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.

Currently having a rules debate in which a friend is arguing that since there is no order of operations in upgrading, there is nothing to stop you from taking a melta gun on a Command Squad Vet, then make him an Appthecary and keep the melta.

My argument is that at that point, I could take stuff like Commander upgrades for my IG, then upgrade him to say S10 Monster Hunter Powerfist Straken. I assumed upgrading the model resets the wargear to the new profile so you can't do that. But I can't find it in the rules-is there anywhere it actually is stated right out?

It really depends on the actual wording of the entry in question.

Consistency isn't something GW spend a lot of time worrying about.


Apothecaries having access to Veteran gear or not is one of those arguments that people have been having over the course of multiple codexes now.

 insaniak wrote:
It really depends on the actual wording of the entry in question.

Consistency isn't something GW spend a lot of time worrying about.


Apothecaries having access to Veteran gear or not is one of those arguments that people have been having over the course of multiple codexes now.

That is what drove me to Dakka, but it was about giving the Apothecary a Lighting Claw.

Rule says: You May Replace Model X with Model Y.

What happens to the wargear and upgrades of the original model?

Because if the apothecary gets a melta, does he also get an extra bolter and pistol from his former life as a veteran? Because you can fire two pistols a turn, so that's a nice little upgrade to his pre-charge capabilities. The only problem is it really makes no sense.

Buuuut is there actually a rule that says that?

the_scotsman wrote:
Rule says: You May Replace Model X with Model Y.

What happens to the wargear and upgrades of the original model?

Because if the apothecary gets a melta, does he also get an extra bolter and pistol from his former life as a veteran? Because you can fire two pistols a turn, so that's a nice little upgrade to his pre-charge capabilities. The only problem is it really makes no sense.

Buuuut is there actually a rule that says that?

the argument against it is he is now an Apothecary, no longer a veteran and it says any Veteran, not any model.

See this thread for some existing discussion.

Compare the wording for the Command Squad datasheet with the wording for the Captain datasheet and the options available. They refer to a 'Captain or Chapter Master'. Note how there's no such specification for a Veteran or Apothecary.

the_scotsman wrote:
Rule says: You May Replace Model X with Model Y.

What happens to the wargear and upgrades of the original model?

This is dealt with in the rules for reading Datasheets, which can be found in the 'Datasheets' section of the codex. The listed Wargear options in a datasheet are Wargear that all models in the unit have (unless specified otherwise), so the Apothecary simply has the base wargear options stated; no replacement or addition.

 Mr. Shine wrote:
See this thread for some existing discussion.

Compare the wording for the Command Squad datasheet with the wording for the Captain datasheet and the options available. They refer to a 'Captain or Chapter Master'. Note how there's no such specification for a Veteran or Apothecary.

the_scotsman wrote:
Rule says: You May Replace Model X with Model Y.

What happens to the wargear and upgrades of the original model?

This is dealt with in the rules for reading Datasheets, which can be found in the 'Datasheets' section of the codex. The listed Wargear options in a datasheet are Wargear that all models in the unit have (unless specified otherwise), so the Apothecary simply has the base wargear options stated; no replacement or addition.

Sadly it isn't dealt with properly. There are a few interpretations of the RAW:

wargear list:

Bolt Gun

Krak Grenades

Frag Grenades

Knife

options list:

Any Veteran can trade in their Bolt Gun or Bolt Pistol for a Demolisher Cannon

Upgrade Veteran to Apothecary, you must trade your Bolt Gun in for a Bolt Pistol

Any Veteran can trade in their Bolt Gun or Bolt Pistol for a Laser Cannon

Any model can swap their Bolt Gun for a Fork

Any model can swap their Bolt Gun or Bolt pistol for a Spoon

a) from top to bottom only - This means you cannot step back up in the options list, only move further down. You validate each option - when you're at that step - against the current state of the model.
Example: Any model can have a Demolisher Cannon or Spoon, but Apothecaries cannot have Laser Cannons (it's no longer a veteran at that step) or forks (since it doesn't have a Bolt Gun anymore)

b) in any order you wish - This means you can step back and forth (up and down) in the options list as you please.You validate each option - when you're at that step - against the current state of the model.
Example: Any model can have Spoon, Laser Cannon and Demolishers since you can pick the LasCan and THEN upgrade to Apothecary.

c) validate after picking everything out AND during selection.
Example: An apothecary can only pick up a spoon since you lost access to both Cannons when switching to Apothecary and since you only had a Bolt pistol after switching, the Fork wasn't allowed either.

All of those can be done without violating a specific rule. HIWPI is a) since that option assumes that the rule authors didn't list options in a random order but choose to list them in that specific order - and in most cases the resulting options / models "kinda make sense"

the_scotsman wrote:
Currently having a rules debate in which a friend is arguing that since there is no order of operations in upgrading, there is nothing to stop you from taking a melta gun on a Command Squad Vet, then make him an Appthecary and keep the melta.

