Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

[Avaris]

Depends on platform; they do for iOS, not so much for the others (as far as I know up to SM supplements). It could change with the new release.

And then there is the issue of having to pay monthly to make proper use of the physical copies you have. While the app isn't a bad idea, it being both paid content AND a subscription model is definitively less than ideal and not exactly a solution for all casuals.

Have we had any details on pricing structure for it yet? I expect you're right that it will be subscription model with paid content extra, but price point will be key.

The best thing they could do would be free basic app, featuring all the codexes from 8th with errata incorporated, to encourage take up, then have paid content as the new codexes come out.

[LansXero]

The precedent is the AoS army builder, which is subscription (although pretty cheap). But then, AoS warscrolls are free already so that bit is different.

Knowing GW though, I'm expecting that there wont be app codex purchases, only physical book / digital book purchases with an added 'free' code. In essence, negating any saving that could've come with the app, while tying the army builder part to the subscription fee on top of it.

[Renegade Paladin]

Well, if that's what they do they should expect no one to pay for the app and just keep using Battlescribe.

[Turalisj]

Anything we have right now is just speculation. We know that the app is planned to launch same day as 9e (in two weeks) and that's about all.


Honestly, at this point I just come into the thread to see how Lans and Cheese are claiming everything is dead in the game and we're all doomed.

[Cheesegear]

Honestly, at this point I just come into the thread to see how Lans and Cheese are claiming everything is dead in the game and we're all doomed.

Objection!
Astartes, Craftworlds and potentially AdMech aren't dead.

Additionally, we're not all doomed.
GW will potentially probably fix it maybe!

At this stage, IMO:
Core Rules are good. However,
- I worry that the core rules, being so expansive, will make intro-games and starting games, harder, and thus, the hobby itself, will be harder to get into. If you've been playing 8th Ed. the entire time, you're fine.
- I worry that non-Astartes competitive players from 8th Ed., are likely to quit, due to what 'isn't dead' (see above).
- Crusade is b0rked. Playing with 'Your Dudes' isn't going to be fun - for your opponent, that is.
- Missions are incredibly lop-sided in favour of the player who goes first.
- Not enough viable Secondaries.
- Terrain customization boils down to being exactly the same as creating Successor Chapters. Yeah, there's a whole bunch of options. But if there's only two good options, what's the point of having so many? (Also see; Viable Secondary Objectives)

From the Core Rules, you can absolutely make a good game.
GW, didn't.
Indomitus isn't worth buying, unless you want the models (specifically, the Necron ones, if you can convince someone to pay you 'half' for the Space Marines...Laugh at them...It's a very lop-sided box, models-wise).

[LeSwordfish]

At this stage, IMO:
Core Rules are good. However,
THE END IS NIGH! THE END IS NIGH! REPENT, YE SINNERS, FOR THE END IS HERE! THE END IS NIGH! A STREAM OF FIRE ISSUED AND CAME OUT FROM BEFORE HIM; A THOUSAND THOUSANDS SERVED HIM, AND TEN THOUSAND TIMES TEN THOUSAND STOOD BEFORE HIM; THE COURT SAT IN JUDGEMENT, AND THE LEAKED BOOKS WERE OPENED! REPENT, YE SINNERS! FOR THE GAME SHALL END.

10char10char

[Destro_Yersul]

Swordfish? You have slain me. I am dead, I have died of laughing.

[Fable Wright]

- Crusade is b0rked. Playing with 'Your Dudes' isn't going to be fun - for your opponent, that is.

Eh. Each buff is +20-40 points to a unit. 'Tis a bit lopsided what with the options being symmetrical, but it has potential for a spot of fun—and it's a Power Level game, so it wasn't balanced to begin with.

- Missions are incredibly lop-sided in favour of the player who goes first.
- Not enough viable Secondaries.

This is true. Good thing it's real easy to patch that, eh? Though I'd be much happier with no viable Secondaries to make the game a bit more interesting. If you just can't get 15 points from each secondary, it'd actually require a strategic investment to deal with those. Doubly so if the only viable ones were board control options, and the kill objectives were a strategic decision that can't hit 15 points, but do directly align with the goal of tabling the opponent.

