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.
Marmatag wrote: The firespear formation is only available as a rule card in the get-started box, in the exact same way that the psychic power card is only available in the psychic power package.
Is the firespear not legal?
This is strawman argument; where it comes from is not the issue.
The issue is that it does not say which units may choose the listed Psychic Disciplines.
It doesn't need to, any unit that can choose where it generates its powers is subject to these rules.
Bottom line is the card ships with an official GW trademark as a part of a GW product.
For this NOT to be a rule would require an FAQ entry.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/13 15:56:51
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
Marmatag wrote: The firespear formation is only available as a rule card in the get-started box, in the exact same way that the psychic power card is only available in the psychic power package.
Is the firespear not legal?
This is strawman argument; where it comes from is not the issue.
The issue is that it does not say which units may choose the listed Psychic Disciplines.
It doesn't need to, any unit that can choose where it generates its powers is subject to these rules.
No, it's not. Note how the Space Marines Supplement Angels of Death doesn't just provided the psychic disciplines which you find reprinted on the cards for your convenience, but also provides a separate rule that does grant clear and explicit access for psykers with the faction Space Marines. Even with the whole book being all about faction Space Marines, from a rules perspective a rule granting units access to the disciplines printed in the book is required. That why there is such a rule.
Bottom line is the card ships with an official GW trademark as a part of a GW product.
For this NOT to be a rule would require an FAQ entry.
The quick reference card does not mean what you think it means.
As explained in this thread based on previous quick reference cards, the checkmark between a faction and a discipline simply means that at least one datasheet in the faction has access to the discipline, either by default or with an optional upgrade or special conditions which may apply, either currently or with a future publication.
Without a rule granting explicit access to individual units the access implied by the reference card to the faction is meaningless.
Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers.
However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning.
I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it.
Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
Marmatag wrote: The firespear formation is only available as a rule card in the get-started box, in the exact same way that the psychic power card is only available in the psychic power package.
Is the firespear not legal?
This is strawman argument; where it comes from is not the issue.
The issue is that it does not say which units may choose the listed Psychic Disciplines.
It doesn't need to, any unit that can choose where it generates its powers is subject to these rules.
The Codexes themselves put the lie to this statment. Eldar psyker units do not all get to generate their powers off of any of the disciplines checked on the Eldar psychic power reference card. That should serve as a reality check for your claims.
Marmatag wrote: Bottom line is the card ships with an official GW trademark as a part of a GW product.
For this NOT to be a rule would require an FAQ entry.
Not at all. What is needed is a FAQ entry to indicate what units CAN use psychic powers that are not listed in their unit entry or a rules supplement. The psychic power cards do not serve this purpose since the reference card does not say which units get to use which powers.
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers.
However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning.
I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it.
Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers. However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning. I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it. Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
You have it backwards. If you want to use something, you have to demonstrate eligibliity.
The misguided argument based on the card goes like this: There is a checkmark between GK and Geomancy. Ergo all GK psyker can use Geomancy! QED! Yay. Oh wait. Wrong... see all the cases explained above where a checkmark for a faction does not imply general access to a discipline, since actually only a single psyker unit out of many in a faction can actually access a discipline. That means there is more detail needed, the checkmark does NOT mean all psykers have or will have access, it means at least one psyker does have, can have or will have access. Or of course simply that someone fethed up.
The actual argument for SM access to Geomancy et al goes like this: Angels of Death, page 107: "Any Psyker with the Space Marine Faction can generate their psychic powers from theh Librarius, Technomancy, Fulmination and Geokinesis disciplines, in addition to any other disciplines they have access to.".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/13 22:24:49
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers.
However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning.
I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it.
Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
The burden of proof lies on the accuser, you have to prove its a eligible source, I don't have to prove that it isn't.
@StephaniusMade
I don't think anyone is saying all grey knight psykers should be able to use them. Most Greyknights have their powers already picked, making that easy to figure out. The argument is if grey knight [Librarians] can use them. The Angels of Death supplement contradicts the card and the marketing that GW put out, which makes me think this is worthy of an Angels of Death psychic powers FAQ.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/03/14 00:34:17
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers.
