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 fine with that. The line of questioning was ultimately going to continue with...
Does a Veteran lose his wargear or "reset" to a default set of "Apothecary wargear" when choosing the option to upgrade to an Apothecary?
...with the ultimate question being...
If a Veteran takes a Special Weapon and then upgrades to an Apothecary, why can't he keep the Special Weapon?
HIWPI:
I suspect very strongly that GW expects that people will take options in the order in which they appear on the page. The issue is that they never explicitly told us that this is the way it works. We're left to hash out RaW, and RaW doesn't tell us to pick things in order. My SM Codex says, in the unit entry description about options, "This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to do so, alongside the associated points for each". You'll note that there is nothing about choosing things in order.
I feel strongly enough about RaW allowing me to do so, that I would convert an Apothecary to wield dual grav pistols and a storm shield on a bike. I also realize that this is likely just bad writing on the part of GW and would not be upset or disappointed if they release an FAQ tomorrow saying that options are intended to be taken in the order in which they are presented.
Check out my website. Editorials! Tutorials! Fun Times To Be Had! - kriswallminis.com
Any downside to not being able to further upgrade an Apothecary is mitigated by the fact that you're not spending 30+ points on a single 1 wound model.
darkcloak wrote: Any downside to not being able to further upgrade an Apothecary is mitigated by the fact that you're not spending 30+ points on a single 1 wound model.
I'd be spending 165 points on my T5, 3++ having, Space Marine Bike riding, Twin Grav Pistol toting Gunslinger Medic who causes Fear and has a burning Hatred for his enemies. Oh yeah, and he inspires his Battle Brothers so much so that everyone nearby re-rolls Morale and Pinning tests as well as getting +1 to assault results!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Tell me that doesn't sound fun!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh! And he can even be the Warlord!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/12/09 01:08:42
Check out my website. Editorials! Tutorials! Fun Times To Be Had! - kriswallminis.com
HIWPI:
I suspect very strongly that GW expects that people will take options in the order in which they appear on the page. The issue is that they never explicitly told us that this is the way it works. We're left to hash out RaW, and RaW doesn't tell us to pick things in order. My SM Codex says, in the unit entry description about options, "This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to do so, alongside the associated points for each". You'll note that there is nothing about choosing things in order.
I feel strongly enough about RaW allowing me to do so, that I would convert an Apothecary to wield dual grav pistols and a storm shield on a bike. I also realize that this is likely just bad writing on the part of GW and would not be upset or disappointed if they release an FAQ tomorrow saying that options are intended to be taken in the order in which they are presented.
And to this i agree, with the addition (that you missed in the intent of my last post) that some of the Codex, like Astra militarum that you quoted so must have read:
One Veteran may carry a vox-caster.
One other Veteran may replace his lasgun with a heavy flamer.
One other Veteran may carry a medi-pack.
One other Veteran may carry a regimental standard.
Two other Veterans may form a Veteran Weapons Team who must take on item from the Heavy Weapons list.
Any remaining Veteran that has not been upgraded with pone of the options above may replace his lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list.
The unit entry tells me that no Veteran who carrys a vox-caster may also take an item from the Special Weapons list. If I take both, I violate the restriction in the Special Weapons line.
That these Codices must be in a "follow-the-order-it's-printed" format. Simply by words like " that have not been upgraded" and "above". Because by RaW, this would not work:
-Any remaining Veteran that has not been upgraded with pone of the options above may replace his lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list.
-Two other Veterans may form a Veteran Weapons Team who must take on item from the Heavy Weapons list.
-One other Veteran may carry a regimental standard.
-One other Veteran may carry a medi-pack.
-One other Veteran may replace his lasgun with a heavy flamer.
-One Veteran may carry a vox-caster. Which means that, to follow these options by RaW, you must apply them (by RaW) in a "follow-the-order-it's-printed" format.
This is never explicitly told anywhere, and until they FAQ we will never know... But some Codex do have the method implied, and that is a "truth" by RaW i will always advocate.
As for the issue at hand and the Space Marines Codex, i remember last time this argument cropped up, that by RaW the best interpretation is an "End loadout" check.
