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.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Azuza001 wrote:
I think that is what makes the most sense. But I would be willing to listen to alternative opinions on it and why.

Trust me, I would love nothing more for this to be true, but it categorically isn't, because of the line in red I quote below. If GW change that line in any official capacity, then we'll all come out smelling of sunshine and rainbows. Until then, Autocannon/Lascannon Venerable Dreads and Librarians with Storm Shields are squatted for the time being.

Wow how can someone be so ignorant ?

They especially explained the dreadnought weapon case in the FAQ which was quoted a dozen times in this thread.

You are 100% allowed to use the index entries for a autocannon dread.

And as I understand it you use the dread cost from Codex (otherwise they wouldnt have said the most recent costs). If they would have meant to use the index costs, they would have simply said you use the datasheet AND the cost from the index.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Weazel wrote:
I'm confused. I play Space Wolves; do I use the points values from Codex: Space Marines or the ones in the Index? Couple of things (like Powerfists and Predators) are cheaper in C:SM...

For Space Wolves, anything that has been updated in the codex (Such as Predators) use the Codex, because you must use the latest rules available for the unit called Predator. For Wolf Lords, you use the Index entry for Captain, since that's the latest rules for the unit called Wolf Lord.

From Codex: Space Marines:

Note that there are several Space Marine Chapters – such as the Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Grey Knights – that deviate significantly from the Codex in terms of organisation and fighting style. The rules and abilities for these Chapters (and any successors they may have) will be detailed in their own codexes.

Space Wolves may not use Codex Space Marines as this is not their Codex.

According to your interpretation, when Codex Space Wolves hit the shelves I, as Ultramarines player, will have to buy it as it will be most recent datasheet for Predator, which of course is not true.

Strykaar wrote:
Wow how can someone be so ignorant ?

They especially explained the dreadnought weapon case in the FAQ which was quoted a dozen times in this thread.

You are 100% allowed to use the index entries for a autocannon dread.

Please try and not get personal. As much as you might disagree, he is 100% supported by GW for choosing not to play with someone using a legacy unit. GW expects legacy units to be the exception, not the rule; a way for players to use their 'outdated' units with a GW accepted datasheet instead of having the player try and homebrew a set of rules. Maybe BaconCatBug just doesn't want to deal with lists that require a ruling by the TO to use.

Strykaar wrote:
And as I understand it you use the dread cost from Codex (otherwise they wouldnt have said the most recent costs). If they would have meant to use the index costs, they would have simply said you use the datasheet AND the cost from the index.

I still don't think this is the correct interpretation, cause it doesn't follow the other stuff they've done for this in 8e. In this case, you use the Index datasheet, and pay the most recent points published for the model (Dread) and its weapons (Twin ACs), which would be the Index points, not the Codex. The Codex datasheet doesn't have the model (Dread) and its weapons (Twin AC), the Index datasheet does.

This way doesn't force Timmy to have to buy the Codex and cross-reference two books for a single unit to take his list to his LGS's Warhammer night, and it matches how they're doing armies that will be getting a Codex soon. It just makes more sense, IMO.

The Q&A page says to use the most recent points printed. It does not say to use the points printed in the same place as the datasheet you're using. The most recent points for some things are in the Index. The most recent points for other things are in the Codex.

For example, with a twin autocannon dread, the most recent points for the dreadnought are in the codex, as it does have a points value listed for Dreadnought. The most recent points for the weapon are the index.

For chapter champion with thunderhammer, the most recent points for both the unit and the weapon are in the codex.

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
The Q&A page says to use the most recent points printed. It does not say to use the points printed in the same place as the datasheet you're using. The most recent points for some things are in the Index. The most recent points for other things are in the Codex.

For example, with a twin autocannon dread, the most recent points for the dreadnought are in the codex, as it does have a points value listed for Dreadnought. The most recent points for the weapon are the index.

For chapter champion with thunderhammer, the most recent points for both the unit and the weapon are in the codex.

It also says to use the latest rules, but when I point that out people get upset. You can't mix and match IMHO.

Again, you are willfully ignoring the rest of the document to focus on the one point you've latched onto.

