DCA - modeling or modeling for advantage

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.

**pretre**

It's lychguard btw.

**nkelsch**

Vindicare-Obsession wrote:People are complaining about the big bad DCA's bringing 2 diffrent types of power weapons to the field so that they are prepared for any circumstance. Thats what this appears to really boil down to.

And before Nos says "Well now since they have an axe and a sword they have no weakness" Wrong. Sword is AP3 meaning TDA is still valid against hem. Axe drops you to I1 so you strike after models in TDA. Weakness and balance found.

I don't think anyone gives a crap about balance... this has more to do with the dozens of UNDEFINED power weapons and how some models are clearly modeled with a specific kind of weapon and the ambiguity of 'is every powerweapon any powerweapon' or do we go by what 'the model' has and if 'the model' refers to the stock model or a converted model.

LYCHGUARD has shown that for those models, they referred to the stock models visual representation. Since they didn't explicitly give everyone everyweapon, it sounds like many other models may get their weapon loadout explicitly defined down the road based upon the stock model's options.

I don't think anyone cares about the balance issues... Just the complete ambiguity of leaving the rule up to the visual representation instead of just simply explicitly saying everyweapon is anyweapon.

**pretre**

nkelsch wrote:LYCHGUARD has shown that for those models, they referred to the stock models visual representation. Since they didn't explicitly give everyone everyweapon, it sounds like many other models may get their weapon loadout explicitly defined down the road based upon the stock model's options.

Except they went the other way in other FAQ rulings:

Codex: Blood Angels wrote:Var – Power Swords
In the bestiary and army list, replace all references to “power
sword” with “power weapon”.

**Grugknuckle**

nkelsch wrote:

Because this is what GW has shown us how they seem to be interpreting it with the LYNCHGUARD change. If they intended that anymodel with a powerweapon may have any weapon as valid weapon options, they could have said that but they didn't. You don't have a powerweapon of your choice, you have a powerweapon of what the model comes with, which is SWORDS for LYCHGUARD and SWORDS for DCA.

I'm not seeing any entry in the Necron FAQ about Lychguard except the one about dispersion shields. But I could be missing it. Can you show me what you're referring to?

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2420315a_Necron_6th_Ed_V1.pdf

**pretre**

It's in the Digital version of the codex, iirc.

**Vindicare-Obsession**

Love how pretre brings an air of sanity to this. Ambiguity is a matter of perspective. I see it as black and white. If the model has a sword, its a sword, if a moedl has an axe, it has an axe. If a model has a lance its an lance, so on and so fourth. There is no grey. You model them with the weapon you want them to have, just like always. Just now, you arent picking a wepaon from the codex, rather from the main rulebook like in WHFB.

**pretre**

This may be the first time someone brought me up as a bastion of sanity.

**Grugknuckle**

It's in the Digital version of the codex, iirc.

Digital Codex!? Does that mean that you can only have up to date rules if you own an iPad? Jeez, one monopoly isn't enough for GW, they want you to feed Apple's too.

Ok...This might be a different thread, but it's an example of modelling something that doesn't come stock. Remember when people were scratch building nightscythes and thunderwolf cavalry because GW had not released those miniatures? What do you do then?

Here's another...How do you model Mark of the Wulfen? Is this one legal?

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/374214-.html?m=2

**Vindicare-Obsession**

So, in otherwords, GW didnt cause enough of a stir with the last stealth re-print, so they have to do it again. Why is it always the crons? This is going to feth up so many YMDC disscussions....

**nosferatu1001**

TH/SS termies, THE termies of 5th and still THE termies of 6th, strike at the same time. Any other non-GK termie that goes through terrain. Balance still lacking.

**nkelsch**

Vindicare-Obsession wrote: You model them with the weapon you want them to have, just like always. Just now, you arent picking a wepaon from the codex, rather from the main rulebook like in WHFB.

That's not what the rule says:
Page 61.
"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the rnodel to tell which type of power weapon it has"

It doesn't say:
"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, you may choose any of the following types of power weapon as long as you model it"

**pretre**

nkelsch wrote:
Vindicare-Obsession wrote: You model them with the weapon you want them to have, just like always. Just now, you arent picking a wepaon from the codex, rather from the main rulebook like in WHFB.