My argument is that at that point, I could take stuff like Commander upgrades for my IG, then upgrade him to say S10 Monster Hunter Powerfist Straken. I assumed upgrading the model resets the wargear to the new profile so you can't do that. But I can't find it in the rules-is there anywhere it actually is stated right out?

You could always just be subjective about agreeing to stuff like that. From my perspective a mg/LC apoth isn't breaking the game and if he models it to look sweet then why not? Otoh if hes trying to do something en masse just to be a dick then no.

nekooni wrote:
Sadly it isn't dealt with properly. There are a few interpretations of the RAW:

It can only be an interpretation of RAW if it's based on something actually written in the rules. There is nothing written in the rules about any kind of order of operations, and we are simply told what a model of a named kind may take. If you replace that model with a model of a different named kind then you have given an option to a model that is not of the allowed named kind.

a) from top to bottom only - This means you cannot step back up in the options list, only move further down. You validate each option - when you're at that step - against the current state of the model.
Example: Any model can have a Demolisher Cannon or Spoon, but Apothecaries cannot have Laser Cannons (it's no longer a veteran at that step) or forks (since it doesn't have a Bolt Gun anymore)

Where do the rules tell you to read from top to bottom, and that you validate a model's wargear against its options only at the step at which you select any given option?

b) in any order you wish - This means you can step back and forth (up and down) in the options list as you please.You validate each option - when you're at that step - against the current state of the model.
Example: Any model can have Spoon, Laser Cannon and Demolishers since you can pick the LasCan and THEN upgrade to Apothecary.

Where do the rules tell you that you validate a model's wargear against its options only at the step at which you select any given option?

c) validate after picking everything out AND during selection.
Example: An apothecary can only pick up a spoon since you lost access to both Cannons when switching to Apothecary and since you only had a Bolt pistol after switching, the Fork wasn't allowed either.

This is correct, as I have explained. If I look at your Apothecary armed with a Meltagun on the table in front of me and ask you, "Where is an Apothecary allowed to take a Meltagun?" then necessarily you are unable to give me an answer, other than to claim you gave a Meltagun to something that is not an Apothecary, and yet here in front of me is an Apothecary with a Meltagun.

All of those can be done without violating a specific rule. HIWPI is a) since that option assumes that the rule authors didn't list options in a random order but choose to list them in that specific order - and in most cases the resulting options / models "kinda make sense"

This is no different to saying, "The rules don't say I can't," which is just silly. The rules don't say I can't win by brushing your models off the table and onto the floor with my hand, but that doesn't make it legitimate.

Two of those three options can be done by imagining a way in which you might do something not specifically stated in the rules. That is not following or even interpreting RAW. That is imagining something outside of RAW.

I'm with reading top to bottom. Thar is how you read any rule in any rulebook. You don't get rending AP2 without To Wound on 6 first.
That is why some upgrades are on top and some other in the middle of list.
If you claim that order of operations is in any order then I say you can jump back to the same statement. So:
I take grav guns on my Vets;
Then I jump to:
One Veteran may be upgraded to an Apothecary
Then I jump to:
One Veteran may be upgraded to an Apothecary
And three more times and I end up with 5 Apothecaries with Grav-guns.

Nothing tells you how to read options list then how about read it how it is written - like any rules: from start to end? Why? Because nothing PERMITS you to jump back and forth.

Danyboy,
One is One, so if you upgrade more then One model you end up violating this Rule. That is why there is a difference between 'A/One Model' and 'Any Model,' to signify if multiple Models can evoke this upgrade option. This is further cemented buy the cost when it comes to 'One Model' always being a single cost while 'Any Model' has a cost that reads along the lines of X/Model. Thus, it isn't the inability to 'jump back and forth' that causes your scenario to be illegal, but the fact the option itself only grants permission for one Model to be upgraded thus.

You don't explain it to me.I understand how it goes. It was extreme example that if you want abuse it with jumping back and forth then I can abuse it also - we can argue if One is jest one or is it one in whole unit...

It is an extreme that is already illegal by the Option itself, so what is the point in bringing it up?

I could argue but it is not the idea.
You have to read Options list and apply them as you read them. Remember that rules are permissive in 40k.
You read "may be upgraded" so you upgrade or not.
Next - "Veteran may take " you take or not.

Rules DON'T ALLLOW you to apply options in any order you want.

If I have permission to take Option X, the only way to deny me from taking X would be to quote a Rule that revokes that permission... do you have such a Rule quote?

