No Codex-No Game?

Greetings Commorragh,

Not sure if this is the right section, so feel free to move and/or rebuke me.

Anyway - I'm meant to have a game against a Chaos player in a day or two. However, he has developed what I'm starting to consider is a bad habit- Playing with no codex.
By using BattleScribe, he has made a few lists incorporating Black Legion or Crimson Slaughter, and using BS as his reference. I think he may want to do the same thing with the new Daemonkin codex for our next game.
Now I use BS to write my lists, and it's an awesome app, but I always have my trusty Codex with me. And I still forget stuff.

So I'm thinking of not playing any list he may write unless it's from a codex he actually has.
I wanted to see if other people have ever had this issue, and if my decision is unfair (I don't want to force him to buy stuff, but I can't help but feel I may be being short changed on some issues)

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask to see an opponent's codex and I personally wouldn't trust BS as I know there have been many mistakes and omissions in it over the years.

Depens on the place. At tournament it is required to have a dex with you to check the rules if needed. Same in gaming nights where pick up games occur. Very ok to use BS or similar if you are trying a new army (allies) for the first feww times before committing to purchasies.

Same with real models on proxies.

I've been in that situation with a player at my club who used to play sans-codex.

I view it that as a bare minimum it's unsporting - not having the codex denies your opponent the opportunity to read special rules that may affect their models, and even without any intention to mislead I find it easier to understand if I've read the text instead of being told someone else's interpretation.

As an example - the player in question brought a manticore to our game, which he'd used the week before against someone else. Now I don't know the rules for the manticore. Turns out that he didn't either, and in that earlier game was effectively twin-linking the missiles for some reason.

Now in fairness, I knew this guy didn't have the codex and played him anyway, though mainly because i'm reasonably familiar with playing against guard so didn't need to know much I didn't already. Against something like daemonkin however, i'd be far more reluctant.

I don't really see the issue 99% of the time. If you print your Battlescribe list out as a "full description", it shows full detail of all the weapons, all the special rules, exactly as they are written in the Codex and in the Rule book and it shows full vehicle and infantry stat lines. I have a codex, which I take to every game, but neither myself or any of my opponents have needed more than once (that I can remember) for the last year.

If you use good respositories, BattleScribe is incredibly accurate nowadays.

We had a guys at our club who use to do that. Wehn the 5th ed NEcron codex came out, he was playing his annihilation barge as fast vehicles. We only noticed he was playing wrong when another player purchased the codex... Now I think it was an honest mistake since the other skimmer he's used to face are my DE but still... it changed the results of many games so no, unless someone tries an army before purchaing it, I ask my opponents to have thier codex.

Interesting to read replies. Cheers.
Just to clarify, the dude has no intention of buying the Supplement Codices. I think he views BS as a way to save himself some cash really.
I do try to assume mistakes made are accidental(as do most people it seems), but he is using supplements to try and get an advantage he feels he can't get from straight CSM codex. So if he does make mistakes, they'll probably be in his favour.
As _Eye mentioned, Daemonkin is new and I have no idea what its like, especially in regards to Formations and Blood Points(?)
Aaand he never prints it out. Just on phone.

I have seen this, while I do not have the daemon kin, I do have lists, but I am not playing them. On top of that the Daemon Kin are the next codex I am buying for sure. I have also read the codex.

I would politely ask after the third game or so to see the codex, simply because that code has some special rule that you need to know. Some do not come out on BS I do believe.

On a personal stand point I don't play any army without the codex. Another reason why I do not play my Daemon Kin

Count Adhemar wrote:

I don't think it's unreasonable to ask to see an opponent's codex and I personally wouldn't trust BS as I know there have been many mistakes and omissions in it over the years.

This.

If the person doesn't have the codex, and relies only on BattleScribe, I won't play them.  I've seen a number of errors in BattleScribe that made the units more powerful than they were and that rules were completely omitted.  Legally speaking, the rules shouldn't be in the Catalogs but that's besides the point.

The Catalogs have got a lot better recently now that the developer is hosting them but nothing prevents a person from downloading the catalogs onto his or her computer, unzipping it, editing the stats and rules he wants to edit, and then push it up to his BattleScribe instance.  I have played a few players that did just that and didn't have their codex.

I can understand not wanting to buy the supplements (especially after the recent Eldar codex); however, if you use it, there's no way for you to tell that Battle Scribe is accurate or not let alone your opponent.  Without even photo screenshots of the rules, there's no way of knowing what's being made up and what's legit.

Battlescribe is fairly accurate, but still has mistakes on it. (HGL lists as having Blind)

I'd play someone who forgot a dex occasionally, but not every week. I've done it myself, so I can show some empathy, but BS doesn't list every rule, and sometimes your opponent wants to read the actual description.

