These are chat archives for BSData/wh40k

12th
Aug 2017
Jonnehs
@Jonnehs
Aug 12 2017 06:28
Where did that pr go with the new GK codex changes?
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 06:35
I didn't close it...I wasn't close to done...
i don't get my codex for another 11ish hours :(
@Jonnehs did you need something?
i shouldn't say not close; it needs a few point adjustments at this point, like the base for the chaplain, and a few other QoL things
Jonnehs
@Jonnehs
Aug 12 2017 07:16
Got a game later and don't want to use a pen like some sort of savage ;D
If you need a picture of the points page I can provide, got mine last night
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 07:18
would be perfect really
the warlord traits aren't super done yet but i'll get a temp hack in if this doesn't fall in line- same with relics
Jonnehs
@Jonnehs
Aug 12 2017 07:24
Imgur taking ages
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 07:27
heh
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 07:30
excellent, thank you, will get on those
Jonnehs
@Jonnehs
Aug 12 2017 07:33
Twin heavy plasma on s
Stormraven up by 26 points
Seems harsh
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 07:40
that is quite the jump :(
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 07:48
Inceptors and Dice are this weeks pre-orders? huh...
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 08:04
@Jonnehs you could grab the file direct from my repo to tide you over ;)
i sadly need sleep; be back in a few hours!
James
@skonk
Aug 12 2017 08:46
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Aug 12 2017 08:54
thanks @skonk. I can get started tonight.
James
@skonk
Aug 12 2017 09:32
:)
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Aug 12 2017 11:20
Wow, they screwed up daemonic ascension.
Since it's Add to your Army it costs points.
Penallegion
@Penallegion
Aug 12 2017 11:54
the think i am most bumed about is zerkers, Plague marines and noise marines no longer can be troops... and if you are talking about the daemonic ascension from chaos boon they are free, it says so in the description text
it says it must have same mark as model removed and does not cost any reinforcement points in matched play
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Aug 12 2017 11:58
oh i missed that
that's good
I am surprised those aren't troops
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 11:59
they still are in index, JS
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Aug 12 2017 12:27
Codex overwrites it when the options are there I thought
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:32
GW has never completely confirmed that though
that's why SM supports both Index and Codex options for changed units (honor guard, calgar, etc)
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:39
Wait wait wait
The rule has always, always been that latest publication overrules previous ones
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:40
HA!
you funny funny guy
poor deluded bastard
you weren't here for C:IA - GW ONLY
invalidates codex to codex
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:42
The only thing the Codex doesn't overrule is the wargear options on things that don't have a current model (like the rifleman dread)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:42
damn keyboard
noppe
nope*
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:43
I will lay down $100 cash that says I'm 100% correct on their intention there
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:43
they have yet to say that plainly.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:43
Geebuz
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:43
they keep dancing around it
it's just like C:IA
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:43
With C:IA they actually said you could use either
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:44
after dancing around it for a week or 2.
they're not saying you CAN'T use Index units
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:44
The only reason they're allowing things in the Indexes in after a Codex release is because of old weapon options
You must know that
You must also know they are only putting things in the Codex that have current models due to the whole bag-o-shiz with Chapterhouse Studios
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:45
both correct statements.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:46
Let me put it another way
While we aren't allowing any of the new codexes at WGC this year
For WGC X it'll be "latest Codex only", I promise
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:47
HOWEVER, (and remember, i'm with you, codex SHOULD overwrite in all instances) GW hasn't said if the unit changed drastically, you have to use the dex.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:47
OH COME ON
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:48
oh I'm perfectly ok with that approach; i think most will do the same and i'm ok with it.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:48
Double Facepalm.jpg
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:48
look, we as BS data devs have to support every legal option
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:49
Shouldn't that include a modicum of common sense on what "every legal option" is?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:50
so as of right now, as dumbshit as it is, untill GW releases a FAQ that says, yes, use only new versions of units, we have to support both versions.
i wish it did.
but then thjat's RAI vs RAW
we are strictly RAW
there is zero intent in BS
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:50
And (keep in mind I'm playing devil's advocate here) aren't we propagating the problem by allow the bullshit to continue?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:51
it's not our place.
we're not TOs.
we're Peons
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:51
So where are we getting RAW that overrules what has been written oh-so-many-times in the past?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:52
because the new edition overwrites all
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:52
I'm not a peon. I'm a data janitor. :)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:52
trust me, i've had this argument with the HH guys.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:53
But -- and again, please understand, I'm playing devil's advocate and not trying to be argumentative -- where is it written in the 8th edition rulebook that you can just use any ol' ruleset you choose?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 12:54
in that case, it was the "Named characters can't take any other wargear then what they have listed; BUT all ICs of Legion X can take wargear Y for Zpts; so Named IC joe blow is Legion X; does he have access to wargear Y?
i understand completly dude
it's not in the ruleset - but the ruleset also doesn't say that old things are invalidated (that i've seen)
so we're going off what GW says.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:56
But 40K is a permissive ruleset
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Aug 12 2017 12:57
I’m just glad I only play xenos. Can’t fuck that up.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:57
Oh?
