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.

Hello all!!

Since the update to the gaz book, there is a rule description that says 'any formation taken from this book can use both artefacts from this book and codex orks'

So can I take a CAD and just use the artefacts from both?

Do I have to take the decision to get a core choice and add a command big Mek to get the force field?

Thanks all!

Can you take a CAD from the Ghazz supplement.?
I don't think so but I am not sure, I would have to look at the specific wording. You used to be able to take that special ghaz supplement detachment that gave you deepstriking orks but that one is no longer in the book.

If you manage to get yourself some sort of GHAZ detachment you be able to get the items but you MUST also use all the GHAZ special rules. Such as the worse mob rule and the must always challenge thingy.

Unfortunately the wording is pretty clear. The Big Mek must belong to a detachment or formation from the W!G supplement book. This is written differently to the warlord traits table on the same page, which is open to any ork warlord.

The only way it seems you could do it is by taking the whole Great Waaagh-Band detachment for around 700 points minimum or a dread mob formation and giving the Big Mek the MFF in there, even more costly.

I am happy to be wrong, in case I have missed something.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The wording is "any units from a detachment or formation presented in this book-" that can take gifts can take orkimedies kustom gubbins.

The CAD is presented in the rulebook. The standalone command big Mek isn't a formation.

I'm peeved.

You can't take any of the Ghazghkull supplement relics in a CAD, for the reasons pointed out.

Big_Mek_Gazguzzla, the Command choice isn't a formation unto itself but it is taken as part of the larger detachment; if you take a Big Mek as your Command choice he can take one supplement relic, as well as one of the codex relics.

xlDuke wrote:
the Command choice isn't a formation unto itself

Which is what I figured, considering it isn't listed as a formation or have a datasheet. I just wish it was so I could take it unbound instead of convincing my friends to use house rules that only benefit myself.

If it were a formation it would be brilliant! Alas! :(

This stinks -- the Farsight Enclaves supplement says you can consider any detachment as a FE instead of TE. My W!G reprint is at the house so i can't scour it to see if there's a similar line of text in there or not.

I don't even think that you could get it in an unbound army. :\
My suggestion would be ignore that stupid update, and go for the original book if your opponent allows it.

Did anyone ask this question in the faq on the Facebook page? It might get clarified!

Just to make the arguement, I'd like to highlight a point or two;

In the softback W!G supplement, on pg 54, under choosing an army it describes the Battle-forged method of choosing an army described in the Warhammer rules.

In the Warhammer rulebook pg 117 one small point "Every army has a primary detachment" pg 118 under detachments "This section focuses on the Battle-forged method" Next paragraph "We have included two detachments at the end of this rules section, each with it's own FOC..." pg120 "On page 122 you will find the combined arms detachment and the allied detachment. Both of these can be used with any army."

pg 55 of W!G softback, it provides an example where steven takes a Great Waaagh-Band and a combined arms detachment..

You can have a Battle-Forged Waaagh Ghazghkull army, organized into a Combined Arms Detachment from the rulebook.

pg 52, WAAAGH! GHAZGHKULL SPECIAL RULES;
"If you use the Formations or the Great Waaagh!-band detachment in this book, the following supplemental special rules apply to all the units they contain." With this point, the CAD is not a Formation or the Great Waaagh!-band detachment, so you do not use the USR's Biggest an' Da Best and Da Boss iz Watchin' because you don't have permission to use those two awesome rules.

Under Orkimedes' Kustom Gubbinz, "all units from a detachment or formation in this book can..." the reference to the (EDIT)Battle forged method of organizing your army(edit)on pg 54 leads you to the CAD in the rulebook which means you have permission to use it as a legal detachment as it's included in W!G.

There you have it, take your W!G Combined Arms Detachment, take a Big Mek, give him the MFF, take two troops, ignore the cruddy mob rule, plug your ears, close this window, throw your computer out the window and run around in your store screaming WAAAGH!!! before a YMDC lurker takes a dump on your day.

