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.

Hey guys, I'm having a bit of trouble understanding the new rule of three. Does it mean I can't take more than 3 Leman russ tank commanders( any variant), or more than 3 leman russ same variant as tank commanders?
cheers lads.

You can include 3 Tank Commanders of any variant, 3 squadrons of 3 Leman Russ of any variant and one Knight Commander Pask (if you're cadian).

Its the page in the book that counts, not specific options on that page.

nekooni wrote:
You can include 3 Tank Commanders of any variant, 3 squadrons of 3 Leman Russ of any variant and one Knight Commander Pask (if you're cadian).

Its the page in the book that counts, not specific options on that page.

Ah that's wwhat I thought. Thanks mate

nekooni wrote:

Its the page in the book that counts, not specific options on that page.

This is HYWPI, not RAW. GW hasnt gone into detail what counts as the same datasheet. Its undefined, we dont know.

 p5freak wrote:

nekooni wrote:

Its the page in the book that counts, not specific options on that page.

This is HYWPI, not RAW. GW hasnt gone into detail what counts as the same datasheet. Its undefined, we dont know.

I mean... I guess. But if it was models rather than units then a single Assault squad would violate the rule of 3 as it has more than 3 Space Marines in it. So clearly running 3 squadrons of 3 Leman Russes is fine.

Tank Commanders and Pask have different names to regular Leman Russes both for their unit and their model. So whichever interpretation you go with, for game purposes a Tank Commander is completely different to a normal Leman Russ, so again that's definitely allowed in my mind.

I don't see any other way you can interpret it in this instance to be honest.

I could see a grey area if you took a Space Marine detachment and a Dark Angel detachment, can you take 3 Predators in each, are they different Datasheets even though they have the same name if they're from different Codexes? I would assume they count as the same, based on the ruling on Stratagems with the same name, but we don't know for sure.

Stux wrote:


I could see a grey area if you took a Space Marine detachment and a Dark Angel detachment, can you take 3 Predators in each, are they different Datasheets even though they have the same name if they're from different Codexes? I would assume they count as the same, based on the ruling on Stratagems with the same name, but we don't know for sure.

Thats what i meant. I wasnt quoting the part with the leman russes/tank commanders. Its pretty clear there.

Stux wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

nekooni wrote:

Its the page in the book that counts, not specific options on that page.

This is HYWPI, not RAW. GW hasnt gone into detail what counts as the same datasheet. Its undefined, we dont know.

I mean... I guess. But if it was models rather than units then a single Assault squad would violate the rule of 3 as it has more than 3 Space Marines in it. So clearly running 3 squadrons of 3 Leman Russes is fine.

Tank Commanders and Pask have different names to regular Leman Russes both for their unit and their model. So whichever interpretation you go with, for game purposes a Tank Commander is completely different to a normal Leman Russ, so again that's definitely allowed in my mind.

I don't see any other way you can interpret it in this instance to be honest.

I could see a grey area if you took a Space Marine detachment and a Dark Angel detachment, can you take 3 Predators in each, are they different Datasheets even though they have the same name if they're from different Codexes? I would assume they count as the same, based on the ruling on Stratagems with the same name, but we don't know for sure.

Think he's refering to the grey area you mentioned. Is the "rhino" same as the "rhino"?

 p5freak wrote:

nekooni wrote:

Its the page in the book that counts, not specific options on that page.

This is HYWPI, not RAW. GW hasnt gone into detail what counts as the same datasheet. Its undefined, we dont know.

No it isn't. It's clear as day!

What wacky way are you trying to interpret this bloody obvious rule that I am not devious enough to get?

 Silentz wrote:
No it isn't. It's clear as day!

What wacky way are you trying to interpret this bloody obvious rule that I am not devious enough to get?

While it's clear two of the same datasheet with different taken options are the same datasheet, what isn't clear is if two datasheets from different books with the same name, but different keywords, are the same datasheet or not.

tneva82 wrote:


Think he's refering to the grey area you mentioned. Is the "rhino" same as the "rhino"?

Ah ok. Well as far as the OP's question is concerned it's not ambiguous.

Rhino is exempt from rule of three though.

Stux wrote:

tneva82 wrote:


Think he's refering to the grey area you mentioned. Is the "rhino" same as the "rhino"?

Ah ok. Well as far as the OP's question is concerned it's not ambiguous.

Rhino is exempt from rule of three though.

Ok, replace rhino with "Devastator Squad".

Hm.

I mean it's surely clear that you can't take... say... 3 index devastator squads and 3 codex devastator squads, for example.

Trying to think of a unit which fits your description.

