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.

How does a Space Marine Biker take a Special Weapon if you enforce top to bottom option selection?

 Kriswall wrote:
How does a Space Marine Biker take a Special Weapon if you enforce top to bottom option selection?

They cannot. Unless of course the "Swap Pistol for CCW" falls somewhere between "Add more Bikers" and "2 Bikers may take Special Weapons".

 Happyjew wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
How does a Space Marine Biker take a Special Weapon if you enforce top to bottom option selection?

They cannot. Unless of course the "Swap Pistol for CCW" falls somewhere between "Add more Bikers" and "2 Bikers may take Special Weapons".

OR...

Unless of course you don't enforce a top to bottom option selection... something which is never mentioned in the rules anywhere so far as I can tell.

The options have to be READ from top to bottom to be understood in many cases (this is a phenomenom of the reading comprehension and not the rules), but I have yet to see a rules citation requiring me to choose options in a certain order.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
How does a Space Marine Biker take a Special Weapon if you enforce top to bottom option selection?

They cannot. Unless of course the "Swap Pistol for CCW" falls somewhere between "Add more Bikers" and "2 Bikers may take Special Weapons".

OR...

Unless of course you don't enforce a top to bottom option selection... something which is never mentioned in the rules anywhere so far as I can tell.

The options have to be READ from top to bottom to be understood in many cases (this is a phenomenom of the reading comprehension and not the rules), but I have yet to see a rules citation requiring me to choose options in a certain order.

Outside of obvious restrictions (X cannot be taken if Y is true), you won't find it.

And, sadly, I have some evidence against the follow-the-order-it's-printed "intent".
Space Marine Codex; Librarian, Chapter Master, or Chaplain.
You can take a SM bike while in power armour.
Then, by following it, I can swap it all (minus the bike, as it isn't called out) for Terminator armour.
Bikes cannot be taken if you're in Termi armour, but if you took the bike first (because I followed the list from top to bottom, or because I "took it first"), I can get guy in Termi armour on a bike.

I'd like to point out that I wouldn't try it, because I seriously think that's against intent.
But that is by going RaW.
Unless I missed something?

 Kriswall wrote:
How does a Space Marine Biker take a Special Weapon if you enforce top to bottom option selection?

I see, I thought they had a boltgun to exchange for some reason...

So yeah:

 Happyjew wrote:
They cannot. Unless of course the "Swap Pistol for CCW" falls somewhere between "Add more Bikers" and "2 Bikers may take Special Weapons".

I will have to note that the Space Marine Codex an anything before it are the issue. Anything published later has a top to bottom method, sometime very obvious like Codex Adepta Sororitas or Astra Militarum.

 Ond Angel wrote:
Outside of obvious restrictions (X cannot be taken if Y is true), you won't find it.

And, sadly, I have some evidence against the follow-the-order-it's-printed "intent".
Space Marine Codex; Librarian, Chapter Master, or Chaplain.
You can take a SM bike while in power armour.
Then, by following it, I can swap it all (minus the bike, as it isn't called out) for Terminator armour.
Bikes cannot be taken if you're in Termi armour, but if you took the bike first (because I followed the list from top to bottom, or because I "took it first"), I can get guy in Termi armour on a bike.

I'd like to point out that I wouldn't try it, because I seriously think that's against intent.
But that is by going RaW.
Unless I missed something?

Well, apart from the restrictions in the Special Issue Wargear (Note 3), that is order specific (you have to be in Terminator armour in order to "may not" take the Bike), the problem exists whether you take Options in "follow-the-order-it's-printed" or choose randomly out of them all.

Same as the Apothecary in Command Squads, it seems that the SM Codex is broken in this "part" of its wording. And the loop comes around:
What is stopping you buying a bike and then Terminator armour. Or a Veteran taking TH+SS and then becoming apothecary.

