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.

In fact, there's a hilarious bit in that they're not limited to making one selection from the Vehicle Equipment List, so you could end up with a Leman Russ Punisher with like 900-something storm bolters as your one unit in a 2k list.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
There is also the drawback that it's model based (though this is... necessarily hard to police). But essentially, it is intended for you to use existing models, not build a new one.

I.E. if I started Eldar today, I'd never get to use an Autarch with a reaper launcher as I never had the model, and converting a new one isn't following the latest rules in the Codex.

With all due respect, that is pants on head crazy. If I build a model, then I have a model, and then I use the rules that best suit that model. It doesn't matter when the model is built.

I don't agree. I think the intent is to allow players with pre-existing models to use them, not to allow new players to build new models to use old rules that have since been superseded.

And how is people gonna know that your model is old? is just insane to think about that scenario.

 Galas wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
There is also the drawback that it's model based (though this is... necessarily hard to police). But essentially, it is intended for you to use existing models, not build a new one.

I.E. if I started Eldar today, I'd never get to use an Autarch with a reaper launcher as I never had the model, and converting a new one isn't following the latest rules in the Codex.

With all due respect, that is pants on head crazy. If I build a model, then I have a model, and then I use the rules that best suit that model. It doesn't matter when the model is built.

I don't agree. I think the intent is to allow players with pre-existing models to use them, not to allow new players to build new models to use old rules that have since been superseded.

And how is people know that your model is old? is just insane to think about that scenario.

Yes, I agree. Hence why I said it'd be hard to police. I could go out right now and make a Commissar with a Power Axe and be like "he's the 2nd edition model" and most people probably wouldn't know.

But I still think that the intent is not simply to just essentially "put the options back in the codex" but rather to have people who already own pre-existing models still be able to use them.

It also means that the fact that a GK dread has completely different options from a Space marine Dread both of which have different options from the Index dread (where they shared the same datasheet) makes all those differences completely meaningless. GK and SM can just use index dread options, so what exactly was the fething point?

Right. That's my point.

I think the logic goes:

"Well, the game is more balanced and representative of the model line if we remove these options."
"But what about the people that already have models with those options?"
"Well, they'll keep using the index, I'm sure such veteran players will be fine with that compromise to keep their models in play."

Meanwhile, in the playerbase...

"I'm totally building this brand new Autarch with a Reaper Launcher completely from scratch, because the option is now there and it's beardy as heck!" *wrings hands evilly*

This may be slightly off tangent but how does this work with FW models? FW offers a dread with a psycannon as a model. What data sheet do I use if I want that option?

Is there more than one choice? If so, I'd say codex > index > FW

I meant there is no psycannon option in either the GK codex or Imp 1. How/where do I find FW datasheets? And what happens if the base cost of the Dread is different from both the Codex and Index? For all I know the psycannon dread may even have a different name, like a Freudian dreadnaught. Does that mean it is a totally different Dread or just a variant of the SM/GK dread?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I meant there is no psycannon option in either the GK codex or Imp 1. How/where do I find FW datasheets? And what happens if the base cost of the Dread is different from both the Codex and Index? For all I know the psycannon dread may even have a different name, like a Freudian dreadnaught. Does that mean it is a totally different Dread or just a variant of the SM/GK dread?

Imperial Armour Index Forces of the Adeptus Astartes, page 50, provides rules for a Dreadnought with a Heavy Psycannon, Nemisis Doomglaive and a Storm bolter and a option to swap the Storm bolter with an Incinerator.

For rules for Forge World models, the Forge World Indexes are the best place to look.

 Asmodai wrote:
For rules for Forge World models, the Forge World Indexes are the best place to look.

Boy good thing you said that.

finally.

Starting to see a precedence here.

First it was all about understrength units cant nah nah nah

then using old models, nah nah nah

GW brings in a well thought out flow chart, introduces aux detatchment requirements, etc.

The intent is clear....they want us to play with our toys....no more naysayers saying you cant this or cant that.....

The intent is clear let people play and those who say you cant are going to get egg on their face again. Follow this precendent the next time you try to take a soap box and shame others.

Oh about the old model vs new....heck what if you just bought a model off ebay and the guy told you it was 20 years old but he made it last weekend. IF YOU ARE TRYING TO HARRASS players from using their toys...the precendent will be that you are wrong....don't be that guy!

Time to start hunting up NOS kits on ebay!

M.

 Crimson wrote:

This has been finally settled:

Cool so I wasn't crazy then. Good to know I was in fact reading this right. I was starting to worry I had been reading the situation wrong even after having like 3 different GW things tell me I was "right"

Also sweet, I can still use demo charges, shotguns, power axes, etc. etc. I had like 30 some odd models screwed over in the index/codex change so it's good to know i can still officially use them. I don't care if people make new models to do whatever, people are going to go for the craziest stuff no matter what happens, this at least gives people a reason to keep their indexes around. Who knows, I may eat these words down the road but worst comes to worst tournaments can always just state that it's codex or bust for high tier events.

I also thought their example model was very well thought out. They clearly gave a lot of thought to this and made sure it was very cut and dry. Nice change of pace to see with GW. The FAQ on the whole appears to be very clearly written. I'm still not crazy about some of their decisions with modifiers, but at least they're being consistent with it.

