Undead legion question

[LordTobiothan]

@LordTobiothan Earlier you told me to replace TK or VC army with LoU everywhere. Now you are directly contradicting that. Again: It describes itself as "the Undead Legions Army List", and tells you to refer to the armybooks.

As Najo points out people are over complicating this.

The replace was an option that was entirely separate from the second bullet point. Either everything is allowed, shared items, corpse cart in a unit, etc. or nothing is. The UL book never says anywhere that tk units count as being from a tomb king army or a vampire counts unit counts as being from a vampire counts army.

As Najo points out, that is what HE believes is intended. Last I checked, as smart as he is he cant read minds. Nor has he ever met the book writer.

 

[GDD]

@LordTobiothan The units come from those books, and are being listed as such on page 20. For the umpteenth time it tells you to use the options from those books.

It is a combined army list. I am playing TK and VC in a combined army list, with it's own special rules. That is a equally valid RAW way of looking at it.

Your need to define it as it's own separate army, despite it not having any unit rules (besides the big guys), and that it keeps referring for you to use the armybooks is over complicating it. QUOTE: If they intended for magic items to be disregarded or combined, or vampires to join chariots or royals to not be able to, they would have stated it in a rule or in a designer note like they did about undead and the general/ heriophant being slain.

This is why I described these discussions as being stupid. The poorly written RAW is almost bait for having a discussion about the English language. If you define it as a combined army list my argument stands. If you for some reason need to look at it as a separate army (despite the above) it becomes a sh*tfest.

Both descriptions work. It's just that one of them seems to be RAI(subjective, yes.), and the other seems to imply a fear of unbalance. To use your comment: There is no support for your interpretation aside from how you think it should work.

We will see what the future holds for the rumors of combined armies and such. That will hopefully bring some agreement to this.

 

[LordTobiothan]

@LordTobiothan The units come from those books, and are being listed as such on page 20. For the umpteenth time it tells you to use the options from those books.

It is a combined army list. I am playing TK and VC in a combined army list, with it's own special rules. That is a equally valid RAW way of looking at it.

Your need to define it as it's own separate army, despite it not having any unit rules (besides the big guys), and that it keeps referring for you to use the armybooks is over complicating it. QUOTE: If they intended for magic items to be disregarded or combined, or vampires to join chariots or royals to not be able to, they would have stated it in a rule or in a designer note like they did about undead and the general/ heriophant being slain.

This is why I described these discussions as being stupid. The poorly written RAW is almost bait for having a discussion about the English language. If you define it as a combined army list my argument stands. If you for some reason need to look at it as a separate army (despite the above) it becomes a sh*tfest.

Both descriptions work. It's just that one of them seems to be RAI(subjective, yes.), and the other seems to imply a fear of unbalance. To use your comment: There is no support for your interpretation aside from how you think it should work.

We will see what the future holds for the rumors of combined armies and such. That will hopefully bring some agreement to this.

Except undead legions is its own army, that is why you cant field mortarch mannfred in a vampire counts list, he is not part of the vc army or the tomb kings army so he is either unplayable, or part of a separate armies choices.

And also, no where in the undead legions book does it say to use the options from either book. It says to use the units and THEIR options. No unit in either book permits the use of the items.

 

[estwheadn]

@LordTobiothan

None of the points you brought up actually support your claim either. The characters from the vampire counts army book have access to VC items on the merit of their rules being in the same book. NOW, had the End Times book included the profiles for the generic characters, THEN they would have no access to those magic items. BUT they didn't, so the characters have all of the options available to them that they would have in a regular VC list because their rules are from the same book.

 

[GDD]

@LordTobiothan Good morning. Displeased to see there is a need for more discussion.

None of what you just wrote disproves my post, nor does it make your argument any better. Argument still stands.

From the online version.
"

Undead Legions Army List

An Undead Legions army can include any of the units listed below. With the exception of
those units and characters detailed later in this section (denoted by ´N´in brackets), you must
use the unit profiles, point costs, equipment, options and special rules found in either
Warhammer: Vampire Counts (denoted by ´VC´) or Warhammer: Tomb Kings (denoted by ´TK´).
Together, these army list entries should be used alongside the ´Choosing an Army´section of
the Warhammer rulebook and the information on the net page to pick a force ready for battle.

"

Look. It says either as well. My first quote was flawed though.

I fail too see where you get your argument from. Seriously read this. It's TK & VC with updated army wide special rules. The Vampire Lord still comes from the Vampire Counts army book, and uses his unit profiles, point costs, equipment, options and special rules. It's just your need to insist the army is completely different, despite all this. It does not tell you to do that anywhere, it tells you the opposite.

EDIT: If we still can't agree then fu*k it. I'm done here.

 

[najo]

Except undead legions is its own army, that is why you cant field mortarch mannfred in a vampire counts list, he is not part of the vc army or the tomb kings army so he is either unplayable, or part of a separate armies choices.

And also, no where in the undead legions book does it say to use the options from either book. It says to use the units and THEIR options. No unit in either book permits the use of the items.

LordTobiothan, there seems to be a certain intensity in your statements towards me. I politely ask you to take that down a notch.

I'm honestly baffled by this debate. I do not understand how some of the players are coming to the conclusion they are over the army books and how they are used with the end times books. Please just go through this with me for thoroughness.

