Draft FAQ not draft anymore

Linky

So, we get boned.

Shadowfield renerfed, and most of what was in the draft not there.

Boooo!


Just to add, Haemonculus Covens got a tiny bit nerfed too.

Here's the full text. New entries changes from the previous FAQ are in orange (as we don't have magenta font)

ERRATA
Page 69 – Weapons of Torture
Change the introductory sentence to:
‘A model may replace their Melee weapon with one of the following:’

Page 72 – Succubus, Options
Change the first option to:
‘• May replace close combat weapon or splinter pistol with an archite glaive - 20 pts’

Page 109 – Artefacts of Cruelty, The Archangel of Pain
Change the final sentence of the second paragraph to read:
‘Wounds cannot be allocated to models with the Fearless or And They Shall Know No Fear special rules (any excess Wounds are lost).’

FAQs
Q: Is a shadow field lost if a model suffers an unsaved Wound that is subsequently discounted due to a successful Feel No Pain roll?
A: Yes

Q: If a model with a soul-trap inflicts a single unsaved Wound with the Instant Death special rule upon an enemy character with 3 Wounds remaining, does the bearer gain +1 Strength (for inflicting a single unsaved Wound) or +3 Strength (for causing the enemy character to lose 3 Wounds)?
A: It gains +1 Strength for inflicting a single unsaved Wound.

Q: What is the firing arc of a Venom’s weapons?
A: They are both hull-mounted weapons and therefore have a 45° arc facing forwards.

Q: In a Dark Eldar/Eldar alliance, does a webway portal allow you to use Gate of Infinity without scattering?
A: No. The webway portal only works when its unit is arriving from Deep Strike Reserve. A unit targeted by Gate of Infinity uses the rules for Deep Striking, but they are not arriving from Deep Strike Reserve when they do so.

Q: Does the Dark Eldar webway portal prevent a Transport the bearer is occupying from scattering during Deep Strike?
A: Yes.

Q: Can I take a Court of the Archon as an HQ unit without an Archon?
A: Yes.

Q: As they are upgrades to Kabalite Warriors and do not have their own datasheet, do Kabalite Trueborn still count as Kabalite Warriors for the purposes of the Kabalite Raiding Party Formation?
A: Yes.

Q: If I have an Archon from Codex: Dark Eldar in a unit of Grotesques from the Haemonculus Covens supplement, do they benefit from each other’s different Power From Pain tables?
A: No. The Archon and the Grotesques use their own Power From Pain rules. However, in your example the Archon would benefit from the Grotesques’ Fearless rule from the second game turn, and from the fifth game turn the Archon would benefit from the Grotesques’ Zealot rule, as these are special rules which affect a unit if even a single model in the unit has that rule.

Q: There is a Diabolical Plaything called the Orbs of Despair. It is printed as having Strength 1, AP2, Instant Death and costs 25 points. In a previous edition this weapon had a higher Strength value. Are the statistics on the newer version correct?
A: Yes.

The bottom weapon on the venom being hull-mounted makes sense. The top one should get at least a 90 degree arc, however.

Yeah, basically, no good news. They obviously didn't listen to the droves of complaints on the draft FAQ for the individual codices.

Also take note of the Covens change. NO longer can multiple detachments/formations stack their Freakish Spectacle rule. They reworded I believe to only allow a max of -1 to LD.

There is the confirmation benefit of Kabalite trueborn counting as warriors. In case we get any formations.

Whew- man, disappointed about the Shadowfield. Happy about the Kabalite/Trueborn harmony.

SCP Yeeman wrote:

Also take note of the Covens change.  NO longer can multiple detachments/formations stack their Freakish Spectacle rule.  They reworded I believe to only allow a max of -1 to LD.

Only Covenite Coteries no longer stack. This point needs to be clarified.

The Red King wrote:

There is the confirmation benefit of Kabalite trueborn counting as warriors.  In case we get any formations.

Yeah, but this was already the consensus everyone(ie. all major tournaments) used already, so it's not really news.

Time to look at the raiding party

Trueborn was nice! Freakesh Spectical is as expected.

Thought they would take the chance to undo the SF rule...

But hey, at least the SM drop pod isnt bonkers anymore. Same with the command squad apothicary no longer able to retroactively take a grav gun

Not letting apothecaries take a weapon is ludicrous.

The Drop Pod ruling is nice, at least. So's the Trueborn ruling. (And that one was unexpected, at least by me.)

The Quantum Shielding ruling is more reasonable than the draft version (even if it is slightly worse for us).

The Freakish Spectacle ruling can't be applied as written. (Unless the intent was to strip it from all of the formations, in which case that doesn't make a lot of sense.)

The Shadowfield ruling is inconsistent when stacked up against the Helfrost/Resurrection Protocols ruling.

The apothecary ruling is not ludicrous. The dude has a specialized battlefield role and training as well as a Narcithium getting in the way.

Jimsolo wrote:

The Shadowfield ruling is inconsistent when stacked up against the Helfrost/Resurrection Protocols ruling.  

This is my biggest problem with it. They set a precedent on a virtually identical situation, then ruled against their precedent to the detriment of our faction.

Ya, the theory behind the Apothicary before was "A random veteran can take a grav gun. Random veteran with grav gun then becomes Apothicary. He already has grav gun, so he keeps grav gun". The logic was shakey at the foundation and I am glad its gone.

And I am quite miffed about the SF/FNP ruling. It goes against what the BRB FAQ stated, and against what other factions get. I guess we are just too powerful to be accorded the same rules as others *eye roll*

fisheyes wrote:

Ya, the theory behind the Apothicary before was "A random veteran can take a grav gun. Random veteran with grav gun then becomes Apothicary. He already has grav gun, so he keeps grav gun". The logic was shakey at the foundation and I am glad its gone.

The problem is, people are going to try to use this as precedent. For instance, eldar dark reapers can purchase starshot missiles for their reaper launchers for 8 points per model in the squad. You then upgrade a dark reaper to a dark reaper exarch later in the progression. Does that mean that you no longer have the starshot missiles? If using this precedent, that's what it would mean, but then you just paid 23 points to upgrade to an exarch for basically no benefit, so it obviously wasn't the author's intent.

One could argue, however, that it isn't a precedent for when you upgrade every single member of the squad to have said weapons, and that in such a case, the upgraded member would get to keep said weapons. Maybe it's just a precedent that you can't cherry pick an upgraded member of a squad to get further upgraded to a special squad member++. In either case, without further explanation, I fear this ruling will cause more arguments than it resolved.