RAW question, once and for all!

[Lord Cornilius]

I've read twenty different threads with twenty different answers, I get a different answer from every member of my gaming club and GW employees so if anyone can substantiate their position let me know.

 

1. In GW tournament play, do Rules as Written in an old Codex overrule contradicting information found in the 5th edition Rulebook?

 

The easiest example is the Force Weapon in the DH Codex.

 

Please, I don't want to hear how you or your gaming group play, I want to know (if possible) what the official GW position is and where you read it, saw it, heard it, played it.

 

Thanks, LC

[ArmouredWing]

I've read twenty different threads with twenty different answers, I get a different answer from every member of my gaming club and GW employees so if anyone can substantiate their position let me know.

 

1. In GW tournament play, do Rules as Written in an old Codex overrule contradicting information found in the 5th edition Rulebook?

 

The easiest example is the Force Weapon in the DH Codex.

 

Please, I don't want to hear how you or your gaming group play, I want to know (if possible) what the official GW position is and where you read it, saw it, heard it, played it.

 

Thanks, LC

 

Codex specific rules over ride all or as one of the GW game developers put it;

 

"It works as written (repeat after me ‘codex trumps rulebook, codex trumps rulebook, codex trumps rulebook...’)"

 

...but take care and make sure that the rule you are unsure about hasn't already been FAQ'd for clarity.

[Lord Cornilius]

Codex specific rules over ride all or as one of the GW game developers put it;

 

"It works as written (repeat after me ‘codex trumps rulebook, codex trumps rulebook, codex trumps rulebook...’)"

 

 

Thanks AW, where is this written?

[Toogeloo]

It's not written anywhere, nor is it official. To be honest, the reason you get 20 different answers from 20 different sources is because there are different interpretations on everyone's part.

 

People will tell you that FAQ over rides Codex which overrides Rulebook, but you will find this too is just not true in all situations.

 

 

A good example is the Dark Angels Codex. It states that if a Dark Angels army uses Combat Squads, all squads become scoring units as long as they stay over half strength. These squads include non-troop choices (like Devastators and Company Veterans). Though Jervis has specifically stated himself that this is true since Codex is supposed to override Rulebook, many tournament officials will deny a player this rule. As well, if you were to call GW and talk to a rules person, they too could end up giving you 3 different answers to this quandry as well.

 

 

 

 

The only thing official about rules confusion is "The Most Important Rule" found on page 2 of the Basic Rule Book which simply states that there is bound to be confusion with the interpretation of rules and which rules take precedent. In these cases you make house rules, compromise the results, or randomize the rule (via a dice roll) in a manner that is considered fair and fun to all players. You will not find a solid set of rules heirarchy anywhere, nor will you find that everyone who plays the game agrees with the heirarchy of said rules either.

 

 

Even at the 'Ard Boyz tournament last weekend, a friend of mine went to the Salt Lake City store to play and I played in Clearfield. The Clearfield store stated that the highest scoring unit for bonus points in the first scenario was simply which unit cost the most points in your list (troop or not). My friend's tourney official said it was troop only.

 

 

So simply remember this, the rules are written in such a way that players will have fun, but more than likely your LGS or gaming group will have their own interpretations of all rules and it is better to abide by those than to try and figure out what was intended in the first place.

[Melissia]

Another thing: According to the new rulebook, I SHOULD be able to equip my canoness with both a Blessed Weapon and a Combi-Flamer (as two-handed only matters now as far as use in close combat). But if you go by Rulebook < Codex < FAQ, I can't do that. Which kinda sucks, but eh...

[Lord Cornilius]

It's not written anywhere, nor is it official. To be honest, the reason you get 20 different answers from 20 different sources is because there are different interpretations on everyone's part.

 

I think this is probably the best answer I'm going to get. Thanks.

 

I guess the best thing to do is go with the weaker option of any given wargear and we'll be fine. :D That seems to be the trend. New force weapon rules / old assault cannon rules. (makes sense to me)

[revnow]

Cornilius, I'm unable to access my 5e rulebook at the moment, but when I get home this afternoon I will find the references for you. There are actually three in the 5e book.

 

Edit: Nevermind I found my old post about the same issue, but involving Thammers. Pages 74 and 289. 74 is important because is says "as normal, Codex takes precedence"

[Evil Homer]

In the Universal Special Rules section there is a reference to a rule being different in the codex than the rule book the codex takes precedence...page reference available if necessary but the rulign referes to instances where a universal special rule in the book differs than in a codex.

[Toogeloo]

@revnow

 

Page 74 states that Universal Special Rules in Codexes take precedent over USRs in the BRB. This information is already FAQed in most cases or known for rules clarification.

 

Page 289 is only stating that if the reference sheets in the back of the BRB are inconsistent with the ones in the Codex, the Codex takes precedent.

