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.

Running an event and the following list question came up:

a) Can you take both the index wargear option "Instrument of Chaos," and the codex wargear option "Brayhorn," on a single Tzaangor squad for +2 to charge rolls?

b) Instruments of Chaos are 0pt options in the index, but were upped to 10pts in the Thousand Sons Codex and Chapter Approved. While it is listed under Thousand Sons, it is a bit unclear whether they mean to include Tzaangors in that bucket as well, or if the reference is specific to Pink Horrors (who can still to this day take an instrument of chaos).

Is the answer that they can only take a Brayhorn for 10pts, they can only take a Instrument for 0pts but no Brayhorn, they can take a single Instrument or Brayhorn for 10pts, they can take both for 20pts (10pts for Brayhorn, 10 pts for Instrument), or they can take both for 10pts (paying 10 for brayhorn, 0 for instrument)?

As far as I know you must use the Codex entry if there is one, you only still use Index datasheets if there isn't a Codex one, you can't mix and match.

He's not talking about mixing datasheets, but taking Index wargear that is not an option in the codex, which is allowed. This example shows why that may be a bad idea.

 Valentine009 wrote:
Running an event and the following list question came up:

a) Can you take both the index wargear option "Instrument of Chaos," and the codex wargear option "Brayhorn," on a single Tzaangor squad for +2 to charge rolls?

b) Instruments of Chaos are 0pt options in the index, but were upped to 10pts in the Thousand Sons Codex and Chapter Approved. While it is listed under Thousand Sons, it is a bit unclear whether they mean to include Tzaangors in that bucket as well, or if the reference is specific to Pink Horrors (who can still to this day take an instrument of chaos).

Is the answer that they can only take a Brayhorn for 10pts, they can only take a Instrument for 0pts but no Brayhorn, they can take a single Instrument or Brayhorn for 10pts, they can take both for 20pts (10pts for Brayhorn, 10 pts for Instrument), or they can take both for 10pts (paying 10 for brayhorn, 0 for instrument)?

It is TECHNICALLY allowed, but you really should expect to get yourself ruled against by the local TO. The Brayhorn is your "Instrument of Chaos", that's shaped as a horn. The intention of the ruling that allows you to take Index options for units with Codex datasheets is that some models that GW sold would become unusable without this ruling. For example, the Razorback has an option for a Lascannon and Twin Plasma Gun in the Index, but the Codex doesn't have this. A lot of people had Razorbacks built like like that, and GW wants people to play with stuff they bought, regardless of when they bought it. Well, the Tzaangor pack has only ever had 1 musical instrument, which was renamed to a Brayhorn with the codex. While the rules, by the RAW, would say this is legal... realize that a TO should rule the Brayhorn as being the Musical Instrument, and thus you only get the 1, and not both. Trying to bring both now would be really unsportsmanlike.

I AM the local TO. :-)

My gut reaction is that if they want an index option then they only get the index option, or they take the codex option, but only those options.

No mix and match.

On that point why are they even trying to use an index entry when the codex entry is there. Every codex has options in the index that they have now lost.

This isn't a case of a biker HQ model, its a false equivalence to claim a legacy case for a rewritten unit.

Cheers

Andrew

 Valentine009 wrote:
I AM the local TO. :-)

hahaha! Well then! The choice is yours . As you can see, you CAN, but I think you should answer "no, you can only take one, not both".

RAW: yes you can take both, and both cost 10

RAI (likely) and HIWPI: take just one of the options, in order to be sportsmanlike.

ZThere are a few instances like this across the indexes, but its generally pretty easy to read and reason and have the "don't be that guy" alarm go off.

on the other hand, if you are playing a game against a That Guy to make a point, we're glad we could help you.

I'm looking for something as tactile as possible. Very entrenched opinions.

 Valentine009 wrote:
I'm looking for something as tactile as possible. Very entrenched opinions.

