Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
There seem to be a few issues with the Rules Pack this year and we should probably seek clarification on them sooner rather than later. As far as I can see from browsing forums these are:


SPECIAL CHARACTERS

The WFB rules pack states Special Characters may be used 'from the appropriate army book'. The 40K rules pack states they may be used from the 'core army list'. This would appear to indicate that while Thorek or Kroq-Gar may be used in the WFB event, Captain Lysander, Marneus Calgar or Commander Farsight may not be used in the 40K event. Is this difference intentional?

If it is, it seems to unfairly impact on players of older codices who will not recieve updated Special Characters for a number of years (particularly Space Marines and Tau Empire).


ALTERNATIVE ARMY LISTS
The 40k rules pack states that only the main army list in a codex may be used, but that alternative army lists may be used provided they do not require opponents consent. Does the Farsight Enclave count as an alternative army list? Are the books of chaos therefore legal?

ALLIES
The 40k rules pack does not mention allies. It does state 'only options from the relevent Warhammer 40,000 codex may be used'. Does this mean Imperial armies may use Inquisitorial Allies as specified in Codex Demonhunters and Codex Witchunters?

CHAOS SPACE MARINES.
The new Chaos Codex is presently listed for release in September. Will The Grand Tournament use the forthcoming Codex Space Marines or the present Codex Space Marines (3rd printing)

TYRANIDS
Is the 'genofixed' business regarding ripper swarms a typo or hangover from the previous codex, or are they not allowed to be upgraded?

Any others?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
333 Posts
ALLIES
The 40k rules pack does not mention allies. It does state 'only options from the relevent Warhammer 40,000 codex may be used'. Does this mean Imperial armies may use Inquisitorial Allies as specified in Codex Demonhunters and Codex Witchunters?
And vice versa?

Also Dan's point elsewhere about armies being chosen from 'the main list'. So, no Chaos legions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Initially I had that - but the books of chaos don't require opponents consent, so are perfectly legal on my reading. I'll rstore it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
Is the 'genofixed' business regarding ripper swarms a typo, or are they not allowed to be upgraded?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
torgoch said:
Initially I had that - but the books of chaos don't require opponents consent, so are perfectly legal on my reading. I'll rstore it.
My issue with your reading of opponents consent lists is that I think it is a hang over from the fantasy side where there are lists that require opponents consent (snotling horde IIRC).
There has never been a list in a 40K codex that requires opponents consent AFAIK.

The various "legion" lists are not main lists but sub lists from their codex's. Just because they dont require opp's consent (which no codex list ever has) doesnt mean you can use them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
But whether its a hang over or not, at present it says you may use any list that doesn't require opponents consent - the fact the 40k doesn't have any opponents consent lists is neither here nor there is it?

If their intention is to stop the books of chaos lists then they need to re-phrase it. At present i think question 2 should clarify the situation in this regard. Are there other non-core lists still?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Death company "list" required opponents' consent. So did one of the harlequin lists that was printed in a journal (way, way back in the dawn of time). Every other list that has appeared in WD or chapter approved has not required opponents' consent, I believe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
torgoch said:
But whether its a hang over or not, at present it says you may use any list that doesn't require opponents consent - the fact the 40k doesn't have any opponents consent lists is neither here nor there is it?

If their intention is to stop the books of chaos lists then they need to re-phrase it. At present i think question 2 should clarify the situation in this regard. Are there other non-core lists still?
It doesnt say that though. What it says is:

- Only the armies listed in the ‘Selecting an Army’ section may be used
in the Grand Tournament.

SELECTING AN ARMY - Unless otherwise noted, only the main lists from the Warhammer 40,000 Codices may be used.

- Other lists included in the army books that require an opponent’s approval may not be used.


