Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Simply put the hardcopy of the Necron Codex states that the gauss cannon has a 24" range. HOWEVER, it has been brought to my attention recently the iCodex gives it 36". Which one should we Cron players go by?

(Frankly, I want 36" just because I miss having the 36" gauss cannon from the Oldcron Codex, but I feel that this is an issue that needs to be settled)

From a technical point of view, the most recent publication takes precedence. In this case, that's the iCodex.

However, I have two personal issues with this. First, but less important, you can't always say which publication is most recent because GW is apparently allergic to putting publication dates on any of their books. Second, and this is crucial, not everyone has access to the iCodex because it requires you to purchase an iPad. GW isn't satisfies with their own monopoly, but insists that you must also feed Apple's monopoly too.

This brings up another point. If I don't own an Ipad how do i show my opponent? My documentation shows its only 24 and I doubt people will take what you say at face value when your printed codex says different.

If my opponent produces the iDex i'll let him use those rules in a heartbeat.
Still GW really should put this in the FAQ and make it available to everyone.

Maybe its a new trend where Ibooks will have better stats/advantages. I can see the FAQ now, "Follow the rules for weapons as indicated in the codex you own."

Or better yet, an ad in the back of new codex. "Do you want more range from XYZ? Buy the Ibook and get an extra 12 inches! Only 24.99 plus IPAD!"

did you by chance mistake it for the heavy gauss cannon?

copper.talos wrote:did you by chance mistake it for the heavy gauss cannon?

Afraid not. Picture of my own digital codex;



EDIT: The Heavy Gauss Cannon is the next entry in the list, but you can only view 2 at a time on it.

It is probably a perk to buy the iDex.

Ya know, I have seen a lot of shopped photos on the internet, and I can safely say that that picture is clearly shopped. All trolling aside, we now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

Of course the more obvious typo explanation can't be the reason.

Of course not. GW does not make typos. Not even in the 5th ed BRB, where Wave Serpents had a FA of 2. GW is perfect, and never wrong.

He's correct. The stats in the Glossary have the Gauss Cannon as 36" range. However in the summary at the end of the army list it is listed as 24".

airmang wrote:He's correct. The stats in the Glossary have the Gauss Cannon as 36" range. However in the summary at the end of the army list it is listed as 24".

Ha, yeah. I never even knew there was a summary, I only ever used the glossary to check stuff.

Typo it is.

Ah well, suppose that ends this thread.

I guess if the summary at the back of the BRB says 36 then its 36 now...

Would be nice if they included info like that in their FaQ

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:I guess if the summary at the back of the BRB says 36 then its 36 now...

Would be nice if they included info like that in their FaQ

If airmang is correct, the summary at the back of the iCodex says 24" NOT 36".

Happyjew wrote:

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:I guess if the summary at the back of the BRB says 36 then its 36 now...

Would be nice if they included info like that in their FaQ

If airmang is correct, the summary at the back of the iCodex says 24" NOT 36".

That is correct, the summary at the back of the digital codex says 24", it's only the glossary that says 36.

Happyjew wrote:Of course not. GW does not make typos. Not even in the 5th ed BRB, where Wave Serpents had a FA of 2. GW is perfect, and never wrong.

Exactly. And this is just one reason why RAW is always equivalent to RAI.

nohman wrote:

airmang wrote:He's correct. The stats in the Glossary have the Gauss Cannon as 36" range. However in the summary at the end of the army list it is listed as 24".

Ha, yeah. I never even knew there was a summary, I only ever used the glossary to check stuff.
Typo it is.

Everyone prepare yourselves for a rules lawyer to claim that the "rules" section takes precedence over the summary.

I'm not a rules lawyer (my degree is in Anonymous Interpretations) but I do recall something (a WD article maybe? perhaps an interview?) where a games designer said that where the rule is fully stated (the glossary in idex i guess?) which in my codices is the wargear section takes precedence over other places where it is referenced.

Grugknuckle wrote:Everyone prepare yourselves for a rules lawyer to claim that the "rules" section takes precedence over the summary.

GW have themselves said on multiple occasions that summaries are prone to errors, and where a summary differs from the rules section it's generally safe to assume that the summary is wrong.


In this case, though, since the summary agrees with the printed codex, we can safely take it as the exception to the norm, I think.

the range, strength and number of shots nerf seemed like horrid judgement on the part of gw so I guess they are throwing us a bone back.. There was really no excuse for doing this when you look at what they did with psybacks and the like the old gauss cannon was perfectly good.

tgf wrote:the range, strength and number of shots nerf seemed like horrid judgement on the part of gw so I guess they are throwing us a bone back.. There was really no excuse for doing this when you look at what they did with psybacks and the like the old gauss cannon was perfectly good.

Yeah, for me it was like drop the strength to 5 and number of shots to 2 to balance out the Improvement to AP3? Okay. Drop the range from 36" to 24"? WTF?!?!?! where's the justification for that?!