 Rismonite wrote:
Just to make the arguement, I'd like to highlight a point or two;

In the softback W!G supplement, on pg 54, under choosing an army it describes the Battle-forged method of choosing an army described in the Warhammer rules.

In the Warhammer rulebook pg 117 one small point "Every army has a primary detachment" pg 118 under detachments "This section focuses on the Battle-forged method" Next paragraph "We have included two detachments at the end of this rules section, each with it's own FOC..." pg120 "On page 122 you will find the combined arms detachment and the allied detachment. Both of these can be used with any army."

pg 55 of W!G softback, it provides an example where steven takes a Great Waaagh-Band and a combined arms detachment..

You can have a Battle-Forged Waaagh Ghazghkull army, organized into a Combined Arms Detachment from the rulebook.

pg 52, WAAAGH! GHAZGHKULL SPECIAL RULES;
"If you use the Formations or the Great Waaagh!-band detachment in this book, the following supplemental special rules apply to all the units they contain." With this point, the CAD is not a Formation or the Great Waaagh!-band detachment, so you do not use the USR's Biggest an' Da Best and Da Boss iz Watchin' because you don't have permission to use those two awesome rules.

Under Orkimedes' Kustom Gubbinz, "all units from a detachment or formation in this book can..." the reference to the (EDIT)Battle forged method of organizing your army(edit)on pg 54 leads you to the CAD in the rulebook which means you have permission to use it as a legal detachment as it's included in W!G.

There you have it, take your W!G Combined Arms Detachment, take a Big Mek, give him the MFF, take two troops, ignore the cruddy mob rule, plug your ears, close this window, throw your computer out the window and run around in your store screaming WAAAGH!!! before a YMDC lurker takes a dump on your day.

Sadly none or this information allows you to take a CAD and use Waaagh! Ghazghkull relics in it. The example given on page 55 simply has 'Steven' using a Great Waaagh!-band and a CAD in his Battle-forged armies. Steven doesn't have a Battle-forged Waaagh! Ghazghkull army organised into a CAD, he has a Battle-forged army organised into a Great Waaagh!-band and a CAD.

The CAD is mentioned on page 54 as you say (only as a reference and an example on how to build Battle-forged army), but I don't think we can consider that "a Detachment or Formation presented in this book" to enable us to take Orkimides' Kustom Kubbinz in. Does a passing reference to the CAD and Allied Detachment in a Bound/Unbound clarification count as a formation presented in the book? I would say no, there's no data sheet or any information about what a CAD is beyond a BRB reference.

By your logic we can't take a CAD with the normal ork codex either. No part of the Ork Codex gives us access to it.

pg 116 of the Rulebook, in the blackbox entry on the left. "The rules for your Citadel miniatures are found in a wide range of Games Workshop publications, such as codexes, codex supplements, and dataslates."

Sadly none or this information allows you to take a CAD and use Waaagh! Ghazghkull relics in it.

yes it does. The ork codex doesn't even go through the work of having the blurb that W!G has on pg 54. This is how you build an army with Codex Orkz. You goto the Rulebook on pg116 and create a battleforged or unbound army and use the information in Codex Orkz,.. Oh also, in that section, they let you have the CAD and AD. So why can't W!G use it? Apparently they needed to clarify it on pg 54 because they knew this might be fuzzy I guess. Once again, the ork codex does not even go through this trouble you just start at 'Choosing your army' on pg 116

The example given on page 55 simply has 'Steven' using a Great Waaagh!-band and a CAD in his Battle-forged armies. Steven doesn't have a Battle-forged Waaagh! Ghazghkull army organised into a CAD, he has a Battle-forged army organised into a Great Waaagh!-band and a CAD.

Yes you are correct here he very much could have a CAD created with the Ork Codex -- A battleforged army that he put together with the rules granted to him on pgs 116 thru 122 in the Rulebook, the same section W!G is pointing to on pg54

..but I don't think we can consider that.

I don't think, makes my head hurt. I don't consider either, heard it's heresy. Why do either when reading can do us just fine here?

Does a passing reference to the CAD and Allied Detachment in a Bound/Unbound clarification count as a formation presented in the book?

