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.

As the title suggests, can they?

No. It's for Space Marines which is only codex: Space Marines. Deathwatch, Blood Angels etc etc cannot use it.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
No. It's for Space Marines which is only codex: Space Marines. Deathwatch, Blood Angels etc etc cannot use it.

Thanks! The wording seemed really weird and I couldn't tell.

Any idea why this is the case? They're all astartes....

Different Chapters have different organisations hence different books. GW knows, ours not to reason why.

 Togusa wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
No. It's for Space Marines which is only codex: Space Marines. Deathwatch, Blood Angels etc etc cannot use it.

Thanks! The wording seemed really weird and I couldn't tell.

Any idea why this is the case? They're all astartes....

Because GW say so, it's that simple really. I remember back in I think it was 4th or 5th, Space Marines had Drop Pods that could seat 12 while Space Wolf Drop Pods could only seat 10. GW works in mysterious ways.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
No. It's for Space Marines which is only codex: Space Marines. Deathwatch, Blood Angels etc etc cannot use it.

Thanks! The wording seemed really weird and I couldn't tell.

Any idea why this is the case? They're all astartes....

Because GW say so, it's that simple really. I remember back in I think it was 4th or 5th, Space Marines had Drop Pods that could seat 12 while Space Wolf Drop Pods could only seat 10. GW works in mysterious ways.

Space Wolves need 2 chairs to pile all their coats on. Fenris gets cold and that fur takes up space.

It's actually storage space for all the beard care supplies they need to carry with them.

Since a dropped only has ten chairs, presumably the Space Wolves didn’t like standing.

thing is that mighta been the case once but GW's been remarkbly flexable, given that each space marine chapter got specificly ONE specialsit detachment, my gut feeling is RAW indomatus crusaders is codex space marines only but RAI it's avaliable to death watch, space wolves, blood angels and dark angels. but that's just my general gut feeling, IMHO it's worth asking them for a FAQ as they say "space marines" not "Space Marines"

If the RaI was to allow non-Codex SM to use it, they would have made it available to non-Codex SM.

Given that all Marine armies use the Astartes keyword, there's a baked in means to make these strats available to non-codex chapters. That it wasnt used, to my addled mind at least, adds credence to the notion that its not remotely intended for BA, DA, SW or DW to use.

Sterling191 wrote:
Given that all Marine armies use the Astartes keyword, there's a baked in means to make these strats available to non-codex chapters. That it wasnt used, to my addled mind at least, adds credence to the notion that its not remotely intended for BA, DA, SW or DW to use.

I'm sorry but that isn't how this even remotely works. The ADEPTUS ASTARTES keyword is not the only thing that makes a Space Marine Detachment, it's the <CHAPTER> (or a specific list of fixed keywords) as well. Page 194 of Codex Adeptus Astartes Space Marines.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:
Given that all Marine armies use the Astartes keyword, there's a baked in means to make these strats available to non-codex chapters. That it wasnt used, to my addled mind at least, adds credence to the notion that its not remotely intended for BA, DA, SW or DW to use.

I'm sorry but that isn't how this even remotely works. The ADEPTUS ASTARTES keyword is not the only thing that makes a Space Marine Detachment, it's the <CHAPTER> (or a specific list of fixed keywords) as well. Page 194 of Codex Adeptus Astartes Space Marines.

I think that's what he means. A "Space Marine Detachment" is defined in the SM codex as being from specific Chapters or with the <CHAPTER> keyword.

The fact that they used that specific term instead of using ADEPTUS ASTARTES suggests that it is specifically not intended for Deathwatch and others.

OTOH, if it was intended to apply to all ADEPTUS ASTARTES and it was just a brainfart on the part of the writer, then it would be a very simple matter for GW to errata it.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:
Given that all Marine armies use the Astartes keyword, there's a baked in means to make these strats available to non-codex chapters. That it wasnt used, to my addled mind at least, adds credence to the notion that its not remotely intended for BA, DA, SW or DW to use.

I'm sorry but that isn't how this even remotely works. The ADEPTUS ASTARTES keyword is not the only thing that makes a Space Marine Detachment, it's the <CHAPTER> (or a specific list of fixed keywords) as well. Page 194 of Codex Adeptus Astartes Space Marines.

Try reading his post instead of ‘violently agreeing’.

 Cheexsta wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:
Given that all Marine armies use the Astartes keyword, there's a baked in means to make these strats available to non-codex chapters. That it wasnt used, to my addled mind at least, adds credence to the notion that its not remotely intended for BA, DA, SW or DW to use.

I'm sorry but that isn't how this even remotely works. The ADEPTUS ASTARTES keyword is not the only thing that makes a Space Marine Detachment, it's the <CHAPTER> (or a specific list of fixed keywords) as well. Page 194 of Codex Adeptus Astartes Space Marines.

I think that's what he means. A "Space Marine Detachment" is defined in the SM codex as being from specific Chapters or with the <CHAPTER> keyword.

