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

Can someone quote for me the page where the rules say this?

I know in the USR it says Codex Special Rules override the version in the BBB.

I know for vehicle cover saves and smoke launchers, it says to use the Codex version ( which means all smoke launchers give glancing hits???).

I don't see anywhere else it makes a reference to this.

Thanks!

As you note, it makes the case in a few areas. Otherwise, it just reverts to the case that codex *has* to overrule rulebook, since that is a large part of the function of a codex. If the codex can't change rules in the rulebook, then it makes them almost pointless.

THis is not even a debatable issue. ALways.. it has been so where the newer publication where concerned with a specific rule for a particular army in its codex supercedes the BBB in its description and interpretation.

The rules do not supercede other army codixes only the main rule book from where they draw thier intent and function.

UNLESS: FAQed to do otherwise....

The only existing exemption to this fact, I'm personally aware of, is the DE codex which is still a 3rd edition Codex. So there are rules in the 5th ed RB that DE can use, instead of following their Codex. One specifically would be Jetbikes. Yeah, it's FAQ'd to do otherwise AtraAngelis

Surely the newer rules must be followed. whether the BBB or the individual codex. Otherwise codexes spanning an edition change will produce some very strange effects.

Kilkrazy wrote:Surely the newer rules must be followed. whether the BBB or the individual codex. Otherwise codexes spanning an edition change will produce some very strange effects.

Definately. But I still don't know how to resolve my Talos' attacks for armour Penetration; so in that case I just follow the original rules for the Talos claws from the codex.

It's in the rulebook in several places.

It's also been a GW policy for about fifteen years.

So unwritten policy governs rules?

Because they make a point to say in the USR section that the Codex overrides, then in other cases, absent an express line in the rules saying so, the Codexes do not override the BBB.

There's no particular need for a specific 'codex over-rides rulebook' rule because it's simply a case of 'more specific over-rides general'

The codex over-rides the rulebook in the exact same way that the Monstrous Creature rules over-ride the more general rules for Movement, Shooting and Assault given earlier in the rulebook.

The codex provides rules that apply to specific models. It therefore by its very nature over-rides more general rules that apply to everybody.

It's not unwritten policy... it's simply the way more specific rules work in conjunction with general ones.

As insaniak stated, specific always overrides the general.

But for those of you who simply cannot live without rules citations, there are multiple places in the rules that state that a codices rules take precedence where they conflict with the basic rules.
(When you have a printers PDF of the rulebook, using the search function finds every instance that shows a relevant entry. Damn, its nice)

Page 74 concerning universal special rules:

As this is just a summary, if any of the Codexes include
one of these special rules and the rule is different, the
one in the Codex takes precedence (representing how
the general special rule applies to that specific race).

Page 97 concerning army specific rules;

Within these final pages you will find statistics for every troop type for
each of the armies in Warhammer 40,000. Although the entries in this
section are correct at the time of printing, the Warhammer 40,000
game system is constantly growing and developing. As such, in the
event of any contradiction between this section and any of the
individual codexes, the codexes always take precedence.

Probably the most hidden and most defining thing that states that a codex takes precedence is on page 62 under 'smoke launchers':

It is worth pointing out that some armies might
use different versions of smoke launchers, which
have slightly different rules. As normal, the rules in
the Codex take precedence.

Note how it says "As normal, the rules in the Codex take precedence."
Meaning, normally the rules in a codex take precedence. In fact, every entry I have given here state the words 'codex' and 'precedence' in conjunction.

Not only has GW historically stated that codices take precedence, but it still says it in the rules, numerous times.
In this instance, logic need not apply, because the rules state it to be so.

Need more proof?

[edit]
Screw it, I am not even going to wait to see if you would.

In the 5th ed rulebook, the word codex is referenced 35 times.
Here are the pages so you can research it yourself:
7, 9, 32, 42, 43, 47, 47, 48, 50, 50, 52, 52, 62, 62, 66, 67, 74, 74, 74, 79, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 87, 87, 87, 92, 97, 97, 101, 106, 106, 107.

As one example, page 42 under poisoned weapons states:

Poisoned weapons
Poisoned weapons range from blades coated in venom
to hypodermic claws. They do not rely on a comparison
of Strength and Toughness to wound – they always
wound on a fixed number, generally shown in brackets.
In most cases this is 4+. Some venoms are so lethal that
the merest drop can kill – these may wound on a 3+,
or even 2+ (as described in the appropriate Codex).

Notice how the codex rules alter and expand upon the basic rules?

Again, as insaniak said, specific overrides general.
Didn't we already go over this a million times in the past already, Hobbs? I thought you would have learned that fundamental thing by now.

The funny thing is that logic is about rules, so if the rules state something to be the case that might otherwise seem illogical, then the logic of those rules applies instead of whatever external logic somebody might be trying to shoe-horn them into...

When the 4 rules made the 3e codex Tau Shield drones not work, GW issued an FAQ confirming they did not work.

Yes, because people kept asking that question. It should have been obvious, but people kept asking. One could say they asked that question.... frequently.

