Hello Everyone,

I'm currently working out my first tournament list, and I want to check some rules interpretations here...

When counting kill points, you count whole units that have been killed. (or units at end of game which have broken)
With Tyranids, units are defined in "broods"
To take a brood of 3 Zoanthropes, or 3 Lictors, by reading the codex, that would be 2 "units"

Each model in these 2 units have the ability to move independently of the other models in their unit.


As I see it, the RAW on this would be that you would not give up kill points for each single one of these models destroyed, only if all the models in these units were destroyed.
(so 2 units, 2 kill points. not 2 units, 6 kill points)

Am I reading this correctly, or are there more rules about Kill Points that I am unaware of?


Thanks,

-Fool Whip

they are all each seperate killpoints, because they act as seperate units.

just like a dedicated transport and the squad within count as individual killpoints.

Quite the same as the inquisitorial codexes and Death Cult Assassins. Separate units, individual KP.

edit: at least I have seven nightshifts in a row as an excuse ;-)

Each group of models required to stay in coherency is a unit, which means a brood of 3 lictors is 3 units, same with a zoanthrope.

I asked this question somewhere some time ago. They are all separate KP's. On a similar note spore mines are also KP's (which is 1 reason why biovores currently suck).

They are all seperate Kill Points. Anything that acts as a seperate unit is a kill point. So 3 Zoanthropes are 3 KP. A Marine Squad and Rhino are 2 KP etc etc.

So bye the same logic a 10 man Tactical Split into 2 5's each is a KP right?

Anarchyman99 wrote:So bye the same logic a 10 man Tactical Split into 2 5's each is a KP right?

Yes, that is correct. A 10 Man Squad with a Razorback Split into Combat Squads is 3 KP.

Wow, that really makes you think.

Also working the other way an IG platoon would normally be 3KP+ (command squad + 2 infantry squads) but using combined infantry squads you can get this down to 2+

Anarchyman99 wrote:Wow, that really makes you think.

Right. This is one of the main advantages of the Combat Squads rule. If you’re playing a KP scenario, you can keep your squads consolidated to minimize KPs. If you’re playing an objective mission, you can split them up to maximize Scoring Units.

Oh wow. Thanks Guys.

On a side note: The spore mines Biovores Shoot count as kill points? I thought that was just spore mines you "deep striked"

FoolWhip wrote:Oh wow. Thanks Guys.

On a side note: The spore mines Biovores Shoot count as kill points? I thought that was just spore mines you "deep striked"

Nope. The ones they fire count as KP, because you place the Model (which becomes a Separate Unit) and then see if it explodes or not.

That is RaW of course. RaP it doesn't come up because no-one uses Biovores anyway (They use 3 Zoanthropes and 2 Carnifexes )

Nope, they are kill points as well... Although I thought I read somewhere that if they directly hit something the immediately detonated and thus they are not placed on the table. I cannot verify this at the moment so dont take it as RAW or RAI.

On a side note, Tri, your comment about IG infantry platoons being worth 2 points if you blob up your guys is haunted by the FAQ of the BRB that stats that command squads are 2 kill points. One for the commander and one for the guardsmen. I know that it should be changed with the new codex, but I had a buddy who brought this up when I was playing a command squad. We got into a heated discussion (prob more my fault) over it. I tried to explain that none of the figures in the squad are ICs or classified as Retinues. I am assuming that this is because the 5th edition FAQ came out before the new edition of the IG codex, but it is still in there. Any idea how to argue this? Should I argue that because it does not say that the squad is a retinue that this would be akin to the sergeant (or other leader of a squad for that matter) having his other figures being a retinue? Just curious how to fight this arguement in an upcomming tournament. I shot an email to GW asking, but I know that one of the tenants of posting on YMDC as that these emails should not be relied on as they can be spoofed. Could I just say "new codicies take precident over old FAQs?" I know with the 'Nids, specifically the broodlord, it actually states when something is a retinue. I am just trying to avoid arguments at a tournement that I would like to be invited back to...

The reason Platoons are 2 KP is because you have the Infantry Squads Blobbed up, but the Platoon Command Squad CANNOT blob with them. Thus, 2 Units, thus 2 KP.

As for the Spore mines, it is put in the FAQ. If they land on target they detonate immediately, thus no model is placed, so no unit is made, so no KP is lost.

I understand that gwar, the point I was bringing up is that in the March 2009 FAQ of the BRB, it states that because the guardsmen count as retinues for the respective commanders (Platoon and Company commanders) the command squads cound as 2 KP. so that would be 2 for the command squad and 1 for the blobbed up squad being 3 KP. As I said, I know the FAQ should be FAQd, but how do I argue this other than to say that nowhere in my codex does it state that the command squad is a retinue?

Ah, I understand now. Well the thing is:
1) FAQ means nothing as it is not errata
2) Its for the old codex, and thus invalid.
3) I find bringing bricks and a Pillowcase helps these kinds of players see reason

zoans, tough as they are, make sense to be seperate killpoints each. 2 wounds each, 2+/6+ T4 is pretty darn survivable. and you really wouldn't want them as a unit anyway, you want to spread their abilities around the field. same with lictors (to a lesser extent)

Thats what I though. I wonder if I can find anyone with an old IG codex (not about to even ask for locations on the internet) locally to use it as a discussion for this issue. I guess the issue is how to argue that it is intended for a previous edition. I will prob argue the point (using SM scouts as an example) that Scouts are a retinue for the Scout Sergeant as it is basically the same thing (basic troops being upgrades for the leader of the unit).

s2ua7 wrote:Thats what I though. I wonder if I can find anyone with an old IG codex (not about to even ask for locations on the internet) locally to use it as a discussion for this issue. I guess the issue is how to argue that it is intended for a previous edition. I will prob argue the point (using SM scouts as an example) that Scouts are a retinue for the Scout Sergeant as it is basically the same thing (basic troops being upgrades for the leader of the unit).

