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.

If I take a command squad and upgrade 2 members, one to an apothecary, and one to a Champion, can they ALSO choose from the "ranged or melee" weapons?

That is, can my apothecary carry a Grav-gun or other choice from those lists?

Thanks.

Most people say no due to the characters no longer being veterans once they are upgraded and so thus cannot take veteran weaponry.

I personally play it that way just to avoid any arguments.

It all revolves down to whether you agree that upgrades can be taken in any order or have to be retroactive in what the model can and cant do.

Personally I play it where the order doesn't matter, but the final result does. So by that, it would be a 'no', an apothecary or champion could not have a weapon that can only be taken by a veteran.

I'd say no in correspondence with what Ghaz says.

I've always played it as yes, provided they remain within the restrictions of the options at the time they are taken.

So for instance it would be legal to first swap a Veteran's chainsword for a power fist and then subsequently upgrade him to an Apothecary, since each option was legal at the time you took it. It would not be legal however to replace a Veteran's chainsword and then upgrade to a Champion, since that upgrade explicitly requires you to swap the chainsword as part of the deal. You would have been able to exchange the pistol though, since that isn't replaced as part of the Champion upgrade.

What's the point in making an illegal option legal just by changing the order in which you take the option? Why wouldn't the game designers make them legal no matter what if you could just change the order to make them legal? How do you prove to your opponent or tournament organizer that you took the upgrades in an order that made the 'legal' instead of illegal?

Because multi-swaps have always been implicitly legal? This is best illustrated by the Bikers FAQ, which gives them the option to swap pistols for chainswords, which in turn is the basis for allowing them to subsequently swap the chainswords for special weapons.

I don't understand why anyone would need "proof" of anything beyond what's written in the codex entry. If you can point to the relevant units and options in the book and show how you went about purchasing them, I would say that's proof enough, no matter how simple or complicated the unit is.

The trouble is you're trying to use a FAQ for something other than what it was designed for. The FAQ changed the rules (and GW's FAQs do change rules) for that one unit. It doesn't say it sets a precedent that allows you to change the order in other army list entries.

So again, what is the point of making an option illegal if you can make it legal just by changing the order? What's the point? Why wouldn't GW just make it legal regardless of what order the upgrades are taken in? There's no bonus for clever army list building in 40K.

 Ghaz wrote:
What's the point in making an illegal option legal just by changing the order in which you take the option? Why wouldn't the game designers make them legal no matter what if you could just change the order to make them legal? How do you prove to your opponent or tournament organizer that you took the upgrades in an order that made the 'legal' instead of illegal?

Very simple. Like this

Space Marine Command Squad
2 Veterans swap Chainsword for Power Fist
2 Veterans swap Bolters for Plasma Gun
1 Veteran with Power Fist Upgraded to Apothecary
1 Veteran with Power Fist Upgraded to Apothecary
1 Veteran Upgraded to have the Standard of the Emperor Ascendent

Or just use common sense as the opponent. If the person is looking to take such a combo, of course he's going to choose an order that makes it legal and not illegal.

There's also the precedent set by the old Ork FAQ, which explicitly stated that Nobs in a Boyz Mob could take weapons reserved for Boyz, like Rokkits and Big Shootas, by taking them first, then upgrading to a Nob. The fact that one ruling was made to allow it means that all identical disputes should follow the same ruling. Especially as this FAQ is the OFFICIAL answer, and anyone who disagrees with that is simply a personal opinion.

It's not a rules change, and taking Veteran upgrades is not even an explicitly illegal choice. It's an option with prerequisites, which isn't the same thing.

Here's a parallel situation straight from the codex: A Chapter Master comes with power armour, a pistol and a chainsword. He has permission to upgrade to Terminator armour with a power sword and storm bolter, and also permission to take weapons from the Terminator Weapons list, all of which explicitly require exchanging his power weapon or storm bolter.

Under the theory you're advancing, all upgrades have to be taken at the same time and be legal "out of the box" to be selected. So how then does the Terminator Chapter Master take a chainfist, for instance? By your argument, he still has his power armour, bolt pistol and chainsword when evaluating legal options; he won't actually get his Terminator armour, power sword and storm bolter until finishing the purchase process, at which point your argument holds that it is too late to make further purchases.