- Terrain customization boils down to being exactly the same as creating Successor Chapters. Yeah, there's a whole bunch of options. But if there's only two good options, what's the point of having so many? (Also see; Viable Secondary Objectives)

Honestly, there's more than two good options. Breachable makes or breaks movement (which wins games). The rest makes terrain work the way you think it should without allowing True Line of Sight and modeling for advantage. Exposed Position so that standing on top of a crate doesn't make you hard to hit. Unstable to prevent people from parking tanks where they don't belong. You're complaining about Light/Heavy/Defensible, but they do allow for a barbed wire field to have some meaning—allowing a 5+ overwatch, positions to avoid in deployment because they benefit enemy melee, and places to go when you can't quite get the terrain you want, but are better than nothing.

There's a reason that XCOM: Enemy Unknown had Half Cover and Full Cover, despite Full Cover being the only 'safe' cover. The bad option led to risks, which allowed risk/rewards more binary than being in the open.

[LansXero]

This is true. Good thing it's real easy to patch that, eh?

Since when is Day 1 DLC a mark of good design?

Honestly, there's more than two good options. Breachable makes or breaks movement (which wins games).

Unless you fly like most things should, ignore LoS or can DS / 'strategic reserve' your way in.

The rest makes terrain work the way you think it should without allowing True Line of Sight and modeling for advantage.

Obscuring can go on a crater with a 5" tall flag. As for 'modeling for advantage', the new definition for Hull includes cannons, sponsons, spikes and any other part of the model when measuring distance.

You're complaining about Light/Heavy/Defensible, but they do allow for a barbed wire field to have some meaning—allowing a 5+ overwatch, positions to avoid in deployment because they benefit enemy melee, and places to go when you can't quite get the terrain you want, but are better than nothing.

Heavy and Light are not like half cover / full cover. One is vs shooting, the other is vs melee so might as well not exist during the shooting phase and viceversa. Of course, currently nobody knows if it only works during the turn you got charged (would be something) or the opposite (would be worthless). 5+ OW when now OW is an stratagem might as well not exist.

[Fable Wright]

Since when is Day 1 DLC a mark of good design?

If I was looking for good rule design, why would I be playing Warhammer? Every other game prides itself on a robust, dynamic rule system, from Infinity to Malifaux. You play Warhammer for the same reason you play a Bethesda Game Studios game, and because there will always be Warhammer players in every store. Expecting anything more is like expecting a new Fallout game without bugs and a good main story.

Unless you fly like most things should, ignore LoS or can DS / 'strategic reserve' your way in.

Neat. Let me know when Hormagaunts, Termagaunts, Fire Warriors, Boyz, Genestealers, Genestealer Cultists, etc. can ignore LoS, fly, and so on. Deep Strike can get you to a different part of the board but has its own counterplay.

Obscuring can go on a crater with a 5" tall flag. As for 'modeling for advantage', the new definition for Hull includes cannons, sponsons, spikes and any other part of the model when measuring distance.

I have no objections to a crater with a 5" flag counting as Obscuring, since it's an abstraction and not everyone just has terrain lying around. Hull cannons/sponsons/spikes/etc. isn't really an issue, since rotating them during gameplay counts as movement for the model, and sight is bi-directional. Why should I care if it's a spike that peeks around the corner rather than a normal hand?

Heavy and Light are not like half cover / full cover. One is vs shooting, the other is vs melee so might as well not exist during the shooting phase and viceversa. Of course, currently nobody knows if it only works during the turn you got charged (would be something) or the opposite (would be worthless). 5+ OW when now OW is an stratagem might as well not exist.

No, Obscuring/Light are like half/full cover was the point I was trying to make.

5+ OW can definitely matter, if you ask Farsight Enclave players or possibly a revitalized IG horde. One charge can make the difference, and twice the hits can do a lot.

