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.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I think that as long as FW rules are only available by expensive mail order books, it's not totally out of line for people to want more than a few minutes before a game reading over some rules.

Prepare to be countered with "Just pirate them." or "with the internet it's not a big deal to order from forgeworld - it's your fault you're uninformed"

Don't get me wrong, I feel that if you want to play a game competitively, you are responsible for keeping up on rules, and you don't need to pirate FW to get a pretty good idea of what units do by reading reviews and tactica.

And given the pace of codices now, if you're not playing a lot, you can't really keep up with super official GW releases, so what does a FW rule here or there really matter?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
I think that as long as FW rules are only available by expensive mail order books, it's not totally out of line for people to want more than a few minutes before a game reading over some rules.

Absolutely. But, again, we're not really discussing an actual in-person in counter but rather the meaning of a rule set.

I think that stating that no authority can bootstrap itself is enough for me to argue a theoretical legality.

Simply put, FW can call itself whatever it likes, but it's not the source of the authority to make rules legal.

Peregrine wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
... which the rule book allows you to use on page 108.
What codexes does FW publish? (hint: none)

So are you going to cite the rule that says "only codices are permitted and we will never publish additional rules that are just as legal as a codex"? Because it sounds like you're assuming GW is using your personal legality policy without any evidence to support it.

It's a permissive rule set (like any rule set must be). I've cited permission to use codexes. Are you just going to pretend such permission exists for FW books?
And note - I don't really care even a little bit about allowing Forgeworld or not. I'm aware it's your personal crusade that every event everywhere must always allow Forgeworld or they're lesser in your eyes.
But when someone is trying to argue that the rule book allows it when it clearly doesn't...

Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Prepare to be countered with "Just pirate them." or "with the internet it's not a big deal to order from forgeworld - it's your fault you're uninformed"

The argument cannot be that FW doesn't count because the books are too expensive. Therefore, no need to hypothesize bad arguments against it.

Difficult to acquire != too expensive. You'll note I never mentioned price. You can have fun tilting at that windmill but you're right - it's a bad argument.

rigeld2 wrote:

Peregrine wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
... which the rule book allows you to use on page 108.
What codexes does FW publish? (hint: none)

So are you going to cite the rule that says "only codices are permitted and we will never publish additional rules that are just as legal as a codex"? Because it sounds like you're assuming GW is using your personal legality policy without any evidence to support it.

It's a permissive rule set (like any rule set must be). I've cited permission to use codexes. Are you just going to pretend such permission exists for FW books?
And note - I don't really care even a little bit about allowing Forgeworld or not. I'm aware it's your personal crusade that every event everywhere must always allow Forgeworld or they're lesser in your eyes.
But when someone is trying to argue that the rule book allows it when it clearly doesn't...

Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Prepare to be countered with "Just pirate them." or "with the internet it's not a big deal to order from forgeworld - it's your fault you're uninformed"

The argument cannot be that FW doesn't count because the books are too expensive. Therefore, no need to hypothesize bad arguments against it.

Difficult to acquire != too expensive. You'll note I never mentioned price. You can have fun tilting at that windmill but you're right - it's a bad argument.

Sentinels of Terra is difficult to acquire. The cheapest way for me to view it is with an iPad mini.

rigeld2 wrote:
I'm aware it's your personal crusade that every event everywhere must always allow Forgeworld or they're lesser in your eyes.
But when someone is trying to argue that the rule book allows it when it clearly doesn't...

This demonstrates the problem I have with these threads. It's well known (or should be) that everything in 40k is "permission only." The rules are sort of collectively agreed upon.

I think a lot of the blowback you get in these threads isn't about stuff being "legal" or not, but simply an insulted reaction to being told that the way they play is lesser than somebody elses.

-Shrike- wrote:
Sentinels of Terra is difficult to acquire. The cheapest way for me to view it is with an iPad mini.

Any mac or PC computer will allow you to view it. You get to print one copy for free. I'm sure you can find a Fedex/Kinkos or whatever.

 pretre wrote:

-Shrike- wrote:
Sentinels of Terra is difficult to acquire. The cheapest way for me to view it is with an iPad mini.

Any mac or PC computer will allow you to view it. You get to print one copy for free. I'm sure you can find a Fedex/Kinkos or whatever.

D'oh, I forgot that they released it in .epub format.

rigeld2 wrote:
It's a permissive rule set (like any rule set must be). I've cited permission to use codexes. Are you just going to pretend such permission exists for FW books?