1) pg 18 of Nagash has undead legionlegion army special rules. It says the army special rules of VC and TK are not used. This is bold print and Army Special Rules capitalized. It is referring to VC p26 and TK p28, both labeled Army Special Rules.
2) this is further reinforced by everything discussed on pg18-19 of Nagash is the rules from those two pages in both books consolidated and cleaned up. They then make note of the rules they intentionally left out and why. There is no mention of anything else. It is obvious that the Army Special Rules is a specific heading to a section being replaced in those army books when using the Undead Legion.
3) p.20 then states that UL can use the units listed on that page. That those denoted N are detailed in the Nagash book and that others are found in their army book. It states that you must use unit profiles, points costs, equipment, options and special rules found in either Warhammer: Vampire Counts (denoted VC) or Waehammer : Tomb Kings (denoted TK). It's then followed by a list of those units, each one listed with a N, VC or TK.

N are simply used as found in the Nagash book. VC are used as found in the VC book. TK as in TK book. That is what these rules say. It says nothing about ignoring options, combining magic items, ignoring magic items, or anything else. It says units must use the stuff in their book they are denoted as.

So you go into the Vampire Counts to build a vampire lord. He buys magic levels, options from his list, vampiric powers from his book, why would magic items be disallowed? If it's only because it says these items are available to a vampire counts army, well, pg. 20 says the units use the options and special rules from their army book. That is an option from their army book. Same thing with tomb kings and tomb princes joining chariot units.

They put the TK and VC next to the unit name to be clear which book the unit is from. It has all the options it has from its army book. It functions the same. Why would they allow everything from the army book (dead and altered special characters aside) and cut out just the magic items or royals joining chariots. That doesnt make sense. But even further, the way we are saying if actually backed up by the wording on pg. 20. Meanwhile, there is no wording supporting combining the magic items or negating them. Go even on more step, once most the armies have combined army lists, does that mean all the army magic items cease to be? Do beastmen, chaos warriors and daemons lose all their army book magic items? When elves are combined that mean the same for them? Why allow all the options to be united in the end times, but leave the magic items out and don't even make mention of that at all, any where.

P.20 is clear enough to allow the magic items. It says units use the options from their army book. Period. Those are options from their army book. No where doors it say they don't use them. No where does it say combine them, in fact it says not to. And, it does state that vampire counts armies can use morghasts. So they did tell us when an unit option from the end times book can be taken in another army.

So, when I read the rulebook it's very clear to me. I don't get where you guys are getting this idea that undead legion doesn't use the army book magic items or chariot rule, that GW dumped those things out (without telling us) to "balance" the combined armies. I don't see how this is my opinion of a vague rule. Please show me what I am missing.

 

[najo]

Here is one more food for thought regarding the train of thought that undead legion isn't a vampire counts or tomb kings army and it doesn't use the magic items etc.

Are the Vampire Counts and Tomb Kings FAQs ignored for Undead Legion? Because by this logic they would be. Technically when they released the Nagash FAQ they would have included all the FAQ from those to armies FAQs, right?

But they didn't. Those errata and FAQs all still apply. The units and their options from VC and TK are meant to function the same in their own armies and in undead legions.

 

[LordTobiothan]

LordTobiothan, there seems to be a certain intensity in your statements towards me. I politely ask you to take that down a notch.

I'm honestly baffled by this debate. I do not understand how some of the players are coming to the conclusion they are over the army books and how they are used with the end times books. Please just go through this with me for thoroughness.

1) pg 18 of Nagash has undead legionlegion army special rules. It says the army special rules of VC and TK are not used. This is bold print and Army Special Rules capitalized. It is referring to VC p26 and TK p28, both labeled Army Special Rules.
2) this is further reinforced by everything discussed on pg18-19 of Nagash is the rules from those two pages in both books consolidated and cleaned up. They then make note of the rules they intentionally left out and why. There is no mention of anything else. It is obvious that the Army Special Rules is a specific heading to a section being replaced in those army books when using the Undead Legion.
3) p.20 then states that UL can use the units listed on that page. That those denoted N are detailed in the Nagash book and that others are found in their army book. It states that you must use unit profiles, points costs, equipment, options and special rules found in either Warhammer: Vampire Counts (denoted VC) or Waehammer : Tomb Kings (denoted TK). It's then followed by a list of those units, each one listed with a N, VC or TK.

N are simply used as found in the Nagash book. VC are used as found in the VC book. TK as in TK book. That is what these rules say. It says nothing about ignoring options, combining magic items, ignoring magic items, or anything else. It says units must use the stuff in their book they are denoted as.

So you go into the Vampire Counts to build a vampire lord. He buys magic levels, options from his list, vampiric powers from his book, why would magic items be disallowed? If it's only because it says these items are available to a vampire counts army, well, pg. 20 says the units use the options and special rules from their army book. That is an option from their army book. Same thing with tomb kings and tomb princes joining chariot units.

