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.

Probably missed a thread on this. But I'm wondering what the consensus is on if you can use the new book with the Iyanden army list or if it still requires the old book?

Two schools of thought: Craftworlds is the new Eldar codex, and thus Iyanden is legal.

Craftworlds is its own dex, and cannot be fielded with Iyanden. (Which would mean Eldar 6th codex is still legal...)

Absent clarification from GW, it's unclear.

Is this the first case of this in recent memory?

Are there any examples from the past where a book had a supplement then got updated?

 Jimsolo wrote:
Two schools of thought: Craftworlds is the new Eldar codex, and thus Iyanden is legal.

Craftworlds is its own dex, and cannot be fielded with Iyanden. (Which would mean Eldar 6th codex is still legal...)

Absent clarification from GW, it's unclear.

Lyanden is not legal with the new codex, and it is the new eldar codex. supplements do not roll over to new codex. Lyanden, unless agreed upon to use the old 6th ed eldar codex, is now outdated.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:


Lyanden is not legal with the new codex, and it is the new eldar codex. supplements do not roll over to new codex. Lyanden, unless agreed upon to use the old 6th ed eldar codex, is now outdated.

I'm leaning towards this interpretation, but I'm curious if there's any precedence for a situation like this.

 Blacksails wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:


Lyanden is not legal with the new codex, and it is the new eldar codex. supplements do not roll over to new codex. Lyanden, unless agreed upon to use the old 6th ed eldar codex, is now outdated.

I'm leaning towards this interpretation, but I'm curious if there's any precedence for a situation like this.

I think this is the first time a codex has been updated while it had a supplement. So there isn't really a precedent for it.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Two schools of thought: Craftworlds is the new Eldar codex, and thus Iyanden is legal.

Craftworlds is its own dex, and cannot be fielded with Iyanden. (Which would mean Eldar 6th codex is still legal...)

Absent clarification from GW, it's unclear.

Lyanden is not legal with the new codex, and it is the new eldar codex. supplements do not roll over to new codex. Lyanden, unless agreed upon to use the old 6th ed eldar codex, is now outdated.

Why not? It is its own book which gives you rules on how to use it (along with the Eldar codex). Codexes are only made illegal when they are replaced by a current one, and there is no current Iyanden book to replace to old one. You are given permission to use it as a supplement to Codex: Eldar, and that permission is never revoked.

This is entirely gross if the supplement is no longer valid. So not only is your old book replaced in two to three years, but your $50 extra purchase is useless from the game play perspective.

If that's true, then hopefully some folks get rightfully mad. I hope it's not.

Without input from GW we will never know for sure.

I think this is the first time a codex has been updated while it had a supplement. So there isn't really a precedent for it.

Indeed. GW seriously needs to clarify this.

I do know this: if supplements ARE invalidated, meaning supplement players must now pay twice as much with EVERY update, I will never pay for another legal codex again.

On a more pragmatic note though, is there actually anything in Craftworlds that would stop the adjustments in Iyanden functioning? The WG-as-Troops was in the codex itself, and is gone, but in theory the actual Iyanded changes still work.

- Wrathknights as Warlords still works (as unsurprisingly Lords of War can be Warlords.. Who'da thunk it? )

- I think it changes which is your Primaris power for Spiritseers, and that should be easy to adjust if the power still exists. If not, then it should still be easy to house rule with the appropriate WC value (if a FAQ didn't already do this for 7th).

Can't recall what else Iyanden changes, but really, I don't see any reason why you couldn't run it alongside the new book.

Five Spiritseers in a single HQ slot. Coupled with the cheap, abundant Venoms in a Realspace Raider detachment, it could be a huge benefit for the Freakshow lists I've been advocating.

 Paradigm wrote:
On a more pragmatic note though, is there actually anything in Craftworlds that would stop the adjustments in Iyanden functioning?

This is a good point. I retract my earlier statement that I think its invalidated, and now I just genuinely don't know.

