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.

Random question that has some serious issues for a double tau list.

Can an allied Farsight Enclave Commander Team unit use markerlights generated from the main Tau Empire force? Can the even use ones generated from the enclave force.

The main reason this is in question for me is due to the sentence structure that say "Immediately before a unit from Codex: Tau Empire shoots....". The Farsight Commander Team, apart from Farsight himself (who is in both the Codex: Tau Empire and the Farsight Enclave supplement), does not exist in the Codex: Tau Empire. Therefore cannot use markerlights generated by any unit unless they are joined to a unit from Codex Tau Empire. These are the situation I can envision.

Can they use markerlights:

Each IC by him/herself: no
Each IC join together in a unit (no farsight): no
Each IC join together in a unit (with farsight) yes
IC joined to Codex Tau Empire units: yes
IC joined to Non-Tau battle brothers: no

What do you think?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Guess I have a pretty sound argument.

I think you're looking into it too much. It's a supplement, not an entirely new codex. The reason the markerlight rule is worded that was is to prevent non-tau units from using markerlight bonuses.

But, on the other hand, there's the Ally issue to work through. I don't have the supplement, but I assume they're BattleBros? If so, what does the allied rules say about BBros using each others' special rules?

I'm sorry, I wasn't very clear. The farsight enclave book adds 0 new models. Therefore, everything from the farsight enclave is a codex:Tau Empire model. I would play it as the farsight enclave gets to use the markerlight support of the regular tau.

No new models were added, but it distinctly adds a new unit in the supplement. A unit that is not from Codex Tau Empire. Its even worded "If you take the Farsight Enclave army, you have access to a special unit...." Seems like a unit that is not from Codex Tau Empire to me.

As a supplement for Codex Tau Empire then the Farsight Enclaves does indeed add the Farsight Enclave Commander Team to Codex Tau Empire. That's what a supplement does.

That doesn't seem quite right.

From your link:
"an extra section in a book, or an additional book that gives more information"

There is a big difference those two. If it counts as part of code tau empire then I agree with you.

But I think it's an additional book that gives more info, and thus any units in it are not from codex tau empire and instead from the supplement itself. I base this on this line from the supplement.

" It also has a series of supplemental rules (presented below) that
can be used in addition to the material found in Codex: Tau Empire."

Being a separate book doesn't mean its not a part of Codex Tau Empire, just like the multiple book of an encyclopedia are all a part of the same edition of that encyclopediam

 Ghaz wrote:
Being a separate book doesn't mean its not a part of Codex Tau Empire, just like the multiple book of an encyclopedia are all a part of the same edition of that encyclopediam

Sure, but there's obviously a distinction between the books of the encyclopedia. The problem for you here is that the supplement leans very heavily on the fact that it is not Codex: Tau Empire.

I think there's a pretty easy thought experiment that shows how this ought to be interpreted. Suppose that the supplement didn't invent a completely new unit. Suppose it instead just allowed you to make one selection from the Troops section of Codex: Eldar which would count as one of your Troops choices in your primary detachment's FOC. It seems clear to me that this unit would not benefit from Markerlights. Yet this is basically the same situation that Farsight's Commander Team is in - it's a unit which is not found in the base codex which the supplement allows you to take in an army using the supplement's rules.

Also note that the Markerlight rules don't talk about a "Tau unit" or even a "Codex: Tau Empire unit". They talk about a "unit from Codex: Tau Empire". The straightforward interpretation of this is that they only benefit units that are from that physical book (where the italics are referring to a book by title), as if someone had told you that something only applied to entries in Volume 1 of an encyclopedia. RAW, I don't think Forgeworld units can benefit from Markerlights either. Forgeworld units are units from Imperial Armour Vol [number] that can be taken in a Codex: Tau Empire army (or Tau Empire army, if you prefer).

Ethereals have a similar problem. "This codex" refers to the physical book, not to the set of all GW products that provide rules for units that can be taken in Tau armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I add that this interpretation is made almost explicit on the first page of C:TE. "Codex: Tau Empire contains everything you need to play a game of Warhammer 40,000 with your army. Within these pages..." This is found in a section called "How This Codex Works".

GW (and basically every player) uses "codex" to refer to a single physical book. GW is obviously using the italicized title of the codex to refer to a particular book.

