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.

Hey folks!

I'm trying to figure out how much a whirlwind in the Space Marine codex costs.

-The codex says the whirlwind comes equipped with a whirlwind vengeance launcher.
-It may replace its whirlwind vengeance launcher with a whirlwind castellan launcher.

-The point values at the back of the codex say that a whirlwind costs 75 points per model, but does not include wargear.
-A whirlwind castellan launcher is 25 points.
-A whirlwind vengeance launcher is 34 points.

In Chapter Approved, the whirlwind is now 70 points.
-A whirlwind castellan launcher is now 15 points.
-A whirlwind vengeance launcher is 20 points.

A whirlwind has various wargear it can buy (storm bolter, hunter killer missiles, etc) I need some clarification here on how to read the codex.

-Does an unmodified whirlwind cost 70 points, or does it cost 90 points?
-If I replace the vengeance launcher with a castellan launcher, does my whirlwind now cost 85 points or 105 points?

I'm confused about "comes equipped with" vs "wargear not included" and what "is" and "isn't" wargear, and how to cost this model.

You always for every unit look at what its base cost is, then look at what it MUST take. After that if you want to trade a item (sometimes you can trade) do the math, or if you want to add then do the math as well.

The description of the WW is "A Whirlwind is a single model equipped with a Whirlwind vengeance launcher."

So you pay X points for WW and X points for WWVL. That would be 90pts, the WW with castellan launcher is 85pts

A WW without any weapons is 70pts, but thats an illegal model so you have to pick one of the 2 weapons and add it to the base.

First you take the model and apply any wargear to it. You take the wargear it is required to take by default, then do any options.

Once you've finished applying options, you total up whatever is left on the model and that is the total cost of your model.

In your example, a Whirlwind with castellan launcher (the default loadout) is 70+15 points. If you replace the Castellan launcher with a Vengence Launcher, the total cost is 70+20, you don't pay for wargear or weapons you have replaced.

"Wargear" means any and all weapons and/or upgrades.

Another example is a Dreadnought. It comes by default with "an assault cannon, a storm bolter and a Dreadnought combat weapon." You replace the assault cannon for a Twin Lascannon. The total cost of the model is now the cost of the Dreadnought, the Twin Lascannon, the Storm Bolter and the Dreadnought Combat Weapon.

This also confused me upon my return, to 8th Edition. (Having last played in 2ed and 3ed) I feel that the explanation is poorly handled in the Codex's, having the points spread separate from the datasheets.

The above posters have explained it accurately though.

Just use Battlescribe.... it does all the math for you

For named characters the wargear is usually already included in their point cost. Always check the codex if it says "does not include wargear" or "including wargear".

 Horst wrote:
Just use Battlescribe.... it does all the math for you

You should not always rely on Battlescribe though. That is how you end up at a tournament with 2 points over the limit.

 Trickstick wrote:

 Horst wrote:
Just use Battlescribe.... it does all the math for you

You should not always rely on Battlescribe though. That is how you end up at a tournament with 2 points over the limit.

But likewise, I find people make more errors doing their own maths than they get from Battlescribe!

The main issue with Battlescribe is that it doesn't explain WHY. That's why you need the book.

Typically I do both (my own list in Excel, and a separate list in Battlescribe) then compare the two to see if I made any mistakes.

The trick is to pick an army that has very few wargear options. Let's see, add a unit of Necron Warriors. They have no wargear options and I know a 10-man blob is always 110 points. Done. Same with most of the common units in the Codex.

Warriors are always 11ppm
Immortals are always 15ppm
Destroyers are always 50ppm
Scarabs are always 13ppm
Wraiths have options, but noone ever takes them, so they're a fixed cost.
Cryteks are 80, Cloakteks are 85, Chronoteks are 95
etc, etc

The Necron list is so easy to remember that I can usually just write the list on a sheet of paper with points next to each unit. Kinda wish the units had more wargear options, but they don't.

 Horst wrote:
Just use Battlescribe.... it does all the math for you

Battlescribe may help with that, but it doesn't substitute for understanding *how* to read the codex, so that one can *make* a list to put into Battlescribe.

The 2 statements are not mutually exclusive.

The model comes equiped with whatever wargear it says it comes with.

