Thunder hammer for index Biker Lord?

[Syrakul]

Sometimes I allow battlescribe to do the work for me when learning new codex stuff. Chaos Biker Lord has been altered to no longer be able to take a thunderhammer. As per the faq an index character can take all index or all codex gear correct? Would there be a new condition that would not allow him to take a thunder-hammer now its in the new codex?

 

Thanks

 

*Edit* just checking the index it says the biker lord can take from the melee weapons chart. In the newest codexes melee weapons chart it lists the thunderhammer. Am I forced to use only index chart then? I cannot use the updated chart? I’m guessing that is the problem. The FAQ commentary is about a codex model that has an index version taking index gear but not the other way around...

[Doom Herald]

As I understand it, the Index unit says you may take an item from the melee weapons list. The list in the most current rules has been updated to include thunderhammers. Ergo, thunderhammers are a viable choice.

[Dr_Ruminahui]

I'm not sure it works that way - for example, the index are designed to allow models that were previously legal to be fielded.  For example, you could use the index to give the commissar a power axe, as that was on the officer's weapon list in the index, but not the codex.  If the index weapon lists defaulted to the list in the codex, then you wouldn't be able to field a commissar with a power axe.

[Darnok]

One of those more interesting RAW vs. RAI issues.

 

RAW you have a point insofar as the current melee weapons list features the thunderhammer, and the original index entry references the "melee weapons" - so it should be legal to take it. On the other hand one could argue that the index can not possibly reference the codex melee weapons list - since the codex was not out at that point in time. The index list has no thunderhammer, so it is not legal to use one.

 

Then there is the RAW aspect, which is crystal clear in my opinion. The index list is meant to cover models legal up to that point, and a lord on bike having a thunderhammer is not among them.

 

I am usually leaning to the RAW side of things, and I do so in this case. My main gripe with this one is that it feels like rules lawyering to begin with: why do you think it is okay to use two iterations of rules for something that was not legal at the point when the first part of them did not allow it?

 

 

P.S.: I wonder why the thunderhammer was made an option in the first place. Other than the BSF Lord there is not a single model in the CSM range featuring one...

[Ketzer]

I even wrote to GW once with a simmilar Question (can a Lord on a Juggernaught take a Thunderhammer) but sadly I didn't get a reply.

Personally i tend to say "no - Index units have no access to the Codex melee equiptment lists."

[Charlo]

@Darnok, that model is exactly why the option has been included.

[Syrakul]

For me it was ‘hey we finally have this sweet CC weapon on lords, which lord can wield it the best?’ and up until codex 2.0/thunderhammer change, index vs codex lords were all simply different legal builds of lord, sort of forgot about the technicalities.

 

I had already half completed a bikerlord conversion when this popped up on my radar. Hence

 

I think they recognized that BSF character would be more popular as a stock Chaos Lord (easier keyword access) especially when they want to sell separately

[Darnok]

@Darnok, that model is exactly why the option has been included.

True. They could have just as easily given the model a sword, or mace or any other of the weapons available other than the hammer.

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Well, you could always use the hammer on your biker lord as power maul or power fist (depending on size).

[Doom Herald]

We'll, it might be worth considering that we are told that the Codex:CSM is supposed to still be valid if you use vigilus Ablaze and the shadowspear datasheets where applicable. Now, if we look at the Vigilus Ablaze wargear list section, it also uses the same language the CSM[iI] Codex uses: "...the units you will find on the following pages..." The CSM Codex has not been eratad to have the wargear list as written changed. This is relevant because not a single datasheet in Vigilus Ablaze uses the "Melee Weapons" lists. Despite this, we know that we can use Thunderhammers for Characters that use the Melee Weapon list. Since we are told the CSM Codex is functional with the Vigilus Ablaze book, it's not a far leap to say the updated wargear lists are updates to the lists in general. I normally would say I doubt we will see an answer to this in FAQs since Index units are the item at issue, but Bike Lords seem common enough that we might.

 

Balance-wise, it shouldn't be game breaking to give a hammer to a Bike Lord. If you are planning just to play localy you could just run it by the store/player group. If you plan to do bigger events with it, well you might add some pressure to get an official answer.

 

Dark Apostles and Havocs have a similar issue where re-vamping these rules have issues with relation to Index rules. Are default Index wargear still valid options? Can a Dark Apostle still have a Powermaul since it was his default weapon in the Index? Can the Havocs still take Bolters which were their default weapon? What about Plasma Guns, since they were a valid wargear option in the Index (replace Bolter with special weapon), even though Bolters are no longer the default weapon.