That's not what the rule says:
Page 61.
"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the rnodel to tell which type of power weapon it has"

It doesn't say:
"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, you may choose any of the following types of power weapon as long as you model it"

It also doesn't say 'Look at the official model'. It is ambiguous.

**Vindicare-Obsession**

No, instead you model it to "choose" as you so eloquently put it.
becuase guess what...
When I look to see what power weapon it has.....
It has the one I modeled!!!
Nowhere does it say, look at the power weapon the model came with.
Khorne Berzerkers come with axes and swords, which do I use?

**Grugknuckle**

nkelsch wrote:
That's not what the rule says:
Page 61.
"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the rnodel to tell which type of power weapon it has"

It doesn't say:
"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, you may choose any of the following types of power weapon as long as you model it"

It depends on what you mean by "model". When I read that, I think of the model after it has been assembled. You are interpreting that as the box art on the model kit? Or the model as pictured in the instructions?

I don't see how that can be right. A box of space wolves does not come with a flamer or a meltagun. Yet the codex entry clearly allows you to take those in your squad. Now you claim that to model a space wolf with a meltagun is MFA. I completely disagree. It is the same for a vanilla space marine. The seargent can have a power weapon, but the model kit only comes with a sword. However, he CAN take the axe from the space wolves box and model it onto his ultramarine. Now when you're playing the game, you look at the assembled model to see what kind of power weapon he has. It's an axe, so S = user +1 AP2.

**nosferatu1001**

pretre wrote:
nkelsch wrote:
Vindicare-Obsession wrote: You model them with the weapon you want them to have, just like always. Just now, you arent picking a wepaon from the codex, rather from the main rulebook like in WHFB.

That's not what the rule says:
Page 61.
"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, look at the rnodel to tell which type of power weapon it has"

It doesn't say:
"If a model's wargear says it has a power weapon which has no further special rules, you may choose any of the following types of power weapon as long as you model it"

It also doesn't say 'Look at the official model'. It is ambiguous.

It does on page 2.

Vindicare - that argument has already been answered - you are given 2 options in the model set, so you choose. Please show the model options given when you buy the DCA model. Does it come with axes?

**Vindicare-Obsession**

It does should I desire to convert them which is allowed in the modeling section of the RULEBOOK. You cannot arbitrarily rip out parts of the rulebook and say they dont matter. Oh, well since im playing necrons I hate to get assaulted, so in that case the assault section of the rulebook is just fun storytime. It dosent matter. That is not how it works.

You tlak about permissive rules, show me where oyu are permitted to ignore the modeling section of the rulebook. Quote the rule, otherwise your arguments are invalid.

**pretre**

nosferatu1001 wrote:It does on page 2.

It doesn't say 'unmodified model' either.

Page 2 only says that the term models in the book refers to Citadel Miniatures. Not that those miniatures can or cannot be assembled, painted, converted or melted down into new forms.

**Baronyu**

Model set argument is flawed, I'll bring in another army into this, as it's the only one I'm familiar with:

DE codex says I could take a venom blade on hekatrix, there is no venom blade in the model set, hence by that same logic, my codex is illegal.

But I believe this is the case for almost every box they made. Hint: They want you to either buy the extra bits(should they be available), or another box or 4 just to get enough of the guns legally allowed to bring per codex.

And where do you stand on people converting existing models to be HQ that GW hasn't made available? Such as hellion to baron? Since conversions are only for rule of cool, then that means my baron conversion is just a fancy hellion, right? Since there is no official baron kit. The codex lied again!!

But at the end of the day, what I really want to ask is... What advantage are DCA gaining specifically that warrants a 6 pages argument?

**pretre**

Baronyu wrote: What advantage are DCA gaining specifically that warrants a 6 pages argument?

As has been said aptly by nkelsch, it isn't about advantage. It is about playing by the rules.

**Vindicare-Obsession**

DCA seem to be the only once capable of ignoring TDA while still retaining normal combat capabilities in different combat.

