[HH1.0] Legio Custodes Tactica

[Hellex_The_Thanatar]

That is awesome.

[Rabidbunneh]

That would be a brutal list to play.

[Fallen11]

I can see that people are posting custodes lists that actually have barely any custode...seems quite fluffy . Almost like taking legion list, and putting in 2x 5 veterans, and calling it a day.

[Runefyre]

I can see that people are posting custodes lists that actually have barely any custode...seems quite fluffy . Almost like taking legion list, and putting in 2x 5 veterans, and calling it a day.

But we're having fun!

[Rabidbunneh]

Hey, my lists have loads in. Well, loads for Custodes anyway. I want to avoid proxying in my 3k game, so the Jetbikes might become more boots on the ground.

[TompiQ]

Well, 3 custodians are roughly equivalent to 10 marines. ^^ But we have to be allowed our extremes as well, despite the lack of rites of war. :D

[God-Potato of Mankind]

I desperately want to take the Haeterererereron Squad for massed paragon spears, to show Castellax who the heck is boss of this Imperium. 

[Hellex_The_Thanatar]

I desperately want to take the Haeterererereron Squad for massed paragon spears, to show Castellax who the heck is boss of this Imperium.

 

...except they can't take paragon spears. Just blades.

[God-Potato of Mankind]

Blades would still work well enough! With shields, those Castellax are getting smashed.

[wildweasel]

What's unfluffy about Dreadnought shock and awe?

[God-Potato of Mankind]

What's unfluffy about Dreadnought shock and awe?

 

Nothing, he just seems to have a stick up the engine port. 

 

I mean Legion lists literally have an "all Dreadnought" list RoW for goodness sake. it's super fluffy.

 

Besides, a Custodes dreadnought is still a custodes. 

[Black Cohort]

The custodes strike me as a group that wouldn't fight fair, if they think unleashing a bunch of dreadnoughts on their foe is the best plan, then they will do it.

[DietOfLiquor]

 

 

 

 

A deep striking dread list would be quite the sight to behold. Also, if anyone tries to argue that the dreadnoughts aren't Legio Custodes units in regards to Valdors trait, counter-argue by bringing up vehicles allowed to transport dreadnoughts. Most of these are allowed to transport "a dreadnought of any type" or such, however there is absolutely nothing defining what a dreadnought is beyond the unit/model name. Hence the dreadnoughts ought to be thoroughly considered to be Legio Custodes units, since they are de facto part of the "Legio Custodes Contemptor-X Dreadnought" unit, which by the same definition rules as is applied to other dreadnoughts for transport purposes define them as Legio Custodes units.

That and legio custodes starts their name off.

 

Legio Custodes contemptor-galatus and achillus

That's exactly what I said, albeit with all the RAW lawyering required to be able to state it as true according to the rules.

 

Technically though the dreadnoughts models are named "Contemptor-Galatus Dreadnought" and "Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought" respectively, so the models themselves don't have anything defining them as Legio Custodes models. The units are definitely such though, in accordance with my above argument.

It's simpler than that. Look at their unit entry they are literally titled as Legio Custodes [name]. That is part of their designation.

That is exactly what I am saying, however people have (here and in other places) argued that Valdors trait actually only applies to units with the Legio Custodes rule. What I wrote above is a way to prove that isn't the case RAW, in case people end up having that discussion with others.

 

 

 

Again. Let me finish up what I have to say once and for all to show you how mistaken you are now that I've had a clear mind set and time to gather my thoughts to bring up the sensible argument.

 

First off. A Dreadnought in its unit entry is specifically stated as Contemptor Dreadnought, Mortis Contemptor Dreadnought, Dreadnought etc etc., for each specific dreadnought listed in the unit entry summary page.

 

Second. Let'ss look at your ruling for a dreadnought of any type. For the example I will reference two pages, first page 92 in the age of darkness army list: "...may carry Dreadnoughts of any type.."

