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.

Your last statement:

"Stormtrooper cannot be taken by units with keyword <Regiment>"

can you explain why you believe this is the case, while also remembering that "Storm Trooper" and the "Militarum Tempestus Keyword" are two different things?

blaktoof wrote:
So normally a baneblade can take stormtrooper doctrine without using a regiment that has no assigned doctrine?

No one wants to face the truth?

Let us know when you want to face it.

blaktoof wrote:
You are taking a doctrine on an unit that cannot normally replace it's faction keyword with the faction that gets the ability you are trying to take

But can be normally taken by choosing the Storm Troopers doctrine if you do not have a doctrine associated with your regiment. You have permission for this in the rules. You can't take the faction. You can take the doctrine as you are given permission and there has not been a specific revoking of the permission to take that doctrine (not getting to choose a faction is not the same at all as not getting to choose a doctrine).

blaktoof wrote:
. You are circumventibg the rules to get said ability by making up a regiment, regardless of what the codex days the faw specifies this is not allowed.

Rules citation please for where selecting Storm Toopers is not allowed that does not involve the factions. Prohibition to choose a faction is not prohibition to choose a doctrine when you have already been given permission to choose any doctrine. Until then, your claim of RAW is unsubstantiaed.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Your last statement:

"Stormtrooper cannot be taken by units with keyword <Regiment>"

can you explain why you believe this is the case, while also remembering that "Storm Trooper" and the "Militarum Tempestus Keyword" are two different things?

Isn't that because the doctrine blurb reads "Militarum Tempestus: Stormtrooper"
It seems like it shares a mutual exclusivity, from the fact that Militarum Tempestus can only use Stromtrooper doctrine, and thus has a fixed keyword <militarum tempestus>, which cannot be swapped out for any other <regiment> keyword. It seems a bit off that the arguments are based on that the exclusivity is only applied regiment-to-doctrine direction, but not doctrine-to-regiment.

A certain unit can take on any doctrine, regardless of what regiment keyword it has as long as its not one of the primary ones.
A certain unit of certain regiment keyword can only take on the doctrine available to it.

I get the RAW, but doesn't this sound a bit off?

 doctortom wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
So normally a baneblade can take stormtrooper doctrine without using a regiment that has no assigned doctrine?

No one wants to face the truth?

Let us know when you want to face it.

blaktoof wrote:
You are taking a doctrine on an unit that cannot normally replace it's faction keyword with the faction that gets the ability you are trying to take

But can be normally taken by choosing the Storm Troopers doctrine if you do not have a doctrine associated with your regiment. You have permission for this in the rules. You can't take the faction. You can take the doctrine as you are given permission and there has not been a specific revoking of the permission to take that doctrine (not getting to choose a faction is not the same at all as not getting to choose a doctrine).

blaktoof wrote:
. You are circumventibg the rules to get said ability by making up a regiment, regardless of what the codex days the faw specifies this is not allowed.

Rules citation please for where selecting Storm Toopers is not allowed that does not involve the factions. Prohibition to choose a faction is not prohibition to choose a doctrine when you have already been given permission to choose any doctrine. Until then, your claim of RAW is unsubstantiaed.

Lol.

You might as well be saying you can take ultramarine chapter tactics at this point and then claim I can't cite where the rules say it isn't allowed. You are specifcaly trying to give units abilities they cannot normally get as they cannot normally switch regiment to the non made up faction which has stormtrooper.

The FAQ specifically calls out not being able to use a faction with no assigned faction rules to give an unit abilities it cannot normally have.

You cannot give anything with the regiment keyword stormtrooper normally because normally anything with regiment keyword cannot replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get that ability.

The only way you can try to achieve that with only the codex rules is by using a regiment with no assigned regiment rules,. The FAQ specifically addresses this as not allowing you to give units abilities they could not normally take.

