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'm not trying to change the subject.

It's obvious that we have two differing opinions as to what is official and not. Your opinion, correct me if i'm wrong, is that only printed material ie. the rule book and codices are official and that FAQs, Errata and any other rules found on the games workshop website are by permission only.

I am of the opinion that FAQs, Errata, codices, and rules found on the games workshop website are official.

Yes, you are trying to change the subject. You want everyone to believe you when you say that you can take whatever you want off of the internet just because you agreed to a game, yet you can't provide any evidence to support your claims.

As for your 'opinion' on the FAQs, if you were to read the preface to the FAQs, you would see that GW clearly states that the Erratas are official and the FAQs are not.

Boy ghaz you really are trying to put words in my mouth and are trying hard. Nowhere did I say one could take whatever they want off the internet, in fact I clearly said a few posts ago that you cannot pull something off a homebrewed website and use it. I'm merely saying that in my opinion and with no specific rules to prevent it, rules published on a games workshop website are legit.

I clearly listed my evidence to support my claims. In case you missed it here it is again.

-There is nothing in the BRB that specifically says that all the rules I use have to come from the actual printed codex.
-The rules for the Red Terror are published on a GW website, other rules published on the same website are considered viable ie. FAQs, errata, Blood Angels Codex.
-The rules for the Red Terror say I may use him in any tyranid swarm 1500 pts or more.

Ghaz wrote:So are you done trying to change the subject, or do you actually have something to back up your claims?

Do you? -Looks- I havent seen any from you tbh

But I'll have to reverse myself if GW says the FAQs aren't official then neither are the rules for the red terror.

Yes, you are saying you can take whatever you want off of the internet. You've not provided a single shred of evidence that you can take ANYTHING beyond the main rulebook and the codices simply by agreeing to a game with your opponent, yet you want us to believe that just because they're on GW's website that they can be used without your opponent's consent when GW themselves say that's not the case with their FAQs? Stop giving us your 'opinion' because it's worthless. Try backing up your position with actual FACTS because so far all of the tripe you posted does NOT support your claims.

There is nothing in the BRB that specifically says that all the rules I use have to come from the actual printed codex.

Again, it doesn't say that you can use wnatever you find on the internet without your opponent's permission either. Try reading "How To Have An Intelligent Rules Debate" to see why this position is so ludicrous as to be pitiful.

The rules for the Red Terror are published on a GW website, other rules published on the same website are considered viable ie. FAQs, errata, Blood Angels Codex.

And again, so what? Just being on GW's website does NOT mean you can use it without your opponent's consent. Where does it say that it does?

The rules for the Red Terror say I may use him in any tyranid swarm 1500 pts or more.

And again, HOW you use him is not the same as giving you permission.

Come back when you actually have some FACTS to support your position instead of avoiding it and posting the same drivel I've clearly shown does NOT provide you permission to field whatever you want just because you happened to find it on the internet. Until such time, I'm done wasting my time with your 'non-arguments' that don't support your claims.

I'm tired of your ad hominem remarks. I've already reversed myself by saying that if the FAQs aren't considered official then neither are the rules for the red terror.

wholly frickin firetruck......this is rediculous....

all in good fun though.....

got another question about the red terror.........

is swallowing whole considered instant death????or better than instant death????

Does the Red Terror have to painted red to be WYSIWYG?

Does it have to look terrifying?

Okay, first off, it is my OPINION that one should tell your opponent if you're using some special character from the website. Just as I would want to be told if my opponent was actually playing a variant Blood Angels chapter.

Based off of the wordings of the Red Terror entry, no opponent permission is needed. Do you need an opponent's permission to utilize something that has been errata'd? No. The Red Terror entry specifically states how it is to be used; in Tyranid armies of 1500+ points.

Ghaz, your "it's not in the rulebook argument" doesn't make sense. The errata are not in a rule book. The Blood Angels chapter is not in a rulebook (...okay, older editions are). By the way, why do you keep falling back on a "you say you can pull anything you want from anywhere on the interwebs" argument? Noone is saying that. We're saying that you can pull things, that say they can be used, from the game's official website.


Swallowing Whole is not Instant Death. If it was, it would have capitalized instant death somewhere in its description.

It doesn't have to be red, but it does have to be scary. Otherwise, Gav Thorpe creeps into your room at night and places a pube on
your tongue while you're asleep.

Edit- Okay, can't get to the Aussie site, but the rules here, http://www.borsoft.net/ilbastione/download/documenti/TheRedTerror.pdf, seem to look the same as I remember. Now based off the fact it says "These rules are no longer official, but there is no reason they can't be used in friendly games", I'd think you would need an opponent's permission. Since, according to this, they are not official.

I'm sorry, but GW has stated numerous times that only the main rulebook and the codices are official and EVERYTHING ELSE requires both opponent's permission. Do you have something that actually says otherwise?

And yes, the Blood Angels are an online CODEX. It is indeed official. It is a codex.

Right. In case anyone is interested in what the rules are instead of shouting back and forth about precendents, those are on pages 86 and 87 of the rulebook. Some excerpts:

Page 86, "The army lists included in the Warhammer 40,000 Codex books specify the precise characteristics and abilities of each troop type, detail the maximum and minimum size of each unit and provide a points value for each model."

"Once [the players] have agreed to a points limit, the players will pick their forces. The best way to do this is to use the full army lists in the relevant Codex books for each army, but players just starting out can use any models that they have in their collection."

So, if the book says that the best way to play is to use the army lists and units in the codices, one might reasonably conclude that using a unit not in a codex would require permission above "Want to play a game?"

Or do we really need to keep discussing "Some random guy at the game store wouldn't let me use my favorite model and I moral support from the Internet."

