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.

:(
Rhinos at 50points & I can take armoured fist squads! (oh, wait a minute, no I can't as they don't exist any more).

How lazy is this list?

The problem is that the free books are already owned by everyone that intends on playing those armies since they've been out for 10 years and are hideously outdated. Most people that run Sisters or Grey Knights do so out of interest in the story and models rather than gameplay. Few people are going to look at those expensive all metal forces and think saving $20 on a book is going to convince them to throw down money on the rest.

If they are going to remove allies for balance reasons I have no problem with that, but don't be sneaky about it and do a Stalin-esque re-write and pretend the rule was never there. Include a passage that explains the new direction and that your old book no longer is valid in that respect, not leave it up to an argument over which version of the book is correct every time. If they had time to edit out all that stuff they also could have added in rules for stuff that used to have them and were costed with those rules in mind like Land Raider Assault Ramps. It's one thing with old weapons or different invul saves on newer versions of Storm Shields or even 50 point rhinos with one fire point but the landraiders had that rule in 4th edition so giving it to them now is going back to the status quo. Leaving that out of an errata was stupid in the first place but this was a perfect opportunity to rectify that.

I don't understand why they hyped this up so much for something so lazy and half assed.

This isn't an update, this is just a release of the codex online. Therefor there aren't any changes.

Want to talk about balance breaking rules? 50 point rhinos are broken. Repentia are broken. Dominions are broken. PAGK are broken. GK special rules are broken. =][= Chimeras are broken.

Meh, so are Dark Angels still - but play with what you got.

Uriels_Flame wrote:Meh, so are Dark Angels still - but play with what you got.

QFT...

there's other Codex books out there if you don't want to play a so-called ''broken'' army, if it can so be called...

I play three armies, as indicated by my signature. That is irrelevant, however, because my point was simply that Allies didn't break the rules because they were already friggin' broken.

Melissia wrote:This isn't an update, this is just a release of the codex online. Therefor there aren't any changes.

Want to talk about balance breaking rules? 50 point rhinos are broken. Repentia are broken. Dominions are broken. PAGK are broken. GK special rules are broken. =][= Chimeras are broken.

Yup. I didn't expect any changes at all but the fact that they left all that stuff the same (whatever I've played with this crap for years I'm used to it and have other armies so it doesn't really matter) but actually take out stuff without making any mention of it anywhere is just really irritating. A SCRIBD scan of the book is better than this since it doesn't cut out half the book which is sad.

Melissia wrote:I play three armies, as indicated by my signature. That is irrelevant, however, because my point was simply that Allies didn't break the rules because they were already friggin' broken.

...but, but MYSTICS and the TAROT

that doesn't mean it is any less tiring to hear the same broken record of complaint over and over and over...

have some patience & learn to accept the things that cannot be changed. maybe there is some enjoyment to be had in this game?

radical bob wrote:that doesn't mean it is any less tiring to hear the same broken record of complaint over and over and over...

have some patience & learn to accept the things that cannot be changed. maybe there is some enjoyment to be had in this game?

Apparently they CAN be changed as evidenced by them removing rules from the book.

touche, sir...

I guess we also must learn to accept the things that can be changed!


in either case, whining about how put-upon older Codices are is pretty unbecoming & for me at least, has gotten pretty old these past couple of months...

radical bob wrote:touche, sir...

I guess we also must learn to accept the things that can be changed!

Fair enough!

And I don't want to listen to your whining either. Stop whining about my posts, yes? Just skip them over if they bother you so much, just like I do with most posts like that.

Ixquic wrote:Yup. I didn't expect any changes at all but the fact that they left all that stuff the same (whatever I've played with this crap for years I'm used to it and have other armies so it doesn't really matter) but actually take out stuff without making any mention of it anywhere is just really irritating. A SCRIBD scan of the book is better than this since it doesn't cut out half the book which is sad.

And therefor my codex takes precedence, because it is an actual codex. So allies rules aren't removed.

Here's an idea.

LET'S STOP ALL OF THE WHINING AND DRAGGING OF THREADS OFF TOPIC!

How does THAT sound?

There's one person doing the dragging Alpha. You guys all know this...

I agree!

So, back on topic of the PDFs. Just because the PDF codex doesn't have the Allies rules-- in the DH version only, apparently-- doesn't mean that those rules are removed. Unless you're going to say that all physical copies of the codex are nullified and replaced by this, which I haven't seen any proof of.