IE: Nothing stops you taking a Bike, then taking Terminator Armour (no order as you say). But when you put the model on the board, you check his equipment: he has a Bike+Terminator armour, but Bike says you can't have Termi armour, so the model must be "re-done".
Same here: give the Apothecary all the equipment you want, but when it comes to check what he has: he is an apothecary, not a Veteran, so some of the options are then "illegal".
This works in the same way as anything: you can decide to field a Command Squad 1st, then choose a Company commander. The "End check" will go through, even though by the rules, you could not take the CCS without the commander.
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage.
Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass.
BlackTalos wrote: Same here: give the Apothecary all the equipment you want, but when it comes to check what he has: he is an apothecary, not a Veteran, so some of the options are then "illegal".
The problem with that interpretation is that there is nothing that says that an Apothecary can't have optional equipment. He just has no option to select that equipment from the armoury.
I don't have enough money to buy a Reaver Titan. That doesn't mean that I can't keep the one I already have sitting out on my shelf. Just that I can't buy one.
As for the issue at hand and the Space Marines Codex, i remember last time this argument cropped up, that by RaW the best interpretation is an "End loadout" check.
IE: Nothing stops you taking a Bike, then taking Terminator Armour (no order as you say). But when you put the model on the board, you check his equipment: he has a Bike+Terminator armour, but Bike says you can't have Termi armour, so the model must be "re-done".
Same here: give the Apothecary all the equipment you want, but when it comes to check what he has: he is an apothecary, not a Veteran, so some of the options are then "illegal".
This works in the same way as anything: you can decide to field a Command Squad 1st, then choose a Company commander. The "End check" will go through, even though by the rules, you could not take the CCS without the commander.
This. And Termie armour and bike example is an excellent one. The same logic that people here use to allow an Apotechary eith a special weapon would allow a Captain with a bike and a terminator armour, by taking the bike first.
Crimson wrote: The same logic that people here use to allow an Apotechary eith a special weapon would allow a Captain with a bike and a terminator armour, by taking the bike first.
Captains in the current Space Marine codex don't have Terminator Armour as an option. Terminator Captains are a completely separate entry.
Crimson wrote: The same logic that people here use to allow an Apotechary eith a special weapon would allow a Captain with a bike and a terminator armour, by taking the bike first.
Captains in the current Space Marine codex don't have Terminator Armour as an option. Terminator Captains are a completely separate entry.
BlackTalos wrote: Same here: give the Apothecary all the equipment you want, but when it comes to check what he has: he is an apothecary, not a Veteran, so some of the options are then "illegal".
The problem with that interpretation is that there is nothing that says that an Apothecary can't have optional equipment. He just has no option to select that equipment from the armoury.
I don't have enough money to buy a Reaver Titan. That doesn't mean that I can't keep the one I already have sitting out on my shelf. Just that I can't buy one.
That interpretation (same as bike & Termi armour), is that you check at the end the "status" of the model, in a way. In no specific order, the model has: • One Veteran may be upgraded to an Apothecary, taking a narthecium • Any Veteran may take any of the following: - Melta bombs • Any Veteran may take items from the Melee Weapons and/or Ranged Weapons lists. (Power fist + Grav-pistol).
So we have 3 "statuses", or "options": Is Apothecary; Has Melta bombs; Has melee+ranged weapons. But as you check the requirements for melee/ranged & Melta bombs, you see that the model is no longer "Any Veteran", because he is Apothecary. Model is illegal.
You can go back and choose all of his options again, but as soon as he takes (or ends up taking) "Is Apothecary", then all the options "Veteran" no longer apply.
That was in essence the interpretation that was concluded previously. I'd still go "by order" over this any-day....
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/09 13:03:21
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage.
Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass.
There is no RaW telling us to take the options in order.
There is no RaW telling us to do an "end of selections check".
There is no RaW telling us Apothecaries can't have a Special Weapon.
I've said I believe GW intends us to select options top to bottom, but NEVER EXPLICITLY TELLS US to do this. I believe this is sloppy writing.