Don't bother with that is he an IC? No ? Then the unit is only worth 1Kpt.

Tri wrote:Don't bother with that is he an IC? No ? Then the unit is only worth 1Kpt.

I agree with Tri. Follow this rule:

"If a character has a retinue, the character and his unit are worth 1 kill point each." BGB p. 91.


The FAQ entry is now obsolete and inapplicable thanks to the new IG Codex, in which Company/Platoon Commanders are NOT independent characters, the Vets/Guardsmen in their units are NOT retinues, and there's no such thing as a "junior officer".


-GK

GiantKiller wrote:

The FAQ entry is now obsolete and inapplicable thanks to the new IG Codex, in which Company/Platoon Commanders are NOT independent characters, the Vets/Guardsmen in their units are NOT retinues, and there's no such thing as a "junior officer".

-GK

Actually the Platoon Commander is classified as a junior officer (C: IG pg 36), although I argued stating that they are no longer ICs so that they do not count as a retinue. To be honest, the person I was having the discussion with stated that he hoped that they counted as one kill point because he was going to be building an IG army, so I dont think that it is going to be an issue to ignore that part of the FAQ, I'm more worried about how a TO will take that FAQ into account.

Better question: how many kill points are a hive tyrant and his accompanying tyrant guard worth? The guard are a retinue of sorts, but the tyrant is not and does not become an independent character.

whocares wrote:Better question: how many kill points are a hive tyrant and his accompanying tyrant guard worth? The guard are a retinue of sorts, but the tyrant is not and does not become an independent character.

Only 1Kpt because he is not an IC. Till its FAQ (or better) otherwise.

Tri wrote:

whocares wrote:Better question: how many kill points are a hive tyrant and his accompanying tyrant guard worth? The guard are a retinue of sorts, but the tyrant is not and does not become an independent character.

Only 1Kpt because he is not an IC. Till its FAQ (or better) otherwise.

Are you so sure? Even though the tyrant guard are specifically classified as retinue and on pg. 91 of the rulebook under kill points it never even uses the word independent?

Pg. 91:

"If a character has a retinue, the character and his unit are worth 1 kill point each."

Now this raises the question, how exactly is character defined? It never says "independent character." And how is retinue defined? Either way, tyrant guard are clearly labeled "retinue" in the tyranid codex, so there's no question about them.

Just food for thought.

I would think the guards would be 1 pt and the HT is 1 pt (thats how I've always done it).

Nids are the WORST for KP objectives. Most players run so much stuff thats IC's that our KP number is outrageous. Not to mention Lictors and Zoans are 1 KP a piece, meaning its effectively 6 KP's if you max em. Most nid lists around 1750 pts have around 10 KP or so, which against things like Cron's is outrageous. I've had many KP games I've lost even tho I almost wiped em out, only because my KP total is so high lol.

Thats probably my one main gripe about nids in general. Orks seem to have the same issue if they run heavy swarm as well :(

Tyranids is an old codex not every thing works as it should. The Hive Tyrant is nether a IC or an upgrade character. If he was an IC that could never join units (... see Necrons) then he would be a character and the rule would force him to give up another KP. Thats why i don't see him as gifting out another KP. Mind you if you do think he gives out an extra KP he will also follow the rest of the rules for retinues and will be come an IC when they die.

Given that the definition of "retinues" is in the IC section you cannot look at that section unless you have an IC in the squad.

Not an IC? Can never be a retinue.

The Hive Tyrant is not an IC.

The Hive Tyrant can take a retinue. Codex: Tyranids Page 35.

It still doesnt give up 2KP, as the reasoning given for this is you have something reverting to an IC. The HT cannot do this...

kirsanth wrote:The Hive Tyrant is not an IC.

The Hive Tyrant can take a retinue. Codex: Tyranids Page 35.

This is the heart of the problem, exactly.

nosferatu1001 wrote:It still doesnt give up 2KP, as the reasoning given for this is you have something reverting to an IC. The HT cannot do this...

Read page 91. Nowhere does it say that a character who reverts to an independent character is a separate kill point. The only argument against the hive tyrant and tyrant guard being two separate kill points is that the tyrant guard are not a retinue, but the tyranid codex specifically labels them as such. However, the rule book specifically defines retinues as containing an IC, which the HT/tyrant guard do not. The codex is in direct confrontation with the rulebook. Is this a question of codex trumps rulebook? I think it's not, as it's obviously simply an out dated book. The thing I don't get is how everyone is so very sure to their answer to this question. I would 4+ it.

Specfic > general

Generally, retinues require an IC.

Specifically, the Tyrant Guard does not.

A retinue is worth a point seperate from their IC, not their unit.