Ultimately you have to make a call one way or the other as the TO, and often that will piss off somebody! That's just how it goes.

Personally I'd not allow taking both, in my view they are clearly meant to represent the same thing.

I think it's very clearly a mistake on the part of GW, but until such time as they FAQ it, I would argue that you can take both an Instrument of Chaos and a Brayhorn.

 Valentine009 wrote:
I'm looking for something as tactile as possible. Very entrenched opinions.

You're the TO. Just tell them while it's technically allowed, it's also VERY obviously an oversight and VERY obviously not intended to be played that way. If they feel strongly enough about the issue to not participate, you probably don't want them playing in your event.

 Stux wrote:

 Valentine009 wrote:
I'm looking for something as tactile as possible. Very entrenched opinions.

Ultimately you have to make a call one way or the other as the TO, and often that will piss off somebody! That's just how it goes.

Personally I'd not allow taking both, in my view they are clearly meant to represent the same thing.

This. Also if anyone’s strategy lives or dies purely on this ruling then eh, it’s an odd thing to pin all your hopes on. Go build a rounded army!

 Kriswall wrote:

 Valentine009 wrote:
I'm looking for something as tactile as possible. Very entrenched opinions.

You're the TO. Just tell them while it's technically allowed, it's also VERY obviously an oversight and VERY obviously not intended to be played that way. If they feel strongly enough about the issue to not participate, you probably don't want them playing in your event.

Agreed with this 100%.

If they want to fall on their swords for this, just go look up BCB's signature. It shows why tons of the game doesn't work by the RAW. You have to make concessions on what the intention of the game is in order to play the game, quote-unquote, normally.

 Yarium wrote:
If they want to fall on their swords for this, just go look up BCB's signature. It shows why tons of the game doesn't work by the RAW. You have to make concessions on what the intention of the game is in order to play the game, quote-unquote, normally.

The game does work RaW, it's just most people dislike the result.

The simple RaW+Designers Commentary answer is you must use the Codex Datasheet, and may use Index Wargear Options where they are not present on the Codex Datasheet.

I am not even sure it is that clear though...

This is what the Designers Commentary flow-cart says: "USE THE CODEX VERSION OF YOUR MODEL’S DATASHEET, BUT YOU CAN CHOOSE TO USE THE INDEX VERSION FOR ITS WARGEAR OPTIONS (NOTE THAT IF THE WARGEAR HAS RULES IN THE CODEX, THESE REPLACE THE INDEX RULES)"

Wargear Options are a portion of the datasheet. If you can use either the Codex or the Index version of that portion of the datasheet, then it would be Brayhorn OR Instrument, they are mutually exclusive based on the version.

I have come across people people arguing that you can sub line-item wargear, and people arguing that it is one 'wargear options' section or the other.

 Valentine009 wrote:
I am not even sure it is that clear though...

This is what the Designers Commentary flow-cart says: "USE THE CODEX VERSION OF YOUR MODEL’S DATASHEET, BUT YOU CAN CHOOSE TO USE THE INDEX VERSION FOR ITS WARGEAR OPTIONS (NOTE THAT IF THE WARGEAR HAS RULES IN THE CODEX, THESE REPLACE THE INDEX RULES)"

Wargear Options are a portion of the datasheet. If you can use either the Codex or the Index version of that portion of the datasheet, then it would be Brayhorn OR Instrument, they are mutually exclusive based on the version.

I have come across people people arguing that you can sub line-item wargear, and people arguing that it is one 'wargear options' section or the other.

It says you can choose to use the Index Version, it doesn't say it replaces the codex version.

I think the right way of saying that though would be:

"You can choose to use the index version for ANY OF its wargear options."

As it it sounds like you can choose to use one or the other. I'm not saying I am convinced either way, it is just maddenly unclear.

Just pick which way you're happier with handling it and do that.

I don't know how big a tournament or what people play, but if they're not playing Ynarri you might just say that the only indexes that can be used are the Forgeworld indexes (if you want to let Forgeworld in). If you're the TO, you get to make the rules for the tournament.