 

So we tokenize the name of the unit entry and see dreadnought in its name, therefore it can be said that a Contemptor Dreadnought or Leviathan Dreadnought is a type of dreadnought. To further define a meaning Dreadnought by type, I refer you to page 55 under the transport capacity of a dreadclaw: "...used to transport a single Dreadnought from the follow:...". This section emphasizes what dreadnoughts are able to be taken by the transport itself.

 

Finally, to prove my point from the 30k forums. You mentioned that it doesn't mention Dreadnought Talon anywhere besides the Title of the page. False. On page 33 of the Age of Darkness Army List book, it lists Dreadnought Talon as a special rule. It goes on at the bottom of the page to describe exactly what a dreadnought talon is. 

 

So. By deduction and modus ponens, we can conclude that by unit entry, legio custodian sentinel guard, with an entry as Sentinel Guard, IS defined as a Legio Custodes unit because it is defined as such underneath the special rules. Much like that of any transport that defines its transport capacity or a dreadnought entry that defines its dreadnought talon special rule, which is needed to understand that a talon of one points to that special rule listed on its page. 

 

Using this same methodology, the unit entry for a Legio Custodes Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought is simply an Achillus Dreadnought. This means that there is a variant of a dreadnought called an Achilus. Is it a Legio Custodes to benefit from the rule? No. It does not contain a special rule or unit composition  that defines it as a Legio Custodes. So RAW it is not a Legio Custodes, therefore, cannot benefit from this rule.

 

To further emphasize, Valdor is not a Legio Custodes unit because no where on his special rules or entry defines him as a Legio Custodes. This is why, specifically stated in his Warlord Trait, that it includes him along with any unit that is Legio Custodes. Why? Because by definition he is not defined as a Legio Custodes unit. 

 

There you have it, from A to Z. Every argument you try to make it sound as a dreadnought variant or however you play it off. It's cut and dry by definition and research that you are incorrect. The dreadnought is not able to deep strike and you're cheating your opponent if you do so. I love my Custodes. But I will not cheat someone from a cut and dry, well defined ruling such as this. If you cannot see this, ask ForgeWorld to clarify this ruling or discuss it with someone other than yourself who is more experienced with a rule set to help you understand special rules and definitions within a unit entry. Good day.  

[Hellex_The_Thanatar]

Sending this off to fw. Let me known if I missed anything and maybe you all can help push for answers with me sooner than later.

 

Hello all! Having recently gotten a copy of the inferno book a few questions have emerged for the legio custodes I was hopping to have addressed.

 

 

What is the profile of the misercordia? When asked at the weekender we were told it's a cc weapon. Just want to ensure if it has specialist weapon or not.

 

Do the agamatus jetbikes replace their bolt cannons or add the additional weapons?

 

Should the agamatus ilastrus bolt cannon be replaced by lastrum bolt cannon On any place it is found?

 

Does the entire squadron of agamatus jetbike squadron upgrade their guns for same cost? Or is it on per model in unit basis? The wording states squadron.

 

What counts as a legio custodes unit for the purpose of Valdors warlord trait? Is it Only units with the legio custodes special rule? Or any unit with the name legio custodes and Valdor? (It not being specified as the legio custodes rule is causing confusion if the dreads can use his warlord trait to feel strike)

 

Do multiple Shrikes stack when it comes to forcing deep strikes mishaps?

 

Does the achillius dread count all of its attacks at strD should any one of the to-hit rolls be a 6? Or only the hits that roll with a to-hit of 6? This is quite unclear.

 

Should the legio custodes dreads have access to talons like all other dreads? (you could sell more :D)

 

Should the pallas gravattack squadron have the weapon adrathic devastator or should it be the exterminator? The points cost is significant for the upgrade and makes little sense, and seeing how the exterminator profile is not in use makes little sense.

 

What unit should have access to the Proteus las lance?

 

Should hetaeron have access to paragon spears as well as paragon blades?

