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.

Couldn't it be interpreted that you use the latest version for the model?

That meaning that the model determines the datasheet, not the other way around.

 doctortom wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
A quote taken out of context that ignores the rest of the document is meaningless.

Which can also apply to what you are saying.

Except not.

Please refer to the first post. Where i use every word in the document that has anything to do with the subject. Your fall back is a single line from a single answer that is ambiguous at best. I use not only that entire answer but 3 other questions and answers, which are significantly clearer, to build a whole picture of our allowances.

Please explain. Which part is taken out of context? What part of the document am i ignoring?

Tyran wrote:
Couldn't it be interpreted that you use the latest version for the model?

That meaning that the model determines the datasheet, not the other way around.

Yes. If they're telling you that you can still use your old models with the index datasheet and current points, obviously they are allowing you to use the older datasheet for your model despite there being a more recent update that applies to the models where the codex datasheet covers all the options. Otherwise, they wouldn't have said that about the models with older options.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:

Please explain. Which part is taken out of context? What part of the document am i ignoring?

Let's see, taking out of context is extrapolating from their comment that you can still use your old miniatures to it saying that you can't use them in any form of Matched Play or any game using "official rules", when it doesn't say that. It ignores that there's an entire question and answer about being able to still use your old models, and tells you exactly how to use your old models, despite the one sentence about them expecting you to usie the newer datasheet when applicable. Using THAT sentence to essentially deny their entire previous answer is taking that out of context. Go back and read your own first post. Tell us where in the paragraph about older models it states that it does not apply to matched play or to games using "official rules"; this time not just by making an assumption and wildly extrapolating so that you can just write off the entire answer to the section that apparently you don't liike.

The OP knows the rationale for both sides of the argument, so what is this thread adding to the forum but a repetition of the bickering in other threads?

 doctortom wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:

Please explain. Which part is taken out of context? What part of the document am i ignoring?

Let's see, taking out of context is extrapolating from their comment that you can still use your old miniatures to it saying that you can't use them in any form of Matched Play or any game using "official rules", when it doesn't say that. It ignores that there's an entire question and answer about being able to still use your old models, and tells you exactly how to use your old models, despite the one sentence about them expecting you to usie the newer datasheet when applicable. Using THAT sentence to essentially deny their entire previous answer is taking that out of context. Go back and read your own first post. Tell us where in the paragraph about older models it states that it does not apply to matched play or to games using "official rules"; this time not just by making an assumption and wildly extrapolating so that you can just write off the entire answer to the section that apparently you don't liike.

Yes, many units’ rules in their codexes will alter from those in the indexes. Sometimes this is to better represent the miniatures and the background, sometimes to balance the game, and sometimes to better fit with the army’s new special rules in the codex itself. In all cases, these will then supersede the rules for that datasheet in the index book.

In all cases, these will then supersede the rules for that datasheet in the index book.

The datasheets in the new codexes overwrite the same datasheets in the index books. You can certainly use units with updated datasheets alongside units from the index that have yet to be updated. Once a unit has been covered in the codex though, we assume you’re using the latest version.

Pretty much that entire quote is important.

Can I choose to use the rules and/or points for units from my index instead of the new ones in the codex once released?

In your own games, if you and your opponent agree, you can, of course, play with whatever rules you like.

In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets. It will also be assumed that you’re using the most up to date points for matched play, in this case, those included in the codex.

In your own games, with your opponents permission. But see all quotes so far, only the most current one (meaning the most current options) are valid in any official capacity.

There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army.

See 1 quote up. In your own games, with your opponents permission.

If you need your opponents permission it's not Matched. It's Open. Since that is the only criteria for Open. Since the new datasheet replaces the old IN ALL CASES, those options no longer exist. So for you to go back to the index and use the old options it has to be with your opponents permission. I.E. Open.

 Lance845 wrote:

If you need your opponents permission it's not Matched. It's Open. Since that is the only criteria for Open. Since the new datasheet replaces the old IN ALL CASES, those options no longer exist. So for you to go back to the index and use the old options it has to be with your opponents permission. I.E. Open.

