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.

I have a friend that is trying to field a whirlwind hyperios in a standard 40k game, I believe its only available in apocalypse games but wanted to get a second opinion on the matter

"Show me the codex" The later Imperial Armour books stamp a unit description with either Apocalypse, Warhammer 40K, or Apocalypse Formation. It is perfectly acceptable to see the stats of any of your opponent's units.

Certain apoc units/vehicles are "40k approved" which means you need your opponents permission, but if any tourney allows approved units, it's legal for that tourney.

I would be very surprised if the hyperios was apocalypse only. Just because its a forgeworld piece doesn't automatically makeit apocalypse only. Also if its a game between friends does it really matter? Let him use it a couple of times and if it becomes too game-changey agree that it shouldn't be used.

It has a 40k stamp, so fine to use in 40k. Its not a superheavy or Gargantuan creature, so no alterations to core rules needed

thanks for the clarification, I couldn't find the stamps for it when searching.

 juraigamer wrote:
Certain apoc units/vehicles are "40k approved" which means you need your opponents permission, but if any tourney allows approved units, it's legal for that tourney.

None apoc unit did not receive a stamp "40k approved, it is not true. And consent opponent is no longer required. http://darogscompany.blogspot.ru/2012/06/legalized-forgeworld-once-and-for-all.html

Since 2011, all the rules of the IA is legal and common equivalent Codex units.

False. Opponent's consent IS required. Your link says nothing about opponent's consent one way or the other.

I'm going to allow him to use it due to me using a night scythe otherwise he wouldn't have any form of AA and I feel that would give me an unfair advantage, plus my gauss weapons will probably glance it to death before he can shoot my scythe down :p

It is legal as long as you agree to let him, and your reasoning for allowing it seems to be to make the game more enjoyable for both of you.

 Ghaz wrote:
False. Opponent's consent IS required. Your link says nothing about opponent's consent one way or the other.

...in the same way opponents consent is required for any game and to use any models.

The IA books give you a suggestion that talking to your opponent about use of FW models is a good idea. Its called manners

 Darog wrote:

 juraigamer wrote:
Certain apoc units/vehicles are "40k approved" which means you need your opponents permission, but if any tourney allows approved units, it's legal for that tourney.

None apoc unit did not receive a stamp "40k approved, it is not true. And consent opponent is no longer required. http://darogscompany.blogspot.ru/2012/06/legalized-forgeworld-once-and-for-all.html

Since 2011, all the rules of the IA is legal and common equivalent Codex units.

Your mostly russian link does little to proove your point, its also a blog... Show me in the 6th ed codex where it says 40k approved must be accepted why dont ya? I field tetras, but consent is still required. I could slap a 40k approved stamp on a ninja turle if I were so inclined.

You could, but youre not GW, unlike FW....

It's a case of "what game are we playing."

If you tell me we are playing 40k, then I'll gear my list to face your army in 40k and you can try to surprise me with your allies choice or by building an army from your codex that I wouldn't expect.

You CANNOT however spring it on me that while I may be playing 40k vanilla, YOU are playing 40k with the FW addons.

Because that's what they are. You also cannot surprise me by saying "oh right, I'm playing Apoc rules! Didn't see THAT coming!"

It's an addon, and if nothing is specified beforehand, I'm going to assume we're playing vanilla 40k.

As pointed out - every game is opponents permission. 40K with FW is still 40k, just the same as 40k where you wont play GK is still 40k

nosferatu1001 wrote:
As pointed out - every game is opponents permission. 40K with FW is still 40k, just the same as 40k where you wont play GK is still 40k

True, but there are assumptions to consider. If you say only "let's play 40k", then the assumption should logically include the latest rulebook and all the latest codexes to be included by that rulebook. t would however not span to include any unmentioned addons or restrictions.

Assumptions change depending on group, of course.
If your gaming group always plays 2nd edition rules, then the assumption will probably be that those are the rules you will play by. If your group always allows FW models, then again, maybe that assumption is understood.

But I believe that my assumption is the general assumption anyone would make if faced with a new opponent and given no other altering factors.

 Purifier wrote:
It's a case of "what game are we playing."

If you tell me we are playing 40k, then I'll gear my list to face your army in 40k and you can try to surprise me with your allies choice or by building an army from your codex that I wouldn't expect.

You CANNOT however spring it on me that while I may be playing 40k vanilla, YOU are playing 40k with the FW addons.

Because that's what they are. You also cannot surprise me by saying "oh right, I'm playing Apoc rules! Didn't see THAT coming!"

It's an addon, and if nothing is specified beforehand, I'm going to assume we're playing vanilla 40k.

As above from Nos, everything is opponents consent, if someone pulls out three helldrakes I bet a few players will refuse to play them.

As to gearing your list perhaps you should do a all comers list?, helps you avoid suprises eh.

Plus for the OP, the whirlwind hyperios is meh, hyperios air defences launchers are a lot better due to the WWH costing 95pts being on a av11 chassis and needing LOS (which for interceptor means it will be in clear view of at least one of your turns), it fires one TL krak missile, much prefer a quad gun or 3 hyperios for 100 and 105 pts respectlively rather then 95pts for the WWH.

