AB40k Maintainers

I wanted to open a thread separate from the bug tracker to stop crowding that up with discussion.

Reiterating the simple question: Why has the decision been made to allow the bike squads to replace their bolt pistol with a chain sword in order to activate special weapons purchases and yet the Sergeants cannot do the same with their bolter and a chainsword to unlock melee and ranged list upgrades?

Here's my case:
In order for bikers to purchase something from the special weapons list, a model must replace either his melee weapon or boltgun with one of the list choices. The bikers are only equipped with bolt pistols. Prior to the 9/13 FAQ, they could not purchase anything from the special weapons list (effectively preventing them from getting melta guns, grav guns, etc.) because they did not have either a melee weapon nor a bolter and had no way to get either of them to perform the exchange.

The 9/13 FAQ gave them the ability to exchange their Bolt Pistol for a Chainsword. This has been interpreted by AB as allowing them to then purchase a special weapon (exchanging the chainsword for one of the options from the special weapons list - though I'll note that AB does not reduce the number of bolt pistols in the unit when adding the special weapons).

However for the Sergeants, there have been two or three bug reports related to the Sergeants in the Tactical and Scout squads noting that AB 1.28B does not allow them to purchase a melee or ranged weapon by exchanging their Bolter - likely because the rules for the melee or ranged weapons require a model to exchange either their bolt pistol or their melee weapon for an option on those lists.

That would be well and good except that now in order to get a combi-weapon, a sergeant must exchange their bolt pistol leaving them in the silly situation of carrying around a bolter and a combi-bolter.

I posit that this is unlikely to be FAQed by GW because the Sergeants in the Tac/Scout squads can already do the equivalent of what the Bikers were given in the 9/13 FAQ: they can exchange their bolter for a chainsword.

So let me ask again: Why can a Biker swap their bolt pistol for a chain sword and AB agrees that they can now buy a special weapon...yet for the Sergeants, they can't get a melee or ranged weapon by exchange their bolter for a chainsword thus activating the options in the list?

It's a double standard - the arguments I've read on the sergeants bug reports are not being applied to the bikers...if the arguments for the method of treating the sergeants are to be taken as true, then you should impose the same restrictions on the bikers and prevent them from buying special weapons as they don't have either a bolter or a melee weapon in their basic wargear list.

Similar to the chapter relic discussion, I had posted this comment:

Not that pictures replace RAW, but pages 134 and 135 of the new codex clearly depict images of Sergeants and Vet Sergeants with two upgraded weapons. Page 134 depicts a sgt with a grav-pistol and a power fist while page 135 depicts a veteran sgt with a storm bolter and a power axe. This would imply that a free exchange of a bolter for a chainsword would allow selection from both the ranged and melee table and would support gungagreg's comments.

I was just reading the Sept 2013 issue of White Dwarf. The issue has a battle report ("And They Shall Know No Fear") that leverages the new Codex Space Marine rules. In the batte report they use a Black Templars list that clearly impacts this issue. Crusader Squad Oswin is led by a Sword Brother with a power fist and combi-grav weapon. Sword Brother's in Crusader Squads use the same RAW language as Sgt's from more traditional squads.

Hope that helps.

This would be the first time ever that the Sgt could not have a power weapon AND a plasma pistol.

It IS strange that you fist must upgrade to chainsword (free) to then change the weapon again but it seems like the most logical way to proceed: apply changes in the order they are listed.

I can see that all the strange wording is to avoid giving a pistol and close combat weapon for free without taking away the rifle or being able to "double-up" on items in the melee or ranged list.

I think the wording is a problem due to them trying to give a "universal" gear/price list to refer to for each unit.

Rules are to tell you what you CAN do so if I can swap an item for a chainsword and I am allowed to swap a chainsword for power weapon (and pay the points) all is well.

fenrick wrote:Similar to the chapter relic discussion, I had posted this comment:

Not that pictures replace RAW, but pages 134 and 135 of the new codex clearly depict images of Sergeants and Vet Sergeants with two upgraded weapons. Page 134 depicts a sgt with a grav-pistol and a power fist while page 135 depicts a veteran sgt with a storm bolter and a power axe. This would imply that a free exchange of a bolter for a chainsword would allow selection from both the ranged and melee table and would support gungagreg's comments.

As you said. Pictures do not determine RAW. I personally have craptons of models that previously were RAw that are not now and still use those models for games.

fenrick wrote:I was just reading the Sept 2013 issue of White Dwarf. The issue has a battle report ("And They Shall Know No Fear") that leverages the new Codex Space Marine rules. In the batte report they use a Black Templars list that clearly impacts this issue. Crusader Squad Oswin is led by a Sword Brother with a power fist and combi-grav weapon. Sword Brother's in Crusader Squads use the same RAW language as Sgt's from more traditional squads.

Hope that helps.

And, as has also been said in the past, BatRep builds have notoriusly been found inaccurate as well and are not coulnted for backing up a RAW discussion.