You don't need points for Open Play. Points can get used in Matched play. They mention how to handle points with the older models and the index; therefore, they are also talking about Matched Play.


EDIT: You also need opponent's permission if you want to use any Forge World models, since they aren't put out by GW proper. Are you going to insist that they also can only be used in Open Play, and not in Matched Play?

EDIT 2: Are you saying that you can never have a Matched Play game or a game with "official rules" if you have to ask your opponent's permission for something? That seems to be what you're saying. That's very sad if that's what you believe.

 doctortom wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

If you need your opponents permission it's not Matched. It's Open. Since that is the only criteria for Open. Since the new datasheet replaces the old IN ALL CASES, those options no longer exist. So for you to go back to the index and use the old options it has to be with your opponents permission. I.E. Open.

You don't need points for Open Play. Points can get used in Matched play. They mention how to handle points with the older models and the index; therefore, they are also talking about Matched Play.


EDIT: You also need opponent's permission if you want to use any Forge World models, since they aren't put out by GW proper. Are you going to insist that they also can only be used in Open Play, and not in Matched Play?

EDIT 2: Are you saying that you can never have a Matched Play game or a game with "official rules" if you have to ask your opponent's permission for something? That seems to be what you're saying. That's very sad if that's what you believe.

Not NEEDING points for open doesnt mean points are unusable in open. Open specifically allows everything.

There is no rule in 8th saying you need permission to use forgeworld.

What i am saying is that they very clearly tell us what to do with newer datasheets. Replace the old one entirely. You dont need permission from your opponent to use the most up to date datasheets. They are the legal rules for the game. But in your own games, with permission, you can put down a soda can, call it a tac marine, say it costs 1ppm, and equip it with a bioplasmic canon. Enjoy that.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The OP knows the rationale for both sides of the argument, so what is this thread adding to the forum but a repetition of the bickering in other threads?

What are you adding to this thread?

This is the second such post you've made here which adds nothing. This is quite a key issue for many veteran players. Stop trying to sweep it under the rug like you're some kind of all-knowing being that OBVIOUSLY knows the answer and is unwilling to reveal it to us plebeians.

Ruin wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The OP knows the rationale for both sides of the argument, so what is this thread adding to the forum but a repetition of the bickering in other threads?

What are you adding to this thread?

This is the second such post you've made here which adds nothing. This is quite a key issue for many veteran players. Stop trying to sweep it under the rug like you're some kind of all-knowing being that OBVIOUSLY knows the answer and is unwilling to reveal it to us plebeians.

Thanks for the personal insults! Just what I always wanted. I don't see the point in repeating it all, everyone weighing in with the same views as last time, repeated arguments, etc. Report my posts as spam by all means but please go read up on Rule 1, ta.

please stay on topic, thank you

The actual text doesn't put any "with your opponent's permision" qualifier on the ability to use those dreadnought weapons. It's a massive leap of logic to add that.

 TheWaspinator wrote:
The actual text doesn't put any "with your opponent's permision" qualifier on the ability to use those dreadnought weapons. It's a massive leap of logic to add that.

The rest of the document does. Read the whole document.

It really doesn't say that. They're saying that you have to agree with your opponent to use an older version of something that has a newer version. That doesn't negate the specific exception given for things like dreadnought weapons.

Under your interpretation, the first question/answer is essentially pointless.

 TheWaspinator wrote:
It really doesn't say that. They're saying that you have to agree with your opponent to use an older version of something that has a newer version. That doesn't negate the specific exception given for things like dreadnought weapons.

Under your interpretation, the first question/answer is essentially pointless.

Its not pointless because it answers the question asked (i think the question itself could have been better). What happens to all the lost options/models?

So you agree that in order to use the older index entry and thus its options you need your opponents permission? So it's not something that is purly supported by the rules but instead an agreement between 2 players?

You're making this absurdly more complicated than it is: they say you can use the index for options that don't exist in the codex. End of story.

