Grey Knight FAQ is up.

[eldargal]

Here (http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1830601a_Grey_Knights_v1_0.pdf).

Nemesis Doomfist Dreadknight is S6, Nemesis falchions give +1 attack not two. Those are the amusing highlights for me.:rolleyes: Of course FAQs are optional, so people can ignore it if they want. Still amuses me given all the arguments.

[HsojVvad]

Thanks again eldargal. I gave up looking on FAQ to see what is updated anymore.

*edit* Just read the FAQ, very plain looking. Looks like GW is getting lazy again. All the other FAQ have the fancy background to it. The GK doesn't.

Since GW loves to copy and paste all the time, how hard is it to add the background on the FAQ? My god, how lazy GW has gotten. Now before I wasn't worried about the rumoured upcoming WD SoB codex, but now after the GK FAQ, I guess people have a right to be worried now.

[newtoncain]

At least they fixed the Coteaz 3 HM + Razor spam for 90ish points x infinity.:D

[SonicPara]

Their FAQ made the Plasma Siphon incredibly powerful and likely more then it needed to be; poor Tau.

I'm glad to see the issues with the Dreadknight cleared up. It was getting pretty frustrating when people were claiming that their Dreadknights were S10 and counted as Jump Infantry so they could go in Stormravens.

The Falchions are disappointing as they do absolutely nothing (the bonus doesn't come from the weapons, just the fact that there are two of them) and the ruling on the shunt puts the nail in the coffin for teleport vs purifier/razorback spam. Expect GK lists to go the way of IG and be carbon-copies of each other spamming purifiers and razorbacks.

Other than that it seems alright. Oh and Coteaz's anti-deep strike rule allows his unit to shoot at both drop pods and the units that come out of them, that is pretty insane.

[eldargal]

What I want to know is, wtf, Mandrakes are daemons? Where in the rules does it say that.:rolleyes:

[DrLove42]

What I want to know is, wtf, Mandrakes are daemons? Where in the rules does it say that.:rolleyes:

It doesn't. The fluff says they're half demon i guess but still...thats a bit stupid

Glad to see the shunt-scout thing is banned....

And Tau burst cannons count as Plasma weapons as well as pulse weapons and pulse rifles? Well screw me sideways and call me Frank...basically a Tau army will not really be able to shoot at a unit with that upgrade!

[isotope99]

Mostly as expected, main surprises:


Dreadknight -> S6 and the extra weapons feel extremely expensive if they cost you +1A for 2 CC weapons. Should have just given them 2 regular close combat weapons IMHO

Scoring dreadnoughts

Not surprising:

No shunt punch

Falchions only +1A

[bonedale]

Bummed about Falchions. They will now become a useless upgrade. I hate worthless choices in books. They are a cool, and expensive upgrade, that sacrifices the huge I6 for 1 attack. I don't think so.

Everything else is just common sense in type.

[euansmith]

How do you get all your juicy info, Eldargal? You always seem to be all over the breaking Grim Dark news. Psychic? Extensive Spy Network? Married to the Mob?

[eldargal]

I check Warseer regularly, used to be other forums too but less and less lately. I check GWs websute for FAQs and such regularly too. Plus I do now have a couple of sources* within GW. I didn't even have to honey trap them.:rolleyes: Also I seem to be quite lucky, the amount of times I will visit a forum for thefirst time in ages (or hours, for Warseer heh) and find some juicy rumour has just been posted allowing me to repost it here before anyone else...


*That sounds so pompous, I feel vaguely ashamed every time I say it.

[BuFFo]

The big changes come from the Main Rule Book FAQ...

Psychic powers got both nerfed and buffed... :)

[eldargal]

Oh yes, thanks for reminding me BuFFington.


There is a new rulebook FAQ up too.:rolleyes:

[TireeWebb]

Question? The Brb Faq says,
Q: Do the effects of the same psychic power cast
multiple times on the same unit stack? (p50)
A: Yes, unless specifically stated otherwise.

Q: Can a psyker attempt to cast the same psychic
power more than once in a turn? (p50)
A: No, unless the psychic power itself specifically allows
it.
Does anyone know what powers would be affected by the ability to stack cast them?

