I cannot be reading this correctly. Did they take all the weapons away from the Autarchs?

That is crazy. They have had those since forever!

Someone tell me I'm wrong.

No model= No rules

Unless you are tyranid where "Model=Rules"

But hey, now you can snipe characters with that sweet 6" gun!

 ArmyC wrote:
I cannot be reading this correctly. Did they take all the weapons away from the Autarchs?

That is crazy. They have had those since forever!

Someone tell me I'm wrong.

basically, if it's not available on a model GW sells, it's no longer a game option.

 Vaktathi wrote:
basically, if it's not available on a model GW sells, it's no longer a game option.

The non-winged, non-bike Autarch doesn't have a model, and yet it's in the Codex.

Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

 Cream Tea wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
basically, if it's not available on a model GW sells, it's no longer a game option.

The non-winged, non-bike Autarch doesn't have a model, and yet it's in the Codex.

Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

they had it on the "last chance" sale a few days ago, if im not mistaken, part of the old models they pulled out for another run recently

 Cream Tea wrote:
Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

It's not as clear as that, but that's discussed in other threads.

Thank Chapter House for the current state of No Model, No Rules.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:
Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

It's not as clear as that, but that's discussed in other threads.

Thank Chapter House for the current state of No Model, No Rules.

Why?

 Cream Tea wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
basically, if it's not available on a model GW sells, it's no longer a game option.

The non-winged, non-bike Autarch doesn't have a model, and yet it's in the Codex.

Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

Yreil is technically an Autarch on foot that they still sell. Plus the winged Autarch can be assembled without wings. But I get what you are saying

And yes, This is just like Biker Librarians (no model, thus no Codex entry) and the Twin Autocannon Dreanought (Dread model exists, but has never included Autocannons, thus its Codex entry does not have the option). Both of these have been clearly FAQ'd to be legal options using the points from the Codex if applicable.
So the Autarch with Jump Generator would be more like the Biker Libbie
Any foot, winged or skyrunner Autarch with a Reaper Launcher would be like the twin Autocannon Dread.

The big question I have is about Banshee Masks. All Autarch variants had access in the Index, but none have it in the Codex.
Assuming the above is true, than you can still use a Banshee mask, but what version? Index or Codex?

-

 ArmyC wrote:
I cannot be reading this correctly. Did they take all the weapons away from the Autarchs?

That is crazy. They have had those since forever!

Someone tell me I'm wrong.

Yep, GW in its wonderful hypocrisy, give gray knights the baby carrier captain, ya know no buy able model required just modify it, here is how. Then nerf the autarchs with a nerf anvil, because modification/bashing is for gray knights. Don't you get it? Ugh, it is like you expect consistency and logic or something. There is three decades of poor decisions. why would they change now?

Just enjoy the fact this was only one really bad/pointless nerfing of a customised model invalidated. It could have been a squatting.

My autarch on skyrunner "jet bike" with banshee mask and laser lance will be crying in the display case. Until 10th edition? hazz'ah.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:

The non-winged, non-bike Autarch doesn't have a model, and yet it's in the Codex.

Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

they had it on the "last chance" sale a few days ago, if im not mistaken, part of the old models they pulled out for another run recently

The codex Autarch has a Star glaive, there is no such Autarch model. They're basically expecting you to convert him out of Yriel.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:
Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

It's not as clear as that, but that's discussed in other threads.

I know it's not a clear-cut issue, but so far I haven't seen any argument made that you can't bring an index-only datasheet model like an Autarch with Warp Jump Generator. The controversy is over whether you could bring index-only wargear for a model that has a codex entry.

pm713 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:
Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

It's not as clear as that, but that's discussed in other threads.

Thank Chapter House for the current state of No Model, No Rules.

Why?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Chapter+House+Games+Workshop

TL;DR Chapter House made 3rd party models but used GW's Trademarked names. GW Sued, Court Case went to hell, GW responded by throwing it's toys out of the pram and started renaming stuff by addling vowels or latin and giving everything adjective nounverb names because COPYRIGHT!

Chapter house should have just backed down, changed the names and been smarter.
But nope, they had to take a stand and screw everyone.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Chapter house should have just backed down, changed the names and been smarter.
But nope, they had to take a stand and screw everyone.

To be fair though, GW really should make models to represent their rules in the first place.
The true shame here is that instead of making those models with all the possible options, they've chosen to drop any option they do not produce instead.

And here's GW's response.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Chapter house should have just backed down, changed the names and been smarter.
But nope, they had to take a stand and screw everyone.

Even if they did perform the action that caused GW's reaction, only GW is responsible for the way GW reacted.

 Galas wrote:
No model= No rules

Unless you are tyranid where "Model=Rules"

I find it pretty funny that if the rumor are correct, they went as far as to give the gribbly spore things in the gemestealer sprue rules.

Only thing I can think of is that they’re hoping people will pick up Yriel as a ‘generic’ Autarch, or as a very minor bone thrown to people who’ve modelled up... something. There’s an outside chance of a foot Autarch but the model wasn’t quite ready and we’ll see it in a few weeks, but I doubt it.

(Also, the ‘we can’t ask someone to make up a model’ after they trumpeted long and hard about the glories of knocking up your own Guard regiment is a bit off)

On the other hand, I now have a second use for that Dire Avenger exarch with the glaive, should I play someone sufficiently picky about things.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:
Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

It's not as clear as that, but that's discussed in other threads.

Thank Chapter House for the current state of No Model, No Rules.

Why?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Chapter+House+Games+Workshop

TL;DR Chapter House made 3rd party models but used GW's Trademarked names. GW Sued, Court Case went to hell, GW responded by throwing it's toys out of the pram and started renaming stuff by addling vowels or latin and giving everything adjective nounverb names because COPYRIGHT!

Sounds like GW's fault to me.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Galas wrote:
No model= No rules

Unless you are tyranid where "Model=Rules"

I find it pretty funny that if the rumor are correct, they went as far as to give the gribbly spore things in the gemestealer sprue rules.

Yes, Tyranids are the only ones that have gain instead of lose things about this new GW policy

 Galas wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Galas wrote:
No model= No rules

Unless you are tyranid where "Model=Rules"

I find it pretty funny that if the rumor are correct, they went as far as to give the gribbly spore things in the gemestealer sprue rules.

Yes, Tyranids are the only ones that have gain instead of lose things about this new GW policy

But they had rules for all of that junk in 4th. Then GW decided "that's dumb" and removed almost all of the options for 3 straight editions. Now they are coming back because "its already on the sprue!"

The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

Ruin wrote:
And here's GW's response.

Yep, GW still doesn't get it. If I have to use house rules for a model then GW has failed at their job. But let's just keep pretending that 8th edition isn't a complete dumpster fire, and "new GW" is suddenly a great company...

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

Yeah, despite all the good will they've built up with me, that singular line rubs me the wrong way. Anyone remember the following snippet from the 3.5 CSM codex?

8th edition, in my opinion, is awesome. I've played since 5th edition. No complaints from me. One thing that helps is that I have complete collections of the factions I play. Nerf my Warp Spiders? Cool, now I get to dust off my Shining Spears.

That said, I was sooooo hoping to equip my Autarch with a Reaper Launcher then take the sniper warlord trait.

Would that be considered greedy?

Yes actually, it would.

 ArmyC wrote:
8th edition, in my opinion, is awesome. I've played since 5th edition. No complaints from me. One thing that helps is that I have complete collections of the factions I play. Nerf my Warp Spiders? Cool, now I get to dust off my Shining Spears.

That said, I was sooooo hoping to equip my Autarch with a Reaper Launcher then take the sniper warlord trait.

