Its pretty simple:
Can Boneripper be my general?
More pointedly, Must he be my general due to higher leadership.

As I can't find anything that says he isn't a Character, or a Lord. or anything for that matter that would lead me to believe he isn't the general.


Just throwing the question around getting thoughts.

Unless it says he IS a character, I don't think so.

However, I don't have the newest Skaven book, so I'm slightly unsure.

What makes a "character" a "character"? Fantasy doesn't have that kind of rule terminology. normally I assume that a model bought at Lord/Hero level is a character, and he can join and leave as per his own rules.

Whats presented here are two such models. Felix and Gotrex comes to mind as far as being similiar and they're both characters.

Yeah sure he can totally be your general, I see giants leading O&G armies all the time...wait, they can't

If Boneripper would take up a hero slot and be able to be taken on his own - sure. But no - Thanquol is the character and Boneripper is a rat-ogre with a name. No LD 10 all around for Skaven.
As far as terminology in Fantasy - if they are in the Hero/Lord section in the end of the book, they are a character. If they are a named character that can be upgraded in a unit (hence it will say you can only take 1 in the army), then they are a character. Boneripper would normally fit this mold (as you can only take 1), but he isn't an upgrade to a unit and has the "Bodyguard of Thanquol" rule.

Can Boneripper even join a unit? Could the old one? I've only ever seen / heard of him wandering around on his own ...

- Salvage

He can't be your general, but he will be your best friend, maybe more then that if you play your cards right....

Mattbranb wrote:If Boneripper would take up a hero slot and be able to be taken on his own - sure. But no - Thanquol is the character and Boneripper is a rat-ogre with a name. No LD 10 all around for Skaven.
As far as terminology in Fantasy - if they are in the Hero/Lord section in the end of the book, they are a character. If they are a named character that can be upgraded in a unit (hence it will say you can only take 1 in the army), then they are a character. Boneripper would normally fit this mold (as you can only take 1), but he isn't an upgrade to a unit and has the "Bodyguard of Thanquol" rule.

Boneripper Takes up a Lord Slot in the same way that Thanquol takes up a Lord Slot.
What makes Thaquol more of a character than Boneripper? There's nothing in the rules that specifies this other than some sort of unspoken player understanding.

The "bodyguard" rule only specifies that if he's outside of 12" of Thanquol he shuts down, otherwise he's got all the normal rules any other Special Character has.
And as you said , he's not an upgrade. Oh and he can join a unit, Rat Swarms. They're both unbreakable. I double checked to make sure non swarms could join, and they can. Hilarity ensues.

See, all I'm looking for is somewhere there to be a rule that says "boneripper is not character" but everything points to that he is.

Yeah sure he can totally be your general, I see giants leading O&G armies all the time...wait, they can't

Uh, well if you could take a Giant as a Lord, then Yes. Sure.

strange_eric wrote:
Whats presented here are two such models. Felix and Gotrex comes to mind as far as being similiar and they're both characters.

What exactly makes 2 models bought as a RARE choice characters?

Platuan4th wrote:

strange_eric wrote:
Whats presented here are two such models. Felix and Gotrex comes to mind as far as being similiar and they're both characters.

What exactly makes 2 models bought as a RARE choice characters?

Their wacky sense of humor

PLAY THE GAME, NOT THE RULES!

Platuan4th wrote:

strange_eric wrote:
Whats presented here are two such models. Felix and Gotrex comes to mind as far as being similiar and they're both characters.

What exactly makes 2 models bought as a RARE choice characters?

I was going off memory. If they aren't characters then that leaves Thanquol in even more of a mess. As then there's no precedent to back it up.

PLAY THE GAME, NOT THE RULES!

Curious, how do I play a "game" without rules? I know this conversation is very RAW but that's the point of it.
I personally would just take Queek and call it a day w/ LD8. but I'm curious if _as_written_ Boneripper can be my General.

No one has yet to offer a convincing argument to show me anywhere in the rules that says Boneripper taken as a Lord Choice can't be my general.

I'm just trying to shed light on this issue so GW can hopefully notice it and say "oh here's an errata" It's really simple to fix. requires one sentence.

You know what makes it even simpler to fix? A little bit of common sense that a rat ogre automaton isn't qualified to be the general.

Manfred von Drakken wrote:PLAY THE GAME, NOT THE RULES!
You know what makes it even simpler to fix? A little bit of common sense that a rat ogre automaton isn't qualified to be the general.

Words of the Wise.

Sure it works in this instance, but more often than not, in a Fantasy/Sci-Fi setting, common sense decisions like that aren't as easy...

Alpharius wrote:Sure it works in this instance, but more often than not, in a Fantasy/Sci-Fi setting, common sense decisions like that aren't as easy...

Words of the wiser.

You could make a pretty fierce argument for or against many characters/units being the army general. For example, I, as a Bretonnian footslogger, would be rather inspired if I saw the Green Knight take the field for my side's benefit and I think it could be argued that I could use his leadership if he were nearby when I watch him invincibly hack enemies to pieces.

But alas, that is very specifically forbidden.

But Mannfred still has a great rule of thumb for any concerned.

I'm sorry, the fact that he is a Rare choice isn't a valid argument?

Well then, I guess there isn't much else to say. Good luck convincing your opponent that Boneripper is your general.

Cryonicleech wrote:Good luck convincing your opponent that Boneripper is your general.

Or the tournament organizer, for that matter.

heheh, didn't he say he wasn't -trying- to make boneripper his general? I don't see why he'd need to convince anyone.

Cryonicleech wrote:I'm sorry, the fact that he is a Rare choice isn't a valid argument?

Well then, I guess there isn't much else to say. Good luck convincing your opponent that Boneripper is your general.