So 1st point says refer to army selection. Army selection says only the main lists from the codex's can be used.
2nd Stops you using opp's consent lists (which is pointless as the army selection bit restricts you to main lists only)

:? Best to ask me thinks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
ANSWERS from Brian re GT rules pack 15/6

These are answers Brian sent me on the GT rules pack questions submitted last week. Brian's responses are in bold

SPECIAL CHARACTERS
The WFB rules pack states Special Characters may be used 'from the appropriate army book'. The 40K rules pack states they may be used from the 'core army list'. This would appear to indicate that while Thorek or Kroq-Gar may be used in the WFB event, Captain Lysander, Marneus Calgar or Commander Farsight may not be used in the 40K event. Is this difference intentional and is this an accurate reading of the Events Team's intent?

There is nothing that restricts the use of these characters in the GT pack other than their specific special rules. As long as their special rules are follwed they can be used in the GT. Please bear in mind that the 40K Characters all specify that the army must be at least 1500pts for the character to be used. Strictly speaking this means the player must design an army of exactly 1500 pts to be able to use them in the GT.

ALTERNATIVE ARMY LISTS
The 40k rules pack states that only the main army list in a codex may be used, but also that alternative army lists may be used provided they do not require opponents consent. Does the Farsight Enclave count as an alternative army list? Are the books of chaos (Nightlords, Iron Warriors etc) therefore legal or illegal?

By the farsight enclave do you mean the army restrictions specified by the inclusion of Farsight in your army? If so, then of course it is legal as the character restrictions must be met in order to use them. The books of Chaos are part of the current Chaos Codex, so, whilst this codex is the legal codex for the GT the books of chaos are legal also.

ALLIES
The 40k rules pack does not mention allies. It does state 'only options from the relevent Warhammer 40,000 codex may be used'. Does this mean Imperial armies may use Inquisitorial Allies as specified in Codex Demonhunters and Codex Witchunters?

As long as the restrictions as stated in the relevant codex are followed then allies can be used.

CHAOS SPACE MARINES.
The new Chaos Codex is presently listed for release in September. Will The Grand Tournament use the forthcoming Codex Space Marines or the present Codex Space Marines (3rd printing)

Until the official release date is announced we can’t specify if and when new codexes will become legal. All we can say is that the normal rule of ‘one calendar month’ applies. This means that any new codex has to be released as a product in it’s own right (not in an army deal) at least one full calendar month before an event to become legal for that event.

TYRANIDS
Is the 'genofixed' business regarding ripper swarms a typo or hangover from the previous codex, or are they not allowed to be upgraded?

For some reason we keep missing this. It is a hangover and the full unit entry in the codex can be used.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
Well that motivates me less to take bikes.

Looks like I'll just take almost the same list as last year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
954 Posts
torgoch said:
ALLIES
The 40k rules pack does not mention allies. It does state 'only options from the relevent Warhammer 40,000 codex may be used'. Does this mean Imperial armies may use Inquisitorial Allies as specified in Codex Demonhunters and Codex Witchunters?

As long as the restrictions as stated in the relevant codex are followed then allies can be used.
Well there goes the neighbourhood! Marine players with the Tarot/Heresius combo as standard!

Yipee

MarzM :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
At least they can't take a Calidus aswell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
At least they can't take a Calidus aswell.
Surely they can? It states that you need an inquisitor in the army to take an assassin so surely as long you also take an inquisitor as an ally you are allowed to take an assassin as well?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
137 Posts
Sure they can take a callidus - just take an inquisitor lord with 3 mystics or whatever's cheap (another scoring unit) then take a callidus. At least that's what i'd do if i really wanted to annoy people.

Torgoch, don't think there's any possible way to take two callidus' in a SM list. You need to take two allied HQs to get the two callidus i think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
I'm also pretty sure the Officio Assasinorum unit entry that 'Note no more than one Officio Assassinorum Operative can be used in any force for any reason.'

I'll have to look into it, I may take Inquisiton allies...well, just because I have them and I can.

Given the choice between me not being able to take them, and every power gamer able to cram a Callidus into their Imperial list- I'd have to do without.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
okay, one more for you with the relevent codices. Could you take a hereticus elite inquisitor and demonhunters elite assasin?
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top