However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning.
I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it.
Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
The burden of proof lies on the accuser, you have to prove its a eligible source, I don't have to prove that it isn't.
No it doesn't. When a player claims permission to do something, they have to demonstrate that permission on request. If you don't have a rule that grants you permission, you don't get to do it. The ruleset only lists things you can do. Anything not listed explicitly, you cannot do.
If I play BA and claim access to the DA psychic discipline for a BA psyker, you'd ask me to show you how that psyker gets access. There is no such rule anywhere, so I cannot show it and have to limit myself to things I actually have permission to use.
That situation does not change when you swap the Codices from BA and DA to GK and SM.
ok, let me contiune the example...
Assume the GK player slams the quick reference card on the table and points to the checkmark as proof that his rhino - or librarian - or any other unit can access the disciplines.
The logical response is - ok, so there is some current or future connection between the discipline and the faction somewhere, show me how that unit gets access. No? Ok, then pick other disciplines to roll on.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/14 07:33:49
MattKing wrote: However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers.
[emphasis added]
This definitely isn't true. The codex FAQs came out a few months ago, including those for DW, GK, DA, and SW. This was the perfect opportunity to grant access to AoD powers to DW Libbys, GK Libbys, DA Libbys, and SW Rune Priests. The errata in those documents did not change any of those datasheets.
RAI we can clearly see that none of those four factions should have access to the AoD powers. Voldus is a step forward. And to use fluff, he's the GM of the Librarian Brotherhood, so of course he'd be more knowledgeable than some rando Libby.
Off-topic, his warlord trait is stupid, and it should've been he gets to generate a 4th power if he sticks with one discipline (like a double Psychic Focus), not just Sanctic.
"[We have] an inheritance which is beyond the reach of change and decay." 1 Peter 1.4
"With the Emperor there is no variation or shadow due to change." James 1.17
“Fear the Emperor; do not associate with those who are given to change.” Proverbs 24.21
Murrax9 wrote: @StephaniusMade
I don't think anyone is saying all grey knight psykers should be able to use them. Most Greyknights have their powers already picked, making that easy to figure out. The argument is if grey knight [Librarians] can use them. The Angels of Death supplement contradicts the card and the marketing that GW put out, which makes me think this is worthy of an Angels of Death psychic powers FAQ.
Sounds logical, but it is just an assumption and interpretation of the possible meaning the checkmark could have. It could also just have been Voldus. We don't know, since we don't have a rule.
My understanding is that the Quick Reference Card's only purpose is to tell players which cards the might want to hang on to, depending on the faction they play. The card's checkmarks arn't GW's equivalent to reading tea leaves and interpreting their meaning freely, also known as making stuff up.
Lets say there is an identical reference card that instead of showing psychic disciplines, showed weapon groups (like melta weapons, flamer weapons, etc.) So there is a grid with faction on one side, weapon groups on the other, and checks indicating that faction has access to that weapon group.
What models in a Blood Angel army have access to melta guns?
This definitely isn't true. The codex FAQs came out a few months ago, including those for DW, GK, DA, and SW. This was the perfect opportunity to grant access to AoD powers to DW Libbys, GK Libbys, DA Libbys, and SW Rune Priests. The errata in those documents did not change any of those datasheets.
Unless they thought it was obvious. Or already stated it on their website.
This definitely isn't true. The codex FAQs came out a few months ago, including those for DW, GK, DA, and SW. This was the perfect opportunity to grant access to AoD powers to DW Libbys, GK Libbys, DA Libbys, and SW Rune Priests. The errata in those documents did not change any of those datasheets.
Unless they thought it was obvious. Or already stated it on their website.
There is a third option. Mind you, I have no behind the scenes knowledge. So this is a guess:
The rules designers meant SM only, the marketing guys fethed up , not understanding the difference between "faction Space Marines" and "space marine factions" and chucked the SM supplement and the cards into the webshop for all the other loyal marine factions.