Yes. First off it isn't just a 'passing' reference. You certainly don't expect them to print pg 116-122 of the 40k Rulebook in every codex and supplement? Especially when they can just put a blurb, like what is on pg54 of W!G, referencing the exact section they tell you how to build a Battleforge army in and give you CAD and AD. It's how you build an army with Codex Orkz. It's the same reason why we can just use the Army List Entries for Codex:Orkz for the formations in W!G, they wouldn't reprint the whole thing in there.

Another quote from pg 54 of W!G "The most common of these are the Combined Arms and Allied Detachments. Note that you can -also- include any of the formations in this section as part of a battle-forged army" Comon man.. 'also' aka in addition to, aka the CAD and AD, in the previous sentence.

I would say no, there's no data sheet or any information about what a CAD is beyond a BRB reference.

Da big rule book is how you make a battle forged army, you use the army list entries in Codices and Supplements (see reference to army list entry box on pg 116 above)
Also, a reminder, text on the top of W!G pg52, the very last bit in the bold section "..., or use them to field an army from Waaagh Ghazghkull itself."

I propose to you, as per pg 52 and 54, that this is one way to build an army with W!G;
-You goto the section of the rulebook describing how to build a battleforged army on page 116 of the rulebook which is what pg 54 explains to do.
-There you are granted the Combined Arms Detachment and the Allied Detachment
-You take a Big Mek and two troop choices
-You take an MFF. Why? because the CAD and AD is presented to you on pg54 of W!G

"This book" yes, the reference is right there on pg 54, and it's described fully in Warhammer 40,000:The Rules.

And again, lastly pg 118 of the Rulebook "We have included two Detachments at the end of this rules section" It's referencing CAD and AD. This is in the rules section pointed to by the Battle-forged Army section pointed at by pg 54 of W!G. It is all connected.

Mind you, per it's written, if you take a CAD with W!G you don't even have to take the two crappy USR's because those explicitly say only the Great Waaagh-Band Detachment and Formations in that book use those two rules.

(Also, Battlescribe lets me do it??? This is definately the most concrete part of my point)

That's all for today, head hurt from type. Besides, I really don't know how many rules I can just type directly out of the books before getting a hand slappy.

 oldzoggy wrote:
I don't even think that you could get it in an unbound army. :\
My suggestion would be ignore that stupid update, and go for the original book if your opponent allows it.

The original book had a similar statement

The artifacts are only available if you use detachments from the supplement. You can make an army using a combination of CADs and W!G detachments but only the detachments found in the supplement have access to the artifacts from the supplement.

It's certainly the strongest argument I've seen for it, and I am happy to be wrong in this circumstance, but I really don't think it's that clear cut.

It's a passing reference that looks like it was used to illustrate a point. I saw it when I checked earlier and didn't come away with the notion that the CAD was part of the W!G any more then if the example army was fighting Eldar and that somehow meant eldar was a featured army in the W!G.

Battlescribe isn't official rules, despite being a great reference I use all the time. You can't count it.

It needs an FAQ at best. In the meantime, you could just argue that it is confused and the MFF isn't unfair in a CAD and let's orks use much more flavourful armies, so friendly games with a W!G CAD are just fine. Tournament play on the other hand...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Once again. I'd love a clear rule for a W!G CAD. Orks need whatever edge they can get as far as balance goes right now.

eh, edited out.. maybe I'll make a better post later.

Edit: this comment is a reply to Rismonite's last post.

By your logic we can't take a CAD with the normal ork codex either. No part of the Ork Codex gives us access to it.

The codex doesn't need to give us permission to use a CAD or an AD, the rulebook tells us "the following detachments can be included in any Battle-forged army" then shows us those detachments. So all codexes have those detachments available. Other detachments come with their own restrictions, such as the Ork Horde Detachment that you can only take if all the units within in are Orks or belong to no faction.