Ghaz wrote:I'm sorry, but GW has stated numerous times that only the main rulebook and the codices are official and EVERYTHING ELSE requires both opponent's permission. Do you have something that actually says otherwise?

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?community=&catId=cat1300034&categoryId=900006&aId=3400020
Apoc Datasheets?

Ghaz wrote:I'm sorry, but GW has stated numerous times that only the main rulebook and the codices are official and THE ENTIRE GAME requires both opponent's permission. Do you have something that actually says otherwise?

And yes, the Blood Angels are an online CODEX. It is indeed official. It is a codex.

Hey Ghaz, I fixed it for you!

you didn't fix anything, you are attempting to be a one-man viral internet spam.

Your argument is just and ridiculous and pedantic as it has always been.

That is like saying that when you play chess, using a queen is 'opponents permission'.
Or that a rook can move diagonally, 'with opponents permission'.

IOW, get over it.

Gwar! wrote:

Ghaz wrote:I'm sorry, but GW has stated numerous times that only the main rulebook and the codices are official and THE ENTIRE GAME requires both opponent's permission. Do you have something that actually says otherwise?

And yes, the Blood Angels are an online CODEX. It is indeed official. It is a codex.

Hey Ghaz, I fixed it for you!

Listen troll, how many times do we have to tell you that's not what's being asked here, so please try to keep on subject.

And davidson, what does the Apocalypse datasheets have to do with anything? The Apocalyse rules themselves are completely 'opponent's agreement' already.

They are GW online pdf's with additional rules for more units that do not require your opponents permission.

Not to mention, the Red Terror's latest rules are not from the 3rd ed codex but from PDF's released by GW CA after the 4th ed codex came out that included Old One Eye and a special lictor.

Yes, they DO require your opponents permission. It's for an Apocalypse game which by it's very nature means it requires your opponents permission. That's how Apocalypse games work.

Ghaz wrote:Yes, they DO require your opponents permission. It's for an Apocalypse game which by it's very nature means it requires your opponents permission. That's how Apocalypse games work.

Also, the Apocalypse book itself says that they would be putting more Datasheets both online and in WD for use with Apocalypse(in effect, shoehorning in their legality). Neither the BGB nor any Codex says the same about new Characters for use with any army.

Ghaz wrote:Yes, they DO require your opponents permission. It's for an Apocalypse game which by it's very nature means it requires your opponents permission. That's how Apocalypse games work.

And via an interesting feat of prestidigitation, Ghaz becomes Gwar.
A satisfying end for all.

Is the flame war over?

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:Is the flame war over?

NOTHING IS OVER!

[/Stallone]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

davidson wrote:They are GW online pdf's with additional rules for more units that do not require your opponents permission.

Not to mention, the Red Terror's latest rules are not from the 3rd ed codex but from PDF's released by GW CA after the 4th ed codex came out that included Old One Eye and a special lictor.

As I remember, the online rules for the special Lictor specifically stated that it needed your opponent's permission to use, whereas the online rules for the Red Terror and Old One Eye did not have such a rule.

AllWillFall2Me wrote:

Ghaz wrote:Yes, they DO require your opponents permission. It's for an Apocalypse game which by it's very nature means it requires your opponents permission. That's how Apocalypse games work.

And via an interesting feat of prestidigitation, Ghaz becomes Gwar.
A satisfying end for all.

Good God, you're correct!

For a fellow dakkatite, I just rummaged in my pile of codices and White Dwarfs and pulled out the old tyranid codex.

The Red Terror: 104 pts:

Ws 6/ Bs - /S 5/ T 5/ W 3 / I 3/ A 5/ Ld 10/ Sv 3+

Armed with two sets of scything talons, the bonus attacks are already included.

It can deepstrike and is a monstrous creature.
If it hits with four or more of its attacks it the assault phase it can choose a model in base-to-base contact and swallow it hole. This causes instant death to the model
Models that can't be swallowed: models with strength and/or toughness value of 5 or more, Bikes and Calvary, and anything with an armour value ( dreadnoughts/tanks/grav-tanks.. etc).

Fast: The red terror moves 9" in the movement phase and can make an assault move of up to 9". When rolling for distance moved through difficult terrain add +3 to the highest roll. The red terror also rolls 3D6 for fall back and pursuit distances.

he seems somewhat over powered for 104 points

but i have to agree with ghaz mostly here, codex - official.
random PDF's from GW's site do not mean they are fine to use, hence why alot of tournies ban rhinox cav.
most of the time you will see it says you need permission to use that model / unit.

Gwar, dont even think of saying everything is permission only, thats really starting to piss everyone off now to the point there will soon be an angry mob.

quick example: you get matched against someone you dont want to fight in adept.
dont want to fight them? piss off then
thats something that does not require permission, you cannot turn down a fight.

I actually do see the point in apocalypse games of asking someone's permission to use something that isn't in the regular, official codex. Apoc is the place for custom things, and for me, anything that isn't in the codex is custom. But in this case, if the creature has official rules there shouldn't be a 'permission granted', right? It's an official entry with official rules, so how can you argue?

because its outdated
i wouldnt have a problem with someone using one (they look like gak though)

Well of course it's outdated, but so is the space wolves codex! Have you played against them lately? To me, outdated has very little to do with anything. GW has no idea how to keep things up and keep things consistent. If they can't release a new codex for every army at the beginning of the new edition, all bets are off.

I'm willing to wager that my friend Chris & I could write every codex (minus fluss), playtest every combination, and make initial rewrites in 6 months. That would be our full time job, but I think we could do it and have a solid foundation upon which to build a game system. And I say this because we've crunched the numbers and we want to send GW a letter and tell them to let us do that...

I would add though, in regards to the red terror, that it would have to be used according to the rules that are laid out with it (i.e. in games over 1,500, yadda yadda yadda).