They put the TK and VC next to the unit name to be clear which book the unit is from. It has all the options it has from its army book. It functions the same. Why would they allow everything from the army book (dead and altered special characters aside) and cut out just the magic items or royals joining chariots. That doesnt make sense. But even further, the way we are saying if actually backed up by the wording on pg. 20. Meanwhile, there is no wording supporting combining the magic items or negating them. Go even on more step, once most the armies have combined army lists, does that mean all the army magic items cease to be? Do beastmen, chaos warriors and daemons lose all their army book magic items? When elves are combined that mean the same for them? Why allow all the options to be united in the end times, but leave the magic items out and don't even make mention of that at all, any where.

P.20 is clear enough to allow the magic items. It says units use the options from their army book. Period. Those are options from their army book. No where doors it say they don't use them. No where does it say combine them, in fact it says not to. And, it does state that vampire counts armies can use morghasts. So they did tell us when an unit option from the end times book can be taken in another army.

So, when I read the rulebook it's very clear to me. I don't get where you guys are getting this idea that undead legion doesn't use the army book magic items or chariot rule, that GW dumped those things out (without telling us) to "balance" the combined armies. I don't see how this is my opinion of a vague rule. Please show me what I am missing.

Okay first, being a mod does not mean you can decide I'm the one bringing animosity to the thread just because you disagree with me. Especially when others in the thread are being noticeably verbally aggressive towards me and don't receive a warning of any kind. None of my posts have had any intensity outside of emphasizing key points I was making through the use of bold or caps, which is natural in a discussion. I in fact hold a degree of respect toward most of your posts, but accusation for the sake of argument is not setting a good example.

Back to actual discussion. The key point you are either not reading or you add it in naturally while reading is that it says nothing about using the options from there book. It only says to use the unit and there options, details on unit X's options are in book y, and none of there options include the magic items in the book.

It isn't saying make a vampire army and a tomb kings army and set them next to each other, it states the units you may use for this entirely separate army and refers you to another armies book to get the units stats and options.

As far as faq goes, anything pertaining to the units is officially an addendum to their rules so those would still apply, anything not about a unit is out.

 

[LordTobiothan]

@LordTobiothan

None of the points you brought up actually support your claim either. The characters from the vampire counts army book have access to VC items on the merit of their rules being in the same book. NOW, had the End Times book included the profiles for the generic characters, THEN they would have no access to those magic items. BUT they didn't, so the characters have all of the options available to them that they would have in a regular VC list because their rules are from the same book.

by that logic you can use karl Franz ascendant in a chaos legion army because he is in their book.

@LordTobiothan Good morning. Displeased to see there is a need for more discussion.

None of what you just wrote disproves my post, nor does it make your argument any better. Argument still stands.

From the online version.
"

Undead Legions Army List

An Undead Legions army can include any of the units listed below. With the exception of
those units and characters detailed later in this section (denoted by ´N´in brackets), you must
use the unit profiles, point costs, equipment, options and special rules found in either
Warhammer: Vampire Counts (denoted by ´VC´) or Warhammer: Tomb Kings (denoted by ´TK´).
Together, these army list entries should be used alongside the ´Choosing an Army´section of
the Warhammer rulebook and the information on the net page to pick a force ready for battle.

"

Look. It says either as well. My first quote was flawed though.

I fail too see where you get your argument from. Seriously read this. It's TK & VC with updated army wide special rules. The Vampire Lord still comes from the Vampire Counts army book, and uses his unit profiles, point costs, equipment, options and special rules. It's just your need to insist the army is completely different, despite all this. It does not tell you to do that anywhere, it tells you the opposite.

EDIT: If we still can't agree then fu*k it. I'm done here.

The book a units rules come from have no bearing. Note my response to the above quote.

And please don't tell me what you think I need to do.

 

[najo]

Okay first, being a mod does not mean you can decide I'm the one bringing animosity to the thread just because you disagree with me. Especially when others in the thread are being noticeably verbally aggressive towards me and don't receive a warning of any kind. None of my posts have had any intensity outside of emphasizing key points I was making through the use of bold or caps, which is natural in a discussion. I in fact hold a degree of respect toward most of your posts, but accusation for the sake of argument is not setting a good example.

I'm specifically referring to your statements on me not understanding their intentions and I can't read their minds. Those two comments seemed to a lack of respect tone directed at me because they disregard my points as being worthless. I only asked you to please take it down a notch. I didn't give you an official warning not have I've seen the need to warn anyone in this thread yet. My moderator position has nothing to do with discussion and I haven't brought it into this discussion nor would I do that. That is assumption your making about me and it's incorrect. I was only asking you to not be so conflictive with me. This short of happened in another thread with us and I really am not trying to be on the wrong foot with you. But when I post about this subject you make statements that are inconsiderate of how I could take them. That's all my comment is about.

As for this whole army rules things. All of us want to be in harmony as a community of warhammer players. Agreeing on the rules is important to sharing armies, giving advice, making rulings etc. The majority of the community sees the end times as I laid it out. People I know who work at GW play it that way. When I brought this upa few weeks ago and explained the RAW argument to an associate of mine in trade sales, his exact words were "Thank him for saving you hours of time, and politely decline the game as he be no fun to play with. People like that just want to find loop holes to argue about the rules." That's how GWs own employees see this whole debate. One side getting it and the other nit picking over a very small RAW technicality that breaks away from the clear RAI, has no text to support it and causes the units to function differently for no stated reason from when they are taken in their origin army.