Input from GW is needed, but I doubt we'd get it, or in a timely manner anyhow.

The last example of this that I can think of is back in edition 4 when the 3.5 eldar codex was replaced and the craftworld supplement became invalid. Ironic...

IMO the supplements should roll over. Clearly just like all the forgeworld books with IG in them work with Astra Militarum (though forgeworld are much better at getting back to you on the issue) any change in codex name should be assumed to work with the old codex supplements. Otherwise should I be allowed to field a CWE with Eldar allies so I can take the old waveserpents? It would be hilarious to field 1 LoW wraithknight and 3 HS wraithknights.

With the WK and Ghost formations in the new Eldar Craftworlds, I think Iyanden is obsolete.

The FW supplements are good examples.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Five Spiritseers in a single HQ slot..

Again, functions perfectly with the new book. I see no reason now why anyone would consider Iyanden invalidated with that in mind, when everything it works just as well as if it had been written for the 7th ed Eldar.

And I believe there's an email from GW floating around somewhere that basically says that while it's not technically 'official' (probably as they no longer sell it), you are encouraged to keep using it (with house ruled tweaks if necessary, but looking at it that shouldn't be needed).

As far as I'm concerned, problem solved.

I'll give a reason. Does codex lyaden say to be used with codex eldar and codex: eldar craftworlds or just eldar?

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
I'll give a reason. Does codex lyaden say to be used with codex eldar and codex: eldar craftworlds or just eldar?

If you use this logic, then the Craftworlds codex is a brand new army book that doesn't replace Codex: Eldar.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Paradigm wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Five Spiritseers in a single HQ slot..

Again, functions perfectly with the new book.

Eh? How's that?

Not true. Using that logic, imperial guard is still a legal codex...

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Not true. Using that logic, imperial guard is still a legal codex...

Lol, yes. Your argument that Iyanden is invalid would also make IG legal still.

How exactly? I am staying that codex eldar has been updated AND changed into codex eldar craftworlds. Since we all know raw you can only use lyanden with codex eldar it is not at all unreasonable to say it cannot be used with codex eldar craftworlds. please stop trying to make this happen. It really won't..

It can't be an update of a book and a different book.

If it's an update, Iyanden still flies.

If it's something different, then Iyanden is out, but 6th Ed Eldar are still in.

Unless GW explicitly says something different, I don't see a third option that doesn't involve just making things up sans precedent.

Where do you get your rules stating lyanden still flies? Please show proof.

 Jimsolo wrote:
It can't be an update of a book and a different book.

If it's an update, Iyanden still flies.

If it's something different, then Iyanden is out, but 6th Ed Eldar are still in.

Unless GW explicitly says something different, I don't see a third option that doesn't involve just making things up sans precedent.

The new Eldar Codex is the New eldar Codex and it is named differently. Also if the 6th edition codex was still "in" it would still be on sale on the GW website. In the sense of that Argument the Iyanden Supplement is also no longer on their website. I say that the Codex Craftworlds is the new Eldar Codex because it has the exact same units as the 6th edition Eldar. There is not a single new model in the book, just updates of existing models. They renamed the army just like they renamed IG, Space Marines and Sisters of Battle.

TL;DR New name, replaces Codex: Eldar from 6th edition.

From the cynical point of view, I could totally imagine GW saying its invalidated, then turn around and sell an updated version for another $50 with a few words changed around.

 Xerics wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
It can't be an update of a book and a different book.

If it's an update, Iyanden still flies.

If it's something different, then Iyanden is out, but 6th Ed Eldar are still in.

Unless GW explicitly says something different, I don't see a third option that doesn't involve just making things up sans precedent.

The new Eldar Codex is the New eldar Codex and it is named differently. Also if the 6th edition codex was still "in" it would still be on sale on the GW website. In the sense of that Argument the Iyanden Supplement is also no longer on their website. I say that the Codex Craftworlds is the new Eldar Codex because it has the exact same units as the 6th edition Eldar. There is not a single new model in the book, just updates of existing models. They renamed the army just like they renamed IG, Space Marines and Sisters of Battle.