 TheWaspinator wrote:
You're making this absurdly more complicated than it is: they say you can use the index for options that don't exist in the codex. End of story.

You think it's LESS complicated to use options from one datasheet, using point values from a different book, to represent a model on a different datasheet as opposed to "The newest datasheet replaces the old one in all cases. Use the newest datasheet."?

THAT is absurd.

@Lance845 you seem to be taking the answer to one specific question (whether you can use points and rules from indices willy-nilly) and applying it across the board.

Just my interpretation but i would summarise it as

Index datasheet only you may use without permission as latest

Codex only you may use without permission as latest

Codex and index datasheets. You should use codex entry in competatIve events however you may ask your opponent permission to use index datasheets/points.

I don't see why this is a problem player A has the right to ask player B has the right this to say no.

Lance845 what are you trying to achieve? As you can read in this thread it is possible to interperate the FAQ it in both ways. What you are saying is that some models that were in the index has to be invalidated (I think GW FAQ states that should not be the case), but why would this be beneficial for anyone? would it ruin the game for you if people could bring autocannon dreads that they have spent hours building and painting. It's not like any of these loadouts are broken.

You bring up examples of soda can marines for 1ppm but that is not really what we are discussing here is it? The rules options are not made up by players, they are clearly in the index with reasonable costs. And if a datasheet has loadout options with new points costs (like power fists for veteran bikers) the new adjusted points cost for the weapon has to be used as stated in FAQ.

 Lance845 wrote:

 TheWaspinator wrote:
You're making this absurdly more complicated than it is: they say you can use the index for options that don't exist in the codex. End of story.

You think it's LESS complicated to use options from one datasheet, using point values from a different book, to represent a model on a different datasheet as opposed to "The newest datasheet replaces the old one in all cases. Use the newest datasheet."?

THAT is absurd.

Absurd or not, that is what you arre given permission to do, whether you like it or not (and apparently you don't).

As you quoted in your first post:

"Can I choose to use the rules and/or points for units from my index instead of the new ones in the codex once released?

In your own games, if you and your opponent agree, you can, of course, play with whatever rules you like.

In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets. It will also be assumed that you’re using the most up to date points for matched play, in this case, those included in the codex."

So, they have told you to use the points from the Codex for matched play. The same matched play that you were insisting (multiple times) that you can't use the older models in.

As for "in all future publications and official events", I would expect the publications to use the codex (though don't be surprised to see the Looted Wagon show up in White Dwarf the way it did for 7th...though I wouldn't mind if they returned to the older looted vehicle rules from 3rd), but as for "official events" everything will be up to the organizers of the specific events as to whether they allow older models like the autocannon dread. You take "assumption" as a blanket denial when in actuality it's up to the tournament organizers the way it always has been. They get to decide if you can use the older models using an index entry, just as they get to decide whether you get to use Forgeworld models and datasheets.

vipoid wrote:@Lance845 you seem to be taking the answer to one specific question (whether you can use points and rules from indices willy-nilly) and applying it across the board.

I don't know what you mean. I thought I was taking into account the answers to all the questions.

Gitdakka wrote:Lance845 what are you trying to achieve? As you can read in this thread it is possible to interperate the FAQ it in both ways. What you are saying is that some models that were in the index has to be invalidated (I think GW FAQ states that should not be the case), but why would this be beneficial for anyone? would it ruin the game for you if people could bring autocannon dreads that they have spent hours building and painting. It's not like any of these loadouts are broken.

You bring up examples of soda can marines for 1ppm but that is not really what we are discussing here is it? The rules options are not made up by players, they are clearly in the index with reasonable costs. And if a datasheet has loadout options with new points costs (like power fists for veteran bikers) the new adjusted points cost for the weapon has to be used as stated in FAQ.

