These are chat archives for BSData/wh40k

31st
Oct 2017
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 00:35
BSData/wh40k#1414
updated
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 00:46
@FarseerVeraenthis not to rain on your parade, but there is a very high probability you might use the new PoC rule because of other wording in the same article. Its still clear as mud
great piece of coding though
@alphalas you seem to be our best rules lawyer along with @CrusherJoe
take a smack at this
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 00:51
"In all cases, these will then supersede the rules for that datasheet in the index book." second paragraph after the retaining options one, which becomes thorny because the 'Name' of the special rule for both autarchs is identical, just one is on-sheet as a definition, the other is a page reference but no real different.
I'm not advancing either case, but there are arguments being made both directions and I'm curious to hear your respective takes
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 00:57
"Are the rules changing?
Yes, many units’ rules in their codexes will alter from those in the indexes. Sometimes this is to better represent the miniatures and the background, sometimes to balance the game, and sometimes to better fit with the army’s new special rules in the codex itself. In all cases, these will then supersede the rules for that datasheet in the index book."
is the full paragraph text
the fact that the points changing below is almost identically worded is what makes things very wierd
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 01:03
(tbh my opinion can be summarized with "Model deprecation was a mistake" and (this image: https://rlv.zcache.com/middle_finger_salute_retro_postcard-rb9b4162638de46008f79605de2e72d89_vgbaq_8byvr_324.jpg )
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 01:04
Honestly I’d say if a rule retained name, it changed.
Because it is technically the same rule
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 02:12
the only thing that makes me think that might be the case is the "In all cases" wording after they've already made the exception
banshee mask is still fuck knows though, since it's gear, not rules or points which are the only things called out
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 02:28
Exactly - I’d say it changed too
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 03:58
So, I realize I'm late to the discussion
But it's been my understanding -- wrong though it may be -- that if you had a model with wargear options that were no longer present in the Codex, you could still use the model by paying the Index price for the no-longer-present wargear and Codex prices for everything else.
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 03:59
its actually codex costs for wargear, we got that one wrong
if there are codex costs
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 04:00
Except when the codex doesn't have the wargear present
What you said. :)
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 04:00
if there aren't its index
the issue now with autarchs is that rules with the same exact name now behave differently
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 04:01
I thought what you did was use the Codex datasheet (therefore with Codex rules) for everything except for the wargear options that were only present in the Index
This is why those asshats that were proposing using the Index versions of CSM Cult Troops datasheets as actual Troops were full of the ol' bullshit
Because the datasheet has been updated with new rules, costs, battlefield roles, etc.
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 04:12
"In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons "

followed by: "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."

then 2 paragraphs later: "Yes, many units’ rules in their codexes will alter from those in the indexes. Sometimes this is to better represent the miniatures and the background, sometimes to balance the game, and sometimes to better fit with the army’s new special rules in the codex itself. In all cases, these will then supersede the rules for that datasheet in the index book."

Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Oct 31 2017 06:47
Yeah, it's a mess... I'm not sure exactly how to handle the banshee mask changes but PoC is done so anything else will be easy :+1:
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 07:18
The only thing to ask for is GW to not be pants on head retarded in the inevitable FAQ
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 08:10
^^ No chance
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Oct 31 2017 08:14
Hehehe
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 08:18
I'm now very confused about R&H. The Index says to reference Index: Imperium 2 for things like the Russ, but they didn't FAQ Index: Imperium 2 to have the new Grinding Advance rules, only FW AM. So, should non-FW Russes now go through a chain of Index>Codex?
or do they just not get the new rules?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Oct 31 2017 08:22
Goodness knows
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 08:23
I would expect that RAI is that they should get the new rules, but once again it's a horrible mess.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Oct 31 2017 08:25
Yeah, part of me wants to just use the new rules, but I honestly don't know what they intended
Did they intend to penalise people for using non codex builds?
Seems like unlikely, but who knows...!
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 09:20
Just go with they get new rules and be done with it imo
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 09:22
that's what i did
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Oct 31 2017 10:13
wrt Leman Russ tanks, that sounds reasonable... although, I'm still not certain about Codex Aeldari
I'm going to continue to implement separate / segregated datasheets for index/codex differences until the FAQ comes out
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 10:24
Just save yourself the work Simon
It’s not worth it imo; especially if GW ever decides to say oh yeah, btw, indexes are no bueno anymore
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 11:28
Anyone else want to take a guess at #1690 before I close it?
