Codex trumps rulebook....when?

[Nabterayl]

[EDIT: This is what I had written, while Tarion was busy digging up the actual cite]

Starion,

Here's a question for you: what if we just read the two books side by side?

"Codex over Rulebook" may be the inviolate way that many people play the game, but it's not persuasive absent some kind of errata-level statement by Games Workshop or an explicit statement to that effect in a rulebook. I haven't been playing the game long enough to know if there was ever such an authoritative statement, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was one of those things that the community has just accepted as inviolable since time immemorial because ... well, because the community has just accepted it as inviolable since time immemorial, and it's a reasonable approximation of what the rules actually say.

So let me ask you this: what if neither is, by default, authoritative?

Neither of the two cases you cite are literal conflicts. In the case of space marine special characters, SeattleDV8's/Jwolf's answer (i.e., p. 49 of the rulebook) doesn't depend on CoR vs. RoC. Codex: Space Marines doesn't explicitly say that you can take two named characters, after all. It only fails to place the "Unique" special rule in the right place. Page 49 doesn't depend on a named special rule at all.

Similarly, the *H codices' versions of force weapons aren't literal conflicts with page 50. The *H codices describe what force weapons chosen from those codices do, which includes "slaying outright," and page 50 says that force weapons grant an extra psychic power, which functions as described, which includes inflicting Instant Death. Read the two as equally authoritative and you end up with *H force weapons that can, if you pass a psychic test, slay en enemy outright, and can, if you pass a psychic test, inflict Instant Death. I see no reason why the *H force weapons can't essentially grant their bearers both powers.

This "side by side" interpretation would mean that the March 2009 FAQ on dedicated transports is wrong, as that answer directly conflicts with page 67 ("The only limitation"). But that's a FAQ, not an erratum.

As always, I think that player agreement is the best way to go. As a textual matter though, and if for some reason we feel the need to articulate an inviolable principle, in the absence of an authoritative statement or a really convincing proof that either CoR or RoC is necessary to make the game work, it seems to me that the most natural approach is to treat SbS as the default state of affairs.

EDIT: Ah, I see Tarion finally found the citation. Good enough for me.

[Culven]

There are a couple of references to codecies always overriding the rulebook. Even without them, as BuFFo said, the game just wouldn't work without this principle. The rulebook sets the groundrules for the game, and the codex modifies them.

[Starion]

Page 62 of the rulebook, Smoke Launchers (Yes, its a bit of an odd place to take it from, but its the one I found first )

"It is worth pointing out that some armies might use different versions of smoke launchers, which have slightly different rules. As normal, the rules in the Codex take precedence"

So, the big book acknowledges that in the example of Smoke Launchers, the codex > rulebook, as normal.

Good Sir, I bow to you superior book-scanning skills. Point conceded.

So let me ask you this: what if neither is, by default, authoritative?

Interesting way to think of it, actually. I suppose at the end of the day, it all boils down to The Most Important Rule (page 2, MRB). If both players agree to "If the psyker passes the test, the wounded model's owner gets the next round of beers in", then why shouldn't that be the rule for the game?

[Nabterayl]

Interesting way to think of it, actually. I suppose at the end of the day, it all boils down to The Most Important Rule (page 2, MRB). If both players agree to "If the psyker passes the test, the wounded model's owner gets the next round of beers in", then why shouldn't that be the rule for the game?

It should, obviously. [url=http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat210004&categoryId=600005&sect ion=&aId=3400019]As GW says[/url],

[W]e encourage you to shape the game around your needs and your taste. We firmly believe that wargaming is about two (or more!) people creating a gaming experience they are both going to enjoy.

Whenever somebody on the internet asks "what's the rule?" I prefer to mentally gloss that as asking, "What does this this piece of text say?" The rule is whatever the hell you and your opponent agree to.

[GrandmasterRay]

If anyone was looking for a direct conflict between Codex and MRB, look no further than the previously mentioned Daemonhunters codex.

MRB p. 67 says "The only limitation of a dedicated transport is that when it is deployed, it can only carry the unit it was selected with (plus any independent characters). After the game begins, it can then transport any friendly infantry unit, subject to transport capacity and other special exclusions, as explained in the unit's entry (it might not be able to transport terminators, for example)."

This next statement is NOT in the unit's entry. It is under the transports section in general.
C: DH p.30 says "Transports are always taken as an upgrade for another unit and may only transport the unit it was bought for."

Does that mean grey knights in expensive rhinos or chimeras that were bought for storm troopers that rove forward to trounce enemies while their lowly storm trooper peons hold rear objectives?

RoC = Yes
CoR = No

I believe strictly in CoR. Luckily in this situation, they cleared it up in the 40k Rulebook FAQ. According to this, the answer is universally, no.

[Nabterayl]

I was thinking about that one too.

If it weren't actually for the page 62 clause (which is still the only written statement I can find of CoR), I'd actually say that the rulebook FAQ got that one wrong. Errata I'll accept, but GW doesn't claim that their FAQ answers are rules. In light of page 62, though, I agree the FAQ is the correct resolution.

[imperialsavant]

:

Page 62 of the rulebook, Smoke Launchers (Yes, its a bit of an odd place to take it from, but its the one I found first )

"It is worth pointing out that some armies might use different versions of smoke launchers, which have slightly different rules. As normal, the rules in the Codex take precedence"

So, the big book acknowledges that in the example of Smoke Launchers, the codex > rulebook, as normal.

Yes & one example is the Black templars Rule Book which has the Smoke rule as per the Previous Rule Book & of course the Orb.

[RexScarlet]

Maybe a better question is;
Why is a 4th edition Codex not “obsolete?”
If GW is not going to “update” an “old” 4th edition Codex with a “current” and "correct" FAQ/errata for 5th edition, then why is a player allowed to use a 4th edition Codex in a 5th edition GT? (Let me dust off my Rogue Trader) When the IRS updates the tax laws/rules, people are not allowed to use the “old rules” to file their taxes.

Why so many differences in 4th edition Codices verse the 5th edition MRB and/or 5th edition Codices? Because, it is 4th edition verse 5th edition. This is why players abide by GW GT rules (what supersedes what, what Codices are allowed, FAQ, points, missions, etc.), because there are “so many” discrepancies, that the GW GT is all players have to sort it all out.

In 20 years the issues/discrepancies have never changed, just the names;
Four Graviton guns on a Dread with a jump-pack.
The Vet Sgt drops the Vortex grenade at his feet and the grenade only deviates half the distance thrown (i.e. ½ of zero=zero) and wipes out an entire deep striking Terminator squad, then the Sgt makes his Displacer-field save and lives.
The Multi-Melta Attack-Bike shoots at zero inches with a 2” template that covers the entire enemy squad and partially covers the AB, the squad is wiped-out, and the AB has to roll on the “targeting matrix” grid, which the owning/firing player gets to move the rolls, i.e. away from the AB image, etc…)

The answer is; “just do the best you can.” (Or use “the most important rule;” just make-up rules as you see fit; pew-pew, ka-boom, I just kilt all yours guys with my Vortex-Cannon)

Emperors-speed…

[Lord Inquisitor]

Codex always trumps rulebook. Plain and simple. If a DH player uses his SS Terminator with 3++ he is a cheater.

[TheKingElessar]

As said, Codex always trumps Rulebook, but only in a DIRECT contradiction. To use the Green Git's ridiculous Trolling example, that he may not even have asked rhetoricallly, the Ork Codex never overrides the rule stating the maximum or any characteristic, excepting AV and A, is always ten. Truth hurts, sometimes.