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.

 insaniak wrote:
It probably would be if I didn't have them...

And how often is this really the case? How many people can afford the models/paint/etc, gas to drive to the store to play, and every other expense of the hobby but not even a pirated and printed copy of the current codex?

(Not that this justifies piracy, but let's be honest here, people who don't want to buy a $50 codex often download it instead of just not having it.)

But you just said that FAQ's were no good, because I might be faking them.

But if we're talking about, say, Black Templars I can just look at the FAQ online if I think what you're claiming doesn't make sense. The same option is not available if you're trying to deal with playing the 4th edition IG codex in 6th.

Seriously, if the army was updated for 6th, and the player still has the 6th ed FAQ, where is the problem? Sure, you might not remember every detail of that FAQ off the top of your head... but if you were familiar with it when it was published, it's still going to look right when you see it.

That depends on how long it's been. If it's the Tau FAQ I'd probably remember it for a while (especially since I play Tau). If it's the CSM FAQ six months from now it's a lot less likely that I'd notice that something isn't right, or have the confidence in my memory to dispute it.

And if not, and they've 'tinkered' with the FAQ to give themselves some sort of advantage... well, they've cheated to win a game of toy soldiers for no actual reward. Yay them.

And they've wasted my time in the process. That risk alone might not be enough to make me reject the idea, but it's just one more thing on a list of reasons why it's not a good idea.

Yes, as discussed up the thread a ways. In most cases, the issues are going to be minor... Certain special rules that will need to be rejiggered or ignored. I wouldn't expect it to require more than a short discussion before the game to sort that out. For most armies, it would probably take less time than sorting out how all of the terrain is going to work.

IMO it already takes enough time to set up and start playing, especially now that 6th added even more random tables to roll on each game. The last thing I want to do is add rule negotiation to the process, especially when it's so easily avoided by using the current rules.

Why not just play old editions? I mean if you allow outdated codexes why not go the whole hog and let people use the old rulebooks too?

Older books were written with the older rules in mind, they can be shoehorned to temporarily play in a new edition, but once they're updated the old codex gets relegated to the Black Library imo.

 Peregrine wrote:
And how often is this really the case? How many people can afford the models/paint/etc, gas to drive to the store to play, and every other expense of the hobby but not even a pirated and printed copy of the current codex?

(Not that this justifies piracy, but let's be honest here, people who don't want to buy a $50 codex often download it instead of just not having it.)

Speaking for myself, I'm not buying the 6th edition codexes because the prices on them here in Oz are beyond ridiculous. I'm also not pirating them because piracy, like drugs, is bad, mkay?

I don't need them enough to warrant breaking the law to get them. When GW finally get around to updating the armies that I am currently playing most often, I'll obviously have to decide whether to update or keep playing with what I have.

But if we're talking about, say, Black Templars I can just look at the FAQ online if I think what you're claiming doesn't make sense. The same option is not available if you're trying to deal with playing the 4th edition IG codex in 6th.

It's also not available for any of the current issues that GW haven't seen fit to FAQ. How do you deal with those situations?

And they've wasted my time in the process. That risk alone might not be enough to make me reject the idea, but it's just one more thing on a list of reasons why it's not a good idea.

So your enjoyment of the game hinges completely on knowing whether or not your opponent is 100% using the correct rules?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MarsNZ wrote:
Why not just play old editions?.

Because they're all different?

If someone enjoys 6th edition over the previous editions, but prefers the 5th edition Eldar codex, it's not really the end of the world for them to continue using it.

Similarly, I absolutely hated 4th edition... but really liked the 4th edition Marine Codex, and would love to have a play around with it under 6th edition rules. Not for beardy combos, or to win the game because my opponent isn't familiar with my list, but simply because it had some fun options that aren't available in the current codex.

 insaniak wrote:

Because they're all different?

If someone enjoys 6th edition over the previous editions, but prefers the 5th edition Eldar codex, it's not really the end of the world for them to continue using it.

Similarly, I absolutely hated 4th edition... but really liked the 4th edition Marine Codex, and would love to have a play around with it under 6th edition rules. Not for beardy combos, or to win the game because my opponent isn't familiar with my list, but simply because it had some fun options that aren't available in the current codex.

I'd be down to play against your 4th edition Marines if you don't mind playing against 3.5 World Eaters in 6th edition. (Provided I'm ever in 'Straya of course!)

 insaniak wrote:

Which rules am I picking and choosing, exactly?

As per my examples, the codex that gives you the most powerful list.

Vladsimpaler wrote:I'd be down to play against your 4th edition Marines if you don't mind playing against 3.5 World Eaters in 6th edition. (Provided I'm ever in 'Straya of course!)

Excellent. Look me up if you're ever down this way

Bookwrack wrote:As per my examples, the codex that gives you the most powerful list.

So where was I doing that...?

kb305 wrote:
I guess unfortunetly you need the newest 50 dollar book

that said the codex updates is basically a way of scamming money off people.

They rarely change anything in a significant or thoughtful way, they recycle old content, old art, a few minor changes, add a few (usually dumb) new units, rinse and repeat.

Maybe it is a pointless money grab, but its not an unaffordable one.

Spread the cost of a codex update and new models over the 4-5 years the codex update lasts and its not so bad.


Assume you have already gotten a good sized army. You have pretty much all the troops, HQs, and common support units you will ever need.

A new codex comes out. $50

Along with 2 new units. Lets assume $125 to get them.

For giggles, lets toss in a codex supplement like Eldar got. $50

$225 every 4-5 years to keep your army updated. that's only $45-$50 a year.

