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.

Good point. All eldar is just that.

 Grey Templar wrote:
No they're not.

Eldar are Eldar are Eldar.



The fact they did not say "This ability only effects units from Codex: Eldar" when they did just that for every other ability in every other codex suggests they wanted the Avatar to buff Dark Eldar too.

It doesn't even say "friendly eldar units become fearless", so it even works on enemy Eldar.

Eldar are Eldar.

Dark Eldar, by definition are not Eldar.

Just like a Heavy Flamer is not a Heavy Weapon, and an Assault Cannon is not an Assault Weapon.

 Grey Templar wrote:
No they're not.

Eldar are Eldar are Eldar.



The fact they did not say "This ability only effects units from Codex: Eldar" when they did just that for every other ability in every other codex suggests they wanted the Avatar to buff Dark Eldar too.

It doesn't even say "friendly eldar units become fearless", so it even works on enemy Eldar.

While it is clear that Eldar are Eldar, it is not true that Eldar are not eldar. Specific rather then general, such as "I hate some people" vs "I hate some People".
Look at the sanguinor's blessing, it refers to Sergeants not sergeants. While unit leaders may be called a sergeant but if they are not a Sergeant then you cannot effect them.

Also, one could look at the 40k rule book on eldar jetbikes (including dark eldar jetbikes) as they are Eldar.
Just like if a rule stated all Marines, it would cover even chaos space marines as well as all the others.

lostinthewarp wrote:
Also, one could look at the 40k rule book on eldar jetbikes (including dark eldar jetbikes) as they are Eldar.
Just like if a rule stated all Marines, it would cover even chaos space marines as well as all the others.

No it wouldn't; Marines aren't Space Wolves, aren't Blood Angels, aren't Chaos Marines... That's why we use those words. Eldar =/= Dark Eldar (RAI and RAW).

lostinthewarp wrote:
Also, one could look at the 40k rule book on eldar jetbikes (including dark eldar jetbikes) as they are Eldar.
Just like if a rule stated all Marines, it would cover even chaos space marines as well as all the others.

If they where the same then why would the book have to specify they are?

Has anyone actually looked up what it says in the allies section yet? We can put this entire damn thing to bed as soon as someone confirms the wording and the 'level' of alliance between CE and DE.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
No they're not.

Eldar are Eldar are Eldar.



The fact they did not say "This ability only effects units from Codex: Eldar" when they did just that for every other ability in every other codex suggests they wanted the Avatar to buff Dark Eldar too.

It doesn't even say "friendly eldar units become fearless", so it even works on enemy Eldar.

While it is clear that Eldar are Eldar, it is not true that Eldar are not eldar. Specific rather then general, such as "I hate some people" vs "I hate some People".
Look at the sanguinor's blessing, it refers to Sergeants not sergeants. While unit leaders may be called a sergeant but if they are not a Sergeant then you cannot effect them.

You seriously think that, because of punctuation, a rule can't be utilised by a sergeant / Sergeant? That's ridiculous, I've love to hear you try to explain that to anyone.

I can just see the Sanguinor now: "Take the left flank!"
sergeant "Yes Sanguinor"
Sanguinor "Oh wait, sorry pal, someone forgot to put a capital letter on your name badge, feth off home, you're not applicable".

Why yes I do think punctuation can tell you how a rule should be used.
The head of an honour guard is a blood champion.... is he a Sergeant?
Lemartes runs the DC.... is he a Sergeant?

While when a Scout Sergeant leads a scout squad.... we have an applicable model.

If the avatar said "all Humans within 12 inches" you'd be wondering why it was capitalised. Eldar didn't need to be capitalised hence it means something other then members of the eldar race. Like when prince philip talks about "these bloody People" he means a certain group.

Kinda see where you're coming from, but that's not punctuation, that's arguing the point over a model leading a squad whilst being named something other than Sergeant. The squads / characters you mention as examples though are pretty 'prestigious' units, so you'd end up then arguing about what rank each model is.

"These Sanguinary Guard are all top of their class, they're all like Sergeants otherwise they wouldn't be in the SG".

Screw that, it's what it says on the label. If it's a Sergeant then yeah, and that applies regardless of capitalisation.

