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.

Alright went through about 5 different threads on this subject, a couple more off site, and I have reached the conclusion there is no definitive ruling on this? Half argue there is no precedent as with the Ork Painboy FAQ, which was the old codex and now longer is applied as Painboys are IC. They also used Army Builder Digital Codex as a "official"(?) ruling and I read that now even THAT has been changed and I cannot check due to not owning it.

So now as I sit here in front of the computer with a Command Squad ready to be assembled, I am forced to ask.

CAN he somehow be taken with a upgrade?

EDIT: Added poll to feel out general feelings

No, any upgrade that is taken for a Veteran is not available to an Apothecary, as he is an Apothecary, not a Veteran.

Alright thank you.

-Removed by insaniak. Please stick to the topic.-

there is no official answer to give you.

it's a very grey area that continues to be a grey area.

there are no guidelines on HOW upgrades are applied to a unit.

the argument you apply weapon/armour upgrades first then he 'takes' the nethcarium to become an apothecary is just as valid an argument as the taking the nethcarium makes him an apothecary first thus preventing weapon upgrades.

its a large grey area, one that cannot be resolved on an internet forum and it is something you should discuss with your opponent(s) who you regularly game with and any tournament organisers you wish to participate in their tournaments.

expect mixed responses.

 nutty_nutter wrote:
there are no guidelines on HOW upgrades are applied to a unit.

None RaW indeed. But i still stand by Intent (RaI) that the order from top to bottom is kept. Multiple examples if you need them

top to bottom doesn't work either, a friend and I went through a couple of codex's seeing if we could use that as a basis, we came across a few that, with that approach, wouldn't work if applied in such a manner...but ce-la-vie that's somewhat OT

 nutty_nutter wrote:
top to bottom doesn't work either, a friend and I went through a couple of codex's seeing if we could use that as a basis, we came across a few that, with that approach, wouldn't work if applied in such a manner...but ce-la-vie that's somewhat OT

From memory, the only issue is this one and same Command Squad in the SM Codex where it has:
• One Veteran may take one of the following: (...)
• One Veteran may be upgraded to a Company Champion, replacing (...)
• One Veteran may be upgraded to an Apothecary, taking a narthecium.

And nothing stops it from being the same man, as opposed to AM and AS:

- One Battle Sister may take a Simulacrum Imperialis
- One other Battle Sister may take one item from the Special Weapons list.
- One other Battle Sister may take one item from the Special Weapons or Heavy Weapons list.

or

• One Veteran may carry a vox-caster
• One other Veteran may replace his lasgun with a heavy flamer
• Two other Veterans may form a Veteran Weapons Team who must take one item from the Heavy Weapons list.
• Up to two (or three, if no heavy flamer is taken) remaining Veterans that have not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace (...)

Where the highlighted text above is a clear show of intent to me. Why would they have worded it like so if these options could be taken from bottom up?
Also, if you could point out the "counter-examples" you found i'd appreciate it, for further discussion.

 nutty_nutter wrote:
top to bottom doesn't work either, a friend and I went through a couple of codex's seeing if we could use that as a basis, we came across a few that, with that approach, wouldn't work if applied in such a manner...but ce-la-vie that's somewhat OT

Dark Reapers form Codex: Eldar in particular, a top to bottom approach simply doesn't work.

The order doesn't matter, but the end results do. If at the end you look at your list and you have an Apothecary with an upgrade only available to a Veteran then you have an illegal list, no matter if you upgraded the model to an Apothecary before or after taking that upgrade.

Given the fact that the Apothecary is only taken with veterans, it might be safe to assume that to become an Apothecary, one must first become a veteran. To me, this would be something like "all Apothecaries are veterans, but not all veterans are Apothecaries."

Ninjakk,
Doesn't matter if it is a Marine Sargent and the option states Marine, or a Veteran Apothecary while the option simply states Veteran.
If an option names a specific Model, only Models with that name can take said option.

 Ninjakk wrote:
Given the fact that the Apothecary is only taken with veterans, it might be safe to assume that to become an Apothecary, one must first become a veteran. To me, this would be something like "all Apothecaries are veterans, but not all veterans are Apothecaries."