At least follow-the-order-it's-printed "intent" fixes half of it. And as much as the SM Codex is broken whether we follow-the-order-it's-printed or not, a lot of other codex (pretty much all the ones that came out after it) do support the idea (against the "choose in any order")

I will re-iterate that you have no actual rule backing to support your hypothesis.

there is also no rule backing supporting the use of upgrade equipment either.

I personally don't see it as game breaking for the apothecary to be able to take upgrades, its not going to swing the balance of the game and he still has to pay the points for it.

and in the grand scale of things with the current state of the game its not even footnote worthy.

still, there are no set methods, rules or president's currently in print that allow nor deny the upgrading of the apothecary.

by default, there is permission to buy upgrades, regardless of your personal feelings on the matter, the unit can purchase upgrades, and there isn't any expressive denial nor direction on order of purchase.

as such its perfectly acceptable to state that you bought 5 x storm shields, 5 x thunder hammers, one vet 'takes' a nethicarum, squad takes a drop pod DC.

 nutty_nutter wrote:
I will re-iterate that you have no actual rule backing to support your hypothesis.

there is also no rule backing supporting the use of upgrade equipment either.

I personally don't see it as game breaking for the apothecary to be able to take upgrades, its not going to swing the balance of the game and he still has to pay the points for it.

and in the grand scale of things with the current state of the game its not even footnote worthy.

still, there are no set methods, rules or president's currently in print that allow nor deny the upgrading of the apothecary.

by default, there is permission to buy upgrades, regardless of your personal feelings on the matter, the unit can purchase upgrades, and there isn't any expressive denial nor direction on order of purchase.

as such its perfectly acceptable to state that you bought 5 x storm shields, 5 x thunder hammers, one vet 'takes' a nethicarum, squad takes a drop pod DC.

I do not have a Rule backing up the hypothesis written in any book, no.

But the hypothesis comes from standard English (read left to right, top to bottom) that induces an order of upgrades.
This can, however, be backed by a few codices, such as Astra Militarum:
"• Up to four Tempestus Scions that have not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace their hot-shot lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list."
"• One remaining Guardsman that has not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace his lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list."
Adepta Sororitas:
"- One other Battle Sister may take one item from the Special Weapons list."
Orks:
"One other model may be upgraded to a Boss Nob"

Now please explain how you :
A) Follow these instructions first, if you have not followed any other Option instructions. And how you follow the other (referred to here) set of instructions?
B) abide by the highlighted orange sections above if these are RaW from their respective Codex and if there is no RaW on "follow-the-order-it's-printed"?

and as was pointed out to you, the dark reapers don't work with your approach either.

you cannot blanket all the codex's with one brush because you have a couple of entries that support your hypothesis, more so when there are those that do not support it.

I don't need to explain how your examples work because it is clear that when reading those entries that they work in sections. not having the sisters of battle, orks or astra militarum codex's I cannot go through them to see if there are other entries within them that do not function with your approach, but I also cannot see how they are formatted within a given layout either.

I also put it to you that each codex is adherent unto itself, meaning that each codex's layout, options and the way to read and work out how units are selected is individual to how it was written at the time, more so when we are dealing with books written for previous editions.

as pointed out in this thread, there are multiple examples of how a top down approach works and doesn't work and without any method or rule telling us how upgrades are applied you cannot enforce such restrictions legitimately.

I stand by my original post.

discuss it with your TO's and regular play groups.

 insaniak wrote:
No, any upgrade that is taken for a Veteran is not available to an Apothecary, as he is an Apothecary, not a Veteran.

He clearly was a veteran before becoming an apothecary and could've purchased options at that stage.

You have simply concluded that because one of the two paths to being an Apothecary prevents it, it should not be allowed.

Just as some conclude that because one of the two paths allows it, it should be allowed.



In other words, you should flag your interpretation and opinion as such instead of making it look like RAW, which it isn't.

When reading the options, you have to read top to bottom and left to right as they are written in English. Reading them out of order results in utter lack of comprehension.