Kitch - I already found that Eldar/Dark Eldar are Battle Brothers on the Allies chart.

If the avatar said all friendly models then it would go for dark eldar, the reason GW didn't change the wording is that they changed the wording of all the powers that said friendly models to "Space Wolves" or "Blood Angels" models.

Eldar are Codex Eldar.

Codex Eldar = Eldar
Codex Dark Eldar = Dark Eldar.

If it says "Eldar", it means Codex: Eldar.

Otherwise Vect wouldn't have BOTH Preferred Enemy: Eldar AND Preferred Enemy: Dark Eldar. Which he does.

Eldar is a race like Orks or Imperial Guard. The Battle Brothers rule says the allied units count as friendly but does not say count as the same race. If the rule is labeled as friendly then it applies to allied Battle Brother units. If the rule is labeled with something else as in Eldar or units taken from the Imperial Guard codex then they do not. If GW wanted the rules to apply to allied DE they would have rephrased the rules or stated Dark Eldar count as Eldar in their FAQs.

Here is the real question: BB says allied ICs can join. So if a Farseer joins a unit of Wyches can he Fortune them? I don't think so since Fortune says Eldar unit.

Homer

And here we end yet another thread with the standard "it's RAI vs RAW" comment.

 kitch102 wrote:
And here we end yet another thread with the standard "it's RAI vs RAW" comment.

RAW and RAI are same in this case. As Mannahnin said, GW has written Vect having both Preferred Enemy: Eldar and Preferred Enemy: Dark Eldar, which would have been pointless and unnecessary if Dark Eldar were Eldar.

 kitch102 wrote:
And here we end yet another thread with the standard "it's RAI vs RAW" comment.

It is RAW, Eldar within the context of codex eldar means things in codex eldar.

 Grey Templar wrote:
No they're not.

Eldar are Eldar are Eldar.



The fact they did not say "This ability only effects units from Codex: Eldar" when they did just that for every other ability in every other codex suggests they wanted the Avatar to buff Dark Eldar too.

It doesn't even say "friendly eldar units become fearless", so it even works on enemy Eldar.

So Dark Angels, Blood Angels and World Eaters are all the same, since they are are space marines?
After all, the only difference between a chaos marine and a loyalist is cultural...

-Matt

HawaiiMatt wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
No they're not.

Eldar are Eldar are Eldar.



The fact they did not say "This ability only effects units from Codex: Eldar" when they did just that for every other ability in every other codex suggests they wanted the Avatar to buff Dark Eldar too.

It doesn't even say "friendly eldar units become fearless", so it even works on enemy Eldar.

So Dark Angels, Blood Angels and World Eaters are all the same, since they are are space marines?
After all, the only difference between a chaos marine and a loyalist is cultural...

-Matt

Lol

 Mannahnin wrote:
Codex Eldar = Eldar
Codex Dark Eldar = Dark Eldar.

If it says "Eldar", it means Codex: Eldar.

Otherwise Vect wouldn't have BOTH Preferred Enemy: Eldar AND Preferred Enemy: Dark Eldar. Which he does.

I thought Vect had Preferred Enemy (everyone). He just had additional bonuses against (Dark) Eldar.

The Eldar codex is too old to be taking the wording literally. Being that Eldar and DE are battle brothers and farseers can cast psychic powers on the DE, the Avatar would confer fearless to the DE that are in range.

 phxlord Eldrad wrote:
The Eldar codex is too old to be taking the wording literally. Being that Eldar and DE are battle brothers and farseers can cast psychic powers on the DE, the Avatar would confer fearless to the DE that are in range.

Why not? We used 3rd ed necrons until last year? Codices have bridged editions before and the eldar are doing it again.
If we don't take the wording literally then what is the point of RAW discussions?

The point is that there were no allied detachments in 4th ed, so there are times when "Eldar" could mean "allied", especially when DE are battle brothers with Eldar.

On the other point however, Eldar does not mean DE just because the names are similar. In terms of narrative, Eldar and DE= Eldar, but on the tabletop the word "Eldar" does not include DE.

 phxlord Eldrad wrote:
The Eldar codex is too old to be taking the wording literally. Being that Eldar and DE are battle brothers and farseers can cast psychic powers on the DE, the Avatar would confer fearless to the DE that are in range.