It's utterly safe to assume this, since the initial unit composition is literally "5 Veterans." From there, you may select upgrades for any or all Veterans, one of which is the option to "...take a narthecium" and become an Apothecary. Nothing prevents a Veteran from selecting any other listed upgrade prior to taking that narthecium. Similarly, a Veteran could replace his bolt pistol prior to selecting the Company Champion upgrade, but he could not replace his chainsword since exchanging it for a power weapon and combat shieid is required as part of the Champion upgrade rules.

 grendel083 wrote:

 nutty_nutter wrote:
top to bottom doesn't work either, a friend and I went through a couple of codex's seeing if we could use that as a basis, we came across a few that, with that approach, wouldn't work if applied in such a manner...but ce-la-vie that's somewhat OT

Dark Reapers form Codex: Eldar in particular, a top to bottom approach simply doesn't work.

Errrmmmm explain? I see no issue with top to bottom:

-May include up to seven additional DR
-All Death Reapers in the Unit may take starshot missiles
-Upgrade one Death Reaper to a Dark Reaper Exarch
-The Dark Reaper Exarch may exchange his reaper launcher for one of the following:
(...)
- If the Dark Reaper Exarch has a Reaper Launcher, he may take starshot missiles.
- (May take powers)
-The Unit can take a Wave Serpent as DT.

BlackTalos, the issue is with the point cost. The cost for Starshot is cheaper for the regular Reapers (individually) than it is for the Exarch (by 2 points IIRC).

The other issue is for units that have options added via FAQ/Errata. Does the option get placed at the end of the list, the beginning, or somewhere in the middle?

 Happyjew wrote:
BlackTalos, the issue is with the point cost. The cost for Starshot is cheaper for the regular Reapers (individually) than it is for the Exarch (by 2 points IIRC).

The other issue is for units that have options added via FAQ/Errata. Does the option get placed at the end of the list, the beginning, or somewhere in the middle?

the errata giving SM command squads (or it was DA? it was marine flavor) was intended to be the first one because in the codex they couldn't change a melee weapon for X (the new option was changing the bolter for a chainsword, I think - this was missing in the codex)

 Happyjew wrote:
BlackTalos, the issue is with the point cost. The cost for Starshot is cheaper for the regular Reapers (individually) than it is for the Exarch (by 2 points IIRC).

The other issue is for units that have options added via FAQ/Errata. Does the option get placed at the end of the list, the beginning, or somewhere in the middle?

Well, apart from a rather silly point costing, it would still work:

1) Pay for the Unit
2) Pay for +7 Reapers (you now have 10)
3) Pay for Starshot (10 times)
4) Pay for Exarch
5) Pay for Exarch Starshot

We can both see an issue (paying for Starshot twice), but as per this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/608047.page
It does seem we enforce the 8 per model to everyone. Order makes this even clearer. If all the Orcs in the other thread must pay 1 point, all the Reapers (Inc Exarch) must pay their toll.

No issue with FAQs either, after a quick glance:
"Page 95 – Deathwing Command Squad, Options
Change the second bullet point to:
‘• One Deathwing Terminator in the army may be upgraded to the Deathwing Champion, replacing all of their weapons with the Halberd of Caliban."

or

"Page 72 – Succubus, Options
Change the first option to:
‘• May replace close combat weapon or splinter pistol with an archite glaive."

Creeperman wrote:
Nothing prevents a Veteran from selecting any other listed upgrade prior to taking that narthecium. Similarly, a Veteran could replace his bolt pistol prior to selecting the Company Champion upgrade, but he could not replace his chainsword since exchanging it for a power weapon and combat shieid is required as part of the Champion upgrade rules.

Nothing prevents me from adding or taking 12 away from every diceroll you make; that does not mean I can.

