AM Codex editing fail - vehicle wargear

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.

**JohnnyHell**

cormadepanda wrote:
Does no one notice space marine seargents can have infinite bolt pistols? Replace bolt pistol with weapons from seargents list - seargents list may take two weapons from list contains bolt pistol rinse and repeat. A pistol is free too. Infinity bolt pistol shots.

You can't swap two for one, nor can you swap a swapped item. Sadly, your Infinity Postil is impossible. You've got two items to swap, for up to two items. There are just some you can't have twice.

**JinxDragon**

It was also specifically addressed within the 'Stepping into a New Edition' answers:
Q: Can a model take the same wargear option more than once? For example, can a Space Marine
Terminator replace his storm bolter with a cyclone missile launcher and another storm bolter, and then
replace its ‘new’ storm bolter with a heavy flamer?
A: No.

Meaningless for this situation, as a single use of an Option gains access to all items on that list, but it does prevent unlimited pistols on a Sargent.

**U02dah4**

I don't recall that ruling being in any of the faq''s so it's not valid

**Ghaz**

U02dah4 wrote:
I don't recall that ruling being in any of the faq''s so it's not valid

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Warhammer_40000_Stepping_into_a_New_Edition_of_Warhammer_40000.pdf

It's valid.

**U02dah4**

The current and up to date errata and faq are available from

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-BE/Rules-Errata#40k-errata

This includes main rulebook, index and codex errata and faq's

"this page you'll find all current updates to the print editions of Games Workshop's range of Warhammer Age of Sigmar, Warhammer 40,000 and The Hobbit: The Battle of The Five Armies games.

These documents bring the print editions up to date with any recent rules or amends to their digital edition. Where a book does not have a Rules Errata document, none have yet been issued."

Your file is not amongst them and so may have been valid at some point but since it's not there is no longer valid.

**Ghaz**

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/23/updated-faqs-and-boots-on-the-groundgw-homepage-post-2/

Right there on Warhammer Community. It's still a valid document.

**U02dah4**

Being still hosted doesn't make it valid.

Is it on

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-BE/Rules-Errata#40k-errata

Where "you'll find all current updates"

It's not therefore not valid as it's not current

**BaconCatBug**

U02dah4 wrote:
Being still hosted doesn't make it valid.

Is it on

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-BE/Rules-Errata#40k-errata

Where "you'll find all current updates"

It's not therefore not valid as it's not current

The fact it's not there is the reason why Ghaz has to keep his thread. GW simply fail to update their official errata page and rely on the community website.

**Ghaz**

U02dah4 wrote:
Being still hosted doesn't make it valid.

Is it on

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-BE/Rules-Errata#40k-errata

Where "you'll find all current updates"

It's not therefore not valid as it's not current

Fail on your part. As its 'Stepping Into a New Edition', it's not a FAQ or Errata. Just because its not where you want it to be doesn't make it any less valid.

**Scott-S6**

Lord Xcapobl wrote:
RAW. RAI. I'm the one with a tank that has more ordnance than Terra itself.

Seriously though, so what if somebody (with the voice of reason) modeled two or three hunter-killer missiles to his tank and uses one during each of the first three turns? We still tend to playing with points more often than with power ratings, so with that added granularity such opponents would still be forced to spend points for each one-shot missile, that can still miss. And realise that I do agree with people saying this can fall out of whack with power ratings, and less reasonable people. But we all know that such people, the TFG's, can be delegated into seeking out eachother, or suffer total social isolation.

They would need to fire all three the first time they shoot - the shooting rules don't offer an option for a model to not fire some of it's weapons.

"If a model has several weapons, it can shoot all of them at the same target, or it can shoot each at a different enemy unit"

**Rolsheen**

Scott-S6 wrote:

They would need to fire all three the first time they shoot - the shooting rules don't offer an option for a model to not fire some of it's weapons.

"If a model has several weapons, it can shoot all of them at the same target, or it can shoot each at a different enemy unit"

Wrong. As you quoted correctly "it can", not "it has to".

**Elbows**

Ghaz wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:
Being still hosted doesn't make it valid.

Is it on

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-BE/Rules-Errata#40k-errata

Where "you'll find all current updates"

It's not therefore not valid as it's not current

Fail on your part. As its 'Stepping Into a New Edition', it's not a FAQ or Errata. Just because its not where you want it to be doesn't make it any less valid.

You have to remember this is Dakka, and this is 40K. And yes, there is a small contingent of lunatics who "feel" that a notice from the ACTUAL DESIGNERS OF THE GAME is not relevant because it isn't on a certain web-page or doesn't use a certain font, or have a certain title. Imagine running into someone like that in a game...

