Codex vs Index, lost options

[greatcrusade08]

Righto, so erring on the side of caution, assume codex only.

[Ciler]

Righto, so erring on the side of caution, assume codex only.

Probably safer indeed. As much as for something like a chaplain on bike noone will question the use of the index entry because there isn't a corresponding one in the codex, the speeder has one so...

[Gen.Steiner]

I think the key takeaway is that at official GW run events the Codex is the place to get your rules from unless the unit's only rules of any kind are in an Index.

 

E.g. Korsarro Khan on Moondrakkan - Index.
Korsarro Khan on foot - Codex.

[Ciler]

So, GW has released the rules for it's grand tournament at warhammer world : https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/08/07/warhammer-40000-grand-tournament-events-pack-now-available/

 

In said rules, the following entry is of relevance to this thread :

 

Publications in use: All current and in-print Warhammer
40,000 Index books and Codexes from Games Workshop
and Forge World, unless their release falls on the weekend of
the event. We expect you to use the most current datasheets
for your models – e.g. those found in a Codex rather than
an Index if a Codex is available for your army. This means
that you may use Faction-appropriate Index datasheets that
might not appear in your Codex (such as Chaplain on Bike).

 

Thus, with the remarkable exception of the honour guard, all old models may be used. This is a GW-hosted tournament, it doesn't get much more official than that.

[Acebaur]

Any options like the auton cannon dreads and las/plas razorbacks(possibly the best loadout)

[Spinsanity]

As Acebaur pointed out, lost options remain lost... The twin-autocannon left arm is not an option in the newest edition of tge dreadnought datasheet, for example...

[Kisada]

As Acebaur pointed out, lost options remain lost... The twin-autocannon left arm is not an option in the newest edition of tge dreadnought datasheet, for example...

 

Yes but Mortis Dreadnought is a different data sheet and is in the FW index.  It allows Twin autocannon

[Ciler]

Any options like the auton cannon dreads and las/plas razorbacks(possibly the best loadout)

You are correct, the razorback slipped my mind. As for the rifleman dread, as said by kisada, the FW index provides the mortis pattern dreadnought that can equip twin autocannons. It's only one meltabomb more expensive than the traditionnal dreadnought.

[Spinsanity]

Alright, the rifleman dread is not a good example, we know...

 

So Razorbacks and Beamer techmarines are out. Anything else, actually?

[Medicinal Carrots]

Off the top of my head: Venerable Rifleman Dreads. Heavy flamer Dreads. Chapter Champion with Thunder Hammer.

[Gen.Steiner]

Heavy flamer Dreadnoughts? What? Dreadnoughts can't take heavy flamers instead of storm bolters any more?

[Acebaur]

Honor guard with anything but axes

[Medicinal Carrots]

Heavy flamer Dreadnoughts? What? Dreadnoughts can't take heavy flamers instead of storm bolters any more?

The twin heavy flamer is not in the Dreadnought Heavy Weapon list in the Codex, so you can't take twin heavy flamer, dreadnought close combat weapon, and heavy flamer using strictly the Codex.

[Ciler]

 

Heavy flamer Dreadnoughts? What? Dreadnoughts can't take heavy flamers instead of storm bolters any more?

The twin heavy flamer is not in the Dreadnought Heavy Weapon list in the Codex, so you can't take twin heavy flamer, dreadnought close combat weapon, and heavy flamer using strictly the Codex.

 

You're not talking about the same thing.

 

A regular dreadnough (as well as an ironclad) can replace the storm bolter or meltagun attached to their CCW with a single heavy flamer.

 

However, a dreadnough cannot take a twin heavy flamer as a ranged weapon. Part of the issue is that the twin heavy flamer desn't exist anymore.

[Spinsanity]

You're not talking about the same thing.

 

A regular dreadnough (as well as an ironclad) can replace the storm bolter or meltagun attached to their CCW with a single heavy flamer.

 

However, a dreadnough cannot take a twin heavy flamer as a ranged weapon. Part of the issue is that the twin heavy flamer desn't exist anymore.

 

I don't even recall ever seeing it to begin with...

 

On the other hand, doesn't Forge World's Siege Dreadnought have an option for an Inferno cannon anyway? (I don't have their Indexes...)

[Gen.Steiner]

Yeah, I never thought Dreads could take twin-linked heavy flamers. Most odd. They do get the FW Inferno Cannon option though.

[Alcyon]

Bit of a revival on this one, but I think it fits here rather than in a new thread.

 

The entry for the Standard of the Emperor Ascendant relic states that only "Company Ancient, Chapter Ancient or Primaris Ancient" can take it.

 

If you want to take a Company Ancient on a Bike, is he allowed to equip this relic due to having the keyword "Company Ancient"? Or is he prevented from doing so due to the name of his datasheet being different?

[Ciler]

Common sense says he can. People may argue that in the relic's entry the words "company ancient" are not in bold and therefore do not refer to a keyword though.

[Eddie Orlock]

Common sense says he can.

A similar interpretation is also supported by Forgeworld's marketing materials around the Relic Whirldwind Scorpius.

 

Typeface alterations may be a guide, but they've not been shown to be consistent enough to be relied upon as rules.

[Toasterfree]

[Ciler]

Well now that's MUCH clearer.

 

Prepare to see a lot of GK librarians with storm shield though !

[Eddie Orlock]

Ya know, when posting something like this, it really helps to cite a source to prove the provenance of it and dispel the thought that it could just be a fancy photoshop.

 

At some point I may talk this over with Damien, this might become codified as an OR rule.

 

I'm equally annoyed at GW for burying things like this deep in their facebook feed.

 

Ah, I'm a little less annoyed with them now. They've committed it as an addendum to the 'Designer's Commentary'.

[Gentlemanloser]

For the autarch example it says 'alongside the appropriate wargear *option*'.

 

Is the ability to use index wargear options an all or nothing afair?

 

Can i take a Codex GK librarian with ws/bs 2+, give him a nemesis weapon (not an option for index wargear) and a Storm Shield (a valid index wargear option)?

 

Or can he only have index wargear if i opt to give him a storm shield?

[Ciler]

As I understand it, it's codex wargear OR index wargear, you can't pick and mix.

 

I do wish they'd errata the GK librarian as it is a glaring oversight.

[Gentlemanloser]

In that case the GK libby would come with a nemesis staff and you would be unable to give him a SS as the codex version does not come with a storm bolter base to swap out.

 

And the index version doesn't give him the wargear option to purchase one. And he doesn't have a force staff to replace either. So both index wargear options are simply unavailable...

 

This flow chart seems to not work with codex datasheets that have different base wargear to the index version. Breaking index option choices...

 

Back to the drawing board GW. 1/10 for effort.