Could a baneblade normally take militarum tempestus to get storm trooper? The raw answer is no. Therefore per the faq any regiment you use cannot give that unit that ability regardless of what you name it.

blaktoof wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
So normally a baneblade can take stormtrooper doctrine without using a regiment that has no assigned doctrine?

No one wants to face the truth?

Let us know when you want to face it.

blaktoof wrote:
You are taking a doctrine on an unit that cannot normally replace it's faction keyword with the faction that gets the ability you are trying to take

But can be normally taken by choosing the Storm Troopers doctrine if you do not have a doctrine associated with your regiment. You have permission for this in the rules. You can't take the faction. You can take the doctrine as you are given permission and there has not been a specific revoking of the permission to take that doctrine (not getting to choose a faction is not the same at all as not getting to choose a doctrine).

blaktoof wrote:
. You are circumventibg the rules to get said ability by making up a regiment, regardless of what the codex days the faw specifies this is not allowed.

Rules citation please for where selecting Storm Toopers is not allowed that does not involve the factions. Prohibition to choose a faction is not prohibition to choose a doctrine when you have already been given permission to choose any doctrine. Until then, your claim of RAW is unsubstantiaed.

Lol.

You might as well be saying you can take ultramarine chapter tactics at this point and then claim I can't cite where the rules say it isn't allowed. You are specifcaly trying to give units abilities they cannot normally get as they cannot normally switch regiment to the non made up faction which has stormtrooper.

The FAQ specifically calls out not being able to use a faction with no assigned faction rules to give an unit abilities it cannot normally have.

You cannot give anything with the regiment keyword stormtrooper normally because normally anything with regiment keyword cannot replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get that ability.

The only way you can try to achieve that with only the codex rules is by using a regiment with no assigned regiment rules,. The FAQ specifically addresses this as not allowing you to give units abilities they could not normally take.

Could a baneblade normally take militarum tempestus to get storm trooper? The raw answer is no. Therefore per the faq any regiment you use cannot give that unit that ability regardless of what you name it.

You can absolutely take <Ultramarines> as a Regiment. Nothing stops you from taking that.

What it DOES stop you from is taking <Ultramarines> as a Regiment, and then benefiting off of rules for the <Ultramarines> Chapter. This is not the same.

You are still under the illusion that that only "proper" way to get Storm Troopers is via the <Militarum Tempestus> Regiment. This is not true - it is no different to me having ANY OTHER DOCTRINE.

So, under your "units which don't have access to it can't have it" rule - that should mean ANY custom regiment can't ever have a Doctrine? I mean, if they want a Doctrine, they need to have the appropriate Keyword, which they can't have, because they're custom. Therefore, no custom regiment can have a Doctrine, right? Right?

Your argument relies on the false supposition that Storm Troopers can only be obtained via the <Militarum Tempestus> keyword. This is false, which therefore disproves your argument.

So you believe a baneblade using a regiment with assigned doctrines can select one of those options and normally take storm trooper doctrine?

blaktoof wrote:
So you believe a baneblade using a regiment with assigned doctrines can select one of those options and normally take storm trooper doctrine?

No, because the regiments with assigned doctrines must take the doctrines assigned to them.

However, a regiment without an assigned doctrine (such as the Praetorians) can pick from any Doctrine, while having the <Praetorian> keyword.

blaktoof wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
So normally a baneblade can take stormtrooper doctrine without using a regiment that has no assigned doctrine?

No one wants to face the truth?

Let us know when you want to face it.

blaktoof wrote:
You are taking a doctrine on an unit that cannot normally replace it's faction keyword with the faction that gets the ability you are trying to take

But can be normally taken by choosing the Storm Troopers doctrine if you do not have a doctrine associated with your regiment. You have permission for this in the rules. You can't take the faction. You can take the doctrine as you are given permission and there has not been a specific revoking of the permission to take that doctrine (not getting to choose a faction is not the same at all as not getting to choose a doctrine).

blaktoof wrote:
. You are circumventibg the rules to get said ability by making up a regiment, regardless of what the codex days the faw specifies this is not allowed.

