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.

A friend of mine is wondering if his BT drop pods will come in using the same rules as the new Ultramarines drop pod rules. I'm his ally in a doubles match and I'm saying no, he's saying that as the BT's are SM's they'd benefit from the rules as well. Can anybody here weigh in with a definite answer.

BT droppods use the rules from their own codex.
And those are slightly different to codex ultramarines.

1hadhq wrote:BT droppods use the rules from their own codex.
And those are slightly different to codex ultramarines.

Agreed - BTs have to use their own codex and the general rule book. When it comes down to it, BTs share a lot of things with the SM codex, however, it is two different armies with 2 different codex rules.

BT Drop Pods come in as reserves. They may have 2 weapons on them. They can fire their death wind launchers when they land. Those are the differences.

BT Pods are not the same as Ultramarine Pods. Use the rules in Codex: BT, nothing else.

At ALL times use the BT codex rules, unless specified otherwise.

This applies to EVERYTHING your friend can think of.

Yeah, that's what I told him, but now I can show him this page.

For a slightly more authoritative answer than 'A bunch of guys on the interwebs said so!' .. check out the Dark Angels FAQ on the GW website. Addresses this very issue right at the end.

The problem with that is that sometimes you run into people like Gwar! telling you that 1. The DA FAQ has zero relevance on BTs, and 2. Its not an Errata and therefore doesn't really exist.

Steelmage99 wrote:The problem with that is that sometimes you run into people like Gwar! telling you that 1. The DA FAQ has zero relevance on BTs, and 2. Its not an Errata and therefore doesn't really exist.

Why so serious?
But yes, the The DA FAQ has zero relevance on BTs, and Its not an Errata and therefore, by GW's own admission, is not actually official.

In short: Use the BT Codex and the BT codex alone. Anything else is Cheating.

Gwar! wrote:In short: Use the BT Codex and the BT codex alone. Anything else is Cheating.

Unless both opponents agree to make some changes, in which case, it's two players modifying the rules of 40k to have more fun.

BTs have a lot of good stuff, and if someone wants to have all the broken stuff out of the BT codex and take some of the new SM rules on top of it, I'd have an issue with it. OTOH, if they're playing a fluffy, non-power-gaming list (as in, something without Preferred Enemy), I'd probably be willing to have a go with it - outside a tourney.

To go back to OP. BTs should use the BT rules, not the SM rules. BTs have lots of advantages (2 heavy weapons in terminator squads, Preferred Enemy for all) to make up for it.

dietrich wrote:
Unless both opponents agree to make some changes, in which case, it's two players modifying the rules of 40k to have more fun.

A completely redundant statement, thrown around way too much on this sub-forum.

Two players can agree to change absolutly any rule they see fit. It is however not too relevant a statement when discussiong the rules.
This is not really an attack directed at dietrich as such, but rather a pet peeve of mine.

dietrich wrote:

Gwar! wrote:In short: Use the BT Codex and the BT codex alone. Anything else is Cheating.

Unless both opponents agree to make some changes, in which case, it's two players modifying the rules of 40k to have more fun.

BTs have a lot of good stuff, and if someone wants to have all the broken stuff out of the BT codex and take some of the new SM rules on top of it, I'd have an issue with it. OTOH, if they're playing a fluffy, non-power-gaming list (as in, something without Preferred Enemy), I'd probably be willing to have a go with it - outside a tourney.

To go back to OP. BTs should use the BT rules, not the SM rules. BTs have lots of advantages (2 heavy weapons in terminator squads, Preferred Enemy for all) to make up for it.

Me and my opponent could quite validly agree to ignore the Organisation Chart in a non-apoc game and just field whatever we had, but it wouldn't make it a valid rule to be discussed on a RaW forum

Steelmage99 wrote:

dietrich wrote:Unless both opponents agree to make some changes, in which case, it's two players modifying the rules of 40k to have more fun.

A completely redundant statement, thrown around way too much on this sub-forum.

No more so than Gwar's constant insistance that anyone who chooses to modify the rules is cheating.

insaniak wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

dietrich wrote:Unless both opponents agree to make some changes, in which case, it's two players modifying the rules of 40k to have more fun.

A completely redundant statement, thrown around way too much on this sub-forum.

No more so than Gwar's constant insistance that anyone who chooses to modify the rules is cheating.

Well, considering this is a Rules forum, for discussing the Rules, we have one of two options:
1) Declare the Rulebook Null and void and just let "TMIR" reign Supreme, thereby making this entire forum redundant and a waste of Money.
2) Have "TMIR" as Implicit to any and all Rules debates and instead operate on the assumption that the players are both trying to actually play the game by using the rules as laid out in the other 111 or so Pages of Rules.

I think Option 2 is the most constructive.

Missed the point, Gwar.

I'm not arguing the purpose of the forum. I'm pointing out that players choosing to modify the rules are not automatically cheating, and your constant claims to the contrary are unneccessarily antagonistic and more than a little irritating.