Does that not conflict with the principle that (specific) codex rules overrule edition rules?

No, because the shield drones not working was due to a general incompatibility with the new casualty removal rules, not a rule being over-ridden or not.

More specifically, Shield Drones didn't have a rule that over-rode the regular casualty removal rules. They were simply designed to work with the different system, and stopped working when that system changed.

The Tyrannid codex allows a rule that overrules the Instant Death rule. Why can't the Tau code allow a rule that overrules the casualty removal rules?

Kilkrazy wrote:Why can't the Tau code allow a rule that overrules the casualty removal rules?

Who said it couldn't?

The problem isn't that the codex can't over-ride the rulebook.

It's simply that it doesn't have such a rule in this particular situation.

I don't see why the Tau Shield drone rules aren't a rule that overrides the BBB.

All GW needed to do was answer player questions by saying, "Yes, Shield drones work as advertised."

It seems to me that the rulebook overrules the codex because it is newer, and that is why GW FAQed they way they did.

Uh, how do Shield Drones not work? Allocate heavy fire to your Shield Drones and that's a Tau you save.

Take a Tau Battlesuit with two Shield Drones hit by a Lascannon. Allocate the wound to a Shield Drone, takes its invulnerable save, the Battlesuit survives unscathed.

I'm talking about the transition from the 3e codex to the 4e rules.

This thread is about whether codexes overrule the rulebook or not.

While my point is irrelevant to the 5e game, it directly addresses the topic of the thread.

Uh, so how is the interaction of a 3rd edition codex and the 4th edition rules relevant to the interaction of codecies and the main rules in 5th edition?

Do you believe that the interaction of codexes and rules should change with every new edition? Does that apply to BBBs only, or include new edition codexes? Do you think that rules should be applied inconsistently, according to some set of unknown principles, that keeps changing?

If your answers to those questions are yes, then the interaction of a 3e code and 4e rules is irrelevant to how 3e, 4e or 5e codexes interact with the 5e or 6e rules.

Kilkrazy wrote:I'm talking about the transition from the 3e codex to the 4e rules.

And yes, I was misremembering the original shield drone rules. They did originally have specific rules that allowed them to take wounds before they were applied to their controller.

The 4th ed FAQ removed that ability, forcing them to use the regular rules for mixed units.

This was a single, specific situation where the rulebook over-rode the codex, though... and it only did so because the FAQ said so.

I believe it was ruled that way for simplicity... they for some reason wanted Tau to be using the same casualty removal rules as everyone else, possibly without fully considering just how useless it made drones. Although it was very quickly made a moot point by the replacement of the codex anyway.

But the point remains that this was a single instance where the rulebook only over-rode the codex because a specific ruling was issued that it so. Without that FAQ, the codex would have continued to take precedence.

Well it took 18 months to replace the codex, when the FAQ could have fixed it in a few weeks. Not that I'm bitter.

However, perhaps this was the example that proves the rule.

Kilkrazy:

It'd be more convenient if the specific rules governing the interaction between the main set of rules and the ancillary sets of rules such as the Codex series of books didn't change between editions, but then the point of a new edition is to, one might imagine, change or add rules to the games.

But since you ask that I take a stand on whether this should happen, I must necessarily give you a conditional answer:

If the relationship between main and ancillary rules is either not clearly defined or has been left undefined, or is unsatisfactory, then yes, that relation should change with every new edition until they get it right.

But I'm puzzled as to how you adduce an affirmative answer (I'm inclined to alliterate adieu) as being related to whether specific instances of interactions across editions is relevant to other specific instances of interactions across editions.

After all, I might strongly and rightly believe that the interaction of codecies and main rules should change every edition, and I might honestly believe that rules should be applied inconsistently, according to some set of unknown principles, that keeps changing. Reasonable people do these things all the time (usually in democratic societies...).

But it still might be the case that the interaction in question does not change, and the rules are consistent and prescribed in accordance with some set of known principles.

In that case, these principles might be what makes an instance of 3rd/4th edition interaction relevant to another instance of 4th/5th interaction.

However, to address the main topic, there is an instance in the 5th edition main rules where a rule specifically over-rides all contrary rules (i.e. printed rules or the sanctioned implications of said printed rules). It is the rule on p.2. for Re-rolls.

It's clearly spoken of under smoke launchers on p. 62. Codex always takes precedence over Rulebook. yes, that means the old assault cannon for daemonhunters.

scuddman wrote:It's clearly spoken of under smoke launchers on p. 62. Codex always takes precedence over Rulebook. yes, that means the old assault cannon for daemonhunters.

Which just happens to agree with the main rulebook summary chart, Forces of the Imperium Assault Cannon, Heavy 3, no mention of rending.

But that cannot be used to justify summaries as any kind of authority. Summaries still remain flawed, wrong and idiotic (at least when GW is the one producing them).

Yep. summaries have mistakes. And the summary section even says that if the summary disagrees with the codex, use the codex. Just pointing out that in this case, summary and codex agree.
As for the original question, codex overrides rulebook. Yes, it does.

I have given an example where the codex did not override the rulebook.