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.

Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

I believe those are indeed different datasheets, so yes you could have 3 and 3

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

They are different datasheets, with different keywords, even though they share the same name, so you can have three of each.

Of course, keep in mind the Rules for Organised play are only suggestions, you need to ask your TO about any tournament specific rules.

In the interest of fairness, there is a camp that believes that datasheets with the same name are the same datasheet. There are a myriad of reasons why that doesn't work, which I won't get into here, but I felt that you should know.

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

Yes they are the same data sheet as they have the same title. The difference with the DP's datasheets is that they are called different things, and are therefore different units.

If you could differentiate data sheet based on keywords you could still take 9 storm ravens for example by applying different faction keywords to them.

Also there is the precedent of identically named psychic powers being considered the same (I. E. You can't cast both) even though the actual effects concern units with different keywords

 Tonberry7 wrote:

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

Yes they are the same data sheet as they have the same title. The difference with the DP's datasheets is that they are called different things, and are therefore different units.

If you could differentiate data sheet based on keywords you could still take 9 storm ravens for example by applying different faction keywords to them.

Also there is the precedent of identically named psychic powers being considered the same (I. E. You can't cast both) even though the actual effects concern units with different keywords

Which is why Space Marines of all flavours have to use the Rhino found in the Space Wolf codex, because it's the most up to date version of the "Rhino" datasheet.

The fact is that GW are not clear enough with the term to determine what counts as the same datasheet. Best solution is to check with the TO.

 Tonberry7 wrote:

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

Yes they are the same data sheet as they have the same title. The difference with the DP's datasheets is that they are called different things, and are therefore different units.

If you could differentiate data sheet based on keywords you could still take 9 storm ravens for example by applying different faction keywords to them.

Also there is the precedent of identically named psychic powers being considered the same (I. E. You can't cast both) even though the actual effects concern units with different keywords

Psychic Powers and Stratagems aren't datasheets. Any "precedent" is irrelevant here.

By your logic, my Ultramarines are forced to use the Space Wolf version of the Rhino, and thus can never embark.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Tonberry7 wrote:

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

Yes they are the same data sheet as they have the same title. The difference with the DP's datasheets is that they are called different things, and are therefore different units.

If you could differentiate data sheet based on keywords you could still take 9 storm ravens for example by applying different faction keywords to them.

Also there is the precedent of identically named psychic powers being considered the same (I. E. You can't cast both) even though the actual effects concern units with different keywords

Psychic Powers and Stratagems aren't datasheets. Any "precedent" is irrelevant here.

By your logic, my Ultramarines are forced to use the Space Wolf version of the Rhino, and thus can never embark.

That's a shame for you. I'd email GW if I were you and apprise them of your problem.

In one of those rare occasions where I’m in agreement with BCB, they are different datasheets from different books so it’s fine to have multiples of each in the same army.

Many previous threads on this situation, not least this long thread from April: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/755349.page

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

With out checking every example, if they have the same name, they would be treated as the same datasheet for the rule of three.

E.g csm chaos cultists and DG chaos cultists. (Of course these are troops )

Sorcerors I imagine are similar , although you there are quite a few different sorceror options to get around this. (E.g. steeds)

Captyn_Bob wrote:

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

With out checking every example, if they have the same name, they would be treated as the same datasheet for the rule of three.

E.g csm chaos cultists and DG chaos cultists.

Sorcerors I imagine are similar , although you there are quite a few different sorceror options to get around this.

I don't have any of the books ATM, but I am pretty sure that a TS Sorcerer and a DG one do not, in fact share the same name. Per recent GW naming standards, they have weird unique names and therefore do not count as the same datasheet for the rule of 3.
That's why DPs aren't the same. The CSM DP is a "Daemon Prince" while a DG one is a "Daemon Prince of Nurgle". Pedantic, sure, but them's the rules

-

 Galef wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

With out checking every example, if they have the same name, they would be treated as the same datasheet for the rule of three.

E.g csm chaos cultists and DG chaos cultists.

Sorcerors I imagine are similar , although you there are quite a few different sorceror options to get around this.