It says you can use the rules from the Index for datasheets not in the Codex, and for datasheets with options not in the Codex. A Dreadnought with weapons not in the Codex is an example given in the same article of something that is allowed.

You can, and in the case of points for some selections, must mix and match.

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
The Q&A page says to use the most recent points printed. It does not say to use the points printed in the same place as the datasheet you're using. The most recent points for some things are in the Index. The most recent points for other things are in the Codex.

For example, with a twin autocannon dread, the most recent points for the dreadnought are in the codex, as it does have a points value listed for Dreadnought. The most recent points for the weapon are the index.

For chapter champion with thunderhammer, the most recent points for both the unit and the weapon are in the codex.

I dunno, man. That seems way more counter-intuitive, clunkier, and doesn't mesh at all with how they set up the rules to use armies that haven't gotten the Codex.

Using your example, if Tim wants to play a Space Wolf army with a model with a P Fist and a RifleDread, he pays the Index points for the P Fist model but has to buy the Codex just so that he has the points, not the datasheet or weapon options, to play the Dread. I would understand this perspective if the P Fist model also paid the Codex price, but GW states in that same article in a very definitive sentence that

other Space Marines factions not covered in the new codex will continue to use all the datasheets, rules and points values in the index until their own codex is released.

It's a lot more cohesive, and isn't contradictory to GW's articles, to say that you pay the points from the same book you pull the datasheet from. If you want to use the Index datasheet because it has extra weapon options, like Twin ACs, then you pay the Index points because those are the most recent points printed for the unit that has those extra weapon options. This way, Tim doesn't have to have an entire new book where the only thing he's using is the point cost of one unit, a unit in a book he isn't even pulling the rules, stats, or weapon options from. He can bring his Index and have a valid army (with permission from his etc. etc.).

Yes, factions without a Codex only use the Index. I am only talking about factions with Codexes.

Mortarion's Herald wrote:

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
The Q&A page says to use the most recent points printed. It does not say to use the points printed in the same place as the datasheet you're using. The most recent points for some things are in the Index. The most recent points for other things are in the Codex.

For example, with a twin autocannon dread, the most recent points for the dreadnought are in the codex, as it does have a points value listed for Dreadnought. The most recent points for the weapon are the index.

For chapter champion with thunderhammer, the most recent points for both the unit and the weapon are in the codex.

I dunno, man. That seems way more counter-intuitive, clunkier, and doesn't mesh at all with how they set up the rules to use armies that haven't gotten the Codex.

Using your example, if Tim wants to play a Space Wolf army with a model with a P Fist and a RifleDread, he pays the Index points for the P Fist model but has to buy the Codex just so that he has the points, not the datasheet or weapon options, to play the Dread. I would understand this perspective if the P Fist model also paid the Codex price, but GW states in that same article in a very definitive sentence that

other Space Marines factions not covered in the new codex will continue to use all the datasheets, rules and points values in the index until their own codex is released.

It's a lot more cohesive, and isn't contradictory to GW's articles, to say that you pay the points from the same book you pull the datasheet from. If you want to use the Index datasheet because it has extra weapon options, like Twin ACs, then you pay the Index points because those are the most recent points printed for the unit that has those extra weapon options. This way, Tim doesn't have to have an entire new book where the only thing he's using is the point cost of one unit, a unit in a book he isn't even pulling the rules, stats, or weapon options from. He can bring his Index and have a valid army (with permission from his etc. etc.).

They have confused things by changing the points costs for generic items like Power Fists in Codexes instead of via Errata as they should have done - hopefully this will be updated in the next batch of FAQs / errata..

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
Yes, factions without a Codex only use the Index. I am only talking about factions with Codexes.

Kind of ignoring the rest of the document to focus on one point, aren't you?

Why do the two examples discussing the same issue have to be mutually exclusive? In fact, I would argue that they are inclusive, using each other to strengthen the other's position.

The main issue I have with the 'only Codex points' stance is that it takes one question two parts of the discussion ask and gives them two completely different answers when there is a single answer that still answers the question and doesn't invalidate any other answers.