Nothing says you have to select them in order once you've read and comprehended the choices.

Until someone is able to point to a rule stating that Veterans lose all existing wargear and replace it with a default set of Apothecary wargear, I will assume they keep what they are equipped with and simply gain the Narthecium. If I upgrade a Thunder Hammer wielding Veteran to be an Apothecary, and in the absence of a rule telling me that he has to lose or trade in the Thunder Hammer, I am left with a Thunder Hammer wielding Apothecary.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
If Johnny McSpaceMarine joined the Apothecarium before learning how to use a Thunder Hammer, then he will never learn how to use one. (Apothecary upgade chosen first, thus losing the option to subsequently take a Thunder Hammer).

morgoth wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
No, any upgrade that is taken for a Veteran is not available to an Apothecary, as he is an Apothecary, not a Veteran.

He clearly was a veteran before becoming an apothecary and could've purchased options at that stage.

You have simply concluded that because one of the two paths to being an Apothecary prevents it, it should not be allowed.

Just as some conclude that because one of the two paths allows it, it should be allowed.



In other words, you should flag your interpretation and opinion as such instead of making it look like RAW, which it isn't.

Then why bother restricting an upgrade to a Veteran if you can get around that restriction by timing? Why not just say 'any model' like they do in numerous entries in the codex? Where do the rules say that you only check the legality of the wargear when you take it?

 Ghaz wrote:

morgoth wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
No, any upgrade that is taken for a Veteran is not available to an Apothecary, as he is an Apothecary, not a Veteran.

He clearly was a veteran before becoming an apothecary and could've purchased options at that stage.

You have simply concluded that because one of the two paths to being an Apothecary prevents it, it should not be allowed.

Just as some conclude that because one of the two paths allows it, it should be allowed.



In other words, you should flag your interpretation and opinion as such instead of making it look like RAW, which it isn't.

Then why bother restricting an upgrade to a Veteran if you can get around that restriction by timing? Why not just say 'any model' like they do in numerous entries in the codex? Where do the rules say that you only check the legality of the wargear when you take it?

The rules basically give you the legality check in the text of the option. 'Any Veteran may' limits the option to Veterans. Is the model a Veteran when you take the option? Yes.

Why bother restricting an upgrade to a Veteran if you can get around that restriction by timing? Poor writing? Restricting the upgrade from being taken by Sargeants? A lack of ability to translate RaI into RaW by the authors? We'll never know why they chose the words they chose. I think we can all agree that a couple of days with a technical copy editor talking to the author would have fixed all these issues.

It is very possible that Apothecaries aren't meant to have certain 'Veteran only' upgrades. Unfortunately, GW never put into writing that options have to be taken sequentially. As written, we can upgrade the wargear on the Veteran and then upgrade the Veteran to an Apothecary.

Not sure if this has been said before in this thread, but here's how my group has interpreted it (and this is based off the DA book, not sure if this changed for the vanilla Space Marine book).

If you look back at the page describing the unit and the fluff, it lists the load outs for the various upgrade characters. So, once you upgrade a veteran to an apothecary their load out becomes the one listed in the unit entry on that page. Therefore, you can upgrade a veteran with as much stuff as you want, but the moment he becomes an apoth his wargear is reverted to the apoth's load out.

We also use the precedent that if a character gets an upgrade then it is usually called out in the load out options (which is why you can't just give your sergeant a heavy bolter in the tac squad). Because there is nothing there specifically allowing an apothecary to take upgrades then he cannot take any other weapons and is stuck with his basic load out.

Again, this is just how my group interpreted it. I'm not looking to argue, just add that to the mix.

The Command Squad doesn't have a Sergeant. It's initial unit composition is five Veterans. So why do several units allow 'any model' to take certain upgrades and yet this one requires it to be a Veteran?

Plus you still haven't provided anything to support that you only check the legality of upgrades at the step you give it to the unit. Why don't you check to see if you have a legal army at other times, like when you start the game?