Now, after people bought the supplment which isn't for their faction - or the cards which were not either - it's difficult to tell them that was a mistake, because that gives rise to requests to return the products for a refund.
Instead, calling it future proofing is better for customer relations.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/14 15:34:34
MattKing wrote: Again I don't think you can do this RAW but the biggest argument for RAI in my opinion is that they immediately released a BA update that included it.
Five months is hardly 'immediately'.
'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
This definitely isn't true. The codex FAQs came out a few months ago, including those for DW, GK, DA, and SW. This was the perfect opportunity to grant access to AoD powers to DW Libbys, GK Libbys, DA Libbys, and SW Rune Priests. The errata in those documents did not change any of those datasheets.
Unless they thought it was obvious. Or already stated it on their website.
There is a third option. Mind you, I have no behind the scenes knowledge. So this is a guess:
The rules designers meant SM only, the marketing guys fethed up , not understanding the difference between "faction Space Marines" and "space marine factions" and chucked the SM supplement and the cards into the webshop for all the other loyal marine factions.
Now, after people bought the supplment which isn't for their faction - or the cards which were not either - it's difficult to tell them that was a mistake, because that gives rise to requests to return the products for a refund.
Instead, calling it future proofing is better for customer relations.
Yes there is a third option i called it most people choosed to ignore it.
AoD supplement and new psy powers was released in late april 2016, while the FAQ questions was gathered around 1 month before this release (march of same year) that's why this issue don't shows up in the FAQ because no one bothered to ask it since no player knew this conflict to properly ask.
Gk codex it's older and outdated, AoD only refer to vanilla chapters and upgrade those largely ignoring SW, BA, DA, so unless GW publish a FAQ or update the GK one we can't fully know for sure wich is the intent for those powers and both sides may be right.
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers. However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning. I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it. Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
You have it backwards. If you want to use something, you have to demonstrate eligibliity.
I demonstrate the aforementioned eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states that Grey Knights can draw powers from AoD disciplines. (the card)
Attempts to discredit this card stray into the realm of "what games workshop intended with the publication," which isn't reading the rules as written. This is a rule card published by games workshop. All of the psychic cards, data cards, etc, are rule cards. This is no different.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/03/14 16:59:35
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Aye, but the psyker entries in the codex do not list those powers. Thus Librarians, Brother Captains, etc... are not allowed to draw from those disciplines.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers.
However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning.
I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it.
Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
You have it backwards. If you want to use something, you have to demonstrate eligibliity.
I demonstrate the aforementioned eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states that Grey Knights can draw powers from AoD disciplines. (the card)
Attempts to discredit this card stray into the realm of "what games workshop intended with the publication," which isn't reading the rules as written. This is a rule card published by games workshop. All of the psychic cards, data cards, etc, are rule cards. This is no different.
You have not demonstrated eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states which units may draw powers from AoD disciplines.
Again, back to the Eldar example. I present you with the card saying which powers Craftworld Eldar may use. Does that suddenly mean that my Warlocks can use Divination or Telepathy? No. I have not provided proof of what powers Warlocks may use. Likewise, you have not provided proof of which units may use AoD disciplines.
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers.
However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning.
I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it.
Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
You have it backwards. If you want to use something, you have to demonstrate eligibliity.
I demonstrate the aforementioned eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states that Grey Knights can draw powers from AoD disciplines. (the card)
Attempts to discredit this card stray into the realm of "what games workshop intended with the publication," which isn't reading the rules as written. This is a rule card published by games workshop. All of the psychic cards, data cards, etc, are rule cards. This is no different.
You have not demonstrated eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states which units may draw powers from AoD disciplines.
Again, back to the Eldar example. I present you with the card saying which powers Craftworld Eldar may use. Does that suddenly mean that my Warlocks can use Divination or Telepathy? No. I have not provided proof of what powers Warlocks may use. Likewise, you have not provided proof of which units may use AoD disciplines.
