Breaking News! Tau FAQ


So while we were preparing for the BAO and goggling at the new Slyvaneth models GW quietly released another Wednesday FAQ. Is it for the greater good? 

You can find the FAQ link here (Facebook)


Not only did the Tau get 7 (!) erratas to their codex they also got a full 10 pages of FAQs answered. Is this a step in the right direction for GW? Maybe we will start to see more erratas as the FAQs get released.


About Petey Pab

Aspiring 40k analyst, tournament reporter and Ultramarines enthusiast, Petey Pab only seeks to gather more knowledge about the game of 40k and share it with as many people as he can in order to unite both hobbyists and gamers. We are, after all, two sides of the same coin.

109 Responses to “Breaking News! Tau FAQ”

  1. Threllen July 13, 2016 9:01 am #

    Most of these make a lot of sense. I think the coordinated firepower errata was what most people thought the rule was meant to be despite those that argued “it makes your buffmander gives buffs to units all the way across the battlefield.”

    Can’t say I’ve ever tried to tank shock a Stormsurge pesonally, but man would that suck to have it straight up die.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 13, 2016 9:06 am #

      Yeah, I agree with 99% of these. Finally, can put that dang Coordinated Firepower debate to bed. Feels good to know we made the right call on that one.

      • Threllen July 13, 2016 9:18 am #

        That’s essentially how the current ITC FAQ rules coordinated firepower, right? So even if the GW FAQs aren’t accepted until they’re published on the website, that one is already covered?

        • Reecius
          Reecius July 13, 2016 9:20 am #

          Yes. We will have to change a few though to reflect GW. I actually agree with almost every ruling in the Tau FAQ, the only one I don’t agree with is Stormsurges with anchors down dying to a Tank Shock, haha.

          • Threllen July 13, 2016 9:31 am

            Yeah… that doesn’t make much sense to me. A giant, anchored super-heavy just gets insta-killed if any size tank tries to move through it? I guess I get the RAW perspective that anything that can’t move out of the way of a tank shock usually dies, but you’d think they would have written an exception into the Stormsurge’s anchor rule so that wouldn’t happen.

          • Lysere July 13, 2016 10:18 am

            Well normal vehicles can’t tank shock a Gargantuan creature, only super heavies can. So unless you let a baneblade sneak up on you then you’re fine.

            Just watch out for Creed.

          • Lysere July 13, 2016 10:28 am

            Now that I said that I can’t seem to find it. Maybe that will be something to consider if it’s not the case. (Because why would a giant monster like that care that a rhino wants to play tag)

          • Andrew G July 13, 2016 10:37 am

            Does that mean you agree with the piranha ones?! 😀

          • tag8833 July 13, 2016 11:12 am


            The restriction on Tank Shocking GC’s is in the ITC FAQ not the rule book.

          • Threllen July 13, 2016 11:46 am

            Per the BRB, you can tank shock anyone. The only restriction is that if a super heavy does a thunderblitz attack, it is treated as a simple ram/tank shock when done to another GMC or another superheavy. But there’s nothing in the BRB preventing any vehicle that can normally tank shock from doing it to a super heavy.

          • Sanchezsam2 July 13, 2016 2:24 pm

            Yea it really should be d3 wounds.

          • Sanchezsam2 July 13, 2016 2:26 pm

            To be fair is any front av12 or less try’s to tank shock the Stormsurge just death or glory and blow it the feck up.

          • Blight1 July 13, 2016 4:46 pm

            But it totally makes sense if you have an ork battlewagon ramping off of it at full force. Forge that narrative all over a giant robot suit.

          • Reecius
            Reecius July 13, 2016 5:32 pm


          • Lord Krungharr July 13, 2016 5:41 pm

            But it’s like trying to dodge one of those kiddie electric cars if your shoes are tied. Certain doom awaits!

          • Kevin Lantz July 13, 2016 6:24 pm

            surely it only dies if it doesnt’ death or glory succesfully?