 Ghaz wrote:
The Command Squad doesn't have a Sergeant. It's initial unit composition is five Veterans. So why do several units allow 'any model' to take certain upgrades and yet this one requires it to be a Veteran?

Plus you still haven't provided anything to support that you only check the legality of upgrades at the step you give it to the unit. Why don't you check to see if you have a legal army at other times, like when you start the game?

Well, you're basically creating a side argument that is the exact same as the core argument. If I can take a Thunder Hammer and THEN upgrade to Apothecary, the army is legal. I don't check to see if the army is legal at other time because no rule tells me I need to. The rules tell me how to select an army, and if I've followed them correctly, the army is legal. If effect, the rules never ask for a validation check... they just tell you how to do it correctly in the first place.

The root of the argument is whether or not I've followed the army list creation rules correctly. Since there are no rules that tell me I have to take the options in order, the options aren't numbered and there is circumstancial evidence (Bikers FAQ) that order of upgrades is important (we have to take an option added to the list before being able to take an option already on the list) , I choose to take my options "out of order" to achieve the desired result. There are numerous situations in the game where performing action A before action B is legal, but doing B before A is not. That O'Vesa can join Farsight, but Farsight can't join O'Vesa is one example. Giving a Thunder Hammer to a Veteran and then Upgrading him to Apothecary is legal. Upgrading a Veteran to Apothecary and then giving him a Thunder Hammer is not.

 Kriswall wrote:
I don't check to see if the army is legal at other time because no rule tells me I need to.

Do you have support for this? Where does it say that as long as the option was legal when you took it it doesn't matter if you take another option that invalidates it. Where is there anything that even says you have to field a 'legal' army in the first place?

 nutty_nutter wrote:
I also put it to you that each codex is adherent unto itself, meaning that each codex's layout, options and the way to read and work out how units are selected is individual to how it was written at the time, more so when we are dealing with books written for previous editions.

Agreed, i suppose using a method from one Codex and applying it to an other is, indeed, a lost cause.

 nutty_nutter wrote:
as pointed out in this thread, there are multiple examples of how a top down approach works and doesn't work and without any method or rule telling us how upgrades are applied you cannot enforce such restrictions legitimately.

I would disagree with "multiple examples" until the list gets longer than:
- Eldar Dark Reapers
- Space Marine Command Squad (not really in the list. Broken in both methods)
- Space Marine Librarian, Chapter Master, or Chaplain
- Could probably put here: Space Marine Codex.

We have 2 Codex "against" (SM, Eldar), 3(4?) Codex "for" (Ork, AM, Tau, AS?). I'll just go by majority for now and say some Codex need a bit more work (Eldar, SM)
Most don't have any issues and work around it (DA,SW: they all "replace boltgun" so both methods are the same)

 Kriswall wrote:
Nothing says you have to select them in order once you've read and comprehended the choices.

 BlackTalos wrote:
"• Up to four Tempestus Scions that have not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace their hot-shot lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list."

Please explain to me (with RaW support) what this option (Rule) means by "Above"? I mean, there is no order in which i choose these options so i'll go for this one first? I have a Unit of 10 Scions, and i decide to use this option. I must follow the RaW of the option.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 nutty_nutter wrote:
I also put it to you that each codex is adherent unto itself, meaning that each codex's layout, options and the way to read and work out how units are selected is individual to how it was written at the time, more so when we are dealing with books written for previous editions.

Agreed, i suppose using a method from one Codex and applying it to an other is, indeed, a lost cause.

 nutty_nutter wrote:
as pointed out in this thread, there are multiple examples of how a top down approach works and doesn't work and without any method or rule telling us how upgrades are applied you cannot enforce such restrictions legitimately.

I would disagree with "multiple examples" until the list gets longer than:
- Eldar Dark Reapers
- Space Marine Command Squad (not really in the list. Broken in both methods)
- Space Marine Librarian, Chapter Master, or Chaplain
- Could probably put here: Space Marine Codex.