Thanks everyone.

I am very much a RAI person, and would prefer players to gain advantages through strong play rather than rules exploitation, but at the same time I want to make sure I am not making arbitrary and/or inconsistent decisions that ruffle feathers.

Smallish, fairly-tight knit community etc. Frankly the entire situation annoys me.

If you’re ruling on the DC, don’t use tzangors as the example, they’re an edge case. Also by GW’s on example paragraphs, its in addition to, not either or

 Valentine009 wrote:
Thanks everyone.

I am very much a RAI person, and would prefer players to gain advantages through strong play rather than rules exploitation, but at the same time I want to make sure I am not making arbitrary and/or inconsistent decisions that ruffle feathers.

Smallish, fairly-tight knit community etc. Frankly the entire situation annoys me.

It's not arbitrary - the box has only EVER come with one item that could be considered the Musical Instrument.

Okay... let's make this even more clear...

If the Index said that a model can take a Boltgun, but the codex said the model can take a Bolter, then these people's arguments would be that a model can take both a Boltgun AND a Bolter, despite those two things being the same weapon. Well, the Tzaangors in the Index could take a Musical Instrument, while the Tzaangors in the Codex can take a Brayhorn. These are both the same upgrade, despite the two having different names. You're not twisting things or coming up with an inconsistent answer - you're saying that the models can take from the options in their boxed set. If the boxed set stays the same, but the names change, well then you're still only taking what's in the boxed set, but now with the new name.

 Valentine009 wrote:
I think the right way of saying that though would be:

"You can choose to use the index version for ANY OF its wargear options."

As it it sounds like you can choose to use one or the other. I'm not saying I am convinced either way, it is just maddenly unclear.

It seems fairly clear to me. It doesn't say you can choose use the index as well as the codex, it says you can choose to use the index version for wargear.

So you use the codex wargear, or you use the index wargear.

 Yarium wrote:

 Valentine009 wrote:
Running an event and the following list question came up:

a) Can you take both the index wargear option "Instrument of Chaos," and the codex wargear option "Brayhorn," on a single Tzaangor squad for +2 to charge rolls?

b) Instruments of Chaos are 0pt options in the index, but were upped to 10pts in the Thousand Sons Codex and Chapter Approved. While it is listed under Thousand Sons, it is a bit unclear whether they mean to include Tzaangors in that bucket as well, or if the reference is specific to Pink Horrors (who can still to this day take an instrument of chaos).

Is the answer that they can only take a Brayhorn for 10pts, they can only take a Instrument for 0pts but no Brayhorn, they can take a single Instrument or Brayhorn for 10pts, they can take both for 20pts (10pts for Brayhorn, 10 pts for Instrument), or they can take both for 10pts (paying 10 for brayhorn, 0 for instrument)?

It is TECHNICALLY allowed, but you really should expect to get yourself ruled against by the local TO. The Brayhorn is your "Instrument of Chaos", that's shaped as a horn. The intention of the ruling that allows you to take Index options for units with Codex datasheets is that some models that GW sold would become unusable without this ruling. For example, the Razorback has an option for a Lascannon and Twin Plasma Gun in the Index, but the Codex doesn't have this. A lot of people had Razorbacks built like like that, and GW wants people to play with stuff they bought, regardless of when they bought it.

That does not make them unusable. WYSIWYG is not a rule in the rule book. That razorback can be used with any of it's wargear options regardless of what bits you stuck on it.

 insaniak wrote:

 Valentine009 wrote:
I think the right way of saying that though would be:

"You can choose to use the index version for ANY OF its wargear options."

As it it sounds like you can choose to use one or the other. I'm not saying I am convinced either way, it is just maddenly unclear.

It seems fairly clear to me. It doesn't say you can choose use the index as well as the codex, it says you can choose to use the index version for wargear.

