Command Squad Question

[Blaze]

I've got a heavily modded command squad but I wasn't sure on a ruling, can my company champ take a storm shield and the apothacary a powersword? They are no longer "veterans", but they are upgraded veterans. I can see how the wording implies they can't but I love my models so I really hope I can.

[alloyslayer]

I think they can, I remember reading somewhere that they could buy the weapons as a veteran then upgrade to champion/apothecary and keep them

[DarkGuard]

Apothecary is a definite and massive no. The Apothecary is in the original unit composition, you don't have to upgrade to him because he's there already. However, this means that due to him having a different name, he has his own set of wargear that he cannot swap out.

 

In the case of the Company Champion, this is grey area. Once he's upgraded you can no longer buy him equipment as he is a Veteran and uses a different profile etc. However, some people argue that the wording of the upgrade system suggests that you can give him new equipment and then upgrade him. The upgrades only adds equipment, not take them away and so therefore he keeps the previous equipment. IMHO this is stretching the rules at the kindest, you are pretty much exploiting them. I'd say play it save and don't upgrade either, especially in the case of the Company Champion you get a power sword, combat shield and +1WS increase for the price of a power sword, what more do you want?

[Blaze]

It's really just because I want to use my forgeworld boarding marine as my IH champion, and the shield is huge. I'm okay with it rule wise I just was hoping I could. Can't even run him as an honour guard champion.

[timmytool]

form C:DA FAQ

 

Q. When I upgrade Deathwing and Ravenwing models to

Standard Bearers and/or Apothecaries, can they still use

items such as lightning claws, thunder hammers and storm

shields, assault cannons, meltaguns, flamers and plasma

guns? (p81)

A. Yes, because they are extraordinary individuals!

 

While they refer too the RW/DW command the same should hold true to the normal command sq's (as the upgrade options are worded near identically)

 

 

In C:DA/C:BT command sq's are all vanilla vets so all can be upgraded pre-StandBearer/Apothecary/champ.

 

Vanilla marines can do the same accept the apothecary can't receive any "veterans" upgrades, C:BA's Honour Guard is in the same boat with its "Sanguinary Novitiate" but fine for the rest of the sq.

 

C:GK and C:SW dont have command sq's so no issue for them

[DarkGuard]

I don't think you can apply something from the C:DA FAQ across to C:SM timmytool. That FAQ relates to C:DA and nothing else, so IMO it carries little to no weight on this subject.

[Morticon]

When an ambiguous issue occurs that is then clarified by an FAQ, it sets precedent for the other identical issues.

 

So, while that FAQ may not be for the C: SM, it shows the precedent and sets the thinking behind that specific kind of upgrade, therefore is useable (at least to lend weight to the arguments for/against) to other codicies with identical situations.

[Gentlemanloser]

I disagree.

 

The FAQs are designed with only thier parent Codex in mind, and FAQs can contradict each others precedent. Just take the 'Nid and GK FAQ on Initative Modifiers.

 

Tyranid FAQ;

 

The Lash Whip will reduce an enemy model's Intiative to 1 before any other modifiers are applied. So <snip> FC <snip> I2 and <snip> Banshee Mask <snip> I10

 

GK FAQ;

 

If an model with a NFW has thier Initiative reduced to a fixed number by an ability/Special Rule, do they still get the +2I from the Halberd?

 

No

 

Win. :/

[Bracks0682]

I have read this and checked with others and yes you can buy a storm shield as a vet and then upgrade to Champion..

And no for the Apothacary.. He stay's the same...

[Morticon]

I disagree.

 

The FAQs are designed with only thier parent Codex in mind, and FAQs can contradict each others precedent. Just take the 'Nid and GK FAQ on Initative Modifiers.

 

Tyranid FAQ;

 

The Lash Whip will reduce an enemy model's Intiative to 1 before any other modifiers are applied. So <snip> FC <snip> I2 and <snip> Banshee Mask <snip> I10

 

GK FAQ;

 

If an model with a NFW has thier Initiative reduced to a fixed number by an ability/Special Rule, do they still get the +2I from the Halberd?

 

No

 

Win. :/

 

 

Could you then show the FAQ that contradicts the upgrade precedent?

 

The word "precedent" refers to the persuasiveness of a single event/occurance without contradiction which can be applied to similar situations- thats why its called a precedent.

 

What you've listed (the nid stuff) cannot be used as a precedent because they're contradictory. They do not set their own precedents.

Which ever one came first was a precedent for the other.

This then then ceased to be a precedent when it was contradicted and when no other identical situations arise.

 

So, until something is posted that contradicts the upgrade question..its prima facie a precedent. That cannot be argued. That's just the definition of it.

 

 

Furthermore, yet unrelated to "precedent", those examples quoted while relating to initiative, are of two completely different items of wargear.

There are plenty of examples where FAQs have ruled identically across the board for SM/identical wargear.

 

The main point is:

 

If you have an ambiguity (key point here) in one army, that has an identical (or near identical) unit and set of ambiguities with the same conditions in another army, and an FAQ clears up one, then you'd be hardpressed to not claim you're being pedantic if you disregard the one without an FAQ.

