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.

And like i said, this is where we're stuck.

I read as saying they "must be from the same chapter".
You are tell telling me i should read it as "can only be from the same chapter" because you read it as a restriction as opposed to an instruction.

Kriswall wrote:

 DJGietzen wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
Chapter is now defined as models having the chapter tactics rule for a specific chapter in the space marine codex.

You lost me here as this is the argument I am talking about. There is no such rule/definition in the codex.

All the codex says that if a rule says something like "Iron Hands Razobacks ignore crew shaken results." it means a Razoback with the chapter tactics special rule drawn from the Iron Hands chapter ignores crew shaken results. Since none of Razorbacks in the codex have the CT rule this made up 'rule' would not apply to them. If however this 'rule' said "Razorbacks drawn from the Iron Hands chapter ignore crew shaken results." then it would apply to them because there is no requirement they have the CT rule.

Incorrect. This rule/definition is most certainly in the Codex. Page 189 of the new codex... "The rules will often refer to a model, character or unit by its Chapter; in all cases, this refers to a model, character or unit with the Chapter Tactics special rule that is drawn from the given Chapter."

That only means that a rule that refers to a, for example, "Iron Hands Rhino" only refers to a Rhino that is both drawn from the Iron Hands chapter and has the Chapter Tactics special rule and does not refer to a Rhino, drawn from the Iron Hands chapter, that lacks the Chapter Tactics special rule. It does not mean that a Rhino cannot be drawn from the Iron Hand chapter.

insaniak wrote:Where are you told that a vehicle must have a designated chapter?

You are not. You are only told that all units in a detachment must be drawn from the same chapter and that units with the chapter tactics special rule must be drawn from a designated chapter. By logical extension those units that do not have the chapter tactics special rule must be drawn from the same chapter as those units that do have the chapter tactics special rule if both types of units are in the same detachment. If you have a detachment that contains no models with the chapter tactics special rule they are not required to be drawn from any chapter.

insaniak wrote:Look at it this way - There is a requirement to be driving a car in order to be served at the drive-through at Macdonalds. Does that grant me permission to drive, even if I don't have a licence?

Clearly not. What it means is that if I can't drive, I can't go through the drive through.


A restriction is not a permission.

This cuts both ways. A requirement that you order food at the McDonald's drive-through does not mean you can drive either. Why do we have permission to draw some units from a chapter but not others?

 jokerkd wrote:
I read as saying they "must be from the same chapter".
You are tell telling me i should read it as "can only be from the same chapter"

...which means the same thing.

Telling you that something must be from the same chapter to be in the formation is not permission to include something in the formation if it lacks that chapter denomination. It's a condition of entry.

...because you read it as a restriction as opposed to an instruction

...because it is.

See my Macdonalds analogy. A restriction is not a permission.






Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DJGietzen wrote:
By logical extension those units that do not have the chapter tactics special rule must be drawn from the same chapter as those units that do have the chapter tactics special rule if both types of units are in the same detachment.

Which rule are you using to assign a chapter to units that do not have Chapter Tactics?

This cuts both ways. A requirement that you order food at the McDonald's drive-through does not mean you can drive either.

That's pretty much my point, yes.

Why do we have permission to draw some units from a chapter but not others?

Because the rules are flawed?

Where is the permission to draw units with the chapter tactics special rule from a designated chapter?

 DJGietzen wrote:
Where is the permission to draw units with the chapter tactics special rule from a designated chapter?

You have that backwards.

The rule quoted at the start of the thread tells us that you determine the chapter by looking at which Chapter Tactics they have.

The drive thru analogy is flawed.

You are only allowed in the drive thru if you have a car. You are allowed in the drive thru. Therefore you have car

 insaniak wrote:
The rule quoted at the start of the thread tells us that you determine the chapter by looking at which Chapter Tactics they have.