[Foreigner]

Question? The Brb Faq says,
Q: Do the effects of the same psychic power cast
multiple times on the same unit stack? (p50)
A: Yes, unless specifically stated otherwise.

Q: Can a psyker attempt to cast the same psychic
power more than once in a turn? (p50)
A: No, unless the psychic power itself specifically allows
it.
Does anyone know what powers would be affected by the ability to stack cast them?

Most notably hammerhand.

Though I think RAW if two librarians cast Might of Titan on a unit it would be Str6 + 3d6 armor pen.

[Malachi]

I check Warseer regularly, used to be other forums too but less and less lately. I check GWs websute for FAQs and such regularly too. Plus I do now have a couple of sources* within GW...

The real question is: how did you GET those sources? Wink, wink, nudge, nudge, say no more, say no more... :)

[Demonus]

just out of curiousity, how many attacks were people thinking they got with falchions?

[lattd]

Am i the only one worried that some people actually tried to claim a dreadknight became jump infantry. The rules clearly state moves like jump infantry and thats all they repeated in the FAQ, is a shame about the falchions though.

[DarkLink]

just out of curiousity, how many attacks were people thinking they got with falchions?

2. Falchions are both a pair of CCW (+1A), and they have a special rule to grant another +1A. GW decided against this, though, and now they're mostly worthless.

[s_harrington]

Hmmmm. Hammerhand stacks? Guess I need to remove the Nemesis Hammers from my army. Who needs hammers when your halberds can reach str 7 or 8 regularly?
Wow, my assault units just got even better.

Although unexpected, it's kinda cool they ruled that deployment counts as 'moving' at least for the purpose of removing servo skulls.

I wonder if that means I can fire smoke launchers by deploying my vehicles now?

[Demonus]

2. Falchions are both a pair of CCW (+1A), and they have a special rule to grant another +1A. GW decided against this, though, and now they're mostly worthless.

ah I always read it that the extra weapon gave you +1 attack, not that you got +1 attack, and another +1 attack. Glad to see they clarified it :)

[Defenestratus]

I can't remember (amazingly) - does Eldrad's pokey-stick specifically say that he can cast the same power twice in a turn? I think it does.

[isotope99]

I can't remember (amazingly) - does Eldrad's pokey-stick specifically say that he can cast the same power twice in a turn? I think it does.

I think there's a general rule that you can't re-roll a re-roll unless specifically stated so most of the eldar powers (doom, guide, fortune) won't stack.

[DrLove42]

Yes Eldrads stick allows a double power usage...

But as Isotope says none of his powers can stack

[Lockark]

It doesn't. The fluff says they're half demon i guess but still...thats a bit stupid

Glad to see the shunt-scout thing is banned....

And Tau burst cannons count as Plasma weapons as well as pulse weapons and pulse rifles? Well screw me sideways and call me Frank...basically a Tau army will not really be able to shoot at a unit with that upgrade!

The better question is why do oblits counts as Deamons? They have warp gifted powers, but arguably many Chaos-Sor's would be a Deamon by that logic.

[celestialatc]

The better question is why do oblits counts as Deamons? They have warp gifted powers, but arguably many Chaos-Sor's would be a Deamon by that logic.

Well to be fair, most of the anti-daemon powers work on Psykers so this would fit with the logic.

[BrokenWing]

I think it's because GW secretly hates Chaos Marines and wanted to give them another swift kick.

[Nabterayl]

The better question is why do oblits counts as Deamons?
Because fluff-wise, an obliterator is a combination of man, machine, and daemon - an obliterator is like a fusion of chaos marine and daemon engine, just like a possessed chaos space marine is a fusion of chaos marine and lesser daemon. As the CSM codex puts it, obliterators "blur the boundaries between biological, technological and daemonic."

[Corvus-Master-of-The-4th]

I think it's because GW secretly hates Chaos Marines and wanted to give them another swift kick.

My Iron Warriors... Take your kick, and move to go cry in the corner...

[BrokenWing]

If it makes you feel better, my friend used to play Word Bearers. At least you can still play your army =).

