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.

So I'm in a disagreement with my gaming group about a pretty specific chapter approved points cost change. In the Forgeworld: adeptus astartes page of CA, TL autocannons were changed to 30 points from 33. My position is that this point change also applies to the space marines index option for TL autocannons, even when applied to a non forge world model such as baseline dreads and ven dreads. This seems to be implied by the language at the top of the page which says that the points values replace those in earlier publications. No changes to TL autocannons are mentioned in the main SM page, although I would note that these are no index option point changes mentioned in that section.

Several people in my gaming group believe that these points changes only take effect when applied to a FW dread such as a mortis or contemptor mortis. I can't find a similiar episode of rules confusion for any other weapons in the codex or index, so none of us really have any objective data to stand on, although it seems to me that not using hte updated points would be a highly confusion and pointless change, as points costs for other wargear seems to be consistent across FW and codex / index options.

You follow the rules as they're written. If the FW page says 30, and it does not specifically call out the Codex options, then they don't change.

Of course, feel free to burn bridges over 9? 12? Points. How many TL AC are you planning to use that this becomes a genuine issue?

Wargear uses the most recently published point costs. Is there any other example of FW wargear costing differently for the same wargear and the same army? No? Then the price change should be universal.

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_designers_commentary_en-1.pdf

Check the last page, this is for GW models only. FW has its own rules. If its a FW model its 30, if its a GW model its 33 from the index.

 p5freak wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_designers_commentary_en-1.pdf

Check the last page, this is for GW models only. FW has its own rules. If its a FW model its 30, if its a GW model its 33 from the index.

That page makes no distinction as to GW or FW models, as they're both part of the same game. Indeed, Chapter Approved (GW book) includes points revisions for FW models. FW being completely separate is edition lag and incorrect. Happy to be proved wrong but I've not seen anything to suggest what you're saying.

Point cost changes are split into prior publications.
Even if the cost for a piece of wargear would be updated to 0 points for FW index units, it doesn't change anything about the cost for GW index units.

Forget the updates for a moment and remember the GW snd FW indices. Even if there is a wargear option the same name in the other book, you are not allowed to use that point cost alternatively.

It doesn't matter if the update is from FW or GW, the latest release counts regarding matched play points for wargear and units with the sane name

Even if there is a wargear option the same name in the other book, you are not allowed to use that point cost alternatively

it is the opposite, your are supposed to use the most recent points and skip those from old books
if a FW book is newer and have different points for AC on Dreads you have to use those points, no matter if you use an Index or Codex or FW Datasheet

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_designers_commentary_en-1.pdf

Check the last page, this is for GW models only. FW has its own rules. If its a FW model its 30, if its a GW model its 33 from the index.

That page makes no distinction as to GW or FW models, as they're both part of the same game. Indeed, Chapter Approved (GW book) includes points revisions for FW models. FW being completely separate is edition lag and incorrect. Happy to be proved wrong but I've not seen anything to suggest what you're saying.

If FW is not seperated, why arent FW units integrated in GWs 8th codeces ?? Why do i have to go to the FW webpage to buy the index there ? You are wrong. FW are still seperate rules from GW rules. They have their own indeces.

Email GW about a FW rule question, they will tell you to ask FW. They have their own email adress. They even have their own phone number.

The points are different for FW and GW models. If you look at CA you'll notice that there are different parts for each faction. If the points changed in your faction via CA then the change only applies to that faction. Otherwise GW would just make a single list of weapon point changes rather than listing the changes individually.

 p5freak wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_designers_commentary_en-1.pdf

Check the last page, this is for GW models only. FW has its own rules. If its a FW model its 30, if its a GW model its 33 from the index.

That page makes no distinction as to GW or FW models, as they're both part of the same game. Indeed, Chapter Approved (GW book) includes points revisions for FW models. FW being completely separate is edition lag and incorrect. Happy to be proved wrong but I've not seen anything to suggest what you're saying.