I don't have any of the books ATM, but I am pretty sure that a TS Sorcerer and a DG one do not, in fact share the same name. Per recent GW naming standards, they have weird unique names and therefore do not count as the same datasheet for the rule of 3.
That's why DPs aren't the same. The CSM DP is a "Daemon Prince" while a DG one is a "Daemon Prince of Nurgle". Pedantic, sure, but them's the rules

-

Sorcerers in the CSM DG and TS books are all just "Sorcerer" unlike the DP situation

The pages look different and have different inherent Keywords. Unless we’re told two different things are the same, they’re different.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The pages look different and have different inherent Keywords. Unless we’re told two different things are the same, they’re different.

I think this is also as important as the name on the sheet. The datasheet itself must be the same to, well, be the same.
Check out the powers and options listed on each sheet.
If the Tsons Sorcerer and the DG sorcerer have the same powers and options lists, you might wanna return your Codex as defective/misprinted as they most certainly do not have acces to the same powers and options. Thus there are not the exact same datasheet

-

Captyn_Bob wrote:

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

With out checking every example, if they have the same name, they would be treated as the same datasheet for the rule of three.

E.g csm chaos cultists and DG chaos cultists. (Of course these are troops )

Sorcerors I imagine are similar , although you there are quite a few different sorceror options to get around this. (E.g. steeds)

Why would they be treated as the same datasheet when they aren't the same datasheet?

Am I forced to use Space Wolf Rhinos for my Blood Angels, thus may never embark?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:

Ozomoto wrote:
Do sorcerers from different factions count as the same datasheet? i.e could I have 3 Tson sorcerers and a deathguard sorcerer in a matched play list.

With out checking every example, if they have the same name, they would be treated as the same datasheet for the rule of three.

E.g csm chaos cultists and DG chaos cultists. (Of course these are troops )

Sorcerors I imagine are similar , although you there are quite a few different sorceror options to get around this. (E.g. steeds)

Why would they be treated as the same datasheet when they aren't the same datasheet?

Am I forced to use Space Wolf Rhinos for my Blood Angels, thus may never embark?

Logical fallacies, repeated constantly , remain logical fallacies.

Precedent for match play restrictions is that same name is same. No reason to assume it doesn't apply for datasheets. If advice was given otherwise , so be it, but we only have confirmation that datasheets with similar but different names are different. We can under that datasheets with Exactly the same name ate treated the same.
Or don't, the rules are optional for tournaments anyway.

Your rhino example shows you don't know how the rules for codices work. Pity.

Captyn_Bob wrote:
Precedent for match play restrictions is that same name is same.

And this is where you fall into your own logical fallacy. Just because Stratagems and Psychic Powers work off the name does not mean Datasheets do. That logic is like saying re-roll hit auras work on to wound rolls because they are both rolls.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
Precedent for match play restrictions is that same name is same.

And this is where you fall into your own logical fallacy. Just because Stratagems and Psychic Powers work off the name does not mean Datasheets do. That logic is like saying re-roll hit auras work on to wound rolls because they are both rolls.

Ah the classic 'because I say so' argument.

Captyn_Bob wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
Precedent for match play restrictions is that same name is same.

And this is where you fall into your own logical fallacy. Just because Stratagems and Psychic Powers work off the name does not mean Datasheets do. That logic is like saying re-roll hit auras work on to wound rolls because they are both rolls.

Ah the classic 'because I say so' argument.

Actually his argument is not like that at all. Your argument is more like the classic'because I say so' argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Captyn_Bob wrote:

Logical fallacies, repeated constantly , remain logical fallacies.

Precedent for match play restrictions is that same name is same. No reason to assume it doesn't apply for datasheets.

Actually there's no reason to assume that it does apply for datasheets. The old Rules As I Assume trick, a.k.a. HIWPI.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
To follow up on this, the Organized Events rules say they limit you on the number of times you can take the same datasheet. It does not specify that this criteria is based exclusively on the name on the datasheet. So, if you have two different datasheets that have different properties - different keywords, for example, they are different datasheets even if they are titled the same because of the obvious fact that they aren't the same if there are things that differ between the two sheets.

Making an assumption that two datasheets are the same if the names are the same, even if there are differences in the datasheets themselves is clearly not following the rules they have set up.

Isn't DG sorcerer called "Malignant Plaguecaster"?

 skchsan wrote:
Isn't DG sorcerer called "Malignant Plaguecaster"?

They also have the regular Sorcerer too.

 Stux wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Isn't DG sorcerer called "Malignant Plaguecaster"?