Nothing to 4+

As for outdated book? An older codex had the Tyrant as an IC, iirc. (TMC granted)

shrug

Actually the Platoon Commander is classified as a junior officer (C: IG pg 36),

Page 36 defines "Junior Officer" as a special rule, not a unit, a unit type, or a model within a unit.

The Company/Platoon commander is still not an IC and his squad is still not a retinue.

-GK

kirsanth wrote:Specfic > general

Generally, retinues require an IC.

Specifically, the Tyrant Guard does not.

A retinue is worth a point seperate from their IC, not their unit.

Nothing to 4+

As for outdated book? An older codex had the Tyrant as an IC, iirc. (TMC granted)

shrug

Pg. 91 makes no mention of ICs.

Yes Kp ask that you have a character and a retinue ... Trouble is that all though we have a retinue we don't have anything definable as a character. The tyrant is not an IC or an upgrade character and these are the only type of character mention in BGB.

whocares wrote:

Tri wrote:

whocares wrote:Better question: how many kill points are a hive tyrant and his accompanying tyrant guard worth? The guard are a retinue of sorts, but the tyrant is not and does not become an independent character.

Only 1Kpt because he is not an IC. Till its FAQ (or better) otherwise.

Are you so sure? Even though the tyrant guard are specifically classified as retinue and on pg. 91 of the rulebook under kill points it never even uses the word independent?

Pg. 91:

"If a character has a retinue, the character and his unit are worth 1 kill point each."

Now this raises the question, how exactly is character defined? It never says "independent character." And how is retinue defined? Either way, tyrant guard are clearly labeled "retinue" in the tyranid codex, so there's no question about them.

Just food for thought.

One KP.
Retinue is defined in the IC Joining and Leaving Units section, page 48. So we have a definiton, and by implication (ie it's location), we can say that it applies only to ICs.
Otherwise, if it applies to ANY character (which includes upgrade characters, per the character definiton on page 47), then we would have to say that every vet sgt etc out there was worth a separate KP. Are they not in a unit that they cannot leave during the game (ie definition of retinue)? Somehow, I don't think anyone agrees with this, so the Tyrant has to be given a pass as well.

Sorry but I'm gonna say 2 kp. If the tyrant doesn't take a retinue he is worth 1 kp. Add the separate unit (retinue of guard) and that's another kp.

I agree it's a sticky issue, but I think it's due to the fact that the codex is outdated more than anything. I guess just making sure that it's clear one way or the other with your gaming group is the best solution.

The Hive Tyrant counts as an upgrade character according to the Tyranid FAQ, and page 91 of the rulebook says 'If a character has a retinue, the character and his unit are worth 1 kill point each.'

I don't see any way to destroy both the tyrant guard and the tyrant without giving up two kill points. If the tyrant somehow dies first, it's died while counting as a character, and gives up a kill point, leaving the retinue to give up its own kill point if destroyed later. If the retinue gets destroyed first, it gives up a kill point and then the tyrant reverts to being a single model unit, so the tyrant gives up a kill point if it's destroyed later.

solkan, so are you saying that any upgrade character who is in a "unit that they cannot leave during the game" (rulebook definition of 'retinue') is worth a separate KP from the unit? Or are you only applying it to the Tyrant?

Seems to me it has to be all or nothing. So if all upgrade characters, then that means that every Marine Sgt, every Eldar Warlock in a guardian squad, etc etc etc, are all worth separate KP. After all, they ALL meet the same criteria that you are using for the Tyrant. They are an upgrade character and the are with a 'retinue', ie a unit they cannot leave during the game.
If only the Tyrant, then you're applying the rule unfairly to one army and not to all armies.

Except their codex's do not define the unit as a retinue... the nid one does... therefore its a retinue + something else.. meaning its 2 KP's. If the marine sergeant could be bought singularly and then a retinue of tactical marines could be added then I would agree that it is 2 KP's as well.
The sergeant is a bad example seeing as you don't "upgrade" to get him.. he's standard so...

Lukus83 wrote:Add the separate unit (retinue of guard) and that's another kp.

Ummm. No?
"Add the separate unit"? Tyrant Guard are not, and cannot be, a seperate unit - any more than a SM sergeant is joined by a "separate unit" of SMs.

shrug

This is a very interesting thread. I never knew that about biovores.

Twalks wrote:Except their codex's do not define the unit as a retinue... the nid one does... therefore its a retinue + something else.. meaning its 2 KP's. If the marine sergeant could be bought singularly and then a retinue of tactical marines could be added then I would agree that it is 2 KP's.

rules for retinues are that the model counts as an upgrade character till every one is dead then they become an IC .... ok he's going to join the safety of the genestealers since he is now an IC character

That seems to be the way it is written. Since the codex states they are a retinue, but the rules for retinues would infer that the Hive Tyrant becomes an IC once the guard have been killed. Either way you play it the game is broken. On one side it is obviously a retinue. On the other it is obviously not an IC.
RAI I believe they would be worth 2 KP's like every other retinue in the game and not become an IC.

RAW it is a retinue for a MC.

The section quoted about retinues is entitled "Independent Characters Joining & Leaving Units" so it will, quite obviously state that the character in question reverts to being an IC - as that section is talking about ICs.

At best one can argue that the rules themselves (in that section) do not apply, but this is largely irrelevant as the Tyrant Guard have rules for denying the opponent the ability to target the Tyrant seperately as a MC.

