Eldar Wraithseer (from updated IA: Apocalypse) - answers from Forge World editors

[Sersis]

Recently I saw the updated rules for Wraithseer in the new IA: Apocalypse from Forge World. The rules presented there aroused many questions in me, so I decided to adress them directly to the FW editors team. I've got the following answers (in bold):


"Hi,

Thank you for your email. Please find answers to your questions below.

1) Question – Wraithseer:

In the updated IA:Apocalyspe Wraithseer is able to purchase Wraithcannon for 40 points. Is this a typo? I am almost sure that you’ve meant to include D-Cannon here (as it was previously in its kit).

No. The Wraithseer may purchase a Wraithcannon for 40 points as stated in its datasheet. If this changes it will be reflected in a future errata.

2) Question – Wraithseer:

While there is a range in the profile for the witchfire power, there is no information on how far the Wraithseer can cast his Enliven and Deliverance blessing powers. Is it correct to assume that the range of this powers is infinite? If not, please tell me what is the casting range for those powers?

Yes, both psychic powers have unlimited range.

3) Question – Wraithseer:

According to the 6th Edition rules for manifesting psychic powers, if the psyker is casting a witchfire power – than he can’t shoot from his ranged weapon. Nevertheless, Wraithseer is a Monstrous Creature and can fire from two of his weapons. Does it mean that can cast his witchfire power and shoot from his shoulder-mounted weapon (for example a D-Cannon) in the same shooting phase?

Yes, using a Witchfire power counts as firing an Assault weapon. A Monstrous creature will be able to use a Witchfire power and fire one weapon.

4) Question – Wraithseer:

Is Wraithseer affected by his own Spirit Mark special ability? Is he affected by Spirit Mark special abilities of Spiritseers?

No to both. Spirit Mark specifically affects Wraithguard, Wraithblades, Wraithlords, Wraithknights and Hemlock Wraithfighters as stated in Codex: Eldar.

5) Question – Wraithseer:

Is Wraithseer affected by the Voice of Twilight psychic power cast by Spiritseers (from Iyanden Supplement to Codex: Eldar)?

No, Voice of Twilight specifically affects Wraithguard, Wraithblades, Wraithlords and Wraithknights.

6) Question – Wraithseer:

Can Wraithseer be healed by using the The Wraithforge Stone (an artifact taken from the list of Gifts of Asuryan from Iyanded Suppleent to Codex: Eldar)

No, The Wraithforge stone only affects a Wraithlord or Wraithknight.

7) Question – Wraithseer:

Can Wraithseer be the target of his own blessing powers: Enliven and Deliverance? Do they work on him?

No. Both powers state which units they affect. The Wraithser is not one of them.

I hope you feel your questions have been fully answered. If there is anything further we can do to assist you, or if you have any queries about the information we have requested or provided, please telephone us.

Regards,
Forge World"

Frankly speaking, I was disheartened by most of the answers, as they look counter-intuitive. About my very first question I ran into a contradicting answer from a FW Facebook representative here:

https://www.facebook.com/ForgeWorldU...02680666415883

It is shown here, that the Wraithseer should be able to purchase D-Cannon instead of Wraithcannon. I've stated this contradiction to FW editors team in a new letter and currently waiting for additional clarification...

All in all, at the moment it looks like if I would take Wraithseer into my roster, it would be without any gun at all, just to keep him in deploy area to spam the Feel No Pain blessing upon the Wraithguard/-blades unit marching to the enemy.

Wraithseer can't be hastened/healed via Iyanden special tricks, his own spells do not work on him and he can't re-roll 1-s on his 'To Hit' rolls via Spirit Mark (although Hemlock Wraithfighter can...., even though he only has access to Blast weapons...). As it turns out (before any new errata is released) that Wraithseer is the only Wraith-unit that is not affected by a number of Wraith-unit specific rules/powers.

[Defenestratus]

Wow

As if I needed another reason to drop mine off a cliff. He'll be collecting dust next to his best friends, howling banshees.

Such a raw deal we're getting from FW. I feel no remorse whatsoever for not purchasing another thing from them ever again.

[Wolfshade]

You can always send it to me ;)

I think though most of the answers are self explanitory

[Tyrendian]

well this directly contradicts what several people, me included, have already got as an answer directly from ForgeWorld - that is definitely supposed to be a D-Cannon, not a Wraithcannon.
Not counting him as "Wraith" seems incredibly stupid - if I had one we would definitely house-rule that to work, and honestly, you are hardly going to play one competitively... so I wouldn't worry too much about that either... seems you just got a "bad" FW guy to reply to you...

[Sersis]

Still, even in the current state it can be worth it just for FnP blessing on Wraithguards/blades. Especially with the first known blessing with unlimited range :)))

I hope they will later realise all the mentioned issues and release Errata. The idea behind the model is begging to be in synergy with all of the subtle power-ups found in Iyanden Supplement. The fact that the ancient artifact (The Wraithforge stone) is powerfull enough to mend wounds on a Wraithknight, but can't heal a Wraithseer is counter-intuitive.