It absolutely does not. The rule quoted at the start of the thread tells us that the use of a chapter name as an adjective by a rule describes whatever noun it is attached to as one with the chapter tactics special rule that is drawn from the named chapter. For example a rule that says "An Iron Hands vehicle..." refers to a vehicle, drawn from the Iron Hands chapter, that has the chapter tactics special rule.

 insaniak wrote:

 DJGietzen wrote:
Where is the permission to draw units with the chapter tactics special rule from a designated chapter?

You have that backwards.

The rule quoted at the start of the thread tells us that you determine the chapter by looking at which Chapter Tactics they have.

I believe it applies to CT models specifically

 jokerkd wrote:
The drive thru analogy is flawed.

You are only allowed in the drive thru if you have a car. You are allowed in the drive thru. Therefore you have car

You're allowed in the drive through if you have a car.


You can't ignore the restriction in one rule just because another rule doesn't include the same restriction.

We're told that all models in a detachment must be from the same Chapter.
We're told that a model's Chapter is determined by Chapter Tactics.

So a rule that allows a given model type to be chosen for a detachment will still be bound by those rules. Yes, you can select vehicles as part of a detachment... but the vehicles you select must be from the same Chapter as the rest of the detachment, because there is no rule that tells us to ignore that requirement.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DJGietzen wrote:

It absolutely does not. The rule quoted at the start of the thread tells us that the use of a chapter name as an adjective by a rule describes whatever noun it is attached to as one with the chapter tactics special rule that is drawn from the named chapter. For example a rule that says "An Iron Hands vehicle..." refers to a vehicle, drawn from the Iron Hands chapter, that has the chapter tactics special rule.

Which brings us back to the question that still hasn't been answered - what other method do the rules give us for assigning a Chapter to something?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jokerkd wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 DJGietzen wrote:
Where is the permission to draw units with the chapter tactics special rule from a designated chapter?

You have that backwards.

The rule quoted at the start of the thread tells us that you determine the chapter by looking at which Chapter Tactics they have.

I believe it applies to CT models specifically

Of course it does. If the model doesn't have Chapter Tactics, you can't determine its Chapter by looking at which version of Chapter Tactics it has.

Which leaves us with a model of indeterminate Chapter... And that model has no way of satisfying the rule that requires it to be the same Chapter as the rest of the detachment you want to put it into.

Again, you read it as a restriction, i read it as an instruction

Yes, that is indeed the problem...

 insaniak wrote:

 DJGietzen wrote:

It absolutely does not. The rule quoted at the start of the thread tells us that the use of a chapter name as an adjective by a rule describes whatever noun it is attached to as one with the chapter tactics special rule that is drawn from the named chapter. For example a rule that says "An Iron Hands vehicle..." refers to a vehicle, drawn from the Iron Hands chapter, that has the chapter tactics special rule.

Which brings us back to the question that still hasn't been answered - what other method do the rules give us for assigning a Chapter to something?

Real quick point of clarification. The entire chapter tactics page is written from the perspective of drawing units from a chapter, not assigning a unit to a chapter, but yes this is where I think the rules gap, if there is one in the RAW, exists. There is no permission to draw units from a chapter explicitly stated in this codex. Either this permission is inherent and therefor applies to both types of units (both units with the CT rule and those with out it) or it is not and with this codex you may only field a handful of formations.

 jokerkd wrote:
Again, you read it as a restriction, i read it as an instruction

Actually... it occurs to me that there's a bigger problem with this...

If you assume that the requirement for all members of the detachment to be from the same chapter is actually an instruction to treat all members of the detachment as being from the same chapter... then the rule becomes essentially meaningless. You would be able to have every single unit in the detachment with a different Chapter Tactics, and still count them as being all from the same Chapter.

Lol and i thought we'd finally just agreed to disagree

I don't follow you there insaniak.

jokerkd's contention was that this rule:

All models in the same Detachment or Formation must be drawn from the same Chapter

...is an instruction to consider all models in the detachment as being from the same Chapter.