The army that is produced using rules from the codex is referred to (p94) as a "Tau Empire army" (no italics).

Nothing you've quoted says that the Farsight Enclaves supplement is not an addition to Codex Tau Empire. Its an optional addition, so yes you can play with just the codex but to use the supplement you must add it to the codex. It is not a standalone product.

 Ghaz wrote:
Nothing you've quoted says that the Farsight Enclaves supplement is not an addition to Codex Tau Empire. Its an optional addition, so yes you can play with just the codex but to use the supplement you must add it to the codex. It is not a standalone product.

Well, sure, it's an addition to Codex: Tau Empire, but not in such a way that it counts as being part of Codex: Tau Empire. That's implicit in what you've just said, since you think it makes sense to talk about "the codex" as a separate entity from the supplement. It's a separate thing with rules that can be used in addition to the rules found in Codex: Tau Empire. But you're talking literal nonsense if you're saying that the supplement itself is deemed to be part of Codex: Tau Empire. That renders a whole bunch of sentences in the supplement completely meaningless. It's also totally unsupported by anything I can see - do you have any quote at all that even hints that that's true?

It is a part of Codex Tau Empire. Can you use it by itself? Is it a codex in it's own right? I'm not the one talking nonsense here. What's nonsense is believing that a supplement for Codex Tau Empire is not a part of that codex (albeit an optional part).

Perhaps you can provide something to to back up your unsupported claims.

...but you're admitting again that the supplement is a separate entity from the book Codex: Tau Empire. I'm just really confused now. You seem to have invented this metaphysics for GW products on the basis of absolutely nothing and are insisting that it is absolutely impossible for GW to give rules for an army list in a form that doesn't count as being identical to the physical codex that the parent army list is from. Except of course when it's time to actually talk about these rules, in which case you're perfectly happy to talk about their container as being separate from the parent codex. There's just no way to come up with a consistent reading of the rules given this weird theory of yours.

I also have no idea how you can say that my claims are "unsupported". There's a book called Codex: Tau Empire. I'm looking at it right now. It is a physical object. That book gives rules for the Warhammer 40,000 game. One rule in the book is self-referential - it refers to the book by name. It says that something is true of units from Codex: Tau Empire. The very, very, very natural reading of this is that it's talking about units which can be found on the pages of the physical book titled "Codex: Tau Empire". That's what the italics mean in everyday English. It's how GW is obviously using those italics in every other instance where it uses the phrase. I can't find "Farsight's Commander Team" anywhere in that book, therefore it is not a unit from that book. I can find "Farsight's Commander Team" in a different book - the Farsight Enclaves supplement. It's a Tau Empire unit, probably. It's definitely a Tau unit. It is not from Codex: Tau Empire. You're insisting that I can find an entry for "zebras" in the "A-C" volume of an encyclopedia, because according to you it is impossible for volumes to be considered distinct entities.

I think you're probably just getting confused by the pretty clear RAW/RAI issue here. Yeah, probably GW intends for Markerlights to work for Forgeworld units and even for Farsight's Commander Team. But they very clearly restrict Markerlight benefits to units found in a particular book with a particular title. I'm certainly not saying you have to play it that way - I wouldn't.

pantsonhead wrote:
You're insisting that I can find an entry for "zebras" in the "A-C" volume of an encyclopedia, because according to you it is impossible for volumes to be considered distinct entities.

False. I'm telling you that all of the volumes of an encyclopedia are a single entity. They are multiple volumes of a single entity printed as such because a single book would be impractical. However you have no support for your claims that something that must be used in addition to Codex Tau Empire is not just that, an addition to the codex just because it's not physically within the pages of the printed codex. By your claims GW could never add anything to a codex via White Dwarf as they've done in the past since the rules wouldn't be physically printed in the codex. GW's choice of the word 'supplement' and it's definition (...add something extra in order to improve something...) more than amply proves that they are both the same codex.

OK, I see better what's confusing you now. You're failing to understand that there is a distinction between a set of rules and a physical book.