So you use the codex wargear, or you use the index wargear.

While that would make sense from wording alone, the accompanying eldar and AM commissar examples are both pulling from a combination of codex and index wargear.

 insaniak wrote:

 Valentine009 wrote:
I think the right way of saying that though would be:

"You can choose to use the index version for ANY OF its wargear options."

As it it sounds like you can choose to use one or the other. I'm not saying I am convinced either way, it is just maddenly unclear.

It seems fairly clear to me. It doesn't say you can choose use the index as well as the codex, it says you can choose to use the index version for wargear.

So you use the codex wargear, or you use the index wargear.

But, you already have permission to use codex options from the codex datasheet. When it says you can choose to use the index datasheet for wargear options, it does not state that you do this instead of using the codex version for options, so it's just additional permission adding on to what permissions you already have.

 doctortom wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Valentine009 wrote:
I think the right way of saying that though would be:

"You can choose to use the index version for ANY OF its wargear options."

As it it sounds like you can choose to use one or the other. I'm not saying I am convinced either way, it is just maddenly unclear.

It seems fairly clear to me. It doesn't say you can choose use the index as well as the codex, it says you can choose to use the index version for wargear.

So you use the codex wargear, or you use the index wargear.

But, you already have permission to use codex options from the codex datasheet. When it says you can choose to use the index datasheet for wargear options, it does not state that you do this instead of using the codex version for options, so it's just additional permission adding on to what permissions you already have.

Actually the reverse is true. You can use the Index options, but cannot use the Codex options. Its an either/or not a permission to use both.

USE THE CODEX VERSION OF YOUR MODEL’S DATASHEET, BUT YOU CAN CHOOSE TO USE THE INDEX VERSION FOR ITS WARGEAR OPTIONS (NOTE THAT IF THE WARGEAR HAS RULES IN THE CODEX, THESE REPLACE THE INDEX RULES)

 WindstormSCR wrote:

While that would make sense from wording alone, the accompanying eldar and AM commissar examples are both pulling from a combination of codex and index wargear.

This is actually not the case at all. The only combination in the examples is using codex prices for the index wargear. No where in the example does it mention taking wargear form both datasheets.

Fragile wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Valentine009 wrote:
I think the right way of saying that though would be:

"You can choose to use the index version for ANY OF its wargear options."

As it it sounds like you can choose to use one or the other. I'm not saying I am convinced either way, it is just maddenly unclear.

It seems fairly clear to me. It doesn't say you can choose use the index as well as the codex, it says you can choose to use the index version for wargear.

So you use the codex wargear, or you use the index wargear.

But, you already have permission to use codex options from the codex datasheet. When it says you can choose to use the index datasheet for wargear options, it does not state that you do this instead of using the codex version for options, so it's just additional permission adding on to what permissions you already have.

Actually the reverse is true. You can use the Index options, but cannot use the Codex options. Its an either/or not a permission to use both.

USE THE CODEX VERSION OF YOUR MODEL’S DATASHEET, BUT YOU CAN CHOOSE TO USE THE INDEX VERSION FOR ITS WARGEAR OPTIONS (NOTE THAT IF THE WARGEAR HAS RULES IN THE CODEX, THESE REPLACE THE INDEX RULES)

"Use the Codex version of your model's datasheet." Part of the codex datasheet is the wargear options which the datasheet gives you permission to. "You can choose to use the index version for its wargear options" is not the same as "you can choose to use the index version instead of the codex version for its wargear options"

 doctortom wrote:


"Use the Codex version of your model's datasheet." Part of the codex datasheet is the wargear options which the datasheet gives you permission to. "You can choose to use the index version for its wargear options" is not the same as "you can choose to use the index version instead of the codex version for its wargear options"

Yeah, but one can also argue that "You can choose to use the index version for its wargear options" is not the same as "You can choose to also use the index version for its wargear options"

Fact of the matter is the imprecise wording leaves it open to interpretation.