This would still be one KP, though, as it is one unit.

The rules for retinues are witihn the IC section: unless you have an IC you do not have permission to even read those rules: they are not relevant to you.

Not an IC, cannot be a retinue (as it can never "return" to being an IC)

Specific > General.

Codex: Tyranids says a Hive Tyrant can have a retinue.

Retinues are not defined anywhere else in the rulebook.. therefore I would presume that there are no rules written for this situation... Looking at the rules for killpoints since there is no retinue + character I would have to assume it is 1 KP then.

kirsanth wrote:Specific > General.

Codex: Tyranids says a Hive Tyrant can have a retinue.

good now where does it say the Tyrant is a character? Doesn't. He is nether an IC or an upgrade character ... he is a single model that can be joined by a retinue.

Retinues are a KP. A MC is a kill point. You can take a Hive Tyrant without a guard. Once the guard is gone the Hive Tyrant reverts back to a MC.

Two KPs. One for the MC and 1 for the retinue.

A Tau Shas'Ui upgrade character cannot be taken on its own. Therefore the Firewarrior unit + the Shas'Ui upgrade Character = 1 Unit.

A Sargeant cannot be taken without taking a Squad. See rules above to Tau Firewarriors.

These upgrade characters are part of the squad. They are not a retinue taken by the upgrade character. They are an upgrade to the squad.

Twalks wrote:Except their codex's do not define the unit as a retinue... the nid one does... therefore its a retinue + something else.. meaning its 2 KP's. If the marine sergeant could be bought singularly and then a retinue of tactical marines could be added then I would agree that it is 2 KP's as well.
The sergeant is a bad example seeing as you don't "upgrade" to get him.. he's standard so...

Codex doesn't have to, the main rulebook does it. By solkan's argument, a unit with an upgrade character in it is indeed a character with a retinue (regardless of whether they are named retinue, bodyguard, or something else), per the main rulebook definition of retinue, ie a unit that the "character" cannot leave during the game. So either ALL "upgrade" characters fall under this rule or none of them do (and anyways, the only reason we can tag the Tyrant as an 'upgrade' character is due to a poorly written FAQ). As for the sgt. So what if he comes with the squad automatically? Means nothing. Several of the real retinues in the game are automatic as well. Inquisitor Lords have a mandatory retinue. So if we follow what you're saying about the sgt, the Inq Lord no longer counts because he has to take the retinue squad? I disagree.

Bottom line. The retinue rules are meant to apply to ICs and ICs only, as clearly shown by where they are in the rulebook. Otherwise, we have to say that every single upgrade character in the game that comes with a unit it cannot leave (ie rulebook definition of retinue) is also worth a separate KP. And for some reason, all the non-Nid players cry (a lot!) whenever the shoe is on the other foot.

rogueeyes wrote:Retinues are a KP. A MC is a kill point. You can take a Hive Tyrant without a guard. Once the guard is gone the Hive Tyrant reverts back to a MC.

Two KPs. One for the MC and 1 for the retinue.

A Tau Shas'Ui upgrade character cannot be taken on its own. Therefore the Firewarrior unit + the Shas'Ui upgrade Character = 1 Unit.

A Sargeant cannot be taken without taking a Squad. See rules above to Tau Firewarriors.

These upgrade characters are part of the squad. They are not a retinue taken by the upgrade character. They are an upgrade to the squad.

Reverts to MC?
It never loses MC status - it simply cannot be targeted as such, as per Shieldwall.

Tyrant Guard can never be taken alone, they must be purchased as a retinue for the HT. Not sure how that helps, but I am not sure where some of those examples came from (or why they appeared).

MC do not, inherently give a KP. If there is a unit of MCs they are worth 1 KP. In fairness I am not certain this can be done, outside of apoc, currently. A MC is worth a kill point is only true because they are a unit - generally speaking.
In this case, it is a MC with a retinue - which is a unit.

shrug

Except nowhere in the book does it state that a tactical squad is a retinue. If it did I would agree with you but it doesn't so I don't

Twalks wrote:Except nowhere in the book does it state that a tactical squad is a retinue. If it did I would agree with you but it doesn't so I don't

No, it states it in the rulebook.

I mis-stated reverting to MC status. The MC does not work like an upgraded character which were the examples I gave. An upgraded character must be taken as an upgrade to a unit that you have. The Guards are not an upgrade - they are a retinue and thus are a KP. If you kill off an upgrade character it is not a KP - only the unit is. This is because a unit takes an upgrade character while for the Hive Tyrant this is the other way around.

Where does it state that a retinue is worth a KP?

Editing to add:
I see page 48 and 91, but it says the character and his unit.

Also, I have generally played that they are worth 2, but I fail to see the rules backing it. There is no Character to be worth a kill point, and multiple MCs can be a unit as per the rules (page 4 main rules).

So I play 2 in friendly situations in the same vein that I use Leaping only for being able to CCwithin 3" instead of 2" - and not granting 12" assault range.

To those of you who state that specific > general, I would say that you need to look at your stance because you are basically arguing that codex > BRB, so just be a little careful there (I am not saying that you are wrong). I do understand that most of the time, codex does overrule the BRB with reguards to rules. The reason I state this is because the BRB is pretty specific when it states that a retinue must have a character that becomes an IC when the other members are killed off. In reality, you are looking at specific (codex) != specific (BRB). There are specific instances when the BRB overrules the codex such as orks leadership never going above 10 due to mob rules.