CloverFox
@CloverFox
Oct 31 2017 11:31
looks to me he's thinking the entry is for wargear nor for dude+wargear
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 11:57
Close it
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 12:35
(again, this is what happens when I sleep)
So use the Index datasheet, but with updated rules from the Codex -- right?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 13:09
Yeah that’s what I’m thinking
Index sheet, with Codex rules and codex points (where applicable)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:28
so, I have an idea
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:29
uh oh :)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:29
@CrusherJoe and I were talking - relic availability is tied to warlord, yes?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:30
yes
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:30
as in your WL has to be from x detachment to have access to x relics for him and up to 2 other characters.
what if there's a WL entry in GST, max 1 in roster; then we link WL entries in each cat to that entry.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:31
hmm, does he actually need to be in an X detachment? Or just be an X unit?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:31
x faction, yes
sorry
from x faction to have x relics available.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:32
yes, to give to <Faction> CHARACTERS
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:33
anyway, THEN, in the relic group set hidden to true if equal to 0 selection of the faction warlord entry.
so if you don't set a AM character to WL, you don't see ANY AM relics, etc
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:34
hmm, that could work...
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:34
I'm about to test implement - I just wanted to run it past someone others then Joe before I put the work in.
@Kohato @GenWilhelm @amis92 thoughts?
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Oct 31 2017 15:36
your warlord just makes the first relic from their faction free. you can still purchase relics for other factions in your army using the relevant stratagem
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:36
it makes it slightly more complicated for those of us who have integrated weapon relics into the weapon options. We'll have to see how that works.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:37
see, as @CrusherJoe pointed out to me, (at least in AM) it specifically says your WL has to be AM to take relic.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:38
it says it in all of the Codexes.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:39
the Strat just says you may take "additional"; which as GW clarified with AoF and Simulacrum, you have to first have access to it to have an additional.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:39
yes, I was going to say that. I don't think you can take any X "relics" if you don't have an X warlord.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:40
^this.
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Oct 31 2017 15:47
in an FAQ they said it was fine to do, and i cant find any other sources saying otherwise
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:47
which FAQ
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Oct 31 2017 15:47
death guard
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:47
Linkify me.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:48
ok there we go.
@CrusherJoe I was actually right
Q: If my army is led by a Chaos Space Marines Warlord, and I have a Detachment of Death Guard, can I use the Gifts of Decay Death Guard Stratagem to include a Relic on a Death Guard Character?A: Yes. The only requirement to have access to Stratagems is that you have a Detachment of the appropriate Faction. If you have a Death Guard Detachment, you have access to their Stratagems.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:49
well, there you go. I missed that.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:51
so did i.
k so nevermind
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 15:52
Okay but that's DG
CAM specifically calls out requiring your warlord to be ASTRA MILITARUM
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Oct 31 2017 15:53
so does DG and CSM
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:54
Screen Shot 2017-10-31 at 11.54.39 AM.png
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 15:55
Okay that answer is for STRATEGEMS
....
oh wait
Fucking hell
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:55
that's just for the free one. There's nothing to stop you using the relevant stratagem to get an "extra" 1 (or 3) on top of your current 0.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:56
Screen Shot 2017-10-31 at 11.55.49 AM.png
1 (or 2)*
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 15:56
:)
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 15:56
HOWEVER
The AM Strategem specifically states "extra Hierloom of Conquest"
The key word being EXTRA
Meaning one more than you have
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:57
Screen Shot 2017-10-31 at 11.56.59 AM.png
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 15:57
Meaning if you don't have one in the first place, you can't get an extra one
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:57
points to GD strat
dg*
GW said it works
and it's the same wording.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Oct 31 2017 15:57
Someone say my name?
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 15:58
....
mother fucker
Way to fuck shit up GW
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:58
me - turns out the idea I had was completely unecessary
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Oct 31 2017 15:58
Oh.
