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.

So I picked up a 3 pack of easy-build Intercessors. While looking at the instructors, I notice the datasheet given.
It lets you take just 3 Intercessors (1 Sgt & 2 joes). Obviously this is just for quick play for newer players that just wanna start rolling dice, but it got me thinking:
How viable is this datasheet?

While not in the Codex/Index, it is an "official" GW source for rules (just like the new units in Black Stone Fortress). And nothing on the datasheet or instruction booklet notes Open Play.
There are no points values, but the Designers Commentary say you use those in the Codex (or CA2108)
Now, the datasheet is "locked" for Ultramarines, but still. 3 Intercessors is a cheap add to any list and fairly durable for those points, making is possible to get a cheap UM battalion or 2 for an MSU list.

So the question is: Can you take units of 3 Intercessors in Matched Play for UMs using this datasheet?

-Discuss

 Galef wrote:
So I picked up a 3 pack of easy-build Intercessors. While looking at the instructors, I notice the datasheet given.
It lets you take just 3 Intercessors (1 Sgt & 2 joes). Obviously this is just for quick play for newer players that just wanna start rolling dice, but it got me thinking:
How viable is this datasheet?

While not in the Codex/Index, it is an "official" GW source for rules (just like the new units in Black Stone Fortress). And nothing on the datasheet or instruction booklet notes Open Play.
There are no points values, but the Designers Commentary say you use those in the Codex (or CA2108)
Now, the datasheet is "locked" for Ultramarines, but still. 3 Intercessors is a cheap add to any list and fairly durable for those points, making is possible to get a cheap UM battalion or 2 for an MSU list.

So the question is: Can you take units of 3 Intercessors in Matched Play for UMs using this datasheet?

-Discuss

You always use the latest datasheet. IIRC the codex is more recent.

Right, but is this the same datasheet?
It isn't <Chapter tactics> Intercessors containing 5 models
It's ULTRAMARINES Intercessors containing 3 models

Sidebar, I'm pretty sure the Easy-Build instruction booklet and Index Imperium 1: Astates were released at the same time. So prior to the Codex, which took precedence? Assuming they are the same datasheet anyway.

But I get what you are saying, as the 2 Chaos Marine datasheet from BSF doesnit share the same name as the CHAOS MARINE datasheet, but is instead BLACK LEGIONNAIRES. Even though we all know it the same rules as BLACK LEGION Chaos Marines, but with different options and only 2 models.

So if the 3 Intercessor datasheet is "outdated", what's the purpose of it? Even in Open Play I still think you have to use the most recent datasheet and unit minimum (unless 3 is all you have)
It's just....odd

-

The latest datasheet for Ultramarines Intercessors is in the SM Codex. It doesn't matter if the keywords don't match, because this is one of the wishy-washy rules like "Look at the fluff to see what tactic your successor chapter uses". The purpose of it is to let Timmy use his new models without buying the codex.

Was kinda hoping for more of a discussion than an immediate shut down. Oh well.

 Galef wrote:
Was kinda hoping for more of a discussion than an immediate shut down. Oh well.

Because there is nothing to discuss.

 Galef wrote:
Was kinda hoping for more of a discussion than an immediate shut down. Oh well.

It's interesting, because the Death Guard have some similar datasheets? But those have unique names.
In this instance, with identical names , I would agree that the codex would supersede and intro rules.

The latest Datasheet for Intercessors, as of today, is in Chapter Approved 2018.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The latest Datasheet for Intercessors, as of today, is in Chapter Approved 2018.

So that opens an interesting can of worms. Because the Designer's Commentary doesn't address rules not in either a Codex or Index. CA is neither. So wouldn't we still use the Codex datasheet?
Obviously that isn't the intent, but still.
Same goes for the Easy-build datasheets. If Codex overrides Index (with stated rules to back that up) than do we apply that to non-Index, non-Codex rules sources too.

I would argue normally yes, but with enough wiggle room that, if an opponent or TO was ok with it, you could indeed make a case to be allowed to use the 3 Intercessor datasheet.
Shame they didn't give a special name to the unit, like the KT Cassius or Black Legionnaires, as an MSU Intercessor army seem fun

-

The data sheet in the 3 model kits are just so players who are starting can use their new models straight away.
It's not really intended to be an alternate entry really.
But I doubt anyone but the most anal twonk will mind you using them in friendly (HA!) games.