Just my 2 cents, take it for what it is worth. Personally I would argue that they are 1 kill point, but would conceed to my opponent/TO should it become a contentious point.

Twalks wrote:Except nowhere in the book does it state that a tactical squad is a retinue. If it did I would agree with you but it doesn't so I don't

Yes, it does, if you assume that an upgrade character can have a retinue. Is it a unit that the (upgrade) character cannot leave? If your answer is yes, then it fits the rulebook definition of "retinue". It doesn't have to be called a retinue. It doesn't have to be called a bodyguard. It doesn't have to be a unit that is bought separately from the character. All that is required, per the main rulebook definition of retinue (as you have now been told several times) is that it be a unit that the charactr cannot leave during the game. So if you want to claim that an "upgrade character" (ie the Hive Tyrant and it's upgrade character status due to the FAQ) with a retinue is worth two KP, then declare it for all of them. All or nothing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kirsanth wrote:Where does it state that a retinue is worth a KP?

Editing to add:
I see page 48 and 91, but it says the character and his unit.

Ummm, page 91. The line about a character and it's unit, the first half of the line
"IF a character has a retinue, the character and his unit are worth 1 kill point eah."

This topic seems to have opened a can of worms I didn't even know existed...

As far as I can tell, Tyrants and their guard are 1 kp. But perhaps Broodlords and their retinue are 2kps?

I agree that if this rule does apply to the HT then it should start applying to all the marine sgt's out there. It's not like the Tyranids need more KP's then they already will have.

Also, whats this about leaping i hear? it's not supposed to give a 12" assault?

FoolWhip wrote: But perhaps Broodlords and their retinue are 2kps?

No Perhaps about it. The Broodlord is an IC, and he has a Retinue. The HT is NOT an IC.

don_mondo wrote:

Twalks wrote:Except nowhere in the book does it state that a tactical squad is a retinue. If it did I would agree with you but it doesn't so I don't

Yes, it does, if you assume that an upgrade character can have a retinue. Is it a unit that the (upgrade) character cannot leave? If your answer is yes, then it fits the rulebook definition of "retinue". It doesn't have to be called a retinue. It doesn't have to be called a bodyguard. It doesn't have to be a unit that is bought separately from the character. All that is required, per the main rulebook definition of retinue (as you have now been told several times) is that it be a unit that the charactr cannot leave during the game. So if you want to claim that an "upgrade character" (ie the Hive Tyrant and it's upgrade character status due to the FAQ) with a retinue is worth two KP, then declare it for all of them. All or nothing.

Well, since a sergeant isn't an (upgrade) character it isn't then is it? I'm stating that retinue's are only for IC/Units which specifically state they may take a retinue such as a Hive Tyrant.

I understand where you are coming from, and what I said was probably the wrong thing to say, my bad for not reading what was said prior more in depth.

Umm, yes, most sgts are upgrade characters.........

page 47, main rules:
"Upgrade characters are fielded as part of units from the start of the game, representing a squad leader or unit champion, such as a Space Marine Veteran Sergeant.............."

MM nevermind.
I think I got mixed up somewhere in here while studying.
I was wrong on the upgrade character.

FoolWhip wrote:Also, whats this about leaping i hear? it's not supposed to give a 12" assault?

I started a thread on Leaping a while back.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/250164.page

If you do not want to read it a summary goes like this:
Leaping gives Fast charge 12"
Fast Charge is simply not defined, in either the codex or the main rules.

It does not change the unit into Beasts.
As such, the Tyranid unit does not charge through terrain (3)d6x2 inches ANYWAY. (Or fall back extra distance, or have restricted movement in ruins)

So the only part that (unquestionably) works is granting CC attacks for being within 3" of an engaged friendly model, instead of 2".

I have rarely encountered a player that said anything other than "It's fine, they can charge 12" anyway", but I prefer to play the less advantageous side of questionable rules, and otherwise stick to RAW.
Leaping is on my list of questions before any game, now with Tyrant+Guard KP issues - thanks for that.

And now back to your regularly scheduled programing.

Well actually, I would allow a 12" charge by RaW, as it DOES have the words "Charge" and "12"" in it, but you are right, though cover it would just assault as normal as it is infantry

Gwar! wrote:Well actually, I would allow a 12" charge by RaW, as it DOES have the words "Charge" and "12"" in it, but you are right, though cover it would just assault as normal as it is infantry

Pffft.

Hotshot Lasgun has "Lasgun" in it.
Nemisis Force Weapon has "Force Weapon" in it.

I am going to stop there.

kirsanth wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Well actually, I would allow a 12" charge by RaW, as it DOES have the words "Charge" and "12"" in it, but you are right, though cover it would just assault as normal as it is infantry

Pffft.

Hotshot Lasgun has "Lasgun" in it.
Nemisis Force Weapon has "Force Weapon" in it.

I am going to stop there.

Yeah but both those issues rely on names of items, which is not applicable here

Kirsanth wrote:If you do not want to read it a summary goes like this:
Leaping gives Fast charge 12"
Fast Charge is simply not defined, in either the codex or the main rules.

It does not change the unit into Beasts.
As such, the Tyranid unit does not charge through terrain (3)d6x2 inches ANYWAY. (Or fall back extra distance, or have restricted movement in ruins)

So the only part that (unquestionably) works is granting CC attacks for being within 3" of an engaged friendly model, instead of 2".