It is cheating if only 1 player wants to change it

Gwar! wrote:It is cheating if only 1 player wants to change it

No its time to dice off 4+ i win

(If you don't like this don't play with them)

I hate the 4+ thing, ever since I knew a guy that would make a list of every badly-worded exploitable rule, most of which no one would agree to, and try to 4+ as many of them as possible before the game. That's fething cheating.

KeithGatchalian wrote:

BT Drop Pods come in as reserves. They may have 2 weapons on them. They can fire their death wind launchers when they land. Those are the differences.

actually they cant, drop pods count as moving at combat speed when they come in, and being as drop pods are not fast vehicles they cannot fire any weapons when they first come in. This is why you never (or only see people who dont know the rule) see deathwind launchers being bought anymore. Because they are not great in the first place and they cant fire until the turn after they arrive.

But in answer to the OPs question you always use the rules in your codex. I.E. BT veh. are dedicated and may only be used by the unit that bought them, older codexes have 4+ storm shields, etc...

As far as the whole FQ vs. Eratta thing goes. Every question and answer here is based upon playing in RTT or other GW tournaments (otherwise just make up the rules as you go and why bother asking for clarification). That being said FAQ's are used in all GW tournaments, so its a moot point as to wether or not FAQ's are valid.

Gwar! wrote:It is cheating if only 1 player wants to change it

Claiming that your BT pods follow the Codex: Space Marine rules when you know full well that the rules say otherwise would be cheating.
Suggesting that your BT pods should use the Codex: Space Marine rules, even though not the way the rules say for it to work is not cheating. It's changing the game to suit yourself, and is exactly the sort of situation that TMIR is supposed to cover and specifically allows.

As much as you may personally dislike the fact that some people prefer to alter the rules to suit themselves, it is the way that a lot of people play. Which is why they tell you to roll for it if you disagree. Two people are playing the game... not just you.

da gob smaka wrote:

KeithGatchalian wrote:

BT Drop Pods come in as reserves. They may have 2 weapons on them. They can fire their death wind launchers when they land. Those are the differences.

actually they cant, drop pods count as moving at combat speed when they come in, and being as drop pods are not fast vehicles they cannot fire any weapons when they first come in. This is why you never (or only see people who dont know the rule) see deathwind launchers being bought anymore. Because they are not great in the first place and they cant fire until the turn after they arrive.

But in answer to the OPs question you always use the rules in your codex. I.E. BT veh. are dedicated and may only be used by the unit that bought them, older codexes have 4+ storm shields, etc...

As far as the whole FQ vs. Eratta thing goes. Every question and answer here is based upon playing in RTT or other GW tournaments (otherwise just make up the rules as you go and why bother asking for clarification). That being said FAQ's are used in all GW tournaments, so its a moot point as to wether or not FAQ's are valid.

Reread the BT codex. There is a line there that says deathwind launchers can fire when the pod comes in. That overrides the main rules.

And Death Wing launchers rock. Nothing like bringing down 4-5 pods and watching 4-5 genestealer/ork/guard/eldar guardian squads go bye bye.

Indeed BT Drop Pods can fire their Deathwind on the turn they land.
Drop Pods bought from the SM Codex cannot.

da gob smaka wrote:

KeithGatchalian wrote:

BT Drop Pods come in as reserves. They may have 2 weapons on them. They can fire their death wind launchers when they land. Those are the differences.

actually they cant, drop pods count as moving at combat speed when they come in, and being as drop pods are not fast vehicles they cannot fire any weapons when they first come in. This is why you never (or only see people who dont know the rule) see deathwind launchers being bought anymore. Because they are not great in the first place and they cant fire until the turn after they arrive.

But in answer to the OPs question you always use the rules in your codex. I.E. BT veh. are dedicated and may only be used by the unit that bought them, older codexes have 4+ storm shields, etc...

As far as the whole FQ vs. Eratta thing goes. Every question and answer here is based upon playing in RTT or other GW tournaments (otherwise just make up the rules as you go and why bother asking for clarification). That being said FAQ's are used in all GW tournaments, so its a moot point as to wether or not FAQ's are valid.

Actually they can shoot they come with POTMS I quote "Also, the Machine Spirit can operate one weapon per turn as long as the vehicle has moved no more than 6" "
Cruising Speed =/= Movement. so, so long as you don't roll badly for scatter (this counts as movement) it may still fire one weapon.

It one of the fun things about trying combine a codex this out of date with the current rules. Also technically units that came in the drop pod may still assault as they disembarking from an open top vehicle.

Edit oh and in the rule for the drop pod its got the words "Drop pods ma fire on the same turn they land" so they can fire from this as well.

Tri wrote:It one of the fun things about trying combine a codex this out of date with the current rules. Also technically units that came in the drop pod may still assault as they disembarking from an open top vehicle.

Nope, sorry:
"In the Movement phase when they arrive, these units may not move any further, other than to disembark from a deep striking transport vehicle"

Ergo, the unit inside also counts as deep striking, and as such "In that turn's Assault phase, however, these units may not launch an assault"