If FW is not seperated, why arent FW units integrated in GWs 8th codeces ?? Why do i have to go to the FW webpage to buy the index there ? You are wrong. FW are still seperate rules from GW rules. They have their own indeces.

Email GW about a FW rule question, they will tell you to ask FW. They have their own email adress. They even have their own phone number.

All that's great but where does it say FW units are dealt with separately by the rules as they're written?

As far as the rules are concerned there is no dividing line. How you buy or access the rules has no bearing on how they function.

If you could provide a rules reason to call me wrong I'll accept it, but you've provided anything but.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
The points are different for FW and GW models. If you look at CA you'll notice that there are different parts for each faction. If the points changed in your faction via CA then the change only applies to that faction. Otherwise GW would just make a single list of weapon point changes rather than listing the changes individually.

Split by faction, yes, but nothing I can see splits by where the rules come from. A points change for a Faction's wargear affects FW Index units, Index legacy units/loadouts and Codex units. It would have to specify otherwise not to. Again, happy to be wrong if you can provide rules evidence rather than hypotheses and assumptions. That's not me being rude, it's just being descriptive. Most "FW is separate" arguments are 7th hangovers.

The OP is making the argument that weapon prices are universal and not faction specific. He is saying since the FW autocannon got reduced to 30 points that all the autocannons now cost 30 points regardless of where the faction originates. (At least that's my understanding of his position.)

You didn't notice that CA had a section for each faction's point changes. If there was no entry for the model/equipment then you would use the appropriate book for its cost. If there was a change listed in CA then you would use the cost listed under the faction that it was listed for.

For example let's say that Weapon1 is used by factions A,B and (FW) unit C. The cost for weapon1 was 15pts for all of the units as listed in their respective books. In CA there is no listing of weapon1 under the unit A or B sections. Therefore units A and B still pay 15 pts for weapon1. However under the section for (FW) unit C the cost is listed as 20 points. Now if you want to use weapon1 with unit C you must pay 20 points. The cost for a weapon is faction specific and not universal. If the costs were universal then GW would just make 1 list and have all of the weapons listed in it.

Different factions can pay different amounts of points for the same thing.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
The OP is making the argument that weapon prices are universal and not faction specific. He is saying since the FW autocannon got reduced to 30 points that all the autocannons now cost 30 points regardless of where the faction originates. (At least that's my understanding of his position.)

You didn't notice that CA had a section for each faction's point changes. If there was no entry for the model/equipment then you would use the appropriate book for its cost. If there was a change listed in CA then you would use the cost listed under the faction that it was listed for.

For example let's say that Weapon1 is used by factions A,B and (FW) unit C. The cost for weapon1 was 15pts for all of the units as listed in their respective books. In CA there is no listing of weapon1 under the unit A or B sections. Therefore units A and B still pay 15 pts for weapon1. However under the section for (FW) unit C the cost is listed as 20 points. Now if you want to use weapon1 with unit C you must pay 20 points. The cost for a weapon is faction specific and not universal. If the costs were universal then GW would just make 1 list and have all of the weapons listed in it.

Different factions can pay different amounts of points for the same thing.

Except we are talking about a unit (C), from FW, that is used in Faction A, and B, which no longer has the weapon option published in the codexes. The only way to access the weapon on A and Bs models is either through the FW model C or grabbing them from the Index Wargear options. The only place where the points will ever be updated going forward is the FW model C because the option has now been abandoned on A and B.

That means that when Forgeworld Updates the point costs for the weapon on C it is updating it in reference to the wargear option for factions A and B and it's the only source of points update that will ever happen.

You use the FW points cost.

This whole mess could be avoided if GW would either accept or reject legacy models in toto. As it is now if a model is in the index then those are the points that you use unless your faction gets a point change from CA (or some other official channel) for that model/weapon.