We have 2 Codex "against" (SM, Eldar), 3(4?) Codex "for" (Ork, AM, Tau, AS?). I'll just go by majority for now and say some Codex need a bit more work (Eldar, SM)
Most don't have any issues and work around it (DA,SW: they all "replace boltgun" so both methods are the same)

 Kriswall wrote:
Nothing says you have to select them in order once you've read and comprehended the choices.

 BlackTalos wrote:
"• Up to four Tempestus Scions that have not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace their hot-shot lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list."

Please explain to me (with RaW support) what this option (Rule) means by "Above"? I mean, there is no order in which i choose these options so i'll go for this one first? I have a Unit of 10 Scions, and i decide to use this option. I must follow the RaW of the option.

Above means above. If you aren't sure what it means in the context of the sentence, I suggest a dictionary. I checked the BRB glossary, but I guess GW assumed we'd know what above means. The option you cite is explicit in what you are and aren't allowed to take. You still have to read top to bottom for comprehension as the rules are written in English. If the Apothecary option was listed last and said something along the lines of 'One Veteran that has not been been upgraded with one of the options above may be upgraded to be an Apothecary...', then I would agree that the intent is to upgrade only 'plain' Veterans. The Apothecary upgrade has no such wording. If anything, your example helps my case because it shows that GW is perfectly willing to place restriction on upgrades... restrictions that don't appear in the Apothecary option.

I can no more provide rules that allow me to choose options 'out of order' than you can provide rules forcing me to choose options 'in order' because the BRB has no such rules anywhere. We're left with common sense and general reading comprehension.

Can Veterans take Thunder Hammers? Yes.
Can Veterans become Apothecaries? Yes.
Can Veterans who've been upgraded to Apothecaries take Thunder Hammers? Thunder Hammers aren't available to Apothecaries, and this model is now an Apothecary, so I'm forced to answer No.
Can Veterans who have taken Thunder Hammers become Apothecaries? Well, I know Veterans can become Apothecaries and the Apothecary upgrade doesn't say anything about models who have taken other options, so I'm forced to answer Yes.
If a Veteran becomes an Apothecary, does he have to give up his Thunder Hammer? I can't find anything in the rules about this such as I might find when a Chapter Master takes Terminator Armour and trades in his equipment, so I'm forced to answer No.

From a fluff perspective, if the Marine learns to use and acquires a Thunder Hammer before being enrolled in Apothecary training, he will retain the wargear and usage thereof. If he has not learned how to use one, the Master of Apothecaries certainly isn't going to teach him or give him one. It's all about your Marines path to becoming an Apothecary.

Here's how I see it:

1. RAW: You can give an upgrade to a Veteran, and then turn him into an Apothecary, and he of course retains the upgrade because nothing says he loses it.

2. RAI: Based on stuff, including DA, and whatever else you may think of, it is likely that the Apothecary may not benefit from the Veteran's upgrades.

3. HYWPI: Apparently you play it with no upgrades on the Apothecary, good for you.

morgoth wrote:
Here's how I see it:

1. RAW: You can give an upgrade to a Veteran, and then turn him into an Apothecary, and he of course retains the upgrade because nothing says he loses it.

That's only if you believe in a strict 'top to bottom' method of determining legality. Do you have any written support for that versus checking to see if the list is legal once its complete?

morgoth wrote:
He clearly was a veteran before becoming an apothecary ...

Indeed. But now he's not.

You have simply concluded that because one of the two paths to being an Apothecary prevents it, it should not be allowed.

No, I'm saying that the 'path' is irrelevant. An Apothecary is not a Veteran, he's an Apothecary. And so he only has access to upgrades that are available to an Apothecary, or to non-specific models.

In other words, you should flag your interpretation and opinion as such instead of making it look like RAW, which it isn't.