See, although the magic item thing is not specifically spelled out, it is implied and can be defended by the term options in p.20. Whereas the position of magic items being removed isn't spelled out nor implied at all. Combining surely isn't implied or stated, in fact it states to use the army book, not stick them together.

So, on the basis that we have to create text and extrapolate to arrive at this extreme RAW position that works counter to the concept of allowing magic items and tomb kings joining chariot units, and all we have to do for the likely RAI side is point to written text on pg. 20 that states units get their options from their army book. And that text doesn't place a limit on that, which means it could include the armies magic items, and some how your argument interpretes this paragraph as saying options but no options listed in other parts of the book, ie magic items.

This debate has no where to go, there is no basis other than being contrary at this point in time. It only creates frustrating in threads and at the game table. My advice to players clinging to this is let it go for now. Vampire and tomb kings magic items don't break the army.

If the FAQ gets updated and sides with your position, fine. Let's be adults about it, shake hands or bro hug it out and move on. But as of right now, there is really no basis to support these conclusions and it's causing strife to players just trying to have fun at their tabl with their friends.

Besides, why would you want undead legions to not have the cool flavorful undead magic items or to keep tomb kings and tomb princes from joining their chariot units. You wouldn't, and most likely GW wouldn't either because it wouldn't be fun and people would be less likely to play undead legions. So, logic and the text in the book favors what I've laid out, as does GWs track record that I've followed for 25 years.

So, please take my words to heart. I'm not using my mod position nor having anything more than a debate on the rules. If you had no hostility toward me, please be mindful of how you may come off and my apologies for misreading you.

In the meantime, let's get back to Warhammer!

 

[LordTobiothan]

I'm specifically referring to your statements on me not understanding their intentions and I can't read their minds. Those two comments seemed to a lack of respect tone directed at me because they disregard my points as being worthless. I only asked you to please take it down a notch. I didn't give you an official warning not have I've seen the need to warn anyone in this thread yet. My moderator position has nothing to do with discussion and I haven't brought it into this discussion nor would I do that. That is assumption your making about me and it's incorrect. I was only asking you to not be so conflictive with me. This short of happened in another thread with us and I really am not trying to be on the wrong foot with you. But when I post about this subject you make statements that are inconsiderate of how I could take them. That's all my comment is about.

As for this whole army rules things. All of us want to be in harmony as a community of warhammer players. Agreeing on the rules is important to sharing armies, giving advice, making rulings etc. The majority of the community sees the end times as I laid it out. People I know who work at GW play it that way. When I brought this upa few weeks ago and explained the RAW argument to an associate of mine in trade sales, his exact words were "Thank him for saving you hours of time, and politely decline the game as he be no fun to play with. People like that just want to find loop holes to argue about the rules." That's how GWs own employees see this whole debate. One side getting it and the other nit picking over a very small RAW technicality that breaks away from the clear RAI, has no text to support it and causes the units to function differently for no stated reason from when they are taken in their origin army.

See, although the magic item thing is not specifically spelled out, it is implied and can be defended by the term options in p.20. Whereas the position of magic items being removed isn't spelled out nor implied at all. Combining surely isn't implied or stated, in fact it states to use the army book, not stick them together.

So, on the basis that we have to create text and extrapolate to arrive at this extreme RAW position that works counter to the concept of allowing magic items and tomb kings joining chariot units, and all we have to do for the likely RAI side is point to written text on pg. 20 that states units get their options from their army book. And that text doesn't place a limit on that, which means it could include the armies magic items, and some how your argument interpretes this paragraph as saying options but no options listed in other parts of the book, ie magic items.

This debate has no where to go, there is no basis other than being contrary at this point in time. It only creates frustrating in threads and at the game table. My advice to players clinging to this is let it go for now. Vampire and tomb kings magic items don't break the army.

If the FAQ gets updated and sides with your position, fine. Let's be adults about it, shake hands or bro hug it out and move on. But as of right now, there is really no basis to support these conclusions and it's causing strife to players just trying to have fun at their tabl with their friends.

Besides, why would you want undead legions to not have the cool flavorful undead magic items or to keep tomb kings and tomb princes from joining their chariot units. You wouldn't, and most likely GW wouldn't either because it wouldn't be fun and people would be less likely to play undead legions. So, logic and the text in the book favors what I've laid out, as does GWs track record that I've followed for 25 years.

So, please take my words to heart. I'm not using my mod position nor having anything more than a debate on the rules. If you had no hostility toward me, please be mindful of how you may come off and my apologies for misreading you.

In the meantime, let's get back to Warhammer!

I did not intend you to read that particular post in any way really. You were the topic of the quote and your name could have been anyone's who has an opinion, so literally everyone. The intent was to point out that you agreeing with him doesn't make the opinion the correct intent because you like any human couldn't actually know. Had nothing to do with you personally, and I honestly had no idea what you were referring to when you mentioned the intensity of my posts toward you which lead me to retort the way I did to your post.

I am willing to let bygones be bygones if you are and apologize if this went to far.

 

[najo]

I did not intend you to read that particular post in any way really. You were the topic of the quote and your name could have been anyone's who has an opinion, so literally everyone. The intent was to point out that you agreeing with him doesn't make the opinion the correct intent because you like any human couldn't actually know. Had nothing to do with you personally, and I honestly had no idea what you were referring to when you mentioned the intensity of my posts toward you which lead me to retort the way I did to your post.

