You need to find a model named "Space Marine". Look at the army list entry. As an example, you can't replace a Tactical Squad's Sergeant because he's not a "Space Marine". He's a "Space Marine Sergeant".
In other words, most of your basic dudes can be replaced. Most of your non basic dudes can't be replaced.
I wonder... does that mean you could equip him with a Jump Pack by placing him with an Assault Squad?
I mean if you replace one Space Marine with the Imperial Space Marine you have a unit composition of 3 Space Marines, 1 Imperial Space Marine and 1 Space Marine Sergeant, and the Assault Squad options say, "The entire squad may take jump packs".
So, basically, he can be deployed in Tactical Squads, Assault Squads, and Devastator squads, seeing how all other units are veterans or have equipment included in their stats?
Hanskrampf wrote:Is he unique or could you drop pod a Tac Squad with Sarge and 9 Imperial Marines (repeat for additional Tac Squads) in front of the enemy?
The model's unit type is 'Infantry (Unique)'.
Matt.Kingsley wrote:You know, I think you're right about that.
Interesting. Probably not intended (or maybe it is?), but still interesting.
Almost certainly not intended, but amusing.
Throw him in with a Skyhammer Devastator or Assault Squad.
Have just put mine together tonight, with the exception of the backpack. Might throw a magnet on the back so I can swap around for a laugh!
Maybe this is being cynical but personally, things like this are not something that I would be willing to let someone proxy. Let the people who paid the $30 dollars for the model enjoy it; As is its intent.
Grizzyzz wrote: Maybe this is being cynical but personally, things like this are not something that I would be willing to let someone proxy. Let the people who paid the $30 dollars for the model enjoy it; As is its intent.
That's a "pay to win" argument, as in "those that pay for it can use it". If anyone can use it with simple conversion, it's no longer pay to win, just a personal choice.
Grizzyzz wrote: Maybe this is being cynical but personally, things like this are not something that I would be willing to let someone proxy. Let the people who paid the $30 dollars for the model enjoy it; As is its intent.
That's a "pay to win" argument, as in "those that pay for it can use it". If anyone can use it with simple conversion, it's no longer pay to win, just a personal choice.
SJ
To some degree that is what any game is no? MTG for example, not everyone can afford the <insert expensive card> of the current standard, so the players that compete will be buying those and others won't.
I am 100% okay with normal proxies, but this is not a normal proxy model, in my opinion anyway.
Grizzyzz wrote: Maybe this is being cynical but personally, things like this are not something that I would be willing to let someone proxy. Let the people who paid the $30 dollars for the model enjoy it; As is its intent.
That's a "pay to win" argument, as in "those that pay for it can use it". If anyone can use it with simple conversion, it's no longer pay to win, just a personal choice.
SJ
To some degree that is what any game is no? MTG for example, not everyone can afford the <insert expensive card> of the current standard, so the players that compete will be buying those and others won't.
I am 100% okay with normal proxies, but this is not a normal proxy model, in my opinion anyway.
I disagree that any game is pay to win - some games may be suffering of so much power creep that they [i]almost[/i ] become pay to win. However, I am unsure if 40k is in that state already (it's close, imo, but not yet there). This fella, however is clearly a Pay to Win situation if you want to follow it RAW.
Grizzyzz wrote: Maybe this is being cynical but personally, things like this are not something that I would be willing to let someone proxy. Let the people who paid the $30 dollars for the model enjoy it; As is its intent.
That's a "pay to win" argument, as in "those that pay for it can use it". If anyone can use it with simple conversion, it's no longer pay to win, just a personal choice.
SJ
To some degree that is what any game is no? MTG for example, not everyone can afford the <insert expensive card> of the current standard, so the players that compete will be buying those and others won't.
I am 100% okay with normal proxies, but this is not a normal proxy model, in my opinion anyway.
Wahammer 40k isn't like a CCG. It's more like an LCG. For those of you who don't know the difference, Collectible Card Games generally have fixed price, randomized packs where you have no idea what you're buying. If you're unlucky, or need something that is no longer in print, you'll potentially spend an inflated price on the secondary market. Living Card Games also have fixed price, but non-randomized packs. You know exactly what you're buying. All expansions remain in print for the life of the game. There is no secondary market.
Allowing proxies of limited edition models and allowing printouts of limited edition rules eliminates this discrepancy and gives everyone access to these models that are otherwise limited availability. Saying that players need to have the actual rules and the actual model breaks the player base into two parts... the haves and the have nots and ultimately undermines the game in a lot of people's minds.
Wahammer 40k isn't like a CCG. It's more like an LCG. For those of you who don't know the difference, Collectible Card Games generally have fixed price, randomized packs where you have no idea what you're buying. If you're unlucky, or need something that is no longer in print, you'll potentially spend an inflated price on the secondary market. Living Card Games also have fixed price, but non-randomized packs. You know exactly what you're buying. All expansions remain in print for the life of the game. There is no secondary market.
Allowing proxies of limited edition models and allowing printouts of limited edition rules eliminates this discrepancy and gives everyone access to these models that are otherwise limited availability. Saying that players need to have the actual rules and the actual model breaks the player base into two parts... the haves and the have nots and ultimately undermines the game in a lot of people's minds.
Comparison to an LCG is a very well put comparison. Some people can afford buying the Skatach Wraithknight and some people can't. Some people save for a year and finally buy one just to see someone else kitbash a bunch of random bits together and call it the same thing. I guess that is where I am coming from. That in and of itself is two player groups, i realize this. I love the hobby side of this game, and applaud well put together models and conversions.
I suppose what i am trying to say is there is a place for conversions and a place without them, and its totally up to the group and players to decide which place they want to be in. I am not saying one is right and one is wrong.
Grizzyzz wrote: Some people save for a year and finally buy one just to see someone else kitbash a bunch of random bits together and call it the same thing.
And they will still have the spiffy, expensive model, and their opponent will have a kitbashed version. Not seeing the problem here.
You see exactly the same thing with card games... some people will shell out $200 for that one special card... and others will just shove a piece of paper with the card name written on it in sharpie into a card sleeve and call it close enough.
For the original question, this is something that's been an issue with GW rules since at least second edition. There's an argument that 'Space Marine' should mean 'anything that has the exact name ('Space Marine') on its profile line. There's another argument that 'Space Marine' would mean, well, any Space Marine. As in, any marine in a Space Marine army.
GW rules clarifications have tended to flipflop somewhat on related issues from time to time, although they have tended to go more towards the profile name being the key. Unit entries, for example would usually specify 'Space Marine' and 'Sergeant' separately for upgrades, or use 'any model' if it's supposed to include them both.
So the fact that they've gone with 'Space Marine' rather than 'any infantry model in a Space Marine army' suggests that they probably just mean anything specifically called 'Space Marine'.
for tournament play, you have to bite the bullet and have the model + rules. Friendly games anything goes IMO. My rule of thumb is and always has been; if GW makes a model for said unit you plan on using, use it, or have a REALLY good/cool conversion. But playing this guy without the official rules(i.e. originals), would be like showing up to a tourny with only a downloaded(illegal) version of a codex. You just don't do it.
Grizzyzz wrote: Some people save for a year and finally buy one just to see someone else kitbash a bunch of random bits together and call it the same thing.
And they will still have the spiffy, expensive model, and their opponent will have a kitbashed version. Not seeing the problem here.