Taken in context, granting a "fast charge of 12"" is the same as giving the model a 12" charge. Like Gwar! pointed out, it does contain the words "charge" and "12"". See Codex:Tyranids p. 33. Tearing something out of context, finding a single word out of sync with the new edition, and declaring the whole phrase inoperative does not equal RAW.

Further, "fast charge" may not be defined, but "charge" sure is. I would argue that since the term "fast" is text with no in-game functionality, it should simply be treated as fluff. They're charging really fast. The rule then goes on to explain that in game terms, that means 12" of charge range. You don't get to throw out the whole phrase just because one word has lost its significance in a new edition, especially when that interpretation would so clearly violate the drafters' intent to give leaping models a 12" charge.

-GK

But you do concede that it has no provision for charging into cover, thus you use the normal rules for infantry (in this case 3D6 pick highest due to MTC)?

Gwar! wrote:But you do concede that it has no provision for charging into cover, thus you use the normal rules for infantry (in this case 3D6 pick highest due to MTC)?

Indeed I do. I believe I quoted that bit of Kirsanth's post unnecessarily as I had no real response to it. Leaping specifically does not make the unit beasts, and nothing that can take leaping is cavalry, and I'm aware of no other rule that causes a 12" charge to have any effect on charging through difficult terrain. Thus, unlike beasts and cavalry, they would not double the highest result among their 3D6.

-GK

Another note on Hive Tyrants:

They are definitely not independent characters, because they are never labeled as so. Also, under "upgrade characters" is the following line

"They do not have an entry of their own and are effectively just another trooper in their unit, with enhanced characteristics and perhaps a wider selection of weapons and wargear choices."

Since a HT has its own entry, they cannot be counted as 'upgrade characters' either.

*waits for gwar to smack down my interpretation again

FoolWhip wrote:Another note on Hive Tyrants:

They are definitely not independent characters, because they are never labeled as so. Also, under "upgrade characters" is the following line

"They do not have an entry of their own and are effectively just another trooper in their unit, with enhanced characteristics and perhaps a wider selection of weapons and wargear choices."

Since a HT has its own entry, they cannot be counted as 'upgrade characters' either.

*waits for gwar to smack down my interpretation again

That is actually a good point. A Little convoluted, but a point nonetheless.

Yep, the only thing that gives them any status as an "upgrade character" is a poorly written FAQ.

FoolWhip wrote:"They do not have an entry of their own and are effectively just another trooper in their unit, with enhanced characteristics and perhaps a wider selection of weapons and wargear choices."

Since a HT has its own entry, they cannot be counted as 'upgrade characters' either.

I agree with this interpretation. The language "They do not have an entry of their own" seems to create a pretty clear condition. We have to interpret the language "an entry of their own" to mean "an entry of its own... in the 'army list' section" not "an entry of its own... in the 'forces of' section" because plenty of upgrade characters have entries in the 'forces' section. If a model has an entry of its own in the army list section then it cannot be an upgrade character.

The Hive Tyrant does indeed have an entry of its own in the army list section, so therefore it cannot be an upgrade character.

Well spotted.

-GK

Q. Is the Hive Tyrant an independent character?
A. No, so it cannot join other units. The only
exception to this is, of course, its retinue of Tyrant
Guard. This unit follows the rules for retinues
(except that the Hive Tyrant counts as an upgrade
character with this unit) until the Guards are all
destroyed, at which point the Hive Tyrant reverts
to the normal rules for monstrous creatures.

That is the worst written explanation imaginable ...
A) Implies the a Tyrant can join another Tyrant's, Tyrant Guards.
B) Follows all the rules for retinues except "counts as an upgrade character" ... it already does count as an upgrade character per the retune rules.
C) Implies that the Tyrant stops being a MC till the unit is destroyed.

Only way any of this makes any sense is if you read it with a 4th edition BGB ...

Tri wrote:Only way any of this makes any sense is if you read it with a 4th edition BGB ...

Even then, it is a horrendous mangling of both the rules and the English language

I believe the most important word of that FAQ answer is the first: "No"

It indicates that the Hive Tyrant is not an independent character, so even if he *does* have a retinue, the unit still doesn't meet the condition created by the annihilation rules: "if a character has a retinue, the character and his unit are worth 1 kill point each." BGB p. 91.

This isn't a character with a retinue, this is a monstrous creature who temporarily puts on an "upgrade character" hat with a retinue. Even that upgrade character hat isn't enough to meet the "if a character has a retinue" condition because "character" here must be interpreted as referring to independent characters, not upgrade characters (seeing as it is well accepted that a sergeant and non-combat-squadded tac squad count as 1kp, not two).

-GK

GK. Exactly what I've been trying to say for three pages now.

If a character has a retinue, the character and his
unit are worth 1 kill point each.

A Monstrous Creature is not a Character as defined in the BRB (pg 51). This invalidates the rule. However, the rest of the unit must be specified as a retinue in order to declare it 2 KPs.

The Tyrant Guard form a retinue with the Hive Tyrant (the unit still deploys as a Monstrous Creature).

Therefore the unit is still described as a Monstrous Creature by RaW. It comes down to an old codex and not being able to defined things accurately. I'm not sure but do Tyranids have IC's at all?

