Codex Dark Angels, page 36 (Company Master):

"Rites of Battle: If a Company Master is on the table then all other Dark Angel units may use his Leadership (10)for Morale, Pinning and Leadership tests, but not Psychic tests."

Codex Necron, page 17 (Pariahs):

"Soulless: Any enemy with a model within 12" of a Pariah counts as having Leadership 7, unless it would normally be less than that."

These two seem to be in direct contradiction. How do I resolve this?


PS. Did a quick search and found two relevant threads (Ork Mob Size/Pariahs and Book of St. Lucius/Pariahs) unfortunatly they both ended unconclusive.

You use the LD of the CM, then it gets modified to 7 due to the Pariahs.

Well I'm not sure so I could be totally wrong and if I am I will probably be crucified for it but;
The Pariah's effect should be the dominant one, if a unit is within 12' of him then they are LD 7.
You could argue the other way but by that thinking if the Chapter Master is within 12' then all your dudes using his LD have 7.

Hope that is the answer you were looking for.

Edit for echo.

Not specifically disagreeing, but the counter-arguments I have heard run along the lines of;

"Yep, and then you can use the marshals leadership 10 for the test, you're not modifying the models leadership to 10, you're using a different models stat, which hasn't been modified. "

and


"Rites of Battle allows you to use the commanders leadership. It's stated pretty clearly that way. As such, if the commander is outside of the pariah's special ability range, his leadership is 9 or 10, whichever version you have. When it's time to take tests, then you may use his, which is 10."

So unless the Pariah is within range of the Master then you don't need to worry.

I honestly do not know how the rules stack, but my gut says this.

The Commander is relaying orders thru the marines short range communications. The pariahs send out an aura of fear. I think (and this is based only on action movies) that the fear would take hold of the marines as the commander's voice is heard demanding a response.

"Echo 2, do you copy? Damn it Artimos! Answer me!"

So I vote for Soulless to take priority.

I disagree, The rites of battle rule say, and you have to pay attention "may use his Leadership"

The rules for Pariahs are to lower the enemy units leader ship to 7 within a certain number of inches from them

So here we go.

1) the unit is in range and has its leader ship lowered to 7

2) They must take a leadership check for whatever reason.

3) The SM player decides to utilize rites of battle which state that he "may use his Leadership" (meaning the Company Captain)

4) Note: the rule does *not* say it adjusts or changes the leadership of the unit whatsoever, so the units LD is still 7

5) Note: the rule *does* say they may use the company masters leadership for LD checks. Notice there is *no* substitution. Only they are using the LD check from the Comapny master who very well may be across the table.

6) This does mean if the Company Master is within the range of the Pariahs and the SM player wishes to utilize Rites of Battle, then the LD used would be a 7.

Exactly. The Pariah's ability reduces the Leadership of the models within 12". Unfortunately for them, those models (if there is a character with Rites of Battle on the table) can USE the leadership of that character instead of their own, reduced LD.

So "using" is not the same as "raising" or "replacing"? effectively, that is.

Im drawing a parallel to "hatches blown" and "doors open" in the Drop Pod discussions.


(Devils Advocate)

Nope. If your Chaos Space Marine Aspiring Champion replaces his bolt pistol with a plasma pistol, he no longer has the use of the bolt pistol, but can choose to use his other weapons.

Under most circumstances a model uses its own LD for tests, or that of the highest-LD model in its unit. However there are a few special rules which allow it to use the LD of another model (or a different value entirely; see Mob Rule), in which circumstances the fact that the model's own LD has been reduced doesn't impact the test.

So an Ork Mob consisting of 9 models within 12" of a Pariah, uses 9 as the target-number for a given Break test and not 7?

I think we could all agree if there are 10 or more Orks. even if the Ld is 7 they would still be fearless.

This sounds more like fishing to me and really looking at a rule six kinds of side ways to be immune to perhaps one of the most rarely seen models in the game. This is more of a RAI type of thing. Verbiage changes over editions and somethings are implied. But this is just silly. Leadership drops if within range.

Why not just take it to the next level? I know I took 5 wounds but I'm using that guys LD so its 10 not 5. Just because your captain is talking to you doesn't mean you should not be running from the very real threat in front of you. Pariahs modify a models leadership regardless of how they got it or who they got it from.

Feel free to abandon common sense and argue this the other way. I do love rolling my eyes at these lil quibbles.

Actually I am the one playing Dark Angels. I just want to be absolutly sure.

Sha1emade wrote:This sounds more like fishing to me and really looking at a rule six kinds of side ways to be immune to perhaps one of the most rarely seen models in the game. This is more of a RAI type of thing. Verbiage changes over editions and somethings are implied. But this is just silly. Leadership drops if within range.

Why not just take it to the next level? I know I took 5 wounds but I'm using that guys LD so its 10 not 5. Just because your captain is talking to you doesn't mean you should not be running from the very real threat in front of you. Pariahs modify a models leadership regardless of how they got it or who they got it from.
Feel free to abandon common sense and argue this the other way. I do love rolling my eyes at these lil quibbles.

I have highlighted what seems to be your argument. Am I right?

Sha1emade wrote:This sounds more like fishing to me and really looking at a rule six kinds of side ways to be immune to perhaps one of the most rarely seen models in the game.

When you start your argument by ascribing a dishonest motivation to the opposition, you are creating unnecessary conflict, and sabotaging the validity of your own argument. The fact that Pariahs are a terrible unit and rarely seen actually REDUCES the likelihood that anyone is arguing out of self-interest in this discussion. I’d like it better if they were more useful, personally.

Sha1emade wrote:But this is just silly. Leadership drops if within range.

Being dismissive and proclaiming your opinion to be the right one, without actually addressing the opposing points previously made, is disrespectful and counterproductive.

Sha1emade wrote:Why not just take it to the next level? I know I took 5 wounds but I'm using that guys LD so its 10 not 5.

Are the situations the same? The Pariahs’ rule modifies the LD of the models in range. Rites of Battle allows you to use the LD of a different model (which may be out of range of the Pariahs) in PLACE of your LD. It changes how the test is taken. IIRC the wounds caused differential in a combat is a penalty on the test, not to the LD of the defeated unit.

Sha1emade wrote: Just because your captain is talking to you doesn't mean you should not be running from the very real threat in front of you.

Fluff /= rules. The radio example given earlier makes perfect narrative sense to me too. But you can use rationalizations to make a more or less reasonable explanation for any rule.

Sha1emade wrote: Pariahs modify a models leadership regardless of how they got it or who they got it from.

This is called circular reasoning. You’re substituting your conclusion for your premise.

Sha1emade wrote: Feel free to abandon common sense and argue this the other way. I do love rolling my eyes at these lil quibbles.

When you start with the assumption that people who disagree with you are most likely intelligent human beings, with some kind of reasoning behind their opinions, you get into fewer arguments, and more polite discussions. When you tell people that disagreeing with you is “abandon(ing) common sense” and that you roll your eyes at their “lil quibbles”, it looks like you’re trying to start a fight.

I can absolutely see the fluff justification for saying that units inside the range of the Pariah effect should be scared, and the proximity of the effect could quite reasonably overpower the impact of an officer who is across the battlefield. Of course, in real life and in literature there are many cases of soldiers who have overcome their fear of immediate dangers based on the courage that an inspiring commander, or even an abstract ideal, instills in them.

Ruling either way can easily be justified based on “fluff” or “realism”. When we’re discussing rules in this forum, however, we generally go off the text first.

When I read the text, it tells me that the Pariahs’ rule reduces the Leadership of the model. Then Rites of Battle tells me that said model is able to use a different model’s Leadership when he actually takes his test. You can obey both rules. One just happens to circumvent the effect of the other.

Well thanks for pointing out that I was being obtuse. I was and I apologize. This one got under my skin a bit.

My reasoning is this. A parahia's power is basically a leadership modification with different wording to apply to ALL models in range. If rites of battle circumvents this why does it not change when the model is in CC vs other foes. Say loosing by 5? According to what you say it is reasonable to use the leadership 10 as the captain is not in that fight. So his heroism should transfer to them. So his leadership is not modified by the overwhelming odds. As you say this would also be justifiable by fluff both for and against because he is inspiring. If what you say is RAI then no DA with a captain on the board can ever be effected by leadership modifications positive or negative unless it effects the captain which would be easy to state as if that was the way it was meant. This just feels wrong and against RAI IMHO. The reason I fight aginst this is if it becomes a president for other types of rules discussions.

Just my 2 cents...

Thanks for the apology.

I see a clear mechanical difference between the substitution of one value for another, vs. a modifier placed on the test. The latter applies no matter which value you’re using in the first place.

Well how about the fact that no mention of UNMODIFIABLE is in the wording for the Captain might help put us back on track. Also we have to consider that the DA codex came quite a bit after the crons dex did. GW often does not add a lengthy sentence to help avoid one possible instance. Which makes these conversations happen.

Also it says ANY unit with a model with in range COUNTS AS having a leadership 7. I think the wording counts as pretty much solves the issue for me. Regardless how or what leadership the model has or had it is now 7 as it has A model in range which is the only criteria according to the crons dex and it has been met.

I believe the precedence for this would be vox casters. As they use the same basic mechanic. The Rites of Battle applies but would be overturned the moment it gets in range as the models now COUNT AS leadership 7. As Rites of Battle and Vox casters basically lend leadership but does not change the models existing Ld as this seems to be the problem with this discussion.

In short you can still use both. But common sense tells me it would run like this.

Squad 1 moves into the Pariahs range and it is reduced to ld 7. DA player says he is using the captains leadership. It is now counts as 10. However as they are still in the soulless bubbly it now counts as 7. Both rules and criteria are met for soulless and Rites of Battle. If Rites works it trumps soulless but not the other way around. As I see it all rules work if done like this and still fits with the RAI IMHO. Yes you have a leadership 10 but at the moment it counts as 7. Both rules satisfied.