You see exactly the same thing with card games... some people will shell out $200 for that one special card... and others will just shove a piece of paper with the card name written on it in sharpie into a card sleeve and call it close enough.
For the original question, this is something that's been an issue with GW rules since at least second edition. There's an argument that 'Space Marine' should mean 'anything that has the exact name ('Space Marine') on its profile line. There's another argument that 'Space Marine' would mean, well, any Space Marine. As in, any marine in a Space Marine army.
GW rules clarifications have tended to flipflop somewhat on related issues from time to time, although they have tended to go more towards the profile name being the key. Unit entries, for example would usually specify 'Space Marine' and 'Sergeant' separately for upgrades, or use 'any model' if it's supposed to include them both.
So the fact that they've gone with 'Space Marine' rather than 'any infantry model in a Space Marine army' suggests that they probably just mean anything specifically called 'Space Marine'.
Agreed there is often lack of consistency on this, even within a single codex!
In chaos space marines it is accepted that 'may upgrade a '[model name]' only applies to that specific model name and not the squad leader (where as 'model' applies to everyone in the squad, including the leader). However, applying that interpretation elsewhere in the codex results in silliness like the possessed champion not benefit from the possessed's bonus table. Frustratingly inconsistent.
LinkXx wrote: for tournament play, you have to bite the bullet and have the model + rules. Friendly games anything goes IMO. My rule of thumb is and always has been; if GW makes a model for said unit you plan on using, use it, or have a REALLY good/cool conversion. But playing this guy without the official rules(i.e. originals), would be like showing up to a tourny with only a downloaded(illegal) version of a codex. You just don't do it.
This was a much better way of saying what I was trying to say!
Yeah I'm not paying 30 bucks for one marine. If tournies allow him, I'll just convert a tac marine and print the rules. Really hoping they just don't allow him though.
niv-mizzet wrote: Yeah I'm not paying 30 bucks for one marine. If tournies allow him, I'll just convert a tac marine and print the rules. Really hoping they just don't allow him though.
Why not? it is one model with one wound and a 3+ armor save...
Because he's got a rapid fire instant death gun and pistol, which you get for free. What marine tournament list wouldn't take it?
Not that my opinion matters, but I think this breaks the game down into two different categories of play (as others before have discussed).
You either go with the pay-to-win, or in this case, pay for premium content like many "free games" do, and require the ACTUAL $30 model in order to get the special marine.
Or...
Allow people to kit-bash and bring counts-as and be flooded with them, which would suck for any non-marine players.
I'm not a fan of the pay-to-win marketing strategy, even more so in tournament play. As a person who has a very finite about of cash to spend on the hobby/competitive game, it is already bad enough when the meta shifts or a new codex drops and you basically have to buy new models to be competitive.
If there was a vote, I personally would say that it shouldn't be allowed at tournaments period. Stops the trend of premium content being led by competitive play and is more fare to all races.
Again, not that my opinion really matters in the grand scheme.
Another option beyond the 3 you list (official only, kitbash or not at all) is the TO expanding which models can be swapped out for the imperial space marine (to include things such as ork boyz, chaos space marines. etc) or even looking at other old 'first for the faction' models and creating rules for them, so every faction gets to have a similar free upgrade.
Well I paid the €25 and got him to celebrate 30 years of Space Marines. It is, after all, something unique. Three decades of an IP that defined my adolescence. It does feel a bit more special than the 25 year anniversary we had a couple years ago, and probably will feel more unique than the 35 year anniversary we will be having in 2021, even if that anniversary includes a far more awesome looking model. I have a thing for round numbers. Then again, the back of the box reads "In 1985, Games Workshop released the first ever Imperial Space Marine", so the 30 Year Anniversary was actually a year ago and GW are a bunch of lazy sods triggering my OCD.
Also, when you realize €25 is the price for normal Space Marine HQ clampacks, it doesnt really feel like GW is ripping you off more than they are already doing
The fact that this time around we get the mini for €3 cheaper and arent stuck with a pre-molded Crimson Fist guy is an improvement, despite us losing the big, scenic base and something cool like a big banner. The rules are an additional bonus.
The way I see it, in friendlies you need to have the permission of your opponent to be able to use this mini. Kinda like how he informs you before showing up with a Lord of War. Regarding tourneys the debate is settled anyway by the TO.
Grizzyzz wrote: Maybe this is being cynical but personally, things like this are not something that I would be willing to let someone proxy. Let the people who paid the $30 dollars for the model enjoy it; As is its intent.
That's a "pay to win" argument, as in "those that pay for it can use it". If anyone can use it with simple conversion, it's no longer pay to win, just a personal choice.
SJ
To some degree that is what any game is no? MTG for example, not everyone can afford the <insert expensive card> of the current standard, so the players that compete will be buying those and others won't.
I am 100% okay with normal proxies, but this is not a normal proxy model, in my opinion anyway.
Grizzyzz wrote: Maybe this is being cynical but personally, things like this are not something that I would be willing to let someone proxy. Let the people who paid the $30 dollars for the model enjoy it; As is its intent.
That's a "pay to win" argument, as in "those that pay for it can use it". If anyone can use it with simple conversion, it's no longer pay to win, just a personal choice.
SJ
To some degree that is what any game is no? MTG for example, not everyone can afford the <insert expensive card> of the current standard, so the players that compete will be buying those and others won't.
I am 100% okay with normal proxies, but this is not a normal proxy model, in my opinion anyway.
Would you be mad if i brought this?
I'd cross out the word 'Unique' on the rules sheet so you could use both if you wanted .
I'm actually kinda disappointed they only updated one model. I expected a full 5 man squad. Would have gladly paid Sternguard/Terminator Prices for the squad, even if it was just cosmetic.
However I'm highly skeptical of the "limited edition" aspect of this marine, as GW has been re-releasing a LOT of "limited edition" models as of late (the Solaq captain, the Terminator Captain, Krom, Karleen, etc) so I wouldn't be surprised if we see him again down the road somewhere a la "Armor through the Ages" type box.
As for letting people proxy him, I'd allow it if they allow me the priviledge too (assuming I was playing with a valid marine army). All in all it's a straight upgrade to either a tactical marine or a devastator marine (not quite assault marines as he lacks a jump pack upgrade, so he might actually be a detriment to that squad depending on the loadout) that isn't holding another special weapon.
MechaEmperor7000 wrote: However I'm highly skeptical of the "limited edition" aspect of this marine, as GW has been re-releasing a LOT of "limited edition" models as of late (the Solaq captain, the Terminator Captain, Krom, Karleen, etc) so I wouldn't be surprised if we see him again down the road somewhere a la "Armor through the Ages" type box.
Those models were never billed as limited edition, they were very careful on the wording there that it was the box that was a limited release.
As for proxying, I think I'd play it by ear. If someone asked if I minded, and they clearly weren't out to waac, I'd be fine. If they were, or assumed that they could use it without checking first, I might not be so easy going. I get that it is a pricey hobby and sometimes le stuff has to be missed, and whilst I'm all for inclusivity, I also don't want to have to endure any chips on shoulders or sentiments of entitlement. That said, if I felt that way about the opponent that I'd say no to the proxy, I'd more likely not actually play them at all...
