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 really sure what you're getting at with that. Could you please expand/explain further what you mean?

The rules give us a framework for replacing items with one another which necessarily has to be sequential. What I'm suggesting is that any options you take have to be both forwards and backwards compatible as such, while still taking into account any replacement steps already taken that the rules allow.

From that perspective of backward and forward validity yes being legal for the end result by following a sequence of options as per a captain or as per the biker. Also as per the apothicary, though it is a sequence of a single option. If you care to view it with a time scale rather than reverse engineering your final result to find what options to take to make it a valid model.

 Mr. Shine wrote:
I'm not really sure what you're getting at with that. Could you please expand/explain further what you mean?

The rules give us a framework for replacing items with one another which necessarily has to be sequential. What I'm suggesting is that any options you take have to be both forwards and backwards compatible as such, while still taking into account any replacement steps already taken that the rules allow.

To explain, I will draw particular emphasis to the underlined part. The upgrade process works only in a forward direction; you can't look at a TDA captain with a combi-melta and a chainfist and say it's legal for him to swap his chainsword, bolt pistol, and grenades for TDA as a finalized model because he no longer has those items to exchange. You could only do so at the beginning, when he still had them, thus essentially going back to the start and looking forwards.

The logical test for an options validity when you presume all options to be of equal standing and taken simultaneously and not sequentially is done by 1st determining what options will be applied, then checking to see if that option would be valid if it was applied last.

Here are a couple examples of how this works.

1) Lets say we have a Sargent model equipped with a boltgun and, of its options, we plan to take these 3.
a) The Sargent may be upgraded to a Veteran,
b) a Sargent or Veteran may replace his boltgun with a bolt pistol and chain-sword
c) any model may replace their chain-sword with a power-sword.

Taking options b&c 1st would not make option a invalid
Taking options a&b 1st would not make option c invalid
Taking options a&c 1st would not make option b invalid

Here you can see, taking all 3 options is fine.

2) Lets say we have a Sargent model equipped with a boltgun and, of its options, we plan to take these 3.
a) a Sargent may replace their chain-sword with a power-fist
b) The Sargent may be upgraded to a Veteran,
c) a Sargent or Veteran may replace his boltgun with a bolt pistol and chain-sword

Taking options b&c 1st would make option a invalid as the model is not a Vetern,
Taking options a&b 1st would not make option c invalid
Taking options a&c 1st would not make option b invalid

Even though option a was listed 1st, for this method we always check an options validity for this method by assuming it is applied last.

 DJGietzen wrote:
The logical test for an options validity when you presume all options to be of equal standing and taken simultaneously and not sequentially is done by 1st determining what options will be applied, then checking to see if that option would be valid if it was applied last.

Here are a couple examples of how this works.

1) Lets say we have a Sargent model equipped with a boltgun and, of its options, we plan to take these 3.
a) The Sargent may be upgraded to a Veteran,
b) a Sargent or Veteran may replace his boltgun with a bolt pistol and chain-sword
c) any model may replace their chain-sword with a power-sword.

Taking options b&c 1st would not make option a invalid
Taking options a&b 1st would not make option c invalid
Taking options a&c 1st would not make option b invalid

Here you can see, taking all 3 options is fine.

2) Lets say we have a Sargent model equipped with a boltgun and, of its options, we plan to take these 3.
a) a Sargent may replace their chain-sword with a power-fist
b) The Sargent may be upgraded to a Veteran,
c) a Sargent or Veteran may replace his boltgun with a bolt pistol and chain-sword

Taking options b&c 1st would make option a invalid as the model is not a Vetern,
Taking options a&b 1st would not make option c invalid
Taking options a&c 1st would not make option b invalid

Even though option a was listed 1st, for this method we always check an options validity for this method by assuming it is applied last.

And so I ask once more, how does a Captain take Terminator armor and a chainfist under this method? It doesn't work.

You have a Captain model equipped with power armor, a chainsword, and a bolt pistol.
a) He may exchange either his chainsword and/or his pistol for equipment from ranged or melee weapon lists.
b) He may take other equipment from the special issue wargear and/or the chapter relic lists.
c) He may exchange his power armor and both weapons for Terminator armor, a power sword, and a storm bolter.
d) If he has Terminator armor, he may exchange either his power sword and/or storm bolter for equipment from the Terminator weapons list.