Boneripper isn't a Rare choice.
What book are you reading?

Seriously, He's under Characters, He's a Lord choice.
The _only_ argument that's remotely valid is that he's listed sort of like a Mount in the back in the summary. However he doesn't operate like a mount.
Doesn't follow any of the rules like a mount or anything of that nature. So, you'd just have to have your TO say "no we're not playing it like that"
and a general house rule to not allow it.

Fluff does not equal rules.

I misread Platuan4th's statement.

Regardless, RAW doesn't matter, because not everyone follows RAW.

My point stands, good luck convincing someone of that.

strange_eric wrote:

Cryonicleech wrote:I'm sorry, the fact that he is a Rare choice isn't a valid argument?

Well then, I guess there isn't much else to say. Good luck convincing your opponent that Boneripper is your general.

Boneripper isn't a Rare choice.
What book are you reading?

Seriously, He's under Characters, He's a Lord choice.
The _only_ argument that's remotely valid is that he's listed sort of like a Mount in the back in the summary. However he doesn't operate like a mount.
Doesn't follow any of the rules like a mount or anything of that nature. So, you'd just have to have your TO say "no we're not playing it like that"
and a general house rule to not allow it.

Fluff does not equal rules.

Really? There has to be a point at which common sense kicks in. This would be that point. If my opponent even THOUGHT of trying to convince me that Boneripper was his general, I'd be picking up my army, wondering what other garbage notions he's got rattling around.

Play the damn game, not the rules.

Hmm, I thought that you couldn't bring Bone Ripper without Thanqual, and that thanqual HAD to be your general.

Arion wrote:Hmm, I thought that you couldn't bring Bone Ripper without Thanqual, and that thanqual HAD to be your general.

Nope. Nothing in Thanquol's rules states that he must be your General. The rules support more that Boneripper _must_ be your general. Since if you have multiple characters
in the same slot (i.e. More than 1 Lord) then you Must choose the character with the highest leadership.

Really? There has to be a point at which common sense kicks in. This would be that point. If my opponent even THOUGHT of trying to convince me that Boneripper was his general, I'd be picking up my army, wondering what other garbage notions he's got rattling around.

Play the damn game, not the rules.

There's never a point where I'm not using common sense. Common sense says I take the Lord Character with the highest leadership to be my General. Guess who's a Lord level Character with the highest leadership? Boneripper. The fact still remains that GW didn't write out the rules even remotely clear. That a playtester could have found this problem within _one_hour_ of staring at this book shows sloppy editing at its finest.

Lastly, If your opponent tries to do something by all merits of the game and rules is perfectly legal and within reason, he has every right to use those rules. Now if you wanna pick up your army and not play him based on the fact that you're scared of a T5 model with 3 wounds and no save who can only join a unit of Rat Swarms then by all means, pick up your army.. Besides I think its totally hilarious that until it gets FAQ'd that a big dumb Automoton keeps the lil rats in line

Regardless, RAW doesn't matter, because not everyone follows RAW.

Very true. Play the game you wanna play. No ones stopping you from saying all skaven are Leadership 10 and have 15 attacks either. But I'm asking a purely RAW question here, not "does this make me sleep better at night?" Kind of thing. I totally wouldn't do this unless it was on a lark to be funny, but by RAW i think it works this way.

I have never seen a body guard be a general lol...

LunaHound wrote:I have never seen a body guard be a general lol...

You can now!

I wish the bodyguard rule had something about "please dont be general kthx" in it :(

Companion monster only have their LD characteristic exist because its needed for monster reaction table.

Its not used for giving free leadership bonus for rest of the army...

I mean does Archaon's Horse turn into general if Archaon is slain? Or any special char's mount?

No.

Your reasoning is only valid if indeed Boneripper was a Mount. Name me all the other Models that are bought alongside another model that operate independently and on their own?

Archaon's horse is a strawman, as it's not the same. The horse is obviously a mount and follows all the rules for a Mount. Tell me, what Rules does Boneripper follow? Mount? Champion? upgrade? nothing in Bonerippers rules suggest that.

Because bone ripper "body guard" is still a companion.
And just like monstrous mounts he reacts to monster reaction table. Like you said there is no specific rule what a body guard does , thus the next logical choice is to look at monstrous mounts rather than "guessing out of the blues"

Actually, he doesn't react with the monster reaction table.

Ok, let me put this plainly, boneripper cannot be taken BY HIMSELF right? then he can't be your general. the fact that he is a companion monster to another character speaks for it self. if he has to follow another character into the battle, then he cannot be your general. to argue otherwise is just silly. i know RAW isn't on my side, but common sense MUST be used. No, you are not using common sense, you are trying to find a loophole to make your rats Ld 10. that is all you are doing.

I hope this is enough to show the common sense:

Bodyguard of Thanquol: Boneripper is a specially
modified Rat Ogre constructed to guard the Grey Seer.
Boneripper must be within 12" of Thanquol. If, at the
start of any friendly turn, Boneripper is not within 12"
of his master, then he is programmed to shut down.
While shut down, Boneripper cannot move and in
combat he will be hit automatically and will not strike
back. If the game ends while Boneripper is shut down,
he counts as a casualty. If Thanquol is slain or flees off
the table, Boneripper is removed as a casualty as well.

It really doesnt get any more obvious than this OP...
If this looks like a supposed General would be , by all means go for it.
Just dont be surprised if people point + laugh + refuse to play against you.

I know , LD 10 is nice right? But no.

