Thursday, November 18, 2010

Consult the Book of Armaments!

GW has finally revised the FAQ on the Big Rule Book once again. After speculation as to why the FAQ section for 40k was down, I must say I'm rather disappointed. While I do appreciate the answering of the more valid questions (defining turn, transports moving flat-out), I was appalled to see some things defined and questioned answered that made me sick to my stomach. Clarifying that an I.C. and a unit they've attached to is worth 2 kill points, and saying that opponents must set up in the same manner in the opposite board edge in Pitched Battle and Spearhead is not only common sense, it says it right in the rule book! These questions aren't valid, as it is spelled out right in the frikin' book.

I was also not to impressed by the fact this was the only FAQ released. 8th edition for Warhammer Fantasy came with brand new FAQ rulings for each an every army almost immediately as there were massive game changes to major mechanics to the core game. Well having played from 4th to 5th in 40k... I can attest to the fact that the core of the game has changed rather dramatically here as well, but we only get rulings for the Big Book, and not every army. Why do my Templar continue to have several unanswered questions (For example: Does Helbrecht's Iron Halo count as being from the list in Relics & Artifacts?) and other armies out there suffering from old rules in new editions (Chaos Dreadnoughts and their crazed rule with the new LoS for walkers).

In all I was excited to think maybe 40k would finally get that bump in the right direction, but even their new BRB FAQ says "No, we won't errata anything, it's just easier to just wait till the new codex is released." Well that's nice GW, but you mean to tell me we have to wait the years it takes you to release a new codex before we get an answer, only then have to wait even further for the FAQ on that codex to hit so we get all new ones answered.

I don't buy this. Perhaps GW should really consider doing more work than taking the easy route. Sorry for the rant, but while there is some good to this FAQ, it think it is vastly out shined by the crap GW seems to be just to darned lazy to fix.


  1. The points they made in this FAQ were well needed. All the these things people would argue at ardboys. Now they have nothing to stand on because they said so.
    It is also nice to see that the scout phase has been labeled as a movement phase.
    As for specific faqs, most of the new armies already have them. Most of the old ones can figure it out and most of those problems are actually not that big of a deal.

    If you ever go to an ard boys and see the random $hit that people try to pull, you will understand this faq.

  2. I'm not saying some questions weren't needed, and of course I understand the merit of a lot of this FAQ.

    To be honest, I'm more upset that they refuse to update the FAQ's for the armies out there when they did that exact thing for fantasy. It's just annoying to have real questions not be answered to me.

  3. I do not remember exactly so I could be wrong but didn't that FAQs for fantasy come after there BRB came out?

  4. not long after the brb came out. Like 3-5 months, but not a real long time after the fantasy brb came out.