Initially I made this thread because in the Tyranid tactica the question came up about Hive Tyrants and 0 point Monstrous Rending Claws, In the Index it has not been FAQed but HT do not come with them in their kit and we all expect that they will be gone as an option from the Codex. IF it is gone then HT will no longer legally be able to take Free Monstrous Rending Claws. (Free because the only other model that gets them are Brood Lords that are priced fairly that way). It was heading towards this exact argument, which doesn't belong in the tactics page. So I started this one, threw up a link, and got the thread back on track. (Fun fact about Tyranid wargear. They are listed using different point values for different monsters and only have a single point value if it's the one value for everyone. Monstrous Scy Tal cost different for trygons, hive tyrants, carnifex etc etc... If this trend continues to the codex, then the most up to date legal listing of the cost for Monstrous Rending Claws on Hive Tyrants will still be the index. Which makes them free.)

You argue that the options on a dread are not OP so what does it matter. But that doesn't take into account the fact that more than half the armies don't have codexes yet. That options can be dropped for many reasons including balance or just not existing in the kit now, and that the point values like these rending claws might transfer forward to the codex combined with the index datasheets options can, in fact, produce OP or ridiculous things. If any of you have played against any HT in the last couple of weeks you might have noticed some Rending Claws on them. You might not have noticed that they cost 0 points.

Just because the Dread came out looking fairly priced does not make it legal. I am not saying in my own games that I would tell that person no automatically. I would probably weigh it and make a call then. But if someone tried to say they wanted to use codex HT with Index free rending claws IF when the codex drops rending claws are not even an option, I would absolutely tell them no. But my willingness to allow adjustments to the legal rules of the game are mostly based on who I am playing and what kind of match we are having. Goofing off and trying some weird stuff? Sure! Trying to test a list for actual usability. Absolutely not. Again, the FAQ clearly states what you are supposed to do with the new datasheet. The datasheet gives you your wargear options. It's no longer an option. It's good to understand the rules of the game we are playing.

If your argument is the options that exist NOW from combining Index options with codex datasheets don't seem OP then I would suggest you stop thinking about NOW and start thinking about what could be when players start mixing and matching things that GW isn't considering because they left those options behind. This isn't some fear of what could be btw. This is just trying to establish the actual rules so when that crap does happen (And it will. We all know it will.) we can either shrug our shoulders and go "well... GW gak rules allowances says it's legal" or say "No. It obviously says the index sheets are overwritten. That option doesn't exist. Stop being TFG."

doctortom wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 TheWaspinator wrote:
You're making this absurdly more complicated than it is: they say you can use the index for options that don't exist in the codex. End of story.

You think it's LESS complicated to use options from one datasheet, using point values from a different book, to represent a model on a different datasheet as opposed to "The newest datasheet replaces the old one in all cases. Use the newest datasheet."?

THAT is absurd.

Absurd or not, that is what you arre given permission to do, whether you like it or not (and apparently you don't).

As you quoted in your first post:

"Can I choose to use the rules and/or points for units from my index instead of the new ones in the codex once released?

In your own games, if you and your opponent agree, you can, of course, play with whatever rules you like.

In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets. It will also be assumed that you’re using the most up to date points for matched play, in this case, those included in the codex."

Did you just choose to ignore "that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets."? The datasheet is what gives you your wargear options. If the datasheet doesn't tell you you can bring a X then you don't have the option to equip it with X.

So, they have told you to use the points from the Codex for matched play. The same matched play that you were insisting (multiple times) that you can't use the older models in.

As for "in all future publications and official events", I would expect the publications to use the codex (though don't be surprised to see the Looted Wagon show up in White Dwarf the way it did for 7th...though I wouldn't mind if they returned to the older looted vehicle rules from 3rd), but as for "official events" everything will be up to the organizers of the specific events as to whether they allow older models like the autocannon dread. You take "assumption" as a blanket denial when in actuality it's up to the tournament organizers the way it always has been. They get to decide if you can use the older models using an index entry, just as they get to decide whether you get to use Forgeworld models and datasheets.

I too hope looted wagons return. Actually I hope this test bed build-a-Landraider they are doing is the first step to some really awesome looted rules.

I don't take assumption on it's own. Taking the document as a whole, I combine it with

1) In all cases, these will then supersede the rules for that datasheet in the index book.
2) The datasheets in the new codexes overwrite the same datasheets in the index books.
3) In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets.