Glad to help
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:58
because GW went and contradicted themselves lol
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Oct 31 2017 15:59
That sounds right
CrusherJoe @CrusherJoe rubs his temples.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 15:59
For fucks sake
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 15:59
@CrusherJoe and I had been going off the AoF ruling (you have to have AoF to use simulac's extra AoF ability)
but GW went and used the opposite interpretation of "additional" then that ruling with the DG FAQ
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 16:01
So you have an AM detachment and a Ultrasmurfs detachment and Bobby G is your Warlord. You get a free Marines relic, then you can use both the Marines strat and the AM strat to get moar relics.
spend 6 CP and get 5 relics!
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:01
yup
exactly.
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Oct 31 2017 16:01
dont forget your admech detachment and your GK detachment
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 16:01
I mean, if any of the marine relics were worth taking, sure LOL
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 16:01
yes, but I don't have 12 CP :(
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Oct 31 2017 16:02
then you dont have enough guardsmen :P
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:02
it gets really expensive, CP wise, but apparently totally legal
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 16:02
The guard list I'm building has 16 CP
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:02
a busy of mine made a list with 26cp
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 16:02
holy shit!!
how many points?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:02
2k
guard is really easy to spam cp
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 16:03
Well I dunno about "spam"
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:03
and have a way to farm the opponent's Strats for CP
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 16:03
To do it you must have moar dudesmen
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 16:12
I see your 26 CP and give you 30+ with 3 624pt AM Brigades + something with the leftovers :)
no, Guard
Eldar!! I'll be lucky to get a single brigade for 2000pts !
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:13
yup I saw that in my second read through lol
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 16:20
got it down to 597 per brigade, so you can get 36 CPs.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:27
600
Is the lowest you can do
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 16:27
I just built that in the new version of your files... :)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:28
3 commanders, 60 guardsmen, 3 astropaths, 3 Scout sents, and 3 tarantulas
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 16:28
Are Platoon COmmanders supposed to be restricted then? They're 1pt cheaper than Astropaths?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:29
Oh shit I overlooked them
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 16:29
otherwise, the same
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:29
Nvm you’re right 597
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 16:29
and then 2 Company commanders and 3 infantry squads for a 180pt Battalion
which leaves about 30pts for wargear.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:31
So that’s 24 cp for 2k
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Oct 31 2017 16:32
How many can you realistically use in a game though?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 16:32
Well if you’re burning 6 before the game begins...
So 3 for +2 relics, 3 for deployment modifying strats...
Also 4 per turn on reroll 1 die, 2 per turn for reroll charge...
If you’re aggressive with it you can burn through them quick
CloverFox
@CloverFox
Oct 31 2017 16:40
when you fail a roll, but need to keep the re-roll for a more important roll later on, then you pass that roll anyway...
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 17:07
hey @ilaunchbury you done that PR?
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Oct 31 2017 17:51
@ilaunchbury minimum eldar brigade is 1020
interestingly, add asurmen and it actually works as an army
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 18:37
@WindstormSCR cool - but 2 of those won’t work at 2k - so probably the most they’re pushing is 12-15 cp
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 18:42
@alphalas, do you mean, am I done? I've literally just thought of something I should look at. I'll do it later tonight.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 18:53
Yeah that’s what I was asking wether you were ready for it to be pulled yet or not
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Oct 31 2017 18:59
Sorry my pensyltucky grammar was showing
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 23:11
@alphalas, I'm done the the R&H PR now. I'd appreciate if you (or someone) could take a quick look at the new way I've done the Chaos Covenant to see if it makes sense.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Oct 31 2017 23:35
first pass of Craftworlds is up
people linked directly to the master can see what it looks like... for information, after the "fun" of doing the Autarch with different rules/profiles from INDEX to CODEX I followed @alphalas 's advice and just sacked it off... I've lazily tagged the options that died from the transition to Codex with (INDEX) so I at least have some reference if I wanna go back and really twiddle it to death...
and now it is bed time
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Oct 31 2017 23:38
If you'd put it up 10 minutes ago, I'd have checked it tonight, but now I'm in bed!
I'll give it a look over in the morning.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Oct 31 2017 23:40
Probably for the best... Just after I merged it I realised I'd not included the new powers for runes of battle... So there is definitely things to work on. There are no relics atm