That's pretty lightweight for most hobbies.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

Maybe it's a belief, conscious or not, that if someone wants to use the older books it's because they had some OP rule or unit that they want to use instead of the nerfed newer codex.

I can't speak for others, but I'm more of a "Move on, dude. It's over. The ship has sailed." kind of guy.

 ansacs wrote:
Because it is boring and you are stopping the flow of progress.

Now if we use the 3rd edition codex with craft world supplement... Wait for me to find my dcannons for my wraithlords.

How is the sob WD dex more boring , then the sob WD dex? The WD dex is impossible to get , but the book version can be bough in FLGS or online.

Usually when a new book comes out I'll give some grace period to people who need to save up some money to buy it. If I know the person, they will probably even get a few months. But sooner or later, you should have the newest book.

If it is a tournament or event, or I am just meeting you for a pick up game at a FLGS or GW store, you need to have all the most current rules/codex/faq/errata. Only if it is agreed upon in advance can we make exception to this.

I've had some people accuse me of being WAAC or TFG because when I play with someone I don't know at all/very well I insist on current rules/faq/errata, and will even print their faq/errata out for them, or have it ready on my laptop or phone.

The game has enough balance issues. Just play the newest stuff, and save the effort of trying to get away with using older books/rules. Unless you and a friend want to have some one off game, then by all means, go nuts and have fun!

Peregrine wrote: Unless it is explicitly stated that an old codex is permitted...

Hmm, unless the rulebook explicitly states that books written for 40k are part of the rules, then they're not actually part of the rules? That's an interesting argument to make given that there are other books that say they're for 40k that also aren't mentioned in the rulebook.

Boniface wrote:What if you would rather not and are happy to take the rough with the smooth?

Playing with an old codex is the same as playing with an old BRB rules set. No reason you can't, but, as mentioned, you and your opponent have to be on the same page.

I'm a little curious as to why you'd want to do this, though. 40k has changed a lot over time, which is one of the reasons that they make new codices. Earlier 6th ed codices, for example, were written in a world of not many monstrous creatures, and so, naturally, tend not to have very many things that can handle them. When new codices come out with more and more monstrous creatures, the older ones are left with big holes in their killing power. Likewise, the way that GW assigns points values have changed over time. If I were to try and run my current guard army with the old guard codex, it would just straight away get over 10% more expensive, without even changing the list.

Plus, as new codices come out, they get more stuff and more options. Some new stuff is crummy, but not all of it. For a classic example, if you play with the old guard codex, you have access to three heavy support vehicles. That's it. Like it or leave it. Now, the guard codex has lots more interesting things it can do with this FO slot.

Which is why I'm curious, because, by and large, newer codices are just better than older ones. Larger, more robust, generally less horrid internal balance, etc. etc. If you're feeling sentimental then, of course, it's fine, but you're probably going to be a lot better off in the long run by learning a new codex than curmudgeoningly gripping onto an old one.

 Ailaros wrote:
Hmm, unless the rulebook explicitly states that books written for 40k are part of the rules, then they're not actually part of the rules? That's an interesting argument to make given that there are other books that say they're for 40k that also aren't mentioned in the rulebook.

Sigh. You're so determined to dig up the same old FW argument that you'll quote me completely out of context now?

If you actually pay attention to the context of that statement you'll see that I'm talking about tournament policies, not what the rules of the game say. If the rules for a tournament don't explicitly say that you're allowed to use old versions of the rules then it's almost guaranteed that it's because the TO didn't anticipate anyone even attempting to do something that absurd, not because they're willing to let you bring your 3rd edition marine codex.

 Ailaros wrote:
I'm a little curious as to why you'd want to do this, though.

As I mentioned before, the 4th edition Marine codex has some funky options that weren't carried over to the newer books. I would have had to completely overhaul my regular Marine army for 5th thanks to them dropping the Trait system, and wound up dusting off my Orks instead.

Not all the changes made for new editions are for the better, and the older codexes often allowed lists very different to those available now.


And, of course, there's those people who might still want to use their Inquisition armies without Grey Knights tagging along...

Makumba wrote:

 ansacs wrote:
Because it is boring and you are stopping the flow of progress.

Now if we use the 3rd edition codex with craft world supplement... Wait for me to find my dcannons for my wraithlords.

How is the sob WD dex more boring , then the sob WD dex? The WD dex is impossible to get , but the book version can be bough in FLGS or online.

Sob neither is more boring than the other as Sob players are as rare as unicorns. Chaos lash lists, eldar warwalkers are the only decent unit in my dex, and tau railrifles are the greater good. These are some of the lists I am bored of and no longer have to play thank you codex release. If everyone keeps using old dexs the game will die out as it is not complex enough strategically, tactically, nor in a role playing sense to survive without major meta changes every quarter.

I would only allow it if the latest codex was released just a month ago and you didn't had time/cash to get the new one.

You can't just pick 'which rules to play with', just like people cannot decide to ignore FAQS and such.

What? Of course you can pick which rules to use. We're talking about a game of toy soldiers here. You're not going to destroy the fabric of the universe by choosing to use rules that aren't the most recently published.

 insaniak wrote:
What? Of course you can pick which rules to use. We're talking about a game of toy soldiers here. You're not going to destroy the fabric of the universe by choosing to use rules that aren't the most recently published.

Absolutely. Choosing to use older rules isn't just a matter of being cheap or trying to power game either. If new rules aren't really better, why even bother with them? If you like the newer rules, great. It's just a game, and for those who think one should somehow tow the line and just 'deal with' rules they find inferior because GW says so are really misguided at best.

I'd allow it if the only reason the person hadn't gotten the latest dex because he/she don't have the money to purchase it