Similarly, how can a Wraith-construct that has a spirit of ancient Warlock/Farseer inside be immune to the energizing effects of Voice of Twilight? Is the spell not powerfull enough to work on such a unique Wraith-unit? This just does not make sense...

It will be fine if they will later limit the range of his blessings, they do not have to be limitless (its broken, 18'' or 24'' will work just fine). But it should be logical if Spirit Mark, the Wraithforge Stone and Voice of Twilight will work for Wraithseer.

[Sersis]

Just recieved a reply to my second letter to Forge World, where I pointed out the inconsistency with Facebook comments about Wraithseer/D-Cannon issue:

"Hi there.
The rules for the Wraithseer should include an option for a D-Cannon rather than a Wraithcannon as indicated on our Facebook site so please accept our apologies for the confusion."

It looks like you were spot on Tyrendian, the guy who was answering to me originally did not know about the Facebook reply from other FW staff.

So at least I can keep my beloved D-Cannon on its shoulder:) It's a start. I think I'll send them a suggestion for future errata to repair the synergy of Wraithseer with other Wraith-unit related rules as I mentioned above.

[Learn2Eel]

Good to hear about the D-Cannon, I am planning to make the Wraithseer my final addition for a 2000 point Wraithwall army now.

[Poseidal]

Updates on Facebook aren't a good way of publishing them, even if it is ephemeral as not everyone can or will use Facebook, and not everyone follows them.

Don't they have, like, a blog on their official site? That at least is focussed and puts it in the correct place.

Another reason to NOT accept FW (even the 40k labelled stuff) in normal games yet, and is a blow to the credibility and inclusion of their rules. (though the models are fine and free to use as 'counts-as' where appropriate; there's no reason why a lot of the models need extra rules anyway - the Dreadnaught Drop Pod can be just that as the regular model doesn't allow room for an ordinary Dreadnaught for example)

[daboarder]

please FW is no worse at this than GW, they STILL haven't cottoned on to the fact the burning chariot cannot fire....

[SaveModifier]

Updates on Facebook aren't a good way of publishing them, even if it is ephemeral as not everyone can or will use Facebook, and not everyone follows them.

Don't they have, like, a blog on their official site? That at least is focussed and puts it in the correct place.

Another reason to NOT accept FW (even the 40k labelled stuff) in normal games yet, and is a blow to the credibility and inclusion of their rules. (though the models are fine and free to use as 'counts-as' where appropriate; there's no reason why a lot of the models need extra rules anyway - the Dreadnaught Drop Pod can be just that as the regular model doesn't allow room for an ordinary Dreadnaught for example)


Mistakes are present in every version of the rules, from every compant, its why FAQs are released, these things so far are judgement calls from people interpreting the rules to help their customers, until an official FAQ is released, the rules from the book are correct so I can see why the first person said that, he wasn't aware of the printing error. This isn't a blow to credibility so much as a small mistake. Its a game of toy soldiers, its not life or death so it doesn't really matter.

[Learn2Eel]

On that note, anyone else curious as to why GW haven't released a single FAQ for 40K or Fantasy since April (unless you count the mini clarification for Eldar) ?

[Poseidal]

Mistakes are present in every version of the rules, from every compant, its why FAQs are released, these things so far are judgement calls from people interpreting the rules to help their customers, until an official FAQ is released, the rules from the book are correct so I can see why the first person said that, he wasn't aware of the printing error. This isn't a blow to credibility so much as a small mistake. Its a game of toy soldiers, its not life or death so it doesn't really matter.

Leaving it as is (as the FW rep answered) is better in this case, as it will be consistent until they release an errata.

I can understand the initial misprint, but if they have an errata, putting it on social media sites is not the way to release it as they can't be considered a central area, and is inherently not credible as a source due to the ephemeral nature of the things (this model doesn't do what the book says, as some guy on Facebook said so).

It isn't the misprint that is the blow to credibility, but the use of social media in this manner and not using their own resources (FW blog) that is.

[daboarder]

Because they've reverted to their old crap? seriously everything started to smell like business as usual post tau release, which is a shame as it was so nice up until then.

[cebalrai]

Because they've reverted to their old crap? seriously everything started to smell like business as usual post tau release, which is a shame as it was so nice up until then.


Speaking of crap, I bought IA:11 about six months ago. Now if I want the updates I have to buy the new APOC book even though I never play APOC and have no interest in it? I have to buy two high-cost books just to FW will support their own products? Are these updates available for free somewhere?

I take it the Hornet, Wraithseer, Wasp, and Warp Hunter were all updated?

[Sersis]

In terms of models that can be used for Warhammer 40k games IA: Apocalypse contains info on Wraithseer, Hornet and Warp Hunter.

Hornet is buffed, Wapr Hunter is nerfed and Wraithseer... I'll say - slightly nerfed.
Shadow Specters got an update via an electronic .pfd file which can be found here: http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/s/shadowspectres.pdf

The info for their Phoenix Lord is yet to be released. Most likely other IA: 11 models will be updated after together with the whole IA:11 book.