Anything that anybody writes on these forums that isn't a direct quote is an interpretation and opinion. There is little point asking everyone to flag every single post they make as such.

 insaniak wrote:

morgoth wrote:
He clearly was a veteran before becoming an apothecary ...

Indeed. But now he's not.

You have simply concluded that because one of the two paths to being an Apothecary prevents it, it should not be allowed.

No, I'm saying that the 'path' is irrelevant. An Apothecary is not a Veteran, he's an Apothecary. And so he only has access to upgrades that are available to an Apothecary, or to non-specific models.

In other words, you should flag your interpretation and opinion as such instead of making it look like RAW, which it isn't.

Anything that anybody writes on these forums that isn't a direct quote is an interpretation and opinion. There is little point asking everyone to flag every single post they make as such.

Do you have any rules to back up your assertion that upgrade path isn't relevant? Do you have any rules to backup that any sort of list validation happens at the end of the list creation process and not during, at every step? Players make decisions in terms of order of operations constantly throughout this game. These decisions have tactical repercussions. Do I shoot with unit A first, or unit B? Do I declare an assault with unit A first, or unit B? Do I take the Thunder Hammer upgrade first, or the Apothecary upgrade?

If I field a Thunder Hammer wielding Apothecary and someone questions me on the legality, I'm just going to say that I chose the Thunder Hammer upgrade followed by the Apothecary upgrade. Unless you can demonstrate ANY rule in the rulebook telling me that the options must be selected in order, my choice is legal. I have yet to see any rule saying that options have to be selected in order. RaW seems to support taking options "out of order".

Also, when you say an Apothecary is not a veteran, he's an Apothecary, you're not telling the whole story. He's an Apothecary who used to be a Veteran and presumably made life choices while being a Veteran (such as selecting a Thunder Hammer).

True or false to each statement...

Veterans can take Thunder Hammers.
Veterans can become Apothecaries.
Becoming an Apothecary doesn't involve losing Wargear.
There is no rule in the core rule book telling us we have to select options from top to bottom.

I would say true to all of the above.

Do you have anything to support your claims that legality is determined in a strict 'top to bottom' order?

Actually, after another look at the entry, I'm going to completely reverse my opinion on this one.

I think I still had the previous codex stuck in my head. The way this one is laid out, there is absolutely no reason you couldn't give a Veteran an upgrade weapon and then upgrade him to an Apothecary.

Welp time to break out the ole' grinder, you get a combi-melta Mr. Apothecary.

 Quickjager wrote:
Welp time to break out the ole' grinder, you get a combi-melta Mr. Apothecary.

Poor Apoth.
I hope he passes his FNP...

 insaniak wrote:
Actually, after another look at the entry, I'm going to completely reverse my opinion on this one.

I think I still had the previous codex stuck in my head. The way this one is laid out, there is absolutely no reason you couldn't give a Veteran an upgrade weapon and then upgrade him to an Apothecary.

So then a Dark Reaper Exarch gets a 2 point discount if the whole squad upgrades to have Starswarm Missles?

 Happyjew wrote:
So then a Dark Reaper Exarch gets a 2 point discount if the whole squad upgrades to have Starswarm Missles?

Probably. I don't recall seeing those options in the Space Marine Command Squad entry.

 insaniak wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
So then a Dark Reaper Exarch gets a 2 point discount if the whole squad upgrades to have Starswarm Missles?

Probably. I don't recall seeing those options in the Space Marine Command Squad entry.

Your argument, if you will, is that you can upgrade a Veteran to have a weapon, and then upgrade to an Apothecary. By that logic, I can upgrade all Dark Reapers to have Skyswarm Missiles, (for 8 ppm) and then upgrade one to an Exarch (who normally pays 10 pts for the same upgrade).

Additionally, an AM Company Command Squad, could upgrade all 4 Veterans to have a special weapon, and then give them a vox-caster, medi-pack, and a regimental standard.

Is that a problem?