The ork codex doesn't even go through the work of having the blurb that W!G has on pg 54. This is how you build an army with Codex Orkz. You goto the Rulebook on pg116 and create a battleforged or unbound army and use the information in Codex Orkz,.. Oh also, in that section, they let you have the CAD and AD. So why can't W!G use it? Apparently they needed to clarify it on pg 54 because they knew this might be fuzzy I guess. Once again, the ork codex does not even go through this trouble you just start at 'Choosing your army' on pg 116

The codex doesn't need to go into detail about how to build an army because like you say it's all put forward in the rule book. The supplement doesn't need to either but for some reason it does, perhaps because the idea of detachments inside of a detachment is an unusual way to build an army so they reiterate BRB information for clarity. I'm not sure if other supplements with similar detachments also do this.

It seems that we're not interpreting the information on pages 54 and 55 (of the supplement) the same way. How I understand it: the text doesn't "let you have the CAD and AD", it just points out that they are common detachments. The mention of a CAD and AD is in the sentence "the most common of these [detachments] are the Combined Arms and Allied Detachments" in reference to building a Battle-forged army, the next sentence explains we can also use W!G Formations in a bound army. This isn't giving us permission to use anything found in W!G inside a CAD or AD; it's merely telling us that like the CAD and AD, the W!G formations can form a Battle-forged army. The other reference to BRB detachments on that page just explains that while those are composed of Battlefield Roles the W!G detachments are instead composed of Army List Entries and Formations. The example of 'Steven building a Battle-forged army' on page 55 only explains to us the step by step way in which Steven builds a Battle-forged army. He decides to take a Great Waaagh!-band and a Combined Arms Detachment. It doesn't say anything about utilising any of the rules (for lack of a better term) found in W!G inside his CAD which you rightly point out that we can't do.

Da big rule book is how you make a battle forged army, you use the army list entries in Codices and Supplements (see reference to army list entry box on pg 116 above)
Also, a reminder, text on the top of W!G pg52, the very last bit in the bold section "..., or use them to field an army from Waaagh Ghazghkull itself."

I propose to you, as per pg 52 and 54, that this is one way to build an army with W!G;
-You goto the section of the rulebook describing how to build a battleforged army on page 116 of the rulebook which is what pg 54 explains to do.
-There you are granted the Combined Arms Detachment and the Allied Detachment
-You take a Big Mek and two troop choices
-You take an MFF. Why? because the CAD and AD is presented to you on pg54 of W!G

Your last sentence here is probably where the crux of our debate lies. I argue that the CAD and AD aren't "presented" to us in W!G, they are simply mentioned as a way of explaining how to build a Battle-forged army both with and without W!G detachments also included. The detachments that are presented to us in W!G (aka "this book" as mentioned in the Orkimedes' Kustom Gubbinz text) are found on pages 56 through to 69.

Also, Battlescribe lets me do it??? This is definately the most concrete part of my point)

I'm not familiar with Battlescribe but it's certainly not a source for rules or permission to do anything in 40k.

Mind you, per it's written, if you take a CAD with W!G you don't even have to take the two crappy USR's because those explicitly say only the Great Waaagh-Band Detachment and Formations in that book use those two rules.

The Biggest an' da Best and Da Boss is Watchin' rules have the same restrictions as Orkimedes' Kustom Gubbinz. The first rule says "this special rule only applies to a Warlord chosen as part of a Detachment or Formation presented in this book", the second says " units with the Mob Rule special rule that include at least one model from this Detachment or Formation" and the last says "any units from a Detachment or Formation presented in this book". If we extend your idea of being able to use W!G relics in a CAD because a CAD is "presented" in the supplement then Biggest an' da Best applies to any faction that uses a CAD - the CAD is "presented" in W!G and a Warlord from a detachment presented in the supplement has the Biggest an da Best rule applied to them.

In light of your ideas I'll be interested to see what other people think on this whole subject but I'll be playing it so I can only take W!G relics in the detachments outlined on pages 56 to 67, which is RAW as I interpret them.

@xlDuke Well, at this point we are arguing the finer points of how the word 'also' works.

