FAQ Questions 2017

[Arkiham]

1 hour ago, Squirrelmaster said:

It's slightly disappointing how many "questions" are "I don't like AoS please change it", but oh well…

It's precisely why I can't fault gw for not doing it publicly. 

 

Though I Think they should, but perhaps sneak onto forums and then gather to see if they are a good resource to ask on and then ask on dedicated aos forums, rayhee than a troll heaven of facebook

[Ratty_McRatface]

It really is too bad that so many of the over 400 comments are not rules clarification questions but comments of rules they want changed to be more like 40k or just asking for more models.  

It's pretty clear that people feel the need to make those comments (most of them know that its not the right place they just can't help themselves) so it might have been a good idea to make that a separate topic to help vent off those ideas first weather they want them or not.  It would at least keep things more clean.

[DynamicCalories]

The larger community surrounding GW is for want of a better word... awful. There's no way of weeing those comments out. People want the moon on a stick.

[Ben Johnson]

Hi all,

Don't worry, we will read every comment on the Facebook post and filter out the appropriate ones to add to the future FAQ list. 

 

[Sleboda]

20 hours ago, Ben Johnson said:

Hi all,

Don't worry, we will read every comment on the Facebook post and filter out the appropriate ones to add to the future FAQ list. 

 

Hey Ben,

Just wanted to publicly comment once again on how much "The New GW" is impressive.

Years and years ago, when I was a GW employee, we had our own forums.  In addition to being an employee, I was a moderator (GW_JadeGriffon_Joe was my name, if memory serves). I thoroughly enjoyed being part of that community, but management at the time pretty much hated having it.  They were only very reluctantly engaging with their consumers this way and as soon as they found an excuse to drop the forum, they did.  The internal message from our IT folks was that it was partially that the forum was seen as a needless expense, but more importantly that the studio could not stand seeing criticism.  This was reinforced by conversations with certain designers/writers at the time who as much as told me that they knew what they were doing and didn't need some kid in a basement to complain to them about how they were doing it.  It was a hostile, arrogant, dismissive atmosphere.  Yet, I loved the forum.  It went away.

 

Now, years later, here you are as a representative of that same group of folks at GW (particulars aside, you are that) jumping on this forum and essentially saying "It's ok guys, they can fuss if they like.  We'll take it all in and make something positive of it."

 

What a huge - and welcome - difference.

 

So, thank you to you personally and to GW as a business for being on your current path and being so involved.  This is a company I could once again be proud to say I worked for were that the case, which was, at the end all those years ago, not as strongly true.

 

Nice job.

[Gotrek]

14 hours ago, Azamar said:

 

When did they decide the Phoenix's ability was free? Is that official? 

I'd love that to be true as I often use one, but I assumed it needed reinforcement points to come back after the ring of death faq. 

I think it was on the facebook page shortly after the FAQ. 

[someone2040]

So interesting this came up in the latest 40k FAQ (Wow, they got 2 FAQ's in a month, while we've got what... 2 in 2 years... sad days:(). They ruled damage halving is done on each individual attack instead of as a pool of damage. So in particular, if you had 4 attacks damage 1 that each make it through armour saves, each individual attack is halved to 0.5, then each is rounded back up to 1 for 4 damage. Current AoS, you of course end up with 2 damage.

That means there is now inconsistencies between the games (For no real good reason).  So it makes me wonder whether in our next FAQ if they'll do a 180 on how wounds are halved in AoS (Honestly, I don't think it should've ever been the way it is now, but eh, that's just me).

[RuneBrush]

7 hours ago, someone2040 said:

So interesting this came up in the latest 40k FAQ (Wow, they got 2 FAQ's in a month, while we've got what... 2 in 2 years... sad days:(). They ruled damage halving is done on each individual attack instead of as a pool of damage. So in particular, if you had 4 attacks damage 1 that each make it through armour saves, each individual attack is halved to 0.5, then each is rounded back up to 1 for 4 damage. Current AoS, you of course end up with 2 damage.

That means there is now inconsistencies between the games (For no real good reason).  So it makes me wonder whether in our next FAQ if they'll do a 180 on how wounds are halved in AoS (Honestly, I don't think it should've ever been the way it is now, but eh, that's just me).

40k has a different damage mechanic in comparison to AoS.  Halving the damage and then applying it on a per-model basis doesn't make sense because a single attack can only hit a single target.  40k is inherently a more complicated game from that perspective - whereas AoS has been designed to have a simpler mechanic with LOTS of attacks being thrown out (I've found you roll a lot less dice in 40k).

I can't see them FAQ'ing to remove the damage pool mechanic.