Codex vs Index, lost options

[Iron Father Ferrum]

So there's been much back and forth in several threads and sub-forums regarding the precedents of the options lost between Index Imperium 1 and leaks from Codex: Space Marines.  Examples include Honor Guard losing the ability to swap from power axes to other power weapons, Dreadnoughts losing the off-hand twin autocannon (thus negating the popular "Rifleman" variant unless one turns to the Forge World Mortis datasheet), and various HQ and Elite choices losing their ability to take bikes.  The confusion stems from two conflicting statements in the same FAQ.  The first is this post from Warhammer Community, in particular:

 

 

There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?

While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.

Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).

They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army.

 

 

The second is this statement:

 

 

Can I combine units from the index and a codex into one army?
The datasheets in the new codexes overwrite the same datasheets in the index books. You can certainly use units with updated datasheets alongside units from the index that have yet to be updated. Once a unit has been covered in the codex though, we assume you’re using the latest version.

 

 

The first statement indicates that you can utilize Index datasheets for units that don't have a Codex datasheet, such as the biker-Librarian, biker-Librarian, biker-Techmarine, and biker-Company Veterans.  It also indicates that the Rifleman Dreadnought is indeed an option since you can use its Index options rather the Codex options.

 

However, the second statement contravenes part of this.  Since "Librarian on a Bike," for example, doesn't have an over-writing datasheet in the Codex, the Index datasheet is still valid.  The second statement indicates that questions like "Kor'sarro Khan on Moondrakkan" (Moondrakkan not being included in the new Codex) and the Rifleman Dreadnought are indeed not valid because they have new Codex datasheets that "over-write" the old Index datasheets.

 

So which statement is the overriding erratum?

[Withershadow]

Seems like pointless pedantry.  If a model you used to have under the old rules is allowed by the Index, but does not appear in the Codex, you can use the Index version.  Why over-complicate it?  If it's a big issue for tournaments, ask the organizer. 

[OutlawSixActual]

There is a difference between "we assume you use the updated sheet" and "you must use the updated sheet."

 

The second only states the former, and the faq question negates the latter. Conflict resolved.

 

You simply have to understand that GW will continue balancing based on codex entries, so you could see index entries causing "bugs" down the line. Just accept that.

[Acebaur]

I believe when they say "rules" they are only talking about special rules within a characters profile and not the options they have in purchasing gear. In the same way that they said that you can use the Index for options/missing units but use the points that are in the current dex. 

[Quixus]

I believe when they say "rules" they are only talking about special rules within a characters profile and not the options they have in purchasing gear. In the same way that they said that you can use the Index for options/missing units but use the points that are in the current dex. 

The second statement only talks about units and their datasheets. Wargear options are on the datasheets. So if a unit has a new datasheet (with fewer options) you are supposed to use that datasheet. So yes as written the old options for units with new datasheets are out.

 

Luckily community posts have no power to change the rules. What would actually invalidate the old rules is a similar statement in the codex or in an erratum (not in an FAQ).

[Kisada]

 

There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?

While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.

Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).

They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army.

 

 

 

 

I believe when they say "rules" they are only talking about special rules within a characters profile and not the options they have in purchasing gear. In the same way that they said that you can use the Index for options/missing units but use the points that are in the current dex. 

The second statement only talks about units and their datasheets. Wargear options are on the datasheets. So if a unit has a new datasheet (with fewer options) you are supposed to use that datasheet. So yes as written the old options for units with new datasheets are out.

 

 

How are you completely ignoring the first FAQ quote to make such a bold statement that is totally the opposite of what an official GW FAQ has said?

[Withershadow]

Exactly, I strongly disagree with that "as-written" interpretation.

 

The Index is basically a collection of legacy models.  The way I interpret that FAQ, if you have a 7th or previous edition model that is represented in the Index, you can use that load-out as long as you use the latest point-cost.

[Kastor Krieg]

The TL;DR version is - "we expect you to use the newest datasheet" and "codex datasheets overwrite same index datasheets".

 

If the ISN'T a Codex one to ovewrite - you can use the index one. Otherwise, use the codex one. Chappie on foot? Codex is the newest. Chappie on Bike? There's none in Codex, so Index is the newest one. Dreadnought? Codex is the newest.

Boom, done.

[Kisada]

The TL;DR version is - "we expect you to use the newest datasheet" and "codex datasheets overwrite same index datasheets".