The original metal one isn't all that rare. Particularly since he was offered as a redemption prize in the Skullz program. He pops up in a reasonable number of old miniature collections.
insaniak wrote: The original metal one isn't all that rare. Particularly since he was offered as a redemption prize in the Skullz program. He pops up in a reasonable number of old miniature collections.
You ever see one, grab him and message me. I'll paypal ya and be eternally grateful!
Matthew wrote: Does anyone know what codices may take him? Only Space Marines, or Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves?
Also, how will this work with proxies?
I would have thought all sm codices except Gk. Proxying is up to both players to agree upon.
Since he has the Chapter Tactics special rule, RAW, he can only be used by Codex: Space Marines. My FLGS, however, has house-ruled that BA, DA, and SW have Chapter Tactics BA, DA, and SW respectively, so we would allow it to be used by them. This is 100% house-ruled, though.
If I wanted to make an issue of it, a simple question of where did you get the rules from? should be enough to not allow you to play it in a tournament. Sure you made a really cool proxy of him, but let's see your official rules on the model.
If I wanted to make an issue of it, a simple question of where did you get the rules from? should be enough to not allow you to play it in a tournament. Sure you made a really cool proxy of him, but let's see your official rules on the model.
Well that's up to the tourney to mandate having an official rules source instead of simply having a copy printed out.
If I wanted to make an issue of it, a simple question of where did you get the rules from? should be enough to not allow you to play it in a tournament. Sure you made a really cool proxy of him, but let's see your official rules on the model.
They don't require the physical data slate, only a clear and concise print out or "scan" of it
Matthew wrote: Does anyone know what codices may take him? Only Space Marines, or Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves?
Also, how will this work with proxies?
I would have thought all sm codices except Gk. Proxying is up to both players to agree upon.
Since he has the Chapter Tactics special rule, RAW, he can only be used by Codex: Space Marines. My FLGS, however, has house-ruled that BA, DA, and SW have Chapter Tactics BA, DA, and SW respectively, so we would allow it to be used by them. This is 100% house-ruled, though.
I don't think RAW it does say that at all. The rule says that one space marine can be replaced with an imperial space marine. Do sw, da, and ba have space marines? Yes. So you can swap him. You could argue at that point that the model doesn't benefit from its chapter tactics as it is from a different codex, but either way he's in the list.
If I wanted to make an issue of it, a simple question of where did you get the rules from? should be enough to not allow you to play it in a tournament. Sure you made a really cool proxy of him, but let's see your official rules on the model.
They don't require the physical data slate, only a clear and concise print out or "scan" of it
No, but those rules are for the imperial space marine model, so you could demand that they need it, outside of him there is no such thing as a space marine with a disintegrator gun. If someone kitbashed a good model and asked if I minded, I wouldn't. If someone put down a conversion and copied rules and told me they were using it, then that would be a different matter.
The issue with that oine of thinking is that only those that can afford to pay to win can have the good things. Requiring the official model and box set rules sheet in order to field the Imperial Space Marine is a way of limiting this option to only those that had the money and the free time to snag one. It's the mind set of only the elite should playing this game, the riff-raff can go play X-Wing.
By allowing everyone the option to play an Imperial Space Marine if they want via a suitable conversion, printed rules, and a legal squad to put it in, the game is more accessable and less douchy.
jeffersonian000 wrote: The issue with that oine of thinking is that only those that can afford to pay to win can have the good things. Requiring the official model and box set rules sheet in order to field the Imperial Space Marine is a way of limiting this option to only those that had the money and the free time to snag one. It's the mind set of only the elite should playing this game, the riff-raff can go play X-Wing.
By allowing everyone the option to play an Imperial Space Marine if they want via a suitable conversion, printed rules, and a legal squad to put it in, the game is more accessable and less douchy.
SJ
To an extent I don't disagree with you, and have said that I'd personally be happy to allow it if asked. My point was that opponents don't actually have to accept proxying, and that a little courtesy goes a long way. That said, a single infantry figure isn't an issue of paying to win, it's a one off £18 model that has a half decent, but short ranged gun, not a £1240 titan. Suggesting someone is elitist because they show the mildest possible objection to potential proxying in a specific instance isn't very fair, and is incorrect.
Matthew wrote: Does anyone know what codices may take him? Only Space Marines, or Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves?
Also, how will this work with proxies?
I would have thought all sm codices except Gk. Proxying is up to both players to agree upon.
Since he has the Chapter Tactics special rule, RAW, he can only be used by Codex: Space Marines. My FLGS, however, has house-ruled that BA, DA, and SW have Chapter Tactics BA, DA, and SW respectively, so we would allow it to be used by them. This is 100% house-ruled, though.
I don't think RAW it does say that at all. The rule says that one space marine can be replaced with an imperial space marine. Do sw, da, and ba have space marines? Yes. So you can swap him. You could argue at that point that the model doesn't benefit from its chapter tactics as it is from a different codex, but either way he's in the list.
If I wanted to make an issue of it, a simple question of where did you get the rules from? should be enough to not allow you to play it in a tournament. Sure you made a really cool proxy of him, but let's see your official rules on the model.
They don't require the physical data slate, only a clear and concise print out or "scan" of it
No, but those rules are for the imperial space marine model, so you could demand that they need it, outside of him there is no such thing as a space marine with a disintegrator gun. If someone kitbashed a good model and asked if I minded, I wouldn't. If someone put down a conversion and copied rules and told me they were using it, then that would be a different matter.
I would ask you to prove that I had not purchased the model and rules, and was using my scan and a conversion as my model and rules are in a display case at home for show only. The judge would agree and you would fail to do so. End of conversation at that point.
@Pain4Pleasure and so could the game, quite happily. I'll repeat, I have never said I would point blank refuse to allow it myself. I would expect the courtesy of being asked though, as I would for any proxying. If you expect me to have to keep track of what is what in your army, it's not much to ask.
jeffersonian000 wrote: The issue with that oine of thinking is that only those that can afford to pay to win can have the good things. Requiring the official model and box set rules sheet in order to field the Imperial Space Marine is a way of limiting this option to only those that had the money and the free time to snag one. It's the mind set of only the elite should playing this game, the riff-raff can go play X-Wing.
By allowing everyone the option to play an Imperial Space Marine if they want via a suitable conversion, printed rules, and a legal squad to put it in, the game is more accessable and less douchy.
SJ
But the former is what helps keep the game balanced more in the long run. For the reasons you stated (exclusivity, asking price, limited window), very few people will end up getting the model, and therefore very few people in the entire meta will be using one in their armies.
If everyone was allowed to kit-bash an Imperial Marine and print out a grainy .jpg image from google search that shows the rules and field it, EVERYONE would do so because it is like a Black Lotus for the Space Marine army: making it a tiny bit more competitive for no points cost at all. And THAT is a power creep that can be felt everywhere.
I would ask you to prove that I had not purchased the model and rules, and was using my scan and a conversion as my model and rules are in a display case at home for show only. The judge would agree and you would fail to do so. End of conversation at that point.
You can't prove a negative claim. Sure if you can convince a judge that you own a legal copy of the rules and model that would be the end of conversation. But it's up to you to prove it to the judge. If it's allowed to use scanned rules, then would it be allowed to use a codex you downloaded from your favorite torrent site? How could a discerning judge tell the difference between a scan of a document you own, and one obtained by illegal means?
sirlynchmob wrote: If it's allowed to use scanned rules, then would it be allowed to use a codex you downloaded from your favorite torrent site? How could a discerning judge tell the difference between a scan of a document you own, and one obtained by illegal means?
