Switch Theme:

Company Veteran sergeants can only take a storm shield if they have a chainsword!  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Resentful Grot With a Plan




I have a Company Veteran Sergeant with a Storm Shield and was just reading the rules carefully - as of the Codex Space Marines FAQ, the only way for him to take a storm shield is if his other weapon is a chainsword! His other squad members can take a storm shield with other weapons, as you would expect.

He can swap his bolt pistol for a storm shield, but then he can't swap his chainsword for anything! The only way to swap the chainsword is to swap both the bolt pistol and chainsword for weapons from the sergeant equipment list, which means that the bolt pistol cannot then be swapped for a storm shield (as double swapping isn't allowed).

Am I missing something? This otherwise seems to be quite a strange situation!

It's also odd that the Codex Blood Angels FAQ wasn't updated too, so Blood Angels Company Veteran Sergeants aren't allowed storm shields at all, only the other veterans in the squad. Similarly, the Company Veteran Sergeant on a bike in the Index wasn't updated either, so he can't take a take a storm shield when his other squad members can, but then it's not as surprising that they forgot to update that.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/14 22:15:13


 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






You are correct, this is indeed the case. I suspect GW forgot their own Special Snowflake FAQs and assumed he could double swap. Everyone forget about the "Stepping into a New Edition" document. Not true, you can take a Storm Shield and other Weapon just fine.

Edit 2: Actually, we had this discussion before about the Helbrute, the Special Snowflake FAQ only prevents the SAME option being taken twice, different options may be taken even with already swapped equipment, so a Veteran Sergeant may legally use the first option to get a Bolt Pistol and X from the Sergeant Equipment List, then use the second option to swap their Bolt pistol for a Storm Shield.

What the FAQ is designed to do is to stop an infinite loop where replacing X gave you X and Y in return, then swapping X for X and Y, leaving you with X, Y and Y, and so on.

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2018/06/14 22:21:14


 
   
Made in gb
Resentful Grot With a Plan




OK, thanks. That makes more sense then! I hadn't thought about it like that.

So now my only concern is that they forgot to extend the FAQ update to Blood Angels and biker Company Veterans, so their sergeants can't have storm shields.
Probably not much chance that they will remember to do that several months later!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/14 22:26:34


 
   
Made in us
Resentful Grot With a Plan




I just came across something new, which suggests the Company Veteran Sergeant can indeed only take a storm shield with a chainsword after all.

The Codex Deathwatch FAQ question about the Watch Captain confirms that it is not possible to swap a replaced weapon with something else - i.e. swapping a chainsword for a new chainsword and then replacing it is not allowed. This seems to apply even though it is not taking the same option twice, but a different option.
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






OrkPlayer137 wrote:
I just came across something new, which suggests the Company Veteran Sergeant can indeed only take a storm shield with a chainsword after all.

The Codex Deathwatch FAQ question about the Watch Captain confirms that it is not possible to swap a replaced weapon with something else - i.e. swapping a chainsword for a new chainsword and then replacing it is not allowed. This seems to apply even though it is not taking the same option twice, but a different option.
That's a perfect example of a Special Snowflake FAQ. It applies ONLY to the Watch Captain and NOTHING else.

If this was the case for everything then the Helbrute entry would be broken to bits because it relies on the fact you can replace a replaced weapon.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/06/23 17:26:29


 
   
Made in us
Deadshot Weapon Moderati




MI

Actually, what the Deathwatch FAQ confirms is that order of operations matters when it comes to replacing wargear. The reason the swap does not work with the Watch Captain is because he has to replace the chainsword with the Relic Blade before he is given the second option of replacing chainsword and boltgun with other items. This order causes them to be exclusive. If the order of these wargear options were reversed on the datasheet, then the answer in the Deathwatch FAQ would either be a Yes or it would indeed be a Special Snowflake ruling if it was still a No.
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






 ikeulhu wrote:
Actually, what the Deathwatch FAQ confirms is that order of operations matters when it comes to replacing wargear. The reason the swap does not work with the Watch Captain is because he has to replace the chainsword with the Relic Blade before he is given the second option of replacing chainsword and boltgun with other items. This order causes them to be exclusive. If the order of these wargear options were reversed on the datasheet, then the answer in the Deathwatch FAQ would either be a Yes or it would indeed be a Special Snowflake ruling if it was still a No.
[Citation Needed] Please show me where the rules say the "order" of wargear options is a thing.
   
Made in gb
Troubled By Non-Compliant Worlds





Kent; United Kingdom; Terra

I’m just assembling a Blood Angels (Flesh Tearers actually) Company Veteran Squad right now and I’m givong the Sgt a storm shield.

Clearly if the exact same unit has had its rule ammended in Codex Space Marines and as this was previously the case in the Index I’m pretty sure it’s an oversight.

I’m also sure nobody in my usual group or anybody who is not a massive douche would have an issue with this.

Check out my blog for all things 30k, 40k, Oldhammer and tutorials:
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk
 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






 Legiocustodes wrote:
I’m just assembling a Blood Angels (Flesh Tearers actually) Company Veteran Squad right now and I’m givong the Sgt a storm shield.

Clearly if the exact same unit has had its rule ammended in Codex Space Marines and as this was previously the case in the Index I’m pretty sure it’s an oversight.

I’m also sure nobody in my usual group or anybody who is not a massive douche would have an issue with this.
That's not a valid line of reasoning. BA and SM are two totally different armies.
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

Between friends though, using that FAQ on a copy/paste Codex entry isn’t exactly a stretch. No need to fun police the guy. Just don’t try it at a GT, Legiocustodes!