LunaHound wrote:I hope this is enough to show the common sense:

Bodyguard of Thanquol: Boneripper is a specially
modified Rat Ogre constructed to guard the Grey Seer.
Boneripper must be within 12" of Thanquol. If, at the
start of any friendly turn, Boneripper is not within 12"
of his master, then he is programmed to shut down.
While shut down, Boneripper cannot move and in
combat he will be hit automatically and will not strike
back. If the game ends while Boneripper is shut down,
he counts as a casualty. If Thanquol is slain or flees off
the table, Boneripper is removed as a casualty as well.

It really doesnt get any more obvious than this OP...
If this looks like a supposed General would be , by all means go for it.
Just dont be surprised if people point + laugh + refuse to play against you.

I know , LD 10 is nice right? But no.

At this rate, I'm not sure this is enough...

Also, this falls down to are the rules restrictive or permissive.

"It doesn't say he cannot be my general" vs. "It does not say he can be my general".

Either way, whilst you seem to be right RAW, you cannot merely play from an RAW standpoint.

Regardless, it seems you cannot be moved from your position, and if you want him to honestly be your general, go for it.

LunaHound wrote:I hope this is enough to show the common sense:

Bodyguard of Thanquol: Boneripper is a specially
modified Rat Ogre constructed to guard the Grey Seer.
Boneripper must be within 12" of Thanquol. If, at the
start of any friendly turn, Boneripper is not within 12"
of his master, then he is programmed to shut down.
While shut down, Boneripper cannot move and in
combat he will be hit automatically and will not strike
back. If the game ends while Boneripper is shut down,
he counts as a casualty. If Thanquol is slain or flees off
the table, Boneripper is removed as a casualty as well.

It really doesnt get any more obvious than this OP...
If this looks like a supposed General would be , by all means go for it.
Just dont be surprised if people point + laugh + refuse to play against you.

I know , LD 10 is nice right? But no.

How is that enough? All that means is that if Boneripper is outside of the Thanquol bubble he doesn't work.
You haven't shown me any rule anywhere saying "Boneripper is a Monster" or "boneripper cannot be your general"
What you're doing here is inferring through a set of thematic concepts that Boneripper cannot possibly be your General.
However there's _nothing_ backing that up. Again, I agree with all of you that he shouldn't be, but you haven't proven to me
via the Rulebook or the Skaven army book that Boneripper cannot be my General.

Ok, let me put this plainly, boneripper cannot be taken BY HIMSELF right? then he can't be your general. the fact that he is a companion monster to another character speaks for it self. if he has to follow another character into the battle, then he cannot be your general. to argue otherwise is just silly. i know RAW isn't on my side, but common sense MUST be used. No, you are not using common sense, you are trying to find a loophole to make your rats Ld 10. that is all you are doing.

First off, your logic works just as well against Thanquol Watch:

Ok, let me put this plainly, Thanquol cannot be taken BY HIMSELF right? then he can't be your general. the fact that he is a companion wizard to another character speaks for it self.

I'm not even using a loophole here. I'm staring at the book. It has a Lord level entry that lists two models that are placed separately on the battlefield. They both operate independently and both are characters unless someone finds a Loophole to make Boneripper suddenly not a Character. He's got a name, stat-line, special rules just like any other character.
If looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, well then it must be a duck.

I appreciate the hate and all but I'm attacking this from a pure RAW angle and i'm interested if anyone has evidence to the contrary. I suppose they don't

strange_eric wrote:I appreciate the hate and all

Are you high?

Cryonicleech wrote:

LunaHound wrote:I hope this is enough to show the common sense:

Bodyguard of Thanquol: Boneripper is a specially
modified Rat Ogre constructed to guard the Grey Seer.
Boneripper must be within 12" of Thanquol. If, at the
start of any friendly turn, Boneripper is not within 12"
of his master, then he is programmed to shut down.
While shut down, Boneripper cannot move and in
combat he will be hit automatically and will not strike
back. If the game ends while Boneripper is shut down,
he counts as a casualty. If Thanquol is slain or flees off
the table, Boneripper is removed as a casualty as well.

It really doesnt get any more obvious than this OP...
If this looks like a supposed General would be , by all means go for it.
Just dont be surprised if people point + laugh + refuse to play against you.

I know , LD 10 is nice right? But no.

At this rate, I'm not sure this is enough...

Also, this falls down to are the rules restrictive or permissive.

"It doesn't say he cannot be my general" vs. "It does not say he can be my general".

Either way, whilst you seem to be right RAW, you cannot merely play from an RAW standpoint.

Regardless, it seems you cannot be moved from your position, and if you want him to honestly be your general, go for it.

Um im not the one that want it , im not strange_eric

So, you will play RAW at the expense of playing the game for any fun? got it. I hope you have fun trying to find anyone to play.

Point is you take Thanquol, not Boneripper. Boneripper is the guardian of Thanquol, not the other way around. Your Logic is flawed. How can a mindless robot be your general when he cannot even lead himself? How can he give his leadership to another unit when, if he is too far from his leader, he can't even operate? RAW is NOT common sense. You are abusing letter of the rule and dismissing the CLEAR INTENT. Let me guess, you are one of those that wouldn't let VC cast IoN into combat, even though it was STRONGLY suggested that they could by the text.

EDIT for spelling, I have Fat Fingers when I type

strange_eric wrote:They both operate independently

Sorry , i just have hard time not laughing at the irony of this sentence + bone ripper's rule.

strange_eric wrote:It has a Lord level entry that lists two models that are placed separately on the battlefield. They both operate independently and both are characters unless someone finds a Loophole to make Boneripper suddenly not a Character. He's got a name, stat-line, special rules just like any other character.
If looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, well then it must be a duck.

