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.

Epub, printed and different printings of the printed boog apparently have differing rules. The extent of the differences are only just being poured over but this was the example that started the comparisson between players who have the physical books and epub version. Quality product....

I'm not too surprised - the iBook & ePub rules for last edition were occasionally updated to be the latest ones, including FAQs and things.

Is there a version number or anything at the start of the ePub?

beast_gts wrote:
I'm not too surprised - the iBook & ePub rules for last edition were occasionally updated to be the latest ones, including FAQs and things.

Is there a version number or anything at the start of the ePub?

From my understanding, it's not just the digital versions that are different. The special editions (that was made to look like the old black books) and possibly some of the normal versions also have the changes.

Worth pointing out, that particular bit of text adds nothing of value. The rules are still the same, so there is no mechanical discrepancy to cause chaos.

So, nice glib but nothing beyond noting GW does bad version control?

 Sherrypie wrote:
Worth pointing out, that particular bit of text adds nothing of value. The rules are still the same, so there is no mechanical discrepancy to cause chaos.

So, nice glib but nothing beyond noting GW does bad version control?

Well I'm sure these are the only differences, no point looking for more I guess... -sarcasm face-

 Sherrypie wrote:
Worth pointing out, that particular bit of text adds nothing of value. The rules are still the same, so there is no mechanical discrepancy to cause chaos.

So, nice glib but nothing beyond noting GW does bad version control?

Worth pointing out that this exact wording got FAQ'd in 1st edition prior to the 2018 one that lost a lot of rulings, including seekers, mor deythan and headhunters getting implacable. When the Infiltrate rule calls them "infiltrators" when not using the forward deployment, it means they're infiltrators even when not using the forward deployment, ergo, all the time.

That's why the second version drops the "infiltrator" term and tells you that you can join when not using the forward deployment.

If you're going to be glib, you should probably understand the rules you're talking about a little more.

Hmm....so, FAQ soonish, maybe? At least to update the "older" printings?

So the digital version that came out after the printed copy is more clear with regards to a rule? Shocker that.
Very likely something that will be in the FAQ whenever that shows up.

 Gert wrote:
So the digital version that came out after the printed copy is more clear with regards to a rule? Shocker that.
Very likely something that will be in the FAQ whenever that shows up.

It's not just the digital and print, different print runs and special editions also have this, i know mediocrity doesn't shock you.

It doesn't though. FW has shoddy rules editing just like GW but even with that, differences in editions of books made at different times isn't surprising. What wasn't caught in the QC for the normal rulebook was obviously found for the release of the special and digital editions. It's not that shocking. Irritating if you're playing against someone who is a gakhead about rules but not for people who aren't trying to find every single problem they can to exploit it.

I kind of expect the same happening with the upcoming Liber books tbh. Why leave the epub versions shackled to the "dead" first print edition wordings, if they are in any way erroneous or incomplete?

Physical first print edition book owners, sucks to be you

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Gert wrote:
So the digital version that came out after the printed copy is more clear with regards to a rule? Shocker that.
Very likely something that will be in the FAQ whenever that shows up.

It's not just the digital and print, different print runs and special editions also have this, i know mediocrity doesn't shock you.

yeah differant printings of books tend to be updated to current errata, nothing new here dude. this is NORMAL.


It's only an apparent scandal to people who have been trapped in a GW exclusive enviroment so long they don't remember what it's like for an edition of a game to last long eneugh for the rules to receive multiple print runs

BrianDavion wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Gert wrote:
So the digital version that came out after the printed copy is more clear with regards to a rule? Shocker that.
Very likely something that will be in the FAQ whenever that shows up.

It's not just the digital and print, different print runs and special editions also have this, i know mediocrity doesn't shock you.

yeah differant printings of books tend to be updated to current errata, nothing new here dude. this is NORMAL.


It's only an apparent scandal to people who have been trapped in a GW exclusive enviroment so long they don't remember what it's like for an edition of a game to last long eneugh for the rules to receive multiple print runs

Aye, and it's always better to fix problems than just let them remain broken. Just leaving the rules text the same for repeated printings despite those rules being erratad in previous FAQs has been a major complaint for gw's 40k books for a while. I just hope they hurry up and release a FAQ to update the first printings to the latest version.

Thinking of selling my physical copy while it's still mint and buying the epub. That's a big, heavy book to be carrying around and I'll have to keep printing FAQs.

More print issues:

Ok, so a typo for the Mechanicum Turbo-Laser Destructor, and.....is there some problem with the Pathfinder rule that I'm missing? Or are you just pointing out the book's repeated problems with the concept of alphabetical order?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Ok, so a typo for the Mechanicum Turbo-Laser Destructor, and.....is there some problem with the Pathfinder rule that I'm missing? Or are you just pointing out the book's repeated problems with the concept of alphabetical order?

Both.

Not to play devils advocate...but could it be possible that they actually have different stats to differentiate them further????


Probably not, but can't discount it.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Ok, so a typo for the Mechanicum Turbo-Laser Destructor, and.....is there some problem with the Pathfinder rule that I'm missing? Or are you just pointing out the book's repeated problems with the concept of alphabetical order?

Both.

then maybe explain the issue?

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Ok, so a typo for the Mechanicum Turbo-Laser Destructor, and.....is there some problem with the Pathfinder rule that I'm missing? Or are you just pointing out the book's repeated problems with the concept of alphabetical order?

Both.

Ok, if it's "both", then what's the problem with Pathfinder that I'm missing? Just posting an image with the rule circled doesn't really tell us anything, and neither does your little cartoon.

Racerguy180 wrote:
Not to play devils advocate...but could it be possible that they actually have different stats to differentiate them further????


Probably not, but can't discount it.

They're different between language publications, but if it was a different weapon it would affect titans/thunderhawk.

The pathfinder is just out of alphabetical order.

The alphabetic issue is a layout decision where they shift text blocks around the page to avoid any paragraphs getting cut. It is an aesthetic decision that repeats through the books, one that I don't particularly like, but not an oversight either. Life goes on.

Racerguy180 wrote:
Not to play devils advocate...but could it be possible that they actually have different stats to differentiate them further????


Probably not, but can't discount it.

See, the issue is that from what I've heard the German version of the books has them the same, so it seems to be an issue in the english version.

 Sherrypie wrote:
The alphabetic issue is a layout decision where they shift text blocks around the page to avoid any paragraphs getting cut. It is an aesthetic decision that repeats through the books, one that I don't particularly like, but not an oversight either. Life goes on.

Glad I saved the money and didn't buy the books. More $ for plastic.

this is not a new issue with GW, I have two versions of the old Bretonnia army book, identical covers, contents etc, except some of the stats and rules are different

only difference, one UK printed, one China printed

leopard wrote:
this is not a new issue with GW, I have two versions of the old Bretonnia army book, identical covers, contents etc, except some of the stats and rules are different

only difference, one UK printed, one China printed

Do they have the same copyright dates? If not then one of them might have been a stealth update.

Thank you for pointing this out.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

leopard wrote:
this is not a new issue with GW, I have two versions of the old Bretonnia army book, identical covers, contents etc, except some of the stats and rules are different

only difference, one UK printed, one China printed

Do they have the same copyright dates? If not then one of them might have been a stealth update.

would have to dig them up to check, it was definitely stealth mode though as nothing in the FAQ etc at the time covered which was correct