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.

Black Blow Fly wrote:I will not let anyone use allies in a friendly game.

G

Then they aren't really friendly games, are they?

Exactly.

G

Black Blow Fly wrote:Exactly.

Black Blow Fly wrote:I will not let anyone use allies in a friendly game.

G

That has as much grounds in actual rules as saying "I will not let anyone use space marines in a friendly game".

Soo . . . we're not allowed to play with the printed codex in friendly games according to a number of people, as this appears to somehow be against the law and therefore punishable by death.

What if I want to play some RT with some friends because I never got the chance when it came out . . . is this punishable too, because that sure as Hell isn't the latest edition of RAWhammer 40K. Or maybe I want to play the 1990's version of French Monopoly, that is an old edition (as currency has changed) is this not allowed? Or maybe I want to watch the original version of Rollerball, not the remake, is this also punishable?

And I'm sorry if this seems off-topic or over the top, but this is just how silly your arguments seem to be about friendly play to me. Why on God's Green Earth can't people still play with the printed WH or DH Codex with Inducted things, or use allies in their other armies?



Oshova

2 Different discussions are going on here.


1. Friendly games.


2. Tournament types of games.



As for 1, sure you can basically do whatever you want.


However, for 2, you get a new codex, it invalidates the old one. Pretty simple. I mean, based on some arguments here, why can't I mix codexes till I get the strongest army I can create? I would love to take some unit choices out of the 3rd edition Ork Codex, or Armageddon....


As to some other posts. There are a lot of IG players that use Mystics, table wide hoods, and the Emp Tarot. It's everywhere, believe it.



Clay

See how simple that was ?

G

The thing is, the online pdf is not a "new codex".
It is part of the old codex, given away for free.

If you want, you can use the full codex, if you have it.
If you don't have it, here's most of the codex, for free!

There is only one codex here. It is just presented in two ways: one is the full version in print, and one is the version minus some pages, in pdf.

Saying that the partial version of the codex takes precedence over the actual version is complete nonsense and totally illegal from a rules standpoint.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Black Blow Fly wrote:See how simple that was ?

G

Primarch's assertions were simple, and wrong, yes!

So a Codex that basically changes an army's rules, is not new? The rules for Allies were left out, the pages were RE-NUMBERED. That means it was done intentionally.

When the Blood Angles PDF came out, did you demand to still use your 3rd edition book? No real difference here.



Clay

Primarch wrote:However, for 2, you get a new codex, it invalidates the old one. Pretty simple. I mean, based on some arguments here, why can't I mix codexes till I get the strongest army I can create? I would love to take some unit choices out of the 3rd edition Ork Codex, or Armageddon....

So I can tear the page with the FOC and all the Grey Knight special rules out of my printed Codex and you would accept that as the new legal Codex invalidating the old one?

Or, more blunt: Show me in your "new Codex" the Grey Knights special rule that every second unit refers to? You can't? Well, then it obviously is not the complete Codex!

Mixing units from all Imperial Codices to compensate for weaknesses was unfair from the start. It is quite obvious that GW will kill this unbalanced 3rd edition experiment as soon as we get new DH/WH Codices. Until then the allies rule is legal but not welcome to everybody. But all this is irrelevant for this discussion.

Ahhh, so the PDF isn't valid then? That's now your stance?



Clay

Primarch wrote:So a Codex that basically changes an army's rules, is not new? The rules for Allies were left out, the pages were RE-NUMBERED. That means it was done intentionally.

When the Blood Angles PDF came out, did you demand to still use your 3rd edition book? No real difference here.

The rules for allies were left out. So that people wouldn't be encouraged to make allies armies when the rules will likely be removed in the next version.
The rules for allies STILL EXIST in the full codex. They just don't give you part of the codex in the free version.
The pages were RE-NUMBERED because GW realized that it would look SLOPPY AND UNPROFESSIONAL to have a misnumbered pdf that is supposed to be a viable alternative to the full codex.

When the Blood Angels PDF came out, RULES ACTUALLY CHANGED. The book was re-written specifically for pdf. It was not the old codex, scanned, and renumbered.

If it was, you'd have a valid point here!

But it wasn't, and you are completely wrong! Good job!

Primarch wrote:Ahhh, so the PDF isn't valid then? That's now your stance?

It is an incomplete scan of a legal Codex with essential rules missing. That is not just a stance, but an obvious fact to everyone owning the complete Codex.

The Blood Angels was released as a new codex, whereas the Inquisition ones were released as the current ones, just free on the internet.

Oshova

Hmm, so I have heard that it was a mistake the pages were left out, seems that wasn't the case.

Either way, again, free to use whatever you want in friendly games of course.

In tournaments, the latest version is the legal version.



Clay

Please show me the Grey Knight special rules, referred to in every second unit in your "new Codex".