The fact that they used that specific term instead of using ADEPTUS ASTARTES suggests that it is specifically not intended for Deathwatch and others.

OTOH, if it was intended to apply to all ADEPTUS ASTARTES and it was just a brainfart on the part of the writer, then it would be a very simple matter for GW to errata it.

Exactly. We're not dealing with Games 'Twelve Years Between Dark Eldar Codexes' Workshop, we're dealing with a Games Workshop that issues errata even for "silly" things like single use weapons being forced to fire or Intercessor Sergeants not being Intercessors. Thus, the only logical conclusion is that if something is not errata'd, it is intended.

No. No, it isn’t the ‘only logical conclusion’. It’s one that fits your agenda.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Cheexsta wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:
Given that all Marine armies use the Astartes keyword, there's a baked in means to make these strats available to non-codex chapters. That it wasnt used, to my addled mind at least, adds credence to the notion that its not remotely intended for BA, DA, SW or DW to use.

I'm sorry but that isn't how this even remotely works. The ADEPTUS ASTARTES keyword is not the only thing that makes a Space Marine Detachment, it's the <CHAPTER> (or a specific list of fixed keywords) as well. Page 194 of Codex Adeptus Astartes Space Marines.

I think that's what he means. A "Space Marine Detachment" is defined in the SM codex as being from specific Chapters or with the <CHAPTER> keyword.

The fact that they used that specific term instead of using ADEPTUS ASTARTES suggests that it is specifically not intended for Deathwatch and others.

OTOH, if it was intended to apply to all ADEPTUS ASTARTES and it was just a brainfart on the part of the writer, then it would be a very simple matter for GW to errata it.

Exactly. We're not dealing with Games 'Twelve Years Between Dark Eldar Codexes' Workshop, we're dealing with a Games Workshop that issues errata even for "silly" things like single use weapons being forced to fire or Intercessor Sergeants not being Intercessors. Thus, the only logical conclusion is that if something is not errata'd, it is intended.

Let's give GW a chance to errata the Vigilus book first before declaring what's intended and not

Especially if the “we can never know intent” guy suddenly knows intent. It’s a silly argument, lots of unintended stuff remains, quite noticeably. Not being patched in no way infers or denotes intent - it could merely be the omission of errata due to time, forgetfulness, belief it’s obvious, not being aware, pure error, etc. Many reasons.

But we’ve been over this before when BCB has been soapboxing about this. “No FAQ = intended” is a fallacy, and one he’s been asked by mods not to post.

 Cheexsta wrote:

The fact that they used that specific term instead of using ADEPTUS ASTARTES suggests that it is specifically not intended for Deathwatch and others.

OTOH, if it was intended to apply to all ADEPTUS ASTARTES and it was just a brainfart on the part of the writer, then it would be a very simple matter for GW to errata it.

Exactly.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Cheexsta wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:
Given that all Marine armies use the Astartes keyword, there's a baked in means to make these strats available to non-codex chapters. That it wasnt used, to my addled mind at least, adds credence to the notion that its not remotely intended for BA, DA, SW or DW to use.

I'm sorry but that isn't how this even remotely works. The ADEPTUS ASTARTES keyword is not the only thing that makes a Space Marine Detachment, it's the <CHAPTER> (or a specific list of fixed keywords) as well. Page 194 of Codex Adeptus Astartes Space Marines.

I think that's what he means. A "Space Marine Detachment" is defined in the SM codex as being from specific Chapters or with the <CHAPTER> keyword.

The fact that they used that specific term instead of using ADEPTUS ASTARTES suggests that it is specifically not intended for Deathwatch and others.

OTOH, if it was intended to apply to all ADEPTUS ASTARTES and it was just a brainfart on the part of the writer, then it would be a very simple matter for GW to errata it.

Exactly. We're not dealing with Games 'Twelve Years Between Dark Eldar Codexes' Workshop, we're dealing with a Games Workshop that issues errata even for "silly" things like single use weapons being forced to fire or Intercessor Sergeants not being Intercessors. Thus, the only logical conclusion is that if something is not errata'd, it is intended.

Militarum Tempestus and Advisers and Auxilila rules interaction after Tempestus Drop Force release anybody?

 Apple Peel wrote:
Militarum Tempestus and Advisers and Auxilila rules interaction after Tempestus Drop Force release anybody?

If it's still unclear, just send an email to GW.

40kfaq@gwplc.com

 Cheexsta wrote:

 Apple Peel wrote:
Militarum Tempestus and Advisers and Auxilila rules interaction after Tempestus Drop Force release anybody?

If it's still unclear, just send an email to GW.

40kfaq@gwplc.com

It’s not really unclear. Tempestus Drop force give a buff to Tempestus detachments with Tempestus units AND Valkyries. The wording of the Militarum Tempestus rule is questionable, and could be argued either way, but with the release of new rules, not a FAQ or rules clarification, one can rather firmly say that he or she is right regarding the rules interaction.