They also have the regular Sorcerer too.

And Tsons have "Exalted Sorcerers" in addition to regular ones.
But as there isn't an FAQ stating same name = same datasheet like Stratagems, we have to go by same datasheet = same datasheet.
Tsons Sorcerers are pretty different from DG ones, ergo, not the same datasheet.

-

same
/sām/Submit
adjective
1.identical; not different.

Because the dictionary says so.

Lacking a specific definition, the convention is that a word assumes its ordinary dictionary meaning.

Ergo, 'same' means 'identical; not different'.

Ergo, a datasheet that says Death Guard on it and a datasheet that says Thousand Sons on it are not the same. They are not identical; they are different.

You can take twelve CSM Sorcerors if you want to, so long as you give no more than three of them the same Mark or leave more than three unmarked, because the Mark modifies what the datasheet says from 'Mark of Chaos' to 'Mark of X'.

Then add three each of the DG and TS named Sorcerors, then another three vanilla Sorcerors from each book and you have 24 Sorcerors not offending the badly-written, ill-conceived and unfit for purpose rule of three.

There are three ways to look at this (as near as I can tell):

1. If it has the same name then it is the same datasheet.

Problem with this means that Space Marines, Blood Angels and Dark Angels are all forced to then use the Rhino found in the Space Wolves Codex (most recent datasheet for the Rhino) since every codex has a datasheet called "Rhino".

2. If it has the same name AND the same Keywords (including Faction Keywords) it is the same Datasheet.

Problem: Most datasheets include a <Faction>, whether it is <Chapter>, <Craftworld>, <Regiment>, etc. This means when you change the <Faction> it is a different datasheet, and one could include 3x ULTRAMARINE Librarians, and 3x WHITE SCARS Librarians.

3. Only datasheets from the same codex is the same.
Problem: If you can somehow pull the same unit for the same army from multiple sources, they are considered to be different datasheets.

In regards to the problem with number 3, however, I believe that is only an issue if you consider Forgeworld to be a separate "codex" or supplemental datasheets.

 Happyjew wrote:
There are three ways to look at this (as near as I can tell):

1. If it has the same name then it is the same datasheet.

Problem with this means that Space Marines, Blood Angels and Dark Angels are all forced to then use the Rhino found in the Space Wolves Codex (most recent datasheet for the Rhino) since every codex has a datasheet called "Rhino".

2. If it has the same name AND the same Keywords (including Faction Keywords) it is the same Datasheet.

Problem: Most datasheets include a <Faction>, whether it is <Chapter>, <Craftworld>, <Regiment>, etc. This means when you change the <Faction> it is a different datasheet, and one could include 3x ULTRAMARINE Librarians, and 3x WHITE SCARS Librarians.

3. Only datasheets from the same codex is the same.
Problem: If you can somehow pull the same unit for the same army from multiple sources, they are considered to be different datasheets.

In regards to the problem with number 3, however, I believe that is only an issue if you consider Forgeworld to be a separate "codex" or supplemental datasheets.

I like your reasoning here. There is also option 4:
Datasheets that are identical are the same, regardless of source. This means EVERYTHING on the datasheet must be the same. Factions, whether "pre-set" or variable, options, wargear, etc.

So in the case of Rhinos, a BA, DA and SW Rhino are all different as they have a different pre-set Faction. The SM Rhino is also different as it has <Chapter Tactic> on its sheet.
However an ULTRAMARINES and WHITE SCARS Rhino would indeed be the same as both have <Chapter Tacits> on the datasheet, regardless of it being replaced.
It also doesn't matter for Rhinos as DTs are not limted by the ruel of 3.

For the OPs specific example, Tsons and DG Sorcerers may have many superficial similarities, but as they have different wargear and Psychic Power Options, not to mention different "pre-set" Factions, they are NOT the same datasheet.

-

 Galef wrote:

However an ULTRAMARINES and WHITE SCARS Rhino would indeed be the same as both have <Chapter Tacits> on the datasheet, regardless of it being replaced.
It also doesn't matter for Rhinos as DTs are not limted by the ruel of 3.

But Terminators, for example, would be.

