daboarder Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 So with the poor release of the modidified DH/WH codexi on GW's website I decided that I would shoot Jervis and email with a new modified PDF attatched to it so that GW themselves could upload it and everyone would be happy. Before I do this I wanted to compile a list of the changes needed to bring these codeci in line with 5th ed, please not that I will be doing the minimal changes so basically just "a bolter is a bolter". heres the list for just the DH: Storm shield: confer a 3+ invulnerable save but the model may never gain an extra attack for 2 close combat weapons Force weapon: see the main rule book Smoke launchers: see the main rulebook Assualt Cannon: Heavy 4, rending Psychic hood: same as SM one Hellguns/hellpistols: same as hot shot Lasguns. nb: I decided to leave shot guns as is to match the IG codex. Is there anything I have missed so far? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
bystrom Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 yes, a couple of things, check this. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2443364 Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 The official GW PDF codexes are now available, and nothing has changed .... except that allying and induction has been entirely removed from the DH codex, and only the WH codex still allows induction (but no allying). Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2443541 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obliterator Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 The official GW PDF codexes are now available, and nothing has changed .... except that allying and induction has been entirely removed from the DH codex, and only the WH codex still allows induction (but no allying). Well, WH did get the repair special rule for the trusty Rhino. But I doubt I'm going to print out the pdf because of that. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2443701 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brovius Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 The official GW PDF codexes are now available, and nothing has changed .... except that allying and induction has been entirely removed from the DH codex, and only the WH codex still allows induction (but no allying). The examples of Grey Knights and Daemons units are gone, too. I guess that means no more issues with CD players about what our wargear and powers are effective against. Oh, and Grey Knights Land Raiders must get The Shrouding now, seeing as it is a Grey Knights special rule, and no examples are given as to what limitation Grey Knights are Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2443706 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitefireinferno Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 Thats just stupid a GK LR/C would not get shrouding due to the fact it is a tank not a Grey knight. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2443803 Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 @Brovius: All units that benefit from the GK special rules have that specifically noted in their profiles. None of the GK vehicles have those notations, so no shrouding for land raiders or dreadnoughts. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2443824 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 Hey, has anyone checked the FAQ yet? Didn't it last time clarify what could be taken as allies or inducted? Could a person of sufficiently beligerant character then use that as an official document endorsing allying and induction, and attempt to rules lawyer combined arms? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2443854 Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Hey, has anyone checked the FAQ yet? Didn't it last time clarify what could be taken as allies or inducted? Could a person of sufficiently beligerant character then use that as an official document endorsing allying and induction, and attempt to rules lawyer combined arms? The FAQs have not been changed to reflect the new Codexes. They probably never will. Keep in mind that FAQs -- with the exception of any Errata section -- do not create rules. They only clarify rules. A FAQ clarification that references rules that no longer exist are simply inapplicable. Outside of that, I am ashamed that anybody here would even consider being a d-bag in a game of little fantasy plastic shoulders. :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2444069 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marid Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 What a miserable hack job of a PDF release. Missing pages, page numbers not updated, art and modeling removed, each language version has different deletions, etc., etc. Any person on this forum would have done a better job. Did they spend more than a hour's work on this garbage? :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2444086 Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulReaver296 Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 And don't forget how long it took to get it out Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2444102 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAR Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 I guess I am not too mad with this crap GW did besides not updating the rhinos :angry:......but considering how stupid the allies rules were in the first place....I PLAY PURE SISTERS OF BATTLE FOR A REASON......I guess we had this coming for the crap we (as a community of 40kers) ie DH mystic, Vulkan Sister lists, for realizing that we could break the codexes in a way the other than what they want us to do by following their (GW and WD staffers) examples. Also does this mean I can not have allies in Apocalypse and when the point of Apocalypse was bring what you can at this point total and who cares about the FOC Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2444275 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Thane Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Lol :angry: a small erratae. And i'd have been happy. A small modification to glue into my codex. A few tweaks of weapons, a few minor additions to make the GK rules up-to-date. That's all I asked... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2444305 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellios Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Also does this mean I can not have allies in Apocalypse and when the point of Apocalypse was bring what you can at this point total and who cares about the FOC APOC never used the allies rules... it has its own system which is basically no system... you can take a Land Raider from your Ultramarines army and fill it up with Harlequins from your Eldar army and that is all fine and dandy... So you can still take what you want for Apocalypse... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2444310 Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAR Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 For now....until gw releases an update for that too. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2444340 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Orlock Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 Could a person of sufficiently beligerant character then use that as an official document endorsing allying and induction, and attempt to rules lawyer combined arms?Outside of that, I am ashamed that anybody here would even consider being a d-bag in a game of little fantasy plastic shoulders. :)The d-baggery proposed is purely a theroetical construct. Further, I would cite the quote in my sig. Of course people would consider it. What you provided was the response I was fishing for: no, and don't be foolish. You haven't read like your usual cool and detached self lately. They may only be tiny figures, but they're tiny figures we've all invested hundreds of hours in, it's only natural for people to form emotional attachments after that time. I grieve for my codex, but I tenatively celebrate something else. With the recent publication of the night spinner rules in a white dwarf, there is a perceptable change in the doctorine surounding what rules are normally legal. A return to the era of the Dwarf being meaningful and the possibility of something like Chapter Approved returning into force. Were my tiny metal women not a thousand miles away, I would use this as a justification to pull out my white dwarf contemporary with the release of my codex and field my zealots. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204875-pdf-update/#findComment-2444557 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.