I hear that attempting to use the printed Codex gives you leprosy, and that every time you say 'Mystic', a starving child in Africa dies.

Primarch wrote:In tournaments, the latest version is the legal version.

So Grey Knights no longer have special rules?

Ok.

Primarch wrote:Hmm, so I have heard that it was a mistake the pages were left out, seems that wasn't the case.

Either way, again, free to use whatever you want in friendly games of course.

In tournaments, the latest version is the legal version.

The removal of allies is intentional. In friendly games you can use whatever you want.

In tournaments you can use the latest version (3rd edition, has never been updated) in either the full print form, or in the partial pdf form. Both are documents that describe the same rules that have never changed (the latest rules, the ones published in 3rd edition). One document describes only some of them. If you want the full rules, you must use the version with the full rules in it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

H.B.M.C. wrote:So Grey Knights no longer have special rules?

Ok.

Primarch clearly has a power of psychic implication which extends all the way from his opinion, based on nothing, to encompass the entire world of 40k players.

But he has a big heart - protecting all the starving African children from the frivolous and selfish use of Mystics.

Damn, I said Mystics!

Damn! I said it again!

I'm a horrible person.

Let's just call them "Those horrible units that the WAAC mafia uses damn I really hate those guys the other day I was walking down the street and got punched in the face and I saw the Daemonhunter book in his bag as he ran off we should probably just ban Daemonhunters"

Primarch is still trying to figure out, why the Grey Knight troops are subject to the special rules of the Inquisitor Lord (including every trooper being an independent character!)

Black Blow Fly wrote:I will not let anyone use allies in a friendly game.

G

Wow, what a jerk. I'm glad your dont play around me. I wouldnt play you in a friendly game, period.

I'd make a comment about the 'Wrecking Crew' here, but that'd just derail what is proving to be an excellently robust and thought-provoking topic.

Here is the problem. You say that I should point out the GK special rules, and that they don't exist in the PDF, so then since I can't point it out, does that invalidate the PDF as a legal codex?

Just curious, you can't have it both ways....



Clay

The PDF as is, is broken with regards to GK special rules. Technically it is unplayable by itself, and you would need the full text.

It's my opinion, not solely mine, but still, that the PDF is the newest and the legal dex. It's fine that you disagree, since as usual GW didn't clarify very well, and would have been better off mimicking the old Codex exactly.


But oh well, play it how you want is what I get from the thread, and it is what I will do.


Clay

Primarch wrote:
However, for 2, you get a new codex, it invalidates the old one. Pretty simple. I mean, based on some arguments here, why can't I mix codexes till I get the strongest army I can create? I would love to take some unit choices out of the 3rd edition Ork Codex, or Armageddon....

That's the issue at hand, this is not a "new codex" or any sort of update that renders the printed rules obsolete. It's just a hurried hack job. Every other language version of the codex contains those pages. When has GW ever released completely different rule sets for different countries?

And if we all settle down and think about it, what has really changed? In tournaments, the final decision ALWAYS rests with the TO. We have heard from the Indy folks in the OP of this thread, and from GW we have this (for what it's worth): http://ottawagamer.blogspot.com/2010/06/deamonhunters-codex-answer-from.html So in tournament games, absolutely nothing has changed. In friendly games, you always had the right to object to a particular unit. If you didn't like Inquisitors/Mystics/Psychic Hoods/Tarot, you were never forced to play that person. So again, nothing at all has changed.

It's much like the new Imperial Armor books. Some people feel these new units are opponent's permission only, while others claim they are now essentially add-ons for the codex. Of course, this distinction is completely meaningless. Regardless of your personal interpretation, in tournaments the TO will decide what you can use. In friendly games, everything is technically "opponent's permission only". Someone telling you to shove that seer council where the sun doesn't shine is being no less reasonable than refusing to play against allies.

Primarch wrote:It's my opinion, not solely mine, but still, that the PDF is the newest and the legal dex. It's fine that you disagree, since as usual GW didn't clarify very well, and would have been better off mimicking the old Codex exactly.

If the new PDF is the current legal copy, then all Daemonhunter armies are illegal as they have no force org chart, and no Grey Knight special rules.
Which way do you honestly think is better?

"The free version with parts removed replaces the original, making the PDF codex illegal to use in the process, effectively removing the entire codex from the game."

or

"The free version is an option that you may use. It is broken and requires reference to the original to use."


And keep in mind, GW said that the removal of allies was a mistake.

Fine, then you are saying the Codex that GW posted on their site is illegal then?



Just for clarification sake.



Clay

Did you not read the first post of the thread? The written codex and the .pdf are not mutually exclusive, and you can use whichever one you own. They never contradict each other on any point, one simply has a few pages missing.

And again, define "illegal". Legality is not defined by Games Workshop in any case.