Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
1 - 2 of 2 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,094 Posts
But, as GW said when asked about the differences between Codicies, if your opponent has no issues with it, then you can always use the DA 'dex, but use the updated rules for wargear from C:SM. OK, it is a pain that you will need two books, but it is certainly do-able. I've always wondered why folk who want to play DA at tournaments, but say they're weak, don't just ask the TO to allow this DA-C:SM mix. It would, seemingly, sort out all of the issues. It is a solution at least as GW-sanctioned as the FAQs.

GFP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,094 Posts
The point about the DA Termies getting the C:SM rules and making them uber-hard is a definite. But, the Community can't have it both ways. Either they are happy that they get what's in the DA book and play with that OR they can get the local players/TOs to OK the use of DA+C:SM and get something that's going to wreck the legs off many things. I mean, if the DA book is that weak, then surely adding to it is OK? And you'd still get access to all of the DA units but with updated weapons.
So, maybe this should have been the first paragraph; I'm unsure as to why the folk who find C:DA to be too weak aren't spearheading the use of C:SM and combining them. Hell, if we are going to use FAQs then this is just as 'legal' as it's GW-approved. I know that needing 2 books is a pain, but wouldn't using both give the DA the ultimately flexible army? Am I being unfair and there are a lot of tournaments out there combining the 2 books?

GFP
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
Top