If I use the Index to use a (insert SM army that is getting its own Codex that is not in Codex) unit, what do I do? I use the Index datasheet and pay the Index points.
If I use the Index to use a (insert legacy unit that has options not in Codex) unit, what do I do? I use the Index datasheet and pay the Index points

Is a LOT cleaner and intuitive than

If I use the Index to use a (insert SM army that is getting its own Codex that is not in Codex) unit, what do I do? I use the Index datasheet and pay the Index points.
If I use the Index to use a (insert legacy unit that has options not in Codex) unit, what do I do? I use the Index datasheet and pay the Codex points except for the one thing that isn't in the Codex where I pay Index points instead

That to me makes way less sense.

 Mr Morden wrote:
They have confused things by changing the points costs for generic items like Power Fists in Codexes instead of via Errata as they should have done - hopefully this will be updated in the next batch of FAQs / errata..

Personally that answer was cleanly answered in the articles they put out, but if it's not what they meant then I expect it to be answered in the next FAQ, and they do seem to be quick to fixing these issues this edition. The bigger issue to me was the legacy units. Again, fingers crossed on a clear and simple answer, but it doesn't mean we can't give it a shot.

The whole... point to the points adjustments is to be current and tweaked. Theyre not going to ask you to use an older points publication when they update them purposely.

(flashbacks to 6th edition, carrying around 4-5 pages of FAQ printouts)

Any games I play, I would automatically expect the person to have written using most current points system to their advantage. All we need is basic profiles from the index.

Whilst I agree the way they have handled it is a bit of a mess I think the intent is pretty clear, hopefully they will issue some kind of clear clarification soon.

The way I'm playing is you can use the index datasheets for units not in the codex and options not in the codex. You use points from the codex if they are in there and the index if they are not. My group also use the updated points for things like powerfists for other non-codex chapters as it seems obvious that these are the new value for them (tournament may not agree with this last part).

The view of some on here that you can no longer use models with options that aren't in the codex (autocannon, SS libby etr..) seems a bit laughable and smacks of TFG, there are printed rules for them released less than two months ago and a statement from GW saying you can still use them, what more are you looking for!

Mortarion's Herald wrote:

Medicinal Carrots wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
They have confused things by changing the points costs for generic items like Power Fists in Codexes instead of via Errata as they should have done - hopefully this will be updated in the next batch of FAQs / errata..

Personally that answer was cleanly answered in the articles they put out, but if it's not what they meant then I expect it to be answered in the next FAQ, and they do seem to be quick to fixing these issues this edition. The bigger issue to me was the legacy units. Again, fingers crossed on a clear and simple answer, but it doesn't mean we can't give it a shot.

I agree they kinda answered the question for say Index Marine units that use Power Fists but not others - Guard, Inquisitors, Ad Mech or even those with equivalent weapons that are now hugely over priced. This should have been a general errata as has been suggested on their facebook page.

and no - saying "wait for your own Codex" is not a answer when its a general weapon pts change.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The whole... point to the points adjustments is to be current and tweaked. Theyre not going to ask you to use an older points publication when they update them purposely.

(flashbacks to 6th edition, carrying around 4-5 pages of FAQ printouts)

Any games I play, I would automatically expect the person to have written using most current points system to their advantage. All we need is basic profiles from the index.

But by that logic you wouldn't have players playing legacy units as they don't have the weapon options in the latest publications, they would be using the updated datasheets from the Codex. That's part of the whole 'updating for the latest edition', right? These are 'outdated' units and GW has provided a set of rules to be able to use those units rather than having the player shelve them. In that sense I think they work the same way as the Index Chapters, and GW was pretty clear on that one aspect; until the Codex comes out for the Index Chapters, you pay Index points. This will mean you will have units in the same army list paying different points for the same thing. The only thing they were clear with updating from Codex to Index, unless I missed something, were Chapter Traits, Relics and the Psyker Table. I believe this works the same for legacy units, and you pay from the Index, cause the legacy units with their options don't exist in the Codex.

 WisdomLS wrote:
Whilst I agree the way they have handled it is a bit of a mess I think the intent is pretty clear, hopefully they will issue some kind of clear clarification soon.