 

Far be it from me to question clear rules but the sagittarum not having the ability to move and shoot heavy weapons at full ballistic skill is a huge pitfall on such an awesome unit. I don't know how I could ever justify getting them when the caladius is just better in every way.

 

Can we have a list of any lords of war the custodes can take? It seems peculiar they can take a Storm Lord but not a fellblade.

 

Anyways thanks as always. I love love love your stuff. I have been obsessively painting for weeks now!

[AlphariusOmegon108]

Hell yes Hellex, looking forward to Fw's reply

[Jarkaira]

I'll bet one marine it will be standard do whatever you want with your miniatures while we may release a FAQ later.

[Hellex_The_Thanatar]

I'll bet one marine it will be standard do whatever you want with your miniatures while we may release a FAQ later.

 

And that's fine as a patch but at least they will have the questions in hand to answer. The more people that pressure them hopefully the faster we get a proper response.

[Gorgoff]

Sending this off to fw. Let me known if I missed anything and maybe you all can help push for answers with me sooner than later.

Hello all! Having recently gotten a copy of the inferno book a few questions have emerged for the legio custodes I was hopping to have addressed.

What is the profile of the misercordia? When asked at the weekender we were told it's a cc weapon. Just want to ensure if it has specialist weapon or not.

Do the agamatus jetbikes replace their bolt cannons or add the additional weapons?

Should the agamatus ilastrus bolt cannon be replaced by lastrum bolt cannon On any place it is found?

Does the entire squadron of agamatus jetbike squadron upgrade their guns for same cost? Or is it on per model in unit basis? The wording states squadron.

What counts as a legio custodes unit for the purpose of Valdors warlord trait? Is it Only units with the legio custodes special rule? Or any unit with the name legio custodes and Valdor? (It not being specified as the legio custodes rule is causing confusion if the dreads can use his warlord trait to feel strike)

Do multiple Shrikes stack when it comes to forcing deep strikes mishaps?

Does the achillius dread count all of its attacks at strD should any one of the to-hit rolls be a 6? Or only the hits that roll with a to-hit of 6? This is quite unclear.

Should the legio custodes dreads have access to talons like all other dreads? (you could sell more :D)

Should the pallas gravattack squadron have the weapon adrathic devastator or should it be the exterminator? The points cost is significant for the upgrade and makes little sense, and seeing how the exterminator profile is not in use makes little sense.

What unit should have access to the Proteus las lance?

Should hetaeron have access to paragon spears as well as paragon blades?

Far be it from me to question clear rules but the sagittarum not having the ability to move and shoot heavy weapons at full ballistic skill is a huge pitfall on such an awesome unit. I don't know how I could ever justify getting them when the caladius is just better in every way.

Can we have a list of any lords of war the custodes can take? It seems peculiar they can take a Storm Lord but not a fellblade.

Anyways thanks as always. I love love love your stuff. I have been obsessively painting for weeks now!

I've just send it too and added that it'll be great if they don't answere ME but make a FAQ out of it.

And of course I asked how much the Flash Gordon Tank gonna be. ;)

So go on people. Send those questions to FW.

It's just copy and paste.

Do it.

[nightwrench]

 

There's no confusion with the varying Transport Capacity rules. Dreadnought only ever appears as a Unit Entry, not as a special rule as well. Any confusion of 'what is a dreadnought?' is solved by looking at varying dedicated transport options; the Legion Dreadnought, Contemptor and Leviathan can all take them as Dedicated Transports, and we see that a 'dreadnought' refers to a varied array of units that have dreadnought in the name. There's nothing else to confuse them with; there's no dreadnought special rule; there's no dreadnought special character that's missing that rule; there's no special permission for it to benefit in the same way as dreadnoughts.

 

Why would Valdor need to be specified to receiving the benefit of his own Trait then? Why have a special rule called the exact same thing? Why did they strip Legio Custodes off the Jet Bikes, but provide them with all the sub-rules when they're the only non-vehicle that natively has deep strike.