  2. Reecius
    Reecius July 13, 2016 9:34 am #

    Although, the change to Ion Cannons is pretty savage….Burst Cannons all day, every day.

    • Leonix July 13, 2016 9:40 am #

      Wait, what changes to Ion Cannons?

      • Leonix July 13, 2016 9:47 am #

        Huh, I never noticed that the Rip’s nova Ion was Ord…

        • Reecius
          Reecius July 13, 2016 10:13 am #

          Brutal, right?

          • Leonix July 13, 2016 10:25 am

            Actually I don’t think its that bad, if your going fully nova shot then most likely a target that your 2nd weapons wont be of much use against, or out of range of them… The bigger issue will be if Reroll 1s won’t help with overheating blast weapons in the final draft.

          • Reecius
            Reecius July 13, 2016 10:26 am

            That’s actually a good point, Leonix. Way to see the glass half full. It’s still a great weapon for intercepting.

          • Leonix July 13, 2016 10:54 am

            But if Reroll 1s are nerfed to not help with Blast Gets Hot, then it will be Burst all the way.

    • Cephalobeard July 13, 2016 9:42 am #

      I saw this as making Burst Cannon ECPA Riptide Wings super slippery, as well. If they have ECPA, they don’t need to stay within 6″ of one another for the rerolls, so they can go wherever they want.

      • Leonix July 13, 2016 10:02 am #

        The bigger issue is that change to Blast gets hot, and reroll1s change… I hope it doesn’t stick to final.

    • Heldericht July 13, 2016 10:19 am #

      Yep, no reason to ever run it really. If you’re taking a single tide, you can just give it Earth Cast Pilot Array to reroll 1s anyway and just run HBC without any fear.

  3. Petey Pab
    Petey Pab July 13, 2016 9:39 am #

    I think this was a really good FAQ. They cleared up a lot of things, and even the stormsurge ruling, though not agreeable to some, is a clarification which in the grand scheme of things is all we really wanted.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 13, 2016 10:13 am #

      Fair enough.

      • Petey Pab
        Petey Pab July 13, 2016 10:45 am #

        Hey Reece, I just realized in the ITC you can not tank shock a SH/GC unless you are also a Superheavy. So even if this rule were used in conjunction with the ITC FAQ you can not kill a stormsurge with a rhino. Huzzah!

        • tag8833 July 13, 2016 11:15 am #

          In the FAQ there is also a provision for Tank Shocking a Stormsurge without being a Super Heavy.

          It is one of several inconsistencies and poorly worded items I’ve been trying to get addressed for some time.

          The Biggest one is that Super Heavy Walkers and Skimmers can go to upper levels, but Gargantuan creatures can’t, so you can make a Stompa immune from a Charging Wraith Knight if you deploy it on the 2nd floor.

          • Petey Pab
            Petey Pab July 13, 2016 11:20 am

            I’m sorry Tag in the ITC FAQ or the GW FAQ?

          • Threllen July 13, 2016 11:51 am

            ITC FAQ. GW doesn’t have any tank shock restrictions. If you can tank shock, you can tank shock anyone. ITC FAQ restricts it so you can only tankshock a SH if you are also a SH. So that at least alleviates some of the issues for Stormsurges when using ITC rules. No little rhino or trukk is going to tank shock you off the map.

          • tag8833 July 13, 2016 1:15 pm

            From the ITC FAQ Page 6:

            GCs/FGCs cannot be tank shocked by a model that isn’t a super-heavy vehicle or GC/FGC itself. Stop any other type of model making a tank shock move 1” away from the GC/FGC.

            Same FAQ page 15:
            If a Stormsurge that has deployed its Stabilising Anchors is Tank Shocked, it must Death or Glory in response. If it fails to stop the Tank Shocking vehicle, it suffers D3 wounds and the tank is left in base to base contact with the Stormsurge at the point it made contact with it.

            I don’t think they were worried about baneblades when they wrote the 2nd one. I remember when they talked about it on the podcast, and Reece specifically mentioned Rhinos.