**Scott-S6**

Rolsheen wrote:
Scott-S6 wrote:

They would need to fire all three the first time they shoot - the shooting rules don't offer an option for a model to not fire some of it's weapons.

"If a model has several weapons, it can shoot all of them at the same target, or it can shoot each at a different enemy unit"

Wrong. As you quoted correctly "it can", not "it has to".

Yes, it "can" select one of two options.

It can shoot all
or
It can shoot each

Both options involve firing all weapons.

**Charistoph**

Elbows wrote:
Ghaz wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:
Being still hosted doesn't make it valid.

Is it on

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-BE/Rules-Errata#40k-errata

Where "you'll find all current updates"

It's not therefore not valid as it's not current

Fail on your part. As its 'Stepping Into a New Edition', it's not a FAQ or Errata. Just because its not where you want it to be doesn't make it any less valid.

You have to remember this is Dakka, and this is 40K. And yes, there is a small contingent of lunatics who "feel" that a notice from the ACTUAL DESIGNERS OF THE GAME is not relevant because it isn't on a certain web-page or doesn't use a certain font, or have a certain title. Imagine running into someone like that in a game...

And there are another contigent of lunatics that "feel" that an FAQ actually changes the words on the page of their book. FAQs provide directions on how to handle a situation, but do not change how the rules are worded. Erratas actually tell us to change the rules.

But then, again, you can always House Rule how you want to play it anyway. Happens all the time.

**U02dah4**

Agreed except GW often misuse Faq for snowflake rulings when they mean errata.

However this is not about whether Faq change rulings or not it's about what counts as faq/errata and Warhammer community is neither until GW release an FAQ/errata stating that it counts

Sure it provides clear RAI when it is well written but RAW overrides RAI as long as RAW is clear

**Dudeface**

Scott-S6 wrote:
Rolsheen wrote:
Scott-S6 wrote:

They would need to fire all three the first time they shoot - the shooting rules don't offer an option for a model to not fire some of it's weapons.

"If a model has several weapons, it can shoot all of them at the same target, or it can shoot each at a different enemy unit"

Wrong. As you quoted correctly "it can", not "it has to".

Yes, it "can" select one of two options.

It can shoot all
or
It can shoot each

Both options involve firing all weapons.

It can fire all weapons, but that just grants permission not a requirement.

can1
kan,kən/Submit
verb
1.
be able to.
"they can run fast"
2.
be permitted to.
"you can use the phone if you want to"

**Stormonu**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
So apparently there's no "limit 1" to anything on the Vehicle Equipment List, and certain vehicles (e.g. Leman Russes) are given access to items from the Vehicle Equipment List.

Does this conceivably mean that a Leman Russ could have, say, fourty hunter-killer missiles (if one modeled it like a M4 Calliope Sherman)? Or like, 12 Heavy Stubbers?

Nice, I've been eying a M4 Sherman Calliope model at the local Hobby Lobby. Now, I've got a good reason to buy it.

Might also scratchbuilt a getup for my Leman Russ, I think I can use straws for the launch tubes...

**doctortom**

Scott-S6 wrote:
Rolsheen wrote:
Scott-S6 wrote:

They would need to fire all three the first time they shoot - the shooting rules don't offer an option for a model to not fire some of it's weapons.

"If a model has several weapons, it can shoot all of them at the same target, or it can shoot each at a different enemy unit"

Wrong. As you quoted correctly "it can", not "it has to".

Yes, it "can" select one of two options.

It can shoot all
or
It can shoot each

Both options involve firing all weapons.

Each at a different enemy unit. What do you do if you want to fire at multiple units, but there aren't enough different units to fire all your ranged weapons at? Going by your RAW, you'd have to also go by the fact that if there aren't as many units to hit as you have weapons to fire, you can only fire at one - it doesn't say you you can fire more than one at one unit and at the same time fire one weapon at a second unit. I'm willing to be it happens all the time though.

**duWhee**

If a tank showed up at my meta with 900 storm bolters on it, I’d allow it . . . but only if the player rolled each gun separately. And paid for the pizza and beer.

**doctortom**

Especially since you'd have only the one model that you'd need to kill?

**KitfoxQQ**

Knight Comander Pask Leman rus outfitted with a MLRS style mlauncher on top similar to the Sherman Caliope launcher

600 points of HKs out to do it right? thats what 100 Hunter Killers at BS2+ if that doesnt get the job done than just add more.