Either multiple swaps have to be legal, or else the entire codex falls apart at any point there are two or more options to be taken. This isn't a case of clever list building, this is common sense reading of the rules.

 Deadshot wrote:
There's also the precedent set by the old Ork FAQ, which explicitly stated that Nobs in a Boyz Mob could take weapons reserved for Boyz, like Rokkits and Big Shootas, by taking them first, then upgrading to a Nob. The fact that one ruling was made to allow it means that all identical disputes should follow the same ruling. Especially as this FAQ is the OFFICIAL answer, and anyone who disagrees with that is simply a personal opinion.

You mean this one?

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas with
shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a big choppa?
(p100)
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big choppa or
power klaw before you choose to upgrade the mob to
have shootas, in which case the Nob is not affected by
the mob’s weapon swap (as he no longer has a choppa
to swap), does not receive a shoota and keeps his
slugga and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

You realize that that exact same FAQ had the following:

Q: Can a Painboy in a unit of Nobs take the ‘eavy
armour, bosspole, Waaagh! Banner or ammo runt
upgrades? (p98)
A: No.


Also, from the BA FAQ:

Q: Can a Furioso Librarian take additional wargear
(such as extra armour)? (p29)
A: No.

 Deadshot wrote:
There's also the precedent set by the old Ork FAQ, which explicitly stated that Nobs in a Boyz Mob could take weapons reserved for Boyz, like Rokkits and Big Shootas, by taking them first, then upgrading to a Nob. The fact that one ruling was made to allow it means that all identical disputes should follow the same ruling. Especially as this FAQ is the OFFICIAL answer, and anyone who disagrees with that is simply a personal opinion.

The old FAQ doesn't say what you think it says. He could take the big shoota or rokkit launcha because the entry said up to X number of orks could take a heavy weapon in the mob. They weren't restricted to boyz.

Creeperman wrote:
Either multiple swaps have to be legal, or else the entire codex falls apart at any point there are two or more options to be taken.

And exactly where did I say that multiple swaps can't be taken? I didn't. What I said was that the results of those multipke swaps cant end in the result of an illegal upgrade. An apothecary with a weapon that only a veteran can take ends up with an illegal upgrade.

Creeperman wrote:
Under the theory you're advancing, all upgrades have to be taken at the same time and be legal "out of the box" to be selected. So how then does the Terminator Chapter Master take a chainfist, for instance? By your argument, he still has his power armour, bolt pistol and chainsword when evaluating legal options; he won't actually get his Terminator armour, power sword and storm bolter until finishing the purchase process, at which point your argument holds that it is too late to make further purchases.

And again, how does saying that only the end result must be legal equate to you must take the upgrades in the oreder they're presented? It doesn't, not in the least. All that matters is at the end of the list building process is that the options be legal. Yours fails because at the end of the process you have an apothecary with an option that can only be taken by a veteran. Whether you upgraded that veteran to an apothecary before or after you purchased the option for a veteran does not matter.

As for 'precedents' in the FAQs, Happyjew has that more than amply covered.

 Ghaz wrote:

Creeperman wrote:
Either multiple swaps have to be legal, or else the entire codex falls apart at any point there are two or more options to be taken.

And exactly where did I say that multiple swaps can't be taken? I didn't. What I said was that the results of those multipke swaps cant end in the result of an illegal upgrade. An apothecary with a weapon that only a veteran can take ends up with an illegal upgrade.

You implied that multiple upgrades can't be taken when you defined "illegal upgrades" as upgrades that were at any point unavailable to the model. In fact you state that yet again, as shown below.

 Ghaz wrote:

Creeperman wrote:
Under the theory you're advancing, all upgrades have to be taken at the same time and be legal "out of the box" to be selected. So how then does the Terminator Chapter Master take a chainfist, for instance? By your argument, he still has his power armour, bolt pistol and chainsword when evaluating legal options; he won't actually get his Terminator armour, power sword and storm bolter until finishing the purchase process, at which point your argument holds that it is too late to make further purchases.

And again, how does saying that only the end result must be legal equate to you must take the upgrades in the oreder they're presented? It doesn't, not in the least. All that matters is at the end of the list building process is that the options be legal. Yours fails because at the end of the process you have an apothecary with an option that can only be taken by a veteran. Whether you upgraded that veteran to an apothecary before or after you purchased the option for a veteran does not matter.