[Charlo]

 

 

@Darnok, that model is exactly why the option has been included.

True. They could have just as easily given the model a sword, or mace or any other of the weapons available other than the hammer.

So you'd rather have less options?!?

[Midnight Brotherhood]

I thought GW already answered this with the flowchart? There is no chaos lord on a bike in the codex so you have to use the index datasheet and index options for wargear.

 

The flowchart basically says if an index datasheet has an updated codex datasheet then you can still use index datasheet wargear. If there is no differing wargear then the codex datasheet supercedes the index datasheet entirely.

 

It doesn't say an index datasheet can use wargear from the codex. It's the other way around, codex datasheets can use index wargear if they had a datasheet back in the index.

 

[Doom Herald]

I thought GW already answered this with the flowchart? There is no chaos lord on a bike in the codex so you have to use the index datasheet and index options for wargear.

 

The flowchart basically says if an index datasheet has an updated codex datasheet then you can still use index datasheet wargear. If there is no differing wargear then the codex datasheet supercedes the index datasheet entirely.

 

It doesn't say an index datasheet can use wargear from the codex. It's the other way around, codex datasheets can use index wargear if they had a datasheet back in the index.

 

Yes, but we are also told that rules in the most recent publication are the most valid. The real question is if we use the most recent CSM "Melee Weapons" list, which would include thunderhammers, or if we use the less up to date Index Melee Weapons list. The Index says that a Lord on Bike can use items from the Melee Weapons list, it doesn't actually list out weapons. If the most recent CSM Melee Weapons list is considered a rules update to the previous ones, that would make Thunderhammers a valid option. The "Melee Weapons list" is seperate from the datasheet.

[Gederas]

I thought GW already answered this with the flowchart? There is no chaos lord on a bike in the codex so you have to use the index datasheet and index options for wargear.

 

The flowchart basically says if an index datasheet has an updated codex datasheet then you can still use index datasheet wargear. If there is no differing wargear then the codex datasheet supercedes the index datasheet entirely.

 

It doesn't say an index datasheet can use wargear from the codex. It's the other way around, codex datasheets can use index wargear if they had a datasheet back in the index.

Yes, but we are also told that rules in the most recent publication are the most valid. The real question is if we use the most recent CSM "Melee Weapons" list, which would include thunderhammers, or if we use the less up to date Index Melee Weapons list. The Index says that a Lord on Bike can use items from the Melee Weapons list, it doesn't actually list out weapons. If the most recent CSM Melee Weapons list is considered a rules update to the previous ones, that would make Thunderhammers a valid option. The "Melee Weapons list" is seperate from the datasheet.

Codex II Melee Weapons list is the most updated one.

 

Ergo, just put thunderhammers on the Biker Lord so he can drive-by smash.

[Doom Herald]

I could see why someone might say it's rules lawyering to say you can have the hammer, but at the same time, it feels like rules lawyering to say you can't. I say this because, you could literally copy and paste this datasheet (0 modification) into the Codex and it's mere presence there would make the argument against it void. Because of this, undeniably, the datasheet does not prevent you from using Thunderhammers. The only thing that might, would be if it's only presence being in the Index denies you access to the updated Melee Weapons List.

 

"In all future publications and official events though, it will be assumed that you’re using the most recent rules and Datasheets." ( https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/ ) This indicates a separation between updated datasheets and updated rules. The most recent datasheet is the Index. The most updated wargear list (a rule that is not a datasheet) is the Codex[iI] / Vigilus II list.

 

I've already demonstrated that the datasheet itself doesn't prevent you from taking hammers. Combined with the statement posted above, I would say we are told to use the Index datasheet, which we are using utterly unmodified, with the most recent rules, which would mean hammers added to the Melee Weapons list for CSM.

 

As for balance or fluff, a Chos Lord on Bike is just a Chaos Lord with the benefits a standard CSM would get from a Bike. The idea fluff-wise that riding any mount would prevent you from using hammers, and only hammers, is questionable. Considering the point cost for hammers, I don't see where it's a balance breaker either.

[Darnok]

 

 

@Darnok, that model is exactly why the option has been included.

True. They could have just as easily given the model a sword, or mace or any other of the weapons available other than the hammer.

So you'd rather have less options?!?

In this one case? Aye.

[Dr_Ruminahui]

It's not a case of "rather" - instead, its a case of whether the rules permit it.  Yes, I would rather my lord on steed of slaanesh could use a thunderhammer than not - but more than that, I would rather play by the rules than break them.