            The thing with super-heavies and levels is Page #8:
            For ease of tournament play, at this event, Gargantuan Creatures, Super-heavy Vehicles, and other Vehicles that do not have the Walker or Skimmer type may not move/be deployed onto an upper level of a ruin.

            Since a Stompa or an IK is a Walker they can go to upper levels. An Obelisk is a skimmer so same deal. But my Barbed Heirodule can’t climb, nor can a Wraithknight or Stormsurge.

            I’ve adopted the Super-Heavies and levels thing as a pet. Until that one gets fixed I include it in basically every poll, and every rules question I submit. I brought it up before, during, and after LVO 2015. My partner and I lost the finals of the team tourney at wargamescon 2015 because of it. I make a point of every game that I play where I’m running a Stompa and my opponent has a GC to let them know I think the wording on that FAQ item is a mistake, and they can go up levels. At my GT 66.7% of people said fix it so that GC can go up. 26.6% said fix it so that SHW and SHS can’t go to upper levels, and only 6.7% said they think the wording is correct.

        • Sanchezsam2 July 13, 2016 2:33 pm #

          To be fair it’s nearly impossible to kill a Stormsurge with an av11 vehicle.
          The Stormsurge would just death or glory the rhino into oblivion.

          • Lord Krungharr July 13, 2016 5:43 pm

            A chaos rhino with destroyer blades would take that challenge !

          • Threllen July 14, 2016 5:28 am

            A chaos rhino with destroyer blades would take that challenge to the grave a long time before it got anywhere near the Stormsurge.

          • westrider July 14, 2016 3:55 pm

            Even a Pulse Blastcannon has a significant chance of failing to stop an undamaged Rhino in a DoG Attack. If it’s got the Pulse Driver Cannon, it’s less than 50/50. Even worse if it’s got Extra Armour for whatever reason.

  4. Vercingatorix July 13, 2016 9:41 am #

    I’m not sure how I liked the two FAQs right next to each other.
    Putting them together makes the logic something like
    “Treat supporting units as if they’re being charged for all purposes including line of sight except for when banshee mask charges them then they’re not the counted as the unit being charged”

    • Threllen July 13, 2016 9:56 am #

      I think the wording is wonky which is kind of confusing but the overall ruling makes sense. The unit being charged can’t overwatch if its within 6″ of a dirge caster, if it’s gone to ground, if the unit has a banshee mask, etc. But none of that should stop a perfectly healthy unit next to them from lending their firepower.

      Of course if that second unit was within range of the dirge caster or went to ground (etc) then they wouldn’t be able to fire other.

      • Vercingatorix July 13, 2016 10:00 am #

        One of the facebook comments said that banshee mask specifies “no unit may overwatch against this unit” or something to that affect, basically being charged doesn’t even affect it.

        • Threllen July 13, 2016 10:16 am #

          Yeah, now that I look at the Banshee’s Mask rule again that one is pretty iffy. I don’t play Tau so any encounters with me getting charged by Banshees don’t involve supporting fire. The exact wording of the masks is just that nothing can overwatch them. Thematically I could go either way about still being able to use Supporting Fire or not, but definitely RAW it doesn’t make much sense to be able to use it.

          • Leonix July 13, 2016 10:27 am

            I think the idea is that supporting fire let them overwatch when they normally can’t.

          • Threllen July 13, 2016 10:50 am

            Yes and no. It allows your buddies to shoot overwatch even though usually only the unit being charged can shoot overwatch. But the “helper” units still need to follow all the normal overwatch restrictions (ie – in range, in LoS, can’t be gone to ground, can’t have already fired overwatch once, etc). In the case of Banshees, it’s not that the units using the Supporting Fire have any reason they can’t fire overwatch, it’s just that the unit they are shooting at (Banshees) can never be Overwatched. It’s kind of a tough one to call.

          • Leonix July 13, 2016 10:52 am

            Yeah I agree with you, I’m just trying to figure out GW’s angle… If there is one.

