathwing DA players. But you do get WS and BS4 scouts. Are your scouts trained better or something? For this bonus you pay 5 points for the unit regardless of whether theres 5 or 10. Yes we get the heavy weapons cheaper, but that might have something to do with the fact that we can't hit a barn door. Oh and we can't get a drop pod to put them into battle in.

Company Veterans (DA only)- So yes we get the nice Sternguard and Vanguard so why would I complain about this? Well forgetting the new ammo which is nice, the distinction between assaulty and shooty veterans is too clear cut in the new codex. The dark angels have a nice unit which can still be as shooty as a tactical squad but still retain most of the hitting power of a vanguard squad. 3 Power weapons in a 5 man squad is fairly nice. And relatively it does cost 15 points less than a vanguard unit. Sure you don't have the options to take jump packs but then again it's an Elites slot not a Fast attack slot.

Fast Attack
On balance there isn't a lot to mention here. In general BA and DA players do get a fairly bad deal on these units, but that may have something to do with the fact that you can take them on mass unlike other marine armies. Having the ability to take Ravenwing and Assault marines does mean that the competition for those slots is decreased.

Heavy Support
Devastators- Anyone noticed that providing you don't include missile launchers, any devastator squad you do under DA/BA rules will be cheaper. weird eh?

Land Raiders- So we get a new codex with a new set of rules for PotMS. Now some people think it's better, but I for one think it's probably worse. So I can fire 1 more weapon than I would be able to normally, ever tried firing both sets of sponsons on the land raider at another tank, it is actually quite difficult to be able to get line of sight with them both. The Lascannon isn't really going to do much against targets suitable for heavy bolter fire and vice versa. So firing at BS2 isn't that much of an issue in my opinion. But where the old rules trump the new rules is that the land raider is able to move in a straight line even if stunned or shaken. That means I don't need to buy extra armour- a 15points break. Also how come you only pay 5 points for the extra storm bolter to my 10, in fact that's the same across the board with the exception to the Baal Predator who pay the new costs.

Okay rant nearly over. But seriously guys if I can find all these things that the BA/DA do better than the vanilla marines then there are probably more than I haven't found. Your codex isn't unplayable just because the new marine codex comes out and the FAQ doesn't say you should get the all the new toys. Play to your strengths and you can still make a competitive army. If you're playing a fun game then sure ask your opponent if you can use the new wargear stats from the new codex, but if he says no then don't get upset. This is a game after all, in the long term you could get the new codex and try to work out a list using it, using your models. Even the UK GT will let you run DA/BA using the vanilla codex so there's not really a problem there.

Also remember you've had your year of being the front runner as a codex, next year if the rumors come true we may be looking at space wolves and then everyone will be playing using their codex because it will be so much better etc (or just different like yours).

Rant Over!!

Dennis · 1 year ago

Wow man, what a bunch of mewling bitches.

Wah, GW ran over my dog!
Wah, GW have insulted my manhood!
Wah, GW stole my candy!

Lives, bitches. Get them.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

How is complaining about internet complainers BETTER than complaining on the internet? OOOH... nevermind, you were trying to make yourself feel better by making others feel bad. Sorry, my bad. carry on.

Dennis · 1 year ago

Complaining about? Nup.

Laughing at? Yep.

Dictionary, dude. Read it.

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

I'm going to live with it but I still have the freedom to release my anger at GW.
Freedom of speech.
Get used to it.

Miggidy_Mack · 1 year ago

You never once hinted that you might be laughing. No inflection on the internet.

UltramarineFan · 1 year ago

You will nver be able to compete with hachett and sixsystems, no how reasonable or good your comeback may be those two will just put 50 rounds through it with a barrage of insults. If you try to come back with your own insults it won't work either as they can just degenarate it till you look like a pathetic idiot throwing insults for no reason. If you don't belive me check the second deamon prince rumours post in the September section(look towards the bottom of that section)

Sixsystems · 1 year ago

Hey Dennis-

If you aren't going to offer anything constructive, stay the f**k off this blog. The naysayers are Hatchett and myself. Try to take our positions and I fear that you will be bitchslapped....