I am willing to let bygones be bygones if you are and apologize if this went to far.

Same here. I am glad we can clear the air between us. No hard feelings.

 

[estwheadn]

by that logic you can use karl Franz ascendant in a chaos legion army because he is in their book.

Actually by that logic you couldn't use karl franz ascendant because in his profile he says he can only be used with an empire army.

The book a units rules come from have no bearing. Note my response to the above quote.

Actually it does. Give evidence to support that it doesnt

 

[LordTobiothan]

Actually by that logic you couldn't use karl franz ascendant because in his profile he says he can only be used with an empire army.



Actually it does. Give evidence to support that it doesnt

The vampire items say vampire army only as well. You argument is that undead legion can use vampire items because they use units from that book. Even when disallowed.

So again by the logic of "in the same book so allowed even when expressly disallowed" karl is an open option for chaos.

 

[estwheadn]

actually the logic wasn't "in the same book so allowed even when expressly disallowed"
the logic was actually "in the same book so allowed EXCEPT when expressly disallowed". Please don't change my arguments to support your purpose.

Also here's some logic for you. Try to follow it.


Premise 1: The passage on the magic item page says that the magic items are available for vampire counts armies
Premise 2: Undead legions units use the same equipment and options as their army book counter parts do
Conclusion: Therefore Undead legions use vampire counts magic items

It's really the simplest argument ever and why you are trying to nitpick at it is beyond me. RAI are clear, RAW are not as clear but still pretty clear in favor of using vc magic items in an ul, even though there are a couple of things you can nitpick at. My local gw store owner confirmed that you can use vc magic items on vampire characters in an undead legions army. Whether you want to trust he would know is up to you.

 

[LordTobiothan]

actually the logic wasn't "in the same book so allowed even when expressly disallowed"
the logic was actually "in the same book so allowed EXCEPT when expressly disallowed". Please don't change my arguments to support your purpose.

Also here's some logic for you. Try to follow it.


Premise 1: The passage on the magic item page says that the magic items are available for vampire counts armies
Premise 2: Undead legions units use the same equipment and options as their army book counter parts do
Conclusion: Therefore Undead legions use vampire counts magic items

It's really the simplest argument ever and why you are trying to nitpick at it is beyond me. RAI are clear, RAW are not as clear but still pretty clear in favor of using vc magic items in an ul, even though there are a couple of things you can nitpick at. My local gw store owner confirmed that you can use vc magic items on vampire characters in an undead legions army. Whether you want to trust he would know is up to you.

None of the vampire counts units have the vampire count magic items as any of there options unfortunately, which is where this entire issue stems from in the first place.

Unless you can point me to the page where it says a vampire lord has access to the vampire counts list of magic items I can't see any other way of reading it where RAW is concerned.

I don't take Rai into account unless I'm standing at a table setting up pieces, since trying to determine rai with 10,000 people on the Internet usually results in 100 different answers. So forgive me if I do not respond on that subject.

 

[najo]

Let's try it like this: The entry for Vampire Lord states under his options he can take 100 points of magic items and a 100 points of vampire powers, plus things like magic levels, mounts, etc.

Undead legions says these units use all of the options, equipment etc from their army book as denoted by VC or TK next to the units name. That paragraph refers the player to follow the army book for those options. That vampire if built in that army book would have access to those magic items, along with the vampire powers, special rules in the unit entries and on the mounts your choosing etc.

In fact, the only part of the Vampire Count army book that is replaced is the Army Special Rules on pg.26. That is the only thing Undead Legions ignores (stating that it does) aside from the units not listed in the army list (like Kemmler or old Manny or old Vlad).

And no where does it say anything about references to Vampire Counts or Tomb King armies being ignored, changed to Undead Legions or anything else weird. It just says units still follow the rules and get the options from their army book.

This very small technicality has no basis for support our any rule in the end times book. In fact, the rule book states that armies have their own magic items and can use those in addition to the one in the general magic items.

So, to support the RAW argument. Where does it state in the Nagash rules that you ignore any thing for the Tomb Kings or Vampire Counts. Back up your position or it doesn't apply. Because the line saying they use the rules in their army book for units denoted VC or TK is RAW.

 

[GhoulKing505]

I love how both sides bring up the exact same point but use it to make different arguments.
On one hand you have people saying it doesn't say to ignore them so you don't.
On the other hand people are saying it doesn't say not to ignore them so ignore them.
Honestly at this point I think it comes down to majority wins. That is how Warhammer should be and has been played. If the vast majority of people believe one way than that's how it is until an faq or errata changes it.
Both sides are bringing up sound aruments. I go with the side of UL being able to use the army book magic items for models and units in said army book. It makes more sense that way and is a compromise between people wanting absolutely none of the army book stuff (magic items, tomb kings/princes not being able to join chariot units, etc.) and the people wanting everything to be combined (coven thrones in chariot units, night shroud on tomb king, etc).
Like I said before, both sides have valid arguments. It's pointless to debate further because there's no swaying the other side. It's always great to err on the side of caution so if @LordTobiothan wants to play it that way I say we let him. If an faq comes out supporting him he won't be disappointed like the rest of us. He also needs to understand that we intend to play it the way we think is right and if ever he is across the table from us not to get upset that we are cheating (I don't think you would I'm just using this as an example).
Let's all stop arguing over something that at this point doesn't matter all that much and just have fun playing the game. I know I can be long winded when I write so thanks for taking the time to read all of this. I hope it helps.

