DH/WH Codex Ruling

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.

**Terminus**

Black Blow Fly wrote:Insaniak I have stated what are my issues. Stop being so passive aggressive please.

G

Your issues seem to amount to not liking Inquisitors with Mystics. Which, of course, is your prerogative, but using the abbreviated .pdf to "justify" your refusal to play against them seems like very tenuous logic. What's perhaps more interesting is why you feel you need to justify your decision at all.

**Black Blow Fly**

Its obvious a lot more than that... thanks basically for nothing. It is the principle here that is what is really important. Plus AS SAID it sets a very bad precedent.

G

**porkuslime**

This was posted on the GW "What's New" page today.

We recently made the Witch Hunters and Daemonhunters codexes available to download as PDFs. Since then, we've received a spate of emails asking questions about the difference between the PDFs and the original, printed copies. Rather than reply to you all individually, I thought I'd try to answer your questions here. Firstly, the rules for allied Space Marines and Inducted Imperial Guard were originally written to reference books that have since gone out of print, so we streamlined the rules required to allow players to collect an army of Daemonhunters or Witch Hunters. The Daemonhunters army list uses the Standard Force Organisation chart, which you'll find on page 87 of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook. The other point that seems to be causing the most confusion is whether or not the PDF versions supersede the printed versions. They don't: you should feel free to continue to use whatever resources you have available to play your games with; the PDF does not overrule or invalidate the printed Codex book. Yes, this may mean that you and your opponent are using what are essentially different army lists for the same army but not every Inquisition force will comprise of the same elements (highly specialised and secretive forces that they are). And if you'd rather use the same one as your opponent, why not simply decide which version you collectively want to use and share the rules between one another? As for tournaments and gaming events, it's entirely up to the organisers to decide which version to use; it is after all their event.

for what it is worth.. bolded hightlighted by me for emphasis..

**Frazzled**

Excellent. Nice to see GW being responsive to queries.

**daedalus**

Awesome. I wonder how many people at GW are groaining and wondering how their client base couldn't figure that out on their own.

**darwinn69**

Wow...8 pages griping about GW giving away something for free, and telling people that it's free so they don't "have" to use it.

**Black Blow Fly**

Well it is good to see that GW made a public reply. That settles everything.

G

**Sanguinary Dan**

Black Blow Fly wrote:Well it is good to see that GW made a public reply. That settles everything.

G

Look Ma! An optimist!

**Ixquic**

I am literally rolling around on my allied models as I type this.

**insaniak**

Kroothawk wrote:But you agree that RAW all Grey Knight standard troops (not Inquisition Guard) are composed of independent characters with strong psychic powers, as the pdf refers to page 10, not to Grey Knight armywide special rules Tournament organizers will not be happy

I think that most tournament organisers (and most players) will be bright enough to realise that the page numbers are whacked, and figure it out for themselves.

Seriously, I know it's popular on the interwebs to pretend that everybody in the real world is incapable of rational thought, but the human race isn't quite in such dire straights just yet.

Kroothawk wrote:We all know what is intended (RAI), but tournaments have to deal with RAW (you know, independent Grey Knight troopers with ultra psychic powers), and there is no line saying to whom those Grey Knight special rules in the summary apply.

There are various units in the army list which have a 'Grey Knights' rule. There is a list of 'Grey Knights' special rules in the summary.

Seriously, it's not rocket science.

Tournaments most certainly do not have to confine themselves to RAW. They work off whichever rules the TO feels fit to apply.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Black Blow Fly wrote:Insaniak I have stated what are my issues. Stop being so passive aggressive please.

It's not being 'passive aggressive' to ask someone to explain their stated viewpoint.

You've stated that you think having two versions of the codex causes 'issues',that it 'sets a bad precedent' and that it's about 'principles'...

You haven't explained what those issues are, what it's setting a bad precedent for, or which principles are involved and why...

**Black Blow Fly**

See you are still be passive aggressive.... Asking repeated questions you know the answer to makes this obvious. I am not going to repeat what I have already stated just so you can ask again.

G

**Frazzled**

I missed those BBF what were they again? Especially in light of the GW statement on the website noted above which clarifies everything pretty well.
EIDT: I should note I do not have a GK/WH army nor mystics nor play guarda the moment and this effects me utterly not at all...

**Black Blow Fly**

I am totally cool with the GW statement on their website. This is the way it should be done.

G

**Frazzled**

Word

**Kroothawk**

@insaniak: Maybe you missed my point:
I am an advocate that the 3rd edition Codex is the only legal one. You need it to learn what the army is about (background), how to paint them (modelling) and how to unscramble the messed up scan of rules in the pdf. It is not difficult to unscramble, but my example was to show, that the pdf with RAW can't be a legal successor of the 3rd edition Codex and is not invalidating the latter for tournaments. And after my posting this example, the aggressive posts of the pdf being the only legal Codex stopped. Seems I made a point.

BTW personally I would never use allies outside Apocalypse games, as it is simply unbalanced in normal games, and GW knows it.

**Captain Avatar**

IMO, I think that the free PDF codices that have the stream-lined inducted allies rules may be a first ever instance of GW doing a beta test on a codex.

**mlund**

Wow, I don't usually do this because I haven't had much cause to do so, but Bravo to GW for actually backing up their product and handling their rules when there is a problem rather than waiving it off. Good show!

- Marty Lund

**ph34r**

I'm glad that GW responded quickly to this issue. Gj GW.

**tiberius183**

Where the hell do you even download this thing? I can't find any PDF codices on GWs website, and I've been to pretty much every section. Link?

**Gymnogyps**

Main GW page, there are menu options in plain text under the colorful "Warhammer" etc menus (hard to see, for me at least). The last one is "Astronomican", click it. You'll come to a page organized by dates. On "This Month", hit the tiny green scroll bar till you find the entries for the codex you are looking for... You have to sign in, though. Oh, and note that if you don't sign in first you'll have to go through it all again. So I'm not sure a link would even work... Wow that is an awful website for actually finding anything.

If anyone has an easier way of finding it, please share, 'cause I'm kinda annoyed that it is going to be even more awful to access as time passes.

**Daemon-Archon Ren**

mlund wrote:Wow, I don't usually do this because I haven't had much cause to do so, but Bravo to GW for actually backing up their product and handling their rules when there is a problem rather than waiving it off. Good show!

- Marty Lund

Black Blow Fly wrote:I am totally cool with the GW statement on their website. This is the way it should be done.

G

I really hope my sarcasm scanner is broken cause if you guys are serious...

porkuslime wrote:

Yes, this may mean that you and your opponent are using what are essentially different army lists for the same army but not every Inquisition force will comprise of the same elements (highly specialised and secretive forces that they are). And if you'd rather use the same one as your opponent, why not simply decide which version you collectively want to use and share the rules between one another? As for tournaments and gaming events, it's entirely up to the organisers to decide which version to use; it is after all their event.

is effectively GW saying "Do what you want, we ain't touchin this"

**nosferatu1001**

No, its GW saying: we dont want to put allies rules in as they are going, but dont want to ACTUALLY say this as that would be giving information away about the existence of new books.

The secrecy around new releases hurts this - good idea, ok execution, usual big fuss over nothing from people on here...