Hmm, this does also mean that I can equip a plague champion with all the Combi- and powerweapons again, right? Also Plasma pistols for plague marines. Cool thing!

One thing that flowchart doesn't clarify is if, for example, <Thousand Sons> Rubric Marines use the updated points from the CSM codex (no extra tax for the sorcerer, soulreaper cannon down to 15 points) or if we're stuck with the Index numbers until our Codex comes out. I've been playing with the assumption that I get the discount but an official clarification would be nice.

 necrontyrOG wrote:
Looking at my codex now. Page 115, Chimera can take any Vehicle Equipment. Page 85, Vehicle Equipment. HK missile and stubber are there.

So. I'm an idiot. Instead of looking earlier in the Codex (to page 85), I thought to the Wargear section in the back, where it *isn't* under the "Vehicle Equipment" listed there.

WELL, at least I learned something about the Index

M.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
One thing that flowchart doesn't clarify is if, for example, <Thousand Sons> Rubric Marines use the updated points from the CSM codex (no extra tax for the sorcerer, soulreaper cannon down to 15 points) or if we're stuck with the Index numbers until our Codex comes out. I've been playing with the assumption that I get the discount but an official clarification would be nice.

I would say you don't. Much like how Space Wolves and Dark Angels can't use the generic Spess Mahrine codex, Tsons can't use the generic NaughtyBoi Spess Mahrine codex either. You're stuck with the index until you get your own codex. That's how I'll be playing my Wolves anyway.

I'm happy with Venerable Dakkadreads tbh

I don't like this ruling, and it will probably be house ruled by TOs. The indices are not supported, they don't receive maintenance, every time something changes in the codex you could break something with the index.
For example, imagine if GW decides in the upcoming tyranid FAQ that hyve tyrants cannot take Monstrous Rending Claws (because it's dumb that you can for zero points).
People will still play it because "Oh look in the Index i can!".
This ruling will create a lot of confusion.

Spoletta wrote:
I don't like this ruling, and it will probably be house ruled by TOs. The indices are not supported, they don't receive maintenance, every time something changes in the codex you could break something with the index.
For example, imagine if GW decides in the upcoming tyranid FAQ that hyve tyrants cannot take Monstrous Rending Claws (because it's dumb that you can for zero points).
People will still play it because "Oh look in the Index i can!".
This ruling will create a lot of confusion.

At that point they will errata the index. They have already done it for Leman Russes, there is every chance they will do it for other armies when needed.

Spoletta wrote:
I don't like this ruling, and it will probably be house ruled by TOs. The indices are not supported, they don't receive maintenance, every time something changes in the codex you could break something with the index.
For example, imagine if GW decides in the upcoming tyranid FAQ that hyve tyrants cannot take Monstrous Rending Claws (because it's dumb that you can for zero points).
People will still play it because "Oh look in the Index i can!".
This ruling will create a lot of confusion.

GW FAQ's the indexes all the time.

Heck, the index that has eldar in it just got FAQ'd today.

 Asmodai wrote:

 Infantryman wrote:
Was checking the entry for the Chimera in the Index compared to the Codex and noticed it lost some options - HK missiles and stubbers/stormbolters, for instance. This is not reflected in the BattleScribe files I have (Warhammer 40,000 v1.0.78, dtd 2 November 2017).

Am I correct in assuming that the entry in the Index (and Battlescribe) is obsolete, and not to be used anymore?

M.

The Chimera entry says "This model may take items from the Vehicle Equipment list." p113

The Vehicle Equipment List (p85) includes Hunter-killer missiles, Heavy stubbers, Stom bolters, among other options.

None of those options were lost.

The HK missile is now on the vehicle equipment list. Please note that there is no limit to the number of items you can take from that list. RAW, this allows you to take an infinite number of HK missiles, up to the total points limit, of course.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
I don't like this ruling, and it will probably be house ruled by TOs. The indices are not supported, they don't receive maintenance, every time something changes in the codex you could break something with the index.
For example, imagine if GW decides in the upcoming tyranid FAQ that hyve tyrants cannot take Monstrous Rending Claws (because it's dumb that you can for zero points).
People will still play it because "Oh look in the Index i can!".
This ruling will create a lot of confusion.

GW FAQ's the indexes all the time.

Heck, the index that has eldar in it just got FAQ'd today.

Well that fixes it for me then. Good work GW.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
One thing that flowchart doesn't clarify is if, for example, <Thousand Sons> Rubric Marines use the updated points from the CSM codex (no extra tax for the sorcerer, soulreaper cannon down to 15 points) or if we're stuck with the Index numbers until our Codex comes out. I've been playing with the assumption that I get the discount but an official clarification would be nice.

if the chaos codex spesificly mentions units from 1000 sons then that overrides the index!, but only thouse that are mentioned.
if there is a model or wargear not beeing mentioned in there then you use the index.

aka, if the chaos codex includes rubric marines keyword in the new price mentioned in the chaos codex then you use the new price. if it dont, you are still stuck whit index price and rules as rubric marines is a seperated army from chaos in the fact that it has its own codex, just in the same way dark angels is seperated from sm codex as it is has its own codex.

all armys are going to have to use both the index and the new codex for a very long time until all units+ selections from the index has made it back into the codex.