[Gentlemanloser]

I'm saying you shoudn't claim a FAQ for one army sets a precedent for another, as as shown, FAQs for seperate armies can contradict each others rulings.

 

What holds for the DA does't automatically hold for every other Codex, just becuase there's nothing released yet that contradicts it.

[thade]

We've been over this many times in here; weird to see you all waivering on it, but then it's been a while.

 

We've agreed on more than one occasion that - like it or not - the conversion to Champion makes him not a Veteran...and all upgrades are purchased for Vets. So if you purchase upgrades "before" upgrading him to Champ, you now have an illegal model: the Champ gets a PS and a Combat Shield. Them's the brakes.

 

Best we've been able to interpret it is that there is an implicit ordering...which is you buy upgrades starting at the top of the list working your way down...so by the time you get to the juicy upgrades, he's "already a Champion". That's RAI, of course. The only RAW is that "He's not a Veteran, and the upgrades are for Veterans." I've yet to see a tournie/event that allows these kinds of upgrades.

 

Have no fear though. He's a perfectly legal model as a straight up Veteran. :P

[timmytool]

We've been over this many times in here; weird to see you all waivering on it, but then it's been a while.

 

We've agreed on more than one occasion that - like it or not - the conversion to Champion makes him not a Veteran...and all upgrades are purchased for Vets. So if you purchase upgrades "before" upgrading him to Champ, you now have an illegal model: the Champ gets a PS and a Combat Shield. Them's the brakes.

 

Best we've been able to interpret it is that there is an implicit ordering...which is you buy upgrades starting at the top of the list working your way down...so by the time you get to the juicy upgrades, he's "already a Champion". That's RAI, of course. The only RAW is that "He's not a Veteran, and the upgrades are for Veterans." I've yet to see a tournie/event that allows these kinds of upgrades.

 

Have no fear though. He's a perfectly legal model as a straight up Veteran. ;)

 

how do you justify the ignoring of precedence?(without a countering FAQ entry)

 

C:DA FAQ posted above in a previous post, that a upgraded model may still have normal options available to "normal" models in the unit (and yes some of the options listed in the FAQ are to specific models upgrades not just "any model" options)

 

also

 

C:Ork FAQ

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas with

shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a big choppa?

(p100)

A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big choppa or

power klaw before you choose to upgrade the mob to

have shootas, in which case the Nob is not affected by

the mob’s weapon swap (as he no longer has a choppa

to swap), does not receive a shoota and keeps his

slugga and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot

happier that way!

in this precedence a option that is listed further into the options can be taken before a preceding upgrade even thought doing it in that order would stop the later option from being available. BTW these options are in different option sections(within the unit entry) just like C:SM (ork options:/charactor: upgrade sections to SM's unit options:/model options:)

[JamesI]

timmytool, I know several times when I've pointed out precedence from another FAQ, I've been told its irrelevant as FAQs only apply to the codex they are written for.

 

I agree with Thade. A champion is not a veteran. I see no justification that taking champion then thunder hammer is illegal, while taking thunder hammer than champion is legal. It shouldn't matter, the result is the same.

[Acebaur]

Since when does the Ork FAQ have any bearing on anything in a Space Marine codex? What holds true for one codex has absolutely no relevance for any other codex, regardless of whether or not they are the same race. C:DA and C:SM are the same as C:Orks and C:Eldar in that neither one has anything to do with the other.

 

FAQ's are written for that codex and that codex only. The DA command squad has virtually no similarities to the C:SM one, they have far different options, rules and weren't even written in the same edition of the game.

 

That entry you sited for the DA FAQ refers to Deathwing and Ravenwing squads, neither of which are a command squad or in the vanilla codex. Those squads are taken as special units with a special character not from the regular command squad.

[thade]

timmytool, I know several times when I've pointed out precedence from another FAQ, I've been told its irrelevant as FAQs only apply to the codex they are written for.

 

We've all pointed this out to him. He still likes to try and use it anyway.

 

A codex's FAQ applies to that codex alone. That's it. No more. No less.

 

EDIT: JamesI, Acebaur...both are vets of the OR board and the forum in general. <3 Let their words carry the weight they must. Let this "other FAQ precedent"-shenanigan die here. Do it for the Emperor, Timmy. For the Emperor.

[Dan VK]

Precedent is a poor way of determining the rules, even if GW uses it (they write the rules, that is their prerogative). Also remember that FAQ answers are, to use GW's wording, Studio House Rules; they are useful, but not binding. Direct permission, or restriction, in the rules, however, is inarguable. A FAQ modifies rules by what it states. If a FAQ answer states that the order of operations for Initiative affecting wargear is applied by whose player turn it is, then I say it applies to the rules as a whole. But no FAQ states anything so broad; FAQ entries either address specific wargear (lash whip, force halberd), a specific profile in a specific codex (C:DA veterans, C:O nobz), or a specific rule not present in other codices (Descent of Angels, Psychic Pilot).

