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.

The point I am making is that if they wanted to say replace the Veteran Abilities with the USR they could of said that. They didn't, and chose to say take precedence over. This implies that you use the Veteran Skills as is, unless it says something that contradicts the USR. Who can take the skill does not in any way contradict what the USR says. An example of a contradiction would be "you may set up your infiltrating unit within 6 of an enemy". That would directly contradict what the USR says and therefore the USR would take precedence. There is nothing in the USR about who can take infiltrate, so there is no conflict and therefore no reason for it take precedence. If they wanted it to be word for word replaced they would of said "the USR replaces the veteran abilities in full" or something to that effect.

 

I disagree with this example, because one definition of enemy is opponent. So it still makes sense. Interpreting it like that would be splitting hairs as enemy and opponent can be used interchangeably. "Takes precedence" and "replaces in full" cannot be used interchangeably.

"takes precedence" over "implies" nothing of the sort.

Takes precedence means "is more important that," or "comes first." There is no implication of conflict.

You still haven't addressed the fact that the FAQ states clearly that Veteran Skills are in fact affected by USR's of the same name, and the USR's replace in full the rules of the same name. You can't pick and choose. The BGB is a new edition, and rules change in new editions.

If GW had intended the same restrictions to be placed on Infiltrate as there were in the C:CSM version, they would have either been included in the BGB version of the USR:Infiltrate, or it would have been clarified in the FAQ, just like they kept the restrictions against infiltrating models with termi armor.

Now, "takes precedence" doesn't have to mean "replaces in full," considering the fact that the USR section states that those USRs that appear in the BGB already "replace in full" the rules that appear in the codices.

Once again, you're still, in effect, saying: "USR's replace "special rules," but even though the FAQ states that the USRs do have an effect on veteran skills of the same name, "veteran skills" are not "special rules" so they don't affect them, unless I percieve there to be a conflict."

Who appointed you "that guy" who determines whether or not a conflict exists??? And since when does a conflict have to exist for something to "take precedence?"

Next, you suppose that divining designer's intent is impossible. With the USR's, the designers' intent is spelled out in the first paragraph in bold at the top of the section. They were trying to simplify the rules and condense them so that each codex didn't have it's own version of a rule. Your interpretation is doing just that; you have one version of Infiltrate for CSM's and another for everyone else. You're interpretation of designers' intent ignores the fact that rules change between editions. If they had wanted to keep all of those restrictions, then they would have been included in the USR or in the FAQ.

Sal.

They did. No matter which way you look at it, Veteran Skilsl are special rules. They are not necessary to play the game nor are they a part of the 'core' rules for the various phases of the game. Hence they are special rules. And what does the Warhammer 40,000 4th edition rulebook then go on to say?

Posted By Saldiven on 02/28/2007 9:41 AM
"takes precedence" over "implies" nothing of the sort.

Takes precedence means "is more important that," or "comes first." There is no implication of conflict.

For something to take precedence, one must come first and the other second. If one comes before the other they are in competiton for first. Competition is a form of conflict. As far as the restrictions are concerned, there is nothing to come in first or second. There is only the one entry under veteran abilites. No rule to conflict, no competition, no precedence to be taken.

Yes I did, several times. You either are not understanding what I am saying or you ignoring it.

No they wouldn't, because they would have to go to every single codex that had a restriction on it and put it in the USR. Now that would be pretty dumb, as they logically should be codex specific.

Quote where it says "veteran abilities" are special skills. I already quoted to you where it says in each codex specifically "special skills". You want to talk about RAW, well, show me where it says that. If it doesn't then it is not RAW.

Careful. You about to cross over into personal attack. You can disagree with my conclusion, but do not make silly accusations at me. And its not me personally that determines where a conflict is, its basic English comprehension. Thats all you need to deterimine a written conflict.

prec·e·dence      /?pr?s?d?ns, pr??sidns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pres-i-duhns, pri-seed-ns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

Posted By Ghaz on 02/28/2007 9:48 AM

The point I am making is that if they wanted to say replace the Veteran Abilities with the USR they could of said that

They did. No matter which way you look at it, Veteran Skilsl are special rules. They are not necessary to play the game nor are they a part of the 'core' rules for the various phases of the game. Hence they are special rules. And what does the Warhammer 40,000 4th edition rulebook then go on to say?

The following unit special rules are the definitive versions, and replace special rules of the same name printed in full in Codexes.

I've already pointed out the following things.

1) The USR in the BBB says "replaces special rules"

2) There are two places where there are special rules clearly identified in every codex. On the page titled special rules, and under each unit entry if applicable.