However if you take into account the FAQ by GW it counts as an upgrade character:

No, so it cannot join other units. The only
exception to this is, of course, its retinue of Tyrant
Guard. This unit follows the rules for retinues
(except that the Hive Tyrant counts as an upgrade
character with this unit) until the Guards are all
destroyed, at which point the Hive Tyrant reverts
to the normal rules for monstrous creatures.

This means it actually does satisfy the rules for the 2 KP for the unit. It never states the character must be an independent character - just a character with a retinue. Without the FAQ you will have 1 KP for the unit. It all depends on what you consider to be appropriate for arguing the fact.

I'll play by having them be 2 KPs. 1 KP for the Hive Tyrant and 1 KP for the retinue of Tyrant Guard.

Upgrade characters are not worth a KP seperate from their unit - and still meet the requirement "character".

See above.

rogueeyes wrote:

This means it actually does satisfy the rules for the 2 KP for the unit. It never states the character must be an independent character - just a character with a retinue. Without the FAQ you will have 1 KP for the unit. It all depends on what you consider to be appropriate for arguing the fact.

I'll play by having them be 2 KPs. 1 KP for the Hive Tyrant and 1 KP for the retinue of Tyrant Guard.

So, rogue, do you also count a vet sgt (an upgrade character who is in a unit he cannot leave, ie the rulebook definition of a retinue) and the unit he is with as two KP? If not, then why do you do so for the Tyrant? It's the same situation, an upgrade character with a retinue. Maybe you should read the entire thread and see the several posts covering this particular point.

Upgrade Characters are Characters! A Character with a retinue is all that is stated for 2 KPs.

Character + Retinue = 2 KP
Hive Tyrant + Tyrant Guard Retinue = 2 KP
Sargent + tactical Squad = 1 KP

The Tactical squad is not a retinue therefore does not satisfy the requirements of a character + retinue. Independent Characters and Upgrade character status does not matter. Only Character status matters here by RaW interpretation.

Under the BRB pg. 91. Read the rule:

If a character has a retinue, the character and his unit are worth 1 kill point each.

Saying a character must be an independent character is RaI. I can interpret this as upgrade characters or as independent characters or as characters. RaW it is Characters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@don_mondo:
I do not count the tactical squad as a retinue because it does not state that it is a retinue. The Tyrant Guard specifically states retinue in the codex.

To lazy to (re)write it myself - reading it was easy enough.

don_mondo wrote:Retinue is defined in the IC Joining and Leaving Units section, page 48. So we have a definiton, and by implication (ie it's location), we can say that it applies only to ICs.
Otherwise, if it applies to ANY character (which includes upgrade characters, per the character definiton on page 47), then we would have to say that every vet sgt etc out there was worth a separate KP. Are they not in a unit that they cannot leave during the game (ie definition of retinue)? Somehow, I don't think anyone agrees with this, so the Tyrant has to be given a pass as well.

The Retinue rules actually state that the unit does not need to be named "retinue".

Sigh.......

OK, rogueeyes, step by step (again). What is a retinue? Main rules, page 48, under ICs joining/leaving units, a retinue is a "unit that they cannot leave during the game".
Also note that in the description of the retinue it states that the retinue can be called "retinue, bodyguard, or similar". In other words, there is no requirement that it be called a retinue. It can be called a tac squad, an infantry squad, whatever. All that is required is that it fit the description as laid out in the rule, a unit that the character cannot leave.

So, since you insist that an upgrade character counts for KP (ala Hive Tyrant), what is an upgrade character? Page 47:
Upgrade characters are fielded as part of units from the start of the game, representing a squad leader or unit champion, such as a Space Marine Veteran Sergeant.

So in a Marine tac squad, IG Infantry squad, etc, you have an upgrade character (sgt) in a unit he cannot leave during the game (ie a retinue). Yet you insist that the Marine example is only worth one KP while the Nid Tyrant (an upgrade character) with Tyrant Guard (a unit he cannot leave, retinue) is worth two KP. To me there is a lack of consistency in that line of reasoning, in that both examples are basically the same thing (ie an upgrade character in a unit it cannot leave-aka retinue).

See the problem?
But I see that you do at least agree that regardless of RAW, RAI is character = IC. I can live with that.

Ok I see the problem. But there is also a flaw that all codexes that contain a retinue list the retinue separately from the character that is attached to the retinue regardless of what the retinue is called. For Tau bodyguards are listed separately from the commander. The Hive Tyrant and Tyrant Guards are listed separately.

The Space Marine Sergeant is NOT listed separately. This is where my problem comes into place with this comparison. I accept that it is a valid argument to say that upgrade characters can add a kill point to all units that include them. However, I do not accept that a Space Marine Sergeant with tactical squad is the same as a Hive Tyrant with a Tyrant Guard.

That's all I ask, that you see the problem.

rogueeyes wrote: However, I do not accept that a Space Marine Sergeant with tactical squad is the same as a Hive Tyrant with a Tyrant Guard.

By your own argument, that is what you are saying.

A retinue is a separate entry from the unit that is taking the retinue. The Hive Tyrant specifically states it may take a retinue. For the Tau (since I am more familiar with them) a firewarrior squad takes a Shas'Ui as an upgrade. This is the overall unit taking an upgrade character. This is how I view the Space Marine Tactical Squad.