If you look in other parts of the codex (bearing in mind it is the same codex, so the author's intent can be seen IMHO), the Sternguard Vets (Elites) have similar options;

Space Marine Codex, page 170 (physical) wrote:
Options
- Any model can replace his boltgun with one of the following
Two veterans may take one item from either the Special Weapons or Heavy Weapons list.
[...]
- The Veteran Sergeant may take Melta Bombs

Does this mean I can give Veteran Sergeants the upgrades a normal member of their squad gets because "Not all Vets are Vet sergeants, but all Vet sergeants are Vets!"
No, it doesn't mean I can do that.

It's the same with the apoth; Cool, I have TH/SS on an apoth! Wait... It says a Veteran can take them, this is an Apoth.

 Ond Angel wrote:
Nothing prevents me from adding or taking 12 away from every diceroll you make; that does not mean I can.

Are we discussing rules here, or just pointless snark?

 Ond Angel wrote:
If you look in other parts of the codex (bearing in mind it is the same codex, so the author's intent can be seen IMHO)

Are you arguing RAW, RAI, or HYWPI?

 Ond Angel wrote:
Does this mean I can give Veteran Sergeants the upgrades a normal member of their squad gets because "Not all Vets are Vet sergeants, but all Vet sergeants are Vets!"
No, it doesn't mean I can do that.

No, a Sergeant is most certainly not a Veteran; he started as a Sergeant and a Sergeant he remains.

 Ond Angel wrote:
It's the same with the apoth; Cool, I have TH/SS on an apoth! Wait... It says a Veteran can take them, this is an Apoth.

And what does an Apothecary start out as? Look at your Command Squad unit composition again. You started with 5 Veterans. Is a Veteran a Veteran? If so, then you can take the upgrades as listed. Does the Apothecary upgrade require you to lose or exchange any wargear? Does the Apothecary upgrade contain any exclusionary language?

Creeperman wrote:

 Ond Angel wrote:
Nothing prevents me from adding or taking 12 away from every diceroll you make; that does not mean I can.

Are we discussing rules here, or just pointless snark?

Rules. We are in a YMDC thread, are we not? (I can include pointless snark if you'd prefer)

Creeperman wrote:

 Ond Angel wrote:
If you look in other parts of the codex (bearing in mind it is the same codex, so the author's intent can be seen IMHO)

Are you arguing RAW, RAI, or HYWPI?

 Ond Angel wrote:
It's the same with the apoth; Cool, I have TH/SS on an apoth! Wait... It says a Veteran can take them, this is an Apoth.

And what does an Apothecary start out as? Look at your Command Squad unit composition again. You started with 5 Veterans. Is a Veteran a Veteran? If so, then you can take the upgrades as listed. Does the Apothecary upgrade require you to lose or exchange any wargear? Does the Apothecary upgrade contain any exclusionary language?

RAW seems to say you can do it.
RAI seems clear, but RAI is always going to be down to the individual's interpretation, as none of us are the author.
HIWPI has no bearing here. I wasn't asked about that, so why is it relevant?
I'm arguing that if we were supposed to be able to take an Apoth with TH/SS and whatever else is available to a Command Squad, the author would have surely written "All models" or "Any models" like he did with Vanguard and Sternguard vets.
Hell, even in the Command Squad entry it says "The entire squad may take bikes".
Why not do that for the other options that call out Vets only if any of them were intended to be able to take certain things.

If the intention was to allow any model in the unit to take a specific upgrade, then why didn't they use the wording 'any model' as they did in the Scout Squad, Vanguard Veteran Squad, Sternguard Veteran Squad, Terminator Squad, Terminator Assault Squad, Centurion Assault Squad and Centurion Devastator Squad? Its because those upgrades are limited to the models designated, either a 'Veteran' or an 'Apothecary'.

RaW is RaW.

If a Veteran can pay to take a Thunder Hammer AND a Veteran can pay to upgrade to an Apothecary, then selecting both upgrades (writing the Thunder Hammer one down first) will result in an Apothecary with a Thunder Hammer.

If the upgrade option said something like "One Veteran may pay X points to upgrade to an Apothecary, replacing all wargear with Bolt Pistol, Narthecium, etc..." then I would gladly agree that Apothecaries would be limited in wargear choices. RaW, they aren't.