Would that be considered greedy?

How dare you try to model for advantage! Greedy WAAC scum!

Or you can use the Index Profile; this is legal as "certain loadouts are no longer avaliable".

Check the FAQs.

The way that GW is handing this is asinine.

If you want to limit kits to options that are present in the kit, sure, kinda a jerk move, but sure.

If you don't. Yay, they've upheld the core tenement of conversion and customization.

But this bizarre streak of disallowing options in the codex, only to immediately follow up by allowing said options again in a strange little index workaround has left me utterly dumbfounded.

Am I the only one who thinks that 90% of these modeling concerns could be solved if GW just released weapon sprues like the Space Marines get?

TheBaconPope wrote:
The way that GW is handing this is asinine.

If you want to limit kits to options that are present in the kit, sure, kinda a jerk move, but sure.

If you don't. Yay, they've upheld the core tenement of conversion and customization.

But this bizarre streak of disallowing options in the codex, only to immediately follow up by allowing said options again in a strange little index workaround has left me utterly dumbfounded.

Am I the only one who thinks that 90% of these modeling concerns could be solved if GW just released weapon sprues like the Space Marines get?

A lot of issues could be solved if GW just issues upgrade packs that actually mattered, instead of Chapter upgrade packs (for chapters with EXISTING UNIQUE MODELS) that only 20% of marine players actually care about.

In the case of, say, the Autarch, you could in theory tweak/retool the Aspect Warrior kits to have proper weapon swaps/sprues. 5 Reapers give you 6 Reaper Launchers of flexible poses, one EML, one Tempest Launcher and one Shuriken Cannon. Bam, you have a spare weapon for your Autarch, and it makes sense: Buy a Dark Reaper kit, get Dark Reaper bitz for said Autarch. Add a mini-kitbash guide so Timmy isn't scared off.

Most of the Eldar range is already painfully overdue for plastics anyway, with hideous Finecast out the wazoo anyway, and this prevents the need for making spare weapon sprues.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

But how will you know he is the Sergeant if he doesn't have a SWORD?!

 Galas wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

But how will you know he is the Sergeant if he doesn't have a SWORD?!

Or in the case of 5 of my Sergeants - Power Axes?

And in the case of Lt. Jefferson "Wild Hog" Bashford, a Power Fist!

Their new Start Collecting box has a War Walker. Without upgrading it it, the Codex entry says it has 2 Shuriken Cannons. The sprue only has 1 though...what am I supposed to do, just make up a model?!! The Made To Order models they recently put up for sale had a Farseer with a staff. The Codex says they can have a blade or a spear. So even if there's a model, there might not be rules. It's bloody stupid.

At least with the Marine characters on bikes it's not like you'd really need to go out of your way to customise one, or buy a whole expensive kit just for the one part that you're definitely not going to be able to buy from a reseller on eBay or anything just to build them.

Hell, if you've bought a few boxes of different Marines you can probably knock out half decent looking characters with just left over bits, gods know I've done it with Chaos a lot. Think I maybe only own a couple of official non-named characters, both Dark Apostles and a Terminator Sorcerer/Lord for each God have been cobbled together pretty darn easily out of spare bits.

For Eldar, particularly Craftworlders, it's very rare to have a lot of useful leftovers. I think the only kit I own that has significant extras is the Wraithguard (well, I own 3 sprue of weapons and some aesthetic goodies that someone who built Wraithblades didn't use) and even then they're only officially usable by more of the same models.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

The kit only has 8 lasguns as far as I recall. (So 8 normal dudes, 1 flamer/grenade launcher and the sergeant's pistol/chainsword)

The biggest argument against the whole "Not on the kit = not an option" thing for me is the fact that certain Space marine and Imperial guard weapons aren't on their basic squad's kit (SM Heavy weapons and the IG Plasmagun/Meltagun/Sniper rifle) yet they still get those as options for their units.

The rule should be applied to everyone or noone. Not one rule for one faction and a different one for another

Jbz` wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

The kit only has 8 lasguns as far as I recall. (So 8 normal dudes, 1 flamer/grenade launcher and the sergeant's pistol/chainsword)

The biggest argument against the whole "Not on the kit = not an option" thing for me is the fact that certain Space marine and Imperial guard weapons aren't on their basic squad's kit (SM Heavy weapons and the IG Plasmagun/Meltagun/Sniper rifle) yet they still get those as options for their units.

The rule should be applied to everyone or noone. Not one rule for one faction and a different one for another

Happens for Eldar too. The wraith knight doesn't come with enough guns. One of GW's selling points for their new starter set is that you can combine the guns from the War Walker and the Wraith Knight to create all the options in the Codex.

Also, it feels like GW is limiting what Characters can do more heavily than normal units. Look at Khan. Can't ride a bike in the Codex even though it is really easy to grab a spare bike and bash the two kits together.

craggy wrote:
Their new Start Collecting box has a War Walker. Without upgrading it it, the Codex entry says it has 2 Shuriken Cannons. The sprue only has 1 though...what am I supposed to do, just make up a model?!! The Made To Order models they recently put up for sale had a Farseer with a staff. The Codex says they can have a blade or a spear. So even if there's a model, there might not be rules. It's bloody stupid.

At least with the Marine characters on bikes it's not like you'd really need to go out of your way to customise one, or buy a whole expensive kit just for the one part that you're definitely not going to be able to buy from a reseller on eBay or anything just to build them.

Hell, if you've bought a few boxes of different Marines you can probably knock out half decent looking characters with just left over bits, gods know I've done it with Chaos a lot. Think I maybe only own a couple of official non-named characters, both Dark Apostles and a Terminator Sorcerer/Lord for each God have been cobbled together pretty darn easily out of spare bits.

For Eldar, particularly Craftworlders, it's very rare to have a lot of useful leftovers. I think the only kit I own that has significant extras is the Wraithguard (well, I own 3 sprue of weapons and some aesthetic goodies that someone who built Wraithblades didn't use) and even then they're only officially usable by more of the same models.

Wraithguard are also one of the newest models in the range, so it comes from an era when GW stuffs lots of goodies into the box. The majority of the eldar line comes from an era when GW expected you to kitbash and/or buy cheap single model blisters (which are not practical in the plastic-only era).

craggy wrote:
Their new Start Collecting box has a War Walker. Without upgrading it it, the Codex entry says it has 2 Shuriken Cannons. The sprue only has 1 though...what am I supposed to do, just make up a model?!!

Take the Shuriken Cannon from the Wraithlord you also get! A War Walker bought alone can't be built with its basic gear though. The one thing in the new SC you can't give the default gear is actually the Farseer, which doesn't come with a Witchblade

Jbz` wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

The kit only has 8 lasguns as far as I recall. (So 8 normal dudes, 1 flamer/grenade launcher and the sergeant's pistol/chainsword)

The biggest argument against the whole "Not on the kit = not an option" thing for me is the fact that certain Space marine and Imperial guard weapons aren't on their basic squad's kit (SM Heavy weapons and the IG Plasmagun/Meltagun/Sniper rifle) yet they still get those as options for their units.

The rule should be applied to everyone or noone. Not one rule for one faction and a different one for another

It's "not a model not an option." are you saying exarch == autarch (I'm not familiar with elder)? Or is there another example of a model that's rules were removed in the codex?

 Cream Tea wrote:

craggy wrote:
Their new Start Collecting box has a War Walker. Without upgrading it it, the Codex entry says it has 2 Shuriken Cannons. The sprue only has 1 though...what am I supposed to do, just make up a model?!!