3) The fact that the FAQ says "take precedence" and not "replaces in full"

You guys have turned this thread into a "no its not" "yes it is" and Im getting tired of re-typing the same thing over and over. You guys want to claim RAW and throw intent in it, but thats not how it works. Its either RAW or its intent, they are mutually exclusive. Either way, RAW or intent makes it so infiltrate can not be used by the models listed under veteran abilities.

So, since this thread has devolved I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

 

And again, VETERAN SKILLS ARE SPECIAL RULES. Saying that they're not doesn't change that. Just like you have a 'Xerox' machine (a photocopier made by the Xerox Corporation) or a 'xerox' machine (any photocopier made by any corporation) it doesn't have to be listed under the heading 'Special Rules' in order to be a special rule.

Secondly, it doesn't matter if it 'takes precedence' or 'replaces in full'. The both mean the exact same thing.

Well ok then.... all I know is I never expected so tiny a question to erupt into this   All I know is when I use the Army Builder program the only daemon princes that can have infiltration are the ones for alpha legion when.  If I try to give it to a prince for any other legion I get the little red light that says daemon princes CAN'T have infiltration, but with AL there is no problem.  So I would assume that since the program is from GW that I should just follow what it tells me.
Aztralwolf

Army Builder is NOT a GW product.

If you are referring to the similar GW product, you still need to follow the rules as spelled out in the BGB and Codices. List building software is a tool of convenience, not a rules source. Not even if it's produced by GW.

Daemon Princes *can* infiltrate. Statured models cannot. It is a restriction in Daemonic Stature. Read Daemonic Stature- models with Daemonic Stature may not infiltrate. The CSM codex had some additional limitations under infiltrate that prevented MoK, Stature, etc. from Infiltrating. But then, along came 4th....

Odd - my Codex has no restriction against infiltration in the D. Stature description. What book are you quoting from?

Posted By Antonin on 03/05/2007 8:29 AM
Odd - my Codex has no restriction against infiltration in the D. Stature description. What book are you quoting from?

It's not in the Daemonic Stature description. It's under Veteran Abilities- Infiltrate.

I was responding to JMurph - I'm fully aware of what's written in the Chaos Codex. Though technically that restriction doesn't exist where you say either - even though it is written in the codex.

Posted By Antonin on 03/05/2007 10:07 AM
I was responding to JMurph - I'm fully aware of what's written in the Chaos Codex. Though technically that restriction doesn't exist where you say either - even though it is written in the codex.

You sure about that? You may want to re-read page 19 again. And seriously, this is my last post in this thread. Way too many people here that either don't know where the facts are, or have no idea what a fact is.

And as per the Warhammer 40,000 4th edition rulebook that has been replaced in full with the Infiltrate Universal Special Rule which has no such restrictions.

This can just go aroun and around, Yes your right Gaz BUT it does not have anything avbout stature in the BBB does it? thats a codex Chaos spesific item/upgrade/wahetever and it clearly says that models with stature cant infiltrate. Therefore they cant. You could argue it but most people woud not agree.

Common sence would say something that huge could not really sneak.

Beef - what part of the rules are you looking at? specifically, does your version of D. Stature have a restriction - in the description of D. Stature itself, and not some other place - against infiltration? If so, then it would be a stealth reprint that I do not have - if not, then Ghaz's point (which is entirely correct by the way) is the controlling point.

And AM? I am entirely sure about that. I do believe you did not understand my post - it covered exactly what you were talking about.

Beef isn't looking anywhere, neither is Jmurph. They are both just wrong. Angelus Mortis can't accept the truth.

-The USR in the rule book completely replaces rules of the same name in codicies.

-The restriction for Stature, MOK, and etc are under the INFILTRATE skill in the Chaos Dex.

-The INFILTRATE skill in the Chaos Dex is completely replaced with the INFILTRATE skill in the rulebook

-The rulebook INFILTRATE skill has no such restrictions on models with the MoK or Demonic Stature.

There really is no other way to look at it.

You are correct WD, I mis-spoke. The restriction is in the Vet Skill descs. However, your analysis may be flawed.

The Infiltrate Vet Skill allows use of the Infiltrate USR. However, it lays out restrictions on who may take the IVS. The fact that the Inf USR does not have these additional limitations doesn't seem determinative.

See what you did Aztralwolf, now we have ground you. Go to your room...

Just as a query more than anything, why does the USR have to replace the codex as written. It won't be the first time that a rule has had the same/ similar name and a slightly different interpretation. USR are exactly that - universal ........ unless something is different. If the codex has a special rule for infiltrate etc, why does it have to be replaced - it isn't the same rule?

Because of this entry in the GW CSM FAQ:

"Veteran Skills that are printed in the Universal Special Rules section of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook always take precedence over those printed in Codex: Chaos Space Marines."

Obviously a huge screw-up by Games Workshop but there's nothing we can really do about that.