Just my 2 cents.

If the model with Rites of Battle is not within range of Soulless, then the Ld check is taken at a 10, except for Psychic tests.

That seems like an assumption to me. Granted most of my reasoning is based on assumptions so each to their own I suppose.

The model within the range of Soulless still counts as having Ld 7. However the text of Rites of Battle does not say to substitute or replace the Ld value, it says you can use the Company Master's Leadership. Thus if he is not also in range of Soulless, the check is taken at 10.

Sha1emade wrote:Squad 1 moves into the Pariahs range and it is reduced to ld 7. DA player says he is using the captains leadership. It is now counts as 10. However as they are still in the soulless bubbly it now counts as 7. Both rules and criteria are met for soulless and Rites of Battle. If Rites works it trumps soulless but not the other way around. As I see it all rules work if done like this and still fits with the RAI IMHO. Yes you have a leadership 10 but at the moment it counts as 7. Both rules satisfied.

I've bolded the part I disagree with. (Disclaimer: I play neither DA nor Necrons.)

The DA squad never has leadership 10, nor does it count as having leadership 10. In this instance, the current Ld of the DA unit is completely irrelevant. What Rites does is allow a unit to test using another unit's leadership - it's a substitution, not a replacement.

So the real question is does a substituted ld get effected. I have yet to hear a convincing argument for or against this. My gut tells me that the final ld should be 7. Say if the Captain is attached to the squad in question but HE is out of range then the squad would still be 7. But if further away using rights of battle then it stays 10? Seems like a wording glitch that would be FAQed against if parahias vs DA was more popular. It just doesn't feel right to me. I play both armies and it still doesn't sit right.

LD 10 would be used.

Normal squad is LD 9 (or something)

Pariahs make them count as Ld7

Captain standing out of Pariah sphere of influence has LD10

Squad can use Captain's leadership.

Captain's leadership is 10.

Squad can use LD 10.

Alternatively, the unit uses the Captain's leadership of 10, but it is within 12" of a Pariah and has their leadership reduces to 7. So the unit uses Ld7.

Remember, the unit is using the Captain's leadership, and the unit is affected by the Pariahs.

The real problem is when the Captain gets within 12" of a Pariah model. Suddenly his Rites of Battle are useless, since his leadership is reduced to 7!

Nurglitch wrote:Alternatively, the unit uses the Captain's leadership of 10, but it is within 12" of a Pariah and has their leadership reduces to 7. So the unit uses Ld7.

Remember, the unit is using the Captain's leadership, and the unit is affected by the Pariahs.

Yes, the unit is using the Capt's leadership. They do not, however, have his leadership. The unit's leadership does not matter here at all.

The real problem is when the Captain gets within 12" of a Pariah model. Suddenly his Rites of Battle are useless, since his leadership is reduced to 7!

Yup, that's how I read it.

Well, as the wording of "Soulless" says "count as 7", the leadership value can be anything you like. It could be 1.000, but it counts as 7. It could be 10, but it counts as 7.

The Rites of Battle does not say "use Captains unmodified Leadership" so it can be modified.

The squad does indeed use the Captains Leadership value of 10. It just happens to count as 7 when the squad gets to use it. The way I see it, it is the only way for us to break no rules.

Shoot the pariahs before they get there.

Deadshane1 wrote:Shoot the pariahs before they get there.

I agree with Shane.... but aside from that I would like to say the same thing that about half the people on this forum are saying in pretty much the same way in the vain hope that my description of the rules will convince the poor lost souls who think that rites of battle doesn't trump the soulless ness of pariahs.

Disclaimer: I play neither necrons nor DA, but I play with marines and use Sicarius, so I DO havea personal stake in being right. However, I like to think that I'm objective enough to not argue for a position just because it helps me.

Probably not though.

It is true that the Pariah's effect reduces the leadership of the space marine squads within 12" to 7. However, all units outside of that bubble are unaffected. This means that the captain's leadership is still 10 right?

So, you have a squad that is close by the pariahs, with LD 7. If and when they are forced to take a leadership check, instead of using their LD7, they use the leadership of their captain, who is heroically directing them from behind.

The leadership value of the captain is unmodified as he is outside ofteh range of the pariahs, keeping him at leadership 10.

Because his leadership score is unmodified, the space marines use his leadership value.

If the rules said that all of their normal leadership scores were replaced by the captains, then the pro-necron side would be right, because the leadership of any unit of the unit had been replaced by the captains ,which was then replaced by a 7 as per the souless rule. Also, if the leadership of the squad followed the standard "counts as" rule, then again, the soulless rule would take precedence.

However, neither of these things occur, as the space marine squad merely temporarily uses the captain's leadership, which, as stated above is unmodified as he is out of the range of the 12" bubble.

Following this rule, if the captain is inside the 12" bubble, then the entire army may choose to use his leadership score, which is now a 7.

Well, as the wording of "Soulless" says "count as 7", the leadership value can be anything you like. It could be 1.000, but it counts as 7. It could be 10, but it counts as 7.

The Rites of Battle does not say "use Captains unmodified Leadership" so it can be modified.

The squad does indeed use the Captains Leadership value of 10. It just happens to count as 7 when the squad gets to use it. The way I see it, it is the only way for us to break no rules.

Not to mention, it is not much different then if the captain was attached to the squad but he himself was out side of the bubble. No one would question that the leadership used for the squad would in fact be 7. But if the unattached captain is all the way across the board then they benefit from his ld 10? Does this not seem strange and not the way the game or rule was intended. I agree with Steelmage99. It is the only way to use both rules and not break any of them. It also fits within the spirit of the game. It also makes more sense then: wow they are scary but I'm not gonna run because I've got a walkie talkie, good thing my captain wasn't standing next to me or we would all be running together.

Whether you feel it makes sense or not, Rites of Battle says they use that particular character/model's Leadership.

If he is not inside the affected area, then the Ld they use is 10. THEIR Leadership is 7, but they aren't using their own.

"Rites of Battle: If a Company Master is on the table then all other Dark Angel units may use his Leadership (10)for Morale, Pinning and Leadership tests, but not Psychic tests."

"Soulless: Any enemy unit with a model within 12" of a Pariah counts as having Leadership 7, unless it would normally be less than that."

So the unit of Space Marines can use the Captain's leadership of 10 but count as having leadership 7 when they do. Simple as.

Actually it says their leadership counts as 7. Not that it is 7 that it counts as 7. Their leadership isn't 10 either but they use ld 10 from the captain witch now counts as 7. Soulless says if ANY enemy unit with a MODEL within 12" COUNTS as LD 7. It seems pretty cut and dry. Rites of battle does not say use the captain's unmodified leadership.

Yes making sense does not matter in a rules discussion but it can help determine how a rule is supposed to work, kind of like a guideline. In this case all rules are satisfied and it makes sense. So a double whammy.

The problem with these two rules and where I think the Rites of Battle crowd is making their argument is when the rules happen. It never says apply after all modifiers for Rites or that it is unmodified.

To convince the Soulless group you need to show us a rule or rules that say a) rites of battle is unmodifiable. b) it is applied after all modifiers have been placed like soulless c) that using rites somehow trumps the fact a model IS with in range of soulless and now their ld counts as seven, regardless of where they got it, as that is soulless only criteria.

I just don't see the wording in Rites that would make this count without reading way to much into what it says.

Also in the main rule book it says that if there is a rules disagreement we are supposed to roll off for it. And......I got a 6.

What is the unit's Leadership? 7

What is the Captain/RoB owner's Ld? 10

Since they are using the captains ld of 10. Their effective ld would be 10. Soulless makes it count as 7. easy.

You have no RAW justification to suggest that the RoB model's Ld is lowered to 7.

All RoB says is they use his Ld. It does not say "in place of."

I'm sure we'll go through some elaborate system of semantic gymnastics now.

Trekari wrote:You have no RAW justification to suggest that the RoB model's Ld is lowered to 7.

All RoB says is they use his Ld. It does not say "in place of."

You are correct. It isn't lowered to 7. It counts as 7.

It can be 1.000, 10 or the square root if Pi.....it counts as 7.

If the RoB model is not in the area of effect, then his Ld is 10. The affected models use his Ld, which is 10.

Theirs has been dropped to 7 by being within the Soulless AoE.

They aren't using their Ld. It could count as 1,000, 10 or the square root of Pi....they aren't using their value, so it doesn't matter.

The wheels on the bus go round and round. Round and round. Round and round.

So basically both sides are convinced. This should be dropped unless someone brings forth a new approach.

I have said my piece and wouldn't mind seeing it the other way as I play DA. However the RAW just does not support this. This feels like the old discussion of a terminator in fact is not wearing terminator armor because it is not listed in his war gear. It strikes me as a wish list or looking for a potential loop hole. If there is a small rules difference use common sense. Common sense IMHO does not support RoB in this case. As RAI would suggest Soulless wins out as well.

By the way lets get more people in on this. RoB operates just like Vox casters, with minor wording changes. Why don't they get some love here.

A comparison to Book of Lucius might alsoprove relevant.

Shae1emade is right. I think we've come to the point where no one will be convinced by further argument, I suggest, in all my arrogance, that the topic be dropped before someone gets teste and sparks something nasty.

Oh and Shae1emade?

I rolled to see who was right, and I got a ten.. cause I was using rights of battle

LOL hahahahhaha!! Well your dice was within 12" of mine so it counted as a 7. AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I started it all over again!