You're being inconsistent here. If you accept multiple swaps as legal, as in the case of the Chapter Master example I gave, then you also have to accept the concepts of intermediate legality that makes those swaps work. A Terminator Chapter Master with a chainfist is a legal configuration, because it was an upgrade from a Terminator Chapter Master with a power sword, which in turn was a legal upgrade from a plain Chapter Master with a chainsword, despite there being no explicit permission for a power-armoured Chapter Master to directly exchange his chainsword for a chainfist. Similarly, an Apothecary with a plasma gun must be legal, because the Veteran he was had permission to purchase that plasma gun, and there are no restrictions on which Veteran may upgrade to an Apothecary, save that only one Veteran per Command Squad may do so.

False. I never once 'implied' that you couldn't take multiple upgrades and none of my posts ever.

Nor am I being inconsistent. You're trying to use a Chapter Master that's always a Chapter Master as a reason for a an Apothecary to take an upgrade available to a Veteran.

You're trying to use a 'one time only' legality. To you it doesn't matter if it's legal now, just that it was at one point at time. That doesn't work. It's an ongoing process, with the final result showing if it's a legal list.

As has already been provided by Happyjew, there's more than ample precedent to show that you're wrong.

 Ghaz wrote:
False. I never once 'implied' that you couldn't take multiple upgrades and none of my posts ever.

Nor am I being inconsistent. You're trying to use a Chapter Master that's always a Chapter Master as a reason for a an Apothecary to take an upgrade available to a Veteran.

You're trying to use a 'one time only' legality. To you it doesn't matter if it's legal now, just that it was at one point at time. That doesn't work. It's an ongoing process, with the final result showing if it's a legal list.

As has already been provided by Happyjew, there's more than ample precedent to show that you're wrong.

A Terminator Chapter Master is a Chapter Master, but a Chapter Master doesn't have access to the Terminator Weapons list unless he upgrades to Terminator Armour. You are effectively arguing that a chainfist is illegal for him to have because at some point in his purchase process he doesn't have access to Terminator Weapons. That's the only part of this that doesn't work. The game is only concerned about upgrade legality at the point you purchase the upgrade in question, otherwise the entire system breaks down the moment you take more than one.

If legality worked the way you're suggesting, you wouldn't even get to upgrade that Chapter Master to Terminator armour in the first place, because he'd need to keep his bolt pistol and chainsword to continually re-satisfy the requirement of replacing those weapons with a power sword and storm bolter.

Also, HappyJew never addressed any of my post, nor my main points, so claiming decisive precedent from him and a couple outdated FAQs is a little premature.

My codex gives me the option to choose ranged or melee weapons for Veterans. It furthermore lets me pay 15 points to upgrade a Veteran to an Apothecary.

Apothecaries can't choose a Ranged weapon because I see no option to choose Ranged weapons for Apothecaries.

I also don't see anything preventing a Veteran who selected a Ranged weapon from being subsequently upgraded to an Apothecary.

This is another example of wanting upgrades to only be chosen in the order in which they are written. There is no rule telling us to do so. To achieve certain outcomes, you need to choose options in certain orders. If you want an Apothecary with a Power Fist, you have to first give a Veteran a Power Fist and then upgrade that Veteran to an Apothecary. If you upgrade the Veteran to an Apothecary first, you're unable to subsequently give him a Power Fist.

There is nothing illegal about an Apothecary wielding a Power Fist. He just learned to use it before he joined the Apothecarium.

Also, a Terminator Chainfist would make a great Power Fist/Narthecium conversion. I might have to do this.

Creeperman, Ghaz is not saying that if a selection is illegal at some point, it is illegal.

He is saying the end result must be legal.

For example, only if a Chapter Master takes Terminator Armour can he take a Chainfist (not 100% sure if that is true away from books at the moment).

If the end result is a Chapter Master wielding a Chainfist without Terminator Armour, then something is wrong.

Since Apothecaries do not have access to Ranged/Melee weapons, if you end up with an Apothecary with an upgraded Ranged/Melee weapon, then something is wrong.


It's not the order (though in some situations, there is an order), it's the end result.

You cannot have a model with a weapon that is not an option to them. Just like you cannot first give a Kabalite warrior a heavy weapon and then upgrade them into a Sybarite, or give a Nob nob-only gear and then upgrade them into a Painboy.

