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.

I'm pretty sure RAW its a no since it says it uses codex: tau empire but was I just wondering if it was possible

I suspect you are answering your own question there. Shem though...

If you take a Farsight Enclave Detachment, the way the rules are written in the supplemental, all the Signature Systems will apply to the Formation.

Here is a read through the old thread.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/592478.page

Alright thanks for the confirmation!

 A GumyBear wrote:
Alright thanks for the confirmation!

Note: In doing so, you will not be able to use any Codex: Tau Empire Signature Systems.
So no Buffmander with your O'vesa Star, but a recent errata lets you take Shadowsun/Aun'va in the allied detachment instead.

 Nilok wrote:
If you take a Farsight Enclave Detachment, the way the rules are written in the supplemental, all the Signature Systems will apply to the Formation.

Here is a read through the old thread.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/592478.page

I don't know what the point of clarifying that is, though, since none of the formation models have permission to take anything except what is listed in the Dataslate. They can't take any Sig Systems, since they're not listed in the Dataslate. Thus, whether you're using Farsight or Taunilla, models from Firebase can't take Sigs.
And interestingly, the Positional Relay refers explicitly to units from C:TE, and would not work with C:FE. (Not that I've ever seen anyone take one of those....)

 Elric Greywolf wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
If you take a Farsight Enclave Detachment, the way the rules are written in the supplemental, all the Signature Systems will apply to the Formation.

Here is a read through the old thread.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/592478.page

I don't know what the point of clarifying that is, though, since none of the formation models have permission to take anything except what is listed in the Dataslate. They can't take any Sig Systems, since they're not listed in the Dataslate. Thus, whether you're using Farsight or Taunilla, models from Firebase can't take Sigs.
And interestingly, the Positional Relay refers explicitly to units from C:TE, and would not work with C:FE. (Not that I've ever seen anyone take one of those....)

I think the Positional Replay won't work only for members for The Eight (not including Farsight) not joined to a normal Tau unit since the Farsight Enclaves is a supplement and uses all the same rules for Codex: Tau Empire unless otherwise stated.

I'm not sure why we are having this discussion again since I already gave you the rules support in the thread I linked.

 Nilok wrote:

 Elric Greywolf wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
put the Earth Caste Pilot Array on a Firebase Support Cadre Formation Detachment. I can't tell if its funny or stupid.

I can't see how this would be accomplished, since the ECPA isn't an option in the dataslate. How are you doing this?

From the Farsight Enclaves, emphasis is mine

SIGNATURE SYSTEMS wrote:Any character in your army that may select Signature Systems may not select from those listed in Codex: Tau Empire, but may instead select from the Signature System of the Farsight Enclaves (opposite), at the points cost shown. Note that XV104 Riptides in your army may select items from the Signature Systems of the Farsight Enclaves

If you take a Farsight Enclaves detachment, all of your Riptides in your army from the Tau Codex, Farsight Enclaves, or the Firebase Cadre can take the ECPA.

The Dataslate does not have those permissions, correct. However, the Farsight Enclave modifies all of the Riptides in your army to be able to select them.

 Nilok wrote:

 Elric Greywolf wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
put the Earth Caste Pilot Array on a Firebase Support Cadre Formation Detachment. I can't tell if its funny or stupid.

I can't see how this would be accomplished, since the ECPA isn't an option in the dataslate. How are you doing this?

From the Farsight Enclaves, emphasis is mine

SIGNATURE SYSTEMS wrote:Any character in your army that may select Signature Systems may not select from those listed in Codex: Tau Empire, but may instead select from the Signature System of the Farsight Enclaves (opposite), at the points cost shown. Note that XV104 Riptides in your army may select items from the Signature Systems of the Farsight Enclaves

If you take a Farsight Enclaves detachment, all of your Riptides in your army from the Tau Codex, Farsight Enclaves, or the Firebase Cadre can take the ECPA.
The Dataslate does not have those permissions, correct. However, the Farsight Enclave modifies all of the Riptides in your army to be able to select them.

Alright, legal. And this time, I'll try to remember.

It is a little bit of a broken situation but, to be fair, it is likely a situation the Authors did not envision when they wrote the Farsight Enclave Supplement.

I usually treat 'army' as 'detachment' in FE supplement. It was the frist one made by them able to ally with the mother codex, and all supplements that came after it have the distinction quite clear.

So, I treat Firebase dataslate as not able to pick anything outside what's being offered in the dataslate itself.

Only issue with that is one piece of errata:
They changed one Rule from 'Your army may Not include X or Y' to 'A Farsight Enclave Army can Not include X or Y.'

It make no sense for the Authors to make such a chance if 'Your Army' and 'Farsight Enclave Army' already the same thing.

There is also something else I want people to consider on why they did not use the terminology 'detachment' within these rules: They already have used this terminology in past rules! This terminology is usually limited to Rules designed to restrict the number of times they can be evoked or prevent certain war-gear from being selected multiple times, but in one very interesting way. It grants the ability for armies made of multiple detachments from the same Codex, such as in 2000+ games where two Primary Detachments exist, to evoke the Rule independently for each detachment. If any other Rule was written to include the same format, by stating the Rule applies to a detachment, it would also allow it to be evoked by individual detachments. Sometimes they want a Rule to be bound to all models taken from that Supplement/Codex regardless of which detachment they are found in, but not binding the entire Army.

I'll be totally honest.

Between this thread, the other one, and GW's less than clear language, I am now totally confused about 'who can take what, and when they can take it'.

I do agree with, their use of very similar terminology and the problems it causes have been well documented throughout the internet. Yet on this issue I have changed my view a little bit, while I would like for the terminology to be more precise I have accepted that the use of 'detachment' as that precise terminology is incorrect. There needs to be a level between 'Your Army' and 'Detachment,' in order to address all models within a single detachment that might have Rules different to other detachments taken from the same codex. They are rare, but I know of one in the Tau Empire Codex off the top of my head which allows certain weapon systems to be selected based on detachment, not the entire army or even that codex.

The way I look at this is a hierarchy that looks something like this:
Your Army
Codex's Army
Detachment
Force Organization Placement
Unit
Model
War-gear