Just wait until the space elf book drops
There will be some bullshit in there I can almost guarantee it LOL
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Aug 12 2017 12:59
I don’t touch space elf filth
Necrons sir. The original race to fuck up the galaxy
And communist fish men.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 12:59
:+1:
Respect!
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Aug 12 2017 13:00
After those are painted I move on to toads dreaming of Dinos in sigmar.
Their new allegiance is great.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 13:02
Yeah for me it's sisters/soup, BA, Tau, then daemon dinos as well
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Aug 12 2017 13:02
I also have 3 knights I like to run. Here’s hoping for troop paladins in the ik codex. Lolol
CrusherJoe @CrusherJoe looks around his lair
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:03
Hmm. Sisters. Wolves. Ultras. Knights.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Aug 12 2017 13:06
Mm wolves
I loved wolf venerable dreads
So nasty
13av front and 3++ lol
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 13:09
Sisters, talons, Inq, tau, BA (30 and 40k), knights, guard
Guard is so low on my priority list though lol
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 13:12
@CrusherJoe there was a community article about codex vs index. It was kinda conflicting even within itself, but there was a statement that said you could use index datasheets, but with updated point values for SM. Ie rifleman dreada
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:13
Right
CrusherJoe @CrusherJoe nods
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:13
Totall get that
if you have a model and it doesn't have an entry in the new Codex
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 13:14
So currently that sets a presidance, that GW hasn't committed to newest rules overwrite
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:14
.....
............
.....................................................................
We're reading the same thing, right?
It sets precedence that the rules overwrite previous rules except in the absence of new rules
If you have a unit of 'zerkers, they are in fact Khorne Berzerkers, and therefore use the latest rules in Codex: Chaos Space Marines
Like...no one is seriously arguing that isn't the case, right?
Please, please tell me that's not the case
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 13:17
"I play World Eaters, and they are troops in the index. The troop datasheet isn't in the C:CSM, there for I use the index troops version."
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:18
For fuck's sake
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 13:18
See where we are all coming from now
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:19
No the troop datasheet isn't in there, because they've changed roles
The unit entry is there
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 13:19
No, you have to understand that each datasheet is it's own entity, even if they have the same name.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:20
Doesn't matter what battlefield role they have now, the unit entry is there, and latest version of the unit entry overrules all previous one
You....you do realize how ridiculous this argument is, right?
Please tell me you do
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 13:21
We all do
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:21
Please tell me that everyone realizes that in going along with this we're doing harm to the community and the game and we're aiding and abetting the rules lawyers and making the situation worse
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 13:21
We have to
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:22
Last I checked we have free will and aren't beholden to anything but ourselves
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 13:22
Because it's RAW. We simply cannot go off RAI
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 13:22
We as data authors have agreed to always go completely RAW. Weither we agree with it it not.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 13:22
^this
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:22
But it's not RAW
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 13:22
@amis92 can probably explain it better
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:23
In fact I would put forth that they way it's being doing now is actually RAI
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 13:23
It is per that one article
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:23
And ignores literal decades of precendence
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 13:23
Yup
It does
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 13:23
We had a huge discussion about it b/c of C:SM
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:24
Okay maybe I've forgotten how to speak and read English
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 13:24
No, we agree with you joe
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:24
But at not point while I was reading that one article did I think, "Wow, I can keep on using Index datasheets for things that have new ones in the Codex"
In fact I'm pretty sure it says in that article that Codex trumps (god I hate using that word) Index, except for what amounts to wargear options that aren't present in the Codex
Last I checked battlefield role wasn't a wargear option, nor something that could be modeled
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:40
So I just summarized this conversation and booted it "upstairs" to Reece and the NOVA/BAO/ITC playtesters/TO group, asking them to please push the question to GW in hopes of getting an official statement
The text of my post:
I think this is a discussion we need to have (and hopefully Reece Richard Robbins et. al. will take to GW) because there needs to be an OFFICIAL rule on this.
With the advent of the new codexes, there are a plethora of units that aren't in there (rifleman dreads come to mind) but in what I can only assume is an appeasement move, GW has said if you have a model for it, you can use the rules in your Index if rules for it aren't in your Codex.
Sounds good, right? More options and whatnot.
...right up until the point when you realize that by not saying "Codex invalidates Index" (as it was, and as it should be) they're leaving it open to all kinds of wankery like people taking CSM Cult units as Troops (because it's in the Index). The argument goes something like this:
"I play World Eaters, and Berzerkers are Troops in Index: Chaos. Each datasheet is it's own discrete entity, even if they have the same name. The Troops battlefield role datasheet isn't in C:CSM, therefore I can use the Index: Chaos version where they have the Troops battlefield role."