I appreciate the hate and all but I'm attacking this from a pure RAW angle and i'm interested if anyone has evidence to the contrary. I suppose they don't

Yes , you made it sound like those 2 chars are equal. In reality they are not.
Can Thanqol survive if Bone Ripper ( his companion body guard ) is destroyed? Yes he can
Can Bone Ripper exist if Thanquo is dead? Nope! not only that , if his dog leash doesnt go far enough , he shuts down.

Actually, thinking about this a little more, I MIGHT just let him be the general. That way I have more options to get the bonus victory points for killing the general. 1)kill bone ripper. 2) Kill Thanquol, 3) somehow get Thanquol and Boneripper away from each other so he shuts down. But, as for a more convincing argument, since you are arguing that they are both Characters and are both in a Lord spot, then you cannot bring Thanquol and Boneripper unless the game is at least 3,000 pts. Since you CANNOT bring one without the other, and you CANNOT bring more than one Lord until 3,000 points, and the are BOTH lord level characters, then you can't use them until you are playing a 3,000 point game.

strange_eric wrote:
I'm not even using a loophole here. I'm staring at the book. It has a Lord level entry that lists two models that are placed separately on the battlefield. They both operate independently and both are characters unless someone finds a Loophole to make Boneripper suddenly not a Character. He's got a name, stat-line, special rules just like any other character.
If looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, well then it must be a duck.

I appreciate the hate and all but I'm attacking this from a pure RAW angle and i'm interested if anyone has evidence to the contrary. I suppose they don't

True, but you're taking this from RAW too strictly.

Yes, you're right. There is nothing that disallows you.

What we are saying is, however, is that it would be incorrect to assume that because RAW states it is so, that it is a correct ruling. Rules are agreed upon by you and your opponent before the game, as although someone may share your view, there are still people who disagree, and rather than simply arguing about it for hours, we can just apply some common sense to the matter.

However, I have one question.

You said there is nothing that states Boneripper is not a character. However, I ask you where it states that he IS a character. He is taken as a Lords choice, but nowhere does it say that he is specifically a character, and follows their rules as such.

Arion wrote:Actually, thinking about this a little more, I MIGHT just let him be the general. That way I have more options to get the bonus victory points for killing the general. 1)kill bone ripper. 2) Kill Thanquol, 3) somehow get Thanquol and Boneripper away from each other so he shuts down. But, as for a more convincing argument, since you are arguing that they are both Characters and are both in a Lord spot, then you cannot bring Thanquol and Boneripper unless the game is at least 3,000 pts. Since you CANNOT bring one without the other, and you CANNOT bring more than one Lord until 3,000 points, and the are BOTH lord level characters, then you can't use them until you are playing a 3,000 point game.

Thats a great idea , that means i get to have 2 Lord Bubbles , one running forward while the shut off bone ripper can baby sit the
rest of the army.

You win! ( this is you --> )
How about these guys? for the same logic Eric , are the doggies and the casket = the General? Because they are Lord Choices and no where does it say they arnt .
And yes i went through the effort of confirming they arnt monstrous mounts , they arnt mount of any kind , and they have their own leader ship. They are the same , *companions to their Lord.

Sorry Eric , but we dont accept the logic of " it doesnt say i cant which mean i can! " as far as im concerned you have no case to be legally allowed to treat bone ripper as general.

Oh and Luna, the red quote of yours was referring to strange_Eric, not you.

Cryonicleech wrote:Oh and Luna, the red quote of yours was referring to strange_Eric, not you.

ah k i was confused about thta since i only see me in the quote ^^
What do you think about those 3 units i just listed though? they have the same over all rules as bone ripper,
they dont fall under mounts , or monstrous mounts , they have their own leader ship and own entry.

According to the logic used so far to whats "allowed" shall we agree the 3 are now also Lords?

I'm not too keen on the Casket, but Orion's Hounds and the Sabretusks do make fine examples.

The casket actually specifies that it is a rare choice. I don't know about the other two, but any Skaven player wishing to field Thanquol in the standard 2250 game will be disappointed.

strange_eric wrote:Your reasoning is only valid if indeed Boneripper was a Mount. Name me all the other Models that are bought alongside another model that operate independently and on their own?

At a guess: Felix and Kell. Though you might ignore Kell as he is 40K. Sure Felix joins with Gotrek but he is a seperate character not and add on, the two go together. Also I might be an edition behind anyway but...

In a very similar way Boneripper is not an add on to Thanquol, they are a partnership just like Felix and Gotrek. Bonerippers status is IMHO an oversight by GW and the characrter is supposed to be Thanquols loyal slave, but that is not the RAW. If you want go make Boneripper general go ahead, grey seers are powers behind thrones anyway, so its not as stupid for Boneripper to be titular army head as it at first looks.

Boneripper is a puppet, but he is big and impressive. If Thanquol says 'follow Boneripper' and Boneripper rears up roars and makes beckonging arm movements before lumbering forward I can see the Skaven army following him with Thanquol tagging along safely at the back. The more I look at it this is a very valid way for Thanquol to operate and Skaven are nothing if not easily led.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LunaHound wrote:
How about these guys? for the same logic Eric , are the doggies and the casket = the General? Because they are Lord Choices and no where does it say they arnt .
And yes i went through the effort of confirming they arnt monstrous mounts , they arnt mount of any kind , and they have their own leader ship. They are the same , *companions to their Lord.

Sorry Eric , but we dont accept the logic of " it doesnt say i cant which mean i can! " as far as im concerned you have no case to be legally allowed to treat bone ripper as general.

We can eliminate Orion's dogs because Orion MUST be army general.

What about Skarsnik and Gobbla! I want an big mean squig to be my General!

Skarsnik and Gobbla occupy a single base, so no.

Cryonicleech wrote:Skarsnik and Gobbla occupy a single base, so no.