Keep in mind this is not a new problem, this has been going on for many Editions now and no one has been able to solve it. To make matters worse, Game Workshop has bounced back and forth on this question time and time again. Sometimes they make it clear that options can be taken out of order, while other times they prevent options from being taken out of order. Sometimes they even write the list in such a way that it is impossible to take Options in the order presented. Annoyingly I can't remember which Units had that problem, and I am not going to dig through every book to find this one or two... someone else can remind us which one's had that problem if they remember.

Also, what happens if new options are added via Errata and where do they sit on your 'order of operations?'

JinxDragon wrote:
Danyboy,
One is One, so if you upgrade more then One model you end up violating this Rule. That is why there is a difference between 'A/One Model' and 'Any Model,' to signify if multiple Models can evoke this upgrade option. This is further cemented buy the cost when it comes to 'One Model' always being a single cost while 'Any Model' has a cost that reads along the lines of X/Model. Thus, it isn't the inability to 'jump back and forth' that causes your scenario to be illegal, but the fact the option itself only grants permission for one Model to be upgraded thus.

First of where is written One in entire unit?
I read this line, apply it to One. Because as you say nothing forbids me to jump back then i'll appy it again to one Veteran. Where is the rule to validate at end (or any other time)?

Here's the problem: if you want to stick to rules by referencing to other entries ("A/One Model" - "Any Model"; "pts" - "pts/model") then you should also use as reference other entries that allows something.
Datasheet entry specifically permits wargear for "Captain or Chapter Master" after the "Upgrade" entry. If that was allowed in any order then it would be written "Captain may take".
The same reference is in Command Squad entries:
"Veteran may take" not "Veteran or Apotrhecary or Champion" may take.
So either we use other lines/entries/datahseets as reference how to read and apply Option list entries or we have no rules at all and my 5 Apothecaries with grav-guns are valid.

And about permission - you have permission to take Option X only when you read the line. Once you've jump to other line there is another "rule". You've had your chance to apply it.

Also - new entries was added by Errata in 6th ed SM Codex. They were added at the end of Options list and was addressed to all models in unit, so it cannot be used as example to prove "my way" or "your way"

This is correct, as I have explained.

It may well be correct, but you have no more proof in the rules that's how it works than the other examples you demanded rules proof that says "this is how you do it".

If you did we wouldn't be seeing the 20th question about this in a year.

As such we can't say that's correct, or that it's incorrect, we can only say that's the way most people play it, and the most likely way you'll see it across multiple Metas.

Danyboy,
Can you quote a Rule that actually states permission to take an Option only exists while you are reading the Option?
For without, your interpenetration lacks Rules as Written support needed to convince anyone with a different interpretation that they are incorrect.

As for proving that two Apothecary in a single Unit would be illegal, allow me to actually quote the Rule that can be found in multiple sources. I will then ask a simple question at the end of this post, one that should be all that is needed to prove the 'One Model' options are forbidden from being selected more then once. This is easily done as each Codex has a section where it explains how to read the Datasheet, which always refer to the Unit as a whole. In every section detailing how Options work, it is further cemented that Options are something the Unit purchases as opposed to individual Models. As something the Unit purchases, a requirement that One Model be upgraded can only mean that a single Model within the Unit may be upgraded.

The following snippets are just example of what the Rule book has to say concerning Options on Datasheets:
This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to do so, alongside the associated points cost for each.
- Dark Eldar
This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to do so, alongside the associated points cost for each.
- Tau
This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to do so, alongside the associated Points cost for each.
- Space Marines

So:
If you have a Unit that contains Two Apothecary, have you obeyed a Rule stating the Unit may upgrade One Model to an Apothecary?

Ok JinxDragon, I admit my example with Apothecaries is incorrect.
Also you convinced me that you found a hole in rules that don't cover how to read and apply them.

Words and phrases used in Datasheets clearly states that upgrades are made first and then certain models or any models are allowed to use certain wargear. Examples:
Captain datasheet: "Captain or Chapter Master"
Tactical/Assault/Centurions/Scouts Squad datasheet: "Sergeant or Veteran Sergeant"

This is "pointless" writing when we will be allowed to equip model and upgrade him later.

Also entire Company Champion and Apothecary "weapon replacement" is also "pointless" if you can "maneuver" with equipment to have whatever you want instead of what is written on theirs Options lists.

Well I really think Codex: Space Marines is consistant and bug free, that is why I believe your ability to take options in any order you want is against RAI, because if it is not then many Options list entries are totally pointless and unnecessarily complicated.

Not knowing the answer doesn't lead to your Interpretation being incorrect, it just means we don't know exactly how we are meant to play this. This is why we need Game Workshop to fix the problem by giving as a Rule that defines the order of operation. It is also why this is likely to be an argument that never gets answered, as we should never put faith in Game Workshop even attempting to fix their problems. I have stated before that I believe Game Workshop expects us to solve their problems for them, showing how little they care for their fan-base past 'buy our over-priced bits of plastic!'