Sha1emade wrote:Actually it says their leadership counts as 7. Not that it is 7 that it counts as 7. Their leadership isn't 10 either but they use ld 10 from the captain witch now counts as 7. Soulless says if ANY enemy unit with a MODEL within 12" COUNTS as LD 7. It seems pretty cut and dry. Rites of battle does not say use the captain's unmodified leadership.

Yes making sense does not matter in a rules discussion but it can help determine how a rule is supposed to work, kind of like a guideline. In this case all rules are satisfied and it makes sense. So a double whammy.

The problem with these two rules and where I think the Rites of Battle crowd is making their argument is when the rules happen. It never says apply after all modifiers for Rites or that it is unmodified.

To convince the Soulless group you need to show us a rule or rules that say a) rites of battle is unmodifiable. b) it is applied after all modifiers have been placed like soulless c) that using rites somehow trumps the fact a model IS with in range of soulless and now their ld counts as seven, regardless of where they got it, as that is soulless only criteria.

I just don't see the wording in Rites that would make this count without reading way to much into what it says.

Also in the main rule book it says that if there is a rules disagreement we are supposed to roll off for it. And......I got a 6.

Alright, let's take a stab at this one.

"If a company master is on the table, then all other Dark Angels units may use his leadership for Morale, Pinning, or Leadership tests, but not Psychic tests."

That is the exact wording from the DA codex. I think the key word here is 'use' his leadership. They do not have it, they merely use it.

With the pariah, you would have your leadership 8 marines reduced to leadership 7 (along with their LD 9 sergeant). This is uncontested.

However, what happens when that RoB leadership is brought in? Well, imagine that the pariah modifies their stat line (they now 'count as' having ld 7 right?). Well, with RoB it doesn't matter what their leadership is, as they use the master's instead.

You are right though, nowhere anywhere does it say the captain's leadership can't be modified, or is brought in before/after modifiers. The problem is that the captain's leadership isn't modified here. I just don't think this is relevant to the debate. They're USING his leadership, not TAKING his leadership. RoB doesn't modify their stat line, as the pariah temporarily does, it simply allows them to use a different value than their own when taking certain tests.

I'll use cars here as an analogy. Let's say that you own a VW. The pariah replaces your car with a Ford. However, you are also able to borrow your daddy's bimmer. What cars are you able to drive? Well you can use your car, which is the Ford, or you can use your daddy's car, which is the bimmer. Unless the pariah replaces your dads car as well, his car is unaffected by the pariah's ability, and does not disallow you from using it, so the ability to use it is entirely unaffected.

Yeah, you got it. It doesn't matter what their leadership counts as, because they're not using it.

Still not convinced. No new information has been brought to the table here as well as the same argument presented pretty much the same way. However from a new mouth and using a different tactic so that is better. However a nice presentation. I will respond by basically saying the same thing that has been said, effectively doing the same thing right back, however with respect I will change my verbiage and presentation but will end up saying pretty much the same thing. This has pretty much become a circular argument. We are really diving too much in to what the words say as opposed to what they should mean. Anyway... Round and Round. Round and Round.

Ok so my take on the TAKING and USING leadership. Is that what we really are down to? As far as I am concerned they are the same thing when all the chips are down. You roll dice based off of that number, period. In the end all models that have leadership USE leadership period, selective application of these words doesn't change that. Regardless of where they got it from. Say sgt, vox caster, captain and so on , what ever leadership they are USING, doesn't matter where it came from, the squad in question would have TEMPORY ownership of that LD for that test. I believe you are confusing where you get the LD 10 from and who is ends up with it. According to your example lets say: EXAMPLE: squad of 5 marines is in battle vs parahias. Pariahs kill 4 marines. Marines kill 0 paraihs. Leadership must be taken. However according to you it is 10 not 7. Well the marines still lost by 4. Well the captain is not in the fight and not with in 12" range so HIS leadership is not effected and they are just USING his leadership so it would be 10. This uses the same argument as what you are using right now. Problem is I don't think anyone will try this one on as they will lose and they know it. It comes down to the fact that his leadership has to be modifiable or the entire army becomes broken. They USE his leadership that they had TAKEN from the captain and it would be 6 after the -4 combat resolution if they were fighting say, smurfs. So it is modified in the same combat but not effected by soulless? One modifieer works but not the other? Principle is the same. I still don't buy it. Can't duck one modifier and not the other.

Thank you and I would like to dedicate this novel to my family. Who have been supportive and....


Just my 2 cents....

You've made up your mind, enjoy your game. Good luck getting people to accept your point of view, however.

Right back at ya. Gotta love obscure rules. Hope this never comes up however. We have all pretty much made up our minds on this one. One way or the other.

Wait wait wait wait wait...

"If a company master is on the table, then all other Dark Angels units may use his leadership for Morale, Pinning, or Leadership tests, but not Psychic tests."

Pariah gene (Im a bit hazy on the fluff buut) and all that, anti-psykerness. Basically its a psychic effect, pretty obviously so.

Granted actual psychic tests are not being made or taken but it does make a note of not being able to affect (effect?) psychic tests.


-As for the wording, well.. they may use his LD10. Thier ld 8 (or 9 sm's) which get lowered to 7 when within range of the souless ability

- They choose to use the chapter masters LD10 score. They now have LD10

- Thier still within range of the 12'' souless ability thus the LD is reduced to 7.


How could a normal grunt space marine be guided by a commanders presence or command where that same commander would be effected and reduced by that power. It doesnt make logical sense. Another point for the pro souless arguement.

All I can see for the pro RoB argument is a symantics issue on the wording.

Obviously wording isn't important at all when debating written rules.

...

Razerous wrote:
-As for the wording, well.. they may use his LD10. Thier ld 8 (or 9 sm's) which get lowered to 7 when within range of the souless ability

- They choose to use the chapter masters LD10 score. They now have LD10

- Thier still within range of the 12'' souless ability thus the LD is reduced to 7.

"The" leadership is not reduced to 7. "The unit" 's leadership is reduced to 7. But they are not using their leadership value of 7, they are using their commander's leadership value, which is 10.

Pick up the unit's leadership. Wad it into a ball. Throw it away. It's completely irrelevant. All that matters is that their commander's leadership value is 10, and that they can use it. Unless something happens to the commander, their leadership is going to be the same as his, which is 10 because of the specific wording of the ability 'Rites of Battle'. 'Souless' is not written specifically enough to override this ability because it only affects the unit and makes no reference to outside sources of leadership, like an Imperial officer's command bubble, Rites of Battle, or the Book of St. Lucius.

All I can see for the pro RoB argument is a symantics issue on the wording.

Right, and that's what wins the argument.

Sourclams, How about a Tactical Squad getting beaten in CC by 4? What leadership value will they "use" for their breaktest (assuming a Captain with RoB on the table)?

According to the rules for Morale Checks, p.43 of the rulebook:

"Morale checks (also called Morale tests) are taken by rolling 2D6 and comparing the total to the unit's Leadership value."

So, in order for a unit to 'use' the Captain's leadership for Morale check, using the Captain's leadership for such purposes would be the same as the unit having the Captain's leadership, since Morale checks are only made by rolling 2D6 and comparing the total to the unit's Leadership value.

Although we appear to be "on the same side", Nurglitch, I cannot allow that to slide in good concience. The unit is is expresly allowed to use the Captains Leadership by way of RoB. Codex trumps Rulebook.

Steelmage99 wrote:Sourclams, How about a Tactical Squad getting beaten in CC by 4? What leadership value will they "use" for their breaktest (assuming a Captain with RoB on the table)?

The base leadership is 10, because they're using the Captain's. To that they apply the -4 situational modifier for being beaten in close combat.

Now, before you scream that the Pariah's 'make you Leadership 7' ability is the same thing, you're right.

But there's another special ability in play that lets the DA player circumvent that by choosing Leadership 10.

It's much like Kustom Force Field granting vehicles two cover saves: on the one hand, it gives a nearby Trukk a 5+ cover save, because it is a model. Simultaneously, it gives a 4+ cover save because the Trukk counts as obscured. The Ork player then picks the 4+ cover save granted by obscurement granted by KFF because it's better in every way than a 5+ granted by KFF.

The unit is Ld7, but the player can choose to use the commander's Ld10.

And I agree with your reply to Nurglitch.

Steelmage99:

This discussion will be better served if you don't consider there to be sides at all. We're all on the same side for figuring out the truth of the matter, which is presumably why the discussion is even taking place in the first place.

That out of the way, I'm not saying that the unit cannot use the Captain's Leadership to make Morale, Pinning, and Leadership tests (excluding Psychic tests). Obviously it can. My point is that the semantic argument distinguishing between 'using' and 'having' a particular Leadership value is moot since by the rules there can be no distinction. Hence it is not a case of whether the Codex somehow 'trumps' the rulebook, but the case that in order for Rites of Battle to be applied, using the Leadership value of any model is the same as having the Leadership value of that model.

Take the Ld9 Sergeant presumably leading the Dark Angel squad: the unit always uses the highest Leadership value in the unit. Again, using a Leadership value is using a Leadership value.

Take the Leadership Tests on p.8 of the rulebook:

"If a unit includes models with different Leadership values, always use the one with the highest Ld value."

Yeah, and you've got a Leadership 8(7) tactical marine, a Leadership 9(7) Veteran sergeant, and way over in the corner, a Leadership 10 Commander.

Choosing between leadership 8(7), 9(7), and 10, 10 is highest.

Except that if the unit uses the Captain's Leadership, then the unit has a Leadership of 10, which counts as 7 due to the nearby Pariahs.

Except it's not.

Yup. As the rules indicate, both the rules for Leadership tests and Morale checks, using is having.

Only because you made it up.