Rules citation please for where selecting Storm Toopers is not allowed that does not involve the factions. Prohibition to choose a faction is not prohibition to choose a doctrine when you have already been given permission to choose any doctrine. Until then, your claim of RAW is unsubstantiaed.

Lol.

You might as well be saying you can take ultramarine chapter tactics at this point and then claim I can't cite where the rules say it isn't allowed. You are specifcaly trying to give units abilities they cannot normally get as they cannot normally switch regiment to the non made up faction which has stormtrooper.

The FAQ specifically calls out not being able to use a faction with no assigned faction rules to give an unit abilities it cannot normally have.

You cannot give anything with the regiment keyword stormtrooper normally because normally anything with regiment keyword cannot replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get that ability.

The only way you can try to achieve that with only the codex rules is by using a regiment with no assigned regiment rules,. The FAQ specifically addresses this as not allowing you to give units abilities they could not normally take.

Could a baneblade normally take militarum tempestus to get storm trooper? The raw answer is no. Therefore per the faq any regiment you use cannot give that unit that ability regardless of what you name it.

So, in other words you don't have a rules quotation prohibiting you from taking the Storm Troopers doctrine. You are merely assuming that you can't take the doctrine because you can't take the regiment name, despite the fact that by RAW you can choose any doctrine for a regiment that doesn't have one, be it one of GW's names like the Chem Dogs, or a home brew one like the Terrain Paisley Unicorns. Prohibition against taking a regiment is not prohibition against taking. a doctrine. And when asked for proof you just want to double down on the faction while ignoring that we have permission to take any doctrine. Let us know when you're ready to face the truth.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
So you believe a baneblade using a regiment with assigned doctrines can select one of those options and normally take storm trooper doctrine?

No, because the regiments with assigned doctrines must take the doctrines assigned to them.

However, a regiment without an assigned doctrine (such as the Praetorians) can pick from any Doctrine, while having the <Praetorian> keyword.

Then per the FAQ the baneblade cannot have stormtrooper.

blaktoof wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
So you believe a baneblade using a regiment with assigned doctrines can select one of those options and normally take storm trooper doctrine?

No, because the regiments with assigned doctrines must take the doctrines assigned to them.

However, a regiment without an assigned doctrine (such as the Praetorians) can pick from any Doctrine, while having the <Praetorian> keyword.

Then per the FAQ the baneblade cannot have stormtrooper.

Your continued lack of proof is astounding.

 doctortom wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
So normally a baneblade can take stormtrooper doctrine without using a regiment that has no assigned doctrine?

No one wants to face the truth?

Let us know when you want to face it.

blaktoof wrote:
You are taking a doctrine on an unit that cannot normally replace it's faction keyword with the faction that gets the ability you are trying to take

But can be normally taken by choosing the Storm Troopers doctrine if you do not have a doctrine associated with your regiment. You have permission for this in the rules. You can't take the faction. You can take the doctrine as you are given permission and there has not been a specific revoking of the permission to take that doctrine (not getting to choose a faction is not the same at all as not getting to choose a doctrine).

blaktoof wrote:
. You are circumventibg the rules to get said ability by making up a regiment, regardless of what the codex days the faw specifies this is not allowed.

Rules citation please for where selecting Storm Toopers is not allowed that does not involve the factions. Prohibition to choose a faction is not prohibition to choose a doctrine when you have already been given permission to choose any doctrine. Until then, your claim of RAW is unsubstantiaed.

Lol.

You might as well be saying you can take ultramarine chapter tactics at this point and then claim I can't cite where the rules say it isn't allowed. You are specifcaly trying to give units abilities they cannot normally get as they cannot normally switch regiment to the non made up faction which has stormtrooper.

The FAQ specifically calls out not being able to use a faction with no assigned faction rules to give an unit abilities it cannot normally have.

You cannot give anything with the regiment keyword stormtrooper normally because normally anything with regiment keyword cannot replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get that ability.