It's been cited over and over again. The only "problem" with it is that it hasn't been printed in the place you want it to be printed in, but that's only a problem if you assume GW has a policy that the only things that are official are the ones explicitly mentioned in the original core rulebook, instead of their actual policy of publishing new stuff and saying "this is part of the game now".

Difficult to acquire != too expensive. You'll note I never mentioned price. You can have fun tilting at that windmill but you're right - it's a bad argument.

If you're not talking about price then you certainly don't have an argument about them being difficult to acquire. If you have the money they're no more difficult to buy than any other GW products.

rigeld2 wrote:
You can have fun tilting at that windmill but you're right - it's a bad argument.

Especially with codex prices the way they are (+ supplements).

 Polonius wrote:
Simply put, FW can call itself whatever it likes, but it's not the source of the authority to make rules legal.

The thing is, FW calls itself whatever GW likes. Which kind of breaks down your third clause there.

 pretre wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
But that doens't make it 100% so.

One wonders just how much more explicit FW will have to be.

I don't think FW being explicit helps. FW could say anything they wanted and people would still argue. GW (I know, I know) itself has to do it.

If GW wanted to end this once and for all, they could put up an allies matrix and an official statement on their website saying 'The following FW units and books are official 40k units and usable in all 40k games.'

See my point here:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Tthe main rule book actually mentions that you can play with things other than an army list from a codex (to include a modified army list).

For anyone who doubts me, just flip back to page 108 in the main rulebook and look under the section that says "The Army List":

The Rules wrote:With the points limit agreed, players need to pick their forces. The best way to do this is to make use of the army list in the relevant codex, although, of course, players are free to either adapt the army lists or use their own system as they wish...

Seeing as FW materials change the army list I'd say that's all the proof you need. Coincidentally it also works for homebrew as well.

You can "alter" your army list with FW units as per the main rulebook and yet people still argue it.

 Manchu wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
You can have fun tilting at that windmill but you're right - it's a bad argument.

Especially with codex prices the way they are (+ supplements).

 Polonius wrote:
Simply put, FW can call itself whatever it likes, but it's not the source of the authority to make rules legal.

The thing is, FW calls itself whatever GW likes. Which kind of breaks down your third clause there.

Sure, in the sense that GW owns both FW and the 40k design studio. But when nearly everybody refers to "GW" rules, they mean those that come from the 40k design studio. And without knowing more about the communication between FW and the studio, i'm not comfortable assuming that everybody is on the same page.

rigeld2 wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Isn't a codex 'an outside source supplement' in relation to the rulebook?

... which the rule book allows you to use on page 108.
What codexes does FW publish? (hint: none)

108 also says you're allowed to alter the army list and even use something other than the army list to play your army, but it seems we ignore the rest of that sentence when we want to selective interpret things to restrict choices.

 Polonius wrote:
And without knowing more about the communication between FW and the studio, i'm not comfortable assuming that everybody is on the same page.

Understandably so considering that there is debate about whether everyone in the studio itself is on the same page. But with that specifically in mind, let's recall that 40k is not intended to be the most tightly written and competitive ruleset on the market. So hypothetical balance arguments, which so often end up getting a lot of play in these threads, really shouldn't be on the table at all.

If we were talking about PP on the other hand ...

 Purifier wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
The argument that this one rules document is official but everything else isn't is just absurd.

That's an absurd thing to say. It states this in this one and not in the others. If anything, saying that because one book has an officiallity policy everything does no matter what it says is the absurd statement.

That said, I'm quite happy to play Forgeworld and my group does to a very minor extent without any complaining. (no full armies but an odd vehicle or armament.)

If GW wanted to make forgeworld feel 101% legit, all they'd have to do was to add Death Korps and Elyssian Drop Troops and those bull space marines (am I missing anyone?) to the ally matrix. That, I think, would have sealed the deal for most anyone.

Death Korps and Elysian Drop Troops are on the ally matrix.

They take up the same slot as Imperial Guard. It says so, right in their rules.

Thanks furyou miko, I had meant to post something like that but got sidetracked.

 Peregrine wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It's a permissive rule set (like any rule set must be). I've cited permission to use codexes. Are you just going to pretend such permission exists for FW books?

It's been cited over and over again. The only "problem" with it is that it hasn't been printed in the place you want it to be printed in, but that's only a problem if you assume GW has a policy that the only things that are official are the ones explicitly mentioned in the original core rulebook, instead of their actual policy of publishing new stuff and saying "this is part of the game now".