We know that order of upgrades is important and legitimate as Space Marine Bikers have to switch Bolt Pistol for Chain Sword in order to be able to switch Melee Weapon for other items.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
BlackTalos, the issue is with the point cost. The cost for Starshot is cheaper for the regular Reapers (individually) than it is for the Exarch (by 2 points IIRC).

The other issue is for units that have options added via FAQ/Errata. Does the option get placed at the end of the list, the beginning, or somewhere in the middle?

Well, apart from a rather silly point costing, it would still work:

1) Pay for the Unit
2) Pay for +7 Reapers (you now have 10)
3) Pay for Starshot (10 times)
4) Pay for Exarch
5) Pay for Exarch Starshot

We can both see an issue (paying for Starshot twice), but as per this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/608047.page
It does seem we enforce the 8 per model to everyone. Order makes this even clearer. If all the Orcs in the other thread must pay 1 point, all the Reapers (Inc Exarch) must pay their toll.

There is a difference. The Ork codex says "the entire mob" (iow unit). The Eldar codex, says "Dark Reapers". I think we can agree that Dark Reaper Exarch =/= Dark Reaper.

No issue with FAQs either, after a quick glance:
"Page 95 – Deathwing Command Squad, Options
Change the second bullet point to:
‘• One Deathwing Terminator in the army may be upgraded to the Deathwing Champion, replacing all of their weapons with the Halberd of Caliban."

or

"Page 72 – Succubus, Options
Change the first option to:
‘• May replace close combat weapon or splinter pistol with an archite glaive."

How about the SM opne? Specifically:
"Page 174 - Bike Squad, options
Add the following option to this list:
'Any model may replace his bolt pistol with
a chainsword...................................................................free'"

 Happyjew wrote:
The cost for Starshot is cheaper for the regular Reapers (individually) than it is for the Exarch (by 2 points IIRC).

Which is one (of the many) examples which illustrates why intent is that the upgrade characters cannot have options meant for the regular troopers. If they could, Exarch wouldn't need their own (and more expensive) Starshot option.

 Crimson wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
The cost for Starshot is cheaper for the regular Reapers (individually) than it is for the Exarch (by 2 points IIRC).

Which is one (of the many) examples which illustrates why intent is that the upgrade characters cannot have options meant for the regular troopers. If they could, Exarch wouldn't need their own (and more expensive) Starshot option.

Except you might want to give just the Exarch Starshot, so he would still need his own option.

 Happyjew wrote:
There is a difference. The Ork codex says "the entire mob" (iow unit). The Eldar codex, says "Dark Reapers". I think we can agree that Dark Reaper Exarch =/= Dark Reaper.

"All Dark Reapers in the Unit". If you haven't purchased an Exarch (Yet), is that not all 10 members?
Sure, the point costing is wrong (or doesn't work - 18pts for an Exarch with Starshot), but that seems like a simple glitch (you even agreed that the Starshot costing is questionable already?)

How about the SM opne? Specifically:
"Page 174 - Bike Squad, options
Add the following option to this list:
'Any model may replace his bolt pistol with
a chainsword...................................................................free'"

It would seem to me that "add" is something to add at the end of the list, which would make sense and does not conflict.

Special weapon says "replace melee weapon or boltgun", but as the amendment above comes at the end, the Melee weapon (Chainsword) you can get for free can't be swapped (as last on the list) with a Special weapon.

Or do you thing GW added the amendment above so that Bike Squad could get a chainsword for free, and then swap it with a Special weapon? Which sounds a lot like Shenanigans.
It would mean you can 1) add an attack bike. 2) Swap B.Pistol for Chainsword. 3) Swap Chainsword for a plasma gun. And end up with an attack bike that has a heavy bolter AND a plasma gun.

If you follow direct order, as i've convinced myself further and further with any example given so far: first you choose 2 Special Weapons, secondly you can add attack bikes, and finally you may select the "added" swap mentioned above, then the above is not possible.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
How about the SM opne? Specifically:
"Page 174 - Bike Squad, options
Add the following option to this list:
'Any model may replace his bolt pistol with
a chainsword...................................................................free'"

It would seem to me that "add" is something to add at the end of the list, which would make sense and does not conflict.

