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.

Yes its justified. Argue all you want. However, in the end just follow the simple ruling. If you own the codex, use it; if you dont own it use the Free PDF. Yes it sucks if you are using the Free PDF but hey, its free...you get what you paid for.

GW's practices suck sometimes...heck look at 8th ed fantasy...the next year will have people going this way and that about the rules changes. We still play the game, we still buy the products (unless its a free pdf ).

I would say lets move on to a new topic to argue about but that wont happen. So lets concentrate some energy on getting this mysterious email linked to dakka or where its coming from.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:So GW is giving something away and people complain. Funnily enough most poeple can't do a good impression of a female dog.
So if free stuff doesn't work?
Charge harder.

Oh come on!

GW changed the rules in these books with the PDFs, there was a whole thread identifying the changes and discussing them.

But now a different arm of GW says the changes don't apply. So people with $100s of Inquisition forces don't know what the rules for their army are.

I think the confusion and irritation is totally justified.

Yeah, I know - for me, at least - that this is where I stand. I'm certain I'm in the strict minority here, but I built a combined SoB AND GK army... one that, when painted and finished, would probably be upwards of 4000 pts. Now if the PDF that was out now was the one we'd have to strictly adhere to, I'd have 2 armies of smaller size - and my sisters (about 800 pts worth) wouldn't even be playable in bigger scenarios!

Now I realize that is an inevitability what with the new codecies being created - and there's always apocalypse games - the fact remains that it isn't fair to the people that DON'T use inquisitors and their broken retinue to not be able to mix 'n match to make up for our 3rd ed codecies' shortcomings! This would be like telling an Eldar player "Sorry, guy - you can't use your Wave Serpents because foot-slogging eldar are more balanced in 5th ed!" or telling space marine players "Sorry, kids - the special chapter codecies are being put on ice - but don't worry! The Vanilla Marines Codex is still available to you! And we put it on PDF! How nice are we?!?!"

In conclusion, I'm thrilled with this ruling. I'll baby my hardcopy WH and DH codecies till they shrivel and die (or I get nice, new, shiny hardcopies of the 5th ed SoB and GK). But don't be upset, you non =][= players, that we are a little testy about our codex being shat on... let he who is without sin cast the first stone. If this was *YOUR* codex, would you be all sunshine and lemondrops, or would you be full of piss and vinegar, too?

insaniak wrote:

Neconilis wrote: But yes, do you truly not see the foolishness in having two different versions of a codex that are both legal?

Yup, it's bound to cause huge problems. I can see the news headlines now:

"This just in: A Warhammer 40000 player in Chicago, Illinois was today angered and confused when his opponent turned up at the table with a Daemon Hunters army that contained no allies!..."



Seriously, there are far bigger things in this hobby to get cranky about. It's a free codex.

Word.

The reason people are complaining about a free codex is because it's created a situation where it's ambiguous regarding what constitutes a legal army where there wasn't one before. If the codex was simply a scanned copy of the original it would be fine but now we have two different books that are both totally valid but have two different army selections. Even in this thread with the very clear GW response there are people trying to figure out a way to invalidate other people's armies where before it was totally clear so this is hardly a favor to Inquisition players (almost all of whom already own a book with actual art and a hobby section).

I agree 100% this is GW wanting to keep people who already own allied armies happy while stopping new players from buying stuff they won't be able to use when the new book comes out which is a nice sentiment. The problem arises in their typical closed door, super secret attitude where we have to assume this is their intent instead of them simply being straight with their customers and saying "Demon Hunters book is being released in the near future; allies will not be a part of it so enjoy it until it lasts and don't make any purchases that will no longer be legal."

Is it just me or are lots of WAAC powergamers who never bothered to buy the Daemonhunters codex disingenuously claiming to be upset about GWs 'confusing' policies? Just go buy it on ebay before the rush of frenzied mystics reliant IG players drive the price through the roof.

Damn we just been nerd served !

I'm definitely in a weird place about this.

1.) It's always nice to have a free army book released as a PDF

and

2.) It's sort of messed up to have 2 legal copies of an army book with different rules.

I think the best compromise would have been to release the same book, or alternately, to release what they did and indicate specifically that this release was a semi-complete teaser that can be used legally in games in lieu of the complete, paid book. Technically, they did the latter, but the explanation was a bit lacking.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:So people with $100s of Inquisition forces don't know what the rules for their army are.

I think the confusion and irritation is totally justified.

It's not that big a deal Kyoto. Unless they play only GKs or SoBs in a few months the people with $100s of Inquisition forces won't have an army any more.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kid_Kyoto wrote:So people with $100s of Inquisition forces don't know what the rules for their army are.

I think the confusion and irritation is totally justified.

It's not that big a deal Kyoto. Unless they play only GKs or SoBs in a few months the people with $100s of Inquisition forces won't have an army any more.