 

[LordTobiothan]

Let's try it like this: The entry for Vampire Lord states under his options he can take 100 points of magic items and a 100 points of vampire powers, plus things like magic levels, mounts, etc.

Undead legions says these units use all of the options, equipment etc from their army book as denoted by VC or TK next to the units name. That paragraph refers the player to follow the army book for those options. That vampire if built in that army book would have access to those magic items, along with the vampire powers, special rules in the unit entries and on the mounts your choosing etc.

Actually being built from that book does not give them access, that is where i find the flawed logic. That line of thinking is more how one might feel it would as opposed to anything actually stating it. You, in fact, have to be making a vampire counts army to use them, not just using their book, as stated on the page for magic items.

In fact, the only part of the Vampire Count army book that is replaced is the Army Special Rules on pg.26. That is the only thing Undead Legions ignores (stating that it does) aside from the units not listed in the army list (like Kemmler or old Manny or old Vlad).

And no where does it say anything about references to Vampire Counts or Tomb King armies being ignored, changed to Undead Legions or anything else weird. It just says units still follow the rules and get the options from their army book.

You are right, when playing an undead legions army it changed nothing but the special rules page, which leaves the rules for the magic items as they were. Following the rules for the units, none of them have those for options, some can take magic items, none are granted access to the vampire items.

This very small technicality has no basis for support our any rule in the end times book. In fact, the rule book states that armies have their own magic items and can use those in addition to the one in the general magic items.

So, to support the RAW argument. Where does it state in the Nagash rules that you ignore any thing for the Tomb Kings or Vampire Counts. Back up your position or it doesn't apply. Because the line saying they use the rules in their army book for units denoted VC or TK is RAW.

Things in warhammer have to explicitly state you can use something, not explicitly state you cant use them. Nothing says I cant run a bloodthirster in my vampire army, a rule does state which units I can use and bloodthirster is not on that list. He isn't explicitly denied, he just isn't on the list of allowed.

I love how both sides bring up the exact same point but use it to make different arguments.
On one hand you have people saying it doesn't say to ignore them so you don't.
On the other hand people are saying it doesn't say not to ignore them so ignore them.
Honestly at this point I think it comes down to majority wins. That is how Warhammer should be and has been played. If the vast majority of people believe one way than that's how it is until an faq or errata changes it.
Both sides are bringing up sound aruments. I go with the side of UL being able to use the army book magic items for models and units in said army book. It makes more sense that way and is a compromise between people wanting absolutely none of the army book stuff (magic items, tomb kings/princes not being able to join chariot units, etc.) and the people wanting everything to be combined (coven thrones in chariot units, night shroud on tomb king, etc).
Like I said before, both sides have valid arguments. It's pointless to debate further because there's no swaying the other side. It's always great to err on the side of caution so if @LordTobiothan wants to play it that way I say we let him. If an faq comes out supporting him he won't be disappointed like the rest of us. He also needs to understand that we intend to play it the way we think is right and if ever he is across the table from us not get upset that we are cheating (I don't think you would I'm just using this as an example).
Let's all stop arguing over something that at this point doesn't matter all that much and just have fun playing the game. I know I can be long winded when I write so thanks for taking the time to read all of this. I hope it helps.

Believe it or not my actual stance on the subject is how i perceived it when I first read it. Which was that any time a book says "vampire counts army" or tomb kings army" you act like it said "undead legions army"

Because my understanding of the RAI was that they wanted these books to be entirely together and separating items and special rules makes it too much of a gimmick temporary allied forces list.

As far as the majority rules goes. The inability to poll the entirety of the internet or every warhammer player makes coming to a conclusion impossible. 90% of the tomb kings boards say no items, warseer is fairly split, warhammer.org came to the RAW conclusion that no items are allowed, and the opposing side, on that board, ended up conceding that it seemed that way. All of those threads are a decent read on the subject for anyone interested.

Also by determining what the RAW actually states we also allow tournament organizers to make the unbiased ruling and any disagreeing angry players blame GW and not them.

 

[GhoulKing505]

I believe you when you say that was what you felt the rule was when first reading it. I'm not disagreeing with you or saying you are wrong. I'm just trying to be that guy who ends this fruitless debate that's just going to go on and on and on and on...
Until an faq comes out we can't be certain. I see a lot of what you are saying. An UL list is not a VC or TK list according to the writing. And the magic items are reserved for a VC or TK army. But what's stopping us from saying an UL army isn't both a VC and TK army? The same thing stopping us from saying it is. It isn't written anywhere. That's why we need to wait for the faq. Both opinions are valid and at this point are right. Until we get more that won't change.
I'm sure when the VC and TK army books were written they were never meant to be combined. Now they are. That's why there are obvious problems and I say both sides should just come together in the middle. Use them like you've been saying, essentially allies. In some ways more than that and is other ways less. I mean isn't that what they are now under Nagash?