[Galadren]

ah I always read it that the extra weapon gave you +1 attack, not that you got +1 attack, and another +1 attack.

To be fair, this is how most people with common sense read it.

[BrokenWing]

Problem is common sense also dictates that if you pay more for a weapon, it's somehow better. 10 points for an extra close combat weapon (per guy) is stupid, and that's just on Interceptors. To say nothing of 5 points per guy on terminators when you could have the same effect *and* be initiative 6 by just buying a banner.

[HsojVvad]

I think it's because GW secretly hates Chaos Marines and wanted to give them another swift kick.

I thought that was Tyranids.


Because fluff-wise, an obliterator is a combination of man, machine, and daemon - an obliterator is like a fusion of chaos marine and daemon engine, just like a possessed chaos space marine is a fusion of chaos marine and lesser daemon. As the CSM codex puts it, obliterators "blur the boundaries between biological, technological and daemonic."

I thought fluff wise was never interpeted into the rules. So many rules don't follow fluff so I can't really understand it.

[BrokenWing]

Ok, Tyranids and Chaos. I remember when nids came out and it was all like "yay" and then DE came out and then Grey Knights came out and all the Nid players cried =(. They also stopped showing up to tournaments =(.

[Kawauso]

While most of these things were common sense (but some were not - like the Plasma Syphon taking plasma from both fluff and rules), it's good to have all of these in print so that people can cease to debate them.

Given how many rules were influences by fluff though (what counts as plasma/daemons), I still find it silly (any annoying) that a model equipped with all the different grenade types can lob 4/5 of them in a single assault move AND still get his weapons ready to attack. It's not like they have Eldar grenade launchers...they pluck them from their belts and throw them by hand. And GK only ever have one hand free... /rant.

Also, I'm with you there on the Tyranids. I refuse to give up, but I'm really frustrated with how difficult GK are proving to be with their overwhelming mobile firepower and superstar units that can handle almost any close combat scenario with ease. And the fact that all of their strengths are greater than any the Tyranids can bring to bear, etc. etc.

[Galadren]

Problem is common sense also dictates that if you pay more for a weapon, it's somehow better. 10 points for an extra close combat weapon (per guy) is stupid, and that's just on Interceptors. To say nothing of 5 points per guy on terminators when you could have the same effect *and* be initiative 6 by just buying a banner.

Maybe because it's not just an extra close combat weapon, but an extra force/power weapon that doesn't allow armor saves?

[BrokenWing]

But that doesn't make you extra ignore armor saves or extra force weapon kill people. According to the regular rules if you have a force weapon or a power weapon and take a pistol or close combat weapon you get +1 attack. Since you're not getting anything for it being another force or power weapon (like somehow doing more force weaponry or super ignoring armor saves) you're paying 5 or 10 points for what amounts to an extra ccw.

[Demonus]

yes but terminators cant take pistols can they? so you are paying 10pts for another pw attack (or 5 or whatever they cost for terms)

[celestialatc]

Problem is common sense also dictates that if you pay more for a weapon, it's somehow better. 10 points for an extra close combat weapon (per guy) is stupid, and that's just on Interceptors. To say nothing of 5 points per guy on terminators when you could have the same effect *and* be initiative 6 by just buying a banner.

I am ripping off the falchions tonight and putting a banner on one of my terminators tonight!

And I am unlearning how to say falchions!

[BrokenWing]

yes but terminators cant take pistols can they? so you are paying 10pts for another pw attack (or 5 or whatever they cost for terms)

But why in the world would you pay that? Lets say you have 5 terminators and give all 5 Falchions. Under the old assumption that was +2 attacks per guy, totally worth it. Now you're getting +1 attack. So you could just spend the 25 points on a banner that does the *exact same thing* and then *for free* get +2 initiative at the same time. That's not a choice. Before it was a choice, you said "do I want more attacks, or higher initiative?" now you can get both at the same time, or you can just get +1 attack for 5 points. You could of course give them +1 attack *and* the banner for a completely ridiculous 50 points, then if you end up being charged you're stuck striking at initiative 4 instead of 6 and you paid 25 points to do it. The trade off was viable before, because you'd have so many attacks, now there's just no reason to do it.