You know why arguing with you is such a pain? Because you write your own interpretation of the rules and go "NUP!!! THEM'S THA RULEZ!!!" And then if people try to argue with you that your whacky interpretation of the rules actually is not the rules, you create some bogus logic map that kills a hundred thousand pixels while still simply screaming "NUP!!! THEM'S THA RULEZ GUYZ LALALALALA!!!!!"

What you quoted out of the basic rulebook is the rule for rolling a unit's leadership test. Except that the unit isn't using their leadership value, as indicated in the codex, which trumps the basic rulebook, it's using its commander's leadership value. This "OMG USING = HAVING" is some whacko thing you made up. Again.

And no matter what that number is , if you are in range of pariah it COUNTS as 7 (unless lower of course).
There's the word that makes the pariah power over rule the RoB.
when testing you use the Ld value , with RoB it becomes 10, But it is still the unit that tests . Not the commander, the units ld has become whatever his is. If in range it is counted as 7.
As much as i wish otherwise, the pariah's rule wins

Except that I didn't make it up. I pointed out what the rules say. The rules say that if you're taking a Morale check, then:

"Morale checks (also called Morale tests) are taken by rolling 2D6 and comparing the total to the unit's Leadership value."

The rules for Leadership Tests tell us that:

"If a unit includes models with different Leadership values, always use the one with the highest Ld value."

So what is the unit's Leadership value, normally?

The unit's Leadership value is normally that of the model with the highest Leadership value. That is the Leadership value that is used for Leadership tests and Morale checks.

So when the Dark Angel's Rites of Battle rule says:

"If a Company Master is on the table then all other Dark Angel units may use his Leadership (10)for Morale, Pinning and Leadership tests, but not Psychic tests."

That means that all other Dark Angel units on the board may have a Leadership of 10, they use Ld10 for Morale checks and so on.

So when the Pariah's Soulless rule says:

"Any enemy unit with a model within 12" of a Pariah counts as having Leadership 7, unless it would normally be less than that."

The Dark Angel unit, supposing it includes a Sergeant, normally has Ld9, because the Sergeant has Ld9 and Ld9 > L8.

Combined with the Captain's Rites of Battle, the Dark Angel unit now has Ld10, and uses Ld10 where Morale, Pinning, and Leadership tests excluding Psychic tests are concerned.

But within 12" of a Pariah, the unit's Leadership now counts as Ld7.

sourclams wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:Sourclams, How about a Tactical Squad getting beaten in CC by 4? What leadership value will they "use" for their breaktest (assuming a Captain with RoB on the table)?

The base leadership is 10, because they're using the Captain's. To that they apply the -4 situational modifier for being beaten in close combat.

Now, before you scream that the Pariah's 'make you Leadership 7' ability is the same thing, you're right.

But there's another special ability in play that lets the DA player circumvent that by choosing Leadership 10.

It's much like Kustom Force Field granting vehicles two cover saves: on the one hand, it gives a nearby Trukk a 5+ cover save, because it is a model. Simultaneously, it gives a 4+ cover save because the Trukk counts as obscured. The Ork player then picks the 4+ cover save granted by obscurement granted by KFF because it's better in every way than a 5+ granted by KFF.

The unit is Ld7, but the player can choose to use the commander's Ld10.

.

So, in effect, Rites of Battle are comparable to an army-wide Book of Lucius?

Not quite, because Lucius would let you ignore things like combat resolution, but yeah more or less same principle. Pariahs special ability attacks the unit's leadership, which they aren't using. It's like the car you aren't driving getting a flat tire.

Nurglitch wrote:If a Company Master is on the table then all other Dark Angel units may use his Leadership (10)for Morale, Pinning and Leadership tests, but not Psychic tests.

They're not using "their" leadership. They're using HIS, that guy, over there's ----> leadership, because the rule specifically says so. If the rule said 'units become Leadership 10', that would be a completely different animal. But they don't say that, you're writing it in.

That means that all other Dark Angel units on the board may have a Leadership of 10, they use Ld10 for Morale checks and so on.

No, that means they're leadership 8 or 9, or whatever, but they can use Leadership 10. You are re-writing the rules based on your interpretation, wherein everything becomes leadership 10. They're not Leadership 10, they're using another model's leadership, because that's what the special rule lets them do.

So when the Pariah's Soulless rule says:

Any enemy unit with a model within 12" of a Pariah counts as having Leadership 7, unless it would normally be less than that.

Yes, the leadership value that they are not using is 7.

In the 40K rules there are many places where the term "counts as" is used.
If one model moves in a unit the whole units "count as" moving, even though only one moved
vehicles pivoting do not "count as" moving even though they have.
Models with Relentless "count as" stationary for shooting
Twin linked weapons have 2 weapons that "count as" one with a re-roll
A vehicle Vulnerable to Blast/templates has every hit "Counts as" 2 hits.
This is a wording that is used to mean that even though a unit/model is in one state we treat it as if it is in another state.
Ilregardless of the units actual Ld if it is over 7 it "counts as" 7
The rule is clear ,it did not say you subtract or reduce the units value, It just treats it as if it was 7.
The SM unit in question is still Ld8, allowed to use RoB Ld10, but Counts As Ld7

I agree with Sourclams. This one is pretty RAW tight.

The Rites of Battle does not state anywhere that it 'replaces' anything.

Simply that you can 'use' (not replace or any other such non-sense) 'his' leadership.

So as long as the Master is still alive or his LD value is unaffected (through a variety of reasons) then the unit can use his (again note: not substitute, not replace, not change their LD value) for the morale/LD check.

Simply Read the Rules as Written on this one and it comes to a logical conclusion.

Every other post against either writes an 'interpretation' of the rule or claim the way the necron rule is writen that it doesn't matter are all opinions or interpretations, but not RAW.

I know RAW is not always right (4th ed Rapid Fire anyone?). But, this one seems logical and makes sense in both gaming terms and seems 'in the spirit of the game'.

See the Helm of Command in Vampire Counts FAQ for the GW answer on this. It is pretty clear

Bear in mind as well that the Pariah's rule states that the MODELS in the unit have their Ld set to 7. In other words, you have a Sgt with Ld9 and some Marines with Ld8, and all of them now have 7 instead.

Now, this means a Neural Shredder wounds on a 3+ (Str8 vs Ld7) as opposed to wounding on a 5+ on the Marines, and a 6+ on the Sgt. The models simply have a different stat line.

Now, you would not argue that they had to roll using a Ld9 or Ld8 with RoB just because they had a different stat line. The whole point of the ability is to use someone else's stat line instead of their own for the roll. Therefore, you ignore the fact their stat line now says "Ld7" instead of "Ld8" and use the stat line of the commander, which is to say Ld10.

Uses does not equal has, it simply means use one instead of the other. You do not replace anything, but instead reference another source.

So, do modifiers work against RoB? Say, losing by 5 wounds. Is rob modifiable? I think it is, because, you are still using the Commanders LD. That has been fulfilled rules wise. The next step would be to see if any modifiers were to come into place (losing combat, psi scream, or any special rules) Guess what, Pariahs are a special rule.

It's modifiable because there's nothing that says it wouldn't be, ala the Book of St. Lucius. Regardless of which leadership value they choose to use, 9 or 10, the Marines are going to carry the -5 penalty they lost combat by.

This is unlike the Soulless special rule, which has nothing to carry over. All it does is set the unit's leadership to "count as having leadership 7", and, as has already been explained, the unit is not using its own leadership.

Wehrkind:

That's not correct. The Soulless rule says:

"Any enemy unit with a model within 12" of a Pariah counts as having Leadership 7, unless it would normally be less than that."

The unit's Leadership counts as 7.

Likewise, since as I've shown earlier in the thread, the rules for Morale check and Leadership tests never say that a Leadership value is used, a Leadership value is something that the unit has. If a unit has a Leadership of 10, then it must roll 10 or under on a Leadership test or Morale check.

So either the Rites of Battle cannot apply, since it specifies a reference to something that has no extension in the rules, using, or using is synonymous with having.

I see your logic Nurglitch and where you are coming from.

But as the rule quoted: "Morale checks (also called Morale tests) are taken by rolling 2D6 and comparing the total to the unit's Leadership value."

Note the "...comparing the total *to the unit's Leadership value*."

this tells me that you make a LD/Morale check and compare it to what it says on the paper.

And, "If a unit includes models with different Leadership values, always use the one with the highest Ld value."

Really has no bearing on this, because this rule just says if you have a guy in the unit that needs to take a morale/Ld check, then use that dudes LD.

In the case of the Parriah rule, That "dude's" LD would also be a 7.

What I am saying: Is, Yes, you do roll a morale check versus the printed paper of the LD value of said unit (baring a higher one in the unit).

But Rites of Battle allows you to *use* the LD value of the commanders. His is unadjusted.

Look its like saying the commander himself has to take the LD test. Since the Commander is nowhere near the parriahs, then he uses his un-adjusted one.

Thats how Rites of Battle reads to me. Simply the unit *uses* (as it says in the rule itself) the LD value (as printed on paper) of the commander himself.

EDIT: To show a 'precedence' of sorts.

The Ork Mob rule 'does' use the word 'substitute' for its leadership change. And hence when in range of a parriah unit would have its leadership lowered to 7. As their LD was literally substituted for a higher one. This is *not* how Rites of Battle is worded. There is no substitution. Only the word *use*.

Also I know this is waaay off base here. But I did look up that Vampire Count FAQ about the helm of command and a unit under its influence and another unit that would 'lower' their stat line. And GW in this case ruled that when using the helm that the unit in question still uses the helm owners stat instead with no modifiers from the offending unit.

paxidon:

The connection is that Morale checks are taken by comparing the unit's Leadership value to the results of a 2D6 roll. And the value used as the unit's Leadership is the highest Leadership of its constituent models.