 

[najo]

I would agree with both of you except for the RAW on p20 supports exactly what I'm saying. This is the text:

An Undead Legions army can include any of the units listed below. With the exception of
those units and characters detailed later in this section (denoted by ´N´in brackets), you must
use the unit profiles, point costs, equipment, options and special rules found in either
Warhammer: Vampire Counts (denoted by ´VC´) or Warhammer: Tomb Kings (denoted by ´TK´).
Together, these army list entries should be used alongside the ´Choosing an Army´section of
the Warhammer rulebook and the information on the net page to pick a force ready for battle

This text flat out says units chosen use the army books they are from. Its clear as day. It does not imply combining, limiting or ignoring. It says the units denoted VC use the profiles, costs, equipment, options and special rules in Warhammer Vampire Counts. Those magic items are an option in that book. It's listed under option in the Vampire lord.

All the arguments add words or intentions to this. When you read this paragraph how is it not clear? RAW I choose to add a Vampire to my undead legion army, pick up the army book and use it to build him. It spells it out and says nothing about restricting any of that choices normal options.

So, please, how does the RAW even remotely support what the counter is saying?

 

[GDD]

@najo The counter is hung up on:

pg 62 VC book: "On these pages are magic items available to Vampire Counts armies. These can be taken in addition to any of the magic items in the Warhammer Rulebook." They are especially hung up on the UL not being a VC army. Previous posts here explain why I think this is redundant by the ET book.

And for example on pg 86 on the VL's profile. That it states he can take 100 points of magic items, but does not specify being able to take the books items.

I have more to contribute to the discussion, but here like elsewhere with this discussion some people reading this will/can simply not see the other side of the argument.

I'd also like to apologize to @LordTobiothan if my posts have seemed aggressive towards you personally. I've just seen this discussion absolutely everywhere, and it frustrates me (for reasons also explained elsewhere in this thread.)

 

[GhoulKing505]

@LordTobiothan is saying that on pg 62 of the VC book it states that the magic items in the section are available to VC armies. Then on pg 86 under the Vampire Lord (and any other character really) it says "May take magic items up to a total of 100 points". Pg 86 is the Vampire Lord's unit options and does not say he can take magic items from the VC book and an UL army is not a VC army therefore he can't take those magic items. It is the argument that because it doesn't say they can take them they can't.
The other argument is that because it doesn't say they can't they can.
Either one could be correct at this point. We need an faq that we probably won't get.

I actually found another funny RAW argument from what you've just posted. It never says to use the "Magic" rules from the book so all undead legion wizards have to use lore of undeath since that's the only one they can take.
Just go through the list with me for a sec: unit profile check, point cost check, equipment check, special rules check, options check. Now what's remaining after that on pg 86 for the vamp lord? Yup! That little part below equipment titled "Magic:". We don't use that in an UL army because it never says we do. (This entire argument, while legit RAW, is sarcastic and just a way of showing that RAW is not always the best way to play)

Edit: You know all GW had to do to fix this whole thing was on that list of things to use from the army books add an "etc" on the end. That way it'd be clear that you use the entire book minus the army rules.

 

[LordTobiothan]

@LordTobiothan is saying that on pg 62 of the VC book it states that the magic items in the section are available to VC armies. Then on pg 86 under the Vampire Lord (and any other character really) it says "May take magic items up to a total of 100 points". Pg 86 is the Vampire Lord's unit options and does not say he can take magic items from the VC book and an UL army is not a VC army therefore he can't take those magic items. It is the argument that because it doesn't say they can take them they can't.
The other argument is that because it doesn't say they can't they can.
Either one could be correct at this point. We need an faq that we probably won't get.

I actually found another funny RAW argument from what you've just posted. It never says to use the "Magic" rules from the book so all undead legion wizards have to use lore of undeath since that's the only one they can take.
Just go through the list with me for a sec: unit profile check, point cost check, equipment check, special rules check, options check. Now what's remaining after that on pg 86 for the vamp lord? Yup! That little part below equipment titled "Magic:". We don't use that in an UL army because it never says we do. (This entire argument, while legit RAW, is sarcastic and just a way of showing that RAW is not always the best way to play)

In my post before this I explain why it has to say they can take them. I am not sure if you may have read the bloodthirster portion of my last post, so I ask that you do that instead of me restating it, if you do not mind.

Lores available to a character, like say a vampire lord, say "a vampire lord may take X, Y, or Z lores", regardless of what army he is in he can take those lores because regardless of the army he is a vampire lord. So in an undead legions army this is still an available choice.

Now if that said "a vampire lord in a vampire counts army may take X,Y, or Z lores" it would be the same argument.

Special rules, options, unit cost, unit profile, and equipment only apply to THIS vampire lord profile, hence the need to specify in the UL book. If there was another vampire lord profile in another book he wouldn't use these statistics. Much like how multiple armies have dire wolves as a unit option with different rules. That vampire lord in another book could however take the lore of death, shadow, and vampires, regardless of whether or not those options are in his own book.

@najo I believe the poster that posted below you gave as much of a response as I could have on clarifying my point. So do not feel I ignored you.

@GDD I did feel a bit attacked, so thank you for bothering to come back. No ill will

 

[najo]

I actually understand that argument and what everyone is hung up on, I didn't know if you saw something further or could add to it. Also, I don't feel ignored, we are totally cool. Also, any all caps below is just be emphasizing words or points, not yelling.