What I cannot find anywhere is a definitive statement from GW saying you can't do that. The Community article about upcoming Codexes seems to say you can (though I know it wasn't what they intended). One needs to be made from an official source.
Now, as a TO I know what ruling I'll make (and it would probably involve derisive laughter followed by looking them straight in the eyes and asking, "Are you serious?") and I'll bet 99% of the TOs here agree with me. But this is something that could have a real negative impact on the community and the overall health of the game. GW needs to close this loophole and stop the rules lawyers in their tracks before this crap spreads.
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 13:47
If the echelons of the tournament scene make a difinitive ruling about this favoeing the codex, I still dont think GW will change there decision. Even though they have sersious rules desicion pull right now.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 13:59
codex.PNG
CrusherJoe @CrusherJoe killed the chat! +10 xp, +5 gp
James
@skonk
Aug 12 2017 14:08
Reply to that and ask why then is the GK codex full of converted models?
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 14:08
^this
i understood it when C:SM dropped, but now they have contradicted themselves with C:GK
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 14:38
Yeah, I've been a bit upset about it- was hoping it was just work stress. But srsly wtAf- converted chaplain and GMND?! FFS...
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 14:41
I need to paint today and my carpal tunnel is really bad this morning 😢
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 15:26
@flakpanda I get your pain, that's no fun :(
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 15:45
Erk @flakpanda that sucks. Carpal tunnel is no joke.
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 15:51
Ok, PR#1116 should be good if anyone wanted to merge it- I don't have much to do and will do it after I pickup my codex. To my knowledge all that's left at this point is double checking power level; but I'll do a full unit-by-unit QA pass later tonight.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 16:11
...
So I see the brimstone horror bullshit continues
CrusherJoe @CrusherJoe sighs
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 17:07
So....everyone go like this post I made so we can get answer
er
an answer
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 17:31
@/all ^^^
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Aug 12 2017 17:36
Although it's not exactly an official ruling, they did say on yesterday's stream that it was a deliberate change to make the Cult units Elite only in the Codex. As far as I'm concerned, that's a statement that they are no longer troops.
Obviously an official 'stop being twats, they're Elites now' would be better.
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Aug 12 2017 18:22
i just want definitive answers… The ambiguity that they are putting out is stupid
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 19:30
The collectors edition GK codex is at least printed well this time
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Aug 12 2017 19:56
@alphalas
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Aug 12 2017 20:14
Got them in mine
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Aug 12 2017 20:30
ah cool, didnt see them
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 20:38
grey knight codex update should be ready to merge!
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 20:48
Is it just my imagination or are both C:CSM and C:GK pretty....lackluster releases?
I really wanted GK to be Great Again. But 19 point dudemen... Sad!
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 20:52
CSM seem to be in a better spot than GK after this- I'm waiting for my next turn against someone playing my Tau against me and without GK being a "support" force or "warlord" force supplemented by guard, etc to get enough CP their kit just doesn't make sense right now
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 21:10
Aaaaaah, I remember the heady, halcyon days of GK 5th edition codex. Man those were good times.
CrusherJoe @CrusherJoe wipes away a nostalgic tear
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 21:12
I have some metal "Grey Knight" units (Daemonhunters) that I basically had an army of, when they got their own codex I was so ready to go! But it came with new units to paint...but I already "normal" units in the right colour scheme; 'twas very confuzzling, but these days missed
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 21:32
So I'm going to post some answers from GW that I think lay a firm case for not supporting units from the Index that are also in the Codex:
One.jpg
Two.jpg
tekton
@tekton
Aug 12 2017 21:37
The second one is kind of where the conversation started in this channel all those days (weeks?) ago. That was the precedent of the only actual, "definitive" use both sources of truth if you have the models.
Sadly, the first one is what I would call "soft language" when writing technical documentation- using the word idea instead of something more concrete opens it up for many to see it as an option, not a forcing.
I'm pretty neutral- the only major thing in there for GK is the Dreadnoughts and if you pick one is basically moves options around in the cat to make it the old datasheet, and I think I have another for the Techmarine (it might as well be different units...). BUT it would be great for the other examples people had to get the same qualifying answer that riffle dreads got!
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Aug 12 2017 21:53
Maybe I'm arguing a lost cause but it doesn't say "use whatever you want", it clearly says, "use Index until Codex, then use Codex. If model was made at one time, but no longer is, use Index if entry for it exists in Index. Note it ONLY specifies things that aren't made anymore as valid choices for using Index rules once Codex comes out, and then if (and only if) there do no exist rules for it in the Codex. Once rules are in the Codex, those are the only valid rules/datasheets for a unit.
Wow, that kickass dinner has gotten me so tired my writing has gone to crap. Sorry for the poor grammar and misspellings. Ugh.