Itsacon
commented
9 years ago Let me pose a counter argument, as well as an argument why this should be in the datafiles anyway:
Just because a unit can be taken in a Space Marine FOC, doesn't make it a Space Marine unit. Example: Fortifications. There exist units without a faction, the FW Knights (if taken outside a Knight detachtment) belong to that category. They are not Space Marine Vehicles, they are vehicles that can be taken in a Space Marine army.
However, the development guidlines clearly state: "Second, catalogue should enable any legal roster to be created. What I mean is that if you can't implement condition exactly as it should, it's better to leave space for illegal builds than to throw errors on some legal ones. We've all made that mistake."
Since it's clear this is an issue that leaves room for discussion (from your questions, it seems that your gaming group allows LoG to be taken on FW knights), it should probably be allowed by the datafile.
But I'd like to defer THAT decision to a more senior developer.
amis92
hisop
afraeve
File: Space Wolves - Codex.catz
BattleScribe version: 1.15.07
Platform: iPhone / iPod / iPad
Dropbox: No
Description: Hi, this issue was looked at by Itsacon and commented on by others a few days ago (re: whether Cerastus Knights and other Titans can take legacies of glory from Imperial Armour 2). The concensus seemed to be that only "Space Marine vehicles/walkers/tanks" could take them, which is certainly true based on the wording of each of the legacy entries. The recital paragraph sets out the broad rule "any vehicle in a Space Marine army, Blood Angels Army, etc., and in an army chosen from the special detachment in Badab 9/10, as limited by each specific entry..." So by adding "Space Marine vehicle/walker/tank", this prevents legacies being taken on Imperial Guard/Astra Militarum vehicles quite clearly. However, notwitstanding RAI which is certainly not clear, the consistent application of rules would seem to indicate that all of the Titan models should be eligible. If one looks at any of the vehicle entries in IA:2, none of them contain any Faction symbols. Most do not have any reference to what army they may be taken in, but the heading of each section say "Adeptus Astartes [tanks]". This is how we know whether it is a "Space Marine" vehicle or not. In a few cases where there are special restrictions, the unit will have the commonly seen paragraph stating "This unit may be taken as a [Heavy Support/Fast Attack/Lord of War/etc.] in a Space Marine army, Blood Angels army, Sisters of Battle army, etc." Basically, if it can be taken in a Space Marine army, it must be a Space Marine vehicle - otherwise the legacies do not apply to any of the vehicles that exist in Imperial Armour or FW dataslates and only to those printed in the actual codex rulebook. So applying this system to the Knights, while they have a Knight symbol (which makes sense, as they can be taken as part of a Knight army/detachment with special rules to govern that), they have the LoW symbol as does a vehicle like the Fellblade, and rules in italics to explain that a Knight may be taken as a LoW in any Imperial army - this is a shorthand way of saying it applies to all flavours of Space Marines, as well as Grey Knights, AM, Sisters, etc (if a LoW is available in the applicable detachment chosen for that codex). So on its face, a Knight Lancer or Warhound or Reaver is no less entitled than a Fellblade to receive a legacy of glory so long as the legacy applies to a walker, and the model in question is taken as a LoW in a Space Marine detachment (so if you took a Space Marine formation, and a Sisters of Battle CAD with a Knight as LoW, you could technically not purchase a legacy for that Knight as it is fairly described as a SoB vehicle in that case). If the community still disagrees that is totally fine. In in the end, Battlescribe is a tool for players to conveniently create army lists, and is not the arbiter of all rules which are ultimately decided by the playgroup or tournament you participate in. So if something is somewhat unclear it would seem useful to err on the side of adding functionality instead of taking it away. On that note, the new 2015 Space Marine codex database includes the Legacy options for the Knight Lancer, and likely all other Super Heavies so there is a discrepancy there. Thanks for the consideration, this was purely meant as an academic discussion and not as a contentious debate!