I agree with Jimsolo - Occasionally is ok; however, if it's a case of using BattleScribe 100% instead of getting the true codex, then no.

If a player can't show me the published rules for the thing, then I'm not going to play against it. Usually that only comes up when people have some resin monstrocity and some rules they printed out from somewhere on the internet.

Jimsolo wrote:

Battlescribe is fairly accurate, but still has mistakes on it.  (HGL lists as having Blind)

What is an HGL?

Hellstrom wrote:

Jimsolo wrote:

Battlescribe is fairly accurate, but still has mistakes on it.  (HGL lists as having Blind)

What is an HGL?

This is why I try not to abbreviate. (Does DA mean Dark Angels or Dark Artisan?) I think they mean the Shadowseer's Hallucinogen Grenade Launcher.

I carry tablet with all the codexes, but i long forego to carry paper Codexes.

Well even after telling him, still brought a supplement list. To make it even more annoying it was autocannon spam and i failed almost every jink save I had to make (3+).
Easily the most boring and frustrating game I've played.

IMO if they can not supply a codex and still want to play, tell them by your memory every stat their units have is 1 with range of 1 inch and if they argue tell them to show you where it is written otherwise.

Battle scribe is no subsitute for a codex. (especially since i use quatermaster )

If they are Trialing a suppliment (and you know they do not run this all the time) i think it is fine.
Also there is this thing called the internet and PDF (not that i condone this method)

Ispa wrote:

IMO if they can not supply a codex and still want to play, tell them by your memory every stat their units have is 1 with range of 1 inch and if they argue tell them to show you where it is written otherwise.

Battle scribe is no subsitute for a codex. (especially since i use quatermaster )

If they are Trialing a suppliment (and you know they do not run this all the time) i think it is fine.
Also there is this thing called the internet and PDF (not that i condone this method)

Exactly.  Not condoning it either, but if your opponent has a device capable of connecting to the internet, then they are capable of getting access to the rules at zero cost.  If they can't even be bothered to go to the minimal trouble of having a PDF, then I would say find someone else to play with.

I have zero issue with this at all - the rulebooks are comically priced for the amount of care and attention GW puts into them, and the number of books you need to theoretically play a given game is also kind of funny.

If it's not a tournament - whatevs.
If it is a tournament...eh, depends whether you're roflstomping me or not

Im with Thor but with tournaments I would say yes they are required. Money is on the line...

A thought occurs - if this list is the one you struggled against in your other thread, he shouldn't have had autocannon Havocs in the first place, unless he was either unbound or running Daemonkin (presuming that was what he used) as allies. They can't take Havocs. Even Battlescribe won't let you get away with that.

To the matter at hand, it depends on the opponent. If I know them, know they wouldn't cheat and trust them to know their codex really well (or I do myself), I wouldn't mind them forgetting it every time. But for games against people I know less well or tournaments, no, they have to have it. Just explain that you'd hate for them to make a mistake and only realise later

It's been interesting to see more peoples replies.
I understand that it many won't buy a codex just to try it out.
I come from Aus, the pirate-iest of pirate nations apparently. I've had access to considerably more codexs than I've bought.
I think after reading the replies and havin a think, it's more the uncertainty of using an unfamiliar list and makin mistakes (his lists are often taken for their benefits with little attention paid to weaknesses)or me failing to understand how a unit or formation interacts (he wasn't sure if the helbrute was attached to unit of cultists or not, after reading up on it myself, I found out it wasn't) and havin very little point of reference.

Mr Believer wrote:

A thought occurs - if this list is the one you struggled against in your other thread, he shouldn't have had autocannon Havocs in the first place, unless he was either unbound or running Daemonkin (presuming that was what he used) as allies. They can't take Havocs. Even Battlescribe won't let you get away with that.

Mr Believer, I think he ran a regular CSM army(as oppposed to the Crimson Slaughter or Black Legion) with the 3 formations attached. I don't think I said that in my other post. But thanks for reading it.

Ah, I see, thanks for clearing that up

Tournament, codices should be required. For friendly play I have no problem with people not having the book as long as all relevant information is printed such as special rules. If the person gets caught cheating and continues to not bring rule descriptions or discovered bringing altered stats and rules I would insist that they bring the codex if they want to play a game with me again. I also have no problem with Battlescribe as long as they are willing to show me the rules and such. Well that is my take on it anyway.

So I've been looking into trying out some of the Coven supplement formations recently, however when I went to purchase it on the gw website I noticed they don't seem to have the actual hard cover book even listed anymore. I see I can still get the ebook version but I'd prefer the physical book, call me old fashioned. I was wondering if anyone knew why they no longer had it listed or if anyone had another place they might know where to purchase a copy. I know most of the rules for the formations through general forum browsing but I'd still feel shady showing up to a game without the book to back up the rules.