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.

GK Henchmen Acolyte Warriors, are DH Codex Inquisitor Retinue Warriors with a few more options; now where exactly do we see ISTs?

GW actually has invalidated a codex. Once. Codex: Assassins. They actually put a statement in the first Daemon Hunters FAQ that DH replaced Assassins.

5 x Warrior Henchmen
3 x Hot Shot Lasguns
2 x Melta
5 x Carapace

Same exact unit with one less BS and better hotshot guns (the new AP3 versions vs the old 3rd ed ones).

But it doesn't actually say IST so you will never accept it. If that's all it takes for you not to accept the codex as replacing it, than you have set an impossibly high bar and under your conditions it is certainly a completely different codex that does not replace C: DH. That being said, that's kind of ignores the other 99% of the codex which is functionally the same.

Play what you want with your friends and in friendly games, but realize that C: DH is dead at 99% of GTs and certainly GW events.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh look, C: DH was already invalidated by a GW event:

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=300002&pIndex=1&aId=15000018a&multiPageMode=true&start=2

Throne of Skulls wrote:What Codicies are legal for 40K?

The most recent versions of the following Codices:

Codex: Black Templars
Codex: Blood Angels
Codex: Chaos Daemons
Codex: Chaos Space Marines
Codex: Dark Angels
Codex: Dark Eldar
Codex: Eldar
Codex: Grey Knights
Codex: Imperial Guard
Codex: Necrons
Codex: Orks
Codex: Space Marines
Codex: Space Wolves
Codex: Tau Empire
Codex: Tyranids
Codex: Witch Hunters

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seems to be missing a codex that was replaced by a newer version... What was the name of it again...? Oh yeah, Codex: Grey Knights replaced Codex: Daemonhunters.

Codex Daemonhunters, the Warrior: Targeter, hellgun, 4+ Armor Save, BS4, Options to take as many meltas as they want(Same as GK Warrior Acolytes). These are almost exactly the Same; Damon hunters had an actual IST unit that was limited on their Special Weapon choices; Warrior Acolytes are in no way the Same as ISTs, they are in every way the Same as the Warrior.

That event is a tourney; we have already said(several times) that tourneys will not be listing Daemonhunters as a legal Codex in them(Just like they do not list the Catachan Codex, which has also never been invalidated, just not used since the 4th edition IG book was released).

@Kommissar Kel: We'll have to agree to disagree on ISTs vs Warriors. Great, but the codex has still been replaced and now invalidated unofficially by GW.

Mind you ; I am not arguing that Codex: daemonhunters no longer exists. I am arguing that Codex: Grey Knights is not the update/replacement codex to Codex: daemonhunters. Any rules that currently specify Codex Daemonhunters does not get to automatically apply to Codex Grey knights, they are not the same codex.

pretre wrote:@Kommissar Kel: We'll have to agree to disagree on ISTs vs Warriors. Great, but the codex has still been replaced and now invalidated unofficially by GW.

Ummm, no, it has been invalidated by one GW tournament. I remember back when GW UK GT did not allow Codex: Catachans but GW US GTs did. So what if a new IG codex had come out that 'replaced' the old IG and Catacahans. GW still had books to sell so they allowed it.

However, bottom line, I personally agree that Grey Knights replaces Daemon Hunters.

Those are three different statements and should be parsed separately.

- No one is arguing that C: DH 'no longer exists'. Sure it exists. GW can't retroactively remove things.
- C: GK is obviously the replacement to C: DH. Just because a few units may have been updated or not brought over, doesn't mean it isn't GK and Inq. Whatever the focus.
- Any rules that specify C: DH, of course don't specify C: GK. They are two different things. Just as any rules specifying the BA Webdex don't apply to the 5th edition C: BA and any rules specifying C: SM 4th don't apply to C: SM 5th (where they make a distinction). They are functionally different versions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

don_mondo wrote:Ummm, no, it has been invalidated by one GW tournament. I remember back when GW UK GT did not allow Codex: Catachans but GW US GTs did. So what if a new IG codex had come out that 'replaced' the old IG and Catacahans. GW still had books to sell so they allowed it.

However, bottom line, I personally agree that Grey Knights replaces Daemon Hunters.

One tournament so far.
It has also been removed as a download from the site and as a sold codex. I'm also willing to bet that no GW tourney, going forward, allows it as an option.

And? Entirely irrelevant. If you could go back and note that we had already mentioned the "de facto" standard for invalidation.