        • Happy_Inquisitor July 13, 2016 11:56 am #

          Yes it seems a little odd – but lets be honest it will come up so rarely that we have probably already expended more thinking time on the issue than it is worth 🙂

          I would just roll with it and take it as a micro-nerf to Eldar which will hardly ever matter.

          • Grizzyzz July 14, 2016 2:57 am

            Exactly, who uses banshees that this will ever be an issue!

            I say that in sadness because I think they are a neat aspect host. And now I am reminded about Scorpions, and more saddened =(

  5. wighti July 13, 2016 9:55 am #

    The Piranha formation will spawn drones every turn again. Interesting to see some tournaments where people really try to take advantage of the free drones.

    • Grizzyzz July 13, 2016 10:11 am #

      Keep in mind I believe their previous FAQ of “a unit may not reenter reserves the same turn they arrived” would still take effect here.

      At least that is my interpretation.

      • Reecius
        Reecius July 13, 2016 10:14 am #

        Yeah, the Rule Book FAQ states nothing may go into and out of reserves in the same turn. The only change here is that the Piranhas come back “Full Strength” which I personally agree with.

        • Heldericht July 13, 2016 10:18 am #

          Glad to see that, I think this is a good compromise. Going on and off every turn was way too absurd. But the whole point of the formation was to come back in full strength and throw expendable units at the opponent, so the spirit of this formation is being retained.

          • Reecius
            Reecius July 13, 2016 10:27 am


          • vercingatorix July 13, 2016 10:47 am

            I killed 30 drones with one tzeentch nova. Easily my favorite moment of the past couple months of playing.

        • FTGT Evan July 13, 2016 12:08 pm #

          This seems like a pretty clear instance (one of few) of Codex>BRB

          • Sanchezsam2 July 13, 2016 2:48 pm

            Except this isn’t a codex or brb it’s a faq.
            And this formation may enter reserves every turn is NOT the same as this unit may enter and leave reserves the same turn.

          • FTGT Evan July 13, 2016 3:28 pm

            And the subsequent faq referring to the formation, specifically says it CAN

          • Sanchezsam2 July 13, 2016 3:38 pm

            No it doesn’t it says they can enter reserves every turn
            This is NOT the same thing as they can enter and leave reserves the same turn.
            Unless you plan on adding a bunch of words to the faq it doesn’t say.

          • Dakkath July 13, 2016 6:55 pm

            “Q: Does the Rearm and Refuel rule [snipped] allow the unit to enter ongoing reserves every turn (as long as it is near the table edge as specified)?

            A: Yes”

            Seems pretty darn cut and dry to me. No adding words necessary. Specific trumps general, so while generally units cannot come in from reserves and then leave the board again the same turn, specifically the firestream can.

          • Sanchezsam2 July 13, 2016 8:58 pm

            It doesn’t say anywhere specifically they can enter and leave reserves the same turn. It only says they can enter reserves every turn. There is no problem with that statement it’s completely true however that still doesn’t give piranhas permission to enter and leave reserves the same turn. There is a direct faq stating you can’t do this and nothing in this faq contradicts that.

          • Dakkath July 13, 2016 11:11 pm

            I think the part you’re looking for is where it says “Yes” and not “Yes, unless that squad of piranhas came on to the board from reserves this turn.”

            They’ve made similar clarifications on other faqs so far, so the fact that this one is so succinct is telling.

          • AbusePuppy July 14, 2016 12:44 am

            What would “every” even mean in that instance, otherwise?

          • Sanchezsam2 July 14, 2016 4:28 am

            Every means what it always meant before piranha faq came out. The piranha can enter reserves every turn. However this is still not permission to break any rule in 40k. 40k is a permissive ruleset just because this faq doesn’t say you cant go into reserves thd same turn as you leave doesn’t mean you can.
            And nearly every other rule like this that provides an exception to breaking a brb rule specifically tells you when you can override a rule. This one doesn’t.
            So making statements like it doesn’t say I can’t do it has never worked before.