The only way you can try to achieve that with only the codex rules is by using a regiment with no assigned regiment rules,. The FAQ specifically addresses this as not allowing you to give units abilities they could not normally take.

Could a baneblade normally take militarum tempestus to get storm trooper? The raw answer is no. Therefore per the faq any regiment you use cannot give that unit that ability regardless of what you name it.

So, in other words you don't have a rules quotation prohibiting you from taking the Storm Troopers doctrine. You are merely assuming that you can't take the doctrine because you can't take the regiment name, despite the fact that by RAW you can choose any doctrine for a regiment that doesn't have one, be it one of GW's names like the Chem Dogs, or a home brew one like the Terrain Paisley Unicorns. Prohibition against taking a regiment is not prohibition against taking. a doctrine. And when asked for proof you just want to double down on the faction while ignoring that we have permission to take any doctrine. Let us know when you're ready to face the truth.

You have been given rules quotes, you have opted to not bother looking at them. You are also misquoting the faq, which clearly states you cannot give units abilities they could not normally take by assigning a made up regiment or a regiment with unassigned faction rules.

You have permission to take a doctrine in the codex, and the faq modifies that by specifically calling out that cannot be used to give an unit an ability it could not normally take by using keywords with assigned rules.

You cannot normally replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get stormtrooper, therefore per the FAQ you cannot use a regiment with unassigned doctrines to get stormtrooper as that is not a valid option for the same unit when it has a normal regiment with assigned rules.

Your only basis for argument is by completely ignoring the faq.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 doctortom wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
So you believe a baneblade using a regiment with assigned doctrines can select one of those options and normally take storm trooper doctrine?

No, because the regiments with assigned doctrines must take the doctrines assigned to them.

However, a regiment without an assigned doctrine (such as the Praetorians) can pick from any Doctrine, while having the <Praetorian> keyword.

Then per the FAQ the baneblade cannot have stormtrooper.

Your continued lack of proof is astounding.

Your continued burying of your head in the sand is astounding.

Blaktoof, can you tell me why a Baneblade cannot have the Storm Trooper doctrine, without referencing Militarum Tempestus at all?

Because Militarum Tempestus is the name of a Regiment, not a Doctrine, and we are talking about Doctrines, so it's irrelevant.

You are falling into the "All rectangles are squares" fallacy.

All squares are rectangles. True premise.
All Militarum Tempestus units can only take the Storm Troopers doctrine. This is true. Militarum Tempestus units cannot choose any other doctrines.

Therefore all rectangles are squares. Faulty conclusion.
Therefore the Storm Toopers doctrine can only be used by Militarum Tempestus units. This is false. There is no such restriction on the doctrine.

Let me re-iterate the logic. Please point out which premise is false, or how a conclusion does not follow from a premise. Please provide a rules justification for why you think it's wrong:

Premise 1. For any unit with the <REGIMENT> faction keyword, you can select a cannon regiment or make up your own regiment, so long as it isn't on the list of excluded options.

Premise 2. SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS is a cannon regiment and is not an excluded option.

Premise 3. Baneblades have the <REGIMENT> faction keyword.

Conclusion A. Based on 1, 2, and 3: Baneblades can be given the SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS regiment.

Premise 4. If your regiment does not have a pre-defined doctrine, you can select a doctrine from Codex: Astra Militarum for your regiment to use.

Premise 5. SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS do not have a pre-defined doctrine.

Premise 6. Storm Troopers is a doctrine from Codex: Astra Militarum.

Conclusion B. Based on 4, 5, and 6: You can select the Storm Troopers doctrine for the SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS regiment to use.

Final Conclusion. Based on A and B: Baneblades can be given the SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS regiment and use the Storm Troopers doctrine.

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
You are falling into the "All rectangles are squares" fallacy.

All squares are rectangles. True premise.
All Militarum Tempestus units can only take the Storm Troopers doctrine. This is true. Militarum Tempestus units cannot choose any other doctrines.