The models cost does not include its wargear.

So you need to add the cost of all its wargear to its own cost even if it comes equiped with it by default.

Forget the codex costs. They dont matter. CA replaces them all. You always use the most recently published profiles and costs.

 Lance845 wrote:
Forget the codex costs. They dont matter. CA replaces them all. You always use the most recently published profiles and costs.

From page 124 of Chapter Approved 2018:

If a unit or item of wargear does not appear in any of the tables below, continue to use the points values for it that are listed within the most recently published book for that Faction…

Yup. Like I said. You always use the most recently published profiles and costs.

 Lance845 wrote:
Yup. Like I said. You always use the most recently published profiles and costs.

However some of them may be in their codex, not Chapter Approved.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Yup. Like I said. You always use the most recently published profiles and costs.

However some of them may be in their codex, not Chapter Approved.

Or in a Campaign book like the recent Vigilus book. The most up to date Intercessors Datasheet lives there, as an example.

 Dashofpepper wrote:

 Horst wrote:
Just use Battlescribe.... it does all the math for you

Battlescribe may help with that, but it doesn't substitute for understanding *how* to read the codex, so that one can *make* a list to put into Battlescribe.

My theory is that the Codex is written so that you are encouraged to use PL... and thats how each units entry is skewed towards, and written that way and all that. 90% of use are using points values, so when you try to take the unit entry and apply points values to it logically you get "interesting" overcosted results. That was my rude awakening to 8th edition.

So.. as everyone else has said.. find the base cost and add just the options you are putting on the vehicle.

 Sazzlefrats wrote:

 Dashofpepper wrote:

 Horst wrote:
Just use Battlescribe.... it does all the math for you

Battlescribe may help with that, but it doesn't substitute for understanding *how* to read the codex, so that one can *make* a list to put into Battlescribe.

My theory is that the Codex is written so that you are encouraged to use PL... and thats how each units entry is skewed towards, and written that way and all that. 90% of use are using points values, so when you try to take the unit entry and apply points values to it logically you get "interesting" overcosted results. That was my rude awakening to 8th edition.

So.. as everyone else has said.. find the base cost and add just the options you are putting on the vehicle.

The rumour is that GW wanted to ditch points entirely, power level for everything including matched play, and that the playtesters threatened to break NDA and cause a massive doody-storm if they did. I agree that they are trying to push people to use PL by punishing people who play with points.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The rumour is that GW wanted to ditch points entirely, power level for everything including matched play, and that the playtesters threatened to break NDA and cause a massive doody-storm if they did. I agree that they are trying to push people to use PL by punishing people who play with points.

I'd love to know the motivation behind that. Surely they must think it would boost sales, I just don't understand how...

I prefer PL to points, but my local meta won't touch them, as they simply max everything and say "look how broken!", Meanwhile, I'm over here with my Necrons...

 Trickstick wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The rumour is that GW wanted to ditch points entirely, power level for everything including matched play, and that the playtesters threatened to break NDA and cause a massive doody-storm if they did. I agree that they are trying to push people to use PL by punishing people who play with points.

I'd love to know the motivation behind that. Surely they must think it would boost sales, I just don't understand how...

I just can't imagine that working... everyone would just take the best / most expensive wargear options on every model if points weren't there to balance it. Like, I use my infantry squads without weapons, because a plasma gun is very expensive for an imperial guardsmen who will probably blow himself up with it. if I could just take them without any cost... then my entire army would rock plasma!

 Horst wrote:
Like, I use my infantry squads without weapons, because a plasma gun is very expensive for an imperial guardsmen who will probably blow himself up with it. if I could just take them without any cost... then my entire army would rock plasma!

Bah, I take the plasma and screw the Guardsman! Powerful gun that may kill someone is worth it. I run bolter/plasma Tallarns and it is great.

I can see powerlevels working if they just remove all of the option, like they seem to have been doing on some units. Then again, I look at some of the Primaris vehicles and the options are insane.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The rumour is that GW wanted to ditch points entirely, power level for everything including matched play, and that the playtesters threatened to break NDA and cause a massive doody-storm if they did. I agree that they are trying to push people to use PL by punishing people who play with points.

And when you say 'rumour' you actually mean 'baseless speculation', right?