What is that supposed to mean? :-P

I just got my SoB army stolen a few weeks ago and am trying to rebuild it from scratch and to be honest if its not legal to ally then it would/will make a big difference when I get to the point where I would consider adding forces other than just pure SoB.

Except it ISN'T an issue.

If it is a pickup game - explain to your opponent. If you cannto reach a solution then dont play. Simple.

If it is a tournament - ask the TO what they will allow.

Easy. Done. Sorted. Can the nerd rage stop now? They released a free PDF with almost-certainly-gone-in-new-book rules removed. They are not stopping you using your current book [remember, it is a TO that would have to stop it, not GW!] nor are they creating a minefield of confusion for people.

Also: chaos space marine codex removed entire playable armies when it was updated (notably any single god cult army, iron warriors with basilisk support, etc) - and it DID invalidate the previous book as far as any tournie or 99% of pick up gamers were aware.

Ivellos wrote:
What is that supposed to mean? :-P

I just got my SoB army stolen a few weeks ago and am trying to rebuild it from scratch and to be honest if its not legal to ally then it would/will make a big difference when I get to the point where I would consider adding forces other than just pure SoB.

I think he's saying that those people who do not use the Chamber Miltant entries (Sisters of Battle and Grey Knights ) from either codex won't have an army anymore. That is the Inquistorial Stormtroopers, Inquisitors, Daemonhosts and all that jazz.

This of course is when Grey Knights get their own dex and the same applies to Sisters.

MVBrandt wrote:Haha, thankfully the above is pretty clear cut, so I don't *HAVE* to "make a ruling." Allies are still good, so long as you own the darned dex

You see, after reading this, I got a bit of a chuckle...

what all you seem to be forgetting is the "Golden Rule"

GW does not HAVE to validate or invalidate ANYTHING pertaining to the rules of Warhammer 40k (edition regardless) because as they state, the rule book they sell you is a book of "Guidelines" moreso then "Rules".

They further this point in their "shrine of knowledge" page where they state that FAQ ruleings are more like "GWs Set of House Rules". The same can be said for this whole "Aliies" mess.

Now I will admit, this is an unprecidented move for GW, they are effectively stating "While we have updated the codex here online for free, the old one you purchased is still just as valid as it ever was" (which would, if used to set precidence, allow for people to use whatever edition, or version, of any codex they wanted whenever). If I were a TO, I would IGNORE THIS RULEING (even calling it a ruling is actually a bit far-fetched) as it does nothing but overcomplicate a should-be-simple situation. Especially if said tournement states "We are using the most current versions of codexes".

Mike, as I understand it, we are using the Most recent versions of codexes for the VA open, if such is true, then Allies should be disallowed. The Copyright date on the online dexes are far more recent then that of the printed codexes that include the rules for Allies in WH and DH armies.

That being said, should All gaming groups do this? Not by a long shot! Hell, GW Springfield (one of my local GWs) still lets players use certain old editions for their lists, and only require the player use ALL the rules from the old edition (for instance, a player wants to use 4th edition IG may do so, but will not get Valks/Vendettas or any other 5th edition goodness). Do I believe personally that people should be able to use whatever codex they want? Hell no! That creates WAY too much confusion and in many cases relies on old rules/mechanics that no longer exist in the current ruleset, and would not fit in to the 5th edition 40k world.

Tl:dr its best to make your decision on a case by case basis, and I'd recommend going one way or the other (instead of mixed, either house rule that Allies exist or don't exist) and use ONLY the "Can we use allies" as a basis. I think that Indy Circut SHOULD infact make a calling (and it should be the same across the board) and if they decide to allow allies, make it an INAT RULES CHANGE and NOT use this email as a basis for their decision, cause if the justification for why I'm playing against IG with Mystics is:

"Because GW sent out an email saying they did not want New material to over-ride old material of their paying customers"

then you'd best belive Doom-Rider will be appearing in my Nova Open list, I paid good money for that codex, and GW says my money's rules shouldn't be over turned just because Thousand Sons get AP3 bolters

~DAR

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except it ISN'T an issue.

If it is a pickup game - explain to your opponent. If you cannto reach a solution then dont play. Simple.

If it is a tournament - ask the TO what they will allow.

Easy. Done. Sorted. Can the nerd rage stop now? They released a free PDF with almost-certainly-gone-in-new-book rules removed. They are not stopping you using your current book [remember, it is a TO that would have to stop it, not GW!] nor are they creating a minefield of confusion for people.

I just wanted to step up to the box and mention this... sorry for picking you out of the crowd, nos, but you're the most recent person to devolve this discussion into a personal attack...

Sure, *FRIENDS* will be amicable to the situation and let you do whatever. That's what friends are for.