 

 

 

Weapons, Wargear, Force Organization, and other nuances can still cause confusion and are typically the issues that need the most clarification but are not covered anywhere in a Rulebook or Codex. Taking a look at the Dark Angel reference I made earlier, it can be clearly seen that the rule was intended for 4th edition rules as far as scoring is concerned, and if playing by Codex trumps Rulebook rules, then the Dark Angels retain all the 4th edition scoring properties. However you will rarely find a setting that follows this and Dark Angels are forced to score the same as 5th edition rules.

 

 

As I said before, there is no firm ruling on what trumps what and you basically have to go on interpretation alone and work out house rules ahead of time.

[number6]

I just find it funny that somebody -- anybody -- is asking Daemonhunters players what the "correct" way is of playing the army. :)

 

Think of how little we would have to talk about if GW actually had a quality assurance, game-testing policy in place and copyeditors with the power to enforce it. Oh, to dream....

 

On topic: Your search for definitiveness will be in vain. Not even GW is consistent about following their own rules. The examples pointed out are evidence enough of that. Your only recourse is try and game with reasonable people who are more interested in fluffy and fun games -- and who will therefore be accommodating and agreeable -- rather than ultra-competitive win-at-all-cost rules lawyers who are out for blood and every little advantage they can weasel out of you.

[Lord Cornilius]

Your only recourse is try and game with reasonable people who are more interested in fluffy and fun games -- and who will therefore be accommodating and agreeable -- rather than ultra-competitive win-at-all-cost rules lawyers who are out for blood and every little advantage they can weasel out of you.

 

I generally do and have no problem, I was just curious in regards to tournaments more than anything.

[Auedawen]

You really need to consult the tournament officials ahead of time and ask about your rules questions specifically to see how they rule them. One 'Ard boyz tournie is different than another which is different from the GT's, so sadly there is no template for us to use ATM.

[revnow]

I'm more than willing to accept the ambiguity reasoning. It's pretty clear that for friendly games the terms of good easy friendly play should be followed. In a tournament a player is required to accept the ruling of the tournament officials. A Daemonhunter player should provide their rationale for the interpretation, and accept the received ruling.

[Lord Cornilius]

I'm more than willing to accept the ambiguity reasoning. It's pretty clear that for friendly games the terms of good easy friendly play should be followed.

 

Generally speaking, I play force weapons and thunderhammers with the new rules, and most of my opponents have no problem with the Rending 4 assault cannon on my Land Raider Crusader.

 

How do most of you guys work it out in "friendly games".

[Thaelion Hexis]

Unfortunately there is a bit of sense required, a sense that some gamers conveniently won't have when it suits them.

 

The way I try to work it in my head is that the rulebook forms the core of the game. Nothing can change that, that is how the game is played. Codices take precedence when army specific issues come up. It's a fine line.

[SpideyScott]

Page 50 of the rulebook clearly states if your codex has a different rule for a psychic power you should use that. It goes on to say that the book lists the rules in general and if the codex shows rules in the specific case. The entry for force weapons is only there for for codexes that dont have the force weapon explained in them.

 

In the DH faq some rules like fearless say to use the rule book, others like true grit are to use the codex.

 

They gave DH the new potms rule yet not with force weapons, psychic hoods etc. So clearly we have to play as written in the codex and faq. Codex allways trumps rule book unless stated otherwise. Its the same way Libarians can use 2 powers a turn or vanguard can assault after DS. Nothing in the main rule book allows this because the codex says it can happen.

[Auedawen]

Well SpideyScott nailed one of the two big ways to play, (the other being Marshall Paul's interpretation). Spidey, I hope you take the heavy 3 non-rending assault cannons on your LRC as well then.

[Lord Cornilius]

1. Page 50 of the rulebook clearly states if your codex has a different rule for a psychic power you should use that.

 

2. Codex allways trumps rule book unless stated otherwise.

 

I understand you frustration, otherwise I wouldn't have started the thread, however, the rulebook doesn't clearly state that if your codex has a different rule for a weapon you should use that. So were really just inferring here.

 

Second, if anyone can find where this is written it would solve all the problems, but alas it appears to be only opinion and hearsay. The overwhelming majority of players that I speak with, and I'm quite active in a gaming club and Kommandoz, believe new Rulebook trumps Codex. I also spoke to a friend last night who played in the Vegas GT who stated the judges also went with Rulebook over Codex.

[SpideyScott]

Im not talking about weapons, page 50 deals with psychic powers. A force weapon ability is a psychic power, thats why is covered under the psychic powers in the BRB and that why you roll a psychic test to use and thats why things that can stop psychic powers can stop the force weapon.

 

If rulebook trumps codex then whats the point in having Vanguard in a SM since in the rule book it clearly states you cant assault after Deep Striking?

In the new SM codex libatians can use 2 psychic powers per turn yet the rule book says you cant?

 

What would be the point in having these in a new codex if they didnt work?