Purifier - no, I assume that "40K" includes everything that is up to date, including FW stuff marked "40K" - that IS 40k now.

Yes, every game is opponents permission.....and so is Imperial Armour, as specifically mentioned in the IA books.

What is your point? Please, spell it out for me.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Purifier - no, I assume that "40K" includes everything that is up to date, including FW stuff marked "40K" - that IS 40k now.

Permissive ruleset, as you very often decree. Where in the BRB or 40k FAQ does it state that "all rules available on the FW site and FW books are to be considered part of this rulebook"

I haven't found that statement. As such, FW is an expansion and cannot be assumed valid unless it is stated beforehand that you are playing with that expansion.

Just like you wouldn't play Carcassonne vanilla and then after you've put out your fields some dude drags out the Inns and Cathedrals expansion and starts placing that.

Where it says in the FW books that they are as official as the codexes.

Again: everything is opponents permission. Everything.

Steel - the books actually suggest you talk to your opponent before hand, after saying the stuff is as official as anything else. It isnt a directive

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Where it says in the FW books that they are as official as the codexes.

First of all, that's sort of a backwards Bible type of logic. They shouldn't be able to validate themselves.
Second, quote it.

Third, are you seriously suggesting when you say that "everything is by agreement" that you sit down and go through every unit in eachother's codx and ask permission for each one before a game? Of course you aren't. You make assumptions.

I don't think assuming FW to be automatically valid is everyone's, or even the majority's, assumption.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Where it says in the FW books that they are as official as the codexes.

Again: everything is opponents permission. Everything.

Steel - the books actually suggest you talk to your opponent before hand, after saying the stuff is as official as anything else. It isnt a directive

You didn't spell out you point.

How can you use "everything is opponents permission" as a counter to "Imperial Armour is opponents permission"?

Steel - because one is included in the other. Requires permission (ALL) contains within it (FW)

Purifier - its been quote multiple times in multiple threads. Absolutely no need to repeat it here.

"THEY" is GW. GW is saying they are legitimate. Same as GW says in WD that a nightspinner is legal, or skull crushers, etc.

Finally - you are confusing implicit and explicit seeking of permission. But yes, literally the game has to be by permission only - otherwise you are saying you can coerce somebody into playing, which is nonsense

What are the specific problems with using forgeworld?

Apart from the 'permission' to use it, do you guys have any other objections?

Because the FW units are devised somewhat in isolation from the rest of the normal GW codex units the special rules and points costs can be a bit iffy sometimes. I don't think anyone really has a genuine problem with them, its just fun to up the drama by pointing out the technical detail of the rules. However, thats what YMDC is all about, rather than discussing house rules and agreements between friends

Most people dont have specific issues with FW - they often have fear of the unknown or unfamiliar, or have heard horror stories of the few poorly designed units FW have produced - all but the caetsus, which still isnt broken, have now been fixed to an extent.

99% of FW units are over priced / under powered, they just look beautiful.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

"THEY" is GW. GW is saying they are legitimate. Same as GW says in WD that a nightspinner is legal, or skull crushers, etc.

In the same way that GW says that Apocalypse is legitimate. You still wouldn't show up to the table with an apocalypse-ready army if you wer asked to play 40k, would you?

And of course I'm talking about implied and explicit permission. That's what I've been explaining post after post, I don't see how that would be unclear.

I'm saying that while the BRB and Codex are implied when you say "let's play 40k" I do NOT believe FW is, as I see it as an extension to an existing game, which needs explicit consent.
In that way, no matter how "GW ok'ed" they are, you will ALWAYS need to specify that you wish to play a game of 40k + FW.

UNLESS the FAQ for the BRB states that "the books from GW are to be considered part of the game without xplicit consent" or some such.

And THIS is the problem people have with FW models. Not that the models in and of themselves are OP or ruin the game, but that you wll spring it on them and then say that as you are playing 40k and the FW rulebook says these are 40k rules and FW is GW, there is an implied permission that you can use FW models.

People want that in black and white. CAN I USE FW MODELS/RULES WITH THE SAME IMPLIED ACCEPTANCE AS ANY MODEL IN MY CODEX
The philosophical questions of "everything is by permission only, you can't force someone to play 40k!" are irrelevant and misleading.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Steel - because one is included in the other. Requires permission (ALL) contains within it (FW)

How does the implied requirement for general consent in any way diminish the explicit requirement for Imperial Armour?

 Purifier wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

"THEY" is GW. GW is saying they are legitimate. Same as GW says in WD that a nightspinner is legal, or skull crushers, etc.

People want that in black and white. CAN I USE FW MODELS/RULES WITH THE SAME IMPLIED ACCEPTANCE AS ANY MODEL IN MY CODEX
The philosophical questions of "everything is by permission only, you can't force someone to play 40k!" are irrelevant and misleading.

So people can't accept that a statement that says it's official does infact mean that it's official?

Do you also treat all WD units as stuff that requires opponent's explicit consent?