Yeah, we'll probably use it in our small games at home. I was just pondering any potential uses in regular matched play

 Galef wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
The latest Datasheet for Intercessors, as of today, is in Chapter Approved 2018.

So that opens an interesting can of worms. Because the Designer's Commentary doesn't address rules not in either a Codex or Index. CA is neither. So wouldn't we still use the Codex datasheet?
Obviously that isn't the intent, but still.
Same goes for the Easy-build datasheets. If Codex overrides Index (with stated rules to back that up) than do we apply that to non-Index, non-Codex rules sources too.

I would argue normally yes, but with enough wiggle room that, if an opponent or TO was ok with it, you could indeed make a case to be allowed to use the 3 Intercessor datasheet.
Shame they didn't give a special name to the unit, like the KT Cassius or Black Legionnaires, as an MSU Intercessor army seem fun

-

Chapter Approved is an annual rules update.

There is no exhaustive list of rules sources. CA is one, as we’ve been told it is, and it tells you the Datasheets within supercede others.

There’s not even any gray area here.

No, really the only grey area is - How usable are the sheets in the boxes supposed to be?

Clearly they're intended as a get-you-by for those who don't have a codex and/or a full unit yet. Whether or not it's appropriate to use them once you have a full army assembled is really going to come down to you and your opponent.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Galef wrote:
So I picked up a 3 pack of easy-build Intercessors. While looking at the instructors, I notice the datasheet given.
It lets you take just 3 Intercessors (1 Sgt & 2 joes). Obviously this is just for quick play for newer players that just wanna start rolling dice, but it got me thinking:
How viable is this datasheet?

While not in the Codex/Index, it is an "official" GW source for rules (just like the new units in Black Stone Fortress). And nothing on the datasheet or instruction booklet notes Open Play.
There are no points values, but the Designers Commentary say you use those in the Codex (or CA2108)
Now, the datasheet is "locked" for Ultramarines, but still. 3 Intercessors is a cheap add to any list and fairly durable for those points, making is possible to get a cheap UM battalion or 2 for an MSU list.

So the question is: Can you take units of 3 Intercessors in Matched Play for UMs using this datasheet?

-Discuss

You always use the latest datasheet. IIRC the codex is more recent.

So the datasheet in codex: space marines is superseded by the one in Conquest?

cool

Pretty sure the latest datasheet for Ultramarine Intercessors is actually the one in CA18 now, come to think of it. No idea why they felt the need for a whole new datasheet when all they changed was the sergeant wargear options, but GW is GW.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Pretty sure the latest datasheet for Ultramarine Intercessors is actually the one in CA18 now, come to think of it. No idea why they felt the need for a whole new datasheet when all they changed was the sergeant wargear options, but GW is GW.

They literally spell out why in the book, and that is the reason. Given you bleat about No Model No Rules so often it’s odd that you can’t make the leap here.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Pretty sure the latest datasheet for Ultramarine Intercessors is actually the one in CA18 now, come to think of it. No idea why they felt the need for a whole new datasheet when all they changed was the sergeant wargear options, but GW is GW.

CA2018 not landed here as yet, though Conquest does have new data sheets for Reivers, Aggressors and will be getting one for the primaris jump pack guys.

do these override the codex? I mean they are more recently published?

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Pretty sure the latest datasheet for Ultramarine Intercessors is actually the one in CA18 now, come to think of it. No idea why they felt the need for a whole new datasheet when all they changed was the sergeant wargear options, but GW is GW.

They literally spell out why in the book, and that is the reason. Given you bleat about No Model No Rules so often it’s odd that you can’t make the leap here.

The only thing that changed was the Sergeant wargear options, just add that line in the actual errata instead of making people pay for it and add a complicated list of instructions to make the datasheet work for Space Wolves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

leopard wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Pretty sure the latest datasheet for Ultramarine Intercessors is actually the one in CA18 now, come to think of it. No idea why they felt the need for a whole new datasheet when all they changed was the sergeant wargear options, but GW is GW.

CA2018 not landed here as yet, though Conquest does have new data sheets for Reivers, Aggressors and will be getting one for the primaris jump pack guys.

do these override the codex? I mean they are more recently published?