As you say, "if you have a guy in the unit that needs to take a morale/Ld check, then use that dudes LD", the combination of those two rules implies that the unit uses the Leadership value that it has.

In the case of the Soulless rule, the Leadership of the unit's constituent models is not affected, and what counts as Ld7 is the unit's Leadership.

Since, due to the Soulless rule being in effect, the unit's Leadership counts as having Ld7, you use that for Morale, Pinning, and Leadership checks that the unit has to make.

Where Rites of Battle is in effect, a unit uses the Leadership of the Captain. Where it uses the Captain's Leadership, and that is Ld10, the unit has Ld10 for Morale checks, Pinning tests, and Leadership tests excluding Psychic tests.

So a unit under the effects of both the Rites of Battle and Soulless has Ld10, but counts as having Ld7, and hence uses Ld7.

Naturally I agree that where Soulless does not affect the Captain, his Leadership remains unaffected. But the Captain does not take the Morale checks, Pinning tests, and Leadership tests; the unit using his Leadership does.

And since the unit using his Leadership has his Leadership, since Morale checks and Leadership tests are made using the unit's Leadership, and that unit is affected by Soulless, they count as having Ld7.

Nurglitch wrote:
And since [I made up that] the unit using his Leadership has his Leadership, since Morale checks and Leadership tests are made using the [Captain's] Leadership, and that unit is affected by Soulless, they count as having Ld[10].

Couple little changes there.

As I've said before, do you not find the LD before any modifiers? That is the 1st step. Determining what the units LD is or who's you're gonna use. The next step is applying modifiers. After you get the LD and subtract the modifiers, then you roll the test. This is the sequence correct? If I am, then the result would be that the souless rule would be in place.

I would buy that. Much simpler that has been said but effective I think.

thanoson wrote:As I've said before, do you not find the LD before any modifiers? That is the 1st step. Determining what the units LD is or who's you're gonna use. The next step is applying modifiers. After you get the LD and subtract the modifiers, then you roll the test. This is the sequence correct? If I am, then the result would be that the souless rule would be in place.

This.

Basically the Argument here is either

-Marines get LD10 from RoB guy (sorry don't know his name), then get modified down to 7
OR
-Marines get modified to LD7, then get LD10 from RoB guy

Okay, Looking at both codices (is the newest DA codex 2006?), the rules are:
Pariahs: Soulless: Any enemy unit with a model within 12" of a Pariah counts as having leadership 7, unless it would normally be less than that.
RoB: If a company master is on the table then all other Dark Angels may use his leadership for Morale, Pinning, and Leadership tests, but not Psychic tests.

I still think that the proper order is: They USE the guy's LD for tests, which is then MODIFIED by Soulless to 7

---

ALSO, another possible way of looking at it is: "...all other Dark Angels may use his leadership for..." Notice the "may"? Maybe this is a case wherein they couldn't, as it is being reduced to 7 and not allowing anything else to happen?

---

Of course, as has been said already, the argument is wholly about what order the two rules go in, to decide the outcome.

I would say that is the meat of the argument. The ultimate problem is the order of events. It almost comes down to personal choice at this point. Some say before some say after. Don't think either side will concede with out a proper FAQ. Luckily this is not that common.

Also, I am not sure if anyone thought of this, but I thought it might be worthwhile to email GW with the question, JUST to see what they have to say. I am not sure how much faith you guys put into GW's responses, but it's worth a shot anyways...

But yeah, this WHOLE THING is all about the order in which the rules apply (Which I still think is get base value (RoB) then modify (Soulless)).

The problem with your argument is that both of these powers/abilitlies is that both have the same effect on the Ld value.
Yes the marines are Ld8
they are within 12" of a unit of Pariahs
There is a commander with a Ld of 10 with the special rule Rites of Battle.
given every unit may use the commanders Ld (10)
unit of SM is within 12" of unit of pariahs
Unit of SM Ld is 8
Pariahs rule souless kicks in.
Pariahs go.you count as Ld7
SM's go wait we have RoB and we get to use our commanders Ld so we are Ld10
Pariahs go,you still count as Ld7


we don't care what your Ld value is , we still treat it as Ld7. we don't change your Ld we just treat it as Ld 7

SeattleDV8 wrote:The problem with your argument is that both of these powers/abilitlies is that both have the same effect on the Ld value.

No, they do not, this is a misconception that people are reading into the scenario which completely skews their perception of the interaction of the rules. One special ability nukes a unit's leadership. My unit is close to your unit so your unit's leadership is bad. This is what Soulless does.

Rights of Battle is not the inverse of this. If Rights of Battle said, "All models become Leadership 10" then Soulless would take precedence. What Rights of Battle *actually* does, however, is to let you use a different unit's leadership. This is specifically what the special rule Rights of Battle says; the unit may (is not obligated to, but may) use the Captain's leadership. It pulls in a different unit's leadership. That is different from simply making your models leadership 10.

Here's the closest analogy I can think of:

I have $800 in my bank account.

Someone hacks my account and steals $800.

However, I have my friend's PIN number and ATM card, because he gave them to me and told me to go hog wild. My friend has $1,000 in his account.

[Now, the question here is not 'how much money is in my bank account (what is my Leadership Value), we don't really care. The real question is 'how much stuff can I buy?' (the leadership I use for passing tests), and the answer to this one is obviously $1,000.]

BUT BUT SOULLESS! SOULLESS MEANS ALL YOUR MONEY IS GONE!!1

No, the only way Soulless (the hacker) can affect my buying power is if it also goes and steals my friend's account balance (within range of the Captain).

This is the difference between using a different unit's leadership (which is what Rights of Battle specifically says it does) and having the same leadership value as another unit. If Rights of Battle simply gave you Leadership 10 (I think Sicarius' rule is worded this way), then there would be no argument. But that's not what RoB does.

As sourclams said, Everyone seems to be misunderstanding the Rites of Battle rule.

Rites of Battle does not make the units LD equal to the Commander

Rites of Battle does not make the units LD equal to the Commander

What it does is allow the unit to *use* the LD of another unit (Commander) instead of their own for Morale/LD checks

Read it well.

The units LD is and has always been 7 per the Parriah rule when in effect.

They (the unit) may decided *not* to use *their* LD of 7 and opt (as per RoB) to use another LD for the morale test.

The LD in question is the Commanders who in this scenario is across the board and unaffected by Parriahs.

So, 1) They (unit) *are* LD 7.

2) They (unit) must take a morale check

3) For the morale check, they (unit) use the LD value of the Commander

Where everyone seems to be misunderstanding is that when using the LD of the Commander, then at that point it is reduced to 7. Edited: This is not the case.

How can this be, the Commanders LD is *not* 7. It is 10. Its as if the Commander himself must take the LD test.

Edited again to keep from double posting

Lets look at the Rule for morale checks from the BGB itself and break it down.

"Morale checks (also called Morale tests) are taken by rolling 2D6 and comparing the total to the unit's Leadership value."

So first, you roll 2D6

Second you then compare to the "*unit's Leadership value"

The Pariah rule changes the LD of the of the unit to 7

The RoB rule allows the unit to not use their LD value as needed by the BGB quoted above, and instead you make the 2D6 roll and per the RoB rule then check it against the value of the Commander. The Commander's LD value is not affected by the Pariah in this scenario and his LD is the unaffected value of 10.

Sourclams, I realize that debating with people online can be frustrating, but being snide and snarky doesn't help the discussion at all and simply creates animosity. Please stop this, as it is a form of trolling and not allowed on Dakka.

Thank you.

OH OH! I got an answer from GW already! Here it is:

Hi Sean,


Good question, and over much debate, we have determined that the rites of battle rule happens first, so their Ld value would be increased to 10, then the Pariahs would cause it to drop to 7.


Jeff Armstrong
Direct Services
Games Workshop Canada
1-888-498-7655

So there we go, an "official" response from GW to answer this question. AGAIN the soulless rule does actually win out.

Anyone ever heard of Jeff Armstrong? John Spencer is the only 'sanctioned' rules guy at askyourquestion@GW. 8 ball, I understand where you're attempting to come from, but the unofficial Rulez fellas' and customer service reps opinions don't actually count for anything. John Spencer has claimed that Deff Rollas don't work when ramming vehicles, but all the tournaments still let you do it. It's a dichotomy that I also find to be very frustrating, that GW employees' opinion have no weight at GW sanctioned events, but that's reality.

Iorek: I've been self-editing posts multiple times for that specific purpose. Kill Krazy can testify to that, I've talked to him a couple times. Don't know what to say beyond that.

... Only the Rites of Battle rule doesn't ever "happen." It does not change anything stat wise, it merely lets a unit use someone else's stat.

Padixon nails it I think. Souless changes a stat. RoB changes which stat you use, specifically one on someone else's line.

Except that Soulless doesn't change the unit's Leadership, it simply makes the unit's Leadership count as 7. Where the unit's Leadership counts as 7, it uses Ld7 for Morale, Pinning, and Leadership tests.

Except when it uses someone else's Ld.

Unfortunately, Wehrkind, that is incorrect.

Regardless of whose Leadership value is being used by the unit, whether it is the Company Captain's or that of the model with the highest Leadership value in the unit, Soulless makes it count as Ld7.

Exactly Nurglitch...

Soulless makes it LD7 regardless of whatever else happens, obviously including RoB

Also yeah, OF COURSE none of the people at GW except for one person knows anything.

but the unofficial Rulez fellas' and customer service reps opinions don't actually count for anything.

EDIT: And Sourclams, your opinions then count for what exactly...?

Nurglitch wrote:Unfortunately, Wehrkind, that is incorrect.

Regardless of whose Leadership value is being used by the unit, whether it is the Company Captain's or that of the model with the highest Leadership value in the unit, Soulless makes it count as Ld7.