He couldn't, and so would be wasting his time by trying.
In which case, he has the choice of either allowing digital copies of the rules (which a growing number of players are using due to the more widespread use of tablets and the nuisance of carrying around multiple hardcover books), or not allowing them. Not allowing digital copies of some rules would be asinine.
sirlynchmob wrote: If it's allowed to use scanned rules, then would it be allowed to use a codex you downloaded from your favorite torrent site? How could a discerning judge tell the difference between a scan of a document you own, and one obtained by illegal means?
He couldn't, and so would be wasting his time by trying.
In which case, he has the choice of either allowing digital copies of the rules (which a growing number of players are using due to the more widespread use of tablets and the nuisance of carrying around multiple hardcover books), or not allowing them. Not allowing digital copies of some rules would be asinine.
jeffersonian000 wrote: The issue with that oine of thinking is that only those that can afford to pay to win can have the good things. Requiring the official model and box set rules sheet in order to field the Imperial Space Marine is a way of limiting this option to only those that had the money and the free time to snag one. It's the mind set of only the elite should playing this game, the riff-raff can go play X-Wing.
By allowing everyone the option to play an Imperial Space Marine if they want via a suitable conversion, printed rules, and a legal squad to put it in, the game is more accessable and less douchy.
SJ
But the former is what helps keep the game balanced more in the long run. For the reasons you stated (exclusivity, asking price, limited window), very few people will end up getting the model, and therefore very few people in the entire meta will be using one in their armies.
If everyone was allowed to kit-bash an Imperial Marine and print out a grainy .jpg image from google search that shows the rules and field it, EVERYONE would do so because it is like a Black Lotus for the Space Marine army: making it a tiny bit more competitive for no points cost at all. And THAT is a power creep that can be felt everywhere.
I very much agree with what you've said here. There's a reason why he's rare. That's how he should be kept. If you're a SM player, be happy that you had the option of getting extra love at all. I don't hear other races complain the same way.
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: It's a pretty simple question. Do we all agree to play by the same set of rules or do some of us get to use better rules because we spent more money?
This. Either he's good to go in the game in which case anyone willing to model him and print the rules should be able to use him, or he shouldn't be allowed at all.
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: It's a pretty simple question. Do we all agree to play by the same set of rules or do some of us get to use better rules because we spent more money?
You present a false dichotomy, not a simple question.
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: It's a pretty simple question. Do we all agree to play by the same set of rules or do some of us get to use better rules because we spent more money?
You present a false dichotomy, not a simple question.
Quite.
If someone buys angels of death then he has access to rules you do not because he spent more money and this is playing by the rules.
Abadabadoobaddon wrote: It's a pretty simple question. Do we all agree to play by the same set of rules or do some of us get to use better rules because we spent more money?
You present a false dichotomy, not a simple question.
Quite.
If someone buys angels of death then he has access to rules you do not because he spent more money and this is playing by the rules.
We're talking different things here. It isn't really a question of what we own at this moment, but what we have access to. Assume Player A purchased a limited edition model that came with limited edition rules during its narrow window of availability and Player B didn't. Fast forward to today. Player A and Player B don't have access to the same rule set. Player A has more, and potentially better, options. Player A will always be able to build more powerful army lists.
So, to clarify the above comment, some players get to use better rule because they spent more money during a specific point in time. The Angels of Death Supplement is a bad comparison because I can go buy it today. Limited edition rules instantly create a class of "haves" versus a class of "have nots" the second they go out of print. Games Workshop limited edition rules seem particularly bad because they go out of print within minutes or hours of being released.
Again, this seems like a lot of fuss over one model with one wound in an army. If it bothers you that much, focus-fire his unit turn one. Problem solved.
I would ask you to prove that I had not purchased the model and rules, and was using my scan and a conversion as my model and rules are in a display case at home for show only. The judge would agree and you would fail to do so. End of conversation at that point.
Then the judge took everyone out for ice cream and everyone clapped and cheered. And that judge's name? Albert Einstein.
cuda1179 wrote: Serious question now.... Well, only half serious.
If you replace an assault marine with the Imperial Marine, it would technically be legal to give him the jump pack, right?
Probably? A quick read looks OK. You are nor swapping something out that he doesn’t have (He lacks a chainsword and bolt pistol, so a lot of the normal exchanges aren’t possible). The unique rule looks to just be “only one in the army” and doesn’t intrinsically mean “can’t adjust”
Now my common sense is telling me special characters can’t be given extra wargear. But frankly, that’s probably just years of accumulated editions of fantasy/early 40k. And this guy isn’t a special character. Even though he kinda feel like one.
cuda1179 wrote: Serious question now.... Well, only half serious.
If you replace an assault marine with the Imperial Marine, it would technically be legal to give him the jump pack, right?
I forget how it's worded. Does the entry state "Entire unit may take jump packs" or "all space marines in the unit may take jump packs"? If the former, yes; if the later, no.
cuda1179 wrote: Serious question now.... Well, only half serious.
If you replace an assault marine with the Imperial Marine, it would technically be legal to give him the jump pack, right?
I forget how it's worded. Does the entry state "Entire unit may take jump packs" or "all space marines in the unit may take jump packs"? If the former, yes; if the later, no.
"The entire squad may take jump packs...Xpts/model"
Sgt_Smudge wrote: So, basically, he can be deployed in Tactical Squads, Assault Squads, and Devastator squads, seeing how all other units are veterans or have equipment included in their stats?
you can put him in a bike squad as well, and can he go in a chaos space marine squad then?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Draccan wrote: Outside of all the whining, what could this model proxy as if you have multiples?
I am thinking scout snipers due to the scope...
You?
sternguard veteran with combi bolter because its a bloody combi-weapon
That's why I said 'strictly speaking', as 'Space Marine' is a proper name given to basic marines in Tactical, Assault and Devastator Squads. If you're going with a less strict interpretation, then you could say he could replace a dreadnought or Marneus Calgar as they're both 'Space Marines' in a fluff sense.
Ghaz wrote: ..., and a bike squad has 'Space Marine Bikers'.
...who are Space Marines...
I wouldn't allow it. I would argue that in unit type you can't ignore "bikers" just because it says "space marines" in front, and also he can't take a bike. So have fun moving 6" with each bike
The same page as the statement that the number of oranges in your fruit bowl isn't relevant, probably.
Not sure what you're looking for there. You can't just make an unsupported claim and then demand a page number to disprove it. If you have seen something in the rules that would make the unit type relevant, please post it.
insaniak wrote: The unit type isn't relevant to determining who is an isn't a Space Marine.
True.
However, the model name for the Unit Profile and Composition IS significant, and "Space Marine Biker" does not equal "Space Marine". The former is used for the most common model in a Space Marine Bike Squad, while the latter is the most common model in Space Marine Tactical, Assault, and Devastator Squads.
A Space Marine given a Jump Pack as part of his Assault Squad upgrades changes from Infantry to Jump Infantry, but still remains a Space Marine. A Veteran upgraded to an Apothecary is still an Infantry model, but is no longer a Veteran.
Does it make sense that you would buy a dreadnaught for over 100 points and swap out for this guy, simply because they are both faction Space Marines ? No, that is clearly not the intent.