It's 10 points for everyone else, which means you'd be paying 100 points for 1 extra attack per guy. Understandable when it was for +2 attacks, stupid when it's for +1. Assuming a 10 man squad anyway.

[Kawauso]

The banner doesn't do the -exact- same thing.

The banner-bearer loses his force weapon.

Just saying.

[BrokenWing]

So? Still completely worth the price.

[Kawauso]

So nothing.
Just pointing out that you're missing out on one model's FW attacks.

[BrokenWing]

Well, yes. It seems really strange actually that you replace a sword with a banner, but I suppose that's because I always imagine the banner as being on his back where they used to be. (Fortunately) haven't purchased my terminators yet. I say fortunately because if I had they'd all have the wrong weapons.

[Nabterayl]

I thought fluff wise was never interpeted into the rules. So many rules don't follow fluff so I can't really understand it.
Certainly we should never interpret fluff to mean rules. If GW wants to do that, they're certainly entitled to.

[Demonus]

So nothing.
Just pointing out that you're missing out on one model's FW attacks.

correct so for the 25 points, you gain +4 FW attacks in your squad of 5, and you lose 2 FW attacks. So 25 pts for +2 force weapon attacks (and 3 normal attacks). OR you can pay 10pts for those 2 extra force weapon attacks, and give the other 3 guys halberds or hammers or swords, and have a variety of wound allocation.

Now of course if you are using a big squad of terminators, sure it is definitely better to take the banner.

shrug. worth it to some, not to others.

hell you could go nuts, and take 9 falchions and a banner, for +18 force weapon attacks =P. i like the halberds for some armies and the other stuff for slower armies (tau, necrons, IG)

[BrokenWing]

Given that I run 6 guys in my Terminator squad (storm raven) I actually ended up going with 4 Halberds and 2 hammers for my post FAQ squad because the banner didn't really work out well enough for them anymore than the falchions did so I just switched it to that and used the saved points to improve other units. I'd say in all they're probably still worth it, depending on your squad size and load out, for Terminators, but they've been FAQed right out of the rest of the army. Edit: except for characters.

[Emerald Rose Widow]

Well, yes. It seems really strange actually that you replace a sword with a banner, but I suppose that's because I always imagine the banner as being on his back where they used to be. (Fortunately) haven't purchased my terminators yet. I say fortunately because if I had they'd all have the wrong weapons.

hehe, this is exactly why I magnetize my models, because I know rules eventually change and thus mechanics change, so it means im never screwed, hehe. Its advice I give to everyone, the magnets from the place I buy them are inexpensive, effective, and I paid like 15 dollars shipped for 200 of them. Really easy to put in too.

I'm a major magnetization advocate.

[Gir]

Did anyone else notice that they said doom fists are str 6 because the dreadknight is not a walker, but it gets +1 for two doomfists even though it's not a walker?

[Tynskel]

I am ripping off the falchions tonight and putting a banner on one of my terminators tonight!

And I am unlearning how to say falchions!

Wait,
What's wrong with having the Banner and Falchions... I mean for 50 points, you get 5x as many attacks as you would for a single extra terminator...

[Demonus]

Did anyone else notice that they said doom fists are str 6 because the dreadknight is not a walker, but it gets +1 for two doomfists even though it's not a walker?

hehe yep. My Greater Daemons have 2 hands, why dont they get +1 attack =P

[Lockark]

Because fluff-wise, an obliterator is a combination of man, machine, and daemon - an obliterator is like a fusion of chaos marine and daemon engine, just like a possessed chaos space marine is a fusion of chaos marine and lesser daemon. As the CSM codex puts it, obliterators "blur the boundaries between biological, technological and daemonic."

But fluff wise they are not demonically possessed. When they say Daemonic they mean as deamonic as in the powers have a Warp in origin like a demon. (No diffrent then a pyscher's powers)

[Lucian Kain]

Wait,
What's wrong with having the Banner and Falchions... I mean for 50 points, you get 5x as many attacks as you would for a single extra terminator...