To see that as far as the rules are concerned, once that codex datasheet releases the index datasheet no longer exists as a rules entity. But, we have this section in our rulebook called open. Where the only rule is to agree to the terms of the match. So we cannot actually just tell you not to use any of the things we have published so, with permission, go do what you want.

 Lance845 wrote:

doctortom wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 TheWaspinator wrote:
You're making this absurdly more complicated than it is: they say you can use the index for options that don't exist in the codex. End of story.

You think it's LESS complicated to use options from one datasheet, using point values from a different book, to represent a model on a different datasheet as opposed to "The newest datasheet replaces the old one in all cases. Use the newest datasheet."?

THAT is absurd.

Absurd or not, that is what you arre given permission to do, whether you like it or not (and apparently you don't).

As you quoted in your first post:

"Can I choose to use the rules and/or points for units from my index instead of the new ones in the codex once released?

In your own games, if you and your opponent agree, you can, of course, play with whatever rules you like.

In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets. It will also be assumed that you’re using the most up to date points for matched play, in this case, those included in the codex."

Did you just choose to ignore "that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets."? The datasheet is what gives you your wargear options. If the datasheet doesn't tell you you can bring a X then you don't have the option to equip it with X.

No, I don't ignore it, I don't take it out of context to try to claim that you can't use your old models with a loadout that used to be permitted (and can be done with the index) that doesn't happen with the new codex. You are choosing to ignore the statement that you can use the models, and that they provided the mechanism for it. The most current datasheet for those models with those loadouts IS the index datasheet, which they have given you explicit permission to use. Quit ignoring that.

 Lance845 wrote:

So, they have told you to use the points from the Codex for matched play. The same matched play that you were insisting (multiple times) that you can't use the older models in.

As for "in all future publications and official events", I would expect the publications to use the codex (though don't be surprised to see the Looted Wagon show up in White Dwarf the way it did for 7th...though I wouldn't mind if they returned to the older looted vehicle rules from 3rd), but as for "official events" everything will be up to the organizers of the specific events as to whether they allow older models like the autocannon dread. You take "assumption" as a blanket denial when in actuality it's up to the tournament organizers the way it always has been. They get to decide if you can use the older models using an index entry, just as they get to decide whether you get to use Forgeworld models and datasheets.

I too hope looted wagons return. Actually I hope this test bed build-a-Landraider they are doing is the first step to some really awesome looted rules.

I don't take assumption on it's own. Taking the document as a whole, I combine it with

1) In all cases, these will then supersede the rules for that datasheet in the index book.
2) The datasheets in the new codexes overwrite the same datasheets in the index books.
3) In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets.

To see that as far as the rules are concerned, once that codex datasheet releases the index datasheet no longer exists as a rules entity. But, we have this section in our rulebook called open. Where the only rule is to agree to the terms of the match. So we cannot actually just tell you not to use any of the things we have published so, with permission, go do what you want.

You have obviously come up with the wrong interpretation then, since they tell you explicitly that a) you can use your old models with the loadouts not covered by the new codex, and b) how to handle using them (index for rules, most recent points). Also, they explicitlymention how to use the points for those models in Matched Play. Therefore , stating that you can't use them in matched play is patently false and makes it look like you are arguing in bad faith (not to mention putting in things like "But, we have this section in our rulebook called open." does appear condescending). So, please explain how you can't use them in matched play when they explicitly told you how to use them in matched play.

 Lance845 wrote:

vipoid wrote:@Lance845 you seem to be taking the answer to one specific question (whether you can use points and rules from indices willy-nilly) and applying it across the board.

I don't know what you mean. I thought I was taking into account the answers to all the questions.

I don't think so. They give you explicit permission to use the index rules/points for models/wargear that doesn't appear in the codex.The *only* requirement is that you have to actually own the model in question.

However, you seem to be assuming that all other answers override this - which would make it entirely pointless.

"Can I choose to use the rules and/or points for units from my index instead of the new ones in the codex once released?