Therefore all rectangles are squares. Faulty conclusion.
Therefore the Storm Toopers doctrine can only be used by Militarum Tempestus units. This is false. There is no such restriction on the doctrine.

Let me re-iterate the logic. Please point out which premise is false, or how a conclusion does not follow from a premise. Please provide a rules justification for why you think it's wrong:

Premise 1. For any unit with the <REGIMENT> faction keyword, you can select a cannon regiment or make up your own regiment, so long as it isn't on the list of excluded options.

Premise 2. SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS is a cannon regiment and is not an excluded option.

Premise 3. Baneblades have the <REGIMENT> faction keyword.

Conclusion A. Based on 1, 2, and 3: Baneblades can be given the SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS regiment.

Premise 4. If your regiment does not have a pre-defined doctrine, you can select a doctrine from Codex: Astra Militarum for your regiment to use.

Premise 5. SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS do not have a pre-defined doctrine.

Premise 6. Storm Troopers is a doctrine from Codex: Astra Militarum.

Conclusion B. Based on 4, 5, and 6: You can select the Storm Troopers doctrine for the SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS regiment to use.

Final Conclusion. Based on A and B: Baneblades can be given the SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS regiment and use the Storm Troopers doctrine.

Your logic isn't actually logical.

There are regiments with assigned doctrines, then there are regiments with unassigned doctrines.

Some of those regiments with unassigned doctrines are Cannon, some are not. Regardless of Cannon or not, their doctrines are unassigned and they can be given doctrines.

By the AM codex alone RAW they could take stormtrooper.

Due to the FAQ there is an issue.

Normally units with regiment cannot select the faction keyword that allows for stormtrooper- this within the rules restricts stormtrooper to only units with the militarum tempestus keyword when dealing with units that have assigned doctrines.

The FAQ clearly states you cannot use a regiment with unassigned doctrines to get an ability it would not normally be able to take.

Any unit with the regiment keyword would not normally be able to get the stormtrooper ability outside of using a regiment with unassigned doctrines. The FAQ clearly says this is not allowed, so your logical path is only valid within the confines of the codex, it had to if or the FAQ for your logic to be valid.

Please quote the exact FAQ wording you're relying on. I do not think it says what you think it saya.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think you'll earn more shots for a Baneblade from the Catachan Doctrine than this doctrine, but could do I think - as people say.

I also think you'll get more accuracy and more shots from Cadian between Order to rerolling your d6 to shoot your turret, rerolling ones for being stationary, +1 to hit from overlapping fields of fire.

blaktoof wrote:So you believe a baneblade using a regiment with assigned doctrines can select one of those options and normally take storm trooper doctrine?

No. A regiment with assigned Doctrines has no choice in selection.

As default, NO AM UNIT has an assigned Doctrine. Only when a pre-gen <Regiment> is decided can a doctrine be permanently assigned.

If I have a custom Regiment, there is absolutely no limit to what I can choose - this includes Storm Troopers.

blaktoof wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
So you believe a baneblade using a regiment with assigned doctrines can select one of those options and normally take storm trooper doctrine?

No, because the regiments with assigned doctrines must take the doctrines assigned to them.

However, a regiment without an assigned doctrine (such as the Praetorians) can pick from any Doctrine, while having the <Praetorian> keyword.

Then per the FAQ the baneblade cannot have stormtrooper.

Okay, you've not responded to any of my comments. I only ask you to respond to a one word reply.

How.

blaktoof wrote:

Medicinal Carrots wrote:
You are falling into the "All rectangles are squares" fallacy.

All squares are rectangles. True premise.
All Militarum Tempestus units can only take the Storm Troopers doctrine. This is true. Militarum Tempestus units cannot choose any other doctrines.

Therefore all rectangles are squares. Faulty conclusion.
Therefore the Storm Toopers doctrine can only be used by Militarum Tempestus units. This is false. There is no such restriction on the doctrine.