I still want Nos to respond to my post btw (making sure it dosent get buried like some do)

**pretre**

Vindicare-Obsession wrote:DCA seem to be the only once capable of ignoring TDA while still retaining normal combat capabilities in different combat.

Maybe as a unit, but many sergeants and characters can take double power weapons and choose different forms.

**nosferatu1001**

Vindicare-Obsession wrote:It does should I desire to convert them which is allowed in the modeling section of the RULEBOOK. You cannot arbitrarily rip out parts of the rulebook and say they dont matter. Oh, well since im playing necrons I hate to get assaulted, so in that case the assault section of the rulebook is just fun storytime. It dosent matter. That is not how it works.

You tlak about permissive rules, show me where oyu are permitted to ignore the modeling section of the rulebook. Quote the rule, otherwise your arguments are invalid.

Wong. My book is called "Warhammer 40000". It is not called a rulebook.

It DOES have a section in it called "THE RULES", which defines the rules for playing the game of warhammer 40,000. It also has a hobby section which defines....dun dun dun!! the hobby section of the warhammer 40,000 universe. It also has a background section.

If you are claiming all these sections are rules in this "rulebook" that you have created out of thin air, hell you capitalised it, i bet you have proof it is called a rulebook?

I'll wait. Some rules form you ths thread would be good.

Pretre - again, it doesnt say you CAN modify them, so you CANNOT. Permissive ruleset.

**Grugknuckle**

Vindicare-Obsession wrote:DCA seem to be the only once capable of ignoring TDA while still retaining normal combat capabilities in different combat.

He is an assassin after all. Isn't he supposed to be some kind of close combat ninja?

**pretre**

nosferatu1001 wrote:If you are claiming all these sections are rules in this "rulebook" that you have created out of thin air, hell you capitalised it, i bet you have proof it is called a rulebook?

Games Workshop wrote:Warhammer 40,000: Rulebook
There is no time for peace. No respite. No forgiveness.

There is only WAR.

In the nightmare future of the 41st Millennium, Mankind teeters upon the brink of destruction. The galaxy-spanning Imperium of Man is beset on all sides by ravening aliens and threatened from within by Warp-spawned entities and heretical plots. Only the strength of the immortal Emperor of Terra stands between humanity and its annihilation, and in his name, countless warriors and agents do battle against the encroaching darkness. Foremost amongst them stand the Space Marines, the ultimate protectors of Mankind.

Across airless moons, within the depths of dark, twisted hive worlds and even in the immaterial realm of Warp space, battles rage that will shape the future of the galaxy forever.
It is a universe that you can enter today, if you dare. But remember that this is a dark and terrible era, and there is no peace amongst the stars...

The Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook is your essential guide to playing atmospheric battles in the 41st Millennium. It helps you field majestic armies of Citadel miniatures across the war-ravaged battlefields of the far-future, in the ultimate contest of strategy and skill.

With 452 full-colour pages, this hardback Rulebook is packed with rich background and contains all the rules for fighting pulse-pounding tabletop battles. The Rulebook includes exciting features such as dynamic close-combat, flyers, psychic devastation and interactive scenery. As well as jaw-dropping artwork, contained within is a history of the 41st Millennium and a richly detailed guide to the races and weapons of the far-future. It also features a comprehensive hobby section to set you on the path to choosing, collecting and building your own Warhammer 40,000 army of Citadel miniatures.

Emphasis mine.

Pretre - again, it doesnt say you CAN modify them, so you CANNOT. Permissive ruleset.

nos - again, it doesn't say you CAN assemble them, so you CANNOT. Permissive ruleset.

**Baronyu**

pretre wrote:
Baronyu wrote: What advantage are DCA gaining specifically that warrants a 6 pages argument?

As has been said aptly by nkelsch, it isn't about advantage. It is about playing by the rules.

Really? That's their whole issue with it?!

I thought they were "terrified" by the thought of DCA's ability to table them, with a single unit, should they be allowed to bring an axe and a sword...

Well, I don't personally see anything wrong with "if it says power weapon, model whatever you want", looks to me that's by the rules.