In your own games, if you and your opponent agree, you can, of course, play with whatever rules you like.

In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets. It will also be assumed that you’re using the most up to date points for matched play, in this case, those included in the codex."

The bolded sentence has to be taken within the context of the words around it, and the question it is answering. Seems pretty clear that this question is addressing those who want to use the Index rules for a unit that has Codex rules. Then another question specifically allows equipment from the Index to be used on Codex units, provided the Codex does not cover that equipment.

Hopefully it will be FAQ'd. Until then, it would be pretty rude to give a guy a hard time for doing what GW seems to have explicitly allowed, or a tournament for ruling either way. I can't think of any examples yet that are really a big deal, though.

One question- how old is too old for weapon/model options?
I have the rules for making Noise Marine Terminators from 3.5 ed. and I made some models based on those rules. Are you saying that I can use them in a current 8th ed event? How about I use point costs for things no longer even in the latest edition's rules? Would you allow me to use squats based upon RTpoint costs?

It seems obvious to me that GW is saying that if there is a new(er) version of a model then that is the way it should be used. If the model or option you want is not available then it is not meant to be played in this edition. They also didn't want to be accused of "squatting" a model or option that is no longer available. So they said if you have it and can find someone who will let you use it then fine, feel free to do so.

Based on your interpretation of GW's statement then the TO would have to allow squats in at RT point costs in an 8th ed event. since that is the last time points were given for them. I think that it is understood by the general community that, unless an event says otherwise, all models and their associated point costs must come from the most recent edition of their rule set (be it book or data sheet or some other medium) within the current general rule set of the game itself. So, 8th ed Rule book = most recent book published under the 8th edition rules. If a model or option is note permitted under the latest publication of that model then it is not legal for an event under those current rules.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
One question- how old is too old for weapon/model options?
I have the rules for making Noise Marine Terminators from 3.5 ed. and I made some models based on those rules. Are you saying that I can use them in a current 8th ed event? How about I use point costs for things no longer even in the latest edition's rules? Would you allow me to use squats based upon RTpoint costs?

It seems obvious to me that GW is saying that if there is a new(er) version of a model then that is the way it should be used. If the model or option you want is not available then it is not meant to be played in this edition. They also didn't want to be accused of "squatting" a model or option that is no longer available. So they said if you have it and can find someone who will let you use it then fine, feel free to do so.

Based on your interpretation of GW's statement then the TO would have to allow squats in at RT point costs in an 8th ed event. since that is the last time points were given for them. I think that it is understood by the general community that, unless an event says otherwise, all models and their associated point costs must come from the most recent edition of their rule set (be it book or data sheet or some other medium) within the current general rule set of the game itself. So, 8th ed Rule book = most recent book published under the 8th edition rules. If a model or option is note permitted under the latest publication of that model then it is not legal for an event under those current rules.

This is pretty much irrelevant. Nothing goes back past the Index, that much has been made clear by GW.

Where and when did GW say that? You're the one who is trying to use, or allow the use of, model options that are no longer permitted under the most recent publication.

If I have a model that is no longer allowed under the current codex what difference does it make where it was originally allowed? In my terminator example I can find the cost of a CSM terminator, the cost for a mark of Slaneesh, and the cost of a blast master. All I need to do is add them up and there I have it. My model under the current point cost. Never mind that AFAIK CSM termies can't have blast masters in the current rules. They were legal in the past and GW said that I can use any model that was once legal that I want.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Where and when did GW say that?

Primarily in the publication that they explicitly reference index vs codex, not 3rd edition vs 8th edition.

From the OP:
While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).

I don't see a limitation on how out of date the model is in order to use the point cost from the index.

Anyway my point is that it is pretty clear that only the newest publication covering that model is to be allowed in event play. So, you can not go back to the index and pluck out an option for say, a dreadnaught that is not an option for that dreadnaught in the most recent codex.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

I don't see a limitation on how out of date the model has to be in order to use the point cost from the index.

"From the index."

Show me where Squats or Noise Marine terminators are in an index and I'll concede the point.