The way I'm playing is you can use the index datasheets for units not in the codex and options not in the codex. You use points from the codex if they are in there and the index if they are not. My group also use the updated points for things like powerfists for other non-codex chapters as it seems obvious that these are the new value for them (tournament may not agree with this last part).

The view of some on here that you can no longer use models with options that aren't in the codex (autocannon, SS libby etr..) seems a bit laughable and smacks of TFG, there are printed rules for them released less than two months ago and a statement from GW saying you can still use them, what more are you looking for!

You and your group have put house rules in place, which are totally ok but not really what we're discussing, the idea being that if you went to a new shop with a new group of people you've never played against, you have the same understanding without needing to have to discuss anything.

I don't think there's any reason not to let your opponent use legacy units or even use only the Index to field their army (unless they're actively trying to take advantage of the differences), but they do require permission from the opponent or TO to use, so it's up to them. While I don't believe they're correct in that you can't use them, GW supports them 100% in being able to decide not play against them.

What I find funny is that legacy unit's you need permission to use but actual charecter models with vastly more powerful abilities you don't. I mean, what feels more likely, that the ultramarine force your facing has "Dexter", a lib in term armor and ss with a few dreads with dual auto cannons or that Robuote Guilliman and his buddy's Marneus Calgar and Chief Lib Tigurius decided that your battle is more important than anything else they could be possibly doing in the universe ?

I still agree with Mortarion's Herald, if it's in the index and not in the codex you can use the index but I also still think you pay index price for all setups. Your using a legacy unit, if the worse thing that you have happen is to use that lib with storm shield is you end up paying an extra 35 points than normal that's not a big deal. It's the legacy tax. I am just happy I still have the option, unlike my legacy Doom rider lol.

I posted a long and detailed question on the 40k Facebook page explaining that there were a few issues with using legacy units and the like asking for a more detailed explanation.

They replied

With a link to the codex FAQ that is causing the issues in the first place saying it should answer all my questions :/

 WisdomLS wrote:
I posted a long and detailed question on the 40k Facebook page explaining that there were a few issues with using legacy units and the like asking for a more detailed explanation.

They replied

With a link to the codex FAQ that is causing the issues in the first place saying it should answer all my questions :/

Just goes to show they don't care.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 WisdomLS wrote:
I posted a long and detailed question on the 40k Facebook page explaining that there were a few issues with using legacy units and the like asking for a more detailed explanation.

They replied

With a link to the codex FAQ that is causing the issues in the first place saying it should answer all my questions :/

Just goes to show they don't care.

Or simply that Nick and Eddie are not the Rules team and are giving out what they're permitted to? It's a corporation with policies and procedures to follow. Don't ascribe laziness or lack of care to them. Those guys very much do care and will pass things on they hear often. It's kinda their job...

I throw no blame at them, I suspect it's the case that they find the faq saying "you can use the index for these" is perfectly clear enough but the more rules minded players would like a more defined and nuanced answer and explanation with examples so there is no misinterpretation.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
The Q&A page says to use the most recent points printed. It does not say to use the points printed in the same place as the datasheet you're using. The most recent points for some things are in the Index. The most recent points for other things are in the Codex.

For example, with a twin autocannon dread, the most recent points for the dreadnought are in the codex, as it does have a points value listed for Dreadnought. The most recent points for the weapon are the index.

For chapter champion with thunderhammer, the most recent points for both the unit and the weapon are in the codex.

It also says to use the latest rules, but when I point that out people get upset. You can't mix and match IMHO.

I am assuming, using your own post, that you refer to this?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Mortarion's Herald wrote:
Again, if you have anything that shows the contrary, that's the kind of info I'm hoping to get on here.

"Once a unit has been covered in the codex though, we assume you’re using the latest version."

Simply put, we can't use the index for Auto/Las Dreads because the entry for Dreadnoughts has been entirely replaced.

Please focus on the "Once a unit has been covered in the codex" part:
You would assume, by this sentence, that the Auto-cannon dreadnought "has been covered" ?

I would disagree.