There is no rule or page number that can explain this, but lets look at some simple reasoning... because that is how GW leaves us to operate.
Lets look at a dread data slate; The name is "Dreadnaught".
Lets look further at a character name on a slate Sargeant Telion is, "Sargeant Telion".
Notice how both of those in their data slate do not reference "Space Marine" as explained in the Imperial marine data slate rule of "One Space Marine in your army may be replaced with Imperial Space Marine at no additional points cost". Cool, so lets look at the Imperial Space Marine data slate.. Name: Imperial Space Marine.
Seems clear so far.. but just in case let us look at the Tactical squad data slate. Here you will find names, "Space Marine", "Space Marine Sargeant", "Veteran Sargeant", each with their own profile.
Given the clear intention of GW to use the dataslate profile name which is unique per profile throughout all their rules, it would continue to be their intention that you would be using that here as well. Thus, this special marine Imperial Space Marine could replace a Space Marine in a tactical squad, but not a Space marine Sargeant nor a Veteran Sargeant
As for Assault squads and Devastators, I can not recall their data slates at the moment. If they use Space Marine as their profile name, then you would be able to substitute one of them, but again not their sargeants.
Insaniak is making a good point, however. Every model is a "spacemarine" in some way, bar the servitors. It depends on the definition you are going for.
From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Exactly
The bolded assumption is the key point being made though - while context implies that this is the model name, it could as easily be faction. This is due to GWs insistence on colliding faction, ALE and model names.
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Exactly
The bolded assumption is the key point being made though - while context implies that this is the model name, it could as easily be faction. This is due to GWs insistence on colliding faction, ALE and model names.
Could be, but the profile name on the dataslate is Imperial Space Marine
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Exactly
The bolded assumption is the key point being made though - while context implies that this is the model name, it could as easily be faction. This is due to GWs insistence on colliding faction, ALE and model names.
If it said "a model with the Space Marines Faction" I would agree in a second. It says "Space Marine". Occam's Razor dictates that it's most likely that the thing being named is being named using its Name and not its Faction. Anything else is a stretch. That the Space Marines Faction shared a similar name with some of the models belonging to that Faction is a coincidence. Replace the Space Marine bit with a different Faction and see if the sentence still makes sense...
"One Space Marine in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
vs.
"One Tau Empire in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
Faction simply doesn't make sense in this context.
nosferatu1001 wrote: I wasnt disagreeing.
I was agreeing that it was an assumption. A likely correct one, but still an assumption.
I was responding to your "it could easily be the faction" bit. The sentence doesn't make sense if it's the faction, so I don't think it actually could easily be the faction.
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Exactly
The bolded assumption is the key point being made though - while context implies that this is the model name, it could as easily be faction. This is due to GWs insistence on colliding faction, ALE and model names.
If it said "a model with the Space Marines Faction" I would agree in a second. It says "Space Marine". Occam's Razor dictates that it's most likely that the thing being named is being named using its Name and not its Faction. Anything else is a stretch. That the Space Marines Faction shared a similar name with some of the models belonging to that Faction is a coincidence. Replace the Space Marine bit with a different Faction and see if the sentence still makes sense...
"One Space Marine in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
vs.
"One Tau Empire in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
Faction simply doesn't make sense in this context.
so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
AS it's GW, we'll never know their intent, but they've used "space marine" to mean everything listed in their codex previously, so it can be used the same way for the 30th marine.
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Exactly
The bolded assumption is the key point being made though - while context implies that this is the model name, it could as easily be faction. This is due to GWs insistence on colliding faction, ALE and model names.
If it said "a model with the Space Marines Faction" I would agree in a second. It says "Space Marine". Occam's Razor dictates that it's most likely that the thing being named is being named using its Name and not its Faction. Anything else is a stretch. That the Space Marines Faction shared a similar name with some of the models belonging to that Faction is a coincidence. Replace the Space Marine bit with a different Faction and see if the sentence still makes sense...
"One Space Marine in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
vs.
"One Tau Empire in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
Faction simply doesn't make sense in this context.
so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
AS it's GW, we'll never know their intent, but they've used "space marine" to mean everything listed in their codex previously, so it can be used the same way for the 30th marine.
Except the Preferred Enemy rule states that it can be applied to a faction. Don't use straw men. They burn down easily.
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Exactly
The bolded assumption is the key point being made though - while context implies that this is the model name, it could as easily be faction. This is due to GWs insistence on colliding faction, ALE and model names.
If it said "a model with the Space Marines Faction" I would agree in a second. It says "Space Marine". Occam's Razor dictates that it's most likely that the thing being named is being named using its Name and not its Faction. Anything else is a stretch. That the Space Marines Faction shared a similar name with some of the models belonging to that Faction is a coincidence. Replace the Space Marine bit with a different Faction and see if the sentence still makes sense...
"One Space Marine in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
vs.
"One Tau Empire in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
Faction simply doesn't make sense in this context.
so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
AS it's GW, we'll never know their intent, but they've used "space marine" to mean everything listed in their codex previously, so it can be used the same way for the 30th marine.
Except the Preferred Enemy rule states that it can be applied to a faction. Don't use straw men. They burn down easily.
except it doesn't, you might want to reread the rule and rethink your answer.
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Exactly
The bolded assumption is the key point being made though - while context implies that this is the model name, it could as easily be faction. This is due to GWs insistence on colliding faction, ALE and model names.
If it said "a model with the Space Marines Faction" I would agree in a second. It says "Space Marine". Occam's Razor dictates that it's most likely that the thing being named is being named using its Name and not its Faction. Anything else is a stretch. That the Space Marines Faction shared a similar name with some of the models belonging to that Faction is a coincidence. Replace the Space Marine bit with a different Faction and see if the sentence still makes sense...
"One Space Marine in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
vs.
"One Tau Empire in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
Faction simply doesn't make sense in this context.
so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
AS it's GW, we'll never know their intent, but they've used "space marine" to mean everything listed in their codex previously, so it can be used the same way for the 30th marine.
Are you talking about a specific case of 'Preferred Enemy: Space Marines'? If its the one from Codex Chaos Space Marines then the codex clarifies exactly what is covered (Designer's Note, pg. 28).
sirlynchmob wrote: so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
AS it's GW, we'll never know their intent, but they've used "space marine" to mean everything listed in their codex previously, so it can be used the same way for the 30th marine.
Preferred Enemy generally lists the Faction in parenthesis. Completely different situation. I can't think of a specific instance where a model has a version of Preferred Enemy that targets other models by name.
They may have used "Space Marine(s)" to mean a variety of things, but we're told that we can replace "One Space Marine in your army...". Which of these makes sense?
1. "One Space Marine (model's name) in your army can be replaced..."
2. "One Space Marine (unit's name) in your army can be replaced..."
3. "One Space Marine (faction's name) in your army can be replaced..."
My contention is that context pretty clearly shows that only option 1 makes sense.
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Exactly
The bolded assumption is the key point being made though - while context implies that this is the model name, it could as easily be faction. This is due to GWs insistence on colliding faction, ALE and model names.
If it said "a model with the Space Marines Faction" I would agree in a second. It says "Space Marine". Occam's Razor dictates that it's most likely that the thing being named is being named using its Name and not its Faction. Anything else is a stretch. That the Space Marines Faction shared a similar name with some of the models belonging to that Faction is a coincidence. Replace the Space Marine bit with a different Faction and see if the sentence still makes sense...