Show me in the rules where it says I can't just pry Skarsnick off the base!
/sarcasm

Ahh, that's right.

Arion wrote:So, you will play RAW at the expense of playing the game for any fun? got it. I hope you have fun trying to find anyone to play.

Point is you take Thanquol, not Boneripper. Boneripper is the guardian of Thanquol, not the other way around. Your Logic is flawed. How can a mindless robot be your general when he cannot even lead himself? How can he give his leadership to another unit when, if he is too far from his leader, he can't even operate? RAW is NOT common sense. You are abusing letter of the rule and dismissing the CLEAR INTENT. Let me guess, you are one of those that wouldn't let VC cast IoN into combat, even though it was STRONGLY suggested that they could by the text.

EDIT for spelling, I have Fat Fingers when I type

So i see you're not reading my whole posts. I clearly don't play this way. I'm engaging in a RAW discussion. Secondly, I am not taking Thanquol. I am taking
"Thanquol and Boneripper" One is not greater or lesser than the other in the rules. And RAW isn't common sense, to some degree, its a direct interpretation of the rules. (its a different brand of "common sense" i suppose "common logic" or "straight reasoning" might be better words suited in this case)

Clear intent is also immaterial in a RAW discussion, since in a RAW discussion we're not here to discuss how was intended to be fielded but how the rules allow him to be fielded.

What do you think about those 3 units i just listed though? they have the same over all rules as bone ripper,
they dont fall under mounts , or monstrous mounts , they have their own leader ship and own entry.

As was discussed, Orion must be your general. As for the Sabretusks, they're bought in addition to. As in an upgrade. There's a couple of things needed there for them to be in the same level as Boneripper:
1.) Must be Unconditionally bought
2.) Must have higher leadership
3.) Must take up the same slot
4.) Must be a Named Character model

As to why I call boneripper a character is that he follows all the normal templating and listing as every other Special Character out there. I wish Thanquol came by himself and you had to buy Boneripper, or i dunno. something.

Also:

Thats a great idea , that means i get to have 2 Lord Bubbles , one running forward while the shut off bone ripper can baby sit the
rest of the army.

You can't have two generals. The rules specifically state you choose the one character with the highest leadership. Also there are many instances in Fantasy where multiple models take up 1 slot. (Chariots for example) This is just a similar case, for one lord slot you get two models that operate independently.

Sorry , i just have hard time not laughing at the irony of this sentence + bone ripper's rule.

Oh its completely hilarious. But its true :( Can Boneripper do whatever he wants as long as he's within 12" of Thanquol? sure can

Right, BUT, by your interpretation, both Thanquol and boneripper are Character found in the LORD section, thus making them both Lords. Now, you can't have two lord in a game under 3,000, so no one wishing to field thanquol in a standard 2250 game can do so. Or are you suggesting we are now getting two Lord character for one Lord spot? As for "one is not greater or lesser than the other" you are clearly wrong. If boneripper is outside of the 12" bubble, then he shuts down being that he is dependent on Thanquol. Thanquol on the other hand can continue to function without problem. Seem to me like Boneripper sure is lesser than thanquol seeing as he need thanquol to function.

You're right, you are looking at this from a pure RAW point of view, WHICH IS WRONG!!!

To correct an earlier point - you canot join a unit of skirmishers unless you are US1, so Boneripper can only join a plague furnace unit or, in higher point games, a screaming bell unit.

To correct an earlier point - you canot join a unit of skirmishers unless you are US1, so Boneripper can only join a plague furnace unit or, in higher point games, a screaming bell unit.

Are you talking about Rat Swarms? Cause they're not skirmishers. They are unbreakable and small. Boneripper can feel free to join them.

Arion wrote:Right, BUT, by your interpretation, both Thanquol and boneripper are Character found in the LORD section, thus making them both Lords. Now, you can't have two lord in a game under 3,000, so no one wishing to field thanquol in a standard 2250 game can do so. Or are you suggesting we are now getting two Lord character for one Lord spot? As for "one is not greater or lesser than the other" you are clearly wrong. If boneripper is outside of the 12" bubble, then he shuts down being that he is dependent on Thanquol. Thanquol on the other hand can continue to function without problem. Seem to me like Boneripper sure is lesser than thanquol seeing as he need thanquol to function.

I just pointed out how GW makes a habit of having multiple things take up one slot. Just because there are two characters doesn't mean that it equals 2 lord slots. Conversely there are characters that don't takeup _any_ slots. And yes I am wholly pointing out that you are getting 2 Lord level models for 1 slot. I don't see how I'm wrong on this point other than you telling me "you're wrong" and having that based on absolutely nothing.

Also you're still basing your judgement on what the model should be on a thematic component. Which isn't a rule at all. Boneripper shutting down doesn't mean he can't be a general. It only means if he wants to be your General then Thanquol had best be on the table and within 12 inches.

You're right, you are looking at this from a pure RAW point of view, WHICH IS WRONG!!!

We should totall encourage GW to write crappier and more vague rules that require lots of assumptions that your opponent is "A sporting fellow" and not one who , you know, reads his army book.

strange_eric wrote:I don't see how I'm wrong on this point other than you telling me "you're wrong" and having that based on absolutely nothing.

Other than your " im right" is based on absolutely nothing as well.

LunaHound wrote:

strange_eric wrote:I don't see how I'm wrong on this point other than you telling me "you're wrong" and having that based on absolutely nothing.

Other than your " im right" is based on absolutely nothing as well.

Other than the rulebook I'm staring at? Everything Im claiming is backed up by normal templating and normal rules.

strange_eric wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

strange_eric wrote:I don't see how I'm wrong on this point other than you telling me "you're wrong" and having that based on absolutely nothing.