Take the Shuriken Cannon from the Wraithlord you also get! A War Walker bought alone can't be built with its basic gear though. The one thing in the new SC you can't give the default gear is actually the Farseer, which doesn't come with a Witchblade

Haha! I missed the Farseer not having a Witchblade. For the War Walker though, swapping parts from another kit?! What madness is this! It is not the GW way! Heresy!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MagicJuggler wrote:


Most of the Eldar range is already painfully overdue for plastics anyway, with hideous Finecast out the wazoo anyway, and this prevents the need for making spare weapon sprues.

The lack of plastic kits doesn't prevent the need for spare weapon sprues, it increases it! Gimme some Fire Dragon guns in a blister pack and I'll buy a Dire Avengers box and make do. A sprue of a dozen Shuriken pistols would be a godsend for converting AOS Elves to 40k Aspect Warriors and characters. (same could be said for DE, but their characters can usually take something different and the DE kits I've picked up have had usually at least 2 sergeant options spare, never mind special weapons on the Scourge kit that can fill the gaps in other models.)

Jbz` wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

The kit only has 8 lasguns as far as I recall. (So 8 normal dudes, 1 flamer/grenade launcher and the sergeant's pistol/chainsword)

The biggest argument against the whole "Not on the kit = not an option" thing for me is the fact that certain Space marine and Imperial guard weapons aren't on their basic squad's kit (SM Heavy weapons and the IG Plasmagun/Meltagun/Sniper rifle) yet they still get those as options for their units.

The rule should be applied to everyone or noone. Not one rule for one faction and a different one for another

Pulling from the GW kit description:

This box set contains 10 multi-part plastic Cadian Shock Troops, and includes: five leg variants, seven head variants, 10 lasguns, two chainswords, two laspistols, two grenade launchers, two flamers and two Vox-casters. Also included are a host of additional components allowing you to assemble a Sergeant and personalise your squad. Models supplied with 25mm round bases.

It requires a bit of creativity to make it work, but it's doable.

Basically what you do is the Lasgun with the bayonet that has no hand attached to it gets left off in favor of the Lasgun that is on its own from the sprue, which takes the arm that matches the bayonet lasgun with no hand, and is paired with the Frag Grenade throwing arm.

kingleir wrote:

Jbz` wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

The kit only has 8 lasguns as far as I recall. (So 8 normal dudes, 1 flamer/grenade launcher and the sergeant's pistol/chainsword)

The biggest argument against the whole "Not on the kit = not an option" thing for me is the fact that certain Space marine and Imperial guard weapons aren't on their basic squad's kit (SM Heavy weapons and the IG Plasmagun/Meltagun/Sniper rifle) yet they still get those as options for their units.

The rule should be applied to everyone or noone. Not one rule for one faction and a different one for another

It's "not a model not an option." are you saying exarch == autarch (I'm not familiar with elder)? Or is there another example of a model that's rules were removed in the codex?

Exarchs are Sergeants, Autarchs are Captains.

 Red_Five wrote:

Or in the case of 5 of my Sergeants - Power Axes?

And in the case of Lt. Jefferson "Wild Hog" Bashford, a Power Fist!

Powerfists are still in the Guard book, just not on Sergeants.

Which is pretty stupid since the only available Guard Powerfist in plastic has a Sergeant's chevrons on it.

 Red_Five wrote:

kingleir wrote:

Jbz` wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

The kit only has 8 lasguns as far as I recall. (So 8 normal dudes, 1 flamer/grenade launcher and the sergeant's pistol/chainsword)

The biggest argument against the whole "Not on the kit = not an option" thing for me is the fact that certain Space marine and Imperial guard weapons aren't on their basic squad's kit (SM Heavy weapons and the IG Plasmagun/Meltagun/Sniper rifle) yet they still get those as options for their units.

The rule should be applied to everyone or noone. Not one rule for one faction and a different one for another

It's "not a model not an option." are you saying exarch == autarch (I'm not familiar with elder)? Or is there another example of a model that's rules were removed in the codex?

Exarchs are Sergeants, Autarchs are Captains.

Yep, I just don't understand the complaint about the SM heavy in the context of the autarch losing options, was it able to be kitted out identical to individual exarchs and as such would have usable models for each piece of their wargear?

Come on folks. Haven't you caught on? GW wants to kill off the bitz companies and make you buy multiple kits to load out one kit or make it look different from the next! They want to "remove confusion" (cause we're all stupid you see) and only have you play with what they have deemed they can milk, errr maximize profits for themselves only, when lil johnny (who too is a dummy) walks into their store and sees you playing. That way lil johnny isn't disappointed (and has to buy more) when he gets hooked on the plastic crack.

I've had to suffer with no exarch for the DR once they took away the web of skulls.....

Jbz` wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

The kit only has 8 lasguns as far as I recall. (So 8 normal dudes, 1 flamer/grenade launcher and the sergeant's pistol/chainsword)

The biggest argument against the whole "Not on the kit = not an option" thing for me is the fact that certain Space marine and Imperial guard weapons aren't on their basic squad's kit (SM Heavy weapons and the IG Plasmagun/Meltagun/Sniper rifle) yet they still get those as options for their units.

The rule should be applied to everyone or noone. Not one rule for one faction and a different one for another

You can get the plastic versions for the special weapons, you just have to buy the command squad box to get a Plasma Gun/Meltagun/Sniper Rifle for the AM.

Ehldar wrote:
Come on folks. Haven't you caught on? GW wants to kill off the bitz companies and make you buy multiple kits to load out one kit or make it look different from the next! They want to "remove confusion" (cause we're all stupid you see) and only have you play with what they have deemed they can milk, errr maximize profits for themselves only, when lil johnny (who too is a dummy) walks into their store and sees you playing. That way lil johnny isn't disappointed (and has to buy more) when he gets hooked on the plastic crack.

I've had to suffer with no exarch for the DR once they took away the web of skulls.....

There's such an easy way for GW to kill Bits Sellers. They can sell bits! If only they had some way to offer parts to customers, who want to order them, by mail...

Yeah bits sellers and companies like kromlech are going no where.

If Gw had any business sense they'd partner up with other companies instead of antagonising customers.

WELL as long as you have the Index you're good to go I guess? I know I'm annoyed as a Marine and Chaos Marine player but nothing I can do except try and tell GW I want those things. Shame I'm not on social media. I should be.

I just love how the Winged Autarch dataslate, comes with a Mandiblaster rules in it but it's not part of the wargear...

Can't wait for week 2 erratas.

 Cream Tea wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
basically, if it's not available on a model GW sells, it's no longer a game option.

The non-winged, non-bike Autarch doesn't have a model, and yet it's in the Codex.

Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

But wait we got indices!

Jbz` wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

I can't really feel too sympathetic.

Guard haven't been able to give Lasguns to their Sergeants for Stormtroopers, Veterans, or Infantry Squads for three iterations of Codex now.

Despite the fact that the box actually allows for you to do so.

The kit only has 8 lasguns as far as I recall. (So 8 normal dudes, 1 flamer/grenade launcher and the sergeant's pistol/chainsword)

The biggest argument against the whole "Not on the kit = not an option" thing for me is the fact that certain Space marine and Imperial guard weapons aren't on their basic squad's kit (SM Heavy weapons and the IG Plasmagun/Meltagun/Sniper rifle) yet they still get those as options for their units.

The rule should be applied to everyone or noone. Not one rule for one faction and a different one for another

It actually comes with 10 lasguns, 2 flamers, 2 grenade launchers, 2 vox casters, and 2 sets of Sergeant arms. So in reality if you wanted to give an infantry squad the options it's actually packaged with an infantry squad should have the option to have all ten men with lasguns, then have the options for up to two be modelled laspistol/ccw, 2 Grenade Launcher/2 Falmer, and up to 2 vox caster.