Another interpenetration, one I am in favour of as there is no defined order of events, is to ensure the end-result that does not contain any 'illegal combinations.' If we are informed that a Veteran may exchange their weapon for a Melta, for a hypothetical example, then we must have an outcome where the Melta is on a Veteran. Should it be found on any other Model not specifically named in the option, that would be evidence that the combination is illegal. This is because the Datasheet presents only three possible ways for a Model to have a piece of wargear: It is generic to all Models in the Unit, it is specified as a starting weapon for the (Model), or an option singles out the Model either by Name or by the catch all of 'Any.'

In closing:
If one has to cleverly manipulate the order of operations, to get an outcome that is clearly impossible without said manipulation, it heavily suggests that something is being done incorrectly.

If you play by ITC, they've FAQ'd it so that Apo's can take special weapons still.

Order of operations has little to do with the issue. The simple fact is the models profile changes from veteran to apothicary. As such the models profile is not eligible to take or have options from another profile.

 Bausk wrote:
Order of operations has little to do with the issue. The simple fact is the models profile changes from veteran to apothicary. As such the models profile is not eligible to take or have options from another profile.

That argument has been tried before, in this previous thread.

Please show where in the rules that tells us when we validate the choices we make when building our army.

regardless of order of operations, an apothecay has no upgrade options, so if you end up with an apothecary with say a grav gun the rules do not actually support this as they support veterans with a grav gun.

in the case of the datasheet name "Command Squad"

it has multiple unit profiles.

Apothecary
Veteran
Company champion

So yes you can upgrade a veteran to have certain gear, and there is an upgrade option for apothecary, but there is no upgrade for apothecaries to have grav guns for example.

at the end of buying the unit from the datasheet if you have an apothecary with a grav gun, you have an option that is not allowed, because an apothecary is not a veteran.

an apothecary with veteran weapon upgrades is not a legal option, if it were then it would say "any model in the command squad can be equipped with a weapon from the following"

However it does not use that wording, or anything similar, but restricts the wording to 'veterans' which not all models in the command squad may be. Is an Apothecary a member of a command squad?- yes. Is an apothecary a veteran?-no. They have separate profiles.

There are no rules for upgrade order, not because you can do them in any order you like, but because there is no order of upgrading. The end result is what matters.







Automatically Appended Next Post:

greytalon666 wrote:
If you play by ITC, they've FAQ'd it so that Apo's can take special weapons still.

many of the ITCs rules are house rules, not faqs.

much like fmc and blast templates.

 Ghaz wrote:
Please show where in the rules that tells us when we validate the choices we make when building our army.

There are none written. All are House Rules.

Standard convention with this, though, is largely as Blacktoof said, it is the end result that matters.

So feel free to do as you wish, just be aware that you may find game opportunities limited because people will feel you are cheating. This is a case of perception defining the game. For a similar case, look up Power of the Machine Spirit and its use.

And if you had asked, I would have said that I agree with Blaktoof entirely. Those who believe in a 'one and done' validation method for army building could potentially have Space Marine Bikes as Troops without a HQ on a bike simply by adding the HQ, adding the Bikes as Troops and then removing the HQ from the army.

 Ghaz wrote:
And if you had asked, I would have said that I agree with Blaktoof entirely. Those who believe in a 'one and done' validation method for army building could potentially have Space Marine Bikes as Troops without a HQ on a bike simply by adding the HQ, adding the Bikes as Troops and then removing the HQ from the army.

Not true, because you have to keep it if you select it.

If you remove it, you have to remove everything you did after it.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
And if you had asked, I would have said that I agree with Blaktoof entirely. Those who believe in a 'one and done' validation method for army building could potentially have Space Marine Bikes as Troops without a HQ on a bike simply by adding the HQ, adding the Bikes as Troops and then removing the HQ from the army.

Not true, because you have to keep it if you select it.

If you remove it, you have to remove everything you did after it.

Which would also be true for the Apothecary. Since the model is no longer a Veteran you would have to remove all the upgrades you gave it when it was a Veteran.

 Ghaz wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
And if you had asked, I would have said that I agree with Blaktoof entirely. Those who believe in a 'one and done' validation method for army building could potentially have Space Marine Bikes as Troops without a HQ on a bike simply by adding the HQ, adding the Bikes as Troops and then removing the HQ from the army.

Not true, because you have to keep it if you select it.

If you remove it, you have to remove everything you did after it.

Which would also be true for the Apothecary. Since the model is no longer a Veteran you would have to remove all the upgrades you gave it when it was a Veteran.

Not the same situation at all.