Other than your " im right" is based on absolutely nothing as well.

Other than the rulebook I'm staring at? Everything Im claiming is backed up by normal templating and normal rules.

Like what?

LunaHound wrote:

strange_eric wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

strange_eric wrote:I don't see how I'm wrong on this point other than you telling me "you're wrong" and having that based on absolutely nothing.

Other than your " im right" is based on absolutely nothing as well.

Other than the rulebook I'm staring at? Everything Im claiming is backed up by normal templating and normal rules.

Like what?

First off, How do you know what model is a character? By what the rules and how army books are laid out He's either a Hero or a Lord. Ok So you're looking in the Lord section. Now normally you'd have _one_ model to stare at, he'd have a list of special rules and you'd bring him to battle and life would be dandy. But here you don't have an option. You have two completely seperate models, that dont sit on the same base, dont sit in the same unit, attack, charge, move around seperately etc. Now in this situation, GW would normally notify you of what can or can't be your general. Or they'd say something like "Boneripper cannot join units, and is just a regular rat ogre, etc" Something to let the player know that this guy is not a Character.
Monsters being characters is nothing new, they do it constantly, Dragon Ogre Shaggoths, Ogre Kings, Treeman, etc. So it can be expected that an ogre sized model can be a Character.
Well if Boneripper is a character and he's got the highest leadership, the rules (pg 97 skaven codex) say the Character with the highest leadership is your General.

The crux of this entire matter is, Is boneripper a Character? If you answer yes to this, then he can be a general.

The one thing that someone could've pointed out the entire time in this discussion is the Summary where it lists a dash next to Bonerippers name. Now, it would stand to reason that it means that Boneripper is akin to a mount/additional part of the model. But he doesn't follow _any_ of those conventions. So we're back at square one. What is he? What does the book tell me that he is? He just happens to follow all the formatting and lay out of a Special Character in a skaven book.

OK, here is the deal. Boneripper is Thanquols BODYGUARD. That means he id the body guard of THANQUOL. That is his JOB. He can't be the general. He is NOT A CHARACTER. You are making stupid argument for no good reason. You pointed out that he is an ADDITION TO ANOTHER CHARACTER.

strange_eric wrote:What is he? What does the book tell me that he is? He just happens to follow all the formatting and lay out of a Special Character in a skaven book.

What he is , is an oversight from GW. ( or its so obvious that GW didnt feel they need to bother to explain anymore )
I'll wait for yakface to respond to this thread. He is both more experienced and better at writing than me.

Arion wrote:OK, here is the deal. Boneripper is Thanquols BODYGUARD. That means he id the body guard of THANQUOL. That is his JOB. He can't be the general. He is NOT A CHARACTER. You are making stupid argument for no good reason. You pointed out that he is an ADDITION TO ANOTHER CHARACTER.

I agree , i think the only reason Bone Ripper's LD is so high is because so he can block off any charge and not run away in a turn leaving Thanquo shuddering in his own puddle of pee.

This is still going on, seriously?

Yes, by RAW, Boneripper can be the general. Every argument against it is a fluff argument.

RAI, nearly everyone is going to play it that he can't be the general, just as nearly everyone is going to play the storm banner as one use only.

Like Manfred said, play the game, not the rules.

There, no can we freaking drop it now?

Sorry Vengis, just because you have a strong opinion it doesn't mean you have a definitive answer.

General Boneripper is supported by the RAW, but is also justifiable in the fluff. To reiterate my earlier post which was ignored in favour of comments on Skarsnik which can explain this:

Orlanth wrote:
In a very similar way Boneripper is not an add on to Thanquol, they are a partnership just like Felix and Gotrek. Bonerippers status is IMHO an oversight by GW and the characrter is supposed to be Thanquols loyal slave, but that is not the RAW. If you want go make Boneripper general go ahead, grey seers are powers behind thrones anyway, so its not as stupid for Boneripper to be titular army head as it at first looks.

Boneripper is a puppet, but he is big and impressive. If Thanquol says 'follow Boneripper' and Boneripper rears up roars and makes beckonging arm movements before lumbering forward I can see the Skaven army following him with Thanquol tagging along safely at the back. The more I look at it this is a very valid way for Thanquol to operate and Skaven are nothing if not easily led.

Now you might disagree, but until you give good reasons why you and anyone else disagrees the discussion is still open. The 'Vengis has spoken so everyone else need shut up' arguement holds less water than you think.

You're right, I shouldn't have added that last line.

Personally, I'm going to play by "If the ruling is unsure, play by the option that is least advantageous to you", or whatever the exact wording is.

The thing is, with this argument, the rules are actually not unsure in the least. It's just that people don't like what they actually say.

What about the Wood Elf sisters? I forget off the top of my head but at least here are 2 more characters bought with the same slot... How would you use this to argue.

Deminyn wrote:What about the Wood Elf sisters? I forget off the top of my head but at least here are 2 more characters bought with the same slot... How would you use this to argue.

Excellent example btw (specifically of two models in same slot)
Sadly, top of their profile says neither can be your Army General. :(

strange_eric wrote:So i see you're not reading my whole posts. I clearly don't play this way. I'm engaging in a RAW discussion. Secondly, I am not taking Thanquol. I am taking
"Thanquol and Boneripper" One is not greater or lesser than the other in the rules. And RAW isn't common sense, to some degree, its a direct interpretation of the rules. (its a different brand of "common sense" i suppose "common logic" or "straight reasoning" might be better words suited in this case)

Clear intent is also immaterial in a RAW discussion, since in a RAW discussion we're not here to discuss how was intended to be fielded but how the rules allow him to be fielded.

