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.

Fling you are just looking for an argument. As stated above this has always been the dark angels combo of having shields, hammers, and the missile. The hammers and shields replace the termies standard load out then you pay to add a missile for every five in the squad because it doesn't replace any weapons it's an additional weapon, a third weapon for the one or two guys pending on squad size. Its because of people like you, that people don't like playing competitive games because you nit pick everything is RAW vs RAI. RAI they're allowed the cyclone. RAW you can make your argument and cry about a 70+pt model and the literal only shooting the squad would have if that breaks a game then you have more issues with your army then what that missile would do to it.

There is precedent for ordinal selection of options outside of FAQs. In the newest CSM codex, a character taking terminator armor replaces ALL of their wargear with terminator armor, a power weapon, and a combi-bolter. It goes on to say that said character in terminator armor may purchase wargear from x, y, and z categories. If your position were correct, that all upgrades were purchased simultaneously, that would mean that the CSM book specifically sets up a situation in which you could spend hundreds of points on wargear, and only end up with terminator armor, a power weapon, and a combi-bolter. This is not RAW, nor is it RAI.

You keep challenging people to prove that upgrades happen ordinally, but you have nothing to support your claim that they happen simultaneously either. I have just posted a specific instance in which ordinal selection is demanded in order for the rules to function as written. I expect that's the best you're going to get, since ordinal selection is inferred in multiple books for multiple armies.

Purchasing upgrades is not a simultaneous affair. Any instance of "taking X replaces your weapons" only refers to basic wargear, and not purchased upgrades unless specifically stated otherwise.

LOOK AT PAGE 60
Can fire CML and storm bolter!!! ONly possible because you can add a CML to a preexisting weapon configuration.
1. So you can add a CML to a current weapon combination.
2. Of all options listed ONLY cml says TAKE not replace.
3. The options are seperated look at first section then look at second set.
It is so f***ing obnvious replace anything you please you can still take a CML as long as its only 1 per 5

So Fling don't pull irelevant FAQs into it. All required info is in the dex!
.

 FlingitNow wrote:
With no ordinality to the options you can still use knowledge of what options are being selected.

The bullet points aren't numbered if you assume they are in order then the DW squad can do this but the DW Command can't., which shows the inconsistency.

If you believe you can select the order then you need to show permission to do so. The Ork FaQ illustrates a precedent that this is the case, however if you're looking at precedent then the BA FaQ comes in and says no.

If you believe that order is irrelevant or that the upgrades occur simultaneously then your TH/SS replaces the CML along with all other weapons.

So your options are:

1. DW squads can but command can't
2. Prove permission to choose the order of upgrades without looking at precedent.
3. Look at clear precedent and accept that you can't have TH/SS replaces+ CML anymore.
4. Assume the upgrades are not ordinal and therefore you can't have TH/S + CML.

Personally I'm for option 3. No one has been able to do option 2. Option 1 is stupid. Option 4 has some merit and is closest to RaW without looking at precedent.

Which BA FAQ says no?

My two cents, since this is a "rulelawyering" problem:

- TH/SS replaces all "weapons", and since CML is not a (plain) weapon, but a heavy weapon, then the problem should not sussist.

- page 60 states that you can fire the CML and SB at the same time, because if it did not state so you could normally fire with only one weapon, having them both. It is clearly a plus of the heavy weapon.

Fling - again, prove that things are simultaneous. WE can prove options are ordinal, given the chaos space marine books existence.

Your position remains untenable, and your vehemence that people are somehow "cheating" because they disagree with your position is telling.

Q: Can a Furioso Librarian take additional wargear (such as extra
armour)? (p29)
A: No.

This is all it says. If you derive deeper meaning from this, it is because you are making it up. There is no reasoning to interpret, there is no wording to translate. No.

Q:What Mastery Level is Mephiston? (pg 47)
A: Mastery Level 3.

With your reasoning, this means DA Terminators are Mastery level 3. Get out from under that bridge.

As above, the options are for furioso dreadnought, NOT the furioso librarian which is what it now is if you select that upgrade. The terminator is still a terminator with or without the TH SS so your comparsion to this FAQ is pointless as it is not the same. Therefor the Ork Nob FAQ takes precedent

So OP as long as you aren't playing with FiN its legal. I think its a pretty safe bet to model them like this. I have had 4 like this for going on 10 years now and not a single opponent has ever had an issue.