This is wrong. Soulless does not say that the unit "counts as having LD7 for moral, pinning, and leadership tests," at which point it would be overriding the RoB rules. It also does not specify a time that the effect takes place, that may in some way suggest that it overrides RoB.

All that soulless does is say that the unit "counts as LD 7," but remember that marines usually "count as LD 8." It doesn't matter what their own leadership is, as they get to use their company master's leadership anyways.

Again, the rules for soulless do not say that "the unit must use LD7" just that they "count as LD 7." However it says "unit"; the unit counts as LD7. This is why it doesn't matter, the unit is not using it's own leadership value, it is using a different leadership value that is outside the realm affected by soulless. The units effectively do not take these tests, their leader does it for them, and since he isn't affected by soulless neither are tests taken by these units.

I understand where your argument is coming from, but like sourclams said you're simply reading too much into the rules. Soulless makes the UNIT count as LD 7, it does not require that they use their own leadership for all tests. There is no clause in the rules for Soulless that say it swoops in after RoB is initiated to replace that borrowed leadership, simply that it alters the unit's base leadership value by making it count as something lower.

I fail to see where it says it DOESN'T replace borrowed leadership, or that it CAN'T change the "borrowed" value now being used.

That said, I don't want to become a big arguer in this (even though I am a Necron player, I have never played against DA), but I WOULD really like to see this get resolved, for both sides, so that this kind of argument doesn't happen ingame.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath:

I'm not reading anything into the rules, I'm simply showing what the rules entail where we follow their text, and they entail that a unit affected by both the Rites of Battle rule and the Soulless rule count their Leadership as 7.

Let's go through this carefully:

The Soulless rule does not replace the unit's Leadership, and the Rites of Battle rule does not let the unit borrow the Company Captain's Leadership. The terms in those rules are 'counts as' and 'use', respectively.

The Leadership Tests and Morale Checks rules treat using a Leadership value and having a Leadership value as equivalent, so the argument that the unit tests on L10 instead of Ld7 when the Company Captain in unaffected by Soulless is invalid.

Here is why:

The Morale Checks rule simply refers to the unit's Leadership.

The Leadership Tests rule employs the term 'use', so that when a unit takes a Leadership test, like a Morale check, it uses a particular Leadership value to judge whether it passes or fails that test. Normally, i.e. according to the basic rules for Leadership Tests, the unit uses the highest Leadership value that it has available among its members.

So, since having and using are equivalent by the rules, arguments predicated on their difference are invalid where the rules are concerned.

Since the Rites of Battle rule permits a unit of Dark Angels to use a Company Captain's Leadership in the specified circumstances, to use a Leadership value from outside of that unit's members, and the Leadership value that it uses is the unit's Leadership value, that makes the Company Captain's Leadership value the unit's Leadership value in those circumstances.

Except that when the unit is also affected by the Soulless rule, it counts as having Ld7. Regardless of whose Leadership value is being used, it counts as Ld7 in all circumstances.

What you say might be true sourclams but what eight ball and Jeff Armstrong have said should not so easily be brushed off. It is the closest to a "official" answer we have so far. We can all hold out for the FAQ but that answer might be a glimpse of what we could see.

Nurglitch wrote:The Soulless rule does not replace the unit's Leadership, and the Rites of Battle rule does not let the unit borrow the Company Captain's Leadership. The terms in those rules are 'counts as' and 'use', respectively.

The Leadership Tests and Morale Checks rules treat using a Leadership value and having a Leadership value as equivalent, so the argument that the unit tests on L10 instead of Ld7 when the Company Captain in unaffected by Soulless is invalid.

This is something you have simply asserted. The rule you referenced explains a leadership test, whereby you roll 2d6 and compare it to the unit's leadership. However, RoB lets you use the Chapter Master's leadership instead of the unit's leadership.

Soulless also affects the unit's leadership. However, again, the unit's leadership isn't at play. The unit is instead using the master's leadership, which the rules for soulless do not affect (he is not within the range, and it doesn't say "the unit and any unit whose leadership they are using."

Nurglitch wrote:The Morale Checks rule simply refers to the unit's Leadership.

They do, and the codex-specific rule Rites of Battle overrides this, and allows them to use another units leadership

Nurglitch wrote:The Leadership Tests rule employs the term 'use', so that when a unit takes a Leadership test, like a Morale check, it uses a particular Leadership value to judge whether it passes or fails that test. Normally, i.e. according to the basic rules for Leadership Tests, the unit uses the highest Leadership value that it has available among its members.

The highest leadership value is the unit's leadership, but remember we're not talking about the unit's leadership anymore, we're talking about the master's leadership.

Nurglitch wrote:So, since having and using are equivalent by the rules, arguments predicated on their difference are invalid where the rules are concerned.

Back this up. You simply asserted it based on a default scenario, which Rites of Battle overrides.

Nurglitch wrote:Since the Rites of Battle rule permits a unit of Dark Angels to use a Company Captain's Leadership in the specified circumstances, to use a Leadership value from outside of that unit's members, and the Leadership value that it uses is the unit's Leadership value, that makes the Company Captain's Leadership value the unit's Leadership value in those circumstances.

But it is not the unit's leadership, it is the Chapter Master's leadership. There is no "replace" in the rules, there is simply a "use" in the rules. All equivalencies you have drawn between these two terms you asserted on your own. "Use" and "replace" are different in that the latter changes the value on the unit's stat line, while the former alters the way a test is taken to "use" a different unit's leadership.

Nurglitch wrote:Except that when the unit is also affected by the Soulless rule, it counts as having Ld7. Regardless of whose Leadership value is being used, it counts as Ld7 in all circumstances.

This is the crux of the argument between the two sides. Actually, I should make that three sides.

You are arguing that "using = having," and that the master grants ownership of his leadership value to the unit, which is then modified by soulless as it is now "their" leadership, which always counts as 7.

Another side is simply saying that the unit always counts as having LD 7 for the purposes of taking tests.

The rest of us are arguing that since soulless only affects the unit's leadership, and RoB allows an alternative to the unit using their own leadership, it circumvents soulless since the pariah is not in range to affect the chapter master.

I disagree with your argument because I do not think that there is anything in the rules to back up "using = having," and that assuming that it is the case in the absence of such a specific rule is unreasonable. DA marines HAVE a leadership of 8, but they instead USE their leader's leadership of 10.

I disagree with the second argument because of the wording in soulless. It states that the unit counts as having leadership 7 while in range of the soulless ability, thus why I have bolded "unit" every time I used it in this post. The unit has a different leadership value now because of soulless, but RoB changes the way they take tests to let them use a different unit's leadership as an alternative.

Like my car analogy, or Sourclam's bank account analogy, it doesn't matter what soulless does to your stuff, since you're using someone else's stuff instead.

Sha1emade wrote:What you say might be true sourclams but what eight ball and Jeff Armstrong have said should not so easily be brushed off. It is the closest to a "official" answer we have so far. We can all hold out for the FAQ but that answer might be a glimpse of what we could see.

It's not going to get an FAQ because it doesn't need one; the rules are actually pretty explicitly clear on this. I understand where the grey area lies, but let's face it, if GW isn't going to errata DA storm shields to be 3+ invuln, they're not going to clarify this issue either.

As to the Jeff Armstrong officiality issue, there's only one guy who answers customer rules questions in a remotely official capacity, and that's John Spencer. Now, added to that, even John Spencer is largely ignored by the 40k playing community (including by Nurglitch on his ruling on Gate of Infinity and models locked in assault), because even though he may be the "voice" of GW, insofar as there is one, his answers are not easily replicable or referrable (official FAQ document).

For that reason, YMDC resorts to a very literal and narrow reading of the rules, looking for exactly what is offered in the rules. That's why I personally try to shoot down individual interpretation and asserted rules-writing-in because although reasonable, they are not the rules. Everyone can play the game however they want, but they come to YMDC to see what's "correct", not what is "right".

So that's the counter to the "reasonable interpretation" argument, for the literal argument all you have to do is read Piraterobotninjaofdeath's response, because as far as I'm concerned he's got it.

Well if it was so clear Sourclams then this thread would not have gone on so long with VASTLY differing opinions. So it is not as "explicitly clear" as you might suggest. Both sides have clear and convincing arguments. In the end we will all play this rule as we see fit. We would all like to see the magic FAQ that I agree we will not see. However others might take what Jeff said as close to a GW response as possible. Given how much is done by committee with GW and how hard it is to do a FAQ for them, getting any answer is better then no answer. So I'm just saying I agree that Jeff's response is not a end of discussion answer till it is put into a FAQ we will never see. But it should be treated with a bit more respect than you have showed it.

Just saying...

I say you talk to the guy you are playing. One of two things I can see are acceptable.

1. Units within 12" are LD 7.

2. If you believe that you can USE his leadership then if the Pariahs are within 12" of the Master then his leadership is 7 and that is the number that can be shared.

What I think.
I think that you sub the Masters LD for yours so even if you take his 10 it still gets knocked down to 7.

OK guys here is the exact same instance in fantasy.. the rules are the exact same just with a different stat. Thsi is directly from the Vampire Counts FaQ

Q. If a friendly undead unit is targeted by an enemy spell or ability which modifies
the Weapon Skill of the unit (e.g. the Lore of Light Spell, Blinding Light) and a
Vampire Lord wearing the Helm of Commandment wishes to pass his Weapon Skill onto
the unit, which takes precedence? Is the unit's Weapon Skill considered to be 7
and then modified per the spell or ability, or will they use the Vampire Lord's
Weapon Skill in such an instance?