To start: Yes, GW could not add anything to the physical book Codex: Tau Empire, short of reprinting the book such that the thing referred to by the symbol "Codex: Tau Empire" was changed. No one who understands language can deny this, and I'm pretty sure that you don't really deny this, actually. Nothing GW does will change the text that is on the pages in front of me, or add pages to the book those pages are in, etc. GW doesn't have magic powers. You object because you think that accepting this fact makes it impossible to ever modify the rules that apply to Tau Empire armies. But why should it? The appropriate rules for playing a Tau Empire army are not defined as whatever happens to appear in the book called Codex: Tau Empire. The appropriate rules for playing a Tau Empire army are whatever GW says are the appropriate rules for playing a Tau Empire army. If GW releases something on its website that says "now a Tau Empire army consists of nothing but one huge unit of 5 point-per-model cultists (see Codex: Chaos Space Marines) up to the game's point limit and ignoring all other FOC requirements", then that's what a Tau Empire army would be.

A Tau Empire army is whatever GW says it is. Codex: Tau Empire is a work that GW has already released and which it cannot change existing copies of, although it could print a new edition and make changes to the effect of rules that reference a work by that name, because the presumption is that when a work is specified by name it is the most recent edition of that work that is being so specified.

GW could also issue something declaring that some rule or unit is deemed to be "from Codex: Tau Empire", and in this case we would treat it as such for gameplay purposes. There's of course nothing like that in the Farsight supplement.

GW in general, of course, has little reason to ever care whether or not something is deemed to be part of a particular physical book, because very few rules reference books by title. Markerlights do, for some reason.

I note again that you're just making things up out of thin air when you declare material can't "supplement" a codex without being part of the (physical) codex for all rules purposes. That's... just not what "supplement" means, not even using the definition you provide. And is just internally contradictory within a single sentence.

Anyway, I think I've made my case. Feel free to have the final say.

I agree it's not a part of the Tau Codex, it is solely in addition to it.

If the letters XYZ were a supplement to the alphabet, than they'd be just that a supplement. As A-W would be the alphabet. The rules for the models in question are found in A-W though.

pantsonhead wrote:
OK, I see better what's confusing you now. You're failing to understand that there is a distinction between a set of rules and a physical book.

I understand the distinction. You however don't. You seem to think that just because it's not in the physical Codex Tau Empire that it can't be a part of Codex Tau Empire. That is false. That's what is confusing you. GW's very decision to call it a 'supplement' proves that it is a part of Codex Tau Empire. You've not provided a single rule that says it is a separate set of rules, especially when it can only be used with the set of rules within Codex Tau Empire.

So can a normal Tau army select the models in the supplement?

All units in an Enclave army are Tau, but they explicitly are not all from the Tau codex.

So a codex can only have a single army list?

Well... Yes.

Tau can't ally Tau, there is no matrix for it in the allies chart.
You can't ally Eldar with Eldar, or Space Wolfs with Space Wolfs.
So, this isn't a question about if the markerlights can be used by Enclave from Tau Empire units, but more about how you are justifying using Tau primaries with Tau allies!

Enclave has special Ally rules, they can ally with everyone Tau can + treat Tau as BBs

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Enclave has special Ally rules, they can ally with everyone Tau can + treat Tau as BBs

What shenanigans is that!? That means you can get a lot of markerlight in, some troops, at the least 1 XV88 and possibly a Riptide and then 7 XV8 and Farsight!
Add that you have six troops, three FT, which might just be PFs and stuff the HS with as many XV88's as you can with Target Locks and there is too damn much shenanigans going on, if the points aren't off the chart!
I have already been testing how much I can break things with using as many markelights as I possibly can, use the HQ for extra shooty FW with CFB's and marker drones all around.
I hope I am thinking of something with a silly amount of points, because it is kinda scaring me to even use a list like this.

If Empire and Enclave are the bestest buds (even thought the fluff say that no contact is to be made with the Enclave), and the supplement is, by the meaning of the word, a direct part of the codex, it is pretty much okay for them to use the allied Tau's markerlight (but I don't see why if they have PFs or the ability to use marker drone squad).