Agreed see:Quick Silver I10 makes them work but obviously only in a unit designed around the librarian.

I saw a moan befor about how many grenades getting thrown befor an assault being inapropriate-thats just silly you didn't stop to think all those grenade effects were in a one package dilivery or grenade.

HammerHand stacking is somthing that needs to be explored/exploited.

The Shrouding with two librarians in StormRavens or even just in general is another.2+ cover saves on flatout Ravens is nothing to snort at.

[DarkLink]

Anyone who thought you couldn't use more than one grenade at a time was smoking something. It's perfectly clear, some people were just being whiney. Same thing with psychic powers, though GW's brb FAQ does change some things there.


Did anyone else notice that they said doom fists are str 6 because the dreadknight is not a walker, but it gets +1 for two doomfists even though it's not a walker?

Well, it's still 2 CCWs.


But fluff wise they are not demonically possessed. When they say Daemonic they mean as deamonic as in the powers have a Warp in origin like a demon. (No diffrent then a pyscher's powers)

GKs do happen to be really good at killing psykers.

[HsojVvad]

My oh my. I thought us Tyranid players were cry babies, espically about not getting an extra 1+ A for having 2 of the same close combat weapons.

Now I see it goes for SM players too now eh? Stop whining and live with it. You have it so much easier than Tyranid players, now you need to have it even easier? Oh my.

[sgw0040]

How would two shroudings give you a 2+ cover safe?
shrouding gives stealth or 6+ cover save if you dont have one, unless I am reading something wrong. I wouldn't think Stealth abilities stack for super stealth.......I mean if i can have the lonestar winnebago with
2+ cover sweet......but i dont think thats happening

[Lockark]

GKs do happen to be really good at killing psykers.

That's nice. But from what I under stood Deamon Hammers were good at killing you know. Deamons. Not Chaotic Man/Machine things.
=U

[Denied]

So the multiples of the same psychic power stake.... just wow ! I am normally running a terminator squad with a GK GM and a Librarian who has Might of Titan and Hammer hands already, this coupled with my halberds means I am swinging at I6 with strength 7 or 8 nemesis force weapons .... just brutal! I think I am dropping the Daemon Hammer from that unit now since it is useless in comparison.

[Caldera02]

Unless, you know, your playing against someone who is shutting down your psychic powers....

[BrokenWing]

Like Njal.

[DarkLink]

My oh my. I thought us Tyranid players were cry babies, espically about not getting an extra 1+ A for having 2 of the same close combat weapons.


Yeah, well, Shadow in the Warp should hit units in vehicles, and Primes should fit in Spores. Don't know what GW was thinking. Besides, my point was that, until GW clarified the issue with this FAQ, Falchions granted +2A. Someone asked why, so I explained.



Now I see it goes for SM players too now eh? Stop whining and live with it. You have it so much easier than Tyranid players, now you need to have it even easier? Oh my.

If you're referring to me, I'm not a SM player. I'm a GK player. And in case you never noticed, I lived with a far, far worse codex than you ever had for the last three years. So step off your soapbox, whiner.


How would two shroudings give you a 2+ cover safe?

Shrouding does not grant +1 to your cover save. Stealth does. So you are absolutely correct, multiple castings of shrouding does nothing.

Though you could get a 2+ cover with a Techmarine+Shrouding.


That's nice. But from what I under stood Deamon Hammers were good at killing you know. Deamons. Not Chaotic Man/Machine things.
=U

Chaotic and daemonic are one and the same. They may not have been possessed by daemons, because they are becoming daemonic themselves. Kinda. Or something like that.

[Denied]

Unless, you know, your playing against someone who is shutting down your psychic powers....

I don't disagree, but that basically makes an anti psyker essential in every army build. Not every codex has access to an anti psyker too.

[Gir]

Well, it's still 2 CCWs.


2 DCCW's, which have their own rules for extra attacks.

Not that it matters, a pair of Falchions is 2 ccw that doesn't give the 2 weapon bonus attack.

[Kawauso]

Not that it matters, a pair of Falchions is 2 ccw that doesn't give the 2 weapon bonus attack.