 

In the rulebook the USR section, the psychic power section and the smoke launcher section all state to use the codex or the rulebook if the codex is different. With your way of thinking grey knights wouldnt have true grit or do you pick and choose what to follow in your codex?

 

Yes i do play my AC as heavy 3, if it was any different then GW would of FAQed when we got the new power of the machine spirit.

 

The WH faq gave then there own verison of hit and run. As for GTs etc they can come up with any rules they want. Just like with ard boyz changed the rules for KP and deployment.

 

Sorry if i sound to harsh but the rule is there, im not saying that they are appiled to wargear like thunder hammers but if a codex didnt trump rule book then why bother having codexed with there own special rules and wargear?

[ArmouredWing]

Codex specific rules over ride all or as one of the GW game developers put it;

 

"It works as written (repeat after me ‘codex trumps rulebook, codex trumps rulebook, codex trumps rulebook...’)"

 

 

Thanks AW, where is this written?

It's about official as it comes folks. The statement came as a part of some correspondence with GW regarding the FAQ's direct from the horses mouth so to speak.

[Lord Cornilius]

Sorry if i sound to harsh but the rule is there, im not saying that they are appiled to wargear like thunder hammers but if a codex didnt trump rule book then why bother having codexed with there own special rules and wargear?

 

Firstly, you don't sound harsh, and believe it or not, I agree with you 100%, you can stop trying to convince me as I was convinced before I started this post. However, the reasons, assumptions, and (a=b b=c therefore a=c) type-thinking cannot be hashed out in a long winded debate before each game.

 

The reason for the topic was to provide clear written "proof" to the vastly overwhelming number of players and GW staff who believe that 3rd and 4th edition codices are supposed to be "updated" with 5th edition rules.

 

I'm not saying your incorrect, but if what we claim (Old Codex over New Rulebook) is so abundantly clear, this post wouldn't exist in the first place.

[Toogeloo]

Codex specific rules over ride all or as one of the GW game developers put it;

 

"It works as written (repeat after me ‘codex trumps rulebook, codex trumps rulebook, codex trumps rulebook...’)"

 

 

Thanks AW, where is this written?

 

It's about official as it comes folks. The statement came as a part of some correspondence with GW regarding the FAQ's direct from the horses mouth so to speak.

Except Tournament officials have the right to determine what trumps what; remember my Dark Angel reference. Good Luck trying to field about 30 scoring units worth of Dark Angels in a tournament just because their codex says they can.

[DevianID]

The way we play is that 5th ed rule book trumps 4th ed (or 3rd lol) codex (we are playing 5th ed after all), and specific overrides general (thus vanguard specificly can assault after deep strike, where in general you can not). However, where a specific rule in the rule book wants us to use older rules from a codex it will tell us (and it does!).

 

So, for example, Thunder Hammers and powerfists require 2 of the same in order to get a bonus attack (and force weapons, as a weapon, fall under this as well, so they cause instant death) as this is what the rule for 5th edition, per the fifth ed book, tells us. It does not specify 'unless your codex has different rules for these weapons'. I think almost everyone agrees that Daemonhunters with Thunderhamer + Pistol does not get +1 attack, even though there is no such restriction in the codex.

 

However, in the rules for smoke launchers, it actually explicitly states that certian armies have different rules for smoke launchers, and in this case, use those rules.

 

Also, it states that certian specific armies use psychic powers differently, like eldar testing on 3d6 not 2d6, so use those rules.

 

Finally, codex rules are obviously always specific to that codex just like point costs are, which is why daemonhunter assault cannons, as weapons not described in the 5th ed rule book, are different from space marine assault cannons.

 

In my opinion, this way provides the most consistant gaming experience, as any wargear found the the main rulebook with be the same, aka not contridicted and made confusing, unless the main rule book says it will be different (smoke launchers). This way, if you have the main rule book, you know what is an army rule and what is a general rule reprinted in the codex for convenience--aka power fists.

[SpideyScott]

Regardless if you use the DH thunder hammers as written or as in the rulebook you never get the +1 attack for having 2 weapons. Your talking about 2 things here, the rules for 2 weapons are in the rulebook and are not even covered by the DH codex. The rule book and the DH codex have different verions of a thunderhammer.

 

Look up force weapons in the main rules. In the weapons section it only says look up the psychic section. The psychic section clearly states use the codex if different from the main rules. So why do you use force weapons from the main rules when there are a psychic power and as you have said should follow the codex?

[Melissia]

Sister Superiors in the Codex are LD8, A1, and Veteran Superiors are LD9 A2... but the rulebook states that normal Superiors have LD9 A2, not just veteran superiors. While it's completely unimportant (Because everyone's going to upgrade their sister superiors anyway for the faith points), I had wondered wether to use these stats or the ones in the codex. But bhen I read up a bit more, and realized that even if they had updated stats for various weapons and units in the rulebook (such as the assault cannon), it would have been pointless anyway because it says the codex takes precedence.