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.

Posted By insaniak on 05/05/2006 11:05 PM

It only lists the ones allowed because it doesn't allow any to start with, adding it to their diverity would logically mean it was not there to start with.

And you base this idea on what? Where in the codex does it suggest that Legion lists are only allowed those Daemon types specifically listed?

The Special Rules section called" .="" special="" rules="" ovverride="" general="" this="" would="" supercede="" daemons="" section="" at="" beginning="" of="" the="" book="" not="" that="" hard="" to="" understand="" [/i="">

The special rules for Alpha Legion gives special rules for fielding Demon Packs,

No it doesn't. It merely limits who can take Icons.

Under Special Rules, it has a section called Daemons....

P1 Special rules override the general: Alpha Legion lists special rules for Daemons.

These special rules cover Daemon Packs, Possessed and Princes. no mention is made of Greater Daemons... there is therefore nothing that over-rides the normal rules for taking Greater Daemons.

See above, it is special rules for Daemons, not just Daemon Packs, since it also includes the Possessed and Daemon Princes.

However, if we assume that having Special Rules for taking Daemons means that you can only take those Daemons specifically allowed in those Special Rules, would you therefore agree that Word Bearers can not in fact take ANY Daemons? After all, despite mentioning that they use 'large numbers of Daemon packs' the only actual rule given is that they may swap other slots for extra Troops slots. It doesn't specifically allow ANY of the various Daemonic units.

Well, second bullet of Word Bearer special rules : "The Word Bearers may take any type of Deamon." So no, I would not agree.

Have a codex? Feel a bit foolish at all? All you did was parrot mauleed instead of looking it up yourself. I'll wait for his response since I have a structured argument for him.

Ahoj!
Interesting, to filthy, stinking cheaters too stupid to understand a WH40K codex

Because of this the Alpha Legion may include Daemon Packs but only cultist units may carry icons to summon them. They may use Daemon Princes and Possessed Chaos Space Marines."

means:

Because of this the Alpha Legion may include Daemon Packs but only cultist units may carry icons to summon them. They may use Daemon Princes and Possessed Chaos Space Marines AND GREATER DEAMONS (AND ANY OTHER TYPES OF DAEMON TOO).

Insaniak - check other Chaos Undivided legion entries - all (apart from BL, which is the "normal" army list) specifiy exactly what daemons can be used by that legion.

Borys

So would everyone agree the argument comes down to this:

Does the listing for Daemons in the Alpha legion list the only daemons allowed?

I can't see anything that says it does. I see text that implies it might, but that would be an intent argument and useless for insisting someone couldn't field their bloodthirster.

So here's the question I put to the "can't" camp: prove just that one point, that these are the only daemons allowed, that the "daemons" heading is for the alpha legion or any other list shows the only daemons allowed. Just remember that saying "it's like that in every other case" (for every other undivided legion) isn't a logical proof.

Again, I can agree that was likely the intent, but the text simply doesn't actually say that.

'...cannot normally rely on Daemons remaining stable enough for them to be useful...'

There's your text.

They then give the specific exceptions to THAT rule saying that daemon packs (with cultists to summon them), possessed, and princes are allowed.

Go ahead and take the greater daemon. By the rules, it automatically loses stability before it can do anything, so you're down an aspiring champion and a greater daemon.

Posted By mauleed on 05/06/2006 7:39 AM

So would everyone agree the argument comes down to this:

Does the listing for Daemons in the Alpha legion list the only daemons allowed?

I can't see anything that says it does. I see text that implies it might, but that would be an intent argument and useless for insisting someone couldn't field their bloodthirster.

So here's the question I put to the "can't" camp: prove just that one point, that these are the only daemons allowed, that the "daemons" heading is for the alpha legion or any other list shows the only daemons allowed. Just remember that saying "it's like that in every other case" (for every other undivided legion) isn't a logical proof.

Again, I can agree that was likely the intent, but the text simply doesn't actually say that.

The proof I did in the form you require addreses exactly that. How about you respond to it?

snoogums

Under Special Rules, it has a section called Daemons....

...which makes no mention of Greater Daemons, therefore placing no further restriction on them than the regular rules.