And nevermind that GW has also said in the various FAQs that sometimes a strict RAW interpretation is a clear violation of the spirit of the rules. There comes a point where you need to pull your head out of wherever you put it, realize that GW effed up again, grin and bear it, admit that NO ONE should be taking Boneripper as a general, and move on to more relevant topics of discussion.

Nope.

1. Boneripper can be army general until FAQed.

2. There are valid fluff reasons to do so. Its a very Skaven thing to do.

The answer is not to complain but to counter. General Boneripper has a lot of disadvantages. as mentioned above you have two characters to protect, the death of either kills your general.

More tellingly Boneripper as a Rat Ogre is hard to hide. The Skaven general that lives is not the badass one but the hidden one in a reserve unit right behind another unit. Also as a set special character your opponent knows his loadout, Skaven have some nasty magic item combos that offer a better deal than Boneripper.

Also ld10 bubble is common for Skaven anyway due to ranks, the only real advantage is that you get it on the flanks and for smaller units.

I'm not sure why this is still being discussed since the rules state that Boneripper is only a modified Rat Ogre (with his improved stats and the warpfire thrower arm), not a Rat Ogre character. When someone can show where RAW states a Rat Ogre can be the general, I'll totally allow it. I really don't care if he's listed under the Lord section, RAW states he's a Rat Ogre and not a Rat Ogre character thus he can't be the general, regardless of leadership.

Where does it say that Thanqual is a character?

I can't believe this thread has gone on this long. Thanquol is a character because he is bought as a character choice. He is described as "a grey seer of distinction", which is a character choice. Boneripper is described as a "mutant rat ogre bodyguard", which is not a character.

Skyth - there isn't a description/rule in any of the character's that say "Character". Of course, when his description says that "he is a grey seer and therefore a Lvl 4 wizard", that might be a clue.

Orlanth - as far as the LD 10 bubble - actually the best you can get is straight up LD8 on Queek, which is then modified by the rank bonuses, which can be negated by flanking attacks. Note the flanking portion, which is why they didn't want LD10 guys running around a Skaven army - it would be make them too powerful.

I know your arguing simply for the argument of RAW vs RAI and don't play it that way - but come on - at some point it gets silly. The longer it goes on and the more arguing the fact that you could take Boneripper as the general leads me to believe that either A. Your really playing it that way or B. You don't understand the difference between RAW vs RAI.

Settle the dispute though - email GW and ask them for a ruling. Couldn't hurt.

My point is that there are exactly the same rules that make Thanquel a character as there are that make Boneripper one.

Technically, until it's FAQ'd or Errata'd, Boneripper has to be your general unless you and your opponent agree to change the rules you are playing by.

"Settle the dispute though - email GW and ask them for a ruling. Couldn't hurt. "

I think that would kill us all.

Or in a more meaningful way: GW answering an email wont answer anything. It needs errata.

skyth wrote:Where does it say that Thanqual is a character?

It's in the first line of his rules. "Thanqual is a Grey Seer and therefore a Level 4 wizard."

As I stated above, according to RAW, Thanqual is a Grey Seer and Boneripper is a Rat Ogre. Thus of the two of them, anything character rules related would fall to Thanqual and not Boneripper, as Rat Ogres are not characters and Grey Seers are.

What rule makes a Grey Seer a character? Units can be wizards as well (See also horrors)

That Boneripper is a Rat Ogre does not mean that he isn't a character also. In the WoC army, it is well accepted that Kholek is a character (And can be the general) even though he is a Shaggot.

strange_eric wrote:"Settle the dispute though - email GW and ask them for a ruling. Couldn't hurt. "

I think that would kill us all.

That's not even the half of it...

I was just reading my Skaven book and I found the solution to this arguement...

p97 "Make sure that your opponent knows which character is your General is your General when you deploy your army."

That duplicate "is your General" CLEARLY shows that GW sucks at rules and therefore I stamp this RAW legal, RAI wrong and sportsmanship is the swing vote.

Only play Boneripper as General if you don't care about what your opponent thinks.

I've been discussing this on a couple of other forums as I really really wanted a valid arguement to stop it...

BUT:

We could not find a conclusive arguement against Boneripper as general using RAW.

I'd say yes.... but you'd be getting low sports from me in a tournament and filthy looks in a friendly game.

You guys DO realize that when GW is forced to FAQ this, they're going to have nasty things to say about anyone defending this, right?

Manfred von Drakken wrote:You guys DO realize that when GW is forced to FAQ this, they're going to have nasty things to say about anyone defending this, right?

By the time that comes out in 5 years , i think most of us would have forgot about this silly discussion...

Manfred von Drakken wrote:You guys DO realize that when GW is forced to FAQ this, they're going to have nasty things to say about anyone defending this, right?

They are as likely to have nasty things to say about someone saying that he can't be the general.

They should have nasty things to say about themselves.

GW says nasty things all the time.

What I'm pissed off about the most is that GW isn't going to actually fix this with a SOLID ruling, FAQ's are just house rules. Now, if they made these FAQ's law, this would be much easier...

If they Errata the entry to state boneripper cannot be the General, that will be "law"

I get what you're saying. I'm sorry on behalf of everyone who misunderstood and said unkind things thinking you were a rule-twisting jerk. It's a silly rule problem and GW needs to fix it.

RAW speaking, there isn't anything that says that Boneripper can't be your general. It's weird; one Lord Choice, two seperate, independent models. How can one Character slot produce two models? It's almost like their each half.

Hey, can Thanquol/Boneripper even be your general at all if their each only half a character? Or do you have to buy a chieftain or a bare-bones warlock engineer to be your general, or can Thanquol and Boneripper both be your general?

All in all, GW should fix this. Bully for noticing. And that Boneripper can join rat swarms.

