Eldar/Dark Eldar/Harlequins FAQs are up

But you can still take the soulshrive for an ap2 power weapon that gets +1 strength for each and every wound....

You can, as well as a few other benefits - but wraith troops isn't one of them

RedRegicide wrote:

Webway in with blaster born, blow up important veichle, then flat out raider between the blaster born and the whatever unit will likely charge them. That's what I would do. Or use raider's dissy to kill a few annoying marines

If the vehicle had already moved before the unit disembarked, the vehicle
cannot move further that turn (including pivoting on the spot, moving Flat Out, Running
or charging). In addition, a vehicle cannot Tank Shock or Ram on a turn that a unit
disembarks from it   - disembarking Big rule book

Massaen wrote:

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Iyanden supplement is still official and allowed to be used with Eldar: Craftworlds. (And I confirmed that this was written in the supplement on page 78: Wraithguard and Wraithblades as troops are back!) This is an important development since wraithguard have access to D-weapons.

Just to update this - no, WGuard are not troops even with the Iyanden supplement. That function was one from the old Spirit seer entry and nothing in the supplement allows it. Also - there is no page 78 in the book?

Just an FYI before DE players went mad for allies...

Page 48 iyanden  -  "Spirit Mark isn’t the only reason that you will want to include a Spiritseer in your army. Including a Spiritseer allows you to take Wraithguards and Wraithblades as Troops choices,
rather than Elites."

The Army of Iyanden: Alterations and additions to
the rules given in Codex: Eldar, that will help you
transform your collection of Citadel miniatures into a
warhost worthy of Iyanden Craftworld.   - same page

Ask your opponents if they are okay with it if not play someone who is, as with any and every book in 40k

If we cant actually take wraiths as troops it defeats the fun fluffy parts of running iyanden, Wraithblades time to get out of retirement

I think the (quite reasonable) argument you'll run into is that the quoted passages aren't rules text.

i know im rules lawyering like a madman but wraiths as troops is important to iyanden

Jimsolo wrote:

I think the (quite reasonable) argument you'll run into is that the quoted passages aren't rules text.  

That's debateable, as the part that says including a spiritseer allows you to take wraithguard as troops certainly isn't "fluff" or flavor text, and it's on the same page that tells you how running iyandan alters your army options.

It quite simply directly says it in the Iyanden supplement. Is it difficult to make an argument that this was simply a reference to a different edition of the Eldar book? Not at all, it most certainly was. But Iyanden is all about armies full of Wraith constructs, and when GW comes out and gives an unqualified statement that said book is still official, and may be used with the current Eldar book, that makes what is written inside official. And from what is written inside, taken in the current situation without worrying about what the situation was when the supplement was released, you CAN take wraithguard as troops.

Think of it this way: If they released that book yesterday instead of in 6th edition, and it said on page 48 that taking a spiritseer allows you to take wraithguard as troops, no one would argue with it. No one would question it. No one would bat an eye.

Well, that IS how we have to read it, because we haven't been given a FAQ to update its compatibility with the current codex, so we just need to take it as written, as if it were released yesterday. And in that context, it specifically says wraithguard may be taken as troops if you take a spiritseer.

I enjoy that a few people are getting pissy with the venom Pintle mounted cannon now being a hull mounted one, I've always played my venoms so that their noses are aimed at what I'm shooting, bringing both guns to fire at the target

Many of the books and supplements have a collector's guide or user's guide too explain how/why to collect the army. The quoted text clearly comes from one of those sections, and isn't binding game rules.

Jimsolo is on the money here

The pale host in doom of mymeara allows you to bring an

Your post got cut off. Bring an what?

Entire wraith army. Sorry.

Jimsolo wrote:

The quoted text clearly comes from one of those sections, and isn't binding game rules.

