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.

if a codex that was made before the new rulebook update came out contains rules that no longer make sense, do you use the old rule or ignore it?

For the most part, you still use the old rule, simply put, codex supercedes main rules. Certain ones however have no game effect whatsoever any moe, like rules/wargear that have to do with choosing board edge. But rules/wargear that effect who goes fist still work.

Is there a specific rule that you have in mind?

Rules and wargear that choose deployment could still work. Like the Witch hunters Liberis Heresies. Regardless of who goes first, that player would get to chose their deployment. Works pretty simply, actually.

Marius Xerxes wrote:Rules and wargear that choose deployment could still work. Like the Witch hunters Liberis Heresies. Regardless of who goes first, that player would get to chose their deployment. Works pretty simply, actually.

Ummmm, no, the Liber Heresius no longer has any effect, at least, not when playing any of the standard three main rulebook scenarios. There is no longer a roll to choose sides, so the WH Inq never gets an opportunity to make a leadership test to choose sides. Don't believe me, not a problem, check the GW Witch Hunters FAQ, it says the same thing.

Q. How does the Liber Heresius work with the
new deployment rules?
A. The Liber Heresius doesn’t work within any of
the three deployment types given in the standard
missions in the new rulebook, because it only
works when you are able to dice off for choice of
deployment zone – in the new missions you don’t
actually dice off for this, as it is decided by who
wins the dice off to have the first turn. However,
there are plenty of other missions where it will
still work, such as many of those in Cities of
Death, in White Dwarf or those written by
tournament organisers for use in their events.

Dark angels codex:
Ravenwing squadrons
''much like combat squads,the squadrons attack bike and land speeder are purchased together with the squadron and then deployed at the same time as the squadron's bikes,BUT FROM THEN ON THEY ALWAYS OPERATE AS COMPLETELY INDEPENDANT SCORING UNITS.''
in the new rules, only troops can capture objectives, so can dark angel ravenwing squadrons capture objectives or not???

any opinions will help greatly.

Ahh this old chestnut. Many people go RAW, as it's written and nothing else. Others use things like Yakface's FAQ. Other have a bit of a chat before hand, or ask an impartial other to decided

According to the rules, they are a scoring unit. Tourneys are free to make whatever rule changes they want to.

kk ty

Or if you don't agree or can't decide roll off

okay lowbridge. will do. ps i kicked buddas ass.

good lad reaper.

you're damn right im a good lad reaper.

ok, now i'm scared PM me

lets get bak to talking about rules. please.

REAPER666 wrote:Dark angels codex:
Ravenwing squadrons
''much like combat squads,the squadrons attack bike and land speeder are purchased together with the squadron and then deployed at the same time as the squadron's bikes,BUT FROM THEN ON THEY ALWAYS OPERATE AS COMPLETELY INDEPENDANT SCORING UNITS.''
in the new rules, only troops can capture objectives, so can dark angel ravenwing squadrons capture objectives or not???

coredump wrote:According to the rules, they are a scoring unit. Tourneys are free to make whatever rule changes they want to.

It's inane to presume that either of these units can claim objectives, based on wording for an old edition. the BGB learly defines which units can claim.

They do count as separate for KP, though.

Eric

It wouldn't be the first non-infantry, non-troop unit that counts as scoring because a Codex says so. Age doesn't make the rule less valid.

For weird stuff, just make sure the other player's aware of it before the game starts. That'll solve 80% of all these kinds of problems.

don_mondo wrote:

Marius Xerxes wrote:Rules and wargear that choose deployment could still work. Like the Witch hunters Liberis Heresies. Regardless of who goes first, that player would get to chose their deployment. Works pretty simply, actually.

Ummmm, no, the Liber Heresius no longer has any effect, at least, not when playing any of the standard three main rulebook scenarios. There is no longer a roll to choose sides, so the WH Inq never gets an opportunity to make a leadership test to choose sides. Don't believe me, not a problem, check the GW Witch Hunters FAQ, it says the same thing.