"One Space Marine in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
vs.
"One Tau Empire in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
Faction simply doesn't make sense in this context.
so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
AS it's GW, we'll never know their intent, but they've used "space marine" to mean everything listed in their codex previously, so it can be used the same way for the 30th marine.
Are you talking about a specific case of 'Preferred Enemy: Space Marines'? If its the one from Codex Chaos Space Marines then the codex clarifies exactly what is covered (Designer's Note, pg. 28).
Right, and if you use that as precedence, think of all the fun places Bob (my new name for the 2016 guy) can be used.
sirlynchmob wrote: so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
AS it's GW, we'll never know their intent, but they've used "space marine" to mean everything listed in their codex previously, so it can be used the same way for the 30th marine.
Preferred Enemy generally lists the Faction in parenthesis. Completely different situation. I can't think of a specific instance where a model has a version of Preferred Enemy that targets other models by name.
They may have used "Space Marine(s)" to mean a variety of things, but we're told that we can replace "One Space Marine in your army...". Which of these makes sense?
1. "One Space Marine (model's name) in your army can be replaced..."
2. "One Space Marine (unit's name) in your army can be replaced..."
3. "One Space Marine (faction's name) in your army can be replaced..."
My contention is that context pretty clearly shows that only option 1 makes sense.
Yes 1 makes sense, it could even be the intent, but is it RAW? well apparently it's debatable.
sirlynchmob wrote: Yes 1 makes sense, it could even be the intent, but is it RAW? well apparently it's debatable.
Everything is debatable.
What isn't debatable is that models have names. This is clearly defined on each datasheet. Calling the power armored dude on a bike model a "Space Marine Biker" has absolute RaW support. Calling him a "Space Marine" is a gamer shorthand with no actual RaW support. It's a fluff based thing. Per the rules, he's a "Space Marine Biker" or a model with the "Space Marines" Faction. The rules wouldn't refer to him as a "Space Marine". That's something only we as gamers do.
sirlynchmob wrote: Yes 1 makes sense, it could even be the intent, but is it RAW? well apparently it's debatable.
Everything is debatable.
What isn't debatable is that models have names. This is clearly defined on each datasheet. Calling the power armored dude on a bike model a "Space Marine Biker" has absolute RaW support. Calling him a "Space Marine" is a gamer shorthand with no actual RaW support. It's a fluff based thing. Per the rules, he's a "Space Marine Biker" or a model with the "Space Marines" Faction. The rules wouldn't refer to him as a "Space Marine". That's something only we as gamers do.
We as gamers, including those gamers who write the rules, would also consider a space marine biker to be a space marine though.
Also, the basic guy in tac/ass/dev squads is a "space marine" but the faction is "space marines". Not the same and therefore clear that the rule is not referring to the faction.
sirlynchmob wrote: Yes 1 makes sense, it could even be the intent, but is it RAW? well apparently it's debatable.
Everything is debatable.
What isn't debatable is that models have names. This is clearly defined on each datasheet. Calling the power armored dude on a bike model a "Space Marine Biker" has absolute RaW support. Calling him a "Space Marine" is a gamer shorthand with no actual RaW support. It's a fluff based thing. Per the rules, he's a "Space Marine Biker" or a model with the "Space Marines" Faction. The rules wouldn't refer to him as a "Space Marine". That's something only we as gamers do.
We as gamers, including those gamers who write the rules, would also consider a space marine biker to be a space marine though.
Sure, from a fluff standpoint... but not from a rules standpoint. There are pretty explicit rules about how models/units/factions/etc are named.
Kriswall wrote: From a rules standpoint, every model has a name. We're told that we can swap any one "Space Marine" in the army for the "Imperial Space Marine". Since "Imperial Space Marine" is the new model's name, it's fair to assume that "Space Marine" is the replaced model's name.
"Space Marine Biker" isn't the same as "Space Marine" in the same way that "Marneus Calgar" isn't the same as "Space Marine", so wouldn't be eligible for replacement.
Exactly
The bolded assumption is the key point being made though - while context implies that this is the model name, it could as easily be faction. This is due to GWs insistence on colliding faction, ALE and model names.
If it said "a model with the Space Marines Faction" I would agree in a second. It says "Space Marine". Occam's Razor dictates that it's most likely that the thing being named is being named using its Name and not its Faction. Anything else is a stretch. That the Space Marines Faction shared a similar name with some of the models belonging to that Faction is a coincidence. Replace the Space Marine bit with a different Faction and see if the sentence still makes sense...
"One Space Marine in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
vs.
"One Tau Empire in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
Faction simply doesn't make sense in this context.
so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
AS it's GW, we'll never know their intent, but they've used "space marine" to mean everything listed in their codex previously, so it can be used the same way for the 30th marine.
Are you talking about a specific case of 'Preferred Enemy: Space Marines'? If its the one from Codex Chaos Space Marines then the codex clarifies exactly what is covered (Designer's Note, pg. 28).
Right, and if you use that as precedence, think of all the fun places Bob (my new name for the 2016 guy) can be used.
Its most definitely not a precedent. Its clearly a 'in this instance we mean this' case.
so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
Correct. Fortunately the rule is Preferred enemy (space marines) making it clear that it's referring to the faction and not (space marine) which would be referring only to models of that name.
so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
Correct. Fortunately the rule is Preferred enemy (space marines) making it clear that it's referring to the faction and not (space marine) which would be referring only to models of that name.
it actually identifies a specific type of foe. specifically space marines. the rules for PE don't make it clear that it's referring to the faction, that's just a widely held assumption.
If PE space marines refer to the whole codex, then replacing 1 space marine would also refer to anyone in the codex.
Or if replacing 1 space marine, only applies to those named space marine, than PE would also only apply to those named space marines.
so preferred enemy space marine would only work on "space marines", not bikers, librarians, sgts?
Correct. Fortunately the rule is Preferred enemy (space marines) making it clear that it's referring to the faction and not (space marine) which would be referring only to models of that name.
it actually identifies a specific type of foe. specifically space marines. the rules for PE don't make it clear that it's referring to the faction, that's just a widely held assumption.
If PE space marines refer to the whole codex, then replacing 1 space marine would also refer to anyone in the codex.
Or if replacing 1 space marine, only applies to those named space marine, than PE would also only apply to those named space marines.
No, there are two distinct terms in use here.
"space marines" is a faction.
"space marine" is a model name.
They are not interchangeable. PE refers to "space marines" which is a faction name. The anniversary model refers to "space marine" which is a model name.
Do you have any examples where those terms are not used in that way to support your argument? (i.e. where "space marine" is used to refer to the faction of where "space marines" is used to refer to models with the name space marine.)
sirlynchmob wrote: Or if replacing 1 space marine, only applies to those named space marine, than PE would also only apply to those named space marines.
do you see right there where your argument falls short? You are arguing the exact text yet you don't have that. Space Marine is not the same text as Space MarineS
Also look at other examples of preferred enemy. It is clear that they are all faction names. Literally every other instance I can think of.
It is mere coincidence that the model profile name on the data slate is similar to the overall Faction name. But even then the faction is referred too in its plural tense, and the model name its singular tense.