Taking options B first and C later is legal, as is taking C first & D later. But you can't take D first and C later because you don't start with a power sword, so under your ruling I guess Captains can't take Terminator weapons, expressly contrary to the text?

How about Bikers? They have a bolt pistol.
a) They may exchange their pistols for chainswords.
b) They may exchange chainswords for special weapons.

Taking A first is fine, but you can't take B without taking A first, which again violates your ruling. Guess Bikers can't have special weapons, again contrary to their list entry.

Can you provide any rules supporting this methodology, or is this just HYWPI?

Creeperman wrote:
To explain, I will draw particular emphasis to the underlined part. The upgrade process works only in a forward direction; you can't look at a TDA captain with a combi-melta and a chainfist and say it's legal for him to swap his chainsword, bolt pistol, and grenades for TDA as a finalized model because he no longer has those items to exchange. You could only do so at the beginning, when he still had them, thus essentially going back to the start and looking forwards.

Okay, perhaps referring to the model's end state wasn't helpful, however what you've said here doesn't really conflict with the idea of upgrades needing to be both backwards and forwards compatible, does it?

Given that as list builders we are all-knowing in terms of what options are applicable to which model types and which restrictions/requiremetns are in place for different options, looking forwards shouldn't be a matter of, "Okay, well he doesn't have Terminator Armour now so he's eligible for a Jump Pack. I'll give him one. Okay, now I'll give him Terminator Armour; there's no restriction on doing so." Or alternatively, "Okay, well he's a Veteran now so I'll give him a Meltagun. Now I'll upgrade him to an Apothecary."

No one gets any upgrades! The rules don't tell you how to purchase them explicitly enough, so you can't get them!

Alternatively you can think of it this way.

For the captain to be equiped with a chainfist, which is what we want, we need to have the prerequisites of TDA and a power sword/weapon.

Or as a biker we know we want a special weapon so we just buy one assuming prerequisites are met. Or in other words just swap it for the bikers only weapon (not counting bike mounted weapons) the bolt pistol (which is just as easier thought of as swapped out for a chain sword than actually is).



Automatically Appended Next Post:
And you can happily write chain fist before TDA on your army list without breaking the game, so no it doesn't matter what order you buy them in, as long as they are valid options for the profile and you fill the requirements for the item.

Creeperman wrote:
And so I ask once more, how does a Captain take Terminator armor and a chainfist under this method? It doesn't work.

I see your confusion. This method only checks for failure on the final option.

You have a Captain model equipped with power armor, a chainsword, and a bolt pistol.
a) He may exchange either his chainsword and/or his pistol for equipment from ranged or melee weapon lists.
b) He may take other equipment from the special issue wargear and/or the chapter relic lists.
c) He may exchange his power armor and both weapons for Terminator armor, a power sword, and a storm bolter.
d) If he has Terminator armor, he may exchange either his power sword and/or storm bolter for equipment from the Terminator weapons list.

Taking options B first and C later is legal, as is taking C first & D later. But you can't take D first and C later because you don't start with a power sword, so under your ruling I guess Captains can't take Terminator weapons, expressly contrary to the text?

In this example we are going to take C & D, so A & B don't matter.Your confusion is that you think can't take D, then C, but thats not the test. The test is only if the last option is possible. You already took D(so for thepurpose of thetest you presume D was magically successful) would you be able to satisfy C?. The answer is yes. Replacing a power-sword or storm-bolter with a terminator weapon does not deprive you of the chain-sword, bolt-pisto and power-armor you would need.

Still confused? Just remember your not checking if every order is possible, only if an option going last would make that one option impossible, and we don't care if any of the previous options would fail. Thats why we test each option as if it was the last.

With the bikes its a bit clearer.

How about Bikers? They have a bolt pistol.
a) They may exchange their pistols for chainswords.
b) They may exchange chainswords for special weapons.

A needs you to have a pistol, B does not remove a pistol. B needs you to have a chain-sword and A does not remove a chain sword. Either A or B could go last so they can go simultaneously.

Looking at the specific entry the OP is referring to I can't see why a vet couldn't be armed with special weapons AND be an apoth. Looks legal from where I'm sitting.

Anyway I'm off to fill my DE compulsory troops choices with trueborn.. upgraded to be elites of course, but thats AFTER I purchased them as troops.