A. They will use the Lord's WS of 7. We recommend casting the spell on the
Lord instead!
S. Official Vampire Counts FAQ

You have to modify the RoB guy's Ld to affect the other unit's Ld. Since they are no longer using thier own Ld it doesnt matter what you do to their Ld stat. All that matters is they have the ability to use the RoB guy's LD (ie you havent turned that ability off or blocked it) and that the RoB guy isnt getting affected by something that lowers his LD. It is very simple.

I just don't buy a fantasy FAQ to solve a rare case in 40k. As the games are very different. The wording on the rules is very different. The impact on the game is different. The fluff behind why they work that ways if different. The time between codex and editions is different.

I appreciate the attempt to bring in new information and new ways to look at the rule but the differences are too vast IMHO. Even if it had ruled the other way I would still have to dismiss it as relevant. It could be used as a REFERENCE to what GW might do if it were to get a FAQ. So in that aspect relevant. But not so much as a answer to this question. (See above for reasons.)

Just saying....

Sha1emade wrote:So I'm just saying I agree that Jeff's response is not a end of discussion answer till it is put into a FAQ we will never see. But it should be treated with a bit more respect than you have showed it.

Just saying...

I absolutely agree that's the way things should be, but the only rules guy at GW is John Spencer, and even his "rulings" are largely ignored. In the end it'll always come down to how you and your friends play it, but this won't be FAQed and the individual quoted is, I'm guessing, a sales liaison and not in any way attached to the official rules writers. Even though he "is GW", it's not in the capacity you're hoping for. It's like the architect of the hospital giving you a medical diagnosis.

If you think the rules and wording in this isntance is different then I highly suggest you reread both rule books and codecies. In this case there is NO difference except one deals with WS and the other deals with LD. One is a magic item and one is an ability.. in essence the same thing when it comes to rules completion.
Also who the hell cares about the "fluff" behind anything.. that has never affected how the rules actually work. Please cite anything that matters to support your anti-arguement other than "its the way I want it to happen."

Thanks.

You can't not use rules from one game and put them in another. It can help clear some things up but it doesn't help in this case.

The Necrons modify your leadership when you are within 12 inches. So you take the Leaders LD score. It still gets taken down to 7.

The models are scary. This isn't Dr. Drew telling you it's only in your head. They have sharp claws and they are wearing human skin. Fear them.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath:

The rules say that using a Leadership value is having a Leadership value. I've already pointed that out a few times already. To whit:

The Leadership Tests rule says:
"If a unit includes models with different Leadership values, always use the one with the highest Ld value."

So what is a unit's Leadership value? The Leadership value that it uses for Leadership tests.

The Morale Checks rule says:
"Morale checks (also called Morale tests) are taken by rolling 2D6 and comparing the total to the unit's Leadership value."

What gets used in a Morale check? The unit's Leadership value.

You thiking of flayed ones mauled?
I dont see a difference in the games or rules in this instance. You can modify a units WS in fantasy also..
Again stop trying to bring fluff into a rules discussion.

Soulless doesn't modify a unit's Leadership.

First

Please don't call me mauleed. mauleed is a guy that rode on Yakfaces coattail. I have no idea where he is now. You can call me MLY.

Second

I'm not using fluff. I'm simply saying that the rules is written that you have to use LD 7. So no matter what you say your LD is it's still 7. The rule here overrides RofB. It says you use LD 7. It doesn't say you have the option to use it.

I could care less about this rule. I don't use RofB or Pariahs. I however do care about people trying to abuse rules to their advantage.

Point 1
You got an IC that you hide in a squad that is not easy to kill.

Point 2
I have a unit that you can fire at all day.

Point 3
You let me get close to you and my rule says you have to use LD 7.

"Suck it up and be a man or woman" I'm trying not to be sexest.

( I did confuse the P's with flayed ones though. )

To Canaan

First Canaan you could attempt to not make this a personal attack and keep it civil and leave emotions at the door. Second many people read the rule as I have not just as you say "its the way I want it to happen." You asked me to cite anything that matters to support my anti-argument. Well given that you cited another game system entirely I shall do the same. In the rules for Candyland it says....

Actually GW rules SEEM to be written in a way that makes sense and from a FLUFFY perspective. As GW has always TRIED to use fluff as a explanation for how things work. Granted for game purposes sometimes they have to be ignored. Generally for balance issues. Why should fluff be COMPLETELY ignored in this case. It hardly unbalances the game and goes with the spirit of the game. You often have to look at a rule from the perspective of how it was meant to work. This can help cut threw some of the ambiguous wording. As both camps are locked on the RAW of the rule the next logical step is to look at what is it supposed to do. Or look at it from a Fluffy standpoint. I know how I read the rule and how you do. So my view BEYOND THE RAW is that this is not how it was meant to be played. DA magic walkie talkie makes the squad braver then if the guy talking to them was actually their. Makes no sense. Using common sense can help us to see how a rule was meant to be played. Given how we are split on this rule not only how it SHOULD work but also HOW it works.

As for the fantasy reference. How can you say their are NO differences and then put forth a laundry list of how they ARE different. You just shot down your own argument. Its like saying baking a cake is exactly like building a car except for the metal and the tools and the you can't eat as car and... This discussion is about differing interpretations of a few words. Introducing another game system and whole new verbiage on a vaguely smiler item hardly helps the discussion. As we are talking about one or two words in 2 codex's thats the meat of this debate. Those two words if changed would make it pretty clear and we would not be having this discussion in the first place. As they haven't changed the debate continues.

To sourclams

You do make a good point and I agree with you. However some people just want an answer so they can move on. This is their out so to speak. As I am sure some will use the obscure fantasy reference for an out. Both are probably not the best justification but at least it is something. I have no doubt we will both keep up the good fight till something surfaces to solve the problem. We both agree HOW it should work. We disagree on what the rules say. So it is worth the discussion as the 2 camps are not yet agreed.

Nurglitch wrote:

The Leadership Tests rule says:
"If a unit includes models with different Leadership values, always use the one with the highest Ld value."

This whole argument you're having hinges on the unit including the model whose leadership they are using. And when the Captain isn't part of the unit? Then this qualifier is thrown out on its ear.

mauleed wrote:The models are scary.

And Dark Angels are fearless [in the fluff] as well as sharing a near-hatred for the Witch that stems from their Primarch's own prejudice. Fluff goes both ways, the rules are really clear.

Nurglitch, your assertion that HAVING = USING when refering to Ld is false. You may USE the stat you HAVE, but sometimes you can USE the stat someone else HAS.

I think you need to clarify why you make the assumption that using a stat with a value X means you replace the stat's original value with value X.

All the rest aside..
What does it matter that that unit's Ld gets changed to Ld 7 when they arent even using their own Ld? They are using Mr. RoB.

Who is Mr. RoB. I know that isn't in any rulebook.

So you are using RoB. The rule says you have a LD of 7.

Now you're deliberately over-simplifying. A correct reading would be:

The unit counts as leadership 7.

The unit may use the leadership of the Captain.

The unit counts as leadership 7 is now irrelevant, because they do not use their own leadership.

Until you can show that the rule is written in a way that gives the unit a specific leadership value, you're stuck bouncing your 7's off of Captain RoB's Wall of 10.

So if the Unit is 12 inches from the captain does he share his 10 or the 7?

You can't have it both ways.

So you say you are using the Captains leadership and then I say my unit makes it 7. How is that wrong?

If the Captain was within 12" of the Pariahs, then it'd be 7. I don't think a single person is disputing that. If this is the premise you were operating on, then I can certainly understand your opposition to RoB functioning as written.

I see both sides to this arguement and I believe the intent of the rule was to make them LD 7. Until a FAQ comes out I'd have to say that RoB Trumps it.

Sourclams- Does my assestment of the order ring true to you? Do you not determine the LD you're gonna use before you figure in modifiers?

thanoson, that IS true, but Sourclams thinks that the LD they take is unmodifiable, because it's not theirs, but someone else's who conveniently gets put into their stats but is unmodifiable...

Still not sure about this...but I still think they get the value, which THEN gets modified.

I believe that it is the natural state of all numbers/stats in this game is to be modifiable. In order to remain unmodifiable, a number/stat has to be expresly stated as being so.

I have no direct rules quote to back this up. It just seem like a logical extension to make.

Sorry Soulclams But the UNIT is taking the test.
Yes they use the commanders Ld value ,but they are still taking the test.
The commander does NOT take the test
Any unit within 12" is effected by Soulless.
The Ld value is unimportant except if it is over 7.
The actual number is unimportant because whatever it is COUNT AS 7.
Those two words tell us that the true state of the unit is not used, we then treat it as the special rules state.

Quoted from Padixon:

The RoB rule allows the unit to not use their LD value as needed by the BGB ..., and instead you make the 2D6 roll and per the RoB rule then check it against the value of the Commander. The Commander's LD value is not affected by the Pariah in this scenario and his LD is the unaffected value of 10.

Soulless reduces the leadership of a unit within 12" to 7 but that is all it does. As stated clearly and explicitly within Rights of Battle, the unit is no longer using its own leadership.

If the Eldar Avatar had the ability to have one attack against a friendly unit instead resolved against itself as if it was the target, and the only attack in question was a melta shot, what do you think would be the resolution?

Sourclams- Does my assestment of the order ring true to you? Do you not determine the LD you're gonna use before you figure in modifiers?

Still not sure about this...but I still think they get the value, which THEN gets modified.

Based on the wording of Rights of Battle it doesn't matter which order you assign the two rules.

If RoB is done first, the unit ignores its own leadership value, takes its commander's leadership for all tests, and then Soulless nukes the leadership they aren't using to 7. The unit still carries any negative modifiers from combat resolution, pinning, etc.