TL;DR New name, replaces Codex: Eldar from 6th edition.

While we had a few words exchanged, I 100% agree with what you said and appreciate the back up

 Jimsolo wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Two schools of thought: Craftworlds is the new Eldar codex, and thus Iyanden is legal.

Craftworlds is its own dex, and cannot be fielded with Iyanden. (Which would mean Eldar 6th codex is still legal...)

Absent clarification from GW, it's unclear.

Lyanden is not legal with the new codex, and it is the new eldar codex. supplements do not roll over to new codex. Lyanden, unless agreed upon to use the old 6th ed eldar codex, is now outdated.

Why not? It is its own book which gives you rules on how to use it (along with the Eldar codex). Codexes are only made illegal when they are replaced by a current one, and there is no current Iyanden book to replace to old one. You are given permission to use it as a supplement to Codex: Eldar, and that permission is never revoked.

Iyanden book specifically says to be used with codex eldar. The new codex is not codex eldar, it is codex eldar CRAFTWORLDS. Just because the words codex eldar are in there doesn't mean it's codex eldar. No, legally in tournaments and the like, you can't use iyanden. If your friends want to let you use it, that's fine. If iyanden was compatible with the new codex, why was it pulled off the Web site completely along with being pulled from all GW retail stores, "known lossed" and thrown in the dumpster out back when the new codex was released? I would say that alone is pretty good evidence that GW does not intend iyanden to work with codex eldar craftworlds.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
It can't be an update of a book and a different book.

If it's an update, Iyanden still flies.

If it's something different, then Iyanden is out, but 6th Ed Eldar are still in.

Unless GW explicitly says something different, I don't see a third option that doesn't involve just making things up sans precedent.

The new Eldar Codex is the New eldar Codex and it is named differently. Also if the 6th edition codex was still "in" it would still be on sale on the GW website. In the sense of that Argument the Iyanden Supplement is also no longer on their website. I say that the Codex Craftworlds is the new Eldar Codex because it has the exact same units as the 6th edition Eldar. There is not a single new model in the book, just updates of existing models. They renamed the army just like they renamed IG, Space Marines and Sisters of Battle.

TL;DR New name, replaces Codex: Eldar from 6th edition.

While we had a few words exchanged, I 100% agree with what you said and appreciate the back up

Glad we can reconcile.

 Toofast wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Two schools of thought: Craftworlds is the new Eldar codex, and thus Iyanden is legal.

Craftworlds is its own dex, and cannot be fielded with Iyanden. (Which would mean Eldar 6th codex is still legal...)

Absent clarification from GW, it's unclear.

Lyanden is not legal with the new codex, and it is the new eldar codex. supplements do not roll over to new codex. Lyanden, unless agreed upon to use the old 6th ed eldar codex, is now outdated.

Why not? It is its own book which gives you rules on how to use it (along with the Eldar codex). Codexes are only made illegal when they are replaced by a current one, and there is no current Iyanden book to replace to old one. You are given permission to use it as a supplement to Codex: Eldar, and that permission is never revoked.

Iyanden book specifically says to be used with codex eldar. The new codex is not codex eldar, it is codex eldar CRAFTWORLDS. Just because the words codex eldar are in there doesn't mean it's codex eldar. No, legally in tournaments and the like, you can't use iyanden. If your friends want to let you use it, that's fine. If iyanden was compatible with the new codex, why was it pulled off the Web site completely along with being pulled from all GW retail stores, "known lossed" and thrown in the dumpster out back when the new codex was released? I would say that alone is pretty good evidence that GW does not intend iyanden to work with codex eldar craftworlds.

Is it then your argument that if a product is not available on GW's web store it isn't legal to use? That's a dangerous precedent to set.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:


TL;DR New name, replaces Codex: Eldar from 6th edition.

If so, and the new book replaces the old for rules purposes, then you can still use Iyanden with it.