Why can't you? If I can give a Veteran wargear and then subsequently upgrade him to an Apothecary, nothing in the rules causes him to lose that wargear.

If I take a unit of Boyz from Codex:Orks, replace their sluggas with shootas and THEN upgrade one to a Nob, the wargear change carries over and I get a Nob with a slugga.

 Kriswall wrote:
Why can't you? If I can give a Veteran wargear and then subsequently upgrade him to an Apothecary, nothing in the rules causes him to lose that wargear.

Because then he no longer is a veteran and cannot have veteran wargear.

If I take a unit of Boyz from Codex:Orks, replace their sluggas with shootas and THEN upgrade one to a Nob, the wargear change carries over and I get a Nob with a slugga.

Yes, because that weapon is 'any ork', ie. any model in the squad, it as a weapon the Nob is allowed to have. If it was 'any boy', you couldn't do that.

How about this...

One veteran may take a company standard.

One veteran may be upgraded to an Apothecary.

In other entries, the word other is used if they want you to pick a different model. Can I have an Apothecary with a company standard?

I followed the order in which the options were presented. I gave one veteran a company standard and then made one veteran an apothecary. I don't see any rule that would remove the company standard or any wargear list designated as "for veterans only".

Is Apotechary a Veteran? No he is not, thus he cannot have items meant for Veterans. This has nothing to do with the order of upgrades.P.88 lists wargear of an Apotechary separately from that of a Veteran or a Company Champion. That's what Apotecharies have and nothing else.

So, is your argument that a model's default starting equipment is fixed until the end of time? This seems obviously incorrect.

So, to break down your statement...

Is the Apothecary a Veteran? From a fluff standpoint, yes. From a rules standpoint, no. He is an Apothecary.

...thus he cannot have items meant for Veterans. I'm not giving him items meant for Veterans. I'm giving Veterans items meant for Veterans. I'm then upgrading one Veteran to an Apothecary, as the rules specifically grant me permission to do.

I have five Veterans... We'll name them A through E.

Veteran A
Veteran B
Veteran C
Veteran D
Veteran E

First option, "One Veteran may take one of the following..." Ok, I'll give 'C' a Company Standard.

Veteran A
Veteran B
Veteran C - Company Standard
Veteran D
Veteran E

Second option, "One Veteran may be upgraded to a Company Champion". Awesome! Who better to Champion the Chapter than the Veteran with the flag. Is he "one Veteran"? Yes he is.

Veteran A
Veteran B
Company Champion - Company Standard
Veteran D
Veteran E

I acknowledge that I can't give a Company Champion a standard, but I also understand that can upgrade a standard bearing Veteran to a Company Champion.

How does this not work? What rule have I violated? I gave ONE VETERAN a standard and then upgraded ONE VETERAN to a Champion.

It doesn't say an other Veteran may be upgraded or a different Veteran may be upgraded. Both upgrades limit you to only giving the upgrade to one Veteran. There is no written restriction requiring you to choose different Veterans. You are introducing that restriction yourself. I am limited to what is in the unit entry.

The army builder in the enhanced digital codex allows it.

If they had wanted any model to be able to take a special weapon, they would have used the phrase "Any model may...", like they have in other parts of the Codex. But they didn't, which makes me think that Apothecarys with special weapons was not GW's intent.

Now, obviously, I don't work for GW, and there is a possibility that such wargear is intended, but for whatever reason the writer used the other terminology. Given the variance in FAQ answers (the Nob-with-slugga/claw one is in opposition to the "Painboy with 'eavy armour one, both from the same {previous} Ork FAQ) I'm not going to try and argue "order of operations" either.

That's how I see it at least.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
The army builder in the enhanced digital codex allows it.

Considering that each Veteran can take potentially two special weapons, does the Digi-dex allow you to take 10 specials and an Apothecary?

 Dozer Blades wrote:
The army builder in the enhanced digital codex allows it.

It does? Well that settles that. Good to know, actually. I always wanted a five-man gravgun bike command squad with an apothecary in it.

Yeah you can't argue with the codex.

Actually what's in the codex is not an army builder, it's just an inventory system to keep track of your models.

Agreed, and it's not very well designed. You can easily choose models with equipment that they could never possibly take.

 Kriswall wrote:
Agreed, and it's not very well designed. You can easily choose models with equipment that they could never possibly take.

Such as?