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.

Darn. This is the first email I've sent to them. We'll see.
I WANT THIS ANSWERED. If it doesn't I don't know about all of you, but I'm reverting back to using the INAT FAQ v.2.2 ruling they gave for their independent torments (they said yes). At least they had the bullocks to give their loyal members a straight answer.

Nurglitch wrote:TheGreatAvatar:

Not to mention that Codex: Space Marines defines a Space Marine army as one that's chosen from the Space Marine list.

You have a pg number for reference?

I can't seem to find that in my codex.

Thanks in advance!

imweasel:

Try reading the thread.

Kreedos wrote:LOL good luck bro, I've e-mailed them about 3 seperate rules issues about 4 months, 2 months and 1 month ago respectively, and I haven't got anything back.

thx for the grim heads up.

Nurglitch wrote:imweasel:

Try reading the thread.

I found that in my space marine codex, but I don't believe that supports your argument.

So what you are saying that I can't take any allies at all. Ever. Interesting.

No, I'm not saying that. Try reading what I wrote.

Nurglitch: What you wrote is filled with the usual back-breaking rhetorical gibberish that you typically make up when trying to argue a specious rule interpretation.

The only definition of 'army' that GW has given us is to vaguely link it to the Force Org chart. Their willingness to use terms like 'Army', 'Codex', 'List', and 'Force' interchangeably pretty much invalidates any attempt to define it as narrowly as opponents to the issue are attempting to, and the BTAotIEoMK rule in the WH/DH codex overrides any assertion regardless.

The most literal reading says it works. The fluff justification is irrelevant.

sourclams wrote:

Nothing in the DH codex permits the allied units to use the parent codex rule just that units from the DH codex can join units from the parent list of acceptable allied armies.

And you just completely made that up.

Actually, no. Where in the DH codex does it permit the units define within to use rules defined within another codex? I'll help you out...it doesn't. The rules on page 21 of DH only states the units from the codex can be allied with units from another codex. Allied is never defined, so, based on the idea of the rules being permissive, allied units do not share codex rules. Yes, they may share a single FO since that's what the allied rule does permit.

You made up your conclusion based on a premise that you also made up.

It's really that simple.

Nurglitch wrote:No, I'm not saying that. Try reading what I wrote.

What you wrote makes no sense whatsoever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:Actually, no. Where in the DH codex does it permit the units define within to use rules defined within another codex? I'll help you out...it doesn't. The rules on page 21 of DH only states the units from the codex can be allied with units from another codex. Allied is never defined, so, based on the idea of the rules being permissive, allied units do not share codex rules. Yes, they may share a single FO since that's what the allied rule does permit.

Where in the world do you get that the DH codex is the end all be all? You don't think there might be another rule in a different codex that would allow that?

imweasel:

And yet you previously claimed that I held the following opinion: "So what you are saying that I can't take any allies at all. Ever. Interesting." So which is it?

Nurglitch wrote:imweasel:

And yet you previously claimed that I held the following opinion: "So what you are saying that I can't take any allies at all. Ever. Interesting." So which is it?

That was the best 'guess' I could make on the gibberish you were writing is all.

Sorry if what you wrote in an attempt to support your position just made no sense whatsoever.

What about it didn't make sense to you?

TheGreatAvatar wrote: Allied is never defined, so, based on the idea of the rules being permissive, allied units do not share codex rules.

Damn... now that I realize I've never seen a difinition of "friendly" in WH40K I can no longer use the Book of St. Lucius! I mean, I can't be sure it means "units in my army" or "units on my side", it could mean "cute fluffy bunny kind of friendly".

imweasel wrote:
Where in the world do you get that the DH codex is the end all be all? You don't think there might be another rule in a different codex that would allow that?

What rule is written in codex A that applies the units defined in codex B? The rules written in the SM codex apply to the units defined within it, no other unit. That's the reason to have a codex.

I already said it, but making up a definition based on a premise you also made up, and then repeating it, definitely doesn't make it true.

Still.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:What rule is written in codex A that applies the units defined in codex B?

Any and all rules which aren't specifically stated to apply exclusively to the models in Codex A.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:What rule is written in codex A that applies the units defined in codex B?

Quite a few, even if most of them are about hurting the enemy. If you don't like it you're free to not use codex-specific weapons against my army unless they're specifically allowed to affect units from another codex.

