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.

I can't find an FAQ/Errata for this and it's hurting my brain.

Inquisitor Draxus has the following ability:

Xenos Hunter: While this model is leading a unit, each time a model in that unit makes an attack that targets an enemy unit that does not have the IMPERIUM and CHAOS Keywords, add 1 to the Hit roll.

My opponent was telling me that this works against everyone as no units have the IMPERIUM AND CHAOS Keywords.

I know this isn't the spirit of the rule, but in the jackweasel "letter of the law" argument, is he correct?

The weasel arguement is right, if it acted as intended, it would say “does not have the IMPERIUM or CHAOS keywords”. This would work as it excludes any unit that has imperium, or chaos, leaving only xenos. Since it says “and”, it means both are needed.

The weasel would, technically, be correct... IF the rule was worded that way. The app and my copy of the codex both say 'or'.

 BorderCountess wrote:
The weasel would, technically, be correct... IF the rule was worded that way. The app and my copy of the codex both say 'or'.

Nice, he was using some "New Recruit " App. Apparently, it's not completely accurate.

Thank you!

New Recuit also says "or".

Weird.

Could he have changed something to make it say that?

Never played the guy before, so I had no reason to question his stuff.

Now, I guess I need to read up on more of my opponents' rules.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
Could he have changed something to make it say that?

Yes - if he's not directly using the app and instead has a list saved (PDF, Word, etc.) it's easy enough to go in and change things. We've had players locally do that before.

beast_gts wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
Could he have changed something to make it say that?

Yes - if he's not directly using the app and instead has a list saved (PDF, Word, etc.) it's easy enough to go in and change things. We've had players locally do that before.

Are there any signs to look out for? Or just fire up the app myself and double check if something strange pops up?

The other possibility is he turned off network access to it and his version has never been updated and it had been mis-input to have that at some point. Early versions of files for all list builders tend to have mistakes like that.

As an aside, this is why having the official printed rules available is a good idea. The various reference and gameplay tools we have are great, but if there's ever a debate over a rule, the source material is always the place to start.

Slipspace wrote:
As an aside, this is why having the official printed rules available is a good idea. The various reference and gameplay tools we have are great, but if there's ever a debate over a rule, the source material is always the place to start.

I would expect that the printed rules are generally the most erroneous, as by their very nature they cannot incorporate errata. For this particular case, the printed rules are correct and use the word "or", but in general printed rules derive no particular authority merely because they used to be trees.

I would say that the 40k mobile application is generally the most reliable source, although it is inconvenient that you can only access it with a phone, and only if you have registered the codex in question.