Kaizoe wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Enclave has special Ally rules, they can ally with everyone Tau can + treat Tau as BBs

What shenanigans is that!? That means you can get a lot of markerlight in, some troops, at the least 1 XV88 and possibly a Riptide and then 7 XV8 and Farsight!
Add that you have six troops, three FT, which might just be PFs and stuff the HS with as many XV88's as you can with Target Locks and there is too damn much shenanigans going on, if the points aren't off the chart!
I have already been testing how much I can break things with using as many markelights as I possibly can, use the HQ for extra shooty FW with CFB's and marker drones all around.
I hope I am thinking of something with a silly amount of points, because it is kinda scaring me to even use a list like this.

If Empire and Enclave are the bestest buds (even thought the fluff say that no contact is to be made with the Enclave), and the supplement is, by the meaning of the word, a direct part of the codex, it is pretty much okay for them to use the allied Tau's markerlight (but I don't see why if they have PFs or the ability to use marker drone squad).

The fluff says that no contact is allowed by the Ethereals. Farsight obviously has had contact with the Tau Empire since someone is sending him the blueprints for the new toys the Tau Empire is using.

I guess you could argue wen you are allying Tau Empire and Farsight, it is that group inside the Tau Empire fighting along side Farsight.

 Ghaz wrote:

I understand the distinction. You however don't. You seem to think that just because it's not in the physical Codex Tau Empire that it can't be a part of Codex Tau Empire. That is false. That's what is confusing you. GW's very decision to call it a 'supplement' proves that it is a part of Codex Tau Empire. You've not provided a single rule that says it is a separate set of rules, especially when it can only be used with the set of rules within Codex Tau Empire.

Huh? I agree with some of this and I might agree with all of it. It's really not at all clear what you're saying. It would probably help you make whatever point you're trying to make if you were very clear about what you mean with each instance of the phrase "Codex Tau Empire" (these are use-mention quotes). You use it four times to mean at least three different things. Maybe four.

The first instance is referring to a book by that title. The second instance is referring to... what? A collection of rules relevant to playing Tau Empire armies? Yeah, okay; I think everyone agrees that the contents of Codex: Tau Empire (note my use of italics to make clear that I'm talking about a particular work by title) are not identical to "all rules for playing Tau Empire armies" (these quotes denote a definition). I was actually very explicit on that point in my last post so I'm very confused as to why you would ascribe the opposite view to me. But if you don't mean this then I have absolutely no idea what this sentence is trying to communicate.

The third instance can't be the same "all rules for playing Tau Empire armies" sense of "Codex Tau Empire". Tau Empire armies never care about the Farsight Enclaves rules, except insofar as they can take an allied detachment using the Farsight Enclaves rules. So I can't make heads or tails of this instance of "Codex Tau Empire". Edit: This is the sort of talk that led me earlier to talk about you inventing a "metaphysics for GW products". My best guess is that here you mean something like "an arbitrary collection of rules that I have deemed to count as part of something called 'Codex Tau Empire'". But I'm also pretty sure that you would deny that you're using it in that way. So I have no clue what you think you mean here. Edit2: Maybe you're saying something like: "Farsight Enclaves armies are a subset of Tau Empire armies, and the rules for Farsight Enclaves armies are part of some larger whole, which if we wanted to we might call 'Codex Tau Empire'". But, semantics aside, I said that that was plausible two posts ago, although I think it's debatable. Regardless, it's completely irrelevant to the rules dispute at hand. So again I'm really just left confused.

Then you use it a fourth time in a way which is at least distinct from the second and third instances, since now you're talking about the supplement as not being part of "Codex Tau Empire" (scare-quotes this time, to indicate that I'm not sure what the symbol actually refers to). Maybe you're talking about the physical book again?

So, what are you saying? Please try to be clear, and avoid using the exact same symbol to refer to at least three different things.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I don't think it's just me. Rigeld2 seems pretty confused by your use of "codex". You're using terms without defining them, and that's not conducive to clarity.

How could the supplement not be part of the Codex: Tau Empire (book and rule collection), when you HAVE to have the Codex: Tau Empire to use Farsight Enclaves - A Codex: Tau Empire Supplement?
I'm pretty sure that GW sees the Farsight Enclaves - A Codex: Tau Empire Supplement book as a chapter for the Codex: Tau Empire, or they would have released it as Codex: Farsight Enclaves.
I would also think that the meaning of Codex: Tau Empire in the Marklight section of the Codex: Tau Empire book means any book with Codex: Tau Empire in the title that GW releases, or something would be noted in the supplement book ...but I'm not sure that GW would just accidentally the whole notation.