We're one of the most egregious examples out there of GW not really following their own rules, IG infantry kits almost never line up to what options they have, the sole exception being Scions, which STILL don't line up with rules because the Sargent in the box is MODELLED WITH A HELLGUN ON HIS BACKPACK but cannot take it!

Don't even get me started on the fact that technically the infantry squad boxes are how you're supposed to be able to make vets, yet come with none of their options, or how we're still allowed to take shotguns when only one official current model has one. And yet if you go to the veteran squad entry, we can take autoguns now, without single kit containing them! Yet sarges still can't take lasguns, vet sarges can't take shotguns, and officers can't take shotguns, when not only have they had options to do so (officers with shotguns are even in the index) but they have pictures of Imperial Guardsmen in the very codex with shotguns from the Genestealer cult kit. Yet other options in the kit that were previously in the codex, like demo charges, were taken out, even though they're clearly showing that you could get those bits from a Genestealer cult player.

The Guard codex is all over the place with how GW follows this rule and it's infuriating. It's like different people are ruling on it in different spots. They're always in the most asinine of ways too. It's rarely something game breaking or big deal, it just seems like things for IG are left out because nobody bothered to read previous codexes to see what options were available. It gets even more confusing because many people claim you can just take the entries from the index instead, but then it makes codexes not including the options essentially pointless. Why remove the option from the codex if you're just going to tell me I can turn around and use the index anyways? Why not just keep the options in at that point? Why take away options that have been around over a decade and are hilariously simple to convert when you know many players out there are going to have modelled units that way?

So basically I feel for you Eldar players. It feels really weird saying that but hey there's a first time for everything

Weren't Scions faqued so they don't need to take a Hotshot laspistol with the banner and Voxcaster and they can keep the Hotshot lasgun?

I have the autarch with banshee mask and wings (except I didn't add the wings). Make him a standard autarch and give him trait of no overwatch.....because banshee mask. Sure, no choice for sword and pistol though.

 Galas wrote:
Weren't Scions faqued so they don't need to take a Hotshot laspistol with the banner and Voxcaster and they can keep the Hotshot lasgun?

Index yes, codex no, they FAQ'd it in and then immediately removed it. I've tried to point it out to GW's page but thanks to the massive gak storm that was the commissar nerf I'm fairly certain that it was never seen.

Small consolation to sergeants though, especially since if I remember correctly you get two holstered lasguns in the box, and on top of that you have options to have all 5 men in the box holding their rifles regardless. And you still can't take a rifle. Stormtrooper Sergeants get not a single option for a rifle type weapon, they get las pistol, bolt pistol, or plasma, but no lasguns or even bolters.

Essentially it's #firstworldproblems for Imperial Guard in a nutshell. In the grand scheme of things its really not a big deal tactically/strategically gameplaywise. It's mainly just because it seems really stupid that guardsmen, who know their main job is shooting things, would completely ignore the option to take a rifle. At least with stormtroopers they have no rifle option in the kit aside from hotshot lasguns, it's far more bizarre for infantry squads and vet sergeants, who can actually get a space marine bolter, but can't get a humble lasgun.

"Here you go Sergeant Kraff, here's your bolter."

"Can't I take a lasgun? Bolter ammo can be a bit hard to find and I'd kind of like to be able to carry more ammo and recharge it in the field like a lasgun has, plus it'd be nice to share the same type of ammo as the squad."

"Sorry, all out, got plenty of bolters though. Are you going to take it or am I going to have to force you to take a power weapon capable of cleaving through space marine armor and plasma pistol capable of killing tanks instead? Oh, I'm sorry you're a veteran sergeant, I meant here's your powerfist. Have fun in that mission to kill that cowardly Tau commander at the clifftop ambush!"


From the sound of things Eldar players are running into a similar issue. Fancy weapons are available but run of the mill basic weapons aren't allowed because... because.

At this rate it won't be much longer and Ork Nobs won't be allowed to take shootas and Space marine Sergeants won't be allowed to take bolters anymore.

Now I'm going to shut up because I"m horribly dragging an Eldar thread off topic.

TheBaconPope wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks that 90% of these modeling concerns could be solved if GW just released weapon sprues like the Space Marines get?

Oh yeah. And maybe even do I dare to hope arms sprue for bp&ccw arms? I would kill for that.

But nope. Instead we get monopose unique sculpts which makes these additions even harder.

Funny that GW doesn't see money to be made by selling additional purchaces to convert models. First box of troops. Then arms sprue and then weapon sprue. 3 sales to make one box worth of models!

tneva82 wrote:

TheBaconPope wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks that 90% of these modeling concerns could be solved if GW just released weapon sprues like the Space Marines get?

Oh yeah. And maybe even do I dare to hope arms sprue for bp&ccw arms? I would kill for that.

But nope. Instead we get monopose unique sculpts which makes these additions even harder.

Funny that GW doesn't see money to be made by selling additional purchaces to convert models. First box of troops. Then arms sprue and then weapon sprue. 3 sales to make one box worth of models!

They did. Remember the Black Templar upgrade sprues? Pretty much exactly what you're describing. Far as I know its the only box like that they ever made.

I'm guessing they didn't do well enough for GW to keep up with the scheme. Which is a shame because I used to have a Black Templar army and I thought those upgrade boxes were awesome. Would've really loved a box like that for Orks or IG.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
They did. Remember the Black Templar upgrade sprues? Pretty much exactly what you're describing. Far as I know its the only box like that they ever made.

I'm guessing they didn't do well enough for GW to keep up with the scheme. Which is a shame because I used to have a Black Templar army and I thought those upgrade boxes were awesome. Would've really loved a box like that for Orks or IG.

Key word being DID.

And BT box was nice enough but problem with that being it was BT. Would be little help for my current need without some serious cutting down of chains etc. I could live with MKVII arms in MKIV body but chains bit too much. Too narrow niche.

 Cream Tea wrote:
The codex Autarch has a Star glaive, there is no such Autarch model. They're basically expecting you to convert him out of Yriel.

Why not use Dire Avenger Exarch with different head and perhaps some other bits to make it more unique? If you're up to the task you could also sculpt cloak or some other garment.

The entire situation saddens me, I enjoy kitbashing and customizing. Part of me wonders, if clarity for matched play is also something that pushed this policy forward. Certainly it's easier to restrain models and what they can have so opponent can know at first glance with what the model comes equipped with. I doubt this is the major reason of why they've decided to go with such narrow options.

What I don't get is they just did a made-to-order Autarch with an illegal kit (Reaper Launcher/Banshee Mask/Power Sword). Will they provide rules with that model?

craggy wrote:


There's such an easy way for GW to kill Bits Sellers. They can sell bits! If only they had some way to offer parts to customers, who want to order them, by mail...

Doesn't make sense. If they did that, they'd simply discontinue index datasheets (or probably wouldn't have even included some of the older legacy options in the index in the first place).

If anything, allowing long-time hobbyists to legally use obscure and ancient options not easily available from GW in the "walk-into-the-store-knows-nothing-about-40K-picks-up-eldar-codex-with-SC-box-type-customers"-way opens up another niche for bits sellers. while allowing GW store managers to sell what they have in the inventory.

Let's face it, even most GW employees aren't THAT deep into the historic GW range to know or be able to answer customer questions about obscure old figures that might randomly have a new lease on life for six months due to some random temporary tournament-relevant synergy. Putting these out of the main GW-store spotlight but keeping it legal for the hard-core fans HELPS bits makers cater to that particular crowd.