This means that if you try to include a vehicle in, say, an Ultramarines detachment, that's fine, because all units in the detachment are considered to be Ultramarines, even if they don't have the Ultramarines Chapter Tactics.


But it would by extension also mean that you could include a unit with, say, the Imperial Fists Chapter Tactics in that same detachment, because all units in the detachment are considered to be Ultramarines, even if they don't have the Ultramarines Chapter Tactics.

Wouldn't the determination be made by what FOC it was purchased under and starts the game as a full and distinct part thereof, like the transports of a troop choice gaining the troop choice's Objective Secured? SM Flesh Tearers' DropPods bought as FA as non-dedicated transports would not gain the Objective Secured rule like a dedicated transport would.

Woo Hoo, follow jokerkd and DJGietzen's rules and we can have Pedro give Calgar +1 attack because he's a Crimson Fist! Yay

 insaniak wrote:
jokerkd's contention was that this rule:

All models in the same Detachment or Formation must be drawn from the same Chapter

...is an instruction to consider all models in the detachment as being from the same Chapter.

This means that if you try to include a vehicle in, say, an Ultramarines detachment, that's fine, because all units in the detachment are considered to be Ultramarines, even if they don't have the Ultramarines Chapter Tactics.


But it would by extension also mean that you could include a unit with, say, the Imperial Fists Chapter Tactics in that same detachment, because all units in the detachment are considered to be Ultramarines, even if they don't have the Ultramarines Chapter Tactics.

we are not given permission any where else to take two different CTs in a detachment. We ARE given permission to take non-CT models with CT models

 jokerkd wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
jokerkd's contention was that this rule:

All models in the same Detachment or Formation must be drawn from the same Chapter

...is an instruction to consider all models in the detachment as being from the same Chapter.

This means that if you try to include a vehicle in, say, an Ultramarines detachment, that's fine, because all units in the detachment are considered to be Ultramarines, even if they don't have the Ultramarines Chapter Tactics.


But it would by extension also mean that you could include a unit with, say, the Imperial Fists Chapter Tactics in that same detachment, because all units in the detachment are considered to be Ultramarines, even if they don't have the Ultramarines Chapter Tactics.

we are not given permission any where else to take two different CTs in a detachment. We ARE given permission to take non-CT models with CT models

Does this line give you permission to assign a Chapter to any unit you want or not? It certainly does not call out non-CT units so you can't treat them differently with this line.

 jokerkd wrote:
We ARE given permission to take non-CT models with CT models

Can you please quote the rule that refers to taking models without Chapter Tactics in a detachment along with models that have it?

Because it hasn't been presented so far in this discussion.

Half of the formations and detachments in the book allow you to take vehicles in the same detachment as units with CT.

or how about the fact that a unit with CT is permitted to take a dedicated transport that doesn't have CT

 jokerkd wrote:
Half of the formations and detachments in the book allow you to take vehicles in the same detachment as units with CT.

or how about the fact that a unit with CT is permitted to take a dedicated transport that doesn't have CT

Those imply you are supposed to have CT models and non-CT models in the same detachment. We all know this is the intent. Now do you have any rules that allow you to say a model without CTs can be assigned a Chapter? If so please quote those rules.

 jokerkd wrote:
Half of the formations and detachments in the book allow you to take vehicles in the same detachment as units with CT.

or how about the fact that a unit with CT is permitted to take a dedicated transport that doesn't have CT

Neither of which answers the question.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Woo Hoo, follow jokerkd and DJGietzen's rules and we can have Pedro give Calgar +1 attack because he's a Crimson Fist! Yay

Don't lump me in on that one. I never said that I agreed with jokerkd that 'all units must be drawn from the same chapter' was an instruction rather then a requirement. As far as I'm concerned there is no way to draw a Raven Guard unit from the Iron Hands chapter. For me its crystal clear. When you add a unit with CT to a detachment you must indicate what chapter it is being drawn from. This is your choice and this book presents you with 7 of them, unless the unit's datasheet has a chapter in brackets after the CT rule, then you only have 1 choice. Once that choice has been made it must be repeated for all other units in the same detachment.