Special weapon says "replace melee weapon or boltgun", but as the amendment above comes at the end, the Melee weapon (Chainsword) you can get for free can't be swapped (as last on the list) with a Special weapon.

Or do you thing GW added the amendment above so that Bike Squad could get a chainsword for free, and then swap it with a Special weapon? Which sounds a lot like Shenanigans.
It would mean you can 1) add an attack bike. 2) Swap B.Pistol for Chainsword. 3) Swap Chainsword for a plasma gun. And end up with an attack bike that has a heavy bolter AND a plasma gun.
If you follow direct order, as i've convinced myself further and further with any example given so far: first you choose 2 Special Weapons, secondly you can add attack bikes, and finally you may select the "added" swap mentioned above.

Neither one of those examples work, though. First, the Attack Bike isn't an upgrade for a Biker, he's an entirely separate attachment for the unit. He never has the chance to swap his bolt pistol for anything. Secondly, you have no permission to swap the pistol directly for a special weapon, since it's not a boltgun or a Melee-type weapon (despite the fact that Pistol-type weapons may be used in assault combat). If you follow direct order the FAQ still doesn't allow a Biker squad to select any special weapon, unless you're swapping the bike's TL boltgun, which is also an interpretation on shaky rules territory.

Creeperman wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
How about the SM opne? Specifically:
"Page 174 - Bike Squad, options
Add the following option to this list:
'Any model may replace his bolt pistol with
a chainsword...................................................................free'"

It would seem to me that "add" is something to add at the end of the list, which would make sense and does not conflict.

Special weapon says "replace melee weapon or boltgun", but as the amendment above comes at the end, the Melee weapon (Chainsword) you can get for free can't be swapped (as last on the list) with a Special weapon.

Or do you thing GW added the amendment above so that Bike Squad could get a chainsword for free, and then swap it with a Special weapon? Which sounds a lot like Shenanigans.
It would mean you can 1) add an attack bike. 2) Swap B.Pistol for Chainsword. 3) Swap Chainsword for a plasma gun. And end up with an attack bike that has a heavy bolter AND a plasma gun.
If you follow direct order, as i've convinced myself further and further with any example given so far: first you choose 2 Special Weapons, secondly you can add attack bikes, and finally you may select the "added" swap mentioned above.

Neither one of those examples work, though. First, the Attack Bike isn't an upgrade for a Biker, he's an entirely separate attachment for the unit. He never has the chance to swap his bolt pistol for anything. Secondly, you have no permission to swap the pistol directly for a special weapon, since it's not a boltgun or a Melee-type weapon (despite the fact that Pistol-type weapons may be used in assault combat). If you follow direct order the FAQ still doesn't allow a Biker squad to select any special weapon, unless you're swapping the bike's TL boltgun, which is also an interpretation on shaky rules territory.

Your first point is incorrect:
The Unit called "Bike Squad" from the SM Codex has the following options:
• The squad may include one Attack Bike - points
• Any model may replace his bolt pistol with a chainsword...................................................................free

Is the Attack Bike a model in the "Bike Squad" Unit? Yes. Does it have a Bolt Pistol? Yes. Why is it not allowed to swap?

Second point:
I never said that you have permission to swap the pistol directly for a special weapon. If you combine (with no order) these two following options (that the "Bike Squad" Unit has):
• Any model may replace his bolt pistol with a chainsword...................................................................free
• Up to two Space Marine Bikers may each take one item from the Special Weapons list.

Where Special Weapon: "A model can replace his Melee weapon or boltgun with one of the following:". Is the chainsword that "Any model" has not a Close combat weapon?

Agreed, the Attack bike is not "Up to two Space Marine Bikers" so the crazy idea that is an Attack Bike with Plasma gun is not feasible, whatever order you pick... But you can still have a standard Space Marine Biker with Boltgun+Plasma Gun, and my shenanigans argument above still stands.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Creeperman wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
How about the SM opne? Specifically:
"Page 174 - Bike Squad, options
Add the following option to this list:
'Any model may replace his bolt pistol with
a chainsword...................................................................free'"

It would seem to me that "add" is something to add at the end of the list, which would make sense and does not conflict.

