Farsight Enclaves Codex an Editing Nightmare?

Farsight Enclaves

Games Workshop latest Codex Supplement for Warhammer 40K – Farsight Enclaves – is out today. The more people pour over the (e)book, the more it becomes clear that the supplement suffers from a particular bad case of unclear rules and bad editing.

I sure make my share of mistakes writing on pinsofwar.com, likely far more than you’ll ever see in any GW supplement (than again I don’t have an editor).

Still, there’re some puzzling things in the book. Three examples…


#1 – Divergent Destiny

Divergent Destiny

As was pointed out to me on Facebook, the Divergent Destiny rule actually contains a double negative.

A Farsight Enclaves army cannot not include Aun’Va or Commander Shadowsun.

Thus, rules-as-written, you must include both?


#2 – Farsight’s Command Team

Farsight's Commander Team

Not so much a mistake, but surely one of the most confused rules ever published.

If you use this rule, it replaces Farsight’s regular bodyguard with a choice made from special characters from the list you see. This list in turn includes Commander Farsight and does not take up a FoC-slot.

  • If this Command Team, which includes Farsight, is taken in place of Farsight’s bodyguard, can you field two Farsights?
  • If this Command Team, which includes Farsight, is taken in place of Farsight and his bodyguard, does Farsight no longer take up a FoC-slot?

Surely they could’ve made that clearer? No?


#3 – Commander Bravestorm

Commander Bravestorm

Apparently a copy-&-paste error that exists only in some versions of the Codex Supplement (ePub) but not in others.

The (likely) correct version, I believe, has Commander Bravestorm wearing an Iridium XV8 Battlesuit. There is, however, clearly “Riptide-Version” of him around.

Prepare to be confused.


Thoughts?

Overall, this Codex Supplement is currently a big mess. I’d probably recommend to hold your purchase a few more days. Hopefully GW will fix these things. The iPad Version will likely be updated with errata. I am not sure if that works the same way for the ePub and Kindle-Versions.

On the upside, the hardcover version of the Farsight Enclaves Supplement in 3 months time will hopefully be flawlessly edited by the time it goes into print.

Games Workshop is crowd-sourcing their editorial work it seem ;)

Z.

Zweischneid

Zweischneid

I am Zweischneid. Wargame Addict. Hopeless painter and founder of Pins of War. I hope you enjoyed this article. Don't forget to share your favourite miniature pictures and wargaming videos at www.pinsofwar.net.
Zweischneid
GW's Latest Teaser Has Bretonnian Minis In It - Still Wood Elves Tough! http://t.co/EKQo1UaIta #wfb #youtube #teaser - 3 days ago
  • J

    Since when has GW even used editors? Put down several Black Library books because of lack of editing.

    • 715

      They hired some for Ward that’s why he’s been decent since Necrons

    • wibbling

      Speaking of editing, are you implying we should put down the books or that you did? In which case, you need a subject in your post.

  • Timberwolf

    Come on, that “You can take two Farsights” problem is intentional misinterpretation of the rule.

    If you take a Farsight Enclave Army, You MAY choose not to use the standard commander bodyguard team, but may choose the Commander Team that, and I quote “consists of up to seven other Battlesuits chosen from ‘The Eight’”. The eighth battlesuit in ‘The Eight’ is Farsight himself.

    You can take him as part of the Commander Team, but here’s the kicker: That’s your Farsight.

    So even if you choose Farsight as your HQ, and then – by whatever knee-jerk, glue-sniffing way of thinking, decide to believe that you now have somehow stumbled across a magical cache of clones of O’shovah, thus allowing you to field him twice… he’s still a Unique Independent Character. And as far as I know, it is explicitly stated in the BRB that you cannot take multiple instances of the same Unique character in your army.

    Someone with pretty poor reading comprehension belched this little nugget into the Web, and everybody jumped on the bandwagon.

    I mean – heck, I’m no native English Speaker, and when I first saw the discussions about that part of the rules I was just asking myself what the guy who came up with that was thinking at the time.

    The other two big errors, Shadowsun and Au’va basically being compulsory HQ choices for a Farsight Enclaves Army, and Bravestorm being unsure on which suit to wear, are down to very very poor editing.

    • http://pinsofwar.net/ Zweischneid

      Of course noone would take two Farsights.

      It is a poorly worded rule, and by no means as clear-cut as you claim it is, which is evidence by the widespread discussion of this rule.