          • AbusePuppy July 14, 2016 6:13 am

            Actually many such rules don’t contain any such mention- for example, Drop Pods don’t actually have the ability to Deep Strike even though they are required to do so.

            There is such a thing as implicit permission, however, which I would argue is in effect here; since the faq said they can do something, it is implied by that allowance to be able to violate a normal rule that would prevent them from doing so.

          • Sanchezsam2 July 14, 2016 1:06 pm

            Drop pods are not required to deepstrike they ate given express permission in the rule of drop pod assault.
            This is nothing like the above example because drop pods do have a special rule that says it must deepstrike.

            This is more like people claiming they can assault after deepstriking even when the rule for that unit doesn’t give it express permission. Which comes up all the freakin time because people are trying to manipulate the riules to say something it never stated.

          • abusepuppy July 14, 2016 3:56 pm

            >Drop pods are not required to deepstrike they ate given express permission in the rule of drop pod assault.

            Yes they are, and no they aren’t. They do not possess the Deep Strike rule nor does the Drop Pod Assault rule grant it to them, though it says they must start the game in Deep Strike reserve.

            The difference between this and other “doesn’t say I can’t so I can” is that the permission is implicit as part of the rule. Saying that they can do something “every turn” ONLY has any meaning if they are allowed to violate the rule that would normally prevent them from doing something every turn.

          • Sanchezsam2 July 14, 2016 4:22 pm

            It’s not implicit because it doesn’t say it.
            A mawloc can mishap and enter ongoing reserves EVERY turn
            However it still doesn’t have permission to enter and leave reserves the same turn.
            The problem is people are taking one action and implying they can take two actions from that statement which doesn’t confer both actions.
            I realize that’s what you want it to do but it still doesn’t allow it. No matter how much you keep trying to say GW is inferring it they don’t say you can.
            Just like assault from ongoing reserves
            The formation must say it for you to assault from reserves.

        • Loofanator July 14, 2016 4:54 am #

          So happy folks won’t be trying to agrue that “full strength” means ” half dead” anymore!

          • AbusePuppy July 14, 2016 6:17 am

            “Squad Tacitus report day 257: all others are dead, long since killed by enemy action. However, as my Combi-Melta remains unfired, we are still at full strength. The Emperor protects.”

  6. Grizzyzz July 13, 2016 10:00 am #

    Completely disagree with Tank shocking a stormsurge. This will be debated, and is inconsistent with their original BRB FAQ as seen here…

    That is my only complaint though. Super happy overall =D

    • Threllen July 13, 2016 10:13 am #

      I’m not a fan of letting Stormsurges get insta-killed, but I do think it is a bit different than the situation they were alluding to in the BRB FAQ. In that situation they’re referring to a GMC that can move but must move in a slightly “non-textbook” manner to get out of the way. They don’t want you to cheese an opponent to death by saying “oh you moved but you had to take the long way around which is illegal.” It’s slightly different when the model isn’t allowed to move period.

      • Grizzyzz July 13, 2016 10:22 am #

        Fair and well put. We will just have to wait and see!

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 13, 2016 10:15 am #

      I agree, Surges shouldn’t die to a Rhino, IMO. Otherwise, great FAQ.

      • Leonix July 13, 2016 10:29 am #

        I dunno, if you let a Rhino get within charge distance, and you Anchor I think you kinda deserve it.

        • Heldericht July 13, 2016 8:28 pm #

          That’s not the point at all.

          Of course if this ruling stands no one will drop anchors near a Rhino or something. The point is, the SS should be allowed to death or glory or take d3 wounds. Simply removing them is an absurd ruling that doesnt make sense.

          • Leonix July 14, 2016 9:17 am

            You still get your death or glory, it’s fine. This is a unique rules interaction.

      • Petey Pab
        Petey Pab July 13, 2016 10:37 am #

        I’m with Leon on this one. If you are anchored, let a rhino get that close, and fail to death or glory you deserve to get run over.

        That being said, it is a super silly thing to imagine. But I love rhinos… They can do anything.