Q. How does the Liber Heresius work with the
new deployment rules?
A. The Liber Heresius doesn’t work within any of
the three deployment types given in the standard
missions in the new rulebook, because it only
works when you are able to dice off for choice of
deployment zone – in the new missions you don’t
actually dice off for this, as it is decided by who
wins the dice off to have the first turn. However,
there are plenty of other missions where it will
still work, such as many of those in Cities of
Death, in White Dwarf or those written by
tournament organisers for use in their events.

I said could, not that it officially does

It's inane to presume that either of these units can claim objectives, based on wording for an old edition. the BGB learly defines which units can claim.

Yeah, why bother following what the rules actually say... that would be inane.

MM, do you tell your Marine opponents that his Eilte Sternguard cannot be a scoring unit because their new codex breaks the rules for what is and what isn't a scoring unit?
I'm assuming no. So if you allow a non-troop to be scoring (because it's codex has a special rule that allows it to be scoring in direct contradiction to the main rules), then what's the problem with allowing a vehcile to be scoring if it's codex says it is?

MM, do you tell your Marine opponents that his Eilte Sternguard cannot be a scoring unit because their new codex breaks the rules for what is and what isn't a scoring unit?

The operative word in that quote being "new."

Don, the problem with the reasoning you are using is that the new SM codex is a 5e codex.
Its' rules were created with 5e in mind. Where it breaks the BGB rules, it breaks them intentionally.

Fall back to the DA codex, and this same fact is not the case. It intended to break a 4e rule... a rule that is no longer in use.

You can't compare apples and oranges.

If I play a DA player, and he wants those models to be considered "SCORING" units, and insists upon it to the point of argument, I'd allow it.
Of course, I would not allow them to be "CLAIMING" units, as the codex does not state that they can CLAIM.

Eric

However the DA codex was "supposedly" written with 5th edition in mind. Codex Trumps rule book, so IMO they can be scoring and claim an objective in a game.

Thank goodness that there is no such thing as "claiming" units and only "scoring" units in 40k can "score" when they control an objective. Page 90 RB.

EDIT: Even though I do agree that older codices were made with a different rules set in mind, it still doesn't mean that the rules the codex uses are invalid. For example: DH force weapons kill outright and don't cause "instant death". You play how the rules tell you to play and everything else is settled between players before the game. If the DA codex says LS are scoring then they are scoring as default unless the players playing the game decide otherwise.

Exactly... the DA Attack Bikes, and the Speeders (when bought as pasrt of a RW attack sqaudron) are scoring. There is no way around it. The codex says they score, so they do. This is a classic Codex>BRB case.

Scoring units claim objectives..that is the rule. So yes, by the definition of them being scoring units, their codex does, in fact, state that they can claim objectives.

It is EXACTLY like the Pedro Sternguard scoring issue. It does not matter which edition a codex is written for..the codex>brb rule is for all current codexes... including DA.

if you take the master of the ravenwing they can be taken as troops. is there anything that states only infantry may score?

It doesn't say infantry can only score but it does say a vehicle can not score on page 90 of the BRB. However, codex overrules BRB so they are scoring.

makes sense to me.

It's nothing like Pedro.
Pedro Cantor was written with 5e rules CURRENT and IN MIND.

This codex, contrary to one person's supposition (without back up) was written WAY before 5e was published and in no way reflects 5e rules.

Later, when I am at home with my books, I will post the evidence that anyone thinking these models can claim is utterly wrong.

Eric

Heh... can't wait for that.

Okay, try these.

Can a lictor assault after Deepstrike? (Codex says yes, BrB says no.)

Do Nids fall back towards synapse? (Codex says yes, brb says no.)


A codex does what it says it does. It is designed to change/break rules that are in the BRB. If they didn't want us to follow the rule in the codex, they could have errata'd it in the FAQ

GW's current policy is that Codex trumps Rulebook. Note, in fourth, they said RB trumps codex.

I'd let you play that they're all scoring. If you have a regular gaming group, I would suggest you try coming to a consensus and stick with that - the INIT FAQ might help. If you're playing in a tourney, I would ask the Tourney Organizer (TO) before the games start for a rulling - emailing him ahead of time might be best.