Can you show me an official GW document that tells us this is true, or even insinuates that? There are plenty of examples of rules and rules clarifications being given in locations inside a book that don't much make sense. That doesn't make them any less a rule. It specifies that you can take wraithguard as troops if you take a spiritseer, and it does so OUTSIDE the italic fluff text. This is clearly in a rules and instructions section of the book. The fact that people don't like it doesn't change what it says.

Again, if this book was released YESTERDAY you'd have ZERO people agreeing with you. The only reason there is ANY argument is because it was released in a prior edition. But since it has been ruled as completely legit and valid for use with the modern codex, we NEED to read it as though it were released yesterday.

If it were released yesterday, that would still NOT be in a rules section.  It would in fact be even more clear since there would be clear cut data sheets that the advisory section wouldn't be on.

Furthermore, if GW later clarifies that I am wrong, I will eat every Wraith unit I own.

Jimsolo wrote:

If it were released yesterday, that would still NOT be in a rules section.  It would in fact be even more clear since there would be clear cut data sheets that the advisory section wouldn't be on.

Furthermore, if GW later clarifies that I am wrong, I will eat every Wraith unit I own.  

All zero of them, huh?

If it was released yesterday, you'd not have a leg to stand on. It's NOT in an italicized section of the book, meaning that it's non-fluff. All non-fluff is binding.

this pertains to the recent faq draft about iyanden so why not post it here

first off does lord of the sorrowful dead not have any game effect other than being a dead warlord ability since spirit mark is an AoE now

and second if using the iyanded supplement am i still able to use other supplements with it

Nope, I've got Wraithguard for WWP shenanigans. If any major FAQ accepts it, I'll even tailor the sauce. (ITC-ketchup, ETC-pesto, NOVA-salsa, and GW itself? We'll say wasabi.)

The font isn't what's relevant though, the context is. I understand trying to grasp at straws to get an advantage, but there's no way to expect that to be the accepted interpretation.

I actually think the complete opposite is the case. I feel like you're trying to grasp at straws to ensure it doesn't cause the meta to shift heavily, when it's perfectly clear that the supplement, in plain English, says you may take wraithguard as troops when you take a spiritseer. Your only argument is WHERE it says it, which would be a ludicrous argument in literally ANY other circumstances.

That said, are we talking REAL wasabi, or the fake stuff we're served at sushi resteraunts all over the country? I've never actually HAD real wasabi.

Nope, I got the hookup on the real business, straight from Okinawa.

I mean, the use of italics isn't the only thing that separates rules from non rules. I'd love to read it that way but it's not a rule anymore than the 5th edition codex saying that dark eldar should use hit and run tactics because they win that way. Does that mean "hit and run tactics" are now an alternate win condition for Dark Eldar? No.

Where can you ask a question, if you have one?

Of Gdubs? Facebook?

For the FAQ's? Your about 3 months too late, but it was on their Facebook page.

As for Iyanden, I find the argument about whether or not you can take Wraithguard as troops to be pointless. Between the Pale Courts Battlehost, Wraith Host and Lords of the Undying Host formations, a Wraith only army with a couple of Spirit Seers is very easy and frankly better than an Iyanden detachment.

Imateria wrote:

For the FAQ's? Your about 3 months too late, but it was on their Facebook page.

As for Iyanden, I find the argument about whether or not you can take Wraithguard as troops to be pointless. Between the Pale Courts Battlehost, Wraith Host and Lords of the Undying Host formations, a Wraith only army with a couple of Spirit Seers is very easy and frankly better than an Iyanden detachment.

It's not better, actually. You're failing to see the big picture here, which is T6 armour 3+ Obsec units with wall of death D-weapons on objectives in cover, able to be taken en masse because you eliminate the typical troop tax that's paid, and put them in a 6 slot position instead of a 3 slot position. So, not a pointless argument at all, really. To the contrary, this is a meta-shifting argument that will likely fundamentally alter the way Eldar lists look in major tournaments.

Cool - if you want to treat those pages as gospel - good luck with your non GMC wraith knight, a modified spirit mark that's worse than the current version