Which nid FW/IA units are now legal?

[ferro]

I'm not asking for stats/rules, but can someone with access to the relevant books please list which Forge World and/or Imperial Armor Tyranid units are stamped "40k Approved" and now officially sanctioned in regular games? Thank you.

[rpricew]

Malanthrope & Stone Crusher Carnifex are legal, can't remember what books they are in though... sorry

[coredump]

Keep in mind, that many folks do not agree that FW has he authority for making rules decisions for 40K. Therefore, the fact that FW says they are 'ok for 40K' does not necessarily carry much water.

Now, if 40K comes out with a new main rulebook, and puts a section in there saying FW models are okay for 40K, that would be different.Oh wait... they did.... and they didn't... nevermind....

[infornography]

It is considered at least proper courtesy to let your opponent know ahead of time if you are using forge world units in your army. Sure they can refuse to play a list that has FW units, but you can refuse to play someone acting that way.

Tournaments tend to be codex only though.

[maugrim]

Traditional opponents of Forgeworld, living in 2005 as they do, still attempt to hold onto the "permission only" story. Which is directly opposed by the all the publishing coming out of GW (which FW is a wholely owned subsidiary, so FW = GW).

Of course, you can always point to the new rules (and actually, the old ones too) which state you make your Army List out of a Codex. It doesn't limit you to certain Codexes, so the IA Codexes would be valid under that statement too.

Either way, haters gonna hate.

[zephoid]

The units are in IA:A 2nd edition (not IA:A2, thats a different book... come on ppl, naming conventions please?)

Stone crusher fex is decent because of the 2+ armor save, but is still a fex with 4 wounds. It was getting killed by fists and melta before, it still will.
The malentrhope is actually a pretty darn good hq. Can be taken in swarms of 1-3, lacks the durability of the tyrant, but makes up for it in lower cost and great abilities.

[coredump]

Jul 23, 2012 10:07:30 GMT maugrim said:

Traditional opponents of Forgeworld, living in 2005 as they do, still attempt to hold onto the "permission only" story. Which is directly opposed by the all the publishing coming out of GW (which FW is a wholely owned subsidiary, so FW = GW).

"All" of the publishing...?? Yet in the actual rules for 40K, published in 2012 and not in 2005, they *still* don't say FW are usable in the game.

Having them published by FW, saying that FW products are 'legal' is not nearly the same thing as saying so in the 40K rulebook.

Of course, you can always point to the new rules (and actually, the old ones too) which state you make your Army List out of a Codex. It doesn't limit you to certain Codexes, so the IA Codexes would be valid under that statement too.

So, by that logic I could make an army out of 4 different codices... or even one that I made up in my spare time.

But more directly, the armies are listed in the BRB, and the rules say that each army has a Codex to follow. And they make no mention of allowing you to use a second codex except for allies; nor do they mention being allowed to use a codex other than the ones for the armies in 40K.

And as mentioned.... that rule book was published in 2012... If they wanted to make FW as "40K approved", they would have put it in the rulebook.

[infornography]

Yes, because GW never has any oversights or accidental omissions and they never have rules provided in sources other than the rule book or codex....

Regardless, it is irrelevant. Tournaments still generally deny them and outside of tournaments people can play or not play with each other as they see fit. This is a complete non-issue. I won't play with people who generally refuse to play lists that include approved for 40k FW models because I find those people tend to be the insufferable variety at the table. Similarly, they won't play me when I have those models. This works itself out nicely.

[questioner]

I think it is pretty much same as always: check with your opponent first. Personally, I would allow it. I also know people who would not.

[Elof Valantor]

If you want to play with FW models, why not just arrange it as an Apoc game without the Apoc rules? Opponents can't complain then.

[Psychichobo]

As a safety net, bring alternative non-FW lists if possible. I don't mind FW units - who doesn't want to use some crazy pretty blorko-tank - but some people think of FW units as nothing but giant cannons that wipe out armies.

Still, best to ask beforehand - if you're the kind of person who demands to foist FW units on your opponent you're no better than the people who claims FW users are cheesy cheats.

[Davor]

Well I guess I am a hater. I am in the camp no Forge World. Use what is in your codex. If you want to use FW, then it better be asked way before ahead of time.

I am sorry, I don't want anyone bringing a Baneblade or what ever they are called when nothing in my codex can stop it. As someone said, it's courtesy to ask ahead of time. Just saying "haters going to hate" is just an excuse. Come on, we all know alot of FW stuff is just way OVER POWERED and can't be countered with something in a codex. Yes a few stuff is not that good in FW but alot of stuff is.

How would you feel if someone shows up with a Titan? How is the Tyranid codex going to go up agaisnt that?

[t⊗theark]

Davor - there are the models permissible in 40k games and those which are not so - this is clearly outlined in the latest release of an Apocalypse book, for example. It is unlikely that we'd be seeing super heavies, gargantuan creatures, old style flyers and heavy walkers in your average list.

[Xantige]

Jul 23, 2012 21:54:01 GMT Davor said:

Well I guess I am a hater. I am in the camp no Forge World. Use what is in your codex. If you want to use FW, then it better be asked way before ahead of time.

I am sorry, I don't want anyone bringing a Baneblade or what ever they are called when nothing in my codex can stop it. As someone said, it's courtesy to ask ahead of time. Just saying "haters going to hate" is just an excuse. Come on, we all know alot of FW stuff is just way OVER POWERED and can't be countered with something in a codex. Yes a few stuff is not that good in FW but alot of stuff is.

How would you feel if someone shows up with a Titan? How is the Tyranid codex going to go up agaisnt that?

I think you're wrongly defining a hater. To be honest, if someone showed up with a Baneblade, or 3, to a regular game, unannounced, and felt they had a legal, normal list. I'd take issue with that. However, if they told me they were bringing a Baneblade (or beter yet, if they asked) I might agree. But it'd have to be in the context of "Hey, do you wanna shake things up? I've got a baneblade I could bring in. We could work out some crazy rules to give your army a chance. Maybe we could play it like Linebreaker!" that'd be different. If I had a competitive army, I might take it, and show up with my own Baneblade next game... if I was that type of gamer. Really, I think it depends on the situation between the two players. I don't think it's an issue of haters and purists, as it is one of courtesy. That courtesy varies from club to club, you just have to know your opponents and what's okay and what isn't.

GW rules and armies aren't known for their balance anyways. I'd just as easily object facing a IG Leafblower or a Necron Flying Army (what's that build called anyways? Boomerang List?). I think a proper FW hater would be someone that just outright doesn't want to see FW stuff outside of apocalypse.

I think in your case, Davor, you just don't want someone crossing the unwritten rules of your gaming club. From what I recall, you play very laid back, so I can imagine how insulting it'd be for someone to show up with a baneblade in a serious list.

Now after all that I hate to sound stupid, and I hate to have shot my mouth off for nothing... but... when and where did FW approve of certain FW models for GW play?

[maugrim]

Well, ever since the beginning of Imperial Armour 1 - many of the units stated they were "Legal to play in a Codex: "X" army as a "Y" Choice". And back then, with opponent's permission you could take a Second Detachment to field Superheavies/Gargantuan.

Now, they are *still* being listed as "Legal to play in a Codex: "X" army" as a "Y" Choice, but they also have a "Warhammer 40k" stamp on the page to reinforce that. There is no "Second Detachment" rules anymore - anything Superheavy or Gargantuan is limited to Apocalypse games only.

In addition, they've got whole Codexes contained within them, Army Lists and all.