Yes, I have a problem with someone bootstrapping themselves into the game and your assumption that it's valid.

Difficult to acquire != too expensive. You'll note I never mentioned price. You can have fun tilting at that windmill but you're right - it's a bad argument.

If you're not talking about price then you certainly don't have an argument about them being difficult to acquire. If you have the money they're no more difficult to buy than any other GW products.

Really? I can go to my FLGS and buy any of the FW books?
Wow that's news. Thanks for telling me!
Oh - you meant over the internet? Oh. But that's more difficult than just going down the street and buying them like I do for my other GW products. It's like your statement was incorrect or something.

 Polonius wrote:
But when nearly everybody refers to "GW" rules, they mean those that come from the 40k design studio.

But where is the evidence that GW draws this line and considers some of their brand names to be different? It seems like this has been invented entirely by certain players.

And without knowing more about the communication between FW and the studio, i'm not comfortable assuming that everybody is on the same page.

This is GW we're talking about, and we all know how much they love their lawyers and total control over everything. If their FW brand was publishing "this is official" statements without permission GW management would shut it down immediately.

 Manchu wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
And without knowing more about the communication between FW and the studio, i'm not comfortable assuming that everybody is on the same page.

Understandably so considering that there is debate about whether everyone in the studio itself is on the same page. But with that specifically in mind, let's recall that 40k is not intended to be the most tightly written and competitive ruleset on the market. So hypothetical balance arguments, which so often end up getting a lot of play in these threads, really shouldn't be on the table at all.

If we were talking about PP on the other hand ...

I'm not arguing balance. I'm saying that its wierd that some 40k rules come from the GW store/web page, and are all produced by the design studio. And then some other ones are produced and marketed by different people. That's a difference, and I can sympathize with the argument that until the people in charge of 40k rules say FW dandy, FW's view is less persuasive.

This thread is like the moron olympics.

"You can't use FW because it's not in the Rules Book!"

"Yes, I can because [this] and you have to let me!"

"Nutjobs won't allow it until GW says so!"

"herp-derp-derp"

"FW isn't a part of the core game!"

"Show me where it explicitly says that! SHOW ME! Citation! CITATIONNNN!"



Good God! How do you people even function in the real world?

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes, I have a problem with someone bootstrapping themselves into the game and your assumption that it's valid.

It's not much of an assumption to "assume" that when GW publishes a statement they mean it. You're the one assuming that GW must mention all legal sources of rules in the core rulebook despite no evidence at all that this is how GW runs their company.

Oh - you meant over the internet? Oh. But that's more difficult than just going down the street and buying them like I do for my other GW products.

Oh hey, kind of like the direct-only kits GW sells.

Plus, ordering online is easier than going to a store. Why spend an hour driving to and from a store when you can just buy online and have the package delivered right to your door?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Isn't a codex 'an outside source supplement' in relation to the rulebook?

... which the rule book allows you to use on page 108.
What codexes does FW publish? (hint: none)

108 also says you're allowed to alter the army list and even use something other than the army list to play your army, but it seems we ignore the rest of that sentence when we want to selective interpret things to restrict choices.

The rulebook also says to 4+ on any disagreement. So let's just pretend that we only apply what's actually written. Or we can have a game and I'll ask for a 4+ on literally everything you do.
Also, you're ignoring that - according to the actual rules and not CZ40k -

p108 wrote:If you're using the codex,then you'll need to know about Force Organisation - sometimes referred to as Force Org.

So let's not selectively ignore things. You don't have a Force Org when you play without a Codex.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
But when nearly everybody refers to "GW" rules, they mean those that come from the 40k design studio.

But where is the evidence that GW draws this line and considers some of their brand names to be different? It seems like this has been invented entirely by certain players.

Probably when they sell them on different websites, through different channels, and with totally different business models.

This is GW we're talking about, and we all know how much they love their lawyers and total control over everything. If their FW brand was publishing "this is official" statements without permission GW management would shut it down immediately.

Well, GW owns FW, they don't need to sue, so that's a bit of a silly point. I think GW execs are worried about the value of the brand, not the nature of the rules.

rigeld2 wrote:
You don't have a Force Org when you play without a Codex.

Yes you do. FW army lists provide a FOC, and individual units are taken as part of a codex army so they use the FOC of their "parent" codex.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Polonius wrote:
[Probably when they sell them on different websites, through different channels, and with totally different business models.

They sell supplements through the ipad store, which is a different source with a totally different business model. Yet somehow we don't see complaints about how Farsight Tau aren't "official" and you need special permission to use them.