CA18 released literally today.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Pretty sure the latest datasheet for Ultramarine Intercessors is actually the one in CA18 now, come to think of it. No idea why they felt the need for a whole new datasheet when all they changed was the sergeant wargear options, but GW is GW.

They literally spell out why in the book, and that is the reason. Given you bleat about No Model No Rules so often it’s odd that you can’t make the leap here.

The only thing that changed was the Sergeant wargear options, just add that line in the actual errata instead of making people pay for it and add a complicated list of instructions to make the datasheet work for Space Wolves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

leopard wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Pretty sure the latest datasheet for Ultramarine Intercessors is actually the one in CA18 now, come to think of it. No idea why they felt the need for a whole new datasheet when all they changed was the sergeant wargear options, but GW is GW.

CA2018 not landed here as yet, though Conquest does have new data sheets for Reivers, Aggressors and will be getting one for the primaris jump pack guys.

do these override the codex? I mean they are more recently published?

CA18 released literally today.

mines not arrived so not seen the contents (yet)

however unless it also has Reivers, Aggressors and a few others in it Conquest is still the most recent data sheets for them.

or perhaps, just perhaps, its not "just" which is the most recent that matters?

leopard wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Pretty sure the latest datasheet for Ultramarine Intercessors is actually the one in CA18 now, come to think of it. No idea why they felt the need for a whole new datasheet when all they changed was the sergeant wargear options, but GW is GW.

CA2018 not landed here as yet, though Conquest does have new data sheets for Reivers, Aggressors and will be getting one for the primaris jump pack guys.

do these override the codex? I mean they are more recently published?

Chapter Approved 2018 was released today, so it is the most recent regardless of availability.

Personally, I would use this Age of Sigmar FAQ as a house rule:

Q: If I have two different warscrolls for the same unit, can I choose which to use, or must I use the most recently published version? Do I have to use any errata that applies to the warscroll?

A: You must use the most recently published warscroll and must use the most recently published errata that you or your opponent have available. Warscrolls with a date of publication are always considered to have been published more recently than a warscroll that doesn’t have one. If you have two warscrolls for a unit and neither has a date of publication, you can choose which warscroll to use.

CA2018 may be the most recent for Intersissors, overriding the codex and other sources.

personally I'd not stop someone using the sheets that came with the models though.

my point was that there are some units that have their most recently published sheets in the partwork magazine, and when in a few weeks the one allowing the jump pack primaris to be taken in units of one lands that will be the most recent for that unit.

you also have plague marines with a conquest data sheets thats newer than the codex: death guard one.

my point is essentially that "but this is newer!" isn't the whole story here

For Matched Play it is. For a friendly you can do what you like.

 Galef wrote:
Was kinda hoping for more of a discussion than an immediate shut down. Oh well.

What's killing the discussion here is the fact that the Datasheets have the same name. YMDC historically uses that as the litmus test of whether it is a 'different' datasheet. Not than remember why.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
For Matched Play it is. For a friendly you can do what you like.

trouble is if thats true then plague marines have lost a whole lot of codex options as a "more recent" data sheet is seriously stripped down, hence my comment that there is a bit more to it, like considering the purpose a sheet is published for. e.g. the obviously simplified ones not overriding the more complete ones, despite being newer

Common misconception.
It's not most recent data sheet this edition. It's data sheet in a codex. Or data sheet in a publication which specifically overrides the codex (Such as CA or a FAQ)



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Plus a flow chart for using index wargear.

leopard wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
For Matched Play it is. For a friendly you can do what you like.

trouble is if thats true then plague marines have lost a whole lot of codex options as a "more recent" data sheet is seriously stripped down, hence my comment that there is a bit more to it, like considering the purpose a sheet is published for. e.g. the obviously simplified ones not overriding the more complete ones, despite being newer

Conquest magazine is not intended to be part of the rules for Matched Play. It’s a beginner magazine series. Not to be conflated with main rules publications. Ditto a starter box with typos or errors not overriding a Codex (we went round that roundabout with Forgebane).

I don’t know why people aren’t grasping this. Codex supersedes Index, with options permitted by Designers Commentary flowchart. Chapter Approved states what the Datasheets within replace and why. Let’s not over complicate this one.

CA 2018 says you can use understrength units in matched play, but only in an auxiliary support detachment.