Well, second bullet of Word Bearer special rules : "The Word Bearers may take any type of Deamon." So no, I would not agree.

So it does. Bad example.

Have a codex? Feel a bit foolish at all?

Not really. I could always just claim that the rules on page 6 of the rulebook take precedence, despite not actually having anything to do with the rules in question...


Borys

Interesting, to filthy, stinking cheaters too stupid to understand a WH40K codex

Surely you've been around YMDC long enough to know better than that, Borys. It's a rules discussion, nothing more.

Insaniak - check other Chaos Undivided legion entries - all (apart from BL, which is the "normal" army list) specifiy exactly what daemons can be used by that legion.

The difference being that in all other cases those entries actually specify when particular daemonic units are not allowed. The Alpha Legion entry does not state that Greater Daemons may not be used. It does not, in fact, place ANY restrictions on Daemons. It simply limits who can take Icons.


skyth

...cannot normally rely on Daemons remaining stable enough for them to be useful...'

And that actually sounds like a rule to you? Can you point out the rules definition of 'useful' in the rulebook? I'm curious as to exactly what actions a unit has to take to be considered 'useful'


Mauleed

Does the listing for Daemons in the Alpha legion list the only daemons allowed?

That's about the gist of it, yes.

There's certainly an argument for it either way, in which case I'd be inclined to say that it's best not to do it... There's no real solid rule that says it's not doable though.

Posted By insaniak on 05/06/2006 3:54 PM
skyth

...cannot normally rely on Daemons remaining stable enough for them to be useful...'

And that actually sounds like a rule to you? Can you point out the rules definition of 'useful' in the rulebook? I'm curious as to exactly what actions a unit has to take to be considered 'useful'

Maybe you need a definition of the word 'on' or 'cannot' also? What about 'to'? The rules are pretty self-explanitory for Alpha Legion. Only the three daemon types listed. Trying to read anything else into it is an extreme case of trying to twist the rules to gain an illegal advantage (ie cheat).

Meow!

Maybe you need a definition of the word 'on' or 'cannot' also?

Of course I don't. But then, I'm not the one trying to make a rule out of a line of fluff.

The rules are pretty self-explanitory for Alpha Legion.

Indeed they are... No restrictions are placed on Daemons, they merely have Icons limited to Cultists only.

Trying to read anything else into it is an extreme case of trying to twist the rules to gain an illegal advantage (ie cheat).

Riight.

Of course, there's the smaaalll fact that I don't play Alpha Legion, have no intention of playing Alpha Legion, and so if this ever comes up in a game it will be my opponent fielding the Greater Daemon, not me.

So how am I trying to cheat, exactly?

Posted By insaniak on 05/06/2006 10:50 PM

The rules are pretty self-explanitory for Alpha Legion.

Indeed they are... No restrictions are placed on Daemons, they merely have Icons limited to Cultists only.

This is only true if you totally ignore the rest of the passage and the context of it.

Posted By snooggums on 05/06/2006 2:38 PM

Posted By mauleed on 05/06/2006 7:39 AM

So would everyone agree the argument comes down to this:

Does the listing for Daemons in the Alpha legion list the only daemons allowed?

I can't see anything that says it does. I see text that implies it might, but that would be an intent argument and useless for insisting someone couldn't field their bloodthirster.

So here's the question I put to the " p < proof. logical a legion) isn?t undivided other every (for case? in that like ?it?s saying remember Just allowed. daemons only the shows list any or legion alpha for is heading ?daemons? allowed, are these point, one just prove camp: can?t?>The proof I did in the form you require addreses exactly that. How about you respond to it?

Honestly I ignored it because it's so obviously wrong. But here you go:

 

P1 Special rules override the general: Alpha Legion lists special rules for Daemons.

 

- This is two premises. Not that it matters, but that's just bad form.

P2 you may only add units to an army that you are allowed to add. The special rules for Alpha Legion gives special rules for fielding Demon Packs, and allows Daemon Princes and Possesssed.

 

This is, again, two premises. But they are both correct.

