8th Ed. FAQ changes to steadfast

[Bish]

Hi

Just reading the FAQ's and read that you now have to out rank ALL enemy units. WOW. Not just one but ALL.

So this brings in to play monsters and knights more. Just have a big old bus in combat then hit with CO's, carno and/or stegs

Samuel

 

[strewart]

Hmm does that really change much? A monster has no ranks at all to add, so you still need to outrank with your big unit, which is exactly as before. It does mean a combo charge with saurus at the front and skinks in the flank is much more powerful now.

 

[Bish]

No it use to be if you out ranked any unit in combat you were steadfast, so if i had a unit with 1000 ranks and one with none, a unit with 1 rank would be steadfast.

But it has all changed now.

Samuel

 

[hellbreaker]

No it use to be if you out ranked any unit in combat you were steadfast, so if i had a unit with 1000 ranks and one with none, a unit with 1 rank would be steadfast.

But it has all changed now.

Samuel

Which basically tips a multi-charge further to your favour rather than your opponent's.

 

[n810]

Hmmm didn't realize i was doing it wrong before, I had been playing like this all along.

 

[forlustria]

which FAQ is this in. Im looking in the FAQ section on the GW site at the main rulebook one. Cant see anything that says you have to out rank all units. The FAQ is version 1.5 . More to the point Ive always played that you need more ranks than the largest unit u r fighting.

 

[Lord Cedric]

The Steadfast FAQ in question is on page 2 of the BRB FAQ 1.5, left-side column, under Page 60 header. Interestingly enough, this ISN"T a change from the previous FAQ of 1.4, which I have as well and the wording is the same.

- Lord Cedric

 

[forlustria]

sorry had to edit as ive just re read it. understand it now. but found a loop hole.

The FAQ does not call for the last sentence to be removed so it will say. compare the units ranks to all enemy units in combat.If even one enemy unit has an equal for higher numbers of ranks, then the unit must test using its modified ld.

you see the FAQ just makes it clearer. you compare your ranks to all units but still only have to beat the highest. If it were against all ranks added together the last sentace would be removed by the FAQ.

 

[Lord Cedric]

sorry had to edit as ive just re read it. understand it now. but found a loop hole.

The FAQ does not call for the last sentence to be removed so it will say. compare the units ranks to all enemy units in combat.If even one enemy unit has an equal for higher numbers of ranks, then the unit must test using its modified ld.

you see the FAQ just makes it clearer. you compare your ranks to all units but still only have to beat the highest. If it were against all ranks added together the last sentace would be removed by the FAQ.

Right. Steadfast is not meant to add up all enemy ranks and compare to your units. It's a unit by unit basis meaning in order to have steadfast, your unit must have more ranks per enemy unit individually.

What the FAQ did was to clean up any possible discrepency about having your unit only having to beat *any* enemy unit in ranks which is incorrect - with *any* meaning if there were 2 enemy units and one was more ranks than your unit and the other was less ranks thank your unit, as long as your unit was higher than either of them, then you had steadfast.

- Lord Cedric

 

[forlustria]

but to be honest the last sentence says if even one enemy unit has equal or higher then you use the modified leadership. To me it didnt really need clearing up. The rule before the FAQ says if you have more ranks then the highest enemy unit. speaks for itself really



s= skinks z =zombies g= ghouls

zzzzz
zzzzz
sssssg
sssssg
sssssg

skinks are steadfast as they have more ranks then the zombies (highest rank)


how can people not understand the rule before the FAQ is what im saying the Faq is not needed IMO.

Im not sure why someone further up was playing that you have a unit with 3 ranks against a unit with 1000 ranks and a unit with 1 rank. he was steadfast due to beating the 1 rank unit . the rule clearly stated that you had beat the highest.

 

[Lord Cedric]

but to be honest the last sentence says if even one enemy unit has equal or higher then you use the modified leadership. To me it didnt really need clearing up. The rule before the FAQ says if you have more ranks then the highest enemy unit. speaks for itself really



s= skinks z =zombies g= ghouls

zzzzz
zzzzz
sssssg
sssssg
sssssg

skinks are steadfast as they have more ranks then the zombies (highest rank)


how can people not understand the rule before the FAQ is what im saying the Faq is not needed IMO.

Im not sure why someone further up was playing that you have a unit with 3 ranks against a unit with 1000 ranks and a unit with 1 rank. he was steadfast due to beating the 1 rank unit . the rule clearly stated that you had beat the highest.

And right there is the BIG argument on other forums (not so much here it seams) as to the "why" GW had to change it in the first place. Although the FAQ does clear up that paragraph with the word change, other, like yourself, have pointed out that simply reading the entire steadfast ruling should clear that up by itself. From what I have gathered is that there have been some players who might have been confused as one paragraph says one thing while the next says something else.

- Lord Cedric

 

[forlustria]

hope i didnt come across too angry there as i wasnt trying to be. You are right we all interprate the rules differently sometimes

 

[Lord Cedric]

hope i didnt come across too angry there as i wasnt trying to be. You are right we all interprate the rules differently sometimes

Nope! Not at all! hehe. I'm with you in that is how I ( and my fellow club) have followed the rule anyways. Just trying to show the other side of the coin.

- Lord Cedric