I'm going to sound like a noob, but to benefit from the chapter tactics special rule, isn't it required that you have the combat tactics rule in the first place

Some of the Chapter Tactics rules do replace a unit's Combat Tactics with some other rule. Vulkan's Chapter Tactics means that units with Combat Tactics lose it, and the entire army gains Twin-Linked on the selected weapons.

Given that the rule is Chapter Tactics, though, one might at first glance presume that it only affects members of that Chapter, rather than any allied units.

Nurglitch wrote:Some of the Chapter Tactics rules do replace a unit's Combat Tactics with some other rule. Vulkan's Chapter Tactics means that units with Combat Tactics lose it, and the entire army gains Twin-Linked on the selected weapons.

Nurglitch has it right.
With that said, the debate is centered around what defines an army.
Either army refers all units in a single force organization chart, OR it refers to the units of a respective codex, or codex army.

With that said, please disregard the use of fluff as arguments. Even if each special character represents a different SM chapter, any player is within their right to use these characters to define their own chapter and play style.

Please note that the previous sentence was not directed toward anyone, but a friendly general request, and a side note to new members of this discussion. : )


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:I'm going to sound like a noob, but...

Don't worry about it. Speak your mind, and if a point has been covered previously, we'll quickly get you up to speed.

From the ard boyz rulez:

"What you should bring:
Your army (not armies)"

Meaning you can only bring 1 army. If allied sisters/DH counted as a seperate army than you technically couldn't use them in ard boyz.

Another reference:
"No more than 2500 points can be used in the selection of an army"

So if sisters/dh do in fact count as a seperate army does that mean I can bring 2500 points of guard and 2500 points of allied sisters?

Sweet, thanks for the insight nurglitch. I'll try and pull that when I go to semis.

Its not that hard, an army is everything you bring to the table.

For 'Ardboyz, I'd call the TO running that semi-final. The TO has the final say on any question about rules. Answers from GW Rules boys, INAT Faq, or 12 pages on YMDC, still get trumped by what the local TO rules at the tournament. It's a lot easier to call first, than to show up with your army and pre-concieved ideas of how you want the rules to work, and spend 1/2 hour of the first game arguing about it.

wow you take everything too litterally mikhaila.
Obviously I wasn't going to bring 5k pts to ard boyz and expect to play with it.

It was just referencing that GW states that you have 1 army not multiple when you bring allies.

Which would in fact make vulkan work with allies.

Timmah wrote:wow you take everything too litterally mikhaila.
Obviously I wasn't going to bring 5k pts to ard boyz and expect to play with it.

Hello....pot, have you met kettle? Weren't you just pointing out the Nurglitch how literal he is?

whitedragon wrote:

Timmah wrote:wow you take everything too litterally mikhaila.
Obviously I wasn't going to bring 5k pts to ard boyz and expect to play with it.

Hello....pot, have you met kettle? Weren't you just pointing out the Nurglitch how literal he is?

I do not believe so...

Nurglitch wrote:Some of the Chapter Tactics rules do replace a unit's Combat Tactics with some other rule. Vulkan's Chapter Tactics means that units with Combat Tactics lose it, and the entire army gains Twin-Linked on the selected weapons.

Given that the rule is Chapter Tactics, though, one might at first glance presume that it only affects members of that Chapter, rather than any allied units.

Except for the fact that at second glance you would not find any rule saying it only affects members of that chapter.

Timmah wrote:wow you take everything too litterally mikhaila.
Obviously I wasn't going to bring 5k pts to ard boyz and expect to play with it.

It was just referencing that GW states that you have 1 army not multiple when you bring allies.

Which would in fact make vulkan work with allies.

You think everything is about you?

That was a pretty generic statement made by many people over and over. Wasn't talking to you, as much as talking in the thread.
Anyone heading to an 'Ardboyz tournament is going to be playing a lot of different players from different shops, and rules may be played differently. It's always easier to call and talk to the TO before the tournament, rather than show up, and try to continue some 12 page YMDC while playing game 1.

How you play the game at home may not be how the game is being played the day of the Tournament. Since the TO has the final say, a quick phone call might save you a lot of grief.

imweasel:

So you don't believe the title of the rule is a part of the rule? Because a second glance will tell you as much as the first, that the rule is "Chapter Tactics", not "Army Tactics".

Nurglitch wrote:imweasel:

So you don't believe the title of the rule is a part of the rule? Because a second glance will tell you as much as the first, that the rule is "Chapter Tactics", not "Army Tactics".

No, the title is not part of the rule. Otherwise why did they write your entire army (not chapter) in the rule itself...