Kaizoe wrote:
How could the supplement not be part of the Codex: Tau Empire (book and rule collection), when you HAVE to have the Codex: Tau Empire to use Farsight Enclaves - A Codex: Tau Empire Supplement?
I'm pretty sure that GW sees the Farsight Enclaves - A Codex: Tau Empire Supplement book as a chapter for the Codex: Tau Empire, or they would have released it as Codex: Farsight Enclaves.
I would also think that the meaning of Codex: Tau Empire in the Marklight section of the Codex: Tau Empire book means any book with Codex: Tau Empire in the title that GW releases, or something would be noted in the supplement book ...but I'm not sure that GW would just accidentally the whole notation.

I mean, obviously the supplement isn't part of the book Codex: Tau Empire. You don't really think it is. Again, this is trivially disproven - I have the most current edition of that book in front of me, and I see no rules for Farsight Enclaves. Maybe it's part of some collection of rules that we might call "Codex: Tau Empire", but I'm not sure what basis there is for saying that this arbitrary categorization matters for playing the actual game. Quotes would be appreciated. It could also in theory be stated to "count as" part of Codex: Tau Empire for all rules purposes. This would actually matter. Again, quotes would be appreciated.

Probably GW intends for Markerlights to work for even Farsight's Commander Team, sure. But both Codex: Tau Empire and Farsight Enclaves - a Codex: Tau Empire Supplement are remarkably consistent (for GW) in using "Codex: Tau Empire" exclusively to refer to the physical book by that specific title. I gave some page references for Codex: Tau Empire doing this earlier. The supplement does it even on the pages available on 3plusplus. The text that's setting out how you go about choosing a "Farsight Enclaves army" uses "Codex: Tau Empire" twice in such a way that it is very obviously pointing you to a physical book by that title which does not include the page that the rule is printed on. The page the rule is printed on offers rules that "can be used in addition to the material found in Codex: Tau Empire". The signature systems section again references a book by title, and your interpretation has it talking nonsense when it says "...may not select from those listed in Codex: Tau Empire, but may instead select from the Signature Systems of the Farsight Enclaves, at the points costs shown." You're saying that what it means is "...may not select from those listed in [various places including this supplement], but may instead select from the [ones listed in this supplement]"?

As I said before, I'm certainly not advocating playing such that Farsight's Commander Team can't use Markerlights (or that Forgeworld units can't use Markerlights, unless Forgeworld books have some language that the supplement lacks). But this is actually one of the clearer rules GW has written.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There is perhaps more room for debate with Ethereals, whose rule only references "this codex". But I don't think I've ever seen GW use "codex" to refer to something other than a real book. Page 3 of Codex: Tau Empire also seems to use "Codex: Tau Empire" and "this codex" interchangeably.

I highly doubt I'd swing either of your arguments based on the, frankly, insanely qualified points I'm seeing brought forward. But I feel I must point out something I pointed out back when the Iyanden supplement came out.

Page 109 of the Rulebook only permits you to fill the FOC, primary, secondary, allied or otherwise, using a Codex. If you don't class the Farsight supplement as being part of Codex: Tau Empire - then as per strict RAW, *you cannot use the book at all*.

This gives you two possible outcomes:
1) The special unit may use markerlights from the main book, or
2) the special unit is invalid per the main rulebook.

Oh, and - since you're not treating the supplement as a Codex, or even as part of one, it can't even be argued that it overrides the rulebook.

In my version of the Farsight Supplement (downloaded yesterday) it says on the rules clarifications under Sub-commander Torchstar that markerlights work for "units from Codex:Tau Empire". So RAW Farsight Supplement markerlights don't work for themselves, only for any Tau allies, if you claim that Tau and Farsight are two different codices....

And while we're at it, why don't we start discussing the signature system dilemma: If I have Codex:Tau as by primary and Farsight as my allies, can my primary detachment take a buff-commander with Sigs from Codex:Tau Empire?

rigeld2 wrote:
Well... Yes.

Precedent states otherwise. For example the 3.5ed chaos codex, which changed armylist based on many,many factors