Let me re-iterate the logic. Please point out which premise is false, or how a conclusion does not follow from a premise. Please provide a rules justification for why you think it's wrong:

Premise 1. For any unit with the <REGIMENT> faction keyword, you can select a cannon regiment or make up your own regiment, so long as it isn't on the list of excluded options.

Premise 2. SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS is a cannon regiment and is not an excluded option.

Premise 3. Baneblades have the <REGIMENT> faction keyword.

Conclusion A. Based on 1, 2, and 3: Baneblades can be given the SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS regiment.

Premise 4. If your regiment does not have a pre-defined doctrine, you can select a doctrine from Codex: Astra Militarum for your regiment to use.

Premise 5. SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS do not have a pre-defined doctrine.

Premise 6. Storm Troopers is a doctrine from Codex: Astra Militarum.

Conclusion B. Based on 4, 5, and 6: You can select the Storm Troopers doctrine for the SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS regiment to use.

Final Conclusion. Based on A and B: Baneblades can be given the SAVLAR CHEM-DOGS regiment and use the Storm Troopers doctrine.

Your logic isn't actually logical.

There are regiments with assigned doctrines, then there are regiments with unassigned doctrines.

Some of those regiments with unassigned doctrines are Cannon,

I think you mean "Canon", unless you're talking about a regiment composed entirely of Leman Russes

blaktoof wrote:
[some are not. Regardless of Cannon or not, their doctrines are unassigned and they can be given doctrines.

By the AM codex alone RAW they could take stormtrooper.

Due to the FAQ there is an issue.

Normally units with regiment cannot select the faction keyword that allows for stormtrooper- this within the rules restricts stormtrooper to only units with the militarum tempestus keyword when dealing with units that have assigned doctrines.

The FAQ clearly states you cannot use a regiment with unassigned doctrines to get an ability it would not normally be able to take.

Yet, as you admit, by the AM codex RAW they could take stormtrooper, or any other doctrine. This must mean that it's normal to be able to select any doctrine, since it's normal to be able to select any doctrine if you have not had one assigned to you.

If it was a normal choice you could replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get the militarum tempestus doctrine.

The FAQ is referring to normal being a normal keyword option with assigned rules.

If you have an abnormal keyword, one with no assigned faction, that is what the FAQ addresses.

It would be normal to assign regiment as world eaters as you point out that there is no restriction on what you name a keyword. But it would not be normal for a baneblade to get world eater abilities, just as it would not be normal for a baneblade to get militarum tempestus abilities.

If a baneblade could normally assign regiment to militarum Tempestus to take stormtrooper then you could use a regiment with unassigned traits aka savlar chem dogs, aka emperor's pink tea party lads, whatever name you choose and give them stormtroopers.

 doctortom wrote:
Yet, as you admit, by the AM codex RAW they could take stormtrooper, or any other doctrine. This must mean that it's normal to be able to select any doctrine, since it's normal to be able to select any doctrine if you have not had one assigned to you.

So the argument then, is that "as per RAW, you are 'normally' allowed to circumvent a specific restriction, i.e. MILITARUM TEMPESTUS keyword not being able to be assigned in lieu of <REGIMENT> keyword in order to gain access to Stromtroopers doctrine, because the codex allows you to create a 'custom' <REGIMENT> that isn't bound by 'Regiment & Doctrines' restriction," thereby allowing you to use Stormtrooper doctrine without resorting to taking units with MILITARUM TEMPESTUS keyword.

In other words, since you are explicitly allowed to work around a given issue, the FAQ restricting you <REGIMENT> manipulation for the purpose of granting abilities it wouldn't 'normally' have is irrelevant, because such manipulation is ALREADY GRANTED, 'normally,' via codex.

But I thought FAQ's override the issues that it addresses in the Codex, no?

P.S. - I find it really funny that almost all of the +5 page topics in YMDC are regarding AM. Conspiracy???

blaktoof wrote:
If it was a normal choice you could replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get the militarum tempestus doctrine.