In a friendly, casual environment, I would allow anyone to choose out of order, while using common sense to solve conflicts. Termie Chapter Masters can't ride bikes because bikes don't allow Termie Armour. AM Veterans with vox-casters can't have Special Weapons because Special Weapon Vets can't have vox-casters. SM Apothecaries can have Special Weapons because nothing in the Apothecary option text puts a restriction on owning a Special Weapon.
In a tournament environment, I would require people to select options from top to bottom. It avoids a lot of poorly written situations and avoids arguments. Having said that, tournaments have to use house rules to tighten up poorly written RaW. Tournaments shouldn't be used as an indication of what RaW actually is, but maybe what it should be.
Check out my website. Editorials! Tutorials! Fun Times To Be Had! - kriswallminis.com
Kriswall wrote: 99% of what people are saying is just HIWPI.
There is no RaW telling us to take the options in order. There is no RaW telling us to do an "end of selections check". There is no RaW telling us Apothecaries can't have a Special Weapon.
I've said I believe GW intends us to select options top to bottom, but NEVER EXPLICITLY TELLS US to do this. I believe this is sloppy writing.
In a friendly, casual environment, I would allow anyone to choose out of order, while using common sense to solve conflicts. Termie Chapter Masters can't ride bikes because bikes don't allow Termie Armour. AM Veterans with vox-casters can't have Special Weapons because Special Weapon Vets can't have vox-casters. SM Apothecaries can have Special Weapons because nothing in the Apothecary option text puts a restriction on owning a Special Weapon.
In a tournament environment, I would require people to select options from top to bottom. It avoids a lot of poorly written situations and avoids arguments. Having said that, tournaments have to use house rules to tighten up poorly written RaW. Tournaments shouldn't be used as an indication of what RaW actually is, but maybe what it should be.
RaW: Chapter Masters can take a bike first and then choose Terminator armour. It uses the same logic that allows you to take Apoth that has Vet upgrades: the Chapter Master in power armour when he chose a bike. Nothing prevents a Chapter Master riding a bike from taking Terminator armour, but restrictions prevent him from taking a bike when he's in Termi armour already. This extends to a Libby and Chaplain. This works if you take it in any order you like, or top to bottom.
By saying "Apoths can have X upgrade because he was a Veteran when he purchased it", you'd need to accept that a CM, Libby, or Chaplain can do the same for Bike + TDA.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/09 13:38:33
If I sound like I'm being a condescending butthole, I'm not. Read my reply as neutrally as possible, please and thank you.
In other words, you should flag your interpretation and opinion as such instead of making it look like RAW, which it isn't.
Anything that anybody writes on these forums that isn't a direct quote is an interpretation and opinion. There is little point asking everyone to flag every single post they make as such.
The RAW allows it, your vision of the RAI does not. Therefore, you should at least mention that it's RAI, if not your RAI.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've seen Chapter Masters with Terminator armors on a bike. I think.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/09 14:20:51
In other words, you should flag your interpretation and opinion as such instead of making it look like RAW, which it isn't.
Anything that anybody writes on these forums that isn't a direct quote is an interpretation and opinion. There is little point asking everyone to flag every single post they make as such.
The RAW allows it, your vision of the RAI does not. Therefore, you should at least mention that it's RAI, if not your RAI.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've seen Chapter Masters with Terminator armors on a bike. I think.
Except you've not shown the RAW on how you check the legality of the list, insisting its a strict 'top to bottom' system when it could be an 'end of operation' check as well. If it was RAW, you would have something written to support that.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
nutty_nutter wrote: there are no guidelines on HOW upgrades are applied to a unit.
None RaW indeed. But i still stand by Intent (RaI) that the order from top to bottom is kept. Multiple examples if you need them
To which i would add that the Astra Militarum Codex must have an order of options in "top to bottom" for some of the RaW to work.
This is RaW: "-Any remaining Veteran that has not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace his lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list."
Can you follow that Rule in a vacuum for Unit X?
The answer of No will mean that "Top to Bottom" must be implied RaW (for this Codex only)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/09 15:44:28
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage.
Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass.