Well, GW owns FW, they don't need to sue, so that's a bit of a silly point. I think GW execs are worried about the value of the brand, not the nature of the rules.

They wouldn't sue, but they would tell FW to stop doing it. And yes, it potentially hurts the value of the brand if you have people randomly adding statements about what is and isn't official.

rigeld2 wrote:


If you're not talking about price then you certainly don't have an argument about them being difficult to acquire. If you have the money they're no more difficult to buy than any other GW products.

Really? I can go to my FLGS and buy any of the FW books?
Wow that's news. Thanks for telling me!
Oh - you meant over the internet? Oh. But that's more difficult than just going down the street and buying them like I do for my other GW products. It's like your statement was incorrect or something.

rigeld2 wrote:
The rulebook also says to 4+ on any disagreement. So let's just pretend that we only apply what's actually written. Or we can have a game and I'll ask for a 4+ on literally everything you do.
Also, you're ignoring that - according to the actual rules and not CZ40k -

Just because you're wrong doesn't mean you need to start with the hyperbole. You only 4+ when you and your opponent disagree on the rules. You can try and dice off for everything but no one will play you.
Here's the actual facts: FW alters the army list by giving you more options to take in the army list. This is allowed by page 108. You can argue otherwise or not play me but one of us is following the rules and the other is not. And it isn't me.

 Peregrine wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yes, I have a problem with someone bootstrapping themselves into the game and your assumption that it's valid.

It's not much of an assumption to "assume" that when GW publishes a statement they mean it. You're the one assuming that GW must mention all legal sources of rules in the core rulebook despite no evidence at all that this is how GW runs their company.

It's like you've failed to actually understand what I'm saying. Yes, exactly like that in fact.
I'm not assuming that. At all. Your crusade has blinded you to the fact that I'm actually a neutral party. Let's look at the post I originally replied to in this thread:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Isn't a codex 'an outside source supplement' in relation to the rulebook?

Which was replying to:

Makumba wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Like a codex?

nope , because the rule book says that the source for rules are codex and the codex are made by GW , the same firm that makes the game and not an outside source sister firm .

(my edit to cut irrelevant text)
Please read and understand my point. Page 108 includes Codexes. It does not include any other book. So trying to use the argument that you're allowed to by the rules is simply and indisputably false.

Oh - you meant over the internet? Oh. But that's more difficult than just going down the street and buying them like I do for my other GW products.

Oh hey, kind of like the direct-only kits GW sells.

Oh hey, and? That's not - and I'll quote you so I'm not putting words in your mouth - "any other GW products." That's some GW products.

Plus, ordering online is easier than going to a store. Why spend an hour driving to and from a store when you can just buy online and have the package delivered right to your door?

Because I play there and want them to stay open. And it's not an hour. Plus - I can call him and he'll have what I want waiting for me when I get there - even more convenient than buying online.

 Peregrine wrote:

They sell supplements through the ipad store, which is a different source with a totally different business model. Yet somehow we don't see complaints about how Farsight Tau aren't "official" and you need special permission to use them.

Agreed. Supplements work only because of the same rules that FW books do: the permissions given on page 108. If you can't take FW then you can't take supplements (and vice versa) because they need the same rule to work.

 Polonius wrote:
I think a lot of the blowback you get in these threads isn't about stuff being "legal" or not, but simply an insulted reaction to being told that the way they play is lesser than somebody elses.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You can argue otherwise or not play me but one of us is following the rules and the other is not.

aaand there you go.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
So, you're trying to tell me that my Sisters of Battle aren't kosher for standard 40k, since you can't buy their codex or their models in your local store?

No - they have a codex and so are by definition allowed.

Anyway, if it's an FLGS you're talking about, then that's the manager's decision not to sell them, not GW's decision. GW stores often do sell Imperial Armour books. I'll get a photo of the ones for sale in my local store tomorrow if you want.

Well - no, it's GW/FW's decision. Since they won't sell FW books at a discount a non-GW store will be guaranteed to lose money on any that they order (since they have to pay shipping). GW stores might not have to pay shipping (I'm not sure) but all of the local ones (more than one) have told me that they can't order them for the shelves anymore and they can't get me free shipping unless I'm over the FW price for free shipping (like they used to be able to).

Zion is Schroedinger's Cultist?

Some people don't want to play with FW. That won't ever change, despite whatever wording FW chooses to use.


Bring it to any game I'm at, just have the rules with you and the proper model.