In case nobody noticed (since they don’t seem to have advertised it), GW has updated the Warhammer 8th FAQs.
This is magnificent news. Not that I’ve looked to closely at the updated FAQs, mind you, but it indicates an approach to FAQs that’s pretty revolutionary for Games Workshop. I don’t think anyone wants to see the FAQs change weekly, mind, but I can’t think of anyone* who doesn’t want to see them be updated when they need updating.
(Because I’m primarily concerned with Skaven), one thing the update did, however, was remove an FAQ: the “Q: Does Strength in Numbers apply to Steadfast rolls? A: Yes.” (I’m paraphrasing, here, because my print out of 1.0 is at home and 1.1 removed it.)
This will cause a little heartburn because it doesn’t exactly mean “No.” The second item in the errata is:
Page 33 – Strength in Numbers
Change the second sentence of the first paragraph to “Units with the Strength in Numbers special rule add their current rank bonus to their Leadership value for any Leadership test.”
That Steadfast test is a Leadership test. The rulebook says, “Take the Leadership test on your unmodified Leadership.” The army book says, “Sure, but always add your rank bonus to your Leadership.” Armybook > rulebook, and all that.
I’m also pretty sure that, when the rulebook says, “unmodified,” it’s specifically in the context of modifying your Leadership by the combat resolution value. Otherwise, things like the Standard of Discipline aren’t applicable, either: “We’ve got a magical standard that makes us braver but, because there are more of us than you, we don’t get to use it.”
It certainly doesn’t feel right: the entire point of Strength in Numbers is to represent individual Skaven being extremely cowardly… but quite brave when there are heaps of them. It also makes Slaves, a unit the army’s supposed to rely on, that I’m already fairly frustrated with, wholly useless: Steadfast on a 2.
Anyway, I don’t think it’s crazy to think SiN doesn’t apply. The FAQ was there: now it’s not. One must assume that was intentional. In earlier editions of the game, it kinda-sorta didn’t apply.
Fortunately, it looks like most of the other guys who play Fantasy agree with me that it probably does apply.
I did want to take a moment to mention all the goofy accessories that came out with the new edition. I’m a complete sucker for stuff like this; I really am.
I kind of wish I weren’t, though: I’m pretty unimpressed with the Warhammer 8th tchotchkes.
The Engineer’s ranging set is unneccessary. Why use a not-particularly-rigid folding ruler when you could use a measuring tape that’s just as flexible, measures farther and takes up less space? This thing would be less of a disappointment if it didn’t bend so much. The calipers are neat… but equally unnecessary.
The dice are interesting looking, but have a weird weight to them. Of all of the accessories, these are the least bad. I’m going to use them as casting/dispelling pool dice, since I’m unlikely to accidentally pick them up and roll them for something else. I think
The templates are… very cool looking, but impractical. I’m not talking about some asshat arguing that the flames touching bases count, but rather that you can’t see through all that detail. That makes it harder to count bases. The flame template isn’t too bad, the large blast template isn’t great, and the small blast template is nearly unusable.
Kind of disappointing.
* I did come across a blog post (that I can’t seem to dig up again or I’d link to it) last week about how that GW had to release the FAQs along with 8th was a terrible thing (as opposed to simply updating all 15 armies with new books at the same time). Such a position is, in my opinion, preposterous.