Knight Crusaders from AdMech and Imperial Knights? They might have slightly different datasheets but trying to argue you could take 6 under the rule of 3 would be ridiculous, yes?

 p5freak wrote:

nekooni wrote:

Its the page in the book that counts, not specific options on that page.

This is HYWPI, not RAW. GW hasnt gone into detail what counts as the same datasheet. Its undefined, we dont know.

I'm pretty confident it's RAW. It doesn't matter if you have an optional stubber or not.
And the term datasheet is defined.
The only undefined thing is whether or not eg a Dark Angel's Predator counts as the same as as Vanilla Predator. RAW I believe it doesn't, but HIWPI is that it does count as the same.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Silentz wrote:
No it isn't. It's clear as day!

What wacky way are you trying to interpret this bloody obvious rule that I am not devious enough to get?

While it's clear two of the same datasheet with different taken options are the same datasheet, what isn't clear is if two datasheets from different books with the same name, but different keywords, are the same datasheet or not.

As much as it fills my heart with joy to see you arguing RAI, if it’s visibly a different Datasheet and in a different book it simply isn’t the same Datasheet.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Silentz wrote:
No it isn't. It's clear as day!

What wacky way are you trying to interpret this bloody obvious rule that I am not devious enough to get?

While it's clear two of the same datasheet with different taken options are the same datasheet, what isn't clear is if two datasheets from different books with the same name, but different keywords, are the same datasheet or not.

As much as it fills my heart with joy to see you arguing RAI, if it’s visibly a different Datasheet and in a different book it simply isn’t the same Datasheet.

But knowing that GW has ruled that psychic powers with the same names from different books, and stratagems with the same names from different books all count as being the same for Psychic Focus / Strategic Discipline, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think that they would consider a datasheet with the same name to be the same datasheet regardless of which book it comes from.

Although as the rules stand, I think you are correct that a datasheet with name X in one book, is different then a datasheet with name X in another book.

I feel that since the 'Rule of Three' is just a suggestion for Organized Events, GW is going to leave it up to the organizers of those events to decide.

 Silentz wrote:
Hm.

I mean it's surely clear that you can't take... say... 3 index devastator squads and 3 codex devastator squads, for example.

Trying to think of a unit which fits your description.

Knight Crusaders from AdMech and Imperial Knights? They might have slightly different datasheets but trying to argue you could take 6 under the rule of 3 would be ridiculous, yes?

The question is more... Can I take 3x Ultramarines Devastator Squads, 3x Blood Angels Devastator Squads and 3x Dark Angels Devastator Squads in a single Matched Play army using the Rule of Three restrictions?

I.e., is a Codex: Space Marines Devastator Squad the same datasheet as a Codex: Blood Angels Devastator Squad? If not, why not? They have the same name. The point people try to make is that GW hasn't told us what make a datasheet unique. The way I play is to consider datasheets from different Codexes, but with the same name, as different datasheets. Some people would consider them to be the same datasheet. The rules don't tell us which interpretation is correct.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Silentz wrote:
Hm.

I mean it's surely clear that you can't take... say... 3 index devastator squads and 3 codex devastator squads, for example.

Trying to think of a unit which fits your description.

Knight Crusaders from AdMech and Imperial Knights? They might have slightly different datasheets but trying to argue you could take 6 under the rule of 3 would be ridiculous, yes?

The question is more... Can I take 3x Ultramarines Devastator Squads, 3x Blood Angels Devastator Squads and 3x Dark Angels Devastator Squads in a single Matched Play army using the Rule of Three restrictions?

I.e., is a Codex: Space Marines Devastator Squad the same datasheet as a Codex: Blood Angels Devastator Squad? If not, why not? They have the same name. The point people try to make is that GW hasn't told us what make a datasheet unique. The way I play is to consider datasheets from different Codexes, but with the same name, as different datasheets. Some people would consider them to be the same datasheet. The rules don't tell us which interpretation is correct.

At this point by RAW they would be different datasheets as they come from different codexes with different keywords. Going from GW's stated intentions, they probably intend for them to be treated as the same, but haven't given a clarification or FAQ on it yet. They will probably rely on tournament organizers to decide on their own which way they would want to handle it, since the rule is for Organized Play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JakeSiren wrote:
As much as it fills my heart with joy to see you arguing RAI, if it’s visibly a different Datasheet and in a different book it simply isn’t the same Datasheet.

But knowing that GW has ruled that psychic powers with the same names from different books, and stratagems with the same names from different books all count as being the same for Psychic Focus / Strategic Discipline, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think that they would consider a datasheet with the same name to be the same datasheet regardless of which book it comes from.

Although as the rules stand, I think you are correct that a datasheet with name X in one book, is different then a datasheet with name X in another book.