 

I'd be super pleased if it gets clarified that LC Dreads do get to deepstrike, from a fluff standpoint it makes sense imo, but I doubt that's how its going to be ruled.

Sure thing there's no confusion. But that doesn't change the fact that we're actively defining a Dreadnought unit/model as one with the word in its name. Necrons have a jump infantry unit that can take a dedicated transport, but that doen't allow them to actually board it. It has since been allowed in an official FAQ, but my point stands that just because you can take a transport doesn't mean you can actually use it. If we allow for rules to categorize based upon unit names we must do so in all cases.

 

EDIT - to answer your points about Valdor and the bikes. In the case of the former, he actually doesn't have Legio Custodes in his name. In the case of the latter there is literally no point in the way they're given all sub-rules and deep strike instead of the parent rule, however due to how sloppy that page is in general I'd chalk it up as poor editing.

 

 

I already know the answer to this question when I pose it to Adepticon's rule committee.  It will the dreadnaughts and any unit that doesn't have ​Special Rule: Legio Custode.

 

it will be argued the rule as intended is only those units that have ​Special Rule: Legio Custodes ​are to be included.  The fact Valdor does not have that specific rule but is included by name in his own warlord trait will be the reason.  The second argument is going to the LA:CAL.  Dreads are excluded from Legion Astartes rules because they do not have the special rule. But bikes and jet bikes in the LA:CAL list do.

 

In my area Adepticon rulings are typically what we follow.  It isn't one or two people there is an experienced player  base that does debate the rule.  They also will change their minds based on feedback and game play.

 

 

 

So I really really want to run a contemptor spam list.

 

 

Start some models on the board and Deep Strike others. Will be hard to deal with that many Dreads with the stats they have. Valdor and his crew do whatever you want them to. Galatus have TL Infernus incinerators and Rampage to deal with any Infantry. Achillus have their Dreadspears for the deadliest targets (with 5 WS6 attacks on the charge and Master-crafted, odds are they will get one '6' and upgrade to D!). Scoring units? Who needs Scoring units?

 

 

This unfortunately as much as I want it to be you get a 6 you get all your attacks as D.  It reads that way but again I do not think this was as intended.  Most abilities that proc on a 6 only affect the one attack not multiple.  I actually cannot think of an ability that has a proc rate were it impacts all of the attacks.

 

@DietOfLiquor

 

I didn't read your post before I replied.  I do agree with your points and you stated them more eloquently then I did.

Edited February 12, 2017 by nightwrench

[TompiQ]

-snip-

I’m sorry, but this is entirely a discussion about RAW. I don’t want to sound rude, but I don’t care at all about how Adepticon, ITC or little Billy and his gaming circle House Rules this. No matter how large or well known a tournament organizer is, unless it is GW or FW proper their rules changes are nothing but house rules. And that is entirely fine, people can play however they want. But please, don’t try to use RAI as an argument in a Raw discussion without extremely solid proof that you know the actual intention behind the rule, something tournament organizers do not. They simply FAQ the rules as they judge fit for their scene, as with any house rule.

 

Even more so for the discussion about the the Achillus’s spear. You try to argue RAI, but we have the RAW in plain text. If the RAI had been obvious the language would be like that of the Lightning Strikes rule, but it is not. You have no idea about the intention, but we have the RAW on print and that’s what goes. Want to play it differently? House rule it.

 

Again. Let me finish up what I have to say once and for all to show you how mistaken you are now that I've had a clear mind set and time to gather my thoughts to bring up the sensible argument.

 

First off. A Dreadnought in its unit entry is specifically stated as Contemptor Dreadnought, Mortis Contemptor Dreadnought, Dreadnought etc etc., for each specific dreadnought listed in the unit entry summary page.

First of all, excuse me for breaking your argument up into sub-quotes but I felt that'd be the best way to answer properly seeing as you wrote about several subjects and I felt the need to respond individually.

