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.

 minisnatcher wrote:
Azyr allows also allowed taking a khorne sorcerer last time I checked... And allows taking a glave on a unit of 5 blood warriors etc. So the functionality of Azyr is hardly a rules source. Only warscrolls and rulebooks are. The latest version of a warscroll on the other hand, is the latest version of a warscroll...

BTW scrollbuilder that is GW powered these days says the spawn are Mortal Tzeentch.
It is not only the app it is all sources were you can download warscrolls.

If there are mistakes such as that I'm inclined to agree, though I would note that scroll builder also has mistakes and errors so it can't be used as a good source either.

Being a (small) TO, I would not allow it and force use of the Tzeentch version. Stupid as it is. I cannot start making exceptions in which case you can and cannot use an old version of a warscroll.

To make things clear here; I agree that I was wrong in my initial assessment. RAW the chaos spawn must be tzeentch. That said, it's a case of RAW vs RAI where I feel RAI should be applied. There's multiple places in AoS where this is the case, going by strict RAW is a rabbit hole that never ends;

-Battalions which include all units of the same keyword but don't have that keyword technically can't be used in that allegiance (outside of allies); this actually makes several placing tournament lists from GHB1 invalid within that context (see Everchosen battalions for example). To take it further, since battalions generally have only a faction keyword listed they don't have the relevant grand alliance keyword, meaning RAW they can't be used at all.

-Technically, every model in a unit (including the leader) can be a musician and standard bearer, while nowhere does it say they must be modeled as such. Because of the FAQ that states musicians/standard bearers can have any of the unit's weapons regardless of what they are modeled with, this means any models in the unit can have any (valid) weapon option even if they are WYSYWIG something completely different. That unit of starter set blood warriors with gorefists? RAW they can have dual axes (and even goreglaives if relevant) without any changes to the model.

-To take things really far, the 4+ rule allows players a 50/50 chance of cheating in any way imaginable. It says that the 4+ rule is used to resolve disputes in rules interpretations but that leaves people free to 'interpret' rules however they like without needing to give any sort of reasoning. Of course, the other player could dispute that the 4+ rule can be used in this way, leading to a 4+ roll to determine how the 4+ rule is used!

Now obviously the above starts in the debatable and goes very quickly into the utterly ridiculous; no one would play with some of the above because it's completely nonsensical. But that doesn't change that they are, technically, RAW. So really it's never a matter of choosing strict RAW over RAI, it's choosing when one starts to apply RAI over RAW. Obviously exactly where people feel that line should be places varies, which leads me back to the original discussion of Khorne Chaos Spawn. Personally, I would allow it under RAI.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 minisnatcher wrote:
Azyr allows also allowed taking a khorne sorcerer last time I checked... And allows taking a glave on a unit of 5 blood warriors etc. So the functionality of Azyr is hardly a rules source. Only warscrolls and rulebooks are. The latest version of a warscroll on the other hand, is the latest version of a warscroll...

BTW scrollbuilder that is GW powered these days says the spawn are Mortal Tzeentch.
It is not only the app it is all sources were you can download warscrolls.

If there are mistakes such as that I'm inclined to agree, though I would note that scroll builder also has mistakes and errors so it can't be used as a good source either.

Yes, that is why I only take warscrolls,faq, and errata, and rulebooks as a rulesource. The mechanic programming functionality of a list builder should not be considered a rulesource. I think we can both agree on that matter.

Being a (small) TO, I would not allow it and force use of the Tzeentch version. Stupid as it is. I cannot start making exceptions in which case you can and cannot use an old version of a warscroll.

To make things clear here; I agree that I was wrong in my initial assessment. RAW the chaos spawn must be tzeentch. That said, it's a case of RAW vs RAI where I feel RAI should be applied. There's multiple places in AoS where this is the case, going by strict RAW is a rabbit hole that never ends;

-Battalions which include all units of the same keyword but don't have that keyword technically can't be used in that allegiance (outside of allies); this actually makes several placing tournament lists from GHB1 invalid within that context (see Everchosen battalions for example). To take it further, since battalions generally have only a faction keyword listed they don't have the relevant grand alliance keyword, meaning RAW they can't be used at all.

-Technically, every model in a unit (including the leader) can be a musician and standard bearer, while nowhere does it say they must be modeled as such. Because of the FAQ that states musicians/standard bearers can have any of the unit's weapons regardless of what they are modeled with, this means any models in the unit can have any (valid) weapon option even if they are WYSYWIG something completely different. That unit of starter set blood warriors with gorefists? RAW they can have dual axes (and even goreglaives if relevant) without any changes to the model.

-To take things really far, the 4+ rule allows players a 50/50 chance of cheating in any way imaginable. It says that the 4+ rule is used to resolve disputes in rules interpretations but that leaves people free to 'interpret' rules however they like without needing to give any sort of reasoning. Of course, the other player could dispute that the 4+ rule can be used in this way, leading to a 4+ roll to determine how the 4+ rule is used!

Now obviously the above starts in the debatable and goes very quickly into the utterly ridiculous; no one would play with some of the above because it's completely nonsensical. But that doesn't change that they are, technically, RAW. So really it's never a matter of choosing strict RAW over RAI, it's choosing when one starts to apply RAI over RAW. Obviously exactly where people feel that line should be places varies, which leads me back to the original discussion of Khorne Chaos Spawn. Personally, I would allow it under RAI.

Hello guys

I solved the problem by buying another box of bloodreavers!

Allegiance: Khorne

Skullmaster, Herald of Khorne

Aspiring Deathbringer
- General
- Bloodaxe and Wrath Hammer
- Trait: Violent Urgency

Bloodsecrator
- Banner of Khorne: Banner of Rage

30 x Bloodletters

20 x Bloodreavers
- Reaver Blades

20 x Bloodreavers
- Reaver Blades

10 x Bloodreavers
- Meatripper Axes

10 x Bloodreavers
- Meatripper Axes