The rules are quite clear: "Once a unit has been covered in the codex", you use those rules, the "latest version" of the rules, for example standard dreadnoughts, Predators (Not the SW or DA or Grey Knights ones), etc.

For "everything else", such as the Autocanon Dreadnought or other legacy Units, MedicinalCarrots had it right:

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
It doesn't say that. It says they "assume" you will use the Codex version, not that you must use the Codex version. The same article says you can use options in the Index that aren't in the Codex. You're also ignoring another part of the same Q&A page:

There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?
While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army.

Per that article, it breaks down as follows:
Is the datasheet in the Index but not in the Codex? Use the Index datasheet.
Is the datasheet in both the Index and Codex, but they have different options? Use either one.
Otherwise, use the Codex datasheet.
In all cases, use the most recent points.

Sorry guys, I am out.

This whole discussion is full of ignorance and interpretations.

The FAQ was 100% clear and leaves ZERO space for interpretations.


If you want to play a unit which has a datasheet in the index but not in the Codex (rifledread), you use the datasheet from the index and the most recent Point costs (which would NOW be the Codex for the dread and the index for the weapon)...

Sorry, I really dont get this discussions. They cant explain it even clearer.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Please focus on the "Once a unit has been covered in the codex" part:
You would assume, by this sentence, that the Auto-cannon dreadnought "has been covered" ?

I would disagree.

The rules are quite clear: "Once a unit has been covered in the codex", you use those rules, the "latest version" of the rules, for example standard dreadnoughts, Predators (Not the SW or DA or Grey Knights ones), etc.

For "everything else", such as the Autocanon Dreadnought or other legacy Units, MedicinalCarrots had it right:

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
It doesn't say that. It says they "assume" you will use the Codex version, not that you must use the Codex version. The same article says you can use options in the Index that aren't in the Codex. You're also ignoring another part of the same Q&A page:

There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?
While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army.

Per that article, it breaks down as follows:
Is the datasheet in the Index but not in the Codex? Use the Index datasheet.
Is the datasheet in both the Index and Codex, but they have different options? Use either one.
Otherwise, use the Codex datasheet.
In all cases, use the most recent points.

I completely agree with being able to use the AC Dread in games (with permission), and I actually really like framing legacy units as a seperate unit from the updated Codex versions, because they actually are now, but following that logic, why would you consider the Codex points for the Codex Dread the ones you have to use for the Index's AC Dread? Being separate units, doesn't that mean you should use the Index points since those are the most recent points published for that model and its weapons?

Strykaar wrote:
Sorry guys, I am out.

This whole discussion is full of ignorance and interpretations.

The FAQ was 100% clear and leaves ZERO space for interpretations.

If you want to play a unit which has a datasheet in the index but not in the Codex (rifledread), you use the datasheet from the index and the most recent Point costs (which would NOW be the Codex for the dread and the index for the weapon)...

Sorry, I really dont get this discussions. They cant explain it even clearer.

Evidently they can, seeing as we're on our way to a third page and there is still no consensus. Why is it that for Index armies with an upcoming Codex, you use the Index points (even if the same weapon is in the Codex for a different price) but the same doesn't apply to legacy units, which would effectively be a different unit from the Codex version. I've yet to see a more convincing argument than the one that is already supported in the same article, that you pay Index points for Index units.

Feel free not to chime in anymore, but the only interpretation losing ground when you leave is your own.

Of course, this would all be solved if they put up the most recent points for things on their website, like they've been saying they would for a while. Then everyone would have access but would have to use older datasheets/rules for their actual units.

Instead we've been getting these mule measures like just updating Reiver points in errata.

Mortarion's Herald wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Please focus on the "Once a unit has been covered in the codex" part:
You would assume, by this sentence, that the Auto-cannon dreadnought "has been covered" ?

I would disagree.

The rules are quite clear: "Once a unit has been covered in the codex", you use those rules, the "latest version" of the rules, for example standard dreadnoughts, Predators (Not the SW or DA or Grey Knights ones), etc.