 

In short, the profiles are different, so the wargear options are different, and there is no FAQ answer that changes this for C:SM.

[dswanick]

JamesI, Acebaur, thade - without getting into the specifics of the upgrade question, let me ask you this:

 

- A Rune Priest wounds a Daemon on a roll of 2+ with his Rune Staff(C:SW, Pg.36). What constitutes a 'Daemon'? Can a Rune Priest wound an Mandrake on a rule of 2+? Your answer should be 'no' because that is from the C:GK FAQ.

- A Rune Priest casts Storm Caller within 6" of a vehicle (C:SW, Pg.37). Storm Caller is a psychic power worded identically (except for the duration of the power) to C:BA's Shield of Sanguinius. Does the vehicle get a 5+ cover save? Your answer should be 'no' because that is only FAQd in the C:BA FAQ.

 

While I don't disagree with your assessment as it comes to the question of upgrading Command Squad Veteran to Champion with the altered wargear - I don't think being so dogmatic about the question of precedent is the right ground to stake your argument on.

[JamesI]

JamesI, Acebaur, thade - without getting into the specifics of the upgrade question, let me ask you this:

 

- A Rune Priest wounds a Daemon on a roll of 2+ with his Rune Staff(C:SW, Pg.36). What constitutes a 'Daemon'? Can a Rune Priest wound an Mandrake on a rule of 2+? Your answer should be 'no' because that is from the C:GK FAQ.

- A Rune Priest casts Storm Caller within 6" of a vehicle (C:SW, Pg.37). Storm Caller is a psychic power worded identically (except for the duration of the power) to C:BA's Shield of Sanguinius. Does the vehicle get a 5+ cover save? Your answer should be 'no' because that is only FAQd in the C:BA FAQ.

 

While I don't disagree with your assessment as it comes to the question of upgrading Command Squad Veteran to Champion with the altered wargear - I don't think being so dogmatic about the question of precedent is the right ground to stake your argument on.

I base my statement of faqs only apply to their own codex mainly from issues that came out of the space wolf codex.

 

Example: Logan in a drop pod with lang fangs (yes, I know the SW FAQ clearly answered this, but before that FAQ came out). Precedent was a model could not use an ability off the table based on previous FAQs. When I pointed this out, I was told those FAQs are not hte Wolf FAQ and therefore irrelevant.

 

And even if we accept Timmy's FAQ as relevant it really isn't anyway.

 

Deathwing standard bears and apothocaries don't have their own statline. According to the codex they are still Deathwing terminators and eligible for deathwing upgrades (the BA sanguinary priest in the PDF codex was the same way, became a preist but still eligible for upgrades). Its an old style of writing and irrelevant to more modern codexes.

[awfulawful]

Them's the brakes.

 

Not this :) again...

[thade]

Them's the brakes.

 

Not this :) again...

Yea, I was talking about your brakes, buddy.

[dswanick]

And even if we accept Timmy's FAQ as relevant it really isn't anyway.

 

Deathwing standard bears and apothocaries don't have their own statline. According to the codex they are still Deathwing terminators and eligible for deathwing upgrades (the BA sanguinary priest in the PDF codex was the same way, became a preist but still eligible for upgrades). Its an old style of writing and irrelevant to more modern codexes.

Now see, this I can accept - the FAQ in question is not a precedent because it does not answer a specific identical question in another un-FAQd Codex problem.

 

I base my statement of faqs only apply to their own codex mainly from issues that came out of the space wolf codex.

 

Example: Logan in a drop pod with lang fangs (yes, I know the SW FAQ clearly answered this, but before that FAQ came out). Precedent was a model could not use an ability off the table based on previous FAQs. When I pointed this out, I was told those FAQs are not hte Wolf FAQ and therefore irrelevant.

This part is where I took issue. Yes, pre-FAQ Logan would have worked the way you say as another similar FAQ set a precedent. Fine. But then Logan is FAQd as different - there is no longer the need for a precedent because we have a direct response to the situation in question.

I still believe that in the two examples I gave that precedent is useful and warranted in considering questions like the ones I posted.

Thank you for clarifying why you have the position you do on this.

[JamesI]

I base my statement of faqs only apply to their own codex mainly from issues that came out of the space wolf codex.

 

Example: Logan in a drop pod with lang fangs (yes, I know the SW FAQ clearly answered this, but before that FAQ came out). Precedent was a model could not use an ability off the table based on previous FAQs. When I pointed this out, I was told those FAQs are not hte Wolf FAQ and therefore irrelevant.

This part is where I took issue. Yes, pre-FAQ Logan would have worked the way you say as another similar FAQ set a precedent. Fine. But then Logan is FAQd as different - there is no longer the need for a precedent because we have a direct response to the situation in question.

I still believe that in the two examples I gave that precedent is useful and warranted in considering questions like the ones I posted.

Thank you for clarifying why you have the position you do on this.

I did specifically say before the SW FAQ. Clearly it is an answered question once the SW FAQ came out.

[Isiah]

Original question has been answered. And, before this digresses any further...