PE(Characters) exists, so that is definitely not a faction name, but doesnt undermine that space marinE and space marineS are two different things entirely
really, you're arguing and using a plural instead of singular?
it's one space marine, they used the singular version of the word. You can have many space marines in your army, more than one, plural. so you assume because they referred to two space marines, that some how extrapolates to the whole codex?
space marine = 1
space marines = 2 or more of the singular space marine.
sirlynchmob wrote: really, you're arguing and using a plural instead of singular?
it's one space marine, they used the singular version of the word. You can have many space marines in your army, more than one, plural. so you assume because they referred to two space marines, that some how extrapolates to the whole codex?
space marine = 1
space marines = 2 or more of the singular space marine.
Do you have an example where the space marines faction is referred to as "space marine" because this seems to be one of the few things that they're consistent with.
"One Space Marine in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
vs.
"One Tau Empire in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
Faction simply doesn't make sense in this context.
Faction doesn't, no.
However, if your example instead said "One Tau in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..." we would have a similar problem to the one we have with the Space Marine rule.
"One Space Marine in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..." vs. "One Tau Empire in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..."
Faction simply doesn't make sense in this context.
Faction doesn't, no.
However, if your example instead said "One Tau in your army can be replaced with the Imperial Space Marine at..." we would have a similar problem to the one we have with the Space Marine rule.
I'll give you that, but I can't think of a single instance where a model is referred to by his "fluff race" from a rules perspective. Models are generally referred to by their name, faction or some other rules based signifier (e.g. Characters, Psykers, etc). We've established that Faction doesn't make sense. I don't think "fluff race" makes sense either sense it's not a normal rules concept.
Space Marines in particular muddy the issue because their "fluff race", Faction and model name can all be more or less the same... Space Marine, Space Marines, Space Marine. With a basic Tau Empire troop, you'd be looking at Tau, Tau Empire, Fire Warrior.
To continue that example, say GW releases an Imperial Fire Warrior model. Do you think the rules for him would say "One Tau in your army may be replaced..." or "One Fire Warrior in your army may be replaced..."? Total judgment call, but I think they'd use Fire Warrior because I think they're naming the model that can be replaced.
I'll give you that, but I can't think of a single instance where a model is referred to by his "fluff race" from a rules perspective.
The obvious one that comes to mind is And They Shall Know No Fear. Before it was a USR, it was for a time just a blanket special rule that applied to 'Space Marines'.
To continue that example, say GW releases an Imperial Fire Warrior model. Do you think the rules for him would say "One Tau in your army may be replaced..." or "One Fire Warrior in your army may be replaced..."? Total judgment call, but I think they'd use Fire Warrior because I think they're naming the model that can be replaced.
I suspect that would depend on which Tau models they intended it to be able to replace.
I'll give you that, but I can't think of a single instance where a model is referred to by his "fluff race" from a rules perspective.
The obvious one that comes to mind is And They Shall Know No Fear. Before it was a USR, it was for a time just a blanket special rule that applied to 'Space Marines'.
That was the 5th edition codex. The concept of factions hadn't been formalized at that point.
insaniak wrote: That doesn't change the point, since my argument has nothing to do with Factions.
Yet the only example you could come up with for GW using a "fluff race" in a rule was from at least two editions ago. It doesn't strengthen your argument.
Kriswall wrote: Yet the only example you could come up with for GW using a "fluff race" in a rule was from at least two editions ago. It doesn't strengthen your argument.
You said that you couldn't think of another instance of GW doing this. I provided one.
It shouldn't have actually been necessary anyway, since a rule being unique in no way makes it any less valid.
To be clear here, I'm not saying that GW clearly intended for you to be able to replace any space marine in the army with the special guy. I'm more on the 'it's unclear' side of the fence. I strongly suspect that the rules for this guy were scrawled down in someone's lunch break, and they didn't really put a lot of thought into them. Within that, it's possible that they meant for people to go by the profile line. It's also possible that the intended for you to be able to swap him in for any reasonably equivalently sized space marine, and just didn't bother specifically excluding things like bikers and dreadnoughts because, really, who would want to?
The former would limit him to Tactical and Devastator squads. The latter would allow you to replace Veterans or characters... and I can't see that doing so would be a particularly big deal.
Sigh. Thanks, 123ply, for showing the emotional maturity of an extremely offensive twelve year old.
Many of us debate on this rules forum because we like the debate... not because we're horrible people who are impossible to game with and nitpick every detail. In a real game situation, I imagine most of us would just say 'whatever works' or dice off and move on with the game.
I act as tournament organizer from time to time. This forum is a great exercise in 'having the argument' ahead of time, learning the peculiarities of both sides of an argument and being prepared to make a decision when something pops up.
In terms of the Imperial Space Marine, we have several options. Being told that "One Space Marine in your army can be replaced..." must either be referring to...
1. Any model with the name "Space Marine".
2. Any model chosen from Codex: Space Marines.
3. Any model who is considered to be a Space Marine from a fluff standpoint. This would include pretty much everything except Servitors, Fenrisian Wolves, etc. from Codexes Space Marines, Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves and Grey Knights. Those books are chock full of Space Marines.
To me, #1 seems most likely as we're told that 'one X can be replaced with a Y". Y is the profile name of a specific model. It stands to reason that X is also the profile name of a specific model. Any other interpretation is going to be potentially valid, but less reasonable. Since this is ambiguous, we either wait for an FAQ or go with the most reasonable interpretation.
So this is like upgrading a space marine captain to a chaptermaster or whether we can have more than one dreadnought when we are told that the formation needs 1 dreadnought?
It's clear that there is no correct answer. I'd let them substitute a SM biker.
Naw wrote: It's clear that there is no correct answer. I'd let them substitute a SM biker.
A foolish move. They would be anchored by the Imperial Space Marine or risk moving out of Coherency. Space Marine Bikers come with their Bikes and do not have them added on. The Imperial Space Marine does not have this option.
Assault Squads are a different discussion and closer to the discussion regarding Wolf Scouts and the Wolf Guard Pack Leader.
Naw wrote: It's clear that there is no correct answer. I'd let them substitute a SM biker.
A foolish move. They would be anchored by the Imperial Space Marine or risk moving out of Coherency. Space Marine Bikers come with their Bikes and do not have them added on. The Imperial Space Marine does not have this option.
Naw wrote: It's clear that there is no correct answer. I'd let them substitute a SM biker.
A foolish move. They would be anchored by the Imperial Space Marine or risk moving out of Coherency. Space Marine Bikers come with their Bikes and do not have them added on. The Imperial Space Marine does not have this option.
Naw wrote: It's clear that there is no correct answer. I'd let them substitute a SM biker.
A foolish move. They would be anchored by the Imperial Space Marine or risk moving out of Coherency. Space Marine Bikers come with their Bikes and do not have them added on. The Imperial Space Marine does not have this option.
I would let them have the bike also
And then no one plays you. Gg no re
Letting someone have more options will cause people not to want to play against you?
Naw wrote: It's clear that there is no correct answer. I'd let them substitute a SM biker.
A foolish move. They would be anchored by the Imperial Space Marine or risk moving out of Coherency. Space Marine Bikers come with their Bikes and do not have them added on. The Imperial Space Marine does not have this option.
I would let them have the bike also
And then no one plays you. Gg no re
Letting someone have more options will cause people not to want to play against you?
You let people do things with models when that model doesn't allow certain things to be done, such as take a bike?
Naw wrote: It's clear that there is no correct answer. I'd let them substitute a SM biker.