      There is no indication that “The Eight” is, or must be, Farsight. You just pick 7 out of a selection of 8 when you make the Commander Team. One of these 8 is Farsight, so he clearly can be a part (!) of the Commander Team (which takes up no FoC choice).

      On the other hand, it says the Commander Team is taken instead (!) of Farsight’s Bodyguard, which is an addition to Farsight himself (who does take up a HQ-slot).

      So, by the phrasing of the rules, Farsight crops up in two places in ways that contradict each other.

      Yes, there was a bit of hyperbole in “can I take 2 Farsights” to illustrate this logical paradox. I apologize if not everyone gets that.

      It remains that the rule is internally contradicting, and thus as much a case of bad editing as the Divergent Destiny rule.

      • Timberwolf

        ** “Of course noone would take two Farsights.” **

        You put too much faith in humanity.

        ** “Yes, there was a bit of hyperbole in “can I take 2 Farsights” to illustrate this logical paradox. I apologize if not everyone gets that.” **

        What paradox? Whoever would even consider this “paradox” clearly hasn’t read the BRB.

        Yes, the rule is poorly worded. But just a small application of common sense is enough to clarify it, and frankly, I don’t see the point of the whole discussion. You put it quite nicely:

        “There is no indication that “The Eight” is, or must be, Farsight. You just pick 7 out of a selection of 8 when you make the Commander Team. One of these 8 is Farsight, so he clearly can be a part (!) of the Commander Team (which takes up no FoC choice).”

        But then…

        “On the other hand, it says the Commander Team is taken instead (!) of Farsight’s Bodyguard, which is an addition to Farsight himself (who does take up a HQ-slot).”

        There’s your solution. Right there. You need Farsight to take Farsight’s Commander Team, that consists of Farsight and seven other commanders (hence ‘The Eight’).

        ** “It remains that the rule is internally contradicting” **
        You can take Farsight as part of a certain unit that you’re only allowed to take if you choose Farsight as your HQ choice. Convoluted, yes. Contradicting? I don’t think so.

        I always thought that Farsight is listed among the others to clarify who exactly makes up ‘The Eight’- if they left him out, and gave us a unit called “The Eight” with seven team members, there would be endless speculation about who #8 would be. Maybe something exclusively for another supplement? Or Apocalpyse? You know how fanbois are….

        Maybe I’m just reading it differently because I’m no native speaker and something kind of gets lost in translation, but the rule itself, though being worded a little weird, still is pretty clear once you think about it.

        (in my opinion, that is)

        • http://pinsofwar.net/ Zweischneid

          I am certain your interpretation is more or less the intention behind this rule.

          But that is not how it’s worded. As written, it’s internally contradicting.

          Application of Common Sense will solve it, just as it will tell you that you’re not supposed to take Shadowsun, rather than Shadowsun being obligatory. Common Sense is a precious thing, and I haven’t seen a RAI vs. RAW issue in the last 20 years that couldn’t have been solved with Common Sense.

          But I believe it is you that’s putting too much faith into (40K) humanity, if you think Common Sense will get you very far on these kind of issues.

          As written, you take Farsight (FoC-slot) in order to take the Commander Team (not a FoC-slot) of which Farsight may be a part as well.

          That is a logical error. Common Sense will solve it. But it’s an editing error that clearly belongs in an article about editing errors (which are ALL solvable with Common Sense).

  • anon

    Double negative sentences ALWAYS stay negative in english.
    I don’t know who wrote the codex, but #2 looks awfully like ward’s/cruddace’s school of bad rule writing…

    • http://pinsofwar.net/ Zweischneid

      Actually, it looks like Kelly. He does, after all, hold the longest FAQ-record in 40K with the atrocious rules-writing in the Space Wolves Codex. I think it’s up to some 9 or 10 pages now, longer than all FAQ for all Cruddace books taken together.

      That said, I believe it is written by Mat Ward, who seems to be hovering in the middle as far as clear writing goes. Not as bad as Kelly. Not quite as good as Cruddace. At least judging by FAQ-length.

    • wibbling

      Actually that’s an error. In English, use of two negatives negates the prior. I’m not not tired would imply you are, for example.

      It’s an exceptionally badly written rule. What’s wrong with ‘cannot include’.

      When you actually start to write it out and understand the intent, it’s not as easy as people would think.