 

If the ISN'T a Codex one to ovewrite - you can use the index one. Otherwise, use the codex one. Chappie on foot? Codex is the newest. Chappie on Bike? There's none in Codex, so Index is the newest one. Dreadnought? Codex is the newest.

 

Boom, done.

 

Please read the quoted FAQ ... it specifically says you CAN use dreadnought weapons from the index.  It says to use the datasheet from the index with the newest points published for that model and its weapons.  Rifleman dread is not dead.

[Gen.Steiner]

Indeed, with the separation of points values it is now easier than ever to equip your models however you and your gaming group like.

 

In terms of what overrides what:

 

If there is no option for it in the current Codex, but there is in the relevant Index - use the Index.

 

The Indexes are there so models that are no longer made (Las/Plas Razorbacks etc) can continue to be used throughout 8th Edition.

 

What happens after 8th Edition is a whole different kettle of fish.

[Pyrotek]

Okay, but the FAQ specifically states

 

 

[...]In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, [...]

 

So, if the Dreadnought e.g. has basically the same datasheet in the codex and the index with only a couple of weapon options missing in the codex, who would ever use the codex one? It's strictly worse. Why even print it in the codex? That's only confusing.

 

 

[Kisada]

Okay, but the FAQ specifically states

 

 

[...]In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, [...]

 

So, if the Dreadnought e.g. has basically the same datasheet in the codex and the index with only a couple of weapon options missing in the codex, who would ever use the codex one? It's strictly worse. Why even print it in the codex? That's only confusing.

 

As many people have speculated it may be because the codexes reflect their current miniature line and so the options available will also reflect what they currently have.  The thought is that GW really wants to avoid another Chapterhouse type of situation where they have current rules without having current models for those rules.

 

The reason they continue to allow the index datasheets is as fan service to people who have supported them by purchasing these older models in the past or converting models to fit those older options.  

 

Just look at the backlash online about invalidating models and options even though they DIDN'T.  Now imagine the real outrage if they actually did lol

[Pyrotek]

I do understand that. Still, it seems to me that they are actually overcomplicating things especially for new players and anyone just getting the codex (because the codizes are described by GW as being the latest source and all you need to field that army) gets a bit shafted. Seems weird.

 

In any case, that thought isn't really part of the rules discussion, so however weird I find it, there isn't much more to discuss regarding that.

[Gen.Steiner]

The assumption is that new players won't know any different, and presumably once the Codexes are all out the Indexes will go OOP.

[ONDIG]

So much fuss over" official " rules ! The way I see it I dumped 125$ on the indexes And I'm good.i now have the most base rules to play any faction in the setting codexes are really just icing on the cake! As far as the codex negating the index I'm not overly concerned I'll use both and let the "competitive" players worry bout officialness. GarageHammer rules!

[Eddie Orlock]

'I don't care' as an opinion does precious little to resolve any questions pertinent to the original issue. The mandate at the B&C is for productive discussion. Posters in this thread are duly advised to remain on topic to avoid censure.

 

----------

 

Now few thoughts on the question at hand.

 

One, just how 'official' is a non-pdf posting on their blog. The official FAQ's are somewhat curated .pdf's with version numbering. I'll challenge that one of the sources of the controversy is insufficiently official, it may be more properly be viewed simply as expounding on a product announcement. Implication from the rulebook was that this would be at the discretion of event organisers. We quite likkly don't actually know what the text will be regarding datasheet supersession.

 

Two, Khan on moondrakken is arguably a separate datasheet by dint of its separate title. If we embrace that posit, their blog is misleading and the claim is based on misinterpretation. It just so happens to share a page in the index.

 

Assuming we're taking this brochure as 'official', we also need to contemplate this passage:

 

"In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets. It will also be assumed that you’re using the most up to date points for matched play, in this case, those included in the codex."

 

Essentially, they're granting official permission to homebrew when your at home, but clarifying that at their events it's only the most recent version of the datasheet. They're distinguishing between 'your games', the ones you play with your mates in your garage, and 'their games' that happen at their events on their premises with their prize support. Taking deprecated options is the modern era equivalent of the 'opponents permission' special character.

 

It's rules support for event organisers to fine tune which rules they'll allow and what they'll block. Of course, what's been allowable in an 'official event' has always been at the discretion of the organiser and you've always been able to do as you will in your garage, so there isn't really much new here.