[Don Qui Ho Tep]

10char10char

That's a bit unfair, I think. It seems that people have been pretty entrenched in their views and there's a lot of crosstalk happening. I think Avaris and Cheesegear are both making honest attempts to engage with other peoples' points of view, and have each displayed good debate etiquette in admitting when they have changed their opinion or misspoken.

For my own part, I've been out of the loop for the past month due to driving cross country and settling in for a long quarantine, so I haven't been able to keep up with the drip-feed of news. It seems to me that's a very effective way to get a lot of hype for a game, but fosters a great deal of speculation rather than data-based discussion.

Now the core rules have leaked and some people have read the leaks and some have only read the core rules and some have only read the reviews and some have done all three and some have only read the discussions on forums. For my own part, I'm very overwhelmed by all the bull**** that you needed to play in 8th edition and frankly am a little burned out on 40k. I'm much more interested in games that have slower-paced development cycle. These drip-releases are killing me - drip rules, drip models, and here's the kicker, all during a global pandemic where very few people are actually playing games. Really bad look for GW.

Assuming that US leadership can get its act together in the next few months (a big if), hopefully an FAQ or similar will have evened out some of the rough spots of 9th edition. At that point, if there's a community for it, I'll try it out. In the meantime, I'm really not eager for 9th. Now that I'm staying with my brother we can play whatever edition we want, whenever we want, and we've got a thing for dead games - 90s Necromunda, 8th edition Fantasy, Wargods of Aegyptus/Olympus. Let's go ahead and add 8th edition 40k to the mix. At least I know they're not making any more books for it. Bleh.

[Blackhawk748]

Neat. Let me know when Hormagaunts, Termagaunts, Fire Warriors, Boyz, Genestealers, Genestealer Cultists, etc. can ignore LoS, fly, and so on. Deep Strike can get you to a different part of the board but has its own counterplay.

The only one of them that's still relevant after the changes to melee are Gaunts and Fre Warriors, and Tyranids got his so hard with other changes we can pretty safely ignore them too.

Seriously, the new Melee Engagement rules straight up kill Melee hordes.

[Fable Wright]

The only one of them that's still relevant after the changes to melee are Gaunts and Fre Warriors, and Tyranids got his so hard with other changes we can pretty safely ignore them too.

Seriously, the new Melee Engagement rules straight up kill Melee hordes.

They will probably be unusable until aggressive points drops make them usable again under the new paradigm.

I might actually finish painting my genestealers and 'gaunts by the time they're good again!

[LansXero]

If I was looking for good rule design, why would I be playing Warhammer?

.

Ah so we both think is bad, you just dont mind. Ok then.

To reinforce this: Objectives get defined as 40mm objects. New objective set in the launch lineup comes with 50mm bases :D.

Neat. Let me know when Hormagaunts, Termagaunts, Fire Warriors, Boyz, Genestealers, Genestealer Cultists, etc. can ignore LoS, fly, and so on. Deep Strike can get you to a different part of the board but has its own counterplay.

Boyz can DaJump, Genestealers have Ambush, Gaunts have that bury thingie no? but then Tyranids are already hurting.

Hull cannons/sponsons/spikes/etc. isn't really an issue, since rotating them during gameplay counts as movement for the model, and sight is bi-directional. Why should I care if it's a spike that peeks around the corner rather than a normal hand?

Because spikes on certain models can add several inches of range. The 'its still moving' thing would matter if vehicles now weren't inmune to move-and-shoot penalties, but they are so it no longer matters.

No, Obscuring/Light are like half/full cover was the point I was trying to make.

5+ OW can definitely matter, if you ask Farsight Enclave players or possibly a revitalized IG horde. One charge can make the difference, and twice the hits can do a lot.

Thats just because Tau get to keep 8th Ed. OW. Anybody else would need the enemy to charge the right unit in the right piece of terrain at the right moment where CPs are on hand. Not likely.

[Fable Wright]

Ah so we both think is bad, you just dont mind. Ok then.

My goal is to have something moderately playable and fun to have good interactions with friends. I'm not expecting an ideal game. By a long shot. The core rules being fine and the fact that the weak points can/will be patched for a better experience without redefining the game is better than my low bar expectation for a return to 7th edition.

