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.

If you are playing a matched play game, then in a Battle-forged army, you can include no more than one Commander in each Detachment.

Note that the formatting is not an error. It says Commander, in non-capitals, but in bold.

Is this supposed to be the COMMANDER keyword, or does it mean any unit with Commander in the name, or does it not work at all because there is no unit called Commander in the codex?

And since it's been made clear to me I have to clarify this: This is a sincere, legitimate question, as GW have proven though errata that the formatting of keywords matters (the errata to the 'Aerial Spotter' Astra Copywritum stratagem specifically).

This is from the Warhammer Community article where Commander is written in small caps:



IMHO, its probably meant to e a keyword but it wouldn't hurt to send an email to 40kfaq@gwplc.com for clarity.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

And since it's been made clear to me I have to clarify this: This is a sincere, legitimate question, as GW have proven though errata that the formatting of keywords matters (the errata to the 'Aerial Spotter' Astra Copywritum stratagem specifically).

I really struggle to see any of your posts as being sincere and legitimate when most of them are about interpreting rules in a manner contrary to obvious intent.

I'm not immediately sure where GW wrote that all Keywords need to be treated in all capital letters, but assuming they intended a non-Keyword here: there is no Commander entry in the Tau codex, as the Commander is now three separate entries: Commander in XV8 Crisis Battlesuit, Commander in XV85 Enforcer Battlesuit, Commander in XV86 Coldstar Battlesuit. As there is no Commander unit, the rule restricts Tau players from taking a unit that does not exist. That's the interpretation for GW intending to use a non-Keyword Commander here.

Mine is in all caps, just like the keyword.

Davall wrote:
Mine is in all caps, just like the keyword.

I have an English-language digital version that only has it bolded, as BCB describes.

 meleti wrote:

Davall wrote:
Mine is in all caps, just like the keyword.

I have an English-language digital version that only has it bolded, as BCB describes.

I am talking about the English print Codex.

Using AZARDI my digital epub version looks like this: http://prntscr.com/isnasb


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Davall wrote:
I am talking about the English print Codex.

In that case I am happy to accept it as GW being GW and incapable of making a single book without 9001 typographical errors. Thanks for the Info. You'd think GW would fix their damn digital books.

Can it be a glitch in the Azardi software? I use Azardi for my Epub codexes and half the time, some words are garbled a bit, usually because the words start to overlap. But if I try it again a few times, I usually get it to load it correctly.

Malachon wrote:
Can it be a glitch in the Azardi software? I use Azardi for my Epub codexes and half the time, some words are garbled a bit, usually because the words start to overlap. But if I try it again a few times, I usually get it to load it correctly.

I extracted the base xhtlm, the error is in there too.

1 Commander (in any of his suits) per detachment.

 meleti wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

And since it's been made clear to me I have to clarify this: This is a sincere, legitimate question, as GW have proven though errata that the formatting of keywords matters (the errata to the 'Aerial Spotter' Astra Copywritum stratagem specifically).

I really struggle to see any of your posts as being sincere and legitimate when most of them are about interpreting rules in a manner contrary to obvious intent.

I'm not immediately sure where GW wrote that all Keywords need to be treated in all capital letters, but assuming they intended a non-Keyword here: there is no Commander entry in the Tau codex, as the Commander is now three separate entries: Commander in XV8 Crisis Battlesuit, Commander in XV85 Enforcer Battlesuit, Commander in XV86 Coldstar Battlesuit. As there is no Commander unit, the rule restricts Tau players from taking a unit that does not exist. That's the interpretation for GW intending to use a non-Keyword Commander here.

Note that this also extends to Commander Shadowsun and Commander Farsight, as both have the Commander keyword on their datasheets.

I suspect that the issue here is a formatting one – Small Caps (as used in the Commander keyword in the picture above) are not actually capitalised characters; it’s something that’s applied at the typesetting stage to normal lower-case letters. So if you stripped the specific formatting out of the above, it would simply read “Commander” (cap C, lower-case for the rest).

It was already cleared up several posts ago and in the thread title that it is an ePub error, not a Rules one.