A foolish move. They would be anchored by the Imperial Space Marine or risk moving out of Coherency. Space Marine Bikers come with their Bikes and do not have them added on. The Imperial Space Marine does not have this option.
I would let them have the bike also
And then no one plays you. Gg no re
Letting someone have more options will cause people not to want to play against you?
You let people do things with models when that model doesn't allow certain things to be done, such as take a bike?[/quote
Exactly this. Same thing with jump packs. The Imperial Marine cam NOT take it, nor can Chaos Marine players legally take the Imperial Space Marine into their army ]
Ghaz wrote: So there is no rule that forbids him from taking an upgrade that applies to models in the unit he is placed in.
No, since you can't provide a rule and we can't provide a rule, the game stops until you become rational and realize that in his data slate he has no permission to take anything of the sort. He does not have any rule likewise stating he can take things from codex space marines. Your failure to do so and your only argument of "well.. It.. It doesn't say I can't do ha!" Is obviously a sign of really wanting to do something you can't. Gg no re
Ghaz wrote: So there is no rule that forbids him from taking an upgrade that applies to models in the unit he is placed in.
No, since you can't provide a rule and we can't provide a rule, the game stops until you become rational and realize that in his data slate he has no permission to take anything of the sort. He does not have any rule likewise stating he can take things from codex space marines. Your failure to do so and your only argument of "well.. It.. It doesn't say I can't do ha!" Is obviously a sign of really wanting to do something you can't. Gg no re
Except I can provide a rule. From Codex Space Marines:
The entire squad may take jump packs…x pts/model
The Imperial Space Marine is a model in the squad and therefore eligible to take a jump pack. Now please provide a rule that says he's not a model in the squad.
Ghaz wrote: So there is no rule that forbids him from taking an upgrade that applies to models in the unit he is placed in.
No, since you can't provide a rule and we can't provide a rule, the game stops until you become rational and realize that in his data slate he has no permission to take anything of the sort. He does not have any rule likewise stating he can take things from codex space marines. Your failure to do so and your only argument of "well.. It.. It doesn't say I can't do ha!" Is obviously a sign of really wanting to do something you can't. Gg no re
Except I can provide a rule. From Codex Space Marines:
The entire squad may take jump packs…x pts/model
The Imperial Space Marine is a model in the squad and therefore eligible to take a jump pack. Now please provide a rule that says he's not a model in the squad.
Oh see now you are Chaning words agains he can replace a space marine not biker or assault marine sadly. And to humor your attempts and shinanigans I will say he can replace a biker or assault troop. He is only given permission to replace them, they come stock with the equipment. He is never given permission to purchase said equipment. And even if he was put in a troop that could purchase said equipments he is never yet again given permission to do so. Now please stop wasting our time and provide actual rules support your claim as to not look further like a fool. Gg no re = good game no rematch since obviously you are oblivious to the fact
The Imperial Space Marine is a model in the squad and therefore eligible to take a jump pack. Now please provide a rule that says he's not a model in the squad.
This is legit. You have to take liberties with the sequencing, and go against the obvious intent (and defiling the frankly beautiful backpack the imperial space marine comes with :p)
The sequencing is wonky, but as you aren't told how you go about 'replacing' a model, it seems fine.
Pain4Pleasure wrote: Oh see now you are Chaning words agains he can replace a space marine not biker or assault marine sadly. And to humor your attempts and shinanigans I will say he can replace a biker or assault troop. He is only given permission to replace them, they come stock with the equipment. He is never given permission to purchase said equipment. And even if he was put in a troop that could purchase said equipments he is never yet again given permission to do so. Now please stop wasting our time and provide actual rules support your claim as to not look further like a fool. Gg no re = good game no rematch since obviously you are oblivious to the fact
Perhaps you should actually read the Assault Squad entry in the codex before you make claims that you can't support with actual rules.
Pain4Pleasure wrote: Oh see now you are Chaning words agains he can replace a space marine not biker or assault marine sadly. And to humor your attempts and shinanigans I will say he can replace a biker or assault troop. He is only given permission to replace them, they come stock with the equipment. He is never given permission to purchase said equipment. And even if he was put in a troop that could purchase said equipments he is never yet again given permission to do so. Now please stop wasting our time and provide actual rules support your claim as to not look further like a fool. Gg no re = good game no rematch since obviously you are oblivious to the fact
Perhaps you should actually read the Assault Squad entry in the codex before you make claims that you can't support with actual rules.
Perhaps you should actually prove he can join a bike squad and be on a bike. And prove where he can join an assault squad when he can only replace a space marine.
Pain4Pleasure wrote: And even if he was put in a troop that could purchase said equipments he is never yet again given permission to do so.
Ghaz just quoted the rule that specifically allows him to take the equipment.
If you assume that he can be put in an assault squad (which he can, as the squad members are Space Marines), he has just as much permission as any other member of the unit to purchase a jump pack.
Pain4Pleasure wrote: Oh see now you are Chaning words agains he can replace a space marine not biker or assault marine sadly. And to humor your attempts and shinanigans I will say he can replace a biker or assault troop. He is only given permission to replace them, they come stock with the equipment. He is never given permission to purchase said equipment. And even if he was put in a troop that could purchase said equipments he is never yet again given permission to do so. Now please stop wasting our time and provide actual rules support your claim as to not look further like a fool. Gg no re = good game no rematch since obviously you are oblivious to the fact
Perhaps you should actually read the Assault Squad entry in the codex before you make claims that you can't support with actual rules.
Perhaps you should actually prove he can join a bike squad and be on a bike. And prove where he can join an assault squad when he can only replace a space marine.
Again, proof that you've never looked at the Assault Squad entry.
Pain4Pleasure wrote: Oh see now you are Chaning words agains he can replace a space marine not biker or assault marine sadly. And to humor your attempts and shinanigans I will say he can replace a biker or assault troop. He is only given permission to replace them, they come stock with the equipment. He is never given permission to purchase said equipment. And even if he was put in a troop that could purchase said equipments he is never yet again given permission to do so. Now please stop wasting our time and provide actual rules support your claim as to not look further like a fool. Gg no re = good game no rematch since obviously you are oblivious to the fact
Perhaps you should actually read the Assault Squad entry in the codex before you make claims that you can't support with actual rules.
Perhaps you should actually prove he can join a bike squad and be on a bike. And prove where he can join an assault squad when he can only replace a space marine.
Again, proof that you've never looked at the Assault Squad entry.
Funny, care to quote the rules on whom he can replace? If it only says space marines, and those are assault space marines, assault is missing and therefore can not be taken. Sorry man.. Won't fly.. Being a part of codex space marines doesn't make it possible. Can't replace a dreadnought with him.. And a dreadnought is a "space marine" in a sense, but not gw intention
Pain4Pleasure wrote: Funny, care to quote the rules on whom he can replace? If it only says space marines, and those are assault space marines...
This proves once again that you haven't bothered reading the Assault Squad unit entry, specifically the unit composition. I'm done wasting my time with someone who doesn't have the common courtesy to read the rules he's arguing.
.
A quick read looks OK. You are nor swapping something out that he doesn’t have (He lacks a chainsword and bolt pistol, so a lot of the normal exchanges aren’t possible). The unique rule looks to just be “only one in the army” and doesn’t intrinsically mean “can’t adjust”