All the CA does is update the FW cost. Units A and B would use the cost in the index since that is the last updated cost for those units. I know of no instance where an index data sheet is updated only to FW. If that is the case of GW saying go to FW for the rules for this model then you may have a case. As it is CA updates are specific to to faction(s) that they are listed under and have no relevance to any other faction.

Since GW split the cost changes specifically between GW and FW models then you can not assume that a change to FW models affects GW models or vice versa. So even if a weapon is in an index and a FW book the change only applies to the FW models.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
The OP is making the argument that weapon prices are universal and not faction specific.

...

Different factions can pay different amounts of points for the same thing.

Oh completely. I was refuting the notion that FW is somehow a mystical, separate entity. Faction costs are necessarily different.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
This whole mess could be avoided if GW would either accept or reject legacy models in toto. As it is now if a model is in the index then those are the points that you use unless your faction gets a point change from CA (or some other official channel) for that model/weapon.

All the CA does is update the FW cost. Units A and B would use the cost in the index since that is the last updated cost for those units. I know of no instance where an index data sheet is updated only to FW. If that is the case of GW saying go to FW for the rules for this model then you may have a case. As it is CA updates are specific to to faction(s) that they are listed under and have no relevance to any other faction.

Since GW split the cost changes specifically between GW and FW models then you can not assume that a change to FW models affects GW models or vice versa. So even if a weapon is in an index and a FW book the change only applies to the FW models.

Wrong. Wargear does not have a cost for a unit. Wargear has its own, separate, cost. We are told very specifically that we can take the index options but we use the most current published profile and points cost for that wargear. CA has the most current cost. They didnt split the costs between gw and fw. They categorized the changes via publication.

Fw is not a faction.

The mortis dread is usable by any army that has access to twin ac via the index. Its the same piece of wargear for the same faction.

I was using faction as a naming convention without being specific. The cost for war gear is listed in the index until the cost is updated in a codex. GW has repeatedly stated that they are not making rules for FW models. Therefore only GW can change the cost of GW models. CA had a specific section of it devoted to changing FW models. If Mortis dreads are in the index then you would look to the GW codex that updates the dread. If there is no GW update then the cost for the weapon is what is in the index. The cost of anything FW is only for FW models.

CA most certainly did split the cost of weapons between factions and GW/FW. There is a section in CA for FW models and it subdivides between models and equipment.

As I said before GW models have GW rules and FW models have FW rules. There is no crossover between GW and FW for points.

Can you provide a Rules citation of any kind?

For what? The designer's notes say to use the index until it is changed. If a unit is not in the appropriate codex then you refer back to the index. You are then supposed to use the cost for weapons as they appear in the latest appropriate source. So if you have a BA model in the index but not in the codex you use the codex cost for the model. If that model has an equipment choice that is in the codex you use the codex cost rather than the index cost. If CA changes the cost of the weapon post publication then you use the CA cost until the next appropriate publication occurs.
You would not use the cost of a weapon found in the index for BA and compare it to the cost of the same weapon found in the SM codex. Even if the SM index changed the cost of the weapon on the index data sheet that would only effect the cost of SM models that use that data sheet.

For the "no crossover of any points" opinion. It might not be of material concern just now but it's not a thing that has been stated. If Lascannons were amended for Guard in a future update then all FW Index Lascannons would change cost too, for example.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I was using faction as a naming convention without being specific. The cost for war gear is listed in the index until the cost is updated in a codex. GW has repeatedly stated that they are not making rules for FW models. Therefore only GW can change the cost of GW models. CA had a specific section of it devoted to changing FW models. If Mortis dreads are in the index then you would look to the GW codex that updates the dread. If there is no GW update then the cost for the weapon is what is in the index. The cost of anything FW is only for FW models.

CA most certainly did split the cost of weapons between factions and GW/FW. There is a section in CA for FW models and it subdivides between models and equipment.

As I said before GW models have GW rules and FW models have FW rules. There is no crossover between GW and FW for points.