 

Personally, I don't find the argument that it is permitted because the weapon list doesn't form part of the data sheet unconvincing.  The weapon list is incorporated by reference - by saying "a model can choose a weapon from the weapon list" (or whatever the exact language is), the datasheet is incorporating the weapons in the referred to list.

 

Additionally, your interpretation flies in the face of the intent of the rules regarding the use of index models.  The intent is that you can use index datasheet entries, weapons and wargear when the codex rules do not permit you to field a model that was legal in previous editions.  An example of this is fielding a commissar with a power axe.  Both the codex and the index datasheets refer you to the appropriate weapon list.  The codex weapon list does not contain power axes, while the index index does.  If the codex weapon list replaces the index weapon list, then a commissar cannot ever use a power axe - as your argument cuts both ways and wipes out index weapons list options that aren't also in the codex weapon list.

[Syrakul]

So bottom line is index/codex alternation is only explicitly stated one way, and only for the intended purpose of allowing old wargear from oop models. (In my case the direction is reversed, rules and intention are both not met)

 

Until Gw faqs it or releases some nifty new Biker Character it looks like a no for the hammer. Ill probably shelve the conversion and stick with a DP in the near future.

 

The thing about Havocs is that codex datasheets supersede index so the option to change wargear would be removed in the datasheet itself so nogo on old wargear. According to the Codex faq page posted by Doom Herald

[Doom Herald]

Except, it's stated that you use updated rules. If Death to the False Emperor, for example, were to have the wording changed in future publications, would you argue that the original wording is incorporated into the Index unit's datasheet and is therefore unaffected? Maybe so, maybe wargear lists are different even though they aren't a part of the datasheet, technically.

 

I would again cite the fact that the Vigilus II Melee Weapons list is still applied to the first format CSM Codex (which we are told is still the valid Codex when incorporating these rules), despite the wording accompanying the updated lists saying that it is used for units in the following pages, none of which use the Melee Weapons list. So, if the Melee Weapons list is not valid retroactively, and the first CSM Codex is considered complete with the Vigilus II and Shadowspear datasheets (per GW), why does GW tell us we can field a Chaos Lord with Thunderhammer? The first CSM Codex Chaos Lord did not receive an erata saying that he can, nor did the Melee Weapons list in the first format codex get eratad to include Thunderhammers, yet despite this, we are told by GW that with the first Codex, Vigilus II, and Shadowspear, we have access to all the same rules As the second Codex and can field the new Thunderhammer Lord. The only way it works this way is if the lists retroactively replace eachother. This is not a conflict with the Comissar/Power Axe example since we are explicitly told if the option was possible at the time of the Index we could use it.

 

As far as claiming the weapons list incorporates those specific weapons into the profile, this would mean Vigilus II included both the Pistols and Melee Weapons lists on pg 161 for no reason since none of the listed units make use of these. Further, the "New and Updated Rules" section on pg. 160 says the datasheets, wargear, and points between pg. 162 & 177 update the CSM (2017) Codex, but the wargear lists are on pg. 161. Meaning, this rule is not what allows people using Codex to use The updated list. The new wargear list in Vigilus II DOES update the Codex form, otherwise GW royaly screwed up (possible admittedly). It is never explicitly said in any rules, but we know it does because GW says all the rules in Codex [iI] can be gathered by the Codex , Shadowspear, and Vigilus II. So, we can't argue against GW when they say that we can use the Chaos Lord with Thunderhammer model by using Codex and the two other books. The only way this is true is if the updated wargear lists affect previous rule sources for that faction. If you want to argue that the updated lists from Vigilus II updated the Codex list, despite no explicit rules saying so even though they do in practice, but that they don't apply to the Index, I guess that's your decision. I don't see the logic behind it though.

 

 

To be completely honest, I find all aspects of this issue a bit sticky. GW could use some work on more explicitly and concisely saying the things they mean to and reviewing the ramifications of revamping things a little more before they do so. Arguments both for and against feel "rules lawyer"y to me, so perhaps shelving it until there is a solid answer is best, as you say. I'm still waiting on some clarification on things from when they did the DG and TS Codexes that make problems with the Index though.

[Dr_Ruminahui]

Vigilus does more than that - at page 160 it states under "New and Update Rules" that "the datasheets, wargear and points presented in this section update those found in the 2017 edition of Codex: Chaos Space Marines or the 2018 edition of Codex: Chaos Deaemons and should be used in your games of Warhammer 40,000."  So, Vigilus does act as an eratta of the CSM I weapons lists (which are described as "Wargear lists" in Vigilus), even if it doesn't explicitly use that word.