[Withershadow]

Of course you do what you want at home, and of course organizers do what they want as well. And let's not start creating a hierarchy of GW FAQ validity (Facebook < Website post < Website PDF < missives from the gods seared on your retinas, etc).

 

The take away is that the Indeces don't just vanish and cease to exist upon a Codex release, and the only absolute requirement is to use the latest stats/point costs available, which will continuously be updated through General's Handbook style publications.

[Eddie Orlock]

... start creating a hierarchy of GW FAQ validity (Facebook < Website post < Website PDF < missives from the gods seared on your retinas, etc). ...

It already exists and you're close but you've missed the rubric. It's really a question of our confidence that it actually stems from the core design team. In practice it looks a bit like the quote, but that's only as an artifact of a bigger idea. Now, recent practice of the community team has improved with regard to not running their mouth off but we have a long and less than perfect history with them.

[Medicinal Carrots]

The only official thing that says Codex entries supersede Index entries is the Codex Q&A page. That page also says you can use Index entries for options that aren't in the Codex.

 

If you ignore the Codex Q&A, then you can use any datasheets you want.

If you follow the Codex Q&A, you can use Index datasheets that aren't in the Codex, as well as Index datasheets with options that aren't in the Codex.

So regardless of how official the Codex Q&A page is, you can use the Index only options. The only way to disallow options that aren't in the Codex is to pick and choose parts of the page to use and and parts of the same page to ignore.

[Gen.Steiner]

What Medicinal Carrots said.

It has in fact given me a reason to pick up Index Chaos and both Index Xenos, which - with the rumoured release of Necromunda and the rapid-fire release of Codexes - will make the next few months both expensive and model-poor! :P

[Medicinal Carrots]

The only official thing that says Codex entries supersede Index entries is the Codex Q&A page. That page also says you can use Index entries for options that aren't in the Codex.

 

If you ignore the Codex Q&A, then you can use any datasheets you want.

If you follow the Codex Q&A, you can use Index datasheets that aren't in the Codex, as well as Index datasheets with options that aren't in the Codex.

So regardless of how official the Codex Q&A page is, you can use the Index only options. The only way to disallow options that aren't in the Codex is to pick and choose parts of the page to use and and parts of the same page to ignore.

And to add to this slightly for those asking "If you can still use the Index options, what's the point of Codex entries overriding Index entries?":

The Codex Q&A only allows you to use Index datasheets if they don't exist in the Codex, or if they have different options from the Codex. For datasheets that are in the Codex and have the same options, you must use the Codex version.

 

Off the top of my head, this matters for the Stormraven. Index Stormraven can transport any Dreadnought. Codex Stormraven cannot transport Redemptors. Since they have the same options, per the Codex Q&A, you must use the Codex version and can't transport Redemptors. There may be other units this matters for as well, but I don't have the books with me to check them all.

[Acebaur]

I think something to consider is that the FAQ says that the rules in the codex supercede those in the index. I believe that GW does not consider the entries options as "rules" but rather those things below that like a captain granting rerolls for example

[Gen.Steiner]

Again, I think a lot of this confusion is really irrelevant - any regular gaming group can (and will) create their own rules and workarounds, pick-up-game friendlies can easily be quickly discussed beforehand, etc. The only time it becomes a serious issue is at tournaments, and tournament organisers have always been able to set their own rules and regs.

 

So.

If you want to use Index entries, Codex entries, or a mix of both, unless you're at a tournament, to borrow a phrase, just do it.

[greatcrusade08]

Sorry to resurrect this, im having trouble ascertaining where the hammer came down on this topic.

im thinking specifically about the land speeder storm weapon options, in the codex, it has no upgrades, in the index it has MM/HF/AC.

Can i 'officially' use the index weapon options?

[Eddie Orlock]

Can I 'officially' use the index weapon options?

I think the hammer didn't so much come down on this one rather so much as it got gently set aside. Borrowing someone else's phrasing of a fairly reasonable perspective:

... for those asking "If you can still use the Index options, what's the point of Codex entries overriding Index entries?":

The Codex Q&A only allows you to use Index datasheets if they don't exist in the Codex, or if they have different options from the Codex. For datasheets that are in the Codex and have the same options, you must use the Codex version. ...

... If you're at a tournament, it's the TO's call about the use of index sheet options and you'll need to inquire with them.

 

If this was a clean question with simple answers a thread on it wouldn't have lasted 23 posts in this section of the forum.

 

So, I wouldn't re-convert your Storms just yet.