In any case, I disagree because the rules for <CHAPTER> and the other <KEYWORDS> say to replace the <KEYWORD> on the datasheet with the keyword of your choice. Otherwise you'd not be able to affect a <CHAPTER> unit with Calgar because he only affects ULTRAMARINES, not <CHAPTER>.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Galef wrote:

However an ULTRAMARINES and WHITE SCARS Rhino would indeed be the same as both have <Chapter Tacits> on the datasheet, regardless of it being replaced.
It also doesn't matter for Rhinos as DTs are not limted by the ruel of 3.

But Terminators, for example, would be.

In any case, I disagree because the rules for <CHAPTER> and the other <KEYWORDS> say to replace the <KEYWORD> on the datasheet with the keyword of your choice. Otherwise you'd not be able to affect a <CHAPTER> unit with Calgar because he only affects ULTRAMARINES, not <CHAPTER>.

Yet you insist on keeping CHAPTER as well as the keyword you choose or ALLEGIANCE as well as the keyword you choose wnen trying to say KHORNE is not KHORNE.

 doctortom wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Galef wrote:

However an ULTRAMARINES and WHITE SCARS Rhino would indeed be the same as both have <Chapter Tacits> on the datasheet, regardless of it being replaced.
It also doesn't matter for Rhinos as DTs are not limted by the ruel of 3.

But Terminators, for example, would be.

In any case, I disagree because the rules for <CHAPTER> and the other <KEYWORDS> say to replace the <KEYWORD> on the datasheet with the keyword of your choice. Otherwise you'd not be able to affect a <CHAPTER> unit with Calgar because he only affects ULTRAMARINES, not <CHAPTER>.

Yet you insist on keeping CHAPTER as well as the keyword you choose or ALLEGIANCE as well as the keyword you choose wnen trying to say KHORNE is not KHORNE.

Because a Special Snowflake FAQ is in play regarding the ALLEGIANCE vs MARK OF CHAOS argument. But you know that of course, you're just trying to play "gotcha". That FAQ doesn't apply here because it is not attempting to "circumvent the restrictions on which units are able to be included in the same Detachment" (affected by Special Snowflake FAQ), but rather the restrictions on how many of a unit you may take in your army as a whole, regardless of Detachment (not affected by Special Snowflake FAQ).

I won't rehash that argument here, but the situations are totally unrelated.

Well. The TS sorcerors are better. They can spam smite at 24" range. Just take sorceror in term armor/exualted/regular sorceror + Ahriman and 3 DP.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Galef wrote:

However an ULTRAMARINES and WHITE SCARS Rhino would indeed be the same as both have <Chapter Tacits> on the datasheet, regardless of it being replaced.
It also doesn't matter for Rhinos as DTs are not limted by the ruel of 3.

But Terminators, for example, would be.

In any case, I disagree because the rules for <CHAPTER> and the other <KEYWORDS> say to replace the <KEYWORD> on the datasheet with the keyword of your choice. Otherwise you'd not be able to affect a <CHAPTER> unit with Calgar because he only affects ULTRAMARINES, not <CHAPTER>.

If this were the case, the rule of 3 would be utterly pointless.
If I wanted 6 Fire Prims, then I could just take 3 Alaitoc and 3 Iyanden. Thankfully this isn't the case as both START with the same datasheet. Replacing Keyword during list building does not change that.
But units with pre-set Keywords would be different from each other, as they started as different from the moment they were printed in their respective books.

-

 Galef wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Galef wrote:

However an ULTRAMARINES and WHITE SCARS Rhino would indeed be the same as both have <Chapter Tacits> on the datasheet, regardless of it being replaced.
It also doesn't matter for Rhinos as DTs are not limted by the ruel of 3.

But Terminators, for example, would be.

In any case, I disagree because the rules for <CHAPTER> and the other <KEYWORDS> say to replace the <KEYWORD> on the datasheet with the keyword of your choice. Otherwise you'd not be able to affect a <CHAPTER> unit with Calgar because he only affects ULTRAMARINES, not <CHAPTER>.

If this were the case, the rule of 3 would be utterly pointless.
If I wanted 6 Fire Prims, then I could just take 3 Alaitoc and 3 Iyanden. Thankfully this isn't the case as both START with the same datasheet. Replacing Keyword during list building does not change that.
But units with pre-set Keywords would be different from each other, as they started as different from the moment they were printed in their respective books.

-

It's not pointless. It stops you taking SIX -1 to hit Fire Prisms instead of three.