Chapter approved is a gw publication with a specific section for points adjustments. There is no new section in ca specifically for fw. The fw books are a part of the points adjustments just like everything else. Gw updated the points for all 40k models including fw. As much as your saying gw isnt making rules for fw... And they havent made new ones.... They are clearly happy to step in and update them. Because they did.

It's right there on the top of page 120 of CA "Updated Point Values: Forge World". So CA does have a special section just for FW.
I'm not saying that FW is separate from GW just that it has separate codices than GW. You wouldn't look for a point adjustment for BAs just because SMs got a point change for the same equipment that you have. Same here Adeptes Astartes has point changes specific to it. If you are using an index datasheet that is not for AA then any changes to AA don't matter. All that matters is whether GW changed the points in your codex. If they did change the points then that's what you use. If they didn't change the points then you stick with the codex cost.

 Lance845 wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I was using faction as a naming convention without being specific. The cost for war gear is listed in the index until the cost is updated in a codex. GW has repeatedly stated that they are not making rules for FW models. Therefore only GW can change the cost of GW models. CA had a specific section of it devoted to changing FW models. If Mortis dreads are in the index then you would look to the GW codex that updates the dread. If there is no GW update then the cost for the weapon is what is in the index. The cost of anything FW is only for FW models.

CA most certainly did split the cost of weapons between factions and GW/FW. There is a section in CA for FW models and it subdivides between models and equipment.

As I said before GW models have GW rules and FW models have FW rules. There is no crossover between GW and FW for points.

Chapter approved is a gw publication with a specific section for points adjustments. There is no new section in ca specifically for fw. The fw books are a part of the points adjustments just like everything else. Gw updated the points for all 40k models including fw. As much as your saying gw isnt making rules for fw... And they havent made new ones.... They are clearly happy to step in and update them. Because they did.

This. If GW made Astra Militarum Lascannons 76pts each tomorrow, that would affect FW Index Imperial Armour: Forces Of the Astra Militarum units as much as it would Codex: Astra Militarum units.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
It's right there on the top of page 120 of CA "Updated Point Values: Forge World". So CA does have a special section just for FW.
I'm not saying that FW is separate from GW just that it has separate codices than GW. You wouldn't look for a point adjustment for BAs just because SMs got a point change for the same equipment that you have. Same here Adeptes Astartes has point changes specific to it. If you are using an index datasheet that is not for AA then any changes to AA don't matter. All that matters is whether GW changed the points in your codex. If they did change the points then that's what you use. If they didn't change the points then you stick with the codex cost.

You're getting everything mixed up.

The Mortis Dread is not a BA unit whos point adjustments would not impact SM. The Mortis Dread is a unit that can be taken as part of a great many forces.

But more importantly, we are not talking about the point costs for a unit which has restrictions on which factions can and cannot take it. We are talking about a piece of wargear that can be taken by several units that can all go to the same group of factions. That includes SM BA SW DA GK.

There is no piece of wargear in 8th that has a different cost when taken by a different unit in the same faction that is not specifically listed as such.

I am going to repeat that.

There is no piece of wargear in 8th that has a different cost when taken by a different unit in the same faction that is not specifically listed as such.

The Twin AC wargear is not listed as "(Cost) Mortis Dread" and then a separate "Cost Dread"

Thats because there is only one point cost for the wargear. Any model that can take the wargear for the listed factions can take it for the listed cost.

Specifically CA says "Adeptus Astartes Wargear. So all and any unit with the ADEPTUS ASTARTES keyword pays that cost for that wargear.

Is your Dread a Adeptus Astartes Unit? Can it take Twin AC in any capacity? Where is the most current point cost published?

 Lance845 wrote:

There is no piece of wargear in 8th that has a different cost when taken by a different unit in the same faction that is not specifically listed as such.