You are not replacing anything with the Militarum Tempestus keyword. And there is no Militarum Tempestus doctrine.
You are using your own keyword (example: Savlar Chem-Dogs). And the doctrine is called "Storm Troopers".

The FAQ is referring to normal being a normal keyword option with assigned rules.

If you have an abnormal keyword, one with no assigned faction, that is what the FAQ addresses.

No, it doesn't. You should really include the actual question that's being answered, not just the answer. Context matters.

The FAQ in question wrote:
Q: If I create an Astra Militarum Regiment of my own and name them, for example, the ‘Emperor’s Finest’, and I then also create an Adeptus Astartes Chapter of my own choosing, and also call them the ‘Emperor’s Finest’, do the abilities that work on the <Regiment> and/or <Chapter> keywords now work on both the Astra Militarum and Adeptus Astartes units?
A: No.

The intent of naming Regiments, Chapters, etc. of your own creation is to personalise your collections and not to enable players to circumvent the restrictions on what abilities affect what units. It is also not intended to circumvent the restrictions on which units are able to be included in the same Detachment.

The FAQ is addressing using the same word to replace different placeholder keywords to force them to match. It is not in any way addressing replacing a single placeholder keyword

It would be normal to assign regiment as world eaters as you point out that there is no restriction on what you name a keyword. But it would not be normal for a baneblade to get world eater abilities, just as it would not be normal for a baneblade to get militarum tempestus abilities.

If a baneblade could normally assign regiment to militarum Tempestus to take stormtrooper then you could use a regiment with unassigned traits aka savlar chem dogs, aka emperor's pink tea party lads, whatever name you choose and give them stormtroopers.

So what if I assign the regiment "Savlar Chem-Dogs". Not Cadia, Catachan, Militarum Tempestus, or any of the others that have pre-defined doctrines. What doctrines can I choose from? And why can I choose those doctrines? What rules on the doctrines themselves define what the Savlar Chem-Dogs regiment can take?

By your logic, you cannot call your regiment anything but "Cadia" if you want to use "Born Soldiers" doctrine. Are you also saying that I can't get the Born Soldiers doctrine if I replace <Regiment> on my Baneblade with <Spiderpig>?

The rules in the Codex and FAQ specifically contradict your reasoning, as they allow you to pick regiments that don't have pre-defined doctrines or even make up your own. You aren't replacing the <REGIMENT> keyword with one of the existing regiments, you are using something completely different, which is explicitly allowed by the FAQ you're trying to use. Choosing a doctrine for your custom regiment is also explicitly allowed by the FAQ. There is no restriction being circumvented, because there is no restriction to start with.

What you said about the FAQ is true, however incomplete.

The FAQ also calls out giving units abilities they could not normally have by giving them a keyword to circumvent which units have which abilities.

A baneblade cannot have stormtrooper with any regiment option with assigned traits. You are trying to give it stormtrooper by giving it a regiment name that has unassigned traits so you can ignore that normally regiment cannot select militarum tempestus to get the militarum Tempestus doctrine.

Can you replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get the militarum tempestus doctrine? If you have to use a regiment that does not have assigned doctrines to do so then you are doing something you cannot normally do by manipulating keywords.

Blaktoof, there is NO SUCH THING as the the Militarum Tempestus doctrine. <Militarum Tempestus> is a Regiment.

Born Soldiers is a Doctrine. <Cadia> is a Regiment.
Storm Troopers is a Doctrine. <Tempestus Militarum> is a Regiment.

By your ruling, ONLY <Cadians> can have Born Soldiers, right?
Give me a yes or no answer.

If no, please support that.

If yes, then there is no reason Storm Troopers cannot also be taken.

I can have WHATEVER REGIMENT I LIKE. I can call them <Whatever I Feel Like Calling Them>. That does not affect what Doctrines they have access to.