        If this FAQ get’s voted through I want to model rhino horns on all my rhinos, and stick stormsurge bits on them.

      • tag8833 July 13, 2016 11:17 am #

        Why is it wrong for Stormsurges to have a weakness?

        Gorkanaughts cost a similar amount and have several massive weaknesses based on the rules. Why do we change the rules to save Stormsurges, but not Gorkanaughts?

      • AngryPanda July 13, 2016 11:46 am #

        I’m with the above comments here. If you have a Rhino in 12 and anchor the thing you just had it coming. Superheavies are already way better than normal tanks but those aren’t supposed to be made of cardboard.

      • Sanchezsam2 July 13, 2016 2:50 pm #

        To be fair a rhino or any av12 or less tank model will almost never kill a Stormsurge who can just death or glory the tank to death.

        • tag8833 July 13, 2016 9:42 pm #

          You need to stun, immobilize or explode it to stop it with Death or Glory. That is 3 out of 6 results on the vehicle damage table assuming you successfully glance it.

  7. X078 July 13, 2016 10:09 am #

    All good. Though they had to rewrite the Coordinated firepower rule to change it. It is now clear again although changed but clear. Void shields and markerlights also as it should be.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 13, 2016 10:15 am #

      Yup, glad we’re all settled on that one, it really upset some people.

      • Dakkath July 13, 2016 6:37 pm #

        Too bad we have to wait 3 months before adopting the faqs

        • Drachnyen July 13, 2016 7:37 pm #

          I through official erratas are applied automatically.

          It’s for the application of the draft FAQ we will have to wait 3 months.

        • PrimoFederalist July 14, 2016 4:16 am #

          Too bad *erratas* are live. Now.

  8. Grizzyzz July 13, 2016 10:10 am #

    But if they stick with it.. I guess just don’t anchor near any free rhinos… the ultimate humiliation…

  9. Cephalobeard July 13, 2016 10:10 am #

    Also, unpopular opinion, but I think Stormsurges getting tank shocked is great, and fluffy.

    They’re a huge mech, with no arms or visible jetpacks. If they got charged and knocked over, they’d probably lose their pilots and be wrecked.

    Is it good, rules wise? Maybe not. Does it make sense, fluff wise? I think so.

    • Grizzyzz July 13, 2016 10:13 am #

      Fluff wise I would argue it still does not make sense. GMC are towering above the battlefield. A small rhino would basically run into a surge and it would not even notice.

      Now… if a baneblade would shock… that could do some damage! (fluff wise and probably thunderblitz wise lol)

    • Heldericht July 13, 2016 10:16 am #

      Fluffwise, the Rhino will get crumpled trying to ram into a stormsurge’s legs when it is anchored solidly. It is huge and towers over it.

      Justifying rules with fluff is always a bad idea.

      • Cephalobeard July 13, 2016 10:23 am #

        I’m not justifying it at all, I even said it probably isn’t good rule wise.

        I just like it. Sometimes people have bad taste, maybe I have bad taste. but I kind of like this.

        • Leonix July 13, 2016 10:37 am #

          The simple solution is just don’t anchor if something that can shock is within threat range, I see nothing wrong with having this rule as it gives surges something to fear.

          Don’t anchor, kill the tank, then anchor next turn.

          • AngryPanda July 13, 2016 11:47 am

            Exactly this. Also not every tank that shocks is a Rhino. That’s just used right now to make it the most ridiculous scene possible. If we argue fluffwise I can bloody well see a Landraider run it over.

          • Sanchezsam2 July 13, 2016 3:22 pm

            You really don’t even need to worry about a rhino or any av12 or less tank using tank shock against a Stormsurge.
            It’s almost impossible for an av12 or less tank to survive a death or glory attack without getting at least getting crew stunned and thus stopping the vehicle.

            First the Stormsurge automatically hits the front armour per death or glory with no cover save allowed.
            Using a str10 ap1 smash or str d atk, the rhino is automatically glanced on a 1 and you reroll that 1 for a pen result instead. Now you roll on the pen chart with +2 to the table to get a stun or better result and stop the tank shock.
            It’s nearly impossible for a rhino to kill a Stormsurge this way.