For "everything else", such as the Autocanon Dreadnought or other legacy Units, MedicinalCarrots had it right:

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
It doesn't say that. It says they "assume" you will use the Codex version, not that you must use the Codex version. The same article says you can use options in the Index that aren't in the Codex. You're also ignoring another part of the same Q&A page:

There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?
While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army.

Per that article, it breaks down as follows:
Is the datasheet in the Index but not in the Codex? Use the Index datasheet.
Is the datasheet in both the Index and Codex, but they have different options? Use either one.
Otherwise, use the Codex datasheet.
In all cases, use the most recent points.

I completely agree with being able to use the AC Dread in games (with permission), and I actually really like framing legacy units as a seperate unit from the updated Codex versions, because they actually are now, but following that logic, why would you consider the Codex points for the Codex Dread the ones you have to use for the Index's AC Dread? Being separate units, doesn't that mean you should use the Index points since those are the most recent points published for that model and its weapons?

Strykaar wrote:
Sorry guys, I am out.

This whole discussion is full of ignorance and interpretations.

The FAQ was 100% clear and leaves ZERO space for interpretations.

If you want to play a unit which has a datasheet in the index but not in the Codex (rifledread), you use the datasheet from the index and the most recent Point costs (which would NOW be the Codex for the dread and the index for the weapon)...

Sorry, I really dont get this discussions. They cant explain it even clearer.

Evidently they can, seeing as we're on our way to a third page and there is still no consensus. Why is it that for Index armies with an upcoming Codex, you use the Index points (even if the same weapon is in the Codex for a different price) but the same doesn't apply to legacy units, which would effectively be a different unit from the Codex version. I've yet to see a more convincing argument than the one that is already supported in the same article, that you pay Index points for Index units.

Feel free not to chime in anymore, but the only interpretation losing ground when you leave is your own.

You're right, and I am still on the fence about using Codex points for Index entries... However that is my HYWPI, I'd take Index models at Index points... but the rules quoted above are quite clear, even if we don't "feel it's right"...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Although the way I see it RAW is that the rules say "that model and its weapons" as 1 item.

I.e not Dread points(Codex) + Autocannons (Index) but actually "points cost of the Rifledread".
This only exists in the Index, so the whole model is Index-costed.

This is interpretation though, as both the dread+ Autocanon points cost can be found in the Codex.

 BlackTalos wrote:
You're right, and I am still on the fence about using Codex points for Index entries... However that is my HYWPI, I'd take Index models at Index points... but the rules quoted above are quite clear, even if we don't "feel it's right"...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Although the way I see it RAW is that the rules say "that model and its weapons" as 1 item.

I.e not Dread points(Codex) + Autocannons (Index) but actually "points cost of the Rifledread".
This only exists in the Index, so the whole model is Index-costed.

This is interpretation though, as both the dread+ Autocanon points cost can be found in the Codex.

That's how I interpreted it, that "model and its weapons" is a self-contained term, meaning the model and the weapon options it has, which would differentiate the Codex and Index models. Honestly, you saying they are separate units is probably the biggest perspective shift this thread has given me.

Also, please correct me if I'm wrong, as I only have the Codex with me and can't doublecheck the Index, but I don't see any type of Autocannon, Twin or otherwise, listed in the Codex. Not sure of other legacy units, but I know this also applies for the Twin Plasma Cannon for the Razorback, which is not the one listed in the Index Razorback datasheet and I assume is different from the Twin Heavy Plasma Cannon. That's why the whole debate started about using the Index points.

I got a question that is slightly off topic...

Can I use the following lists in one detachment and still use their traits/covenants:

Chaos Space Marines - Codex and Index.
Renegades - IA Index Astra Militarum.
Hellforged - IA Index Chaos.

I'm trying to create a unique army and need to use all three books in one detachment.

Puscifer wrote:
I got a question that is slightly off topic...

Can I use the following lists in one detachment and still use their traits/covenants:

Chaos Space Marines - Codex and Index.
Renegades - IA Index Astra Militarum.
Hellforged - IA Index Chaos.

I'm trying to create a unique army and need to use all three books in one detachment.

Depends on what the rule for the trait says. As long as all the keywords are correct within the detachment I don't see why not.