There's the Skyrider Autarch, with the old jetbike to ride. How long is that going to stay in the range?

Also, what happened to "The Hobby"? The idea that stock models were vaguely inferior to models that you had to work to use.

"dude chapterhouse lol"

Chapterhouse has nothing to do with GW's incompetence. "Piracy is a service problem" as my old buddy Gabe Newell once said. If GW was willing to actually compete in the market and address the needs of its customers rather then try to dictate what people want, there would have never been such a big 3rd party market for bitz. Recasts, 3rd party replicas, 3rd party models altogether like plastic sisters: these are all a direct result of GW refusal to move at any speed other then the beat of their own drum.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:
Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

It's not as clear as that, but that's discussed in other threads.

Thank Chapter House for the current state of No Model, No Rules.

Why?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Chapter+House+Games+Workshop

TL;DR Chapter House made 3rd party models but used GW's Trademarked names. GW Sued, Court Case went to hell, GW responded by throwing it's toys out of the pram and started renaming stuff by addling vowels or latin and giving everything adjective nounverb names because COPYRIGHT!

"Throwing its toys out of its pram" is an interesting term for "putting sixteen band-aids on your cut before you go back to wading in the amazon". Legal precedent is a powerful tool when it comes to copyright law, and Chapterhouse specifically won when it came to terms like "Imperial Guard", "Eldar" and "Space Marines" because they were not legally unique and distinct enough. That legal precedent essentially means anyone who wants to make "Eldar" miniatures can make "Eldar" miniatures.

the_scotsman wrote:
"Throwing its toys out of its pram" is an interesting term for "putting sixteen band-aids on your cut before you go back to wading in the amazon". Legal precedent is a powerful tool when it comes to copyright law, and Chapterhouse specifically won when it came to terms like "Imperial Guard", "Eldar" and "Space Marines" because they were not legally unique and distinct enough. That legal precedent essentially means anyone who wants to make "Eldar" miniatures can make "Eldar" miniatures.

But has GW's "fix" actually fixed anything?

"Hah, we've changed 'Imperial Guard' to 'Astra Militarum'. Now, if those pirates want to make knock-offs, they'll have to stick with 'Imperial Guard' - just like all of our players. Wait, what problem were we solving again?"

Yeah guard will always be guard, space marines the same the stupid name changes won't stop people making stuff anyone with two brain cells could of told them that.

Don't even start me on aos....

 vipoid wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
"Throwing its toys out of its pram" is an interesting term for "putting sixteen band-aids on your cut before you go back to wading in the amazon". Legal precedent is a powerful tool when it comes to copyright law, and Chapterhouse specifically won when it came to terms like "Imperial Guard", "Eldar" and "Space Marines" because they were not legally unique and distinct enough. That legal precedent essentially means anyone who wants to make "Eldar" miniatures can make "Eldar" miniatures.

But has GW's "fix" actually fixed anything?

"Hah, we've changed 'Imperial Guard' to 'Astra Militarum'. Now, if those pirates want to make knock-offs, they'll have to stick with 'Imperial Guard' - just like all of our players. Wait, what problem were we solving again?"

This one always bugs me. One of the very biggest things made clear in the Astra Militarum book was that "It's the fancy, High Gothic name. You can call them whatever you want--this is the fancy name like Adeptus Astartes"...yet people got so upset about the name on the book being changed.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

TheBaconPope wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks that 90% of these modeling concerns could be solved if GW just released weapon sprues like the Space Marines get?

Oh yeah. And maybe even do I dare to hope arms sprue for bp&ccw arms? I would kill for that.

But nope. Instead we get monopose unique sculpts which makes these additions even harder.

Funny that GW doesn't see money to be made by selling additional purchaces to convert models. First box of troops. Then arms sprue and then weapon sprue. 3 sales to make one box worth of models!

They did. Remember the Black Templar upgrade sprues? Pretty much exactly what you're describing. Far as I know its the only box like that they ever made.

I'm guessing they didn't do well enough for GW to keep up with the scheme. Which is a shame because I used to have a Black Templar army and I thought those upgrade boxes were awesome. Would've really loved a box like that for Orks or IG.

They made two others, the Dark Angels Upgrade Sprue and the Ravenwing Sprue. They cocked up the former because they included full bodies, essentially making the upgrade sprue a cheap way to get 5 marine bodies for 20 CAD (at a time when a box of marines cost 45 CAD). 5 really good looking bodies btw. The Ravenwing Sprue, on the other hand, never really took off because it only had two real purposes; make ravenwing bikers (who sucked for 2 whole editions) and to make sammael in Sableclaw, who also sucked for two editions. Apart from some other vehicle decorations, there was nothing you really needed out of that sprue.

And the reason the DA sprue came with 5 extra full bodies is because people complained that the Black Templar sprue made it too expensive to do BTs; you had to pay 45 CAD for the base tactical squad, then 36 CAD for the upgrade sprue, then 60 CAD for the two boxes of scouts/neophytes. The DA sprue, in theory, could be tacked on to a combat squad to make 10 marines for about 50 CAD instead, but then the above happened. The DA sprue still exists, but is now packaged as "Dark Angels Company Veterans" because it is essentially just 5 DA veterans. When Space Wolves rolled around, they just didn't bother with an upgrade sprue and just did a full set of them (for Power Armored wolves and terminators alike).

I really love 8th edition, but this removing options thing is utterly crazy and super frustrating.

Still even then sprues are not quite what I would be hoping. Sprue that has just CCW&BP arms. Not chapter specific kits, not vehicle kits etc. Then other sprues like special weapon/heavy weapon sprues etc. Maybe jump pack sprues etc.

I do agree that this is the worst design decision GW has made in...a long time. The only nice thing is that if you don't tournament game...and you're not a cheesy douche - model your stuff as you want and pay your points. I mentioned it in another thread - you want to model your Primaris Captain with double lighting claws? Go for it. Just pay the points. It's not going to break the game or end the world.

I admit, I don't like the Autarch and don't think he should exist fluff-wise. I do think a Dark Reaper launcher flying Autarch with the sniper ability is pretty cheesy and not something I'd run. But if your opponent allows it and you pay your points - go for it. We aren't beholden to how we play 40K. Change your rules, loosen them up a bit. If you're a tourney-goer or training for tourneys...don't. Simple.

 Elbows wrote:
I do agree that this is the worst design decision GW has made in...a long time. The only nice thing is that if you don't tournament game...and you're not a cheesy douche - model your stuff as you want and pay your points. I mentioned it in another thread - you want to model your Primaris Captain with double lighting claws? Go for it. Just pay the points. It's not going to break the game or end the world.

I agree heartily with this sentiment.

 Elbows wrote:
I admit, I don't like the Autarch and don't think he should exist fluff-wise.

Any chance you could elaborate on this?

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

TheBaconPope wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks that 90% of these modeling concerns could be solved if GW just released weapon sprues like the Space Marines get?

Oh yeah. And maybe even do I dare to hope arms sprue for bp&ccw arms? I would kill for that.

But nope. Instead we get monopose unique sculpts which makes these additions even harder.

Funny that GW doesn't see money to be made by selling additional purchaces to convert models. First box of troops. Then arms sprue and then weapon sprue. 3 sales to make one box worth of models!

They did. Remember the Black Templar upgrade sprues? Pretty much exactly what you're describing. Far as I know its the only box like that they ever made.

I'm guessing they didn't do well enough for GW to keep up with the scheme. Which is a shame because I used to have a Black Templar army and I thought those upgrade boxes were awesome. Would've really loved a box like that for Orks or IG.