Special weapon says "replace melee weapon or boltgun", but as the amendment above comes at the end, the Melee weapon (Chainsword) you can get for free can't be swapped (as last on the list) with a Special weapon.

Or do you thing GW added the amendment above so that Bike Squad could get a chainsword for free, and then swap it with a Special weapon? Which sounds a lot like Shenanigans.
It would mean you can 1) add an attack bike. 2) Swap B.Pistol for Chainsword. 3) Swap Chainsword for a plasma gun. And end up with an attack bike that has a heavy bolter AND a plasma gun.
If you follow direct order, as i've convinced myself further and further with any example given so far: first you choose 2 Special Weapons, secondly you can add attack bikes, and finally you may select the "added" swap mentioned above.

Neither one of those examples work, though. First, the Attack Bike isn't an upgrade for a Biker, he's an entirely separate attachment for the unit. He never has the chance to swap his bolt pistol for anything. Secondly, you have no permission to swap the pistol directly for a special weapon, since it's not a boltgun or a Melee-type weapon (despite the fact that Pistol-type weapons may be used in assault combat). If you follow direct order the FAQ still doesn't allow a Biker squad to select any special weapon, unless you're swapping the bike's TL boltgun, which is also an interpretation on shaky rules territory.

Your first point is incorrect:
The Unit called "Bike Squad" from the SM Codex has the following options:
• The squad may include one Attack Bike - points
• Any model may replace his bolt pistol with a chainsword...................................................................free

Is the Attack Bike a model in the "Bike Squad" Unit? Yes. Does it have a Bolt Pistol? Yes. Why is it not allowed to swap?

You're right, the Attack Bike could swap for a chainsword. I was addressing the plasma gun part.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Second point:
I never said that you have permission to swap the pistol directly for a special weapon. If you combine (with no order) these two following options (that the "Bike Squad" Unit has):
• Any model may replace his bolt pistol with a chainsword...................................................................free
• Up to two Space Marine Bikers may each take one item from the Special Weapons list.

Where Special Weapon: "A model can replace his Melee weapon or boltgun with one of the following:". Is the chainsword that "Any model" has not a Close combat weapon?

Agreed, the Attack bike is not "Up to two Space Marine Bikers" so the crazy idea that is an Attack Bike with Plasma gun is not feasible, whatever order you pick... But you can still have a standard Space Marine Biker with Boltgun+Plasma Gun, and my shenanigans argument above still stands.

You did say "direct order" in the quote above. Do you not mean top-to-bottom, in order, with the FAQ addendum at the end? Here's what you wrote earlier:

 BlackTalos wrote:
If you follow direct order, as i've convinced myself further and further with any example given so far: first you choose 2 Special Weapons, secondly you can add attack bikes, and finally you may select the "added" swap mentioned above.

If so, please explain how you're swapping the Biker's default bolt pistol for a plasma gun without first exchanging it for a chainsword while maintaining strict top-to-bottom option ordering?

Creeperman wrote:
You did say "direct order" in the quote above. Do you not mean top-to-bottom, in order, with the FAQ addendum at the end? Here's what you wrote earlier:

 BlackTalos wrote:
If you follow direct order, as i've convinced myself further and further with any example given so far: first you choose 2 Special Weapons, secondly you can add attack bikes, and finally you may select the "added" swap mentioned above.

If so, please explain how you're swapping the Biker's default bolt pistol for a plasma gun without first exchanging it for a chainsword while maintaining strict top-to-bottom option ordering?

No, no, no, it seems you got my post completely upside-down.

My point is:
-I believe maintaining strict top-to-bottom option ordering.

If you don't follow strict top-to-bottom option ordering, then the plasma gun + boltgun wielding Biker was a result (Or the Apothecary with Thunder hammer + SS) and other "well i picked this first so it's legal" arguments.

I think those situations are wrong and was saying they are possible shenanigans. Hope this clears it up?
Edited it for clarity.