Boyz can DaJump, Genestealers have Ambush, Gaunts have that bury thingie no? but then Tyranids are already hurting.

Yes, they can deep strike, but deep strike is nowhere near as good as Fly or ignoring LOS. Deep strike can be screened out by e.g. Biovores with Spore Mines spawning things in the opponent's deployment zone, and good spacing in yours. Or just 2-man drone squads. Or so many things. Deep Strike is definitely not guaranteed to get around Obscuring like Fly/indirect fire.

Because spikes on certain models can add several inches of range. The 'its still moving' thing would matter if vehicles now weren't inmune to move-and-shoot penalties, but they are so it no longer matters.

You're going to have to explain this one to me. All spikes must be in the deployment zone at the game start. Those spikes can also be shot at as easily as the rest of the model. When rotating, things like Grinding Advance on the leman russ can be penalized, and it's a distinct possibility that you'll need to Advance in order to do a 180 degree turn with the spike, and have the rest of your movement penalized by it. You're effectively getting a longer/shorter base, true, but... I'm not sure what the benefit of that is.

[Don Qui Ho Tep]

To reinforce this: Objectives get defined as 40mm objects. New objective set in the launch lineup comes with 50mm bases :D

So this at the end of the day is what is the most frustrating for me - it's just sloppy. I don't have strong opinions about the 9th rules, and because I'll probably never be good enough to play in a competitive league I'll stick to casual games with friends where we can play by our gentlemen's agreements and similar without feeling bad about it. But to provide 40 mm objectives with 50 mm bases is just - it's really frustrating. It's like printing the Chaos Codex 2.0 without adjusting the Obliterator point values. Printing massive hardcover rulebooks with Day 1 FAQs. Releasing Psychic Awakening months before they launch a new edition. These kinds of mess ups are not okay at the level that the company is operating. New rules! New models! Buy new books with new rules!

Can we just slow things down for a bit? I know that's been said before in terms of game design, but I'm saying this rules-agnostic - just in terms of copy-editing alone GW has been caught with their pants down too many times.

[Cheesegear]

[He is one of Legion.]

I ain't even mad.
Well played.
I'm gonna use that in one of my DND games.

This is true. Good thing it's real easy to patch that, eh?

It is.
Unfortunately, we're not at that stage, yet. We're at the hype stage.
We're at the pre-ordering Indomitus stage.
We're at the stage where we're deciding whether or not to throw down cash on a new army, for a new edition.

Now that the Core Rules and Game Reviews are out (no leaks, they're out).
You're gonna need to buy a rulebook or starter set in two weeks.
You're gonna need to buy Chapter Approved, too.

Should you spend money now? Should you pre-order? (Should you pre-order anything, ever!?)

We're not at the patching stage.

Though I'd be much happier with no viable Secondaries to make the game a bit more interesting. If you just can't get 15 points from each secondary, it'd actually require a strategic investment to deal with those.

I agree.

Honestly, there's more than two good options.

Hyperbole.
My point is/was, that in most cases, when GW presents you with a lot of choices, but you can only take so many (e.g; Warlord Traits, Psychic Powers, Relics, Successor Tactis...Terrain), what's good (or at least playable), and what...Isn't. Is very quickly determined, often to the point where all other choices are bad, because the good choice, is so much gooder than the other choices you can make.

Usually when this happens, GW throws everything to the wall, and the community decides what sticks, and what doesn't...And after a certain point, what hasn't stuck...Is still taking page space that could be used for anything else...Perhaps even something good.

Hull cannons/sponsons/spikes/etc. isn't really an issue, since rotating them during gameplay counts as movement for the model, and sight is bi-directional. Why should I care if it's a spike that peeks around the corner rather than a normal hand?

You should care,

Spoiler: Because This is What it Looks like

Show

I guess the question is, "How abstract is too abstract?"

I think Avaris and Cheesegear are both making honest attempts to engage with other peoples' points of view, and have each displayed good debate etiquette in admitting when they have changed their opinion or misspoken.