I understand 100% how you are seeing it, I didn't see it that way before. Yes it is kind of fuzzy now, the RAI part of me wants to consider (lol consider) it needs a bit more description to -not- include it's previous sentence's inclusion of CAD and AD 'in addition' to the references in W!G in the second sentance. I'm sure you might say it needs some more description for it to explain that it is including CAD and AD in the prior sentance, and not dis-including it. I like to think there is other legit reference in other places, but without that one interpretation on pg 54 the point is a little weak.

"Also" bleh, what a word.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
oh I was being 110% sarcastic about the point on Battlescribe being a legit source, sorry.. Difficult for me to be soo serious.

 chelsea_hollywood wrote:

 oldzoggy wrote:
I don't even think that you could get it in an unbound army. :\
My suggestion would be ignore that stupid update, and go for the original book if your opponent allows it.

The original book had a similar statement

The artifacts are only available if you use detachments from the supplement. You can make an army using a combination of CADs and W!G detachments but only the detachments found in the supplement have access to the artifacts from the supplement.

Jep true but the original version did contain something really similar to the CAD the Great waaaagh detachment. This was what I was hinting at.
I'll add it to help the discussion along. The Cool thing about that detachment is that if you claim to be "unbound" that you don't take the command benefits.
This allows you to not use the bad special rules of whaaagh ghazzkull and use the old waaagh ghaz relics all for the price of losing objective secured.
Note this doesn't work with the new book at all.

On the other hand you might just want to use the command benefits 1/3 chance of deepstriking boyz or 1/6th chance of deepstriking battle wagons (filled with burna boyz) is kinda fun.

Can I just say that I'm very impressed with the constructive styles of argument with references etc. Nice one lads!

I think it's time we demanded some kind of FAQ or at least a clarification via email. Personally I'd love to just be able to take a CAD, use the normal ork rule book and have an FAQ in there saying that any Army that includes a PRIMARY detachment of ork may take artefacts from codex orks and W!G.

That way you can't just ally in orks for the artefacts and it lets ork players use both sets without having to pay the massive formation tax just for a nicer artefact. I don't think it's much to ask and it certainly won't suddenly make orks top tier all of a sudden.

THOUGHTS ON A PETITION AS WELL??

I don't play Orks but I'd happily play against them with the MFF so long as there was an Ork ally to the W!G detachment

I am pretty sure this guy uses such a list and there is no complaints

https://youtu.be/uyyLmL9ooTM?t=721

 Tiny_Titan wrote:


THOUGHTS ON A PETITION AS WELL??

A petition for a FAQ is totally unnecessary.
RAW is clear on this one. You can ONLY use the item in a detachment or formation out of the book. The CAD is not from that book.
A petition for better / useful ork rules might be a less wasteful way to spend your time.

ConanMan wrote:
I don't play Orks but I'd happily play against them with the MFF so long as there was an Ork ally to the W!G detachment

I am pretty sure this guy uses such a list and there is no complaints

https://youtu.be/uyyLmL9ooTM?t=721

This is a good point and I have seen the video before too. Thing is, I think most players allow this sort of thing because they haven't seen the small print in the ork book and don't question it. But now that we have debate over it all, I don't feel comfortable playing it as having it help me win might not actually be legit :/


Automatically Appended Next Post:
email sent. now we wait.

My feeling is Orks need it to be viable as an assault based army.

I would prefer playing with the MFF simply cos they are going to viable in assault like wulfen are.

With the MFF they become competitive, with a 2+/4++ first turn jink on their nobs bikers 2 wounds with a 5+fnp (with pain boy) without it they are less and less capable of being useable and would die to my scat bikes and d train

 oldzoggy wrote:

 Tiny_Titan wrote:


THOUGHTS ON A PETITION AS WELL??

A petition for a FAQ is totally unnecessary.
RAW is clear on this one. You can ONLY use the item in a detachment or formation out of the book. The CAD is not from that book.
A petition for better / useful ork rules might be a less wasteful way to spend your time.

Yes, that's how I read it. Seems pretty clear to me.

A petition won't work. Despite some of GW's recent attempts at reaching out to its player base, I really don't think they care. This supplement is an example of that. If you don't like the quality of their products, stop giving them money.