 Ghaz wrote:

leopard wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Pretty sure the latest datasheet for Ultramarine Intercessors is actually the one in CA18 now, come to think of it. No idea why they felt the need for a whole new datasheet when all they changed was the sergeant wargear options, but GW is GW.

CA2018 not landed here as yet, though Conquest does have new data sheets for Reivers, Aggressors and will be getting one for the primaris jump pack guys.

do these override the codex? I mean they are more recently published?

Chapter Approved 2018 was released today, so it is the most recent regardless of availability.

Personally, I would use this Age of Sigmar FAQ as a house rule:

Q: If I have two different warscrolls for the same unit, can I choose which to use, or must I use the most recently published version? Do I have to use any errata that applies to the warscroll?

A: You must use the most recently published warscroll and must use the most recently published errata that you or your opponent have available. Warscrolls with a date of publication are always considered to have been published more recently than a warscroll that doesn’t have one. If you have two warscrolls for a unit and neither has a date of publication, you can choose which warscroll to use.

Chapter Approved 2018 has similar wording at the top of page 124.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

leopard wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
For Matched Play it is. For a friendly you can do what you like.

trouble is if thats true then plague marines have lost a whole lot of codex options as a "more recent" data sheet is seriously stripped down, hence my comment that there is a bit more to it, like considering the purpose a sheet is published for. e.g. the obviously simplified ones not overriding the more complete ones, despite being newer

Conquest magazine is not intended to be part of the rules for Matched Play. It’s a beginner magazine series. Not to be conflated with main rules publications. Ditto a starter box with typos or errors not overriding a Codex (we went round that roundabout with Forgebane).

I don’t know why people aren’t grasping this. Codex supersedes Index, with options permitted by Designers Commentary flowchart. Chapter Approved states what the Datasheets within replace and why. Let’s not over complicate this one.

that was sort of the point I was making, there are data sheets published, which may be more recent than others, that while identically formatted to the main ones, and with nothing to identify them as otherwise are not intended to supersede others, hence the date of publication alone does not fix which is the most valid version to use


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 p5freak wrote:
CA 2018 says you can use understrength units in matched play, but only in an auxiliary support detachment.

which is true of course, but is a unit "understrength" if you have a datasheet that says it isn't?

its a bit of a can of worms in some ways, unless you accept the principle that its not date alone but a combination of date and scope/intent that matters.

Personally I have no issues with anyone using the partwork data sheets, as long as by so doing you use them for all applicable units (noting you get a lot fewer options), sort of an all or nothing deal.

Gets slightly more interesting when you have a data sheet thats in Conquest and not anywhere else, e.g. Lt whatshisname, is that valid for the normal game?

In essence it comes down to a very simple question "is the person trying to do this acting in what can be called the spirt of the game and game play generally?", if the answer is yes why not? if the answer is no you have other problems anyway.

for events its worth clarifying, as this will not be first, or indeed last time someone discovers a "newer" datasheet for a unit they didn't even know existed prior to the game, blanket "most recent == good, other == bad" doesn't work, despite this being the internet there is this thing called common sense

leopard wrote:
for events its worth clarifying, as this will not be first, or indeed last time someone discovers a "newer" datasheet for a unit they didn't even know existed prior to the game, blanket "most recent == good, other == bad" doesn't work, despite this being the internet there is this thing called common sense

Yeah, I was going to bring that up too. How do you KNOW what datasheet is the most recent.
I mean, CA is doing a good job by actually listing the year on the title of the book, but models/boxsets don't exactly have release dates on them.
The closest "date" I could find is a copyright 2017 in very, very same print on the booklet. A booklet, BTW, that I didn't know existed until this past weekend

Ignoring CA2018 for just a moment, I believe the SM Codex also has a copyright of 2017. So without just "knowing" which came first, how do you prove which datasheet takes precedence? Specifically if we had to prove this to a newer player who was insistent that he bought 3 set of Easy-build Primaris to fill his first Battalion?

It could be a slippery slop, and personally I do not find it to be fair for newer players to be constantly told the rules they JUST bought aren't valid.
So basically HIWPI, if someone showed up to a casual game and was fielding 3-man Intercessors in their UM army and could show the Easy-build datasheet, I wouldn't question it for a moment. Nor would I care if they cleared it with a TO in an organized event.

-