*STRANGERS* are just that - and walking into a game store, if I don't know you, I'd want to go by what is current in the rules... and the rules for =][= are vague right now. See, while I'm a super social adult with plenty of charisma to go around (some would say too much...), its genuinely hard for me to ask someone "Hey, you wanna play a pickup game of 40k?" I don't know why. Of all things, I guess wargaming nerds are intimidating to me - by the cloth of the hobby, I guess wargamers are designed to be 'elitists'... prolly the same reason I don't play FPS with people in the same room (oooooonly online...). I feel like I'm being judged on too many fronts that I'm not good at naturally - painting and modeling, mostly.

... this hobby is what I get for finishing up school as a secondary school History teacher... I just like war tactics, I guess...

The point is, some of us are embarrassed out of our skin to inquire about a pick-up game in the first place - and now people like you are expecting us to add the tag "Do you want to play? BTW if you don't adhere to my demands, I'm gonna walk"? A) That's pretty crummy gaming etiquette, IMO... B) we shouldn't be put in that position. *THAT* is what the "Nerd Rage" is about, and I think we just wish others would be more understanding. Again, put yourselves in our shoes.

/ box

You have a codex right? Whats the issue?

If you have a codex then you play whats in the codex. If you are starting from scratch from the PDf then use whats in the PDF. Problem...solution.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except it ISN'T an issue.

If it is a pickup game - explain to your opponent. If you cannto reach a solution then dont play. Simple.

If it is a tournament - ask the TO what they will allow.

Easy. Done. Sorted. Can the nerd rage stop now? They released a free PDF with almost-certainly-gone-in-new-book rules removed. They are not stopping you using your current book [remember, it is a TO that would have to stop it, not GW!] nor are they creating a minefield of confusion for people.

Also: chaos space marine codex removed entire playable armies when it was updated (notably any single god cult army, iron warriors with basilisk support, etc) - and it DID invalidate the previous book as far as any tournie or 99% of pick up gamers were aware.

I dont see anyone bent out of shape in this thread. Its been quite civilised. Yesterday my gaming group decided we will use the PDF versions only since they are the latest. I encourage others to do so as well.

And at MVBrandt - you should seriously consider not allowing allies at your event since you have been billing it as a true competition.

G

The point is, some of us are embarrassed out of our skin to inquire about a pick-up game in the first place - and now people like you are expecting us to add the tag "Do you want to play? BTW if you don't adhere to my demands, I'm gonna walk"? A) That's pretty crummy gaming etiquette, IMO... B) we shouldn't be put in that position. *THAT* is what the "Nerd Rage" is about, and I think we just wish others would be more understanding. Again, put yourselves in our shoes.

Darn that GW for making you look for a pick up game!

IILeiBlazeII...no idea what you were trying to say there. I think I have had to much coffee this morning and to many reports to review.

Anyways I want to go back to the point. There is not a lot of confusion on what you should use. If you are playing someone who has DH/WH in a tournament or pick-up game, ask if they are using the codex or the pdf. Same goes for you. Problem solved, you/your opponent know what they are facing and whether you can use allies or not.

What I think is confusing is why GW made this move. Are they doing this right now as a stop gap until they correct it? Or is this permanent? Is some intern getting hammered because he dropped the ball. Just have to wait and see.

mikhaila wrote:The point is, some of us are embarrassed out of our skin to inquire about a pick-up game in the first place - and now people like you are expecting us to add the tag "Do you want to play? BTW if you don't adhere to my demands, I'm gonna walk"? A) That's pretty crummy gaming etiquette, IMO... B) we shouldn't be put in that position. *THAT* is what the "Nerd Rage" is about, and I think we just wish others would be more understanding. Again, put yourselves in our shoes.

Isn't this an issue regardless?

I mean, for one, some people (it's becoming alot more and more common) don't believe the GW FAQ holds water to a real game, and as such will begin a game under the impression that they can use your locator beacons, hit fast skimmers moving flat out on a 3+ with Goblet of Spite, and issue orders to their Sisters of Battle.... on the opposite spectrum, some people believe universal-FAQs like INAT are doctrine, and will disallow Meshing saves, and implement a host of INAT exclusive rulings that their opponent may have no idea where it was coming from...

case and point, this is nothing new. Its a confusing ruling by GW, big surprise there! Again, leave it to the LGS/GW or your Local Gaming Group to have their own set of rules and go by them. Its easier to have that pressure removed, and as long as people know the rules before the game starts, there should be no major issue. It is not difficult to ask a store owner to pick a set of rules, and act like the Authority figure in their own place of business.

Unless you mean like a Pick-Up-Game in the Mall/Library/public park, in which case, wth are you doing lugging your army around there anywho ;P

Black Blow Fly wrote:

I dont see anyone bent out of shape in this thread. Its been quite civilised. Yesterday my gaming group decided we will use the PDF versions only since they are the latest. I encourage others to do so as well.

