These are chat archives for BSData/wh40k

28th
Sep 2016
cartag
@cartag
Sep 28 2016 00:02
Right now there are at least four different Chaos Lord entries, and I have to put checks in for each to check for things like artefacts, mounts, troop choice instead of elite, etc.
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 07:34

I have a doubt about #2481, the apocalypse book is from 2013 and the Dark Eldar codex is from 2014, shouldn't the points values in the codex overwrite those in that book?

Of for Apocalypse games that book overwrites the codexes?

(never played Apoc xD)

Or for*
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Sep 28 2016 07:38
The only precedence i know of is from the SM FB FAQ about sentinels of terra rules
i dont have the apoc book, so i cant look at it :p
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 07:39
mih, I will give it a look today at GW (thank Cegorach for the open copies), but nevertheless, the points values there should only be applied to Apoc games, right? like the Apoc formations can't be used in normal 40k

So, if it overwrites the codex it should only be in Apoc detachments, not in any other type of detach.... heh, no idea how to do that xDDD

Will give it a read and then decide what to answer there

flakpanda
@flakpanda
Sep 28 2016 07:42
i believe so, because it states they are apoc detachments, correct?
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 07:42
yep, but I have no idea if single units are btanded as Apoc units or not, it makes sense for them to be, but hey, we're talking GW here xD
branded*
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Sep 28 2016 07:44
the reaper is from the apoc book?
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 07:45

it a normal unit, but that guy says the profile is wrong cause in the Apoc book it has different gear options.

So... either the Codex overwrites that and nothing has to be done OR in Apoc games the Apoc book takes precedence and the Reaper should have a diferent profile for that detachments

it's *
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Sep 28 2016 07:47
if the apoc book changes profiles/gear for another formation or game, then it should be changed to reflect that, even though in the case the apoc book is older
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 07:48
oh wait no, I was confusing the Reaper with the Ravager, the Reaper isn't in the Codex ._.
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Sep 28 2016 07:48
so the reaper is from the apoc book?
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 07:48
then I should take a look at the Apoc book to verify what he says and change that, no discussion here
yep
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Sep 28 2016 07:49
lol
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 07:49
hehe little mistake o'mine
xD
srry for the headache xD
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Sep 28 2016 07:50
no headache. talking it out helps
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 07:50
:)
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Sep 28 2016 08:47
I had a look in the apoc book last week to verify #2481 and it uses the 5th edition style of vehicle upgrades where the points are listed on each datasheet. The report is accurate, but it's a case of does the newer codex replace its available upgrades, or do we go RAW and let it take upgrades that have no profile?
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Sep 28 2016 12:06
It's hard to say. Codexes are always the newest source and should be taken over old apoc books if the unit is the same.
If the FW/Apoc book has a unit that is unique, it should be used as written, using any upgrades it has (all of which should be in the book)
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Sep 28 2016 12:06
This message was deleted
The problem is the upgrades refer to the previous version of the codex, so some of them no longer exist.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Sep 28 2016 12:08
Are the upgrades not present in the apoc book?
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Sep 28 2016 12:08
No, they say "See Codex: Dark Eldar"
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Sep 28 2016 12:08
Ahh, alright ... that's a tough one.
I'd see if you can track them down.
And if the upgrades are compatable with 7th ed rules
add them
if not, omit
7th ed rules trump all, all the time.
If an upgrade can't be used in 7th ed ... it shouldn't be included.
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 12:10
Hmmmm but if they say "See Codex: Dark Eldar" the current valid codex should be applied, doesn't matter in any way what the old codex said
(I have yet to read the apoc book)
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Sep 28 2016 12:10
It's a bit of a gray area (what isn't with gw).
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Sep 28 2016 12:11
What about upgrades that aren't in the current version of the codex?
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 12:11
Gray Workshop
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Sep 28 2016 12:11
If they aren't in the codex, I'd omit them.
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 12:11
+1, but it's gray as 50 shades
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Sep 28 2016 12:12
Codex is the current source. If the apoc book says to see codex, and they're not there- they're not available.
Exactly. @Marina42 ... implementing older books with current sources is always hard. We try to err on the side of allow it, but in cases where upgrades no longer exist, I can't really justify using them.
Marina
@Marina42
Sep 28 2016 12:14
I will give a look to the apoc book before answering just in case, but yeah
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Sep 28 2016 12:14
That's like saying a unit in IA12 gets to use the old necron rules.
That's why we keep Dark Harvest in it's own cat file. There's no way to implement it with the current necrons codex.
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Sep 28 2016 12:15
I understand that you use the new versions of updated rules, but what if iy has the option to purchase things that haven't been updated - this is what the big issue is.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Sep 28 2016 12:16
Thats what I mean. It is given the option to purchase a non-existent thing.
The rules say look at codex: DE. codex de doen't have that upgrade.
I'd omit it. If the user wants to include it. they can manually add the point and go scour an out of date codex.
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Sep 28 2016 12:17
Hooray for Forgeworld :D
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Sep 28 2016 12:17
Exactly.
Where almost nothing is 100% compatible with 7e