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.

Just want to see if I'm reading this right. Here goes:

Is it possible to use a member of 2 different Courts and attach them to the same unit? For example I have 2 Royal Courts and a unit of Warriors. Could I attach a Cryptek from each Royal Court to that unit? If so this raises another question: What's the result of attaching 2 Crypteks with Seismic Crucibles?

Thanks

you are right. you can in fact attach 2 crypteks as long as theyre from different courts. im not sure i understand ur 2nd question

The Seismic Crucible reduces a units assault move by D3. If you have 2 Crucibles in the unit (from 2 different courts) can you reduce the assault move by 2D3?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Same thing with the Lightning Field I guess...

i believe you could. it gives no limitation or other way of saying you could not

Lacking the actual text, there is always the idea that two instances of a rule can be satisfied by one application.
e.g. Stealth

St the start of the enemy Assault phase, roll a D3 and nominate an an enemy unit... Reduce their assault move by the result of the D3 for that phase.

I would say that they don't stack.

why would they not?

"Only one member of the royal court can join each unit in this manner" Please guys - read the dex!

You roll the D3 and reduce the assault move from the first one; you then go to do the same from the second, excepting you see that the rules have been satisfied; the enemy unit has had their assault range reduced by d3.

Basically for the same reason that very few things in this game actually stack; the rules for most tell you to do X, once you have done x; you have satisfied that rule and any other instances of it.

'The Royal Court' is singular, so you can (until FAQed) place one model from each of the two Royal Courts you are permitted to take.

Kommisar, thats just bad reasoning imo.

razerous, read a post b4 commenting on it

Ghaz wrote:'The Royal Court' is singular, so you can (until FAQed) place one model from each of the two Royal Courts you are permitted to take.

Not sure on this one, I can see it from either side to be honest. Hope it gets FAQ'd quickly. Beings the Royal Court has 2x Instances it does make it Royal Courts however you stick a dude in from one royal court, than you're sticking another dude in from a different royal Court.

Ghaz wrote:'The Royal Court' is singular, so you can (until FAQed) place one model from each of the two Royal Courts you are permitted to take.

"The Royal Court" and "the Royal Court" is a small difference but important. Again, please read the dex before posting (which in turn is more important than reading the thread before posting!).

Razerous wrote:

Ghaz wrote:'The Royal Court' is singular, so you can (until FAQed) place one model from each of the two Royal Courts you are permitted to take.

"The Royal Court" and "the Royal Court" is a small difference but important. Again, please read the dex before posting (which in turn is more important than reading the thread before posting!).

Umm he did read the codex, his argument makes sense and does hold ground at present. Maybe you should go back and read the codex again before posting...

It's open to interpretation at present and needs a faq to be honest.

"The Royal Court" and "the Royal Court" is a small difference but important.

And you did notice that my use of "The" was at the beginning of the sentence where its proper to capitalize the first word?

Regardless, I don't see a difference between the two. The only time there would be a difference is if they would have used "a Royal Court" instead of "the Royal Court".

"the Royal Court" applies to the Court in question, not both courts. You can take one from each and throw them into the same unit.

Excellent. That's what I was hoping for...though it does mean my total HQ points cost is ridiculously high.

Lukus83 wrote:Excellent. That's what I was hoping for...though it does mean my total HQ points cost is ridiculously high.

Just a heads up, this will probably be FAQ'd so I wouldnt invest too much $$ until the faq hits the site.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
Just a heads up, this will probably be FAQ'd so I wouldnt invest too much $$ until the faq hits the site.

Deathmark heads and Praetorian staves on Necron Warrior bodies. Even if you make five extra Crypteks this way, it's not too expensive and uses a lot of leftover components. I would certainly suggest it until the FAQ comes out, it allows you to take 5-man Troops units with 2 'special' weapon models- it's a great option. I look at it as an additional option in the Necron Warrior entry, "Up to two Necron Warriors may change their gauss flayers for an eldritch lance for 22 points a model."

I'd say the best you could do was nominate 2 different enemy units. As if they both have the same effect it is satisfied in rolling the D3 the first time...

I would certainly suggest it until the FAQ comes out...

And conversely I would not suggest it. No reason wasting time developing a tactic that is very likely to be wiped out with the first FAQ.

Remember, EACH Royal Court you take can be made up of 0-5 Crypteks and/or 0-5 Lords. With two Overlords, you can have up to 20 Royal Cout members...

With everything taken into consideration, this could support the "2 Lords/Crypteks from 2 Royal Courts" standpoint even if you don't max out the courts(besides, they would be expeeeensive points-wise). The fact that the option is there, makes me think they intended for the two joining a unit.

Though, upon FAQ time, we shall see the true intention...

However you've not taken into account that you don't have to assign them as squad leaders.

I very seldom post as numerous people on this forum have great credibility in their posts.

But on page 90 of the new codex it does say the are assigned to Lead a unit. I think there can only be one leader not counting IC's to lead a squad.

Just my thoughts.

Zenxzen wrote:I very seldom post as numerous people on this forum have great credibility in their posts.

But on page 90 of the new codex it does say the are assigned to Lead a unit. I think there can only be one leader not counting IC's to lead a squad.

Just my thoughts.

I'm missing the part that states two ICs cannot lead a unit?

Yes, 2 IC's can lead a unit but the Court is not IC's

Space Wolf Long Fangs with a Squad Leader and attached Wolf Guard. Both 'lead' the squad and neither are independent characters.

Zenxzen wrote:Yes, 2 IC's can lead a unit but the Court is not IC's

Okay, where is it stated that two models can't "lead" a unit? Also, what special attributes are designated to the "lead" (beyond a colorful story)?

Zenxzen wrote:I very seldom post as numerous people on this forum have great credibility in their posts.

But on page 90 of the new codex it does say the are assigned to Lead a unit. I think there can only be one leader not counting IC's to lead a squad.

Just my thoughts.

I think you're right that this is the intended meaning. The wording is pretty ambiguous though, and does seem open to two Royal Court members "leading" a squad. That said, I think this interpretation is against the spirit of the rule and will probably get FAQed before long.

In the SW codex page 92, Long Fangs Pack, the squad leader is part of the unit not an add-on and the Wolf Guard pack leaders page 86 are better worded but for me the same as in the Necron codex only one can join another unit and it its assumed to take leadership.

I play BA and SM but with my grandson I have allot of Necrons and I am adding to them now but as I do agree with the way the new Codex is written it could be taken as one from each RC so FAQ is in order.

The qustions and debates here are what make me read the rules harded so ++ from you guys to make me better.