Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hey,

Just curious on whether or not if a unit of warriors is given the hive commander ability to outflank they can still do this if a tyranid prime is attached to the squad. Since the wording says 'A single unit of troops may outflank' and in the IC section of the rules it says IC's joining units with special rules makes them lose them.

Is this correct and if so can people show me proof to back it up?

If the IC had the ability to outflank then they could outflank. If you attack the IC otherwise you must deploy as normal. The prime does not get the ability to outflank, the troops unit does.

This is not like Snikrot in the Ork codex.

Duce wrote:Hey,

Just curious on whether or not if a unit of warriors is given the hive commander ability to outflank they can still do this if a tyranid prime is attached to the squad. Since the wording says 'A single unit of troops may outflank' and in the IC section of the rules it says IC's joining units with special rules makes them lose them.

Is this correct and if so can people show me proof to back it up?

Yes. GW's rulebook FAQ now states that you are allowed to join your ICs to units BEFORE deployment. That means if a unit is able to be given a rule (such as the ability to outflank) then the IC will be part of that unit when the ability is granted and will therefore benefit from it.

Of course, as highlighted by the opposing opinion already posted in this thread, this interpretation is not universally accepted, but I do think it is the correct one, IMHO.

If you joined the HQ char to the troops though would that not interfer with the phrasing of the hive commander ability where it says 'a unit of troops'? since it would not be a pure unit of troops now but a troop unit and attached HQ?

Duce wrote:If you joined the HQ char to the troops though would that not interfer with the phrasing of the hive commander ability where it says 'a unit of troops'? since it would not be a pure unit of troops now but a troop unit and attached HQ?

Like I said, that is one valid interpretation, just not one I find most player subscribe to. Most players seem to play that when an ability is passed onto a unit from an external source then it applies to any ICs joined to the unit as well. For example, if a Chaplain is joined to a unit along with a SM Commander, most people play that the Chaplains bonus on the turn the unit charges also applies to the other joined IC as he is part of the unit.

So in other words, when an IC joins a unit, the rules say that he is a member of that unit, therefore he would gain any abilities granted to the unit from any external source. The only reason he doesn't get the special rules that the UNIT naturally has is because the rules for characters say so.


It is a contentious issue, but you just need to make sure that you play it consistently. For example if you play that the IC couldn't benefit from the Hive Commander bonus here, you should apply it in all cases, and deny a Warboss joined to a Nob unit from benefiting from the Feel No Pain provided by Dok's Tools, etc, etc, etc.

As long as you're consistent and your opponent's onboard, then it should be fine...but you just shouldn't be picking this one rule out to apply one interpretation and then letting the rest slide.

The sticking point for me is not that a rule benefiting a 'unit' shouldn't be applied to an attached IC, it is that the specification is for a unit of troops. With an IC it is no longer just a unit of troops.

This is different from a chaplain or a painboy because (correct me if I am wrong) I believe those say 'the unit may' or 'the unit has' not 'the nobz unit has'

Another point of comparison is the Dawn of War deployment. It states 2 troops and an HQ. In this case, even if you joined a HQ to the troops, it would not be part of the "Troops" but it would be part of the unit.

Sentai_Sage wrote:Another point of comparison is the Dawn of War deployment. It states 2 troops and an HQ. In this case, even if you joined a HQ to the troops, it would not be part of the "Troops" but it would be part of the unit.

There are two things remember about Dawn of War deployment:

1) It was written *before* GW change the rules via FAQ. In the rulebook the only way to deploy a joined IC on the table is to join as you deploy him. Now you're able to join ICs to units before deployment, so technically you could argue that a joined IC wouldn't count towards Dawn of War except for point #2:

2) Dawn of War has a specific example saying it works that way. Again, if it didn't have that, I'd argue that with the change in rules, it now WOULD allow joined ICs to not count towards the Dawn of War limit.

calypso2ts wrote:The sticking point for me is not that a rule benefiting a 'unit' shouldn't be applied to an attached IC, it is that the specification is for a unit of troops. With an IC it is no longer just a unit of troops.

This is different from a chaplain or a painboy because (correct me if I am wrong) I believe those say 'the unit may' or 'the unit has' not 'the nobz unit has'

I can see where you make that distinction, but I don't personally see it.

'A unit' or 'that unit' or 'a single unit' are all just single units. The fact that this rule specifies a unit of 'troops' simply identifies that the unit chosen must be from the Troops section, in other words, it limits which units may be chosen.

When an IC joins a unit he is 'joining' the unit. By the very nature of the word, it means he is part of that unit.

I believe anyone against this is thinking very situationally, instead of where your interpretation leads.

If for example, there was a psychic power that affected a single enemy unit of Troops, do you really believe anyone would argue that this power couldn't be used on a unit of Troops that had an IC joined to it?

When an HQ IC joins a unit, the whole unit is not a "Troop" any more then it is an "HQ." I mean, sure it's a Unit, but it's a unit that has a troop and an HQ in it.
I don't see why it must be all one way or the other.

yakface wrote: When an IC joins a unit he is 'joining' the unit. By the very nature of the word, it means he is part of that unit.

In this case, this has created a unit that contains an HQ and a Troop.

yakface wrote: If for example, there was a psychic power that affected a single enemy unit of Troops, do you really believe anyone would argue that this power couldn't be used on a unit of Troops that had an IC joined to it?

But, in the same way, could a power that only affected an HQ hurt that unit? If is totally a troop, then the HQ would be safe. But if it's a troop and an HQ in one unit, it could.

yakface wrote:
If for example, there was a psychic power that affected a single enemy unit of Troops, do you really believe anyone would argue that this power couldn't be used on a unit of Troops that had an IC joined to it?

In that case it is a good thing there are not psychic powers that only effect troops, otherwise it would make my argument seem silly!

Sentai_Sage wrote:When an HQ IC joins a unit, the whole unit is not a "Troop" any more then it is an "HQ." I mean, sure it's a Unit, but it's a unit that has a troop and an HQ in it.

If the unit is no longer considered Troops does that mean it can't score objectives?

calypso2ts wrote:

yakface wrote:
If for example, there was a psychic power that affected a single enemy unit of Troops, do you really believe anyone would argue that this power couldn't be used on a unit of Troops that had an IC joined to it?

In that case it is a good thing there are not psychic powers that only effect troops, otherwise it would make my argument seem silly!

Don't forget that only Troops units can hold objectives. If attaching an IC means a Troops unit is no longer "a unit of Troops" for the purpose of Hive Commander then it also can't hold objectives.

There is a subtle difference between scoring and granting outflank. I am not arguing that the troops unit itself cannot be given the ability to outflank. It is just the IC does not gain that ability as well. To outflank with the IC attached, you need both to have the ability to outflank.

To score an objective, a model from a unit in the troops slot of the FOC just need to be within 3", and the IC does not interfere with that occurring.