Now if you view the Hive Tyrant takes a Tyrant Guard as an upgrade. This is the Character taking the upgrade - not the unit taking the character as an upgrade. You can take a hive tyrant by its self. You cannot have a Sergeant by himself or a Shas'Ui Firewarrior by its self unless you have the entire unit destroyed first.

This is what I was trying to state beforehand.

1. Hive Tyrant takes the Tyrant Guard
2. Firewarrior Squad takes the Shas'Ui
3. Tactical Squad takes the Sergeant
4. Tau Commander Takes the Bodyguard

In other terms
1. Character takes the Squad
2. Squad takes the Character
3. Squad takes the Character
4. Character takes the Squad

In Kill Point Terms
1. 2 KP
2. 1 KP
3. 1 KP
4. 2 KP

This is my point in the argument. It is a matter of logic and the stating of the words and how you take things when setting up an army. Does the unit come along with the character or does the character come along with the unit?

Except the rules for retinues do not take any notice of your orderering: it just requires that the unit is one the character cannot leave.

You also ignore the "reverts back to IC" part for HT; it does not do so and therefore is not a retinue (BRB definition) but a retinue (Tyranid Codex)

Just because they share the same name does not necessarily mean they are exactly the same, see the Stormshield fun and games between codices.

The BGB states the retinue rule under the Independent Character Rules section. No independent Character = no retinue. Codexes make exceptions to the standard rules however and override the BGB since they are more specific thus allowing a retinue for a MC. MC takes the place of IC in this case. When the retinue is killed the MC reverts back to a MC.

By reverting back to MC status I mean it is no longer an upgrade character but is once again the MC and loses the upgrade character status.

It never stops being an MC: read the rules for TG again (they are all deployed as MC, and nothing states the HT loses MC status just cannot be targetted as such)

MC is a unit type, IC is a special type that can be added to MC, Infantry, etc. Being an IC cannot and does not preclude you from being any unit type.

While it states it is a retinue it does not fit the BRB definition of such.

rogueeyes wrote: MC takes the place of IC in this case. When the retinue is killed the MC reverts back to a MC.

By reverting back to MC status I mean it is no longer an upgrade character but is once again the MC and loses the upgrade character status.

So if it is not a character, why is it a KP seperate from its unit?

MC units (or MC in units) are (still) not worth a KP per model.

I'm not saying it loses the MC status. It reverts to only MC status instead of the upgrade Character status. You are correct that IC does not preclude MC. That is flawed in my previous explanation.

ICs are the only thing that can take a retinue by the BGB. Codexes override the BGB. This means that the MC can take a retinue. The Tyranid codex states that it is a retinue. It becomes an character with a retinue by the BGB and the codex. It becomes 2 KP because of the FAQ, the Codex stating retinue and the BGB stating a character with a retinue is 2 KP.

Sergeants cannot take a retinue because they are not IC. They are upgrade characters. Upgrade characters are not IC. Only ICs may have a retinue - in whatever form they are called. This is stated by the BGB. Retinues are under the IC rules. No IC then no retinue - unless the codex specifically states it is a retinue.

A unit can take a retinue if the codex states it can take a retinue. This overrides the BGB. I don't care what you call anything with an upgrade character - it is not a retinue because upgrade characters are included in the BGB. Monstrous Creatures with a retinue are not included in the BGB. in the Tyranid Codex it states that the Tyrant Guard are a retinue. The only thing that defines a retinue is the IC area of the BGB. Specific overrides General. This means the Tyrant Guard takes the Retinue role of an IC.

This does not apply to upgrade characters. Upgrade characters are included under a different section of the BGB. An IC can become an Upgrade Character but an Upgrade Character cannot become an IC.

rogueeyes wrote: It becomes an character with a retinue by the BGB and the codex.

Why? Where is the rule for that?

rogueeyes wrote: The only thing that defines a retinue is the IC area of the BGB. Specific overrides General. This means the Tyrant Guard takes the Retinue role of an IC.

Sure, but that does not mean it becomes one. The most specific rules (that are written in the books) say the MC has a retinue.

kirsanth wrote:

rogueeyes wrote: It becomes an character with a retinue by the BGB and the codex.

Why? Where is the rule for that?

Sorry it states this in the FAQ.

rogueeyes wrote:Sorry it states this in the FAQ.

-Cough-

I'll just leave now

Good to know we all recognize the issue.

^^

We all recognize there is major issues with a lot of codices. For the next few years these will be problems. Even after new codices come out there will still be quite a few issues.

For now we'll leave it at that.

rogueeyes wrote:

1. Hive Tyrant takes the Tyrant Guard
2. Firewarrior Squad takes the Shas'Ui
3. Tactical Squad takes the Sergeant
4. Tau Commander Takes the Bodyguard

In Kill Point Terms
1. 2 KP
2. 1 KP
3. 1 KP
4. 2 KP



So for gameplay purposes, what would the point cost on these units be in a 1500pt game?
(obviously this is all relative, but let's just say your average unit of each of these.)

(Since there is obviously lots of questioning going on here about the language of the rules, I want to see the actual difference in the unit values. This will help me for house rules just to keep things fair.)

Since I am really only familiar with Tyranids at the moment, I will only add to the first field.

1. HT with some upgrades, 2x guard 211pts
2.
3.
4.


-Fool Whip