They made two others, the Dark Angels Upgrade Sprue and the Ravenwing Sprue. They cocked up the former because they included full bodies, essentially making the upgrade sprue a cheap way to get 5 marine bodies for 20 CAD (at a time when a box of marines cost 45 CAD). 5 really good looking bodies btw. The Ravenwing Sprue, on the other hand, never really took off because it only had two real purposes; make ravenwing bikers (who sucked for 2 whole editions) and to make sammael in Sableclaw, who also sucked for two editions. Apart from some other vehicle decorations, there was nothing you really needed out of that sprue.

And the reason the DA sprue came with 5 extra full bodies is because people complained that the Black Templar sprue made it too expensive to do BTs; you had to pay 45 CAD for the base tactical squad, then 36 CAD for the upgrade sprue, then 60 CAD for the two boxes of scouts/neophytes. The DA sprue, in theory, could be tacked on to a combat squad to make 10 marines for about 50 CAD instead, but then the above happened. The DA sprue still exists, but is now packaged as "Dark Angels Company Veterans" because it is essentially just 5 DA veterans. When Space Wolves rolled around, they just didn't bother with an upgrade sprue and just did a full set of them (for Power Armored wolves and terminators alike).

NVM, I should read the full post before posting

And the Black Templar sprue is AWESOME. The problem is people using ALL the parts on 5 models. If you use one black templar part for model with just a upgrade sprue you can make 20 (Or more) Black Templar space marines, 5 black templar terminators, and some black templar vehicles.

It's probably actually more game-wise I dislike the Autarch and will never run or own one. The Autarch is one of the Eldar models which is indicative of the change in GW's army design --- when armies went from being more individual to more bland. I preferred the narrower focus when Eldar started in RT/2nd ed.

The identity of each army was highlighted more by its missing elements and what it lacked, than what it had. That's part of good design to me - a benefit, with a penalty.

Guard had better tanks than anyone, including the Marines - awesome. Tyranids ate your face in close combat with almost zero exception. Eldar were one-trick ponies with powerful psykers. Necrons, for their brief introduction were soulless and nigh unstoppable (to a level not even imagined in today's game). Orks were crazy, inaccurate and bizarre...but could overwhelm you with bizarre weapons.

A lot of armies lacked a lot of elements that other armies had. That was very much the purpose. With Eldar - you made due with the crazy big Avatar or a potent Farseer (who, admittedly was far stronger then than now). But the gap you had? You didn't have the Space Marine captain option. An armored super fighter. You had Exarchs (who were vastly more potent than now) and more Warlocks (also miles more potent than the joke they are now), but you didn't have the mega-combatant. You could trick out a pretty mean Exarch, but even then you were more likely to keep them aimed in one discipline. The closest you came to a Space Marine captain figure was a Phoenix Lord - and they were rightly aimed at one kind of goal or discipline.

The Autarch just smacks of a "hell, let them do everything" kind of approach that GW has been on for a decade or more. I don't think it adds much to the game personally. An Autarch with swooping hawk wings, a banshee mask, and a dark reaper launcher, etc...is just piss-lazy game design. I appreciate the idea of "oh he's been in all the aspects so he's got..."...it's just boring. It's also out of character to me, but it's just a silly personal gripe.

I think I understand where you're coming from, Elbows.

I seem to recall someone (might even have been you) saying recently that the Autarch was basically GW giving Eldar a DE Archon, but the lack of an Archon-equivalent in Eldar was one of the things that had made the two distinct.

For me autarch reminded of 2nd ed exarch. Versatile combat monster with lots of conversion potential

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

lmao relax man

you all in the thread relax I mean GW is a gaming company not a modelling company

 Galas wrote:
And the Black Templar sprue is AWESOME. The problem is people using ALL the parts on 5 models. If you use one black templar part for model with just a upgrade sprue you can make 20 (Or more) Black Templar space marines, 5 black templar terminators, and some black templar vehicles.

The sprue is awesome, don't get me wrong. But the pricepoint is a bit high for me to spend, especially since again you need neophytes, who are more expensive than the marines already.

If it was 10 bucks cheaper I would be so totally over that.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

lmao relax man

you all in the thread relax I mean GW is a gaming company not a modelling company

Nice one

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
And the Black Templar sprue is AWESOME. The problem is people using ALL the parts on 5 models. If you use one black templar part for model with just a upgrade sprue you can make 20 (Or more) Black Templar space marines, 5 black templar terminators, and some black templar vehicles.

The sprue is awesome, don't get me wrong. But the pricepoint is a bit high for me to spend, especially since again you need neophytes, who are more expensive than the marines already.

If it was 10 bucks cheaper I would be so totally over that.

Many times I tought about making Black Templar just for that sprue We need upgrade sprues like those for Primaris. The Ultramarine one was *****. Like, it didn't even had a crested helmet?! And the primaris heads without helmets had 0 that make them Ultramarines. At least the normal one has the laurel crown.

And poor old Web of Skulls Autarch isn't in either book...

The 'forcing' people to kitbash argument is a strong contender for this years 'stupidiest thing said by GW'

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

lmao relax man

you all in the thread relax I mean GW is a gaming company not a modelling company

On the opposite they are models first, games second. Wgich is the issue here

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
The 'forcing' people to kitbash argument is a strong contender for this years 'stupidiest thing said by GW'

Yeah, it really doesn't make sense to me.

- As long as the model comes with at least some of the options available, then no one will ever by "forced" to kitbash (just take the options it already comes with).

- In a lot of cases, kitbashing isn't even that hard. Almost effortless, even. I mean, back in 5th, the designers were boasting about how easy it was to swap arms and such between DE models.

- I know this might blow GW's mind, but many people might even find kitbashing fun.


It's like if Lego decided "Well, we don't want to force our customers to assemble our products, so we've decided to start selling each set as one big brick in the exact shape of the model."

LEGO actually does that, to the derision of the AFOL (Adult Fan of LEGO) community, that they've come up with a particularly derisive term for certain noncustomizable parts, the "Piece with Only One Purpose" (or POOP). A notable POOP example is the "rock-throwing arm" from the Rock Raiders line, and increased POOP proliferation is considered a form of dumbing down for the uncreatives.

 vipoid wrote:
It's like if Lego decided "Well, we don't want to force our customers to assemble our products, so we've decided to start selling each set as one big brick in the exact shape of the model."

Lego actually almost did that with Bionicle and Hero Factory. The worst was the Av-torians and Agori, who had some of the lowest piece counts ever for lego sets (and that is not an exaggeration, some of those sets had 7 pieces). Even now their "Constraction" builds are more like broken apart action figures rather than actual construction sets.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
LEGO actually does that, to the derision of the AFOL (Adult Fan of LEGO) community, that they've come up with a particularly derisive term for certain noncustomizable parts, the "Piece with Only One Purpose" (or POOP). A notable POOP example is the "rock-throwing arm" from the Rock Raiders line, and increased POOP proliferation is considered a form of dumbing down for the uncreatives.

As someone once hardcore into Lego I can vouch for this.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Red_Five wrote:

Or in the case of 5 of my Sergeants - Power Axes?

And in the case of Lt. Jefferson "Wild Hog" Bashford, a Power Fist!

Powerfists are still in the Guard book, just not on Sergeants.

Which is pretty stupid since the only available Guard Powerfist in plastic has a Sergeant's chevrons on it.

Really? I never noticed. My Lt. with a Power Fist is an old metal Catachan, so he likely does not have that issue.