Ok...but my question still stands, why are Bikers being allowed to follow this path of upgrading their bolt pistol to a chain sword and then gaining unlocks for special weapons and not the Sergeants??? It doesn't make sense the stance being taken by the maintenance team on this. It's the same issue for both. It boils down to - why is it not RAW to replace the Sgt bolter with a chain sword (a defined RAW melee weapon) and THEN trade it up for a combi-weapon or some other weapon???? Strict RAW allows this and you're doing it for the Bikers, why not the Sergeants????

gungagreg wrote:Ok...but my question still stands, why are Bikers being allowed to follow this path of upgrading their bolt pistol to a chain sword and then gaining unlocks for special weapons and not the Sergeants??? It doesn't make sense the stance being taken by the maintenance team on this. It's the same issue for both. It boils down to - why is it not RAW to replace the Sgt bolter with a chain sword (a defined RAW melee weapon) and THEN trade it up for a combi-weapon or some other weapon???? Strict RAW allows this and you're doing it for the Bikers, why not the Sergeants????

I do not have the SM codex. I will need to review those sections once I have a copy myself and see how the book is setup for upgrades versus designed in the datafiles at this point.

Thankyou! That's mainly what I'm asking for - if there is going to be difference in how the rules are interpreted between units I'd just like to understand why. Especially this case when, looking beyond AB40K to other parts of the community (11th company, BoLS, Dakka, and others) where the general interpretation seems to be that Sgts can get two CCW (pistol and PW for instance) AND bikes can now get two SW in the squad. I'd hate for AB to set itself apart and not have a good reason for this - I'm passionate about this topic because SM are my main army and AB is such an important tool.

jlong05
I do not have the SM codex. I will need to review those sections once I have a copy myself and see how the book is setup for upgrades versus designed in the datafiles at this point.

Thanks for stating this. The structure they have settled on is a bit nuts at first glance. If you need a specific quote just to wrap your brain around their method I would happily volunteer. We may have to get a collection going for AB40 maintainer codex purchases with advanced emergency rush put on it.

Moving this to the thread -

Comparing codexes, the Dark Angels codex uses the same phrasing as the Space Marine book for this rule, but Army Builder treats them differently.

"Ranged Weapons ...............................................
A model can replace his bolt pistol and/or Melee weapon
with one of the following:"
Page 159 in Codex: Space Marines and Page 91 in Codex: Dark Angels.

But in Army Builder, if you are Dark Angels, it allows the the Boltgun to be removed and replaced with any of the weapons while it isn't allowed in Codex: Space Marines.

So, if this needs to be FAQ'd, then the Dark Angels data file should be changed to match SM. Because when you view a sergeant under DA, it has 'replace one weapon with' in the unit options instead of replace bolt pistol/et. al. This option in Army Builder for Dark Angels more closely matches what Codex: Chaos Space Marines has for the ranged weapons option (page 91)

"Ranged Weapons ................................................ Page 65
A model can replace one weapon with
one of the following" which means you can give up any weapon for one of the ranged choices. Admittedly a different list, but the functionality matches.

I won't argue that this doesn't desperately need to be FAQ'd, but it should be programmed to work the same for Codex: Dark Angels and Codex: Space Marines as they use the same phrasing.

I spoke with several GW employees while placing an order this morning and they interpreted it the same way several of us do. You can replace the bolter with a chain sword for free and then upgrade either or both the bolt pistol and chain sword off of the melee or ranged lists. The silliness of the interpretation that a single SM model could have a bolter and a combi-weapon, but not a grav-pistol and a power weapon was not lost on them.

It is apparently a common question sent to the rules clarification email address (shocking) and will hopefully be addressed in an upcoming FAQ.

It would be nice if the AB files were configured to allow it since almost everyone I speak to in my area interprets it this way as well. But I admire the decision to try and stay as close to RAW as possible, even if I disagree.

So this isn't a bug in AB? It's the RAW that's at fault? Meaning some 90% of my sergeants are now illegal? Ouch.

jboweruk wrote:So this isn't a bug in AB? It's the RAW that's at fault? Meaning some 90% of my sergeants are now illegal? Ouch.

Owkey, I just understand it now how it actuelly works, Serges can switch out any weapon for a Chainsword, which is melee and change this one for a Ranged weapon of their choice.

I don't know how they end up using this way because now you have to change a weapon for a melee weapon on the unit entry on the serge and then go to the Wargear List to change it again for a ranged weapon.

This isn't allowed in the current C:SM so this IS a bug.

In AB you could make it simpler to simply state: "Replace Bolt Pistol or Boltgun with".

Personally I feel this is an error in the Codex as Techmarines now can take a combi-weapon together with a Boltgun, what is the point in that?

Right, just read the bit for Tac marines in my codex on P167, it reads (and I quote):

"... Sergeant or Veteran Sergeant may take items from the melee weapons and/or ranged weapons lists."

Now yes he may swap his boltgun and/or bolt pistol with a chainsword.


Now, please explain how on Earth that means in any way whatsoever he can't take a plasma pistol and power fist/weapon? Because it's pretty clear to me and still has the same options as the old codex just worded slightly differently. I fail to see how the wording though could preclude anything in those options from being taken.

may replace bolter/bolt pistol for chainsword - yep could do that in the old codex as an option but it was listed among the other options is the only difference here, in fact, if anything the old options were more exclusive than the new.
may take items from... in this case ranged/melee weapons lists. So how does the former in any way whatsoever preclude him from the remaining options? Do tell? Is it something I've missed because to me it seems clear as glass what his options are, RAW and RAI and no conflict.