That's...Refreshing to hear. Thank you.

Now the core rules have leaked and some people have read the leaks and some have only read the core rules and some have only read the reviews and some have done all three and some have only read the discussions on forums.

My issue is that only certain people have even made reviews in the first place, because they're the only people who are allowed to make reviews.
The real magic comes in reading reviews, of those reviews.

For my own part, I'm very overwhelmed by all the bull**** that you needed to play in 8th edition and frankly am a little burned out on 40k.

The problem is that nothing from 8th Ed. has gone away. 9th Ed. isn't, and wont, solve that.

Yes, maybe there's an App for everything. But it depends on the pricing structure for it, and it looks like Paid+Sub, which always rubs me the wrong way.

[Avaris]

Hyperbole.
My point is/was, that in most cases, when GW presents you with a lot of choices, but you can only take so many (e.g; Warlord Traits, Psychic Powers, Relics, Successor Tactis...Terrain), what's good (or at least playable), and what...Isn't. Is very quickly determined, often to the point where all other choices are bad, because the good choice, is so much gooder than the other choices you can make.

Usually when this happens, GW throws everything to the wall, and the community decides what sticks, and what doesn't...And after a certain point, what hasn't stuck...Is still taking page space that could be used for anything else...Perhaps even something good.

I think this speaks to what I see as one of the biggest missed opportunities/issues I see in 40k. I’ve said before that I increasingly favour power level over points: wouldn’t use it in tournaments, but for most games it’s enough, as there are other limiting factors on what players can use (the models they own: tournament players are less constrained by this, given they are willing to buy what they need). This also applies to terrain: while there is a ‘best’ terrain, people will use what they’ve got and apply the appropriate rules.

For relics, warlord traits and army traits though, everyone has free reign. So everything has to be compared against everything else. So a lot of options just won’t get used. Ironically, the one place that 8th removed points from fully is the one place it should have been kept!

What I would like to see for relics and warlord traits is some sort of tier system: you can either select one tier 1 relic, two teir 2 or three teir 3. I might try houseruling it at some point: a lot of reviewers (such as Goonhammer) score relics and warlord traits from A to F or similar, so could easily take those as a guideline: tier 1 A, tier 2 B to C, tier 3 D to F.

Army traits is more difficult, as you can only pick 2. Theoretically it’s gated behind model availability and colour scheme, but generally I don’t think that’s a good restraint: everyone should be free to use the rules they want regardless of colour scheme. One of the worst recent decisions is making successor chapters worse than first founding by restricting access to relics, even if you want to use the founding chapter’s chapter trait. If you’re using custom traits that’s ok, it’s a trade off, but the Inheritors of the Primarch trait should give access to relics as if you were the founding chapter.

[Don Qui Ho Tep]

My issue is that only certain people have even made reviews in the first place, because they're the only people who are allowed to make reviews.
The real magic comes in reading reviews, of those reviews.

This is fair. And to the earlier point that these are pre-patch reviews, and we really have no guarantee that certain things will or will not be subject to an FAQ in a reasonable amount of time, I'm content waiting a few months and seeing how peoples' game experience sits then. Plus, and I've said this before, the fact that much of the world is shut down and unable to play games in person for some time, I don't know how much feedback or criticism will be born out of actual gameplay.

The problem is that nothing from 8th Ed. has gone away. 9th Ed. isn't, and wont, solve that.

Yes, maybe there's an App for everything. But it depends on the pricing structure for it, and it looks like Paid+Sub, which always rubs me the wrong way.

True - but doesn't the new edition mean the FAQs reset? E.g., can I cast Warptime on my Warp Talons the turn they deepstrike, even though the 8th edition Chaos Codex FAQ says I can't? Or are the FAQs meant to be pasted directly into the codex itself, and therefor stay relevant in 9th? What I mean to say is, there would be a difference between the FAQ explaining how inconsistent text within the codex is resolved in 8th edition, versus the FAQ explaining how inconsistent text within the codex is resolved. I was hoping it was the former but if I've got to keep consulting all the 8th edition FAQs and the Day 1 9th ed FAQs - oh boy, seems like a lot of effort, eh? Maybe I'll just play Warcry...