You have to READ the options from top to bottom to comprehend them. You don't have to apply them from top to bottom as there is no RaW on the matter and the options aren't numbered. So long as you've read and comprehended the option, applying "out of order" is no issue. What does above mean? You're not operating in a vaccum if you apply the option first. You just have to look at the physical paper or computer screen and look above the option to see what is written there. Saying you're operating in a vacuum is being a little dramatic.
A Biker Chapter Master who selects Terminator Armour is perfectly acceptable according to current RaW and perfectly illustrates the issue with current RaW. We can never know RaI, but it seems likely that RaI would prevent a Biker CM from taking Termie Armour. It's also possible from a RaI standpoint that it's allowed and the resulting Biker CM represents a CM riding an up-armoured bike with a built in invuln save/forcefield and the ability to teleport onto the battlefield... a CM worthy Relic Bike if you will.
RaI is dangerous because any halfway creative person can come up with a perfectly reasonable explanation for any rules issue to go either way.
Check out my website. Editorials! Tutorials! Fun Times To Be Had! - kriswallminis.com
So i guess you can explain what "the options above" refer to without quoting any other part of the AM codex? That would be surprising.
BlackTalos wrote: This is RaW: "-Any remaining Veteran that has not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace his lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list."
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage.
Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass.
BlackTalos wrote: So i guess you can explain what "the options above" refer to without quoting any other part of the AM codex? That would be surprising.
BlackTalos wrote: This is RaW: "-Any remaining Veteran that has not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace his lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list."
Sure. It means whatever options are listed above that one.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
BlackTalos wrote: So i guess you can explain what "the options above" refer to without quoting any other part of the AM codex? That would be surprising.
BlackTalos wrote: This is RaW: "-Any remaining Veteran that has not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace his lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list."
Sure. It means whatever options are listed above that one.
So, you would not conclude that this "list" has an order?
DA:80-S+G+M+B++I-Pw40k01++D+++A+++WD100R++T(T)DM+
Roronoa Zoro wrote:When the world shoves you around, you just gotta stand up and shove back. It's not like somebody's gonna save you if you start babbling excuses. - Bring on the hardship. It's preferred in a path of carnage.
Manchu wrote:
It's like you take a Space Marine and say "what could make him cooler?" Instead of adding more super-genetic-psycho-organic modification, you take it all away. You have a regular human left in power armor and all the armies of hell at the gates. And she doesn't even flinch. Pure. Badass.
The list specifically doesn't have an order. Since this list uses bullet points, it is by definition unordered. If it were numbered (1, 2, 3), then it would be an ordered list. I tried googling to find a good explanation, but evidently ordered versus unordered lists are a thing in web site programming also, so the first few pages of results were about HTML coding!
Also, RaW is the whole entry. Citing one sentence out of the entire entry doesn't represent RaW... it represents a citation of one small part of the overall RaW. We use citations to prove our points, but must make sure the citation is large enough to include context. We need to know what is written above to know what above means. By citing the one line and saying above is unknowable, you're basically quoting something without the relevant context.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And again, this comes down to poor writing. Consider this...
AM Vets
Each Veteran may select up to one upgrade from the following list.
* take a vox-caster (no more than one per unit)
* take a company standard (no more than one per unit)
* take a medi-pack (no more than one per unit)
* take an item from the Special Weapons list
SM Vets
One Veteran my be upgraded to an Apothecary, exchanging all wargear for Power Armour, Bolt Pistol, Chainsword and Narthecium
Simple wording and both result in what most of us thing is probably RaI.
GW needs to hire a technical copy editor. Or just give some law school student a free army to edit the books. Literally anything. The current writers aren't very good at the technical mechanics of the rules.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/09 17:42:36
Check out my website. Editorials! Tutorials! Fun Times To Be Had! - kriswallminis.com
BlackTalos wrote: So i guess you can explain what "the options above" refer to without quoting any other part of the AM codex? That would be surprising.
BlackTalos wrote: This is RaW: "-Any remaining Veteran that has not been upgraded with one of the options above may replace his lasgun with one item from the Special Weapons list."
Sure. It means whatever options are listed above that one.
So, you would not conclude that this "list" has an order?
No, I wouldn't. List doesn't inherently imply ordered list.