I'm not sure if i understand what you are saying there, but you could be wrong. AM has different costs for wargear, depending on the unit. Meltaguns for tempestus scions are 17, but only 12 if used by an infantry squad.

 p5freak wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

There is no piece of wargear in 8th that has a different cost when taken by a different unit in the same faction that is not specifically listed as such.

I'm not sure if i understand what you are saying there, but you could be wrong. AM has different costs for wargear, depending on the unit. Meltaguns for tempestus scions are 17, but only 12 if used by an infantry squad.

Which is specifically listed as being pricier for a BS3+ unit, so fits with what Lance845 said perfectly.

 p5freak wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

There is no piece of wargear in 8th that has a different cost when taken by a different unit in the same faction that is not specifically listed as such.

I'm not sure if i understand what you are saying there, but you could be wrong. AM has different costs for wargear, depending on the unit. Meltaguns for tempestus scions are 17, but only 12 if used by an infantry squad.

I am saying that when you look at your wargear points costs each entry has a single cost. Sometimes that entry is very specific. "Monstrous Scything Talons (Carnifex)" "Monstrous Scything Talons (Hive Tyrant)". But the vast majority of the time there is no special little thing. It's just the name of the wargear. "Scything Talons" Twin-link Autocannons". In THOSE cases there is only a single price for all units that take that wargear. And you are ALWAYS expected to use the most recently published price for the wargear you are using. No 8th ed publication has 2 different listings for Twin AC. There is only the one, with no special notation that it's for specific units. So if you are part of that faction (ADEPTUS ASTARTES), and you have that war gear option (Twin AC), then CA has the most recently published price for that option and you are expected to be using that price when building your list. It doesn't matter what book you found the option in (the index). The flow chart is VERY clear on this. You don't reference the index for anything but the options or datasheets for units that have not been updated. The price and profile for the wargear has to come from the most current publication.

Once again GW contradicts itself. You are supposed to use the most recently published price for the wargear you are using. The designers commentary tells us to use index points for wargear which is not in the codex. In CA AC gets updated points, but in the FW section. Why update wargear in CA which is not in the codex ? Makes no sense.

My call is its 30 for FW models, and 33 for GW models. Because FW has their own indeces, their own point costs, the update in CA only applies to FW models, because its in the FW section.

God this makes me realize once again why I hate that FW publishes rules. It also makes me wish GW would just have listed FW options under their faction in chapter approved instead of seperately. The issue I see with all of this is that if you assume the points must always be the same, somewhere down the road FW could publish a book amending lascannons to 5 points, which by the logic posed here would make all lascannons 5 points, but done so in a book most people don't own and were not made aware would alter points costs. That said because of wording in chapter approved the points for the autocannon do change
The FW section states that the points listed here replace those listed in earlier books, not earlier FW books. The index is an earlier book and thus the points would be ammended by CA.

If all of the same weapon was the same cost across the board then CA would have just said that that weapon would be that price in 1 place and not repeat it over and over. I think that we can all agree that GW tries to save as much money (in this case printing) as they can whenever they can.
The fact that GW does list the same weapon in multiple places in the same publication that effects multiple codices says that the price is not grouped but rather the weapon prices are independent for each codex. Just because there is no weapon currently that has a different price for the same weapon does not mean that is, or will, always be the case.
GW took the time and effort to list a weapon adjustment to a weapon in one specific section of a large selection of lists. As a GK player I have the option of taking a dread with an autocannon per the index. The cost for the autocannon is listed in the index. Just because a specific codex now has a different cost for an autocannon does not automatically mean my autocannon is now the same. It could be that GW thought that units that specific codex needed an adjustment. You can't assume that GW meant for autocannons everywhere needed an adjustment.

P.S. sorry for the rambling - super bowl hangover.

Why do you feel the need to cross reference between books and mix and match points/rules just so you gain "advantage" at a FLGS... I get it if its prize on the line, but aren't you playing this game for fun?

FYI, thunderhammer costs more for WS2+ characters vs others. Same goes for Stormshield. just use the points listed for that particular unit and call it a day.