If Soulless is done first, the unit's leadership is nuked to 7, then it ignores its own leadership value and uses the Leadership 10 carried by its commander. The unit still carries any negative modifiers from combat resolution, pinning, etc.

sourclams wrote:


Soulless reduces the leadership of a unit within 12" to 7

There's your mistake Soulless does not reduce the Ld. In makes the Units Ld Count AS 7 . Nowhere in the rule does it say the Ld of the unit is reduced.

You are correct. I paraphrased badly.

The unit is still not using its own leadership. Situation unchanged.

Exactly what I have been saying Sour. It is irrelevant what the unit within 12 Ld is. They are no longer using their own Ld they are using the RoB provided by the leader. There is no arguement that their LD gets modded to 7.. However, as stated, since the unit is not using their own LD the fear has no direct effect on them for purposes of Ld tests.

SO then you are saying that no modifiers are gonna be used then. No psi scream, no losing combat by 5. Because the commander isn't being affected by combat ergo they use his unmodified LD for all test. Does that sound right?

Nurglitch wrote:PirateRobotNinjaofDeath:

The rules say that using a Leadership value is having a Leadership value. I've already pointed that out a few times already. To whit:

The Leadership Tests rule says:
"If a unit includes models with different Leadership values, always use the one with the highest Ld value."

So what is a unit's Leadership value? The Leadership value that it uses for Leadership tests.

The Morale Checks rule says:
"Morale checks (also called Morale tests) are taken by rolling 2D6 and comparing the total to the unit's Leadership value."

What gets used in a Morale check? The unit's Leadership value.

Are you seriously still not listening to us here? We have shown why we think these lines you quote have no relevance, and rather than address our arguments you just keep requoting them over and over again.

"If a unit includes models with a different Leadership value, always use the one with the highest LD value."
So the DA unit would be leadership 9 because of the vet sergeant. The unit can either use that leadership, or use a special codex rule to override having to use that leadership and use the commander's leadership instead.

"Morale checks are taken by rolling 2d6 and comparing the total to the unit's leadership value."

Yes, this is the default scenario. However, the codex specific rule Rites of Battle gives an alternative to this, by allowing them to compare the total to the COMMANDER'S leadership value instead.


With RoB, the moral checks line now looks like this

"Morale checks are taken by rolling 2d6 and [either] comparing the total to the unit's leadership value [or comparing it to the commander's leadership value]"

This means that the unit can either use its own modified leadership of 7, or use it's commander's unmodified leadership of 10 (unless of course he too is in range of the pariah).

thanoson wrote:SO then you are saying that no modifiers are gonna be used then. No psi scream, no losing combat by 5. Because the commander isn't being affected by combat ergo they use his unmodified LD for all test. Does that sound right?

No, what we're saying is that you use the commander's leadership IN PLACE of the unit's own leadership. Losing combat by 5 means that the unit takes a moral test at -5. It may either use it's own leadership of 9, which would be modified to 4, or it would use the commander's leadership of 10 modified to 5.

This is because the wording is different. One says "takes a moral test at -5" while the pariah says "the unit counts as leadership 7." The former applies to all morale tests, while the latter simply changes the stat line on the unit (which RoB allows it to not use anyways).

We would not be arguing this if soulless was worded "the unit uses a leadership value of 7 for all tests" or "the unit takes tests at -x leadership" or "the unit counts as leadership 7, which it uses for the purposes of all tests." Likewise, if RoB said "a unit may replace its leadership with the commander's leadership" or "all units count as having the commander's leadership," or something else along those lines, we could see that RoB too would be modifying the unit's stat line, and soulless would take precedence. However, this is not the case and RoB instead offers an alternative to using the unit's own leadership. This allows it to bypass soulless entirely, so long as the commander is out of range.

Eight Ball wrote:thanoson, that IS true, but Sourclams thinks that the LD they take is unmodifiable, because it's not theirs, but someone else's who conveniently gets put into their stats but is unmodifiable...

Still not sure about this...but I still think they get the value, which THEN gets modified.

You mistake our argument. We're not saying that it's unmodifiable, we're saying that it's not theirs thus they never gain ownership of it (putting it into their stat line) which means that soulless never has a chance to modify it. They simply compare their 2d6 against the commander's leadership rather than their own, and he is outside the area of affect of soulless.

8 ball, just out of curiosity, are you and Nurglitch mates in real life? I notice you're Canadian and the low post count indicates that you're new to the boards.

You know Sourclams, I never thought of that...but no, I don't know him in real life....UNLESS, Nurglitch (if you're around), do you live somewhere near Winnipeg, Manitoba?

/offtopic

Eight Ball wrote:You know Sourclams, I never thought of that...but no, I don't know him in real life....UNLESS, Nurglitch (if you're around), do you live somewhere near Winnipeg, Manitoba?

/offtopic

eeeew winterpeg lol

//offtopic

rofl...yeah, luckily I live about an hour away from there, where, albeit still very cold, it is a bit...nicer...

where you from PRND?

(wow lots of offtopic here)

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath wrote:

thanoson wrote:SO then you are saying that no modifiers are gonna be used then. No psi scream, no losing combat by 5. Because the commander isn't being affected by combat ergo they use his unmodified LD for all test. Does that sound right?

No, what we're saying is that you use the commander's leadership IN PLACE of the unit's own leadership. Losing combat by 5 means that the unit takes a moral test at -5. It may either use it's own leadership of 9, which would be modified to 4, or it would use the commander's leadership of 10 modified to 5.

This is because the wording is different. One says "takes a moral test at -5" while the pariah says "the unit counts as leadership 7." The former applies to all morale tests, while the latter simply changes the stat line on the unit (which RoB allows it to not use anyways).

Under Morale Modifiers (pg 43), it says "This is represented by applying Leadership modifiers to morale checks, which can reduce the unit's Leadership value by -1, -2..."

The modifiers affect the unit's Leadership value, not the roll itself.

I think thanoson is right. According to your argument you're trapped into accepting that any unit using the commander's Leadership is immune to morale modifiers, which is a bold claim to be sure.

I don't think that can be so, because the Book of St. Lucius explicitly says replaced with the holders unmodified Leadership. This is different from Rites of Battle or the IG's Comms, which don't say unmodified. So, they probably can't be unmodified as it doesn't say so specifically when it does elsewhere.

Modifications seem different from the Pariah rule or the Culexus Souless rule. Perhaps they are not technically a modifier to LD. It's a replacement of the existing value with another value rather than (say) '-3 to LD unless it brings it lower to 7, in that case count as 7.' It changes LD without being an LD modifier, before any modifers applied by checks. Notice that the Pariah/Souless rules don't mention any checks directly while the Rites of Battle rule does. So as it's constantly on, the Pariah ability happens before any checks, which ironically means that Rites of Battle does work against it because it only works sometimes instead of always. Rites of Battle is a more specific rule.

I lean towards the intepretation that a DA unit without fearless within a Pariah's range of effect that loses a combat by 2 may take, through Rites of Battle, a morale check of 10, modified by -2 for losing the battle (LD 8). It's not required to take the check at LD 7 -2 because all rules seem like they do work fine. The Pariah changes it to LD 7, and during a check, the Rites of Battle allow another unit's LD (one which is assumed outside the range of Pariah at that time). If there were a DA unit with an LD of 2, they could still use the Rites of Battle to make it a 10 for the purposes of certain checks.

deadlygopher wrote:

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath wrote:

thanoson wrote:SO then you are saying that no modifiers are gonna be used then. No psi scream, no losing combat by 5. Because the commander isn't being affected by combat ergo they use his unmodified LD for all test. Does that sound right?

No, what we're saying is that you use the commander's leadership IN PLACE of the unit's own leadership. Losing combat by 5 means that the unit takes a moral test at -5. It may either use it's own leadership of 9, which would be modified to 4, or it would use the commander's leadership of 10 modified to 5.

This is because the wording is different. One says "takes a moral test at -5" while the pariah says "the unit counts as leadership 7." The former applies to all morale tests, while the latter simply changes the stat line on the unit (which RoB allows it to not use anyways).

Under Morale Modifiers (pg 43), it says "This is represented by applying Leadership modifiers to morale checks, which can reduce the unit's Leadership value by -1, -2..."

The modifiers affect the unit's Leadership value, not the roll itself.

I think thanoson is right. According to your argument you're trapped into accepting that any unit using the commander's Leadership is immune to morale modifiers, which is a bold claim to be sure.

You quoted his post, but I see you didn't quite get what he was saying.

He is saying that modifiers would work with RoB because modifiers affect the roll.

And in the parts that was not quoted he went on to say that soulless literally says "unit's leadership counts as 7" This *is* a stat line change. Not a modifier to a leadership check, like say a lost combat would be.

RoB simply allows a unit to literally *use* (as worded in the rule itself) the Commander's Leadership (his stat line) for the test (morale/pinning).

Again, I see this on as pretty RAW tight.

1) you have the soulless ability that modifies a stat line "unit's leadership counts as 7"

2) you have RoB ability that gives the affected unit to not use its own leadership and use one from the commanders instead.

3) modifiers are still added during a lost combat because a modifier (as you all agree) does not change a stat line (basically it does not make a stat line "count as" anything). But affects the roll itself.

4) Soulless is not worded that way at all. In fact it is worded as making a units leadership count as 7. As quoted above.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath wrote:

thanoson wrote:SO then you are saying that no modifiers are gonna be used then. No psi scream, no losing combat by 5. Because the
This is because the wording is different. One says "takes a moral test at -5" while the pariah says "the unit counts as leadership 7." The former applies to all morale tests, while the latter simply changes the stat line on the unit (which RoB allows it to not use anyways).

I just want to point out that Moral test are taken at a, in this case, -5 to the leadership of the unit in question. In essence the test itself isnt modified. the leadership used is.
I have no other point besides making sure te correct wotding is used.