You card was released within 7th edition, the Codex:Craftworld was updated after 7th edition release, BRB says use the most up to date rulebook you can find, Codex trumps your card.
Gk codex it's older than Angels of Death datacards, so your example is void, and the reason this argument keeps comming. Until Gw updates again the GK codex or publish a new FAQ/Errata both sides have a good reason to be right.
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers.
However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning.
I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it.
Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
You have it backwards. If you want to use something, you have to demonstrate eligibliity.
I demonstrate the aforementioned eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states that Grey Knights can draw powers from AoD disciplines. (the card)
Attempts to discredit this card stray into the realm of "what games workshop intended with the publication," which isn't reading the rules as written. This is a rule card published by games workshop. All of the psychic cards, data cards, etc, are rule cards. This is no different.
You have not demonstrated eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states which units may draw powers from AoD disciplines.
Again, back to the Eldar example. I present you with the card saying which powers Craftworld Eldar may use. Does that suddenly mean that my Warlocks can use Divination or Telepathy? No. I have not provided proof of what powers Warlocks may use. Likewise, you have not provided proof of which units may use AoD disciplines.
four complete psychic disciplines available to Space Marines Librarians of all Chapters (including Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves, Grey Knights and Deathwatch)
Which actually explains the intent of the card in further detail.
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers.
However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning.
I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it.
Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
You have it backwards. If you want to use something, you have to demonstrate eligibliity.
I demonstrate the aforementioned eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states that Grey Knights can draw powers from AoD disciplines. (the card)
Attempts to discredit this card stray into the realm of "what games workshop intended with the publication," which isn't reading the rules as written. This is a rule card published by games workshop. All of the psychic cards, data cards, etc, are rule cards. This is no different.
You have not demonstrated eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states which units may draw powers from AoD disciplines.
Again, back to the Eldar example. I present you with the card saying which powers Craftworld Eldar may use. Does that suddenly mean that my Warlocks can use Divination or Telepathy? No. I have not provided proof of what powers Warlocks may use. Likewise, you have not provided proof of which units may use AoD disciplines.
four complete psychic disciplines available to Space Marines Librarians of all Chapters (including Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves, Grey Knights and Deathwatch)
Is it in the AoD book or a FAQ?
Which actually explains the intent of the card in further detail.
MattKing wrote: Although it is not explicitly stated, except on the GW site and on the ref card, under the conditions that were put forth the other faction libs do not have access to thees powers.
However, I would like to point out that since the release of AOD, every single supplement, rule and non-sm-faction-sm character that has access to psy powers has been listed as having access to the AOD powers. So I wouldn't call it future proofing so much as ret-coning.
I would guess it is GW's intention to allow astarties thees powers but no ITC valid document supports it.
Because this is a rules forum, the conclusion should be they do NOT have access to the powers, but this forum also concluded that Catifractii captain should have bikes because even though "terminator" is part of their name, they are not wearing terminator armor (Hurr-durr).
ITC rulings have 0 influence on this game. ITC does not even follow GWfaq's in their tournaments. I would really like to see someone produce a GW approved source that states it's game cards have no actual validity as a rules source. Explicitly stating that even though GK have access to the AOD powers based on their cards - they do not actually have access to them.
You have it backwards. If you want to use something, you have to demonstrate eligibliity.
I demonstrate the aforementioned eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states that Grey Knights can draw powers from AoD disciplines. (the card)
Attempts to discredit this card stray into the realm of "what games workshop intended with the publication," which isn't reading the rules as written. This is a rule card published by games workshop. All of the psychic cards, data cards, etc, are rule cards. This is no different.
You have not demonstrated eligibility by providing an official games workshop publication which clearly states which units may draw powers from AoD disciplines.
Again, back to the Eldar example. I present you with the card saying which powers Craftworld Eldar may use. Does that suddenly mean that my Warlocks can use Divination or Telepathy? No. I have not provided proof of what powers Warlocks may use. Likewise, you have not provided proof of which units may use AoD disciplines.
You card was released within 7th edition, the Codex:Craftworld was updated after 7th edition release, BRB says use the most up to date rulebook you can find, Codex trumps your card.