 

Also important is that Vigilus does not day that it updates the wargear lists in the Indexes.

 

I do agree with you that GW could be clearer on this, but I think much of the problem is people forgetting the intent of the flow chart and therefore reading into it what isn't there.

[Doom Herald]

Vigilus does more than that - at page 160 it states under "New and Update Rules" that "the datasheets, wargear and points presented in this section update those found in the 2017 edition of Codex: Chaos Space Marines or the 2018 edition of Codex: Chaos Deaemons and should be used in your games of Warhammer 40,000." So, Vigilus does act as an eratta of the CSM I weapons lists (which are described as "Wargear lists" in Vigilus), even if it doesn't explicitly use that word.

 

Also important is that Vigilus does not day that it updates the wargear lists in the Indexes.

 

I do agree with you that GW could be clearer on this, but I think much of the problem is people forgetting the intent of the flow chart and therefore reading into it what isn't there.

The section that it says it updates is defined as starting on pg 162 and ending on 177. The wargear list is on page 161. That rule does not affect the wargear list. I edited my previous post as you were replying it would seem.

 

Edit:

This is the added segment.

As far as claiming the weapons list incorporates those specific weapons into the profile, this would mean Vigilus II included both the Pistols and Melee Weapons lists on pg 161 for no reason since none of the listed units make use of these. Further, the "New and Updated Rules" section on pg. 160 says the datasheets, wargear, and points between pg. 162 & 177 update the CSM (2017) Codex, but the wargear lists are on pg. 161. Meaning, this rule is not what allows people using Codex to use The updated list. The new wargear list in Vigilus II DOES update the Codex form, otherwise GW royaly screwed up (possible admittedly). It is never explicitly said in any rules, but we know it does because GW says all the rules in Codex [iI] can be gathered by the Codex , Shadowspear, and Vigilus II. So, we can't argue against GW when they say that we can use the Chaos Lord with Thunderhammer model by using Codex and the two other books. The only way this is true is if the updated wargear lists affect previous rule sources for that faction. If you want to argue that the updated lists from Vigilus II updated the Codex list, despite no explicit rules saying so even though they do in practice, but that they don't apply to the Index, I guess that's your decision. I don't see the logic behind it though.

[Dr_Ruminahui]

I find it rather a stretch to go from "Vigilus doesn't explicitly update the C:CSM wargear list" to "therefore, Vigilus updates all the CSM wargear lists."  I find it much more rational to say "GW made a typo with its explanatory test as to what the term "this section" meant.

[Doom Herald]

It's not a stretch if it does so because it is the "most recent rules" for CSM wargear lists. But you are right, it is very possible it was a typo. Editing on books has been terrible in 8th, it may be biased to say so since I am a Chaos player, but it seems especially problematic with Chaos books. It has amused me that shortly after both major CSM releases, GW posted that they were looking for new editors.

[tbone]

I wonder if there are any other models that have a similar situation as the lord. I don't have my books handy right now, but if I remember correctly the index only had 3 psychic powers. I think it would be fair to say if there is something that allows index sorcerer models (like those on a palanquin) access to the newer psychic powers, then, I'd say, it's probably likely the lord can use a thunderhammer... otherwisethat flowchart would be nuts hahah

[Doom Herald]

I wonder if there are any other models that have a similar situation as the lord. I don't have my books handy right now, but if I remember correctly the index only had 3 psychic powers. I think it would be fair to say if there is something that allows index sorcerer models (like those on a palanquin) access to the newer psychic powers, then, I'd say, it's probably likely the lord can use a thunderhammer... otherwisethat flowchart would be nuts hahah

I didn't even think about that. That's a good point though. I know at one point they had a page that did explicitly state that Index Psykers got the full discipline as presented in the Codex. They took it down though about the time they put out the Daemons Codex. It's just my suspicion, but I believe they did so because prior to the Daemons Codex, Be'lakor had access to all 6 Dark Hereticus powers due to statements on that page. When they released the Codex with Be'lakor, it only listed 3 powers in his Dark Hereticus section. By taking down the page which previously stated Be'lakor had access to the full discipline, they could circumvent too many questions and complaints. Sorry, slight tangent there, but yeah, it seems to me that if an updated psychic power list is valid, an updated weapons list should be too.