My beautiful wife wrote:Trucks = Carnifex snack, Tanks = meals.
morgoth wrote: The RAW allows it, your vision of the RAI does not. Therefore, you should at least mention that it's RAI, if not your RAI.
2 points - For one, the fact that you think the RAW says something different to what I think it says does not automatically make my interpretation RAI.
For two, it's a good idea to read the whole thread before responding, since I've already said that I was wrong with my initial response on this.
So the question then becomes: Is it just the Chapter Master entry that is badly written, or both of them?
The thing is, the 'top down' approach that people are espousing doesn't fix the Chapter Master either, since the option to put him on a bike comes before the option to upgrade to Terminator armour.
The 'interpretation' suggested by Black Talos fixes this, but isn't based on any actual rules provided anywhere in the army selection process.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/09 19:54:37
I don't have the SM 'Dex in front of me right now, but what exactly is the wording on the Chapter Master Termie upgrade? I thought there was some wording about trading in all Wargear for [list of Termie wargear]? I might be way off. I was just wondering, because if so, buying a Bike that is immediately traded in wouldn't be an issue?
I might be wrong. Apologies if so. I don't fully remember the wording. I really need to load all these ePub codexes onto my phone.
Check out my website. Editorials! Tutorials! Fun Times To Be Had! - kriswallminis.com
Codex Space Marines wrote:• A Chapter Master may replace his power armour, bolt pistol, chainsword and frag and krak grenades with Terminator armour, storm bolter and power sword
• A Chapter Master in Terminator armour may only take items from the Terminator Weapons, Special Issue Wargear and/or Chapter Relics lists.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/09 20:20:01
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
So, again you're left with the fact that a Chapter Master in Power Armour is taking the Bike. He acquires the Terminator armour later. We know that option upgrades happen sequentially and not all at once from the Bikers issue (Bolt Pistol to Chainsword THEN Chainsword to Special Weapon). RaW, you can have a Chapter Master on Bike with Terminator Armour.
Check out my website. Editorials! Tutorials! Fun Times To Be Had! - kriswallminis.com
Yes, you can. But the fact that the terminator armour limits what he can select suggests that this isn't intended. Otherwise there would be no point to that limitation.
In other words, you should flag your interpretation and opinion as such instead of making it look like RAW, which it isn't.
Anything that anybody writes on these forums that isn't a direct quote is an interpretation and opinion. There is little point asking everyone to flag every single post they make as such.
The RAW allows it, your vision of the RAI does not. Therefore, you should at least mention that it's RAI, if not your RAI.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've seen Chapter Masters with Terminator armors on a bike. I think.
Except you've not shown the RAW on how you check the legality of the list, insisting its a strict 'top to bottom' system when it could be an 'end of operation' check as well. If it was RAW, you would have something written to support that.
On the contrary, you have not shown that there even is a list legality check.
insaniak wrote: Yes, you can. But the fact that the terminator armour limits what he can select suggests that this isn't intended. Otherwise there would be no point to that limitation.
I'd like to say that isn't strictly true. A Captain in Termi armour is its own entry in this edition of the codex, and it also has access to the special issue wargear list.
No, I'm not trying to argue the intent of "A Termi Captain can't do it, but CMs, Libbys and Chaplains can!". I'm just making a point.
However, the same could be said about the Apothecary, as the entry does say "Veterans may ...", not any model.
Maybe the author intended the CM, Libby, and Chaplain to take bike + Termi armour, and for Apoths to have Vet upgrades (unlikely, but possible for the former, more likely on the latter IMO). The problem is that none of us can know for sure unless we go and interrogate the guy.
Or get an FAQ.
If I sound like I'm being a condescending butthole, I'm not. Read my reply as neutrally as possible, please and thank you.
RAI is actually perfectly clear. When GW intends any model to have an upgrade, they write 'any model', when they they specify which model can take the upgrade, then it is meant for that model only. They do not hide upgrades in easter eggs for clever rules lawyers to find.
morgoth wrote: On the contrary, you have not shown that there even is a list legality check.
Which means that you can't know if it's RAW because you don't know how to check if it's legal.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