 

First off. A Dreadnought in its unit entry is specifically stated as Contemptor Dreadnought, Mortis Contemptor Dreadnought, Dreadnought etc etc., for each specific dreadnought listed in the unit entry summary page.

You are confusing unit entry with characteristics profile. A WH40K (as in game system) unit entry is the entirety of all the units rules, points cost, wargear and options. In the case of the HH books, a unit entry is their whole rule page(s). A unit entry also contains a characteristics profile for each model available to the unit, which in the case of a dreadnought unit is that of the dreadnought model. A standard Legion Contemptor Dreadnought, in HH, is a model type available to the unit type Contemptor Dreadnought Talon. I refer you to the chapter MODELS & UNITS in the WH40K rulebook if you want to check.

 

Second. Let'ss look at your ruling for a dreadnought of any type. For the example I will reference two pages, first page 92 in the age of darkness army list: "...may carry Dreadnoughts of any type.."

 

So we tokenize the name of the unit entry and see dreadnought in its name, therefore it can be said that a Contemptor Dreadnought or Leviathan Dreadnought is a type of dreadnought. To further define a meaning Dreadnought by type, I refer you to page 55 under the transport capacity of a dreadclaw: "...used to transport a single Dreadnought from the follow:...". This section emphasizes what dreadnoughts are able to be taken by the transport itself.

You are using the exact same process I’ve used all along, tokenizing a name. As I said above what you mean is you want to tokenize the models name as taken from its characteristics profile, and that’s fine by me. Whether you want to tokenize model name or unit name matters little to me as I am tokenizing the “Legio Custodes Unit” which cannot be anything but the name of the unit entry.

 

That a dreadclaw specifies further has no bearing on my argument. I specifically mentioned the Mastodon and Stormbird as examples which do not, meaning my logic chain has to apply or they are still disallowed to actually carry dreadnoughts.

 

Finally, to prove my point from the 30k forums. You mentioned that it doesn't mention Dreadnought Talon anywhere besides the Title of the page. False. On page 33 of the Age of Darkness Army List book, it lists Dreadnought Talon as a special rule. It goes on at the bottom of the page to describe exactly what a dreadnought talon is.

You are misquoting and misrepresenting what I said. I specifically used “Contemptor Dreadnought Talon”, not “Dreadnought Talon”. That post was entirely about how you confused the name of units with the name of models, which again is what your current counter argument is built upon. It had no relevance to anything else in the discussion and I didn’t ever try to argue about the Dreadnought Talon rule in any way. Feel free to read the post again, I’ll include it below for people who wonder what I said:

 

You are mistaking model profile entry for unit entry. The name of the model is Custodian Guard, the name of the unit is Legion Custodes Custodian Guard Squad. I refer you to the Contemptor Dreadnought Talons transport entry in the astartes list:

 

"A Contemptor Dreadnought Talon numbering a single Dreadnought may [...]"

 

Where is the only other place where Contemptor Dreadnought Talon is mentioned on the page? The title, which is what defines what the unit actually is. It is not a Legion Contemptor Unit, but a Contemptor Dreadnought Talon consisting of 1-3 Legion Contemptor Dreadnoughts. In the same way, the Legio Custodes Contemptor-Achillus/Galatus Dreadnought consists of one Contemptor-Achillus/Galatus.

 

For extra reference check the 40k rulebook where it defines profiles. It is quite clear that a profile (including the name) belongs to a model, not a unit.

 

So. By deduction and modus ponens, we can conclude that by unit entry, legio custodian sentinel guard, with an entry as Sentinel Guard, IS defined as a Legio Custodes unit because it is defined as such underneath the special rules. Much like that of any transport that defines its transport capacity or a dreadnought entry that defines its dreadnought talon special rule, which is needed to understand that a talon of one points to that special rule listed on its page.