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in gb
Troubled By Non-Compliant Worlds





Kent; United Kingdom; Terra

Yeah... they are basically 80% identical. In fact on closer examination both of them have Codex Adeptus Astartes above their respective names would indicate they are pretty similar. Ergo if two identical units feature in the Codices and both have the same spurious obvious mistake then one gets upgraded in the latest FAQ bout the other one simply doesn’t get an FAQ for ages I think I’ll read between the lines and use that for my own exact same unit.

It’s not like I’m saying; ‘SM Company Veteran Sgts can carry storm shields... that must mean my BA Intercessors Sgts can carry stom shields’.

I bet you’re a joy to play against.

Check out my blog for all things 30k, 40k, Oldhammer and tutorials:
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk
 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






 Legiocustodes wrote:
Yeah... they are basically 80% identical. In fact on closer examination both of them have Codex Adeptus Astartes above their respective names would indicate they are pretty similar. Ergo if two identical units feature in the Codices and both have the same spurious obvious mistake then one gets upgraded in the latest FAQ bout the other one simply doesn’t get an FAQ for ages I think I’ll read between the lines and use that for my own exact same unit.

It’s not like I’m saying; ‘SM Company Veteran Sgts can carry storm shields... that must mean my BA Intercessors Sgts can carry stom shields’.

I bet you’re a joy to play against.
I played in a time where Space Marine Chaplains got to have extra special rules while my Wolf Priests did not. Did I just ignore the rules and use Chaplain rules? No, because the rules are clear. Insinuating your opponent is not fun to play against because they play by the rules is, imho, rather rude.
   
Made in gb
Troubled By Non-Compliant Worlds





Kent; United Kingdom; Terra

Was that the same period when wolf guard Terminators could take assault cannons, cyclone launchers and chain fists all in the same model... and the whole squad could be thusly equipped.

I would say the rules are not clear; I would say they are ambiguous and open to interpretation.

I wasn’t insinuating it... I was stating it.

Check out my blog for all things 30k, 40k, Oldhammer and tutorials:
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk
 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






The rules are clear. You not liking them doesn't make them ambiguous. You're free to make up whatever house rules you want, but you can't claim they are what the actual rules are.
   
Made in gb
Troubled By Non-Compliant Worlds





Kent; United Kingdom; Terra

I didn’t say I didn’t like them. I said they are ambiguous. An identical unit in another Codex has had its wording updated in an FAQ. Not a similar unit, but an identical one. The SM FAQ is four months newer than the BA one so I would say it sets a precedent, particularly as the rule itself is clearly an anomaly... unless you can tell me why the sergeant of this unit wouldn’t have access to the same artefact of wargear as his squad. Perhaps it reflects that when they were arming up the new guy got the last Storm Shield when the Tech Marine was handing them out. I bet that wound up the Sergeant... How envious he will be when all the Nova Marines and Crimson Fists Sergeants from the exact same unit type run passed him doing ‘shield bumps’

Rubbish.... clearly he should have access to it. It’s just an anomaly in the wording that GW have ammended for one Codex and not the other. Only a complete rules lawyer would not acknowledge the precedent set.

Check out my blog for all things 30k, 40k, Oldhammer and tutorials:
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk
 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






That isn't what ambiguous means. In any case, you're wrong. I'll leave it at that since you're clearly not willing to listen to logic.

By your logic my Ultramarines can take Baal Predators. After all, Ultramarines Predators should be identical to BA ones!

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/07/02 23:43:51


 
   
Made in gb
Troubled By Non-Compliant Worlds





Kent; United Kingdom; Terra

Yes thank you for your impromptu lesson of English; though I am quite aware of what ambiguous means.

Clearly my logic wouldn’t dictate that Ultramarines can take Baal Predators as these are separate Blood Angel specific units. Where as Colapny Veterans are a copy and paste entry from Codex Space Marines just like 89% of the Codex. They are idenirival (clearly a Baal predatpr isn’t .... because it has the word ‘baal’ in front of the word ‘predator’.)

Ergo when GW spotted their wording mistake in th SM Codex back in April it is a fair assumption that the identical copy and paste unit in the BA Codex should receive the same update...perhaps we could call it a copy and paste update.

As I asked before can you tell me one balance, canon or any reason why Blood Angels would not have this?

How would you react if your opponent turned up with a Storm Shield on his sergeant? Would it make you sick; would you force him (or her) to snap the arms off their model while you pumped your finger into the relevant Codex page with glee. I hope not...

Check out my blog for all things 30k, 40k, Oldhammer and tutorials:
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk
 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






 Legiocustodes wrote:
As I asked before can you tell me one balance, canon or any reason why Blood Angels would not have this?
There doesn't need to be. The rules are clear. Fluff has no bearing on rules.
 Legiocustodes wrote:
How would you react if your opponent turned up with a Storm Shield on his sergeant? Would it make you sick; would you force him (or her) to snap the arms off their model while you pumped your finger into the relevant Codex page with glee. I hope not...
I would refuse to play them as I would have arranged pre-game to follow the rules. The fact that this is even needed boggles my mind. If I showed up with a Predator with 30 lascannons (but only paid for 2), would you allow that? If not, you are a hypocrite.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/07/03 05:52:28


 
   
Made in de
Nihilistic Necron Lord






Germany

BA are not the same as SM. Read the SM codex. It says they are different. I don't remember the exact words. That's why they have their own codex.
   
Made in gb
Troubled By Non-Compliant Worlds





Kent; United Kingdom; Terra

Like I said... a joy to play against.

Check out my blog for all things 30k, 40k, Oldhammer and tutorials:
http://classicastartes.blogspot.co.uk
 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins





Tacoma, WA, USA

BCB is neither wrong nor unreasonable about this. There are multiple points of divergence between Codex Space Marines and Codex Blood Angels, such as Hand Flamers in general and Heavy Flamers in Tactical Squads. Assuming one you don’t like is a mistake is unreasonable.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: