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.

Apologies if this has been covered. I did a search, but couldn’t find anything related to the current codex.

A few datasheets in the new codex permit ‘one model’ in the unit to carry an icon.
Does this mean you could give it to a champ, special weapon guy, etc?

(That seems to be the previous interpretation; dunno if it has changed?)

Thanks!

If it says "one model" then yes any model can, but if it specifically says "one Legionary" or "one Terminator" then the Champion can't take it.

 Denny wrote:
Apologies if this has been covered. I did a search, but couldn’t find anything related to the current codex.

A few datasheets in the new codex permit ‘one model’ in the unit to carry an icon.
Does this mean you could give it to a champ, special weapon guy, etc?

(That seems to be the previous interpretation; dunno if it has changed?)

Thanks!

One model is any one model from the unit.

 Valkyrie wrote:
If it says "one model" then yes any model can, but if it specifically says "one Legionary" or "one Terminator" then the Champion can't take it.

This. Khorne Berzerkers in the WD index are an example of a unit that is inexplicably limited in this way.

A bezerker Champion is still a bezerker unless he comes with his own data sheet. So I don't see where the problem is. Same with Legionaires. If someone is on the data sheet lablelled "Legionaires" then they are a Legionaire maybe a special version of one but still a Legionaire.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
A bezerker Champion is still a bezerker unless he comes with his own data sheet. So I don't see where the problem is. Same with Legionaires. If someone is on the data sheet lablelled "Legionaires" then they are a Legionaire maybe a special version of one but still a Legionaire.

That's not the way it works. For example, a unit of Noise Marines consists of 4-9 Noise Marines and 1 Noise Marine Champion. The Wargear Options for the unit specifically state which models can take the option (i.e., a Noise Marine can replace his boltgun with a blastmaster but a Noise Marine Champion cannot and a Noise Marine Champion can take a Doom Siren while a Noise Marine cannot). A Noise Marine and a Noise Marine Champion are two different models even though they're on the same datasheet.

Leo - that is incorrect. You don't get to take part of a proper noun and decide it is the same.

To me it's all noise marine champions are noise marines but not all noise marines are noise marine champions. The champion on the data sheet is a subset of the larger whole listed at the top of the data sheet. To me at least this is a logical construct and I've never seen anything that says to treat champions of a unit as a separate part of the unit (an individual yes but never a separate part). If it was not a subset of the unit then it should have its own datasheet that says that it can be used with unit X and leads said unit.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
To me it's all noise marine champions are noise marines...

No. A Noise Marine Champion is just that, a Noise Marine Champion. They are not a Noise Marine and cannot take wargear options that are only available to Noise Marines. Otherwise, there would be no need to have some wargear options noted as being for Noise Marines and some for any model as your reading of the rules would have them be the exact same thing.

I believe they are the same thing. It wouldn't be the first time that GW has written the same rule using different terminology. It could be something as simple as a British v American v other English speaking country's mode of speech but I just think that it's the typical GW lazy editors.

Still doesn't change the fact that that's not how it works.

Your belief is wrong Leo. They have been very consistent that when they say noise marine it does not include noise marine champion.

A plague marine champion cannot take a flail.

I never said that a champion was treated the same as a normal trooper (no champ/Lt has ever had the option to have a heavy weapon) but that does not exclude them from general statements/rules dealing with the unit as a whole. A model can have different options and still be part of the whole.

Even the term noise marine champion has the words noise marine in it. So, again to me, if a rule says noise marine then it includes all the models on the same data sheet that contain the words noise marine. I don't have a death guard codex so I don't know for certain but going by your rules a "death guard with X" is different from a "death guard" and as such would not be eligible for anything that referred to generic death guard models. If you can find something that says that the designers intend that the champions are treated differently for generic rules or even a rule itself that says this then I would be convinced. As it is, to me, a noise marine champion on the same data sheet as a noise marine unit is part of the unit and subject to any generic noise marine rule.

By your logic noise marine champions in the last edition couldn't benefit from Kakophony of the Apocolypse (or whatever it was called) that enabled noise marines to shoot after being destroyed. Since the rule only said noise marines and not noise marine champions. You can't have the rules read one way in one circumstance and another in a different circumstance.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I never said that a champion was treated the same as a normal trooper (no champ/Lt has ever had the option to have a heavy weapon) but that does not exclude them from general statements/rules dealing with the unit as a whole. A model can have different options and still be part of the whole.

Even the term noise marine champion has the words noise marine in it. So, again to me, if a rule says noise marine then it includes all the models on the same data sheet that contain the words noise marine. I don't have a death guard codex so I don't know for certain but going by your rules a "death guard with X" is different from a "death guard" and as such would not be eligible for anything that referred to generic death guard models. If you can find something that says that the designers intend that the champions are treated differently for generic rules or even a rule itself that says this then I would be convinced. As it is, to me, a noise marine champion on the same data sheet as a noise marine unit is part of the unit and subject to any generic noise marine rule.

By your logic noise marine champions in the last edition couldn't benefit from Kakophony of the Apocolypse (or whatever it was called) that enabled noise marines to shoot after being destroyed. Since the rule only said noise marines and not noise marine champions. You can't have the rules read one way in one circumstance and another in a different circumstance.

You sure you're not p5 on another account?

If it doesn't matter then why do multiple datasheets have to state "Any model..." as well as "Any Cultist/Legionary/Noise Marine..." etc?

So the evidence against your position Leo is multiple-fold

1) They explicitly call out "any model" when they want "any" model to do so. Across all 9th edition codexes this is true.

2) you're not allowed to decide that a proper noun can be decomposed into smaller parts. An assault cannon isn't an assault weapon despite having assault in the name. You cannot decide a Bolter only relic can be given to a model with a Heavy Bolter just because the word "Bolter" appears in both

3) assuming you meant "endless cacophony" it was aimed at the unit level and not a model firing again.

You have, in short, nothing to support your position and plenty against it.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I never said that a champion was treated the same as a normal trooper (no champ/Lt has ever had the option to have a heavy weapon) but that does not exclude them from general statements/rules dealing with the unit as a whole. A model can have different options and still be part of the whole.

Even the term noise marine champion has the words noise marine in it. So, again to me, if a rule says noise marine then it includes all the models on the same data sheet that contain the words noise marine. I don't have a death guard codex so I don't know for certain but going by your rules a "death guard with X" is different from a "death guard" and as such would not be eligible for anything that referred to generic death guard models. If you can find something that says that the designers intend that the champions are treated differently for generic rules or even a rule itself that says this then I would be convinced. As it is, to me, a noise marine champion on the same data sheet as a noise marine unit is part of the unit and subject to any generic noise marine rule.

By your logic noise marine champions in the last edition couldn't benefit from Kakophony of the Apocolypse (or whatever it was called) that enabled noise marines to shoot after being destroyed. Since the rule only said noise marines and not noise marine champions. You can't have the rules read one way in one circumstance and another in a different circumstance.

And your last point is also wrong, Music of the Apocalypse applied "Each time a model in this unit is slain..."

If you're going to be wrong, at least get it right.

@Valkyrie- I'm sure you've never been misspoken or made a mistake in your life so I apologize for existing in your world of perfection. I also apologize for standing up to an argument that basically boils down to "everyone says it's this way" but no one can cite why it is that way. On the other hand if you can't argue facts attacking the person is a fair tactic.

Nos- I respect your argument but you still haven't sited anything from GW that backs up your position. I don't have all the codices so I can't fact check you but assuming you are correct then GW has done a much better job of rules terminology consistency than in previous editions. As to the breaking down of proper nouns IIRC GW has defined a "bolter" weapon as any weapon with "bolter" in its name. Just like "bolter" "pistol" is any weapon with the word "pistol" in it. GW's naming conventions do tend to be a bit loose in some parts of their rules.

Yes, they explicitly called this out in a rule. They have stated what aa "bolt weapon" is. That's not the same as what I asked. So then you're allowed to do so. Again, do you think a relic that specifies it replaces a Bolter would be legal when used to replace a heavy Bolter? This is t asking about what a bolt weapon is, it's the proper noun Bolter and the proper noun Heavy Bolter.

I have cited correctly. GW consistently uses "any model " when "any model" in the unit , and specified when only a subset of the unit csn use it. What's your explanation for this disparity ? We've given sufficient evidence to count as proof. You have, with all respect, given precisely nothing.

Fair enough. I was looking at things from a different POV. As to your heavy bolter question I honestly don't know if it would be legal or not. On a practical level I don't know that anything that replaces a bolter would be an improvement over the heavy bolter.

A unit of Noise Marines is made up of a Noise Marine Champion model and a number of Noise Marine models. They are all Noise Marines and even just one of them can be a unit of Noise Marines after casualties. However a Noise Marine Champion model is never a Noise Marine model nor vice versa.

Your last sentence directly contradicts the sentence written before it. Or I'm just not understanding what you've written.

In either event I've already conceded that a Noise Marine Champion is different from a Noise Marine Grunt.

You're not seeing key words as key words. Hence the bold.

Exactly. Both types of models have the same keyword, Noise Marines, but neither are the same model.

I missed the bolding in the second sentence. I must need to adjust the contrast setting on my monitor.

Hey, quick question about the Icon : if the bearer is killed, does the unit still keep the keyword so it keeps the bonus for Mark of Chaos + Icon ?

Thanks !

No, as they don't have an icon any longer.