No. Modus Ponens has no bearing if the underlying premise is wrong, which I’ve proved yours is. You are talking about the MODEL Sentinel Guard that is part of the UNIT Legio Custodes Sentinel Guard Squad. And yet again, using exactly the same tokenization we HAVE to apply to dreadnoughts in order for them to be dreadnoughts according to any rules purpose, any unit Legio Custodes is a Legio Custodes unit.

 

As a sidenote, the rule for Dreadnought Talon includes nothing that defines anything having the rule as a dreadnought but rather assumes that they are. Even if it did the problem would remain for Mortis and Deredeo Dreadnoughts which aren’t taken in talons.

 

Using this same methodology, the unit entry for a Legio Custodes Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought is simply an Achillus Dreadnought. This means that there is a variant of a dreadnought called an Achilus. Is it a Legio Custodes to benefit from the rule? No. It does not contain a special rule or unit composition that defines it as a Legio Custodes. So RAW it is not a Legio Custodes, therefore, cannot benefit from this rule.

No. The unit is and always will be a Legio Custodes Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought for all rules purposes pertaining to units. The model is a, Achillus Dreadnought. Yes, this does mean that there is a variant of a dreadnought called an Achillus. RAW however it IS part of a Legio Custodes unit (assuming it is taken in the only unit it can be taken in). If we then want to define a Legio Custodes model as one having the special rule Legio Custodes or as one being part of a Legio Custodes unit is irrelevant because the rule speaks about units in their entirety.

 

To further emphasize, Valdor is not a Legio Custodes unit because no where on his special rules or entry defines him as a Legio Custodes. This is why, specifically stated in his Warlord Trait, that it includes him along with any unit that is Legio Custodes. Why? Because by definition he is not defined as a Legio Custodes unit.

I never disputed this, Valdor is not a Legio Custodes unit by your definition or mine. It still has no relevance to my arguments seeing as I am talking about Legio Custodes units and couldn’t care less seeing as he gets the transponder anyway. Valdor is simply not relevant beyond the fact that the warlord trait is his.

 

To be honest I suspect the primary reason Valdor lacks the rule is because they did such a half-assed job editing the Talons list. There is no point at all in giving Valdor the sub-rules but not the parent rule. Same goes for the bikes. Nevertheless, this is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

There you have it, from A to Z. Every argument you try to make it sound as a dreadnought variant or however you play it off. It's cut and dry by definition and research that you are incorrect. The dreadnought is not able to deep strike and you're cheating your opponent if you do so. I love my Custodes. But I will not cheat someone from a cut and dry, well defined ruling such as this. If you cannot see this, ask ForgeWorld to clarify this ruling or discuss it with someone other than yourself who is more experienced with a rule set to help you understand special rules and definitions within a unit entry. Good day. thanks.gif sweat.gif

There I have it, based on a false premise. RAW the Dreadnoughts may deep strike as long as Valdor is the warlord. And I agree that the ruling is well defined, but clearly in the other direction. If this wasn’t the intention of the rules writer they will edit it in an FAQ or Errata, but that won’t change the fact that permission is there to deep strike dreadnoughts as we speak and there is no evidence against it being the case that they shouldn’t.

I will gladly accept an official FW ruling against my stance, RAW is overwritten by FAQs all the time. However, until an official FAQ or Errata is published RAW holds true and if people want the game to play any other way they are free to house rule it.

Edited February 12, 2017 by TompiQ

[Hellex_The_Thanatar]

And on that note....send them my rules questionair! Let's push them for clear answers!