 DJGietzen wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Woo Hoo, follow jokerkd and DJGietzen's rules and we can have Pedro give Calgar +1 attack because he's a Crimson Fist! Yay

Don't lump me in on that one. I never said that I agreed with jokerkd that 'all units must be drawn from the same chapter' was an instruction rather then a requirement. As far as I'm concerned there is no way to draw a Raven Guard unit from the Iron Hands chapter. For me its crystal clear. When you add a unit with CT to a detachment you must indicate what chapter it is being drawn from. This is your choice and this book presents you with 7 of them, unless the unit's datasheet has a chapter in brackets after the CT rule, then you only have 1 choice. Once that choice has been made it must be repeated for all other units in the same detachment.

So what rule are you using to choose a Chapter and what rule limits models with CTs to picking 1 chapter?

@Flingitnow. When choosing and army you much make a note of which chapter each unit with the CT rule is being drawn from. The wording of this rule prohibits drawing a single unit from multiple chapters simultaneously. Even if it did not, a unit containing models drawn from two different chapters counts as neither so its a moot point as a tactical squad drawn from both the iron hands chapter and the raven guard chapter would not be referenced by any rules that refer to iron hands units nor would they be referenced by any rules that refer to raven guard units.

 DJGietzen wrote:
@Flingitnow. When choosing and army you much make a note of which chapter each unit with the CT rule is being drawn from. The wording of this rule prohibits drawing a single unit from multiple chapters simultaneously. Even if it did not, a unit containing models drawn from two different chapters counts as neither so its a moot point as a tactical squad drawn from both the iron hands chapter and the raven guard chapter would not be referenced by any rules that refer to iron hands units nor would they be referenced by any rules that refer to raven guard units.

So is being drawn from the same as having CTs? Or can Marneas Clagar be drawn from the Crimson Fists Chapter? Also could you actuallyanswer the questions I asked in the previous post?

 FlingitNow wrote:
So is being drawn from the same as having CTs?

No, being drawn from a chapter is not the same as having the chapter tactics special rule. Its a quality of a unit that has no inherent value.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Or can Marneas Clagar be drawn from the Crimson Fists Chapter?

"If a unit's datasheet contains a Chapter in brackets after the Chapter Tactics special rule the unit must always be drawn from this chapter."

 FlingitNow wrote:
So what rule are you using to choose a Chapter...]

This is where I think the rules gap, if there is one in the RAW, exists. There is no permission to draw units from a chapter explicitly stated in this codex. Either this permission is inherent and therefor applies to both types of units (both units with the CT rule and those with out it) or it is not and with this codex you may only field a handful of formations. For the sake discussion we assume the permission to draw a unit from a chapter of my choice when adding it to a detachment exists .

 FlingitNow wrote:
...and what rule limits models with CTs to picking 1 chapter?

"When choosing an army you must make a note of which Chapter each unit with the Chapter Tactics rule is being drawn from." The wording of this rule prohibits drawing a single unit from multiple chapters simultaneously. Even if it did not, a unit containing models drawn from two different chapters counts as neither so its a moot point as a tactical squad drawn from both the iron hands chapter and the raven guard chapter would not be referenced by any rules that refer to iron hands units nor would they be referenced by any rules that refer to raven guard units.

This is where I think the rules gap, if there is one in the RAW, exists. There is no permission to draw units from a chapter explicitly stated in this codex.

Your very next paragraph disagrees with you:

"When choosing an army you must make a note of which Chapter each unit with the Chapter Tactics rule is being drawn from." The wording of this rule prohibits drawing a single unit from multiple chapters

So here not only am I seeing permission for units with CTs to bedrawn from a Chapter but a requirement to pick one. Where issuch pepermission for nonCT units?