The interaction between <Regiment> and Doctrine is as follows:

1. An Astra Militarum unit must have a <Regiment>. This can be pre-gen or custom.
2. <Militarum Tempestus> cannot be selected as a <Regiment>.
3. Some <Regiments> have a Doctrine they must use.
4. If your <Regiment> does not have an attached Doctrine, you must choose one of the Doctrines your <Regiment> uses.

There is NO RESTRICTION on what Doctrine you can have. There IS a restriction on what <Regiment> you have.

<Regiment> =/= Doctrine

Yeah blaktoof seems to have a logic error whereby the variable "Doctrine" keeps getting replaced with the value for the variable "regiment" and prevents him from recognizing that they are different, though oftentimes related.

I'll ask again since you ignored it:
So what if I assign the regiment "Savlar Chem-Dogs". Not Cadia, Catachan, Militarum Tempestus, or any of the others that have pre-defined doctrines. What doctrines can I choose from? And why can I choose those doctrines? What rules on the doctrines themselves define what the Savlar Chem-Dogs regiment can take?

You are all very bad at reading.

I have actually answered all of your questions already and did not ignore them, feel free to text reading.

OK, I'm done feeding the troll.

blaktoof wrote:
You are all very bad at reading.

I have actually answered all of your questions already and did not ignore them, feel free to text reading.

You haven't answered our questions, but your own inability to actually read and understand them is astounding.

It's like you're so convinced of your own position that you won't even consider the difference between choosing a Regiment and choosing a Doctrine.

blaktoof wrote:
What you said about the FAQ is true, however incomplete.

The FAQ also calls out giving units abilities they could not normally have by giving them a keyword to circumvent which units have which abilities.

A baneblade cannot have stormtrooper with any regiment option with assigned traits. You are trying to give it stormtrooper by giving it a regiment name that has unassigned traits so you can ignore that normally regiment cannot select militarum tempestus to get the militarum Tempestus doctrine.

Can you replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get the militarum tempestus doctrine? If you have to use a regiment that does not have assigned doctrines to do so then you are doing something you cannot normally do by manipulating keywords.

The FAQ calls out not giving them abilities that they can't get normally - HOWEVER, a baneblade CAN get Storm Troopers normally by taking the Storm Troopers doctrine, which IS normal to be able to do with any regiment that does not have its own predetermined Doctrine. What they are talking about is to not be able to give Regiments Space Marines abilities by naming them Iron Hands or one of the other Chapter names. Likewise, a Space Marine Chapter would not be be called Cadian or one of the other predifined regiments and be able to have the Marines benefit from the regimental doctrine. THAT is what they are talking about in that question, not about whether baneblades can have storm troopers.

 doctortom wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
What you said about the FAQ is true, however incomplete.

The FAQ also calls out giving units abilities they could not normally have by giving them a keyword to circumvent which units have which abilities.

A baneblade cannot have stormtrooper with any regiment option with assigned traits. You are trying to give it stormtrooper by giving it a regiment name that has unassigned traits so you can ignore that normally regiment cannot select militarum tempestus to get the militarum Tempestus doctrine.

Can you replace regiment with militarum Tempestus to get the militarum tempestus doctrine? If you have to use a regiment that does not have assigned doctrines to do so then you are doing something you cannot normally do by manipulating keywords.

The FAQ calls out not giving them abilities that they can't get normally - HOWEVER, a baneblade CAN get Storm Troopers normally by taking the Storm Troopers doctrine, which IS normal to be able to do with any regiment that does not have its own predetermined Doctrine. What they are talking about is to not be able to give Regiments Space Marines abilities by naming them Iron Hands or one of the other Chapter names. Likewise, a Space Marine Chapter would not be be called Cadian or one of the other predifined regiments and be able to have the Marines benefit from the regimental doctrine. THAT is what they are talking about in that question, not about whether baneblades can have storm troopers.

Somehow according to Blaktoof, apparently not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blaktoof wrote:
You are all very bad at reading.

I have actually answered all of your questions already and did not ignore them, feel free to text reading.

And yet you still think that <Regiment> and Doctrine mean the same thing. This is not true.