          • Sanchezsam2 July 13, 2016 3:29 pm

            I’m sorry I forgot to add that the pulse drive cannon means your atk is str d ap1 which also means you roll can roll d3 hull or 3 with a 6 via ITC rules and can just outright blow up the rhino as well. As well as stopping it via a stun result on the pen table.

            Reliably I would say the only tanks with a chance to kill a Stormsurge via tank shock need to be av13 or more.

          • Ben Raven July 13, 2016 4:30 pm

            Forget the Rhinos. How about using Wave Serpents? The Serpent shield with reduce the hit to a glancing hit in most cases and then good-bye Stormsurge.

          • westrider July 14, 2016 4:01 pm

            @Sanchezsam2: Smash is AP2, not AP1. That leaves slightly less than a 50/50 chance of stopping a Rhino. Worse if it’s got Extra Armour.

          • Sanchezsam2 July 15, 2016 4:30 am

            Pulse driver is str d ap1
            So not only is the there a chance to stun, immobilise or explode 4 out of 6.
            But you also have a chance to outright kill the rhino with either a 6 result in the str d table or a 3 result on the d3 hull roll.

      • punchymango July 13, 2016 10:35 pm #

        Well, let’s be real, we all know rhinos are made of corrugated cardboard. You could disable one with rocks thrown in anger.

  10. Ishagu July 13, 2016 12:29 pm #

    Going to run an Invisible fast Tank with boosted AV right at the Stormsurges lol

  11. C-Stock July 13, 2016 3:15 pm #

    Vehicles suck compared to GMC. Can’t we throw them a bone here and let the tank shock FAQ stand?

  12. Dakkath July 13, 2016 6:51 pm #

    While everyone is worried about rhinos breaking their stormsurges ankles, I’m over here enjoying confirmations on multiple holophotons, firestream piranhas actually coming back full strength, the eight not being allowed to cheat the sig system numbers, multitrackers definitely work on interceptor and overwatch, farsight riptides getting access to the ECPA again, markerlights being unaffected by void shields, coordinated firepower clarifications, and Sun sharks getting their starting pulse bomb.

    I find it interesting there was no clarification on whether a single model could take signature systems or they count the same as relics.

    • AbusePuppy July 14, 2016 12:47 am #

      No need; there’s nothing unclear about the wiring at all on multiple Signature Systems.

      I am really happy about the Firestream Wing being useful again, though.

      • Dakkath July 14, 2016 1:06 am #

        Oh I definitely agree it’s clear wording, but you know how some players like to whine that someone else has better toys.

        • Threllen July 15, 2016 5:15 am #

          People just don’t like to read. They see the BRB FAQ that says “only one relic per model unless the rule explicitly says multiple are allowed.” And they conveniently forget to check if the couple words apply to the Tau codex.

          • Threllen July 15, 2016 5:18 am

            last couple words*

  13. Frozocrone July 14, 2016 2:01 am #

    Stormsurge’s be like:

  14. Grizzyzz July 14, 2016 5:05 am #

    I feel like this needs to be said. I think @Reecius, you mispoke in your podcast, referring to the Ion cannon “nerf”

    The only ordnance weapon is the Nova profile. The Ion cannon itself is not by default an “ordnance” weapon.

    I have seen so many people lash out about this FAQ ruling and I think it is out of misunderstanding of the profiles.

    Heavy burst is still the best Wing weapon (IMO) but the Ion can still use its 3shot or overcharge profile in the wing as normal as well.

    • Reecius
      Reecius July 14, 2016 5:30 am #

      I actually did mention that the normal shots aren’t Ordnance, but thank you for the clarification all the same.

      • Grizzyzz July 14, 2016 8:40 am #

        Roger! Then my mistake =D

        • Reecius
          Reecius July 14, 2016 9:55 am #

          All good =) It was definitely worth noting.

Leave a Reply