For relics, warlord traits and army traits though, everyone has free reign. So everything has to be compared against everything else. So a lot of options just won’t get used. Ironically, the one place that 8th removed points from fully is the one place it should have been kept!

What I would like to see for relics and warlord traits is some sort of tier system: you can either select one tier 1 relic, two teir 2 or three teir 3. I might try houseruling it at some point: a lot of reviewers (such as Goonhammer) score relics and warlord traits from A to F or similar, so could easily take those as a guideline: tier 1 A, tier 2 B to C, tier 3 D to F.

I see what you mean about relics being the only power level-equivalent present in Matched Play. I think your solution would work very well, as would assigning a point value to special equipment. I think one of the draws to wargaming is force customization. But I suppose there's a reason 8th edition sold as well as it did, so maybe I'm in the minority. Then again, I know for a lot of people 40k and/or AoS are the only wargames they play, and they probably want a very specific experience.

One game that I thought did a great job in making both very powerful and very weak units viable was Dystopian Wars. There was a Force Org of sorts, but you didn't just take the weak tiny tanks because you had to - they were the only ones that could deal with infantry blocks, and the large ponderous tanks had a hard time hitting them cuz they were so dang tiny. Yes, point costs helped to make a balanced army, but the gameplay itself rewarded using different builds within the same faction. It was as complicated as you wanted it to be - plenty of alliances and command abilities you could unlock by making specific builds, but it was all optional.

But then Spartan Games went out of business. So shows you what I know.

[LansXero]

I'm content waiting a few months and seeing how peoples' game experience sits then.

Which is a reasonable sentiment, but also one thats more common than it should. Indexes meant everyone was waiting anxiously to try their stuff, now its just 'wait for your turn on the buff/nerf roulette'. Launches should be exciting, not worrying.

True - but doesn't the new edition mean the FAQs reset?

No. Errata replaces previous text. FAQs are just clarifications on printed rules; as the rules are still valid, their interpretation stands until overrules by more recent content.

But I suppose there's a reason 8th edition sold as well as it did, so maybe I'm in the minority. Then again, I know for a lot of people 40k and/or AoS are the only wargames they play, and they probably want a very specific experience.

This is a 9th edition change. Before, you could pick relics during deployment so you could tailor them to the enemy you were facing. Taking Relic of Lost Cadia vs Chaos, the anti-mortal wounds one for knights vs 1k sons, etc. Between that and letting YOU decide the amount of CPs by investing in detachments, you could include a wide variety of them without being stuck with just the best ones. Now, with CPs being much more scarce and HAVING TO WRITE THEM IN THE ROSTER BEFOREHAND its down to only the best all the time every time.

But then Spartan Games went out of business. So shows you what I know.

Spartan commited suicide by kickstarter though, quality of the game is merely a secondary factor.

[Renegade Paladin]

You should care,

Spoiler: Because This is What it Looks like

Show

It looks like a 403 error?

[Avaris]

This is a 9th edition change. Before, you could pick relics during deployment so you could tailor them to the enemy you were facing. Taking Relic of Lost Cadia vs Chaos, the anti-mortal wounds one for knights vs 1k sons, etc. Between that and letting YOU decide the amount of CPs by investing in detachments, you could include a wide variety of them without being stuck with just the best ones. Now, with CPs being much more scarce and HAVING TO WRITE THEM IN THE ROSTER BEFOREHAND its down to only the best all the time every time.

The rules change limits things even more certainly, though arguably 90% of relics weren't used even under the old rules (looking at you, special pistols).

On the subject of rules changes, Goonhammer continues to put out really helpful guides to everything that has changed (I really wish GW had just given us a changelog). A couple of notable things:

• Command point reroll is now much more limited. Now specifies the types of rolls that can be rerolled, and you re-roll ALL the dice associated with that roll, if applicable. "Use this Stratagem after you have made a hit roll, a wound roll, a damage roll, a saving throw, an Advance roll, a charge roll, a Psychic test, a Deny the Witch test, or you have rolled the dice to determine the number of attacks made by a weapon. Re-roll that roll, test, or saving throw."
• You can no longer switch between psykers when activating powers: you select a psyker, do all their powers, then move on.