Gk codex it's older than Angels of Death datacards, so your example is void, and the reason this argument keeps comming. Until Gw updates again the GK codex or publish a new FAQ/Errata both sides have a good reason to be right.
The datacard isn't older than the latest Grey Knights FAQ. Did the FAQ tell us they could use the powers? If not, then no you don't get to because it's not in the AoD supplement or in your GKFAQ. Until it's FAQ'd to let you, you can't.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/14 18:11:12
There is no official FAQ supporting the use of each individual forgeworld unit, and forgeworld units are not included in codexes. Therefore, no one can use forgeworld units in a bound list.
There is no official FAQ stating that formation cards included in start collecting packages are allowed outside of an unbound game. These formations are not included in the codex. Therefore, start collecting formations are not allowed in a bound list.
I mean things get absurd fast if we start using (1) the presence in a codex or (2) the presence in an FAQ as a requirement - above and beyond other official, GW publications - to use things.
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
Marmatag wrote: There is no official FAQ supporting the use of each individual forgeworld unit, and forgeworld units are not included in codexes. Therefore, no one can use forgeworld units in a bound list.
Forgeworld books state which units can be used in which battlefield roles in a 40k game. No FAQ needed.
Marmatag wrote: There is no official FAQ stating that formation cards included in start collecting packages are allowed outside of an unbound game. These formations are not included in the codex. Therefore, start collecting formations are not allowed in a bound list.
I mean things get absurd fast if we start using (1) the presence in a codex or (2) the presence in an FAQ as a requirement - above and beyond other official, GW publications - to use things.
You go to extreme levels, however. The formation cards in start collecting boxes are official publications so are fine. The psychic power cards while published by GW still need you to refer to a GW publication to tell you which units can use which powers. The psychic power card by itself is not enough to allow specific units to use the powers. There has been no GW publication that has come out to allow it - the markeyting hype does not count as a publication giving us rules for the game. It's been almost a year since the book has come out and there's been no FAQ on it. Grey Knights had a FAQ in January which does not mention using these. Barring lack of any rules-based publications that tell you what units can use the powers in AoD, you don't get to use the powers in AoD by RAW.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lord Perversor wrote: Again GW requested Questions and doubts to be submitted for the FAQ in march , Angels of Death was published in late April.
the latest FAQ/Errata it's based in player questions made 1 month before this issue could arise not on GW self intent to keep up to date the rules.
Nice try, but no cigar. It's been almost a year (10 1/2 months) and no FAQ for AoD. There has been a FAQ for Grey Knights in January of this year. They could easily have included mention of it in there if they had wanted to. Or, put out a FAQ on Angels of Death in the 10 1/2 months since it's been published. They managed to get a FAQ out on The Fracture of Biel-Tan pretty quickly; you'd think if there was any feeling that they wanted to clarify in the rules that GK could use the powers from Angels of Death they could easily have put out a mention somewhere in that time period. That they didn't should be an indication to you.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/03/14 20:35:19
There's been no FAQ because there is no need for an FAQ.
The website explicitly states that Grey Knights have access to these powers.
This is reinforced by the cards, which are an official publication.
The only argument against the cards involves either an entirely different set of circumstances, or discrediting them by saying it's "future proofing," which wouldn't really make sense at all, because I doubt even GW knows if GK would get access to biomancy down the road, but more importantly it's a subjective stance based on what you think the rules mean, rather than what they say.
We can just end the debate really, I doubt we'll agree. I do understand why you'd want it in an FAQ or a codex, largely because that precedent was set for other factions. Explicit clarity never hurt anyone.
Even if I'm wrong, it would be nice to see an FAQ entry regarding this topic, that (1) answers our question and (2) establishes if the website or cards are an official source.
And at the end of the day it hardly matters, since basically every tournament format bans or neuters these powers anyway, for some reason or another.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/03/14 20:45:03
Galas wrote: I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you
Bharring wrote: He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
8500
1500
6000
2000
5000