C:Alpha Legion may only field Daemons that are Daemon Packs, Possessed and Daemon Princes.

 

Unfortunately, your conclusion obviously doesn't follow from your premises. I presume you mean to say in P2 thatAlpha legion lists the only daemons allowed, then add a P3 that says greater daemons aren't one of them (in which case your conclusion would follow), but so far any claim that the alpha legion lists only the daemons allowed appears to be unsupported. Regardless, you didn't actually include that in your argument, you just jumped to the conclusion without supporting it.

 

Skyth: I'm not sure how to respond to your supporting quote other than to say that it doesn't support you. I want something that always says these are the only daemons you can have, and you've got a vague description that says you normally can't have daemons at all. Again, I see the intent, and I see how it's helpful in making assumptions, but I definitely don't see a definitive statement there.

 

I'm all game for Alpha legion not being able to infiltrate a bloodthirster. Just find a rule to make sure we can definitively prevent it.

See next post...Sorry.

Posted By mauleed on 05/07/2006 8:13 AM

 you've got a vague description that says you normally can't have daemons at all.

Bingo. Cannot normally have daemons at all. Not look for the exception to THAT rule. The exception listed is that cultists can summon daemon packs and Alpha Legion can take possessed/Princes. Under a permissive system, that's all you can take, unless you resort to a 'the rules don't say that I can't' argument.

I'd agree except that that exact line doesn't say "you can't have daemons except....".

Here's the actual text:

"The Alpha legion cannot normally rely on daemons remaining stable for long enough for them to be useful because they are so far from the eye of terror."

I don't see how you can make the leap to "you can't have daemons except...." from that. It doesn't say you can't have anything. In fact it implies that alpha legion daemons should be less stable more than it does that you can't take any specific units. And I doubt you're claiming that Alpha legion has to take instability tests on 3D6.

I'll give you that it's close, but you're making a jump that simply isn't in the text.

This falls into the category of "I wouldnt' do it, but I can't complain if someone else does."

I've seen outriders make the call both ways, and before anyone jumps on me I know, they have no idea what they are doing. I personally like to think that they can take the big nasty if they so choose, I'm not going to take one in my AL because it doesn't fit with my fluff, but if I see another AL player with a blue marine bursting into daemon blood orgy death than I'm not going to rain on his gory parade.

I summon thee, oh deceased thread!

From the v.3.0 CSM Q&A: (http://oz.games-workshop.com/games/40k/chapter_approved/assets/qa/ChaosSMQAver3.pdf)


So, it appears not. But they said nothing about AL taking demagogues! >

Is that the newest FAQ for chaos? I seem to recall it being up to V4.0

Here's the rhetorical bit:

The "Alpha legion cannot normally rely..." sentence is too vague to be used as a rule in a literal deductive argument. A rule has to be able to be translated into absolute terms like "all X are Y" or "only A are B." The unfortunate use of the words "normally" and "useful" which can't be determined in terms of other rules require you to make all kinds of assumptions about what the line means.

In order to make the line mean "Alpha legion can't have daemons" you have to show that
"normally" = "all the time"
and
"useful" = "able to have."

These meanings are contextually there, but the equvalancies break down when you try to make conditional statements out of them. It's probably not intended, but under the codex as currently written the only literal outcome is that Alpha Legion can have greater deamons.

It is from the Chapter Approved Q&A that appeared after the release of C:CSM. It is not a FAQ. The FAQ is up to 4.01. The current FAQ is silent on the issue.

Which leads to 2 possible outcomes: 1) The Q&A is correct and, since the FAQ does not contradict it, AL may not take any Daemons other than Daemon Packs or 2) The FAQ supersedes the Q&A and removes any limitations it stated or implied.

I am somewhat inclined to go with the first, since other Chapter Approved continue to be in effect. OTOH, they are for the previous version of the game so I think there is a strong argument that they are superceded.... If this is the case, I will gladly add a BT to my Infiltrating AL. Modelled as a giant winged carnasuar, of course!

Arguing the semantics will not produce desired results as the wording is too vague. Hence the disagreements.

I say Alpha Legion can summon a Blodthirster, because they do it in Dawn of War.