No, they do. That's the bonus conferred in the rules entry for the item. The just never granted any other bonus. It was just written poorly (i.e. it shouldn't have bothered mentioning the bonus and clearly described the weapon options as 2 NFWs).

[Nabterayl]

2 DCCW's, which have their own rules for extra attacks.
None of which are applicable to a dreadknight. The dreadknight doomfist FAQ is just a surprising example of GW actually bothering to write what they mean for once. A dreadnought close combat weapon is (i) a power weapon (which is irrelevant to an MC), (ii) doubles a walker's strength (which is irrelevant to an MC, and (iii) gives one bonus attack per DCCW to walkers (which is irrelevant to an MC). The only things about a Nemesis doomfist that work for a dreadknight are that they're Nemesis weapons, and they're close combat weapons. That was always the literal way to read the codex; the FAQ just clarifies that yes, they really did mean to give a dreadknight weapons with special rules that are inapplicable to it.

[Gir]

the FAQ just clarifies that yes, they really did mean to give a dreadknight weapons with special rules that are inapplicable to it.

Or the random web pleb thought they did when he wrote the FAQ.

[C.of.N.finity]

No, they do. That's the bonus conferred in the rules entry for the item. The just never granted any other bonus. It was just written poorly (i.e. it shouldn't have bothered mentioning the bonus and clearly described the weapon options as 2 NFWs).

Unfortunatly thats not the case. Page 54 of the codex lists the rules on that page as 'further abilities'. 2 CCW's isn't an ability, the ability is what gives +1 attack. It's the 2 CCWs that would give the other attack.

But I agree at least that the wording was rather poor.

[Paul]

Unfortunatly thats not the case. Page 54 of the codex lists the rules on that page as 'further abilities', 2 CCW's isn't an ability, the ability is what gives +1 attack. It's the 2 CCWs that would give the other attack.

But I agree at least that the wording was rather poor.

2 CCWs isn't also necessarily what is meant by a pair.

Unless my pair of pants is two pants.

[Nabterayl]

2 CCWs isn't also necessarily what is meant by a pair.

Unless my pair of pants is two pants.
True, though in that case, it would seem that Shrike does not have two lightning claws (which, heck, maybe he doesn't :p). I think this is a case of GW over-thinking things. I'm pretty sure the thought process was "Wait, shouldn't we put something in here about why somebody might want to take falchions? Oh, good idea, let's add a sentence that clarifies they give an extra attack." And then all the close-reading folks, who would have figured it out anyway, go, "Hot dog, +2A!"

[C.of.N.finity]

Ya know, this is an interesting question: Which takes precedence, a FAQ or the codex? I don't mean hard errata or ammendments, just the question and answer part, the soft part. Does that supercede the rules in the codex? I know it only seeks to clarify them, but what if the rules are clear enough in the codex?

Just an interesting thought.

[daboarder]

what I post now I post as a disgruntled Nid player...


DEAL WITH IT!!!

You all jumped up and down demanding that we Nid players had to deal with a FAQ ruling that violated the rules as per the BRB so allow me to say that their is no arguing that "oh dear GW really intended Falchion's to grant two attacks, its quite clear if you read the faq....while squinting, in the dark, from 5 feet away" they made the rule you don't have to like it but stop arguing over their intent. Same goes for the Dreadknight...its not uncommon for GW to write rules badly and there is no point arguing over the "meaning" of a clarification. As for the Daemon and Plasma, nothing new to see here people move along, avatar has been doing this for YEARS.

/rant

[Nabterayl]

Ya know, this is an interesting question: Which takes precedence, a FAQ or the codex? I don't mean hard errata or ammendments, just the question and answer part, the soft part. Does that supercede the rules in the codex? I know it only seeks to clarify them, but what if the rules are clear enough in the codex?

Just an interesting thought.
I think it depends on how you view FAQs. If you view them as clarifications, then any interpretation of the codex that conflicts with the FAQ is an incorrect interpretation. If you view them as amendments, then the FAQ takes precedence. If you view them as just rules, then you have to decide. If you view them as house rules, then I think the codex clearly takes precedence.