Now i want to go look at my Cadian sprues to see the sergeant chevrons.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

lmao relax man

you all in the thread relax I mean GW is a gaming company not a modelling company

Did GW ever revert that statement that they didn't make rules, they made models? I remember that quote being thrown around a lot in 7th, I think it was a Kirbyism if I remember correctly. I just remember not knowing whether to laugh or shake my head when I heard it.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The justification by itself "that it requires new players to kitbash" is a horrid cop-out. Rather than make it simpler to mix-and-match components, have spare bitz (or even weapon-packs), GW said "nope, no options."

lmao relax man

you all in the thread relax I mean GW is a gaming company not a modelling company

Did GW ever revert that statement that they didn't make rules, they made models? I remember that quote being thrown around a lot in 7th, I think it was a Kirbyism if I remember correctly. I just remember not knowing whether to laugh or shake my head when I heard it.

Gw don't make rules or models, they make faq's now.....

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
It's like if Lego decided "Well, we don't want to force our customers to assemble our products, so we've decided to start selling each set as one big brick in the exact shape of the model."

Lego actually almost did that with Bionicle and Hero Factory. The worst was the Av-torians and Agori, who had some of the lowest piece counts ever for lego sets (and that is not an exaggeration, some of those sets had 7 pieces). Even now their "Constraction" builds are more like broken apart action figures rather than actual construction sets.

Those things were horrible.

I am looking at my OG Makuta, Takanuva and Toa Mata models gathering dust on a shelf (Is it okay to call them models? Ugh, adulthood...) and then the Hero Factory stuff and I am seeing all kinds of parallels with GW.

An example that leaps to mind is the old Space Marine Commander box (one of my favourite kits ever) and the new monopose Captain.

Also, worth remembering...if you have a monopose model a 3rd party company will struggle to make simple resin bits which are plug-n-play. Not saying it's impossible to mod them, but it removes the ease of copying or selling "notMarine" components.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
It's like if Lego decided "Well, we don't want to force our customers to assemble our products, so we've decided to start selling each set as one big brick in the exact shape of the model."

Lego actually almost did that with Bionicle and Hero Factory. The worst was the Av-torians and Agori, who had some of the lowest piece counts ever for lego sets (and that is not an exaggeration, some of those sets had 7 pieces). Even now their "Constraction" builds are more like broken apart action figures rather than actual construction sets.

Those things were horrible.

I am looking at my OG Makuta, Takanuva and Toa Mata models gathering dust on a shelf (Is it okay to call them models? Ugh, adulthood...) and then the Hero Factory stuff and I am seeing all kinds of parallels with GW.

An example that leaps to mind is the old Space Marine Commander box (one of my favourite kits ever) and the new monopose Captain.

It's not even just that. GW at one point released a series of sets that were basically Warhammer Lords (Empire General, High Elf Noble, High Elf Mage, Orc Warbosses). It came with enough parts to build any variation of the thing you wanted (so great weapons, hand weapons, shields, lances, axes, etc) and even let you build two models out of the box just so you had the option to make a foot model or a mounted model. Price-wise, it was still much more expensive than converting your own out of plastic pieces (35 for 2 models vs 40 for a box of 8 knights), but at least they had all of the options (and looked badass to boot).

Sadly I think it was because they didn't sell nearly as well as mono-posed metal models of the time, GW never pursued that line of models later. Which is a shame since I would have loved to see something similar done for 40k (although technically the Tau Commander, Chaos Space Marine Terminator Lord and Space Marine Commander sets are all that).

 Elbows wrote:
Also, worth remembering...if you have a monopose model a 3rd party company will struggle to make simple resin bits which are plug-n-play. Not saying it's impossible to mod them, but it removes the ease of copying or selling "notMarine" components.

It was easy for me, because I detest bling so I just made my own stand in HQ dudes. I just completed my Lufgt Huron, Lias, Tyberos, Asterion, Shrike, and generic Leutenit with a Primarchs Wrath. I plan to make more just with the generic MK3 armor and bitz from FW.

Simple FAQ time, folks!

1. Do you own an autarch with wings/on a bike/other options? Do you own an apothecary on a bike? Do you own rough riders? Do you own <insert model> with <index datasheet>?
Yes. Congrats on the cool model!

2. Can you use this model in games of Warhammer 40K?
Yes, this model recently received rules in the index!

3. Does this model have recently updated, legitimate, and officially sanctioned rules supported by GW?
Yes, (see above) in its respective index.

4. Can I use the rules in the index if they're not in the codex?
Yes. Source: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

5. But what if the tournament/event I want to attend has decided that index-only datasheets cannot be used?
That decision is entirely within the rights of the Tournament Organizers to make. It is an arbitrary decision with no official justification, but still it is their decision to make. Its similar to the decision to limit games to only 3 detachments. That's not in rules but they are free to run their events in this way. This is called a house-rule. While technically not endorsed in the official Warhammer 40k rule set or FAQ, it was specifically ok'd in the Age of Sigmar FAQ. So I think they won't mind if you do a bit of it in 40k!

6. But I still want to go to the tournament/event!!
If you support their codex-only policy or have no strong feelings one way or the other then go to the event! Have fun! If you think players should be allowed access to all the (officially sanctioned, recently updated, & legitimate) rules when playing 40k and it really bothers you that much, then don't go. Don't support the events the limit the game in ways you strongly believe are unhealthy for the community as a whole or that you find unenjoyable. Take a stand!

7. But I really want to use a certain datasheet from the index but have chosen to personally only use models from the codex!!!
Congrats on your conviction! I personally use only models for my tyranids that I think are cool such as 3rd ed. carnifexes, strangleweb and spikerifle termagants, and shrikes! If the model/options have rules in a datasheet in the codex or index, you're good to go! Using index-only datasheets is entirely your decision to make! Have fun!

8. But what I reallly want to do is use models with a datasheet in the index but not the codex, whilst pretending that there is some rules conflict or issue in doing so, and then complaining that this nonexistent problem that I have created for myself is somehow the fault of the faceless and awful GW-monster that we all love to rag on so much!!!!
Well, once again, that's your decision to make! The actions you have described are hypocritical and indefensibly dishonest but, hey! We all have our moral dilemmas and personality flaws we have to deal with!

9. But what I reeeeeaaaaallllyyy want to do is have my selfish, whiny (but also anonymous) behavior validated in an online community that has become little more than a haven for hateful tirades, self-righteous complaining, and faux-victimization at the 'hands of the evil corporation'!!!!
Weeeelllll... 'HEAVY sigh' Go sit and stew, .

10. But isn't this "FAQ" just a thinly veiled insult directed at those portions of the 40k community whose behavior you (read: I) disagree with and find questionable, toxic, and destructive?
Oh its not thinly veiled at all! It is openly designed to piss them off and I hope it does!! I know its prolly a futile dream, but maybe some of them will quit 40k, burn their armies (and post videos of it on Youtube pleasepleaseplease), and go do something else they actually enjoy. One of the healthiest things GW has ever done was the way they released Age of Sigmar. It was like cutting off a gangrenous, infected limb. Its really risky, might just kill you, but if it works it will save your life. Good riddance to the nastiness that was that part of the WHFB community. I wish they'd done the same to 40k and cut out the worst of the rot in this community as well!

Peace out, Dakka! I'm gone!

When you've finished strawmanning, there are still some issues.

For example: "Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models."

(Emphasis mine.)

I hope no players were stupid enough to buy one of the current Autarchs (or any other model in the same situation) and convert them.

pm713 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Cream Tea wrote:
Anyway, GW have said that you can still use Index entries that aren't in the codex.

It's not as clear as that, but that's discussed in other threads.

Thank Chapter House for the current state of No Model, No Rules.