Other FAQs aren't relevant.
Just read the dex, pg 60 and then go through the options not that hard.
If you are trying to argue simo therefore the CML TH/SS doesn't work how do you replace n take at the same time?
Again the permissive is TAKEr!
I guess we can count on orgaizers the the three in my area laugherd their a**es off overr this.
Anyone run it passed the biggies like adepticon?

 FlingitNow wrote:
With no ordinality to the options you can still use knowledge of what options are being selected.

The bullet points aren't numbered if you assume they are in order then the DW squad can do this but the DW Command can't., which shows the inconsistency.

If you believe you can select the order then you need to show permission to do so. The Ork FaQ illustrates a precedent that this is the case, however if you're looking at precedent then the BA FaQ comes in and says no.

If you believe that order is irrelevant or that the upgrades occur simultaneously then your TH/SS replaces the CML along with all other weapons.

So your options are:

1. DW squads can but command can't
2. Prove permission to choose the order of upgrades without looking at precedent.
3. Look at clear precedent and accept that you can't have TH/SS replaces+ CML anymore.
4. Assume the upgrades are not ordinal and therefore you can't have TH/S + CML.

Personally I'm for option 3. No one has been able to do option 2. Option 1 is stupid. Option 4 has some merit and is closest to RaW without looking at precedent.

A terminator can fire his cyclone missile launcher in addition to his STORM BOLTER

It doesn't get any clearer than that. The terminator starts with an SB & PF. He then replaces these with the TH/SS - before becoming the 1 in 5 who can take a CML. Your arguement is meaningless, and you haven't even got the intelligence to accept that and back down. Sick of guys like you - read the book.

READ THE BOOK. If you READ THE BOOK, you will see (or rather you won't but there you go) that you are wrong. It's basic English. The only person trying to over-complicate matters is you. READ THE BOOK.

No-one needs to 'prove' the order of upgrades to you. It's quite clear if you READ THE BOOK.

 FlingitNow wrote:

 Homer S wrote:
The TH&SS replace all weapons but does not change the named profile. Any DW Termie may take a CML. A DW Termie w/TH&SS is still a DW Termie. Should it be FAQd? Yes!

Homer

why is changing the name of the profile important. tgf kept trying to make it important in another thread. It has no relevance as tgf had to concede.

It clearly needs an FaQ as so many people are either being wilfully ignorant of the rules or are out right cheating. Their attitude is making others break the rule unknowingly.

The profile is what drives most of these updates. Vis a vis the whole Veteran v. Champion v. Apothecary debate in Dark Angels. I see your point about GWs poor wording with "Replaces all weapons...". This should probably be errata'd to "Replace Storm Bolter & Power Fist..." Also, I can't think of any other unit where upgrades replace other upgrades already taken.

Homer

 Tehjonny wrote:

A terminator can fire his cyclone missile launcher in addition to his STORM BOLTER

It doesn't get any clearer than that. The terminator starts with an SB & PF. He then replaces these with the TH/SS - before becoming the 1 in 5 who can take a CML. Your arguement is meaningless, and you haven't even got the intelligence to accept that and back down. Sick of guys like you - read the book.

READ THE BOOK. If you READ THE BOOK, you will see (or rather you won't but there you go) that you are wrong. It's basic English. The only person trying to over-complicate matters is you. READ THE BOOK.

No-one needs to 'prove' the order of upgrades to you. It's quite clear if you READ THE BOOK.

He is obviously reading the book, just focusing on different words than you are. Maybe you should READ THE BOOK and attempt to understand others perspective and how they could reach this conclusion, then form a coherant arguement rather than jumping to insulting people, it just leads other readers to lean away from your point of view, and makes you appear less credible.

I've tried reading through the relevant rules put forward by either side, but seems perfectly legal to me, though could have been clearer. Though many weapon sections are like that really, and the more they contain the messier it can be.

MarkyMark wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
With no ordinality to the options you can still use knowledge of what options are being selected.

The bullet points aren't numbered if you assume they are in order then the DW squad can do this but the DW Command can't., which shows the inconsistency.

If you believe you can select the order then you need to show permission to do so. The Ork FaQ illustrates a precedent that this is the case, however if you're looking at precedent then the BA FaQ comes in and says no.