Also an article about Crusade, which makes me keen to try it, obviously.

[Renegade Paladin]

Wait, you have to pay requisition points to have a tank commander? But that's a unit straight out of the codex. I hope they meant Tank Ace.

Anyway, the experience system sounds suspiciously similar to the one in the 4th edition rulebook.

[Forum Explorer]

Wait, you have to pay requisition points to have a tank commander? But that's a unit straight out of the codex. I hope they meant Tank Ace.

Anyway, the experience system sounds suspiciously similar to the one in the 4th edition rulebook.

Going by the other examples they took, they meant Tank Ace.

[LansXero]

The rules change limits things even more certainly, though arguably 90% of relics weren't used even under the old rules (looking at you, special pistols).

Depends a lot on list, faction and time period.

One more for the pile of 'needs a FAQ soon': The new 5" vertical engagement range means that if you DS 9" diagonally (base to base) away from something, and can fit under it, you now need less than 9" (likely 7 or even less) to charge them. Which was FAQd away long time ago in 8th, so unsure if they meant to bring it back.

[Cheesegear]

I don't know how much feedback or criticism will be born out of actual gameplay.

In Australia, only Victoria is locked down because second-wave. (Everywhere else did what they were told, and now we can go outside)
So expect Australians to freak out about 9th Ed. because I'll definitely be playing games and contributing to the fact that Australia has #1 cancer rate in the world.

True - but doesn't the new edition mean the FAQs reset? E.g., can I cast Warptime on my Warp Talons the turn they deepstrike, even though the 8th edition Chaos Codex FAQ says I can't?

No? The Codex FAQs and Errata are extremely unlikely to change. That is, things will be added to it to make it 9th Ed., but they wont be taken away to make it original 8.0.

Or are the FAQs meant to be pasted directly into the codex itself, and therefor stay relevant in 9th?

Something, something...Living Edition. (Oh man, that was lies..."There wont be a 9th Ed. 'cause 8th Ed. is a living edition." Hahahahahahaha)
As above, we're unlikely to see anything in the current Errata/FAQs, get removed. We're likely to only see additions, based on how things interact with new rules.

e.g; If Vehicles don't take penalties to hit when moving, what does Power of the Machine Spirit do?
Errata'ing PotMS, isn't going to suddenly revert Combat Doctrines to their printed book-form.

It looks like a 403 error?

It's a Land Raider Crusader firing it's Twin Assault Cannon, and Hurricanes, through it's antennae, over a rock that's blocking its LoS.
It should be a pretty familiar meme.

[Fable Wright]

It's a Land Raider Crusader firing it's Twin Assault Cannon, and Hurricanes, through it's antennae, over a rock that's blocking its LoS.
It should be a pretty familiar meme.

Good thing that Obscuring means that it doesn't matter how tall your model is, eh?

[LeSwordfish]

It's a Land Raider Crusader firing it's Twin Assault Cannon, and Hurricanes, through it's antennae, over a rock that's blocking its LoS.
It should be a pretty familiar meme.

I guess you had to be there.

[LansXero]

Good thing that Obscuring means that it doesn't matter how tall your model is, eh?

Not exactly. Models inside obscuring terrain can shoot out / be shot but still have to follow true LoS. So yes but no.

[Dragonus45]

It's a Land Raider Crusader firing it's Twin Assault Cannon, and Hurricanes, through it's antennae, over a rock that's blocking its LoS.
It should be a pretty familiar meme.

So I just started getting back into the game right when 9th edition cam out, and I've already had a game where I recently lost an entire squad of sisters because a Sister Superior had the tip of her chain sword poking out through a door I can only agree something real funky is going on with LoS and I'm not sure I entirely like the lack of fixing it in 9th.