H.B.M.C. wrote:There's only one person doing the dragging Alpha. You guys all know this...

I would certainly hope so.

H.B.M.C. wrote:There's one person doing the dragging Alpha. You guys all know this...

Yes, me. And I didn't even post in this one before now. That's how good I am.

High five Aggy! *raises arm*

filbert wrote:

RUNE wrote:

Los bajé hace un rato y se ven muy bien.

The bath has a rat and it goes very well.

Erasoketa wrote:

Estoy hasta los huevos de tener que tirar de mi codex WH en inglés xDD

I have fear eggs that fire my English WH codex



Translation service provided by filbert spanglish Inc.

I'm pondering about sigging this. Nice try btw xDDDDD

Melissia wrote:I agree!

So, back on topic of the PDFs. Just because the PDF codex doesn't have the Allies rules-- in the DH version only, apparently-- doesn't mean that those rules are removed. Unless you're going to say that all physical copies of the codex are nullified and replaced by this, which I haven't seen any proof of.

Yeah until there's an errata explaining that the removal was intentional or that this is now the only legal version of the codex I will continue to use the rules as written.

I think it's a safe assumption that the implication of the allies rule being removed from the online codex will be interpreted differently from region to region. Ultimately, the only thing that matters is how the specific tournament/region you are attending rules, not forcing others to your interpretation in an online community. Considering someone earlier stated that the page numbers were reordered, I do think this raises the strong possibility that either the new allies rule in the upcoming dex is removed....or game breaking mechanics (such as Inquisitor/Mystics) is removed.

I think this bodes well for a new DH on the horizon and I'm assuming this was simply a stop gap measure until the new dex hits shelves. Perhaps DH were forced back or they sold their existing stock quicker than anticipated.

Unfortunately, the hard copies of the codices are out of print. While you can use them all you want with anyone who will let you, GW didn't call the pdf's "copies" of the actual dexes. They stated they were actually releasing the dexes online. You can flog an old and outdated hard copy all you want ... it'll get you about as far as flogging an older marine dex. Newer copies are available and differ from the older copies ... just how it is.

It's to each their own, of course. Nobody can or will try to make you play "their" way if you don't want to.

PS - This is also all resolved if they do a better job of clarifying the change/exemption. That said, I don't know the value to swearing it's a typo and holding your dated codices in a death grip either. Things change.

I don't have to "flog" an old copy. I bought my codex from GW many years ago. And there's nothing indicating my old codex is out of date, now is there?

Mn, I agree that there will likely be no allies in a future codex-- and that allies will instead be left to supplements. But we're playing with the current codices, not some future dream codex that might come sometime next year if we're lucky.

Cool, thanks! My gf is starting a ssters army, she'll be psyched to see this without having to spend 25 bucks on it.

They are just a copy and as such both versions are currently legal. More to the point the printed codex is not a free product and they would have put slightly more effort into it's production. The only reason they did this was because it works out cheaper than just printing more.

Pretty much the codex is more valid as this is simply just a copy of that. Now if they simply said that it replaces the normal codex's rules then yes there would be no more allies.

But, everyone arguing over it is not going to provide any facts to validate if it takes precedence over the physical copy, all it will do is make the more dominant personality's opinion seem like a fact; as usual on the internet. So until then it's best to go with both versions as the valid and the parts the physical copy has that are missing from the virtual can be seen as a welcomed bonus to those that only have the virtual one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So simply to ask wouldn't this be easily solved by emailing them?

If people can't stick to the topic the thread will be locked.

They edited the books to their respective erratas. The original Daemonhunters codex didn't have Hellpistols and Bolters as wargear and their Heavy Flamer was mislabeled as a Heavy Weapon. The errata fixed this.
Nevertheless, these downloadable codecies have the "corrected" stats.

Mvbrandt has got it. The free .pdf is the current dex. Allies are gone. Or can other players use earlier edition dexes? Third edition orks ?

olympia wrote:The free .pdf is the current dex.

Prove it.

OK, how does GW releasing a codex online, being a more recent version, NOT make it more valid than the older edition? When the new BA codex came out in stores, no one cried that it did not invalidate the PDF codex. I am not seeing it here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I mean, this is just a successive rev. How does it NOT invalidate previous revs?