[Sol_Invictus]

I really don't understand the confusion about this as it seems pretty simple to me.  Look at the list of units in the Talons army list (list provided by m_r_parker)

 

HQ: Legio Custodes Shield Captain

HQ: Sisters of Silence Oblivion Knight-Centura

HQ: Sisters of Silence Excruciatus Cadre

HQ: Constantin Valdor

HQ: Jenetia Krole

Elites: Legio Custodes Hetaeren Guard Squad

Elites: Legio Custodes Aquilon Terminator Squad

Elites: Legio Custodes Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought

Elites: Sisters of Silence Oblivion Knight Cadre

Troops: Legio Custodes Custodian Guard Squad

Troops: Legio Custodes Sentinel Guard Squad

Troops: Sisters of Silence Prosecutor Cadre

Troops: Sisters of Silence Vigilator Cadre

Dedicated Transport: Legio Custodes Coronus Grav-Carrier

Dedicated Transport: Sisters of Silence Kharon Pattern Acquistor

Fast Attack: Sisters of Silence Pursuer Cadre

Fast Attack: Legio Custodes Agmatus Jetbike Squadron

Fast Attack: Legio Custodes Pallas Grav-Attack Squadron

Heavy Support: Sisters of Silence Seeker Cadre

Heavy Support: Legio Custodes Sagittarum Guard Squad

Heavy Support: Legio Custodes Caladius Grav-Tank

Heavy Support: Legio Custodes Contemptor-Galatus Dreadnought

Lords of War: Warlord-Sinister Pattern Battle Psi-Titan

 

You've 4 types of units in this list:

1. Legio Custodes units

2. Sisters of Silence units

3. Warlord-Sinister Titan 

4. Named characters (Valdor and Krole)

 

Now let's look at Valdor's rule:

"any Legio Custodes unit (including Constantin Valdor himself) may be given Teleportation Transponders (see page 243) at no extra cost".

 

The list above tells us what a Legio Custodes unit is and also explains why Valdor himself needs an exception, he doesn't have "Legio Custodes" in his unit name unlike every other Legio Custodes unit in the list.

 

It would seem to me that RAW and RAI are the exact same in this case and leaves very little room for confusion. 

[TompiQ]

The other side of the argument is that a Legio Custodes unit is one with the Legio Custodes rule. To which I respond that units do not have rules, models have rules (which also may be unit wide). So the warlord trait would actually have to read "models with the Legio Custodes rule" or "units consisting entirely of models with the Legio Custodes rule" to actually have that effect. Beyond that the reasoning I used above is what proves that unit names actually can define what they are, such as dreadnoughts and hence LC units.

Edited February 12, 2017 by TompiQ

[SkimaskMohawk]

You're making up methodology for what constitutes a unit/model in terms of what appears on a Army List Entry. 

 

For example, the Achillus is referred to as Legio Custodes Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought, Achillus Dreadnought, and Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought. What is it? Do the titles under the red names count then if its the red name? Why not? 

 

Also, if you're going to be using "bad editing" as a reason why valdor is missing the LC rule, I'm for sure going to be using it as a reason for why his warlord trait doesn't say "units with e Legio Custodes special rule" like how everything in the LAADAL does.  

[TompiQ]

You're making up methodology for what constitutes a unit/model in terms of what appears on a Army List Entry. 

 

For example, the Achillus is referred to as Legio Custodes Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought, Achillus Dreadnought, and Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought. What is it? Do the titles under the red names count then if its the red name? Why not? 

 

Also, if you're going to be using "bad editing" as a reason why valdor is missing the LC rule, I'm for sure going to be using it as a reason for why his warlord trait doesn't say "units with e Legio Custodes special rule" like how everything in the LAADAL does.  

 

No, I am not. The name Achillus Dreadnought is part of the characteristics profile, which the rulebook specifically attributes to individual models. The name Legio Custodes Contemptor-Achillus Dreadnought is the title of the unit entry and thus the name of the unit. An example is yet again the Contemptor Dreadnought Talon where it clearly refers to exactly that name under its transports options, clarifying that that is actually the name of the unit. The sub-titles ought to be regarded as fluff portions of other rules are, but the title of the unit clearly fills a rules purpose.

 

I merely mentioned why I thought the rule was omitted, bad editing is not an excuse to disregard RAW. Rules as written stands no matter how poorly they are written, but as Sol_Invictus helps prove the rule isn't neccessarily badly written at all.