So, here is where I am saying RAW does say use the army book in its entirety:

1) Undead legions came second, so the text in VC and TK can't be written to refer outside of their army books or to the undead legions because combining army books wasn't occurring before hand. So of course rules like the chariots and magic items are going to self reference their own book.

2) Undead Legions does no re-labeling of books or rules or itself outside of Army Special Rules. It only says disregard the original books Army Special Rules and use these ones. So, still no precedence for anything the other side is saying.

3) Then when we get to pg 20. it clearly states:

"you must use the unit profiles, point costs, equipment, options and special rules found in either Warhammer: Vampire Counts (denoted by ´VC´) or Warhammer: Tomb Kings (denoted by ´TK´)"

Look at how specific and clear GW is being here. profiles, cost, equipment, OPTIONS and special rules. OPTIONS is magic items (among other things). It says FOUND in EITHER Vampire Counts or Tomb Kings denoted by VC or TK.

That means, you go to the profile in Vampire Counts. You use everything listed there to build him. Nothing there is prohibiting anything. So FOUND in Warhammer: Vampire Counts means use the Army Book to build him. The Either/or and Denoted means a unit pulls its options and profiles from Vampire Counts or Tomb Kings. The list is marked with VC and TK next to the units. It is telling you to use the Army Book for that unit.

So, I build a Vampire Lord. I got to his profile and use Warhammer: Vampire Counts to build him. As the Nagash book says. Options FOUND in Warhammer Armies Vampire Counts are their Magic Items!

Or the chariot situation. I build a Skeleton Chariot unit and a Tomb King on a chariot. They can use the options/rules/etc FOUND in Warhammer Tomb Kings. They are denoted as TK units in the Nagash book. The Chariot special rule says characters from the Tomb King book on a chariot can join them. That is what the Tomb King on a chariot is.

Again, the RAW is:"you must use the unit profiles, point costs, equipment, options and special rules found in either Warhammer: Vampire Counts (denoted by ´VC´) or Warhammer: Tomb Kings (denoted by ´TK´)"

Nothing about ignoring parts of the book or that rules stop working or Vampires on Coven thrones being able to join Chariot units.

See this is what is blowing my mind. The RAW is clear as day that you use the army book in its entirety. The only part that gets ignored is the Army Special Rules because they stated that and gave you replacement rules. But here, in the unit building, they say use the army book. Period.

So, I really don't get it. What's even weirder is I've heard multiple arguments as to why people think its this other weird way. Everything from them not specifically stating Undead Legion armies can to the opposite and saying well it doesn't say they can't. And my whole point this entire time, it doesn't say that about any of those things. It says exactly what I have quoted and spelled out.

What's even more bizarre to me though. RAI. Which is more likely, honestly. GW wanting the units to function as they did in the original army book and they are just gathered together under the Undead Legion combined list now or this weird argument where they don;t have magic items and chariot units? If someone builds a TK army (no special characters that died) and they have royals in every chariot unit. Then they take that same army and convert it to Undead Legion, and now it plays differently. Or you got that Vampire Army with Screaming Banner and Book of Arkhan and Black Periapt, then you convert it to Undead Legion and you don;t get those Vampire themed items even though you have a Vampire themed undead legion army with all the vampire powers, spells, unit options etc. What sense is there in that?

Even further. How does allowing army magic items hurt anything? Those items are meant to work with those armies. They fit the same roll as Daemonic Gifts, Vampiric Powers, Chaos Mutations, etc. You pay points for them. Its not like your getting them for free. They make the army function properly. The army was built with using those items in mind. Why all of the sudden would the items disappear?

One more step, fluff wise. These armies are conquered and united under Nagash. Why would their magic items go away or cease to function? And if that was what GW intended... then why is there NO MENTION OF IT ANYWHERE.

So, there is another factor here. Aside from the very obvious RAI and that the RAW supports what my position is and has no verbiage whatsoever that supports the contrary (last I checked, Warhammer doesn't work on what isn't written or how people want to interpret unwritten rules but what is specifically written), but common sense supports my position. The most likely scenario is that the magic item are available. GWs track record supports this.

You can even hop over to Legions of Chaos to reinforce this. Its written the same way. It specifically mentions Daemonic Gifts, how they function and that they are like the magic items for the daemons. It states that they are chosen like magic items and makes no mention of anything weird like, unlike Warriors of Chaos and Beastmen who don't get their army book magic items, Daemons get their daemonic gifts. Why if magic items are so over powered to allow in the army that GW checked them with game mechanics to block them out but allowed daemonic gifts or doesn't make any mention of no army book magic items?

So, what has us on this side of things frustrated is we are playing by RAW. We read those rules and in doing what it says step by step it let's us use magic items from the army book on the units from the same book. We are then getting into these super threads that are taking over every Warhammer forum with arguments that are adding or ignoring very clear text GW wrote. This feels to us like we are in some sort of crazy world.

So, I hope that clears up what ever hang up there is. At this point we could be going around and around. I don't understand why players such as yourself and groups like Warhammer.org and Adepticon are not on the same page. I really don't. This is WAY more clear that the 50% Lords and Heroes thing being officially was, at least IMHO.

Peace and sorry for the length, we are still cool though