If you believe that order is irrelevant or that the upgrades occur simultaneously then your TH/SS replaces the CML along with all other weapons.

So your options are:

1. DW squads can but command can't
2. Prove permission to choose the order of upgrades without looking at precedent.
3. Look at clear precedent and accept that you can't have TH/SS replaces+ CML anymore.
4. Assume the upgrades are not ordinal and therefore you can't have TH/S + CML.

Personally I'm for option 3. No one has been able to do option 2. Option 1 is stupid. Option 4 has some merit and is closest to RaW without looking at precedent.

Which BA FAQ says no?

The one regarding the Furioso Librarian and taking options. The Furioso Dreadnought entry has a big list of options, and then the last is "Upgrade to a Furioso Librarian, exchanging all wargear for ..."

As none of the options are explicitly predicated on being a standard Furioso Dreadnought, the thinking is that if you were able to choose the order of upgrades you could do the Librarian upgrade first and then take the other options. The FAQ clarifies that that is not allowed, which means either you can't choose the order or that the other options were implicitly predicated on being a Furioso Dreadnought rather than a Furioso Librarian. In conjunction with the FAQ regarding Ork Nobs in units of Shoota boyz signs point to the latter rather than the former.

Exactly, upgrade to a furioso librarian, therefore its no longer a furioso dreadnought. Hence why that FAQ is not revelent

Taking a cyclone on a TH/SS termi in the last codex was allowed out of pity, i wouldn't get your hopes up.

LOL going to make 6 more

Well of course you're for option 3 Fling, that's the position you always argue.

After reviewing the BRB and the codex I'm inclined to say Option 1 is correct, in addition to being the RAW. Fling is right the DW Command Squad lists heavy weapons before CC weapons, but this is no different from the other Command Squads when compared to their Elite/FA equivalent. The load out options and points cost are completely different between the PW Command Squad and the Company Vet squad, despite both units being comprised entirely of Veterans.

You really don't have "clear precedent" here Fling. Clear precedence would be another the FAQ for another SM Chapter specifically allowing or disallowing the TH/SS or dual LC with a CML. What we have are situations that are vaguely similar (Ork FAQ is character in a squad being upgrade differently than the Boyz and BA FAQ is about a model who's upgrade changes his statline).

The Command Squad really looks like the good old GW copy/paste getting away from them, but maybe they do want them to be distinct

 Tehjonny wrote:
A terminator can fire his cyclone missile launcher in addition to his STORM BOLTER

OK, I've seen this come up a few times. What does it have to do with anything?

It proves you can take CML with another weapon load out ie take it on top of something else
So go ahead replace weapons w TH SS now Take a cyclone ML
You also therefor don't require Free hands to use a CML

canadianguy wrote:
It proves you can take CML with another weapon load out ie take it on top of something elseL

How? The CML can be fired in addition to a storm bolter. All this is saying is if a model is equipped with a CML and storm bolter you can fire both (something not normally allowed with Infantry model).

 FlingitNow wrote:

If you believe you can select the order then you need to show permission to do so. The Ork FaQ illustrates a precedent that this is the case, however if you're looking at precedent then the BA FaQ comes in and says no.

I'm sorry but this is not true. Its a poor interpretation of the BA FAQ. Both the Ork FAQ and BA FAQ set the same precedent.

You can choose to apply the options in any order you would like. An option to remove or replace a piece of war gear is handled on a model by model bases and only effect that model if it does in fact have the item being removed/replaced in its war gear. When a model is upgraded from one type to another it ceases to be its previous type and any options that specify the previous type are no longer applicable. Options that effect the entire unit will still effect the upgraded model because it is still part of the unit.

The disagreement about weather a dreadnought is still a dreadnought after its upgraded is more complicated and really does need an errata, this is fairly straight forward.

Can we all just agree to ignore FlingItNow and his absurd rules interpretations?

I have asked all tournie organizers I know and haver had a few online friends ask ones they knew all said its fine
Enough for me to be comfortable making my conversions.
Have fun all!

I can see GW's dilemma with writing the options for the Deathwing. On the one hand, IF they said
"Any model can replace his Storm Bolter and Close Combat Weapon" with :"
then someone might say, well I replaced my Storm Bolter with a Heavy Flamer so I can keep it.
So they decided to say
"Any model can replace all of his weapons with :"
thinking, surely, based on the history of the Dark Angel configurations, no one would think you couldn't keep the CML.