Why?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Chapter+House+Games+Workshop

TL;DR Chapter House made 3rd party models but used GW's Trademarked names. GW Sued, Court Case went to hell, GW responded by throwing it's toys out of the pram and started renaming stuff by addling vowels or latin and giving everything adjective nounverb names because COPYRIGHT!

Sounds like GW's fault to me.

It unequivocally was games workshops fault, they had no real reason to sue other than being over zealous about copyrights they in fact did not own, chapterhouse was stupid for poking the bear, and since then gw has continued to water down the options in the books, when the indexs get phased out (and they will), a lot of armies will lose a lot of options.

bhollenb wrote:
Simple FAQ time, folks!

1. Do you own an autarch with wings/on a bike/other options? Do you own an apothecary on a bike? Do you own rough riders? Do you own <insert model> with <index datasheet>?
Yes. Congrats on the cool model!

2. Can you use this model in games of Warhammer 40K?
Yes, this model recently received rules in the index!

3. Does this model have recently updated, legitimate, and officially sanctioned rules supported by GW?
Yes, (see above) in its respective index.

4. Can I use the rules in the index if they're not in the codex?
Yes. Source: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

How "nice" of you to make fake FAQ that tells incorrect information. Going to what GW actually says:

Can I combine units from the index and a codex into one army?
The datasheets in the new codexes overwrite the same datasheets in the index books. You can certainly use units with updated datasheets alongside units from the index that have yet to be updated. Once a unit has been covered in the codex though, we assume you’re using the latest version.

Can I choose to use the rules and/or points for units from my index instead of the new ones in the codex once released?
In your own games, if you and your opponent agree, you can, of course, play with whatever rules you like.

In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets. It will also be assumed that you’re using the most up to date points for matched play, in this case, those included in the codex.

There. You were proven false. Now stop spreading lies to mislead new players. Now at home games you are free to of course decide otherwise but at tournaments etc you generally play by the rules. You presumably don't insist opponent cannot premeasure either just because you might have invented such a house rule.

Play Eldar and was not really a Fan of the Autarch. Just not enough Value for the points. And now really struggling to justify. But lots of good stuff in the codex.

 Formosa wrote:
It unequivocally was games workshops fault, they had no real reason to sue other than being over zealous about copyrights they in fact did not own, chapterhouse was stupid for poking the bear, and since then gw has continued to water down the options in the books, when the indexs get phased out (and they will), a lot of armies will lose a lot of options.

I actually have to agree with this, as the entire point of a legal team is to make sure that before you send out a cease and desist letter that it's within your legal rights to do so. While the situation did seem like it was initially in GW's favour, any good law person should have been able to see the possible flaw a mile away. This also voids the usual "they have to defend their IP" argument since the law doesn't force you to repeatedly send out false litigation.

Still though, Chapterhouse didn't earn any brownie points either since apparently they weren't exactly subtle about using GW stuff in their advertisement (the other third party sites at least had the common sense to try and hide it).

"Heads for futuristic Mongolian-inspired warriors (wink wink)" versus "Heads for White Scars." If IP protection was what GW was concerned about, if they simply took the time to explain in a non-adversarial way why they care about retaining their own product, I doubt that would have gotten as much hate. Making excuses like "It's the High Gothic Name" or "we don't want to scare newcomers with kitbashing" sounds like whiny excuse-making, or a cheater being caught sliding dms to his side chick.

People are being pedantic about the no model no rules thing and use of Index options. GW has advocated many times to use Index entries for options No longer supported. They Call out Rifle man dreads specifically, so the whole "codex entry supercedes Index" is clearly not intended. Ask your opponent. Any reasonable player will allow you.

I think it's a shame that GW chose to cut the codex options, limiting build and conversion possibilities.

On the other hand, I can understand. I mean, it's not like I was going to use this fantastic third-party model for my Autarch...



(Actually, I still am)

I like the autarch option for reroll 1s and possible CP Regen. The warlord traits in general are not great, so not losing out too much.

craftworld_uk wrote:
I think it's a shame that GW chose to cut the codex options, limiting build and conversion possibilities.

On the other hand, I can understand. I mean, it's not like I was going to use this fantastic third-party model for my Autarch...



(Actually, I still am)

Your Autarch appears to have mated with a Lictor.

craftworld_uk wrote:
I think it's a shame that GW chose to cut the codex options, limiting build and conversion possibilities.

On the other hand, I can understand. I mean, it's not like I was going to use this fantastic third-party model for my Autarch...

Spoiler:

(Actually, I still am)

It's the only option for the Exarch now though, so there's that.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
People are being pedantic about the no model no rules thing and use of Index options. GW has advocated many times to use Index entries for options No longer supported. They Call out Rifle man dreads specifically, so the whole "codex entry supercedes Index" is clearly not intended. Ask your opponent. Any reasonable player will allow you.

"Clearly not intended" when they flat out said it...Yeah right.

But of course if you assume you can use index datasheets as well as codex datasheets then IG players thanks, takes index commisar and ignores the FAQ that specifically addresses codex rather than index.

Can't have it both ways.

 vipoid wrote:

Your Autarch appears to have mated with a Lictor.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Skinnereal wrote:

It's the only option for the Exarch now though, so there's that.

Eh, has the spinner rifle gone?

I'm hoping I can get away with using the 'Autarch with jump generator' entry from the index for now. Would anyone here mind?

Also, side note, what's going on with the Storm Guardians blades/chainswords - same points but one is clearly better?

craftworld_uk wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:

It's the only option for the Exarch now though, so there's that.

Eh, has the spinner rifle gone?

I'm hoping I can get away with using the 'Autarch with jump generator' entry from the index for now. Would anyone here mind?

Death Spinner, or a pair and blades. No other options now.
Go for it.

craftworld_uk wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

Your Autarch appears to have mated with a Lictor.

Joking aside, that's a lovely model.

The rules are removed from the codex but the index weapon options remain legal per the faq.

calm your tits.

tneva82 wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
People are being pedantic about the no model no rules thing and use of Index options. GW has advocated many times to use Index entries for options No longer supported. They Call out Rifle man dreads specifically, so the whole "codex entry supercedes Index" is clearly not intended. Ask your opponent. Any reasonable player will allow you.

"Clearly not intended" when they flat out said it...Yeah right.

But of course if you assume you can use index datasheets as well as codex datasheets then IG players thanks, takes index commisar and ignores the FAQ that specifically addresses codex rather than index.

Can't have it both ways.

You use the most up to date rules and points. Those come from the codex. The unsupported options come from the Index, but still follow codex rules and points. In my example you use the Index dreadnought with updated points values from the Codex. In your example you can certainly use the Index commissar, but with the Codex rules and points.

My point was when people argue that because there is no rifleman dread options in the Codex proper, the entry does not exist anymore, as the Codex entry is most to date.

Seems to me like you can have any way you want.

 Khaine wrote:
What I don't get is they just did a made-to-order Autarch with an illegal kit (Reaper Launcher/Banshee Mask/Power Sword). Will they provide rules with that model?

Yeah, Made to Order and 8th edition are interesting bedfellows - I picked up Chaplain Xavier and Lord Solar Macharius from one of the early ones. Xavier (a Chaplain with Thunder Hammer) wasn't even usable in the Index, let alone the Codex. LSM might be usable as a Company Commander - I've not reviewed his equipment against the Codex options since picking up the book.

tneva82 wrote:

"Clearly not intended" when they flat out said it...Yeah right.

But of course if you assume you can use index datasheets as well as codex datasheets then IG players thanks, takes index commisar and ignores the FAQ that specifically addresses codex rather than index.

Can't have it both ways.

Yep, clearly. Not intended. Perhaps if you read the rest of the page you quoted earlier...

There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).