And at MVBrandt - you should seriously consider not allowing allies at your event since you have been billing it as a true competition.

G

This post is a perfect example of why the free codex is not appreciated by a lot of people that play the armies.

Reading between the lines here, it sounds like they're kicking the ball to the TO's for whether to allow allies or not until the new codex comes out. Why make a universal decision when you can have hundreds of people make piece-meal ones?

Temujin wrote:Is it just me or are lots of WAAC powergamers who never bothered to buy the Daemonhunters codex disingenuously claiming to be upset about GWs 'confusing' policies? Just go buy it on ebay before the rush of frenzied mystics reliant IG players drive the price through the roof.

Holy crap, I didn't even think about that.

Selling Daemonhunters 'dex, with Mystics rules!

$10,000,000!
Cash only. Up front.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slackermagee wrote:Reading between the lines here, it sounds like they're kicking the ball to the TO's for whether to allow allies or not until the new codex comes out. Why make a universal decision when you can have hundreds of people make piece-meal ones?

It comes down to tournament organizers anyways. They decide y'know...
How the tournament is organized.

I think most people are P.O not because they removed allies but because it was done in what seemed like an underhanded 'kick-in-the-nuts' fashion.

They didn't adjust anything, didn't alter any rules, didn't incorperate the Errata or FAQ.
They just cut and paste and removed the ally rules.

From a business perspective this is how you piss off your market, from a public perspective this is basicly punching us in the figurative nutsack.

They said they were up at the start of the month in WD but didn't put them up till near then end. GW's blog spoke about them as if it was the full dex that was put up and then went on to talk about the great ally rules allow the blogger to put Stormtroopers in his IG army (WTF?!) and then every time people have asked if removing the rules was a mistake we get an assortment of answers in every flavour.

And GW hasn't said anything about it. They keep to them selves in their unscalable ivory tower pretending that all is right with the world.

Frazzled wrote:You have a codex right? Whats the issue?

If you have a codex then you play whats in the codex. If you are starting from scratch from the PDf then use whats in the PDF. Problem...solution.

It's not that, it's principles. It's principalities! Messing with my codex is like messing with my emotions!

I hears ya, but in this instance they aren't messing with it. if the allied rule is falling away in the future this is fine and saves some wailing and gnashing of teeth.

I still want to know what is massive about these PDFs (WD said they would be), or where I get all the "cool background" on Chaos from the PDFs that they said I would on the website?

A lot of people seem to be taking the "does not affect me, so who cares" response to the change in the allies and inducted "rules". Which, I guess, is normal. I can not wait to have these discussion on DE or Necrons when they get revamped.

More than anything, this thread just highlights the amount of people out there that aren't pirating the original codex, that has been online and in .pdf form for the last six years.

"Grrr this new .pdf doesn't have ally rules!"

Why not just steal the original? You guys have no qualms over "free" medium sharing, why not take the next step up and download with the big dogs?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kettu wrote:I think most people are P.O not because they removed allies but because it was done in what seemed like an underhanded 'kick-in-the-nuts' fashion.

They didn't adjust anything, didn't alter any rules, didn't incorperate the Errata or FAQ.
They just cut and paste and removed the ally rules.

From a business perspective this is how you piss off your market, from a public perspective this is basicly punching us in the figurative nutsack.

So you're a melodramatic queen. Check. Try not to get your panties in a bunch.

And GW hasn't said anything about it. They keep to them selves in their unscalable ivory tower pretending that all is right with the world.

They don't have to. They honestly don't care what you think, and until their profits take a hit they will continue to do whatever they feel like is best for their product. You're not that important.

Actually Kettu and all customers in general are very important.

G

Modquisition on. Gentlemen, politeness is required. Several posts have been violative of Dakka Rule #1: Be Polite.

This is a public warning. Posts after this will be viewed as intentionally violating Frazzled's warning. Just to be clear: thats bad.

I really cannot understand the confusion here.

1. They will not be making anymore witchhunter/daemonhunter codeci.

2. To allow new players to start these armies if they want to, they release a pdf version of the current codeci.

3. To not piss these people off who are starting these armies, they remove rules which may have resulted in them investing money where it would no longer be relevent.

4. They state that these new codeci do not override the old current one which still has rules for allies. These codeci exist to serve new-comers to the army.

If it's really that confusing, just pretend they are two different armies (or 4 different rather):

Witch Hunters
Which Hunters
Daemon Hunters
Demon Hunters

Frazzled wrote:

And, you know, the thing about a Pikachu... he's got lifeless eyes. Black eyes. Like a doll's eyes. When he comes at ya, doesn't seem to be living... until he bites ya, and those black eyes roll over white and then... ah then you hear that terrible high-pitched screamin'.