[cebalrai]

In terms of models that can be used for Warhammer 40k games IA: Apocalypse contains info on Wraithseer, Hornet and Warp Hunter.

Hornet is buffed, Wapr Hunter is nerfed and Wraithseer... I'll say - slightly nerfed.
Shadow Specters got an update via an electronic .pfd file which can be found here: http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/s/shadowspectres.pdf

The info for their Phoenix Lord is yet to be released. Most likely other IA: 11 models will be updated after together with the whole IA:11 book.


What did they do with the Hornet? Same base price with cheaper codex-rate guns? How much for pulse laser?

Same with the Wasp?

[Sersis]

No update for the Wasp yet. It will be updated together with Corsair army (IA 11).
As for the Hornet - it is much better now (IMO). All of the weapon upgrades in IA: Apocalypse for it cost 5 points. Yes, even the Pulse laser. Maybe this is a typo and it will be later corrected in Errata, but all remains as shown in the book - you will be able to have a squadron of 3 hornets with 2 Pulse lasers each for 240 points. This is 12 48" S8 AP2 shots.

[Garradh]

you will be able to have a squadron of 3 hornets with 2 Pulse lasers each for 240 points. This is 12 48" S8 AP2 shots.

Why in the name of beans am I paying 210 for 24 S6 AP6 shots then? Looks like it's time to do some shopping.

As for the Wraithseer clarifications, with a Mastery level of 1 it almost seems wise to stick it in the back with a bright lance, in good cover, buffing and pot-shooting. Very expensive unit that doesn't do any job very well - can't shoot as good as a Wraithlord, not monstrous-creature enough to be a close combat monster, and only about as useful a pysker as a Spiritseer (better powers but less Mastery). I love the model, I think it is gorgeous, but I can't justify the points cost.

[Pssyche]

I love the model, I think it is gorgeous...

Actually, in my book, you just did justify its points cost.

[cebalrai]

Why in the name of beans am I paying 210 for 24 S6 AP6 shots then? Looks like it's time to do some shopping.

As for the Wraithseer clarifications, with a Mastery level of 1 it almost seems wise to stick it in the back with a bright lance, in good cover, buffing and pot-shooting. Very expensive unit that doesn't do any job very well - can't shoot as good as a Wraithlord, not monstrous-creature enough to be a close combat monster, and only about as useful a pysker as a Spiritseer (better powers but less Mastery). I love the model, I think it is gorgeous, but I can't justify the points cost.


The Wraithseer has a D-Cannon and is very powerful in CC. Are we looking at the same unit here?

I recently used one against Salamanders... It charged it into Vulcan and a bunch of marines, murdered Vulcan in the first round of the challenge, and then killed the rest of the Marines without taking a single wound. I assaulted a bunch of Guardians to speed up the cleanup but the Wraithseer was going to kill everything unscathed.

[hisdudeness]

Why,why, why are people still emailing GW/FW with rules questions? It have been proven time and time again that emails (and answers from store staff) are iffy at best.

This floors me every time some brings these up like they mean anything.

[Tynskel]

Why,why, why are people still emailing GW/FW with rules questions? It have been proven time and time again that emails (and answers from store staff) are iffy at best.

This floors me every time some brings these up like they mean anything.

That is because GW is the authority.

[hisdudeness]

I'm glad we are now accepting the word from random GW employee in a format that cannot be verified in any way. I guess the word from a random store manager is official also?

Ignore this.....<I believe the funniest part of this is that in another thread you are arguing that the Army builder is not a valid source for rule...>

[Tynskel]

I'm glad we are now accepting the word from random GW employee in a format that cannot be verified in any way. I guess the word from a random store manager is official also?

I believe the funniest part of this is that in another thread you are arguing that the Army builder is not a valid source for rule...

Army Builder is *not* a product developed by GW. And, you need to quote that, not allude to something I may have said, because I am pretty sure you are wrong. My problem with Army Builder is that it puts all the rules, and the millions of junk items on the sheet. Unnecessary, and unclean.

Rules are for rulebooks. Army lists are for what you bought.
When you are in a GW store, and the Red Shirt says something, you pick up the dice and keep playing.

[hisdudeness]

Ignore the army builder part..that was sucked in from a copy/paste and was not for this thread... To clarify, I was not talking about Lone Wolf's product but the ebook Codex list builder.

You still did not address the issues of "answers" from GW/FW. It has been proven multiple times that you can ask the same question multiple times and get contradicting answers. Then you have the verification problem, I can produce an official looking email from "GW" that says whatever I want. Then we have the problem of who is answering the email, is it a design team member or just some random intern?

Put these problems together and emails become less then worthless. If your group wants to use these as a valid source then go for it, but don't expect it to fly most other places.

As far as GW store managers, their rulings are good for their store and has no place in a rules discussion forum. Managers go through no special training and have no direct link to the design studio to be any sort of reliable source for rules interpretations.

[Tynskel]

That is irrelevant. When you are in GW stores, the Red Shirt is the moderator. Their conflict resolution may not make sense, but it is from authority.

[hisdudeness]

What?!?