Well one example that this is done well is the IG codex with Command Squads.

If a model upgrades to a banner, medipack, etc... he can't then take a special.

The way it's worded is:
"Any veterans who have not been upgraded with any of the options above may replace their lasgun with..."

The clear wording means IG don't have this issue with people trying to take standard bearers with melta guns.

Not sure whose viewpoint this supports - if anyone's. I'm not sure you can draw particularly valid comparisons between codices written by different authors...

^ That's actually the standard format for squads with those options. If an upgrade changes the models statline (even in name only) they lose the general upgrades for the squad, unless it says "any model may". Using the DA codex a command squad can have a standard bearer (no profile change), Apoth (change), and Champ (profile change). Unfortunately that doesn't apply to this discussion because the DW don't change profile

This must be what an acid flashback is like. Way, way back in 2nd edition the Space Wolf codex, which was a very early codex for that era, had the terminator options listed in a very open pattern that would allow you to pick whatever you wanted from the list so long as you could properly rep it. What made this incredibly nasty was the cyclone missile launcher was a back mount with the laser designator on the left hand. Which meant you could mount an assault cannon on the right arm. It cost about 115 per model but you could have all the terminators in a squad loaded like this. When you added in that the cyclone missile launcher let you fire off groups of 2 missiles, up to the entire rack of 12 in one volley, which used the krak missile rules but created a template of 1/2 an inch radius per pair of missiles, dropping multiple 12 inch blast templates doing Str 8, 1d10 wounds, with a -6 on the armor save would either wipe out or devastate any opponent. And then the terminators still had a Str 8 1d10 wounds -3 armor save 3jam die weapon to finish off anything left over.

We had one guy that ran with that. He was allowed to use those guys once, and everyone else agreed he couldn't use them again.

This "option" isn't anywhere near as horrible, and I suppose this is a digression, but I just had to post when I started reading about another cyclone missile launcher .... abuse.

Here are my humble thoughts on the matter. The words, "Replace all weapons" are very straight forward. It doesn't say, "Replace all weapons currently equipped at the time of upgrading".

If you have to rules-lawyer something in order to justify it, there might be a good chance you are wrong. While you may not like FlingItNow's opinion or his delivery, he is the one that is taking the most basic interpretation of the rule. No word smithing, no creative interpretation, just taking the words as they are written.

The "It's always been a part of DA" justification is not valid either. New codex, new rules, new vision, what was before is not automatically what will be now.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
Here are my humble thoughts on the matter. The words, "Replace all weapons" are very straight forward. It doesn't say, "Replace all weapons currently equipped at the time of upgrading".

If you have to rules-lawyer something in order to justify it, there might be a good chance you are wrong. While you may not like FlingItNow's opinion or his delivery, he is the one that is taking the most basic interpretation of the rule. No word smithing, no creative interpretation, just taking the words as they are written.

The "It's always been a part of DA" justification is not valid either. New codex, new rules, new vision, what was before is not automatically what will be now.

The problem with Fling's logic is that it only works on a narrow interpretation. If all upgrades are purchased concurrently then any upgrade that specifies a set number of models cannot be taken. Adding more models to the squad is listed along with the other upgrades so they would follow the same rules. Just as it doesn't say "Replace all weapons currently equipped at the time of upgrading" it also doesn't say "If you intend enough models to create a ten man squad you can take an additional heavy weapon", it says "For each five models in the squad one Deathwing Terminator may take one of the options listed below".

Fling's stance is that upgrades are non-ordinal, they are all selected at the same time. If that is the case then you could never take the second heavy weapon, the squad is only comprised of more than 5 models after upgrades have been purchased. As I pointed out earlier in this thread "Replace all weapons" is inclusive of the Sgt who wields a power sword instead of a power fist. The Sgt is prevented from taking a heavy weapon by the specification that one "Deathwing Terminator may take..." preventing the Sgt from bearing the heavy weapon. If upgrades can be purchased in any order at the player's discretion then Fling's argument is completely invalidated. If upgrades are all purchased "simultaneously" nearly every unit is prevented from taking upgrades based on squad size