Only psychic powers taken from the psychic disciplines can be used on Dark Eldar. The ones in the codex can only target enemies out Eldar.

If DE=Eldar then why would Vect's entry bother to say:
"...He has the prefered enemy rules against all units. Against Eldar and Dark Eldar units, Vect also rerolls failed To wound rolls"

 phxlord Eldrad wrote:
The Eldar codex is too old to be taking the wording literally. Being that Eldar and DE are battle brothers and farseers can cast psychic powers on the DE, the Avatar would confer fearless to the DE that are in range.

Huh? In that case, they probably meant StarCannons to be Heavy 3. Yeah, that's the ticket!

FYI, Farseer buff powers all say Eldar units too.

Homer

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
No they're not.

Eldar are Eldar are Eldar.



The fact they did not say "This ability only effects units from Codex: Eldar" when they did just that for every other ability in every other codex suggests they wanted the Avatar to buff Dark Eldar too.

It doesn't even say "friendly eldar units become fearless", so it even works on enemy Eldar.

Eldar are Eldar.

Dark Eldar, by definition are not Eldar.

Just like a Heavy Flamer is not a Heavy Weapon, and an Assault Cannon is not an Assault Weapon.

Verbs are not nouns they describe of give character to nouns.

A flamer, hand flamer and heavy flamer are all flamers (flame weapons) so the Avatar ignores them all. It even ignores flame weapons not necessarily listed in its special rules. Why? because they use flame as the method of attack.

Dark, Light, Red, Blue Grey, Gray or paisley, an eldar is still an eldar. That is why other army books were FAQ'd to only affect units in the same army book, but Eldar were not.

matt442 wrote:
That is why other army books were FAQ'd to only affect units in the same army book, but Eldar were not.

They changed the various rules, because they said either "all "X" in your army does this" or "select a friendly unit" or something similar.

The Eldar rules all specify that they affect Eldar so there was no need to change it. If, for example, the Avatars rule said all friendly units are Fearless, then it would affect allied Dark Eldar, however since it specifies that it only works on Eldar, Dark Eldar are unaffected.

matt442 wrote:
Verbs are not nouns they describe of give character to nouns.

Wow really Thanks!

I must have missed that year of school...

Eldar is the name of an army.

Dark Eldar is the name of a different army.

Eldar /= Dark Eldar

 Homer S wrote:

 phxlord Eldrad wrote:
The Eldar codex is too old to be taking the wording literally. Being that Eldar and DE are battle brothers and farseers can cast psychic powers on the DE, the Avatar would confer fearless to the DE that are in range.

Huh? In that case, they probably meant StarCannons to be Heavy 3. Yeah, that's the ticket!

FYI, Farseer buff powers all say Eldar units too.

Homer

Clearly that's not what I meant, but I like your enthusiasm. Maybe my friends and I are just more casual players than you, but we use farseer powers on DE too since they're battle brothers. My point is that while the RAW says "Eldar units", I think the RAI for that has changed since there were no allied detachments back then. And I wouldn't even be arguing the point if they weren't battle brothers, that changes everything in my mind. Clearly the Avatar or farseer can't help out Marine detachments

 phxlord Eldrad wrote:

 Homer S wrote:

 phxlord Eldrad wrote:
The Eldar codex is too old to be taking the wording literally. Being that Eldar and DE are battle brothers and farseers can cast psychic powers on the DE, the Avatar would confer fearless to the DE that are in range.

Huh? In that case, they probably meant StarCannons to be Heavy 3. Yeah, that's the ticket!

FYI, Farseer buff powers all say Eldar units too.

Homer

Clearly that's not what I meant, but I like your enthusiasm. Maybe my friends and I are just more casual players than you, but we use farseer powers on DE too since they're battle brothers. My point is that while the RAW says "Eldar units", I think the RAI for that has changed since there were no allied detachments back then. And I wouldn't even be arguing the point if they weren't battle brothers, that changes everything in my mind. Clearly the Avatar or farseer can't help out Marine detachments

Can he help Tau? Tau and Eldar are battle brothers.