**nosferatu1001**

Is that from the rulebook, or the website? My rulebook does not have that written in it.

Again, you use CM minis, and those CM minis show you how to assemble them as CM minis. Permission already granted

It does NOT say you can convert them.

It comes down to this: certain conversions will be accpeted, as they do not bring an advantage in game PURELY from the conversion

This gives an undeiable ingame advantage over the actual model supplied by GW, and so will be denied more often that not

You have no rules argument, you havent had one since the start.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Baronyu wrote:
pretre wrote:
Baronyu wrote: What advantage are DCA gaining specifically that warrants a 6 pages argument?

As has been said aptly by nkelsch, it isn't about advantage. It is about playing by the rules.

Really? That's their whole issue with it?!

I thought they were "terrified" by the thought of DCA's ability to table them, with a single unit, should they be allowed to bring an axe and a sword...

Well, I don't personally see anything wrong with "if it says power weapon, model whatever you want", looks to me that's by the rules.

Nope, wrong. The rules dont say that, as you would have known if youd read the thread.

**Grugknuckle**

Well, I don't personally see anything wrong with "if it says power weapon, model whatever you want", looks to me that's by the rules.

+1 . Seriously. Who wants to play with someone who is quoting rules at you every 10 seconds? Play by the rules. But PLAY. It means have fun.

If you show up to a tournament which you have paid hundreds of dollars to attend with an army which you have spent thousands of dollars and thousands of hours to paint and assemble and then your first opponent says, "You're army is illegal because your DCA has axes instead of swords," you would be furious. Having two axes confers no advantage over have two swords.

**Vindicare-Obsession**

nosferatu1001 wrote:If you are claiming all these sections are rules in this "rulebook" that you have created out of thin air, hell you capitalised it, i bet you have proof it is called a rulebook?

I'll wait. Some rules form you ths thread would be good.

From the GW website, direct quote, you can even check behind me, Warhammer 40,000: Rulebook

Now, how about you cite some specific rules agiainst conversion instead of spouting "Permissive" constantly, because in a permissive ruleset you cannot build your models, paint them, or even enter a tournament (tournaments arent in the rulbook are they?) nor can you lead one. You want permissive? Tell me where in the rulebook it says, you have permission to own a Warhammer 40,000 rulebook.

**pretre**

nosferatu1001 wrote:Is that from the rulebook, or the website? My rulebook does not have that written in it.

Again, you use CM minis, and those CM minis show you how to assemble them as CM minis. Permission already granted

It does NOT say you can convert them.

The rules do not support assembly. If we're going by Citadel publications for how to assemble them, then what about the conversion kits on their website? That is a clear indication that Citadel allows conversions.
http://search.games-workshop.com/search/keywords-conversion--locale-us--res_per_page-100

It comes down to this: certain conversions will be accpeted, as they do not bring an advantage in game PURELY from the conversion

This gives an undeiable ingame advantage over the actual model supplied by GW, and so will be denied more often that not

I don't think you can speak for all TOs and other players. It is clear from the poll that you don't speak for all players. It is a matter of time before we know if you speak for all TOs.

MVB says that this is an allowed conversion and he runs Nova: http://nova.tlsconline.com/showthread.php?t=205

pretre wrote:Is it permitted to field DCA (or any model) that is listed in the Codex as having a Power Weapon with any of the listed variants in the Main Rulebook?

So, for example, can I modify stock DCA to have Axe/Sword. This would allow me to choose at the start of the fight sub-phase which weapon to fight with.

MVB wrote:Yes. You must clarify what each model has as required on your army list, however.

You have no rules argument, you havent had one since the start.

And you have no argument from the rules section of the book that you are allowed or not allowed to assemble, convert or paint miniatures. You haven't from the start.

**Crimson**

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Again, you use CM minis, and those CM minis show you how to assemble them as CM minis. Permission already granted

It does NOT say you can convert them.

Not all Citadel Miniatures come with assembling instructions, and I don't get why those instructions matter anyway. I mean they're not in the rules section of the book either. Why would those have any relevance if the modelling section of the book doesn't?