So, in theory: You buy a named character on a dragon.
The rules state said character cannot be a general.
The dragon takes up a hero slot, meaning he can lead the army?

TBH: GW has fethed up once again with thier quality wording.
I dont see how a mindless rat ogre could lead an army

Given that Rat Ogres are not very bright (and in 6E at least, Boneripper wasn't even alive, he was effectively a mindless bone golem under Thanaqol's control) anyone trying to use one as a general is... silly. Poor sportsmanship at the very least.

AS far as the post arguing 'is Grey Seer Thanaqol a character'... I point out that Grey Seers are Lord level characters, where Rat Ogres are merely Rare choice units.

I'd say that makes it pretty clear right there.

(A note in passing: my main army is Skaven. It would be sweet to have a LD 10 general. A little too sweet. Almost not a challenge anymore sweet.)

I would agree with the way that Vulcan looks at this. While there is nothing that explicitly states that Boneripper is not a character there is more than enough evidence to indicate that he is just a single ogre sized infantry model that does not count as a character.

Also I will go back to a statement that I made in a different thread. If there is a large amount of ambiguity with a rule its best to play it in the least advantageous way until the FAQ is released. Its the most sportsmanlike way to play.

The thing is, there is no ambiguity in the rule at all...

There is as Boneripper cannot exsist without Thanaqol and also is listed as just a specially modified Rat Ogre. As Vulcan stated previously a Rat Ogre is not Character.

Neither is a Dragon Ogre Shaggoth, but there is one that is a character.

A gutter runner is not a character, so that means that an Assassin isn't?

The fact that Boneripper shuts down without Thanaqol does not bring in any ambiguty as to whether he is a character. The general has to be the character that has the highest leadership barring a rule that says otherwise. Thus with a leadership 10, Boneripper HAS to be the general unless you have another character that has leadership 10.

All the arguments that I've heard against Boneripper being the general boil down to 'I don't like that rule and you're a bad person if you play by it'.

It has nothing to do with "I don't like that rule" but it has everything to do with the fact that Boneripper cannot exsist without Thanaqol and because of that there is no possible way he can be a character.

Kolek can exsist on his own and function with out any boundaries. He does not have a rule that states he is bound to another model ( in this case a character). Also there is not a rule that states Kolek is a Dragon Ogre Shaggoth, only a fluff description that states he is the oldest living one. Where as the rules for Boneripper explicitly state he is a Rat Ogre.

An Assassin is a Character choice and as such is not a gutter runner.

That he shuts down without Thanqol has no effect on whether he's a character or not.

The Green Knight has to stay within a certain area...Are you saying that he's not a character?

There can be no question that Boneripper is a character, its just a matter of what type of character he is.

He is at the very least a named special charqacter, because he hasa name and exists outside the normal rules. This is not unusual monstes can be characters, chaos had a named two headed dragon, named chaos spawn etc.

Some are lord or heo choices, some come out of the army allocation. Some cannot be general. Those that cannot be general hacve stated on their entry.

Boneripper has no such entry, but he does have his own named entry in the army book. The only restriction is that he must be taken with Thanquol.

This is stupid, and anyone who tried this should get a broken nose for their thoughts.

However, I'm pretty sure that Orlanth is, as of now, right. Or, at least, that this is a heap more complicated than that.

All RAI aside (it doesn't make sense, he's just a Rat Ogre, etc.), the problem is as follows:

When you buy Thanquol, you buy the Lord choice: Thanquol and Boneripper. Two models. One Lord choice.
This isn't like an elf riding a dragon that takes up a hero slot-both of these models are part of this Lord choice.

So yes, Thanquol is a character. He's a Lord choice. Half of one. Boneripper is the other half.

So what I (and I would believe Orlanth) is trying to say is this: Boneripper should have something, some little phrase or rule, that makes him unable to be the army general, or, better yet, make him part of Thanquol's equipment, or part of his special rules.

skyth wrote:Neither is a Dragon Ogre Shaggoth, but there is one that is a character.

Said Dragon Ogre Shaggoths use to have the option to be bought as either a Rare Choice or Character Choice. Said Dragon Ogre Shaggoth Lord is a Character as he's given special magic items, rules, is (I'm almost positive) mentioned with specific leadership effects in mind, etcetera.

A gutter runner is not a character, so that means that an Assassin isn't?

Are you even trying? "A Night Goblin is not a Character, does that mean a Night Goblin Big Boss isn't a character"? That's the exact same thing you're saying.

The fact that Boneripper shuts down without Thanaqol does not bring in any ambiguty as to whether he is a character. The general has to be the character that has the highest leadership barring a rule that says otherwise.

Thus with a leadership 10, Boneripper HAS to be the general unless you have another character that has leadership 10.

Bone Ripper is not a character. He cannot declare challenges, he cannot be attached to units, etcetera.

All the arguments that I've heard against Boneripper being the general boil down to 'I don't like that rule and you're a bad person if you play by it'.

By your logic: The highest leadership in my Goblin Army is a Leadership 7 model. However, it ties with the leadership of a Gigantic Spider. Could I thus make a Gigantic Spider my army's general: After all, said Gigantic Spider would be intimidating. It also is in the same character slot as my Goblin Big Boss, and there's nothing stating it doesn't count as a character. If my opponent says no, it's just them being a meanie because they don't like me having a monster as my general.

skyth wrote:
The Green Knight has to stay within a certain area...Are you saying that he's not a character?

I am not saying that the Green Knight isn't a character, but his rules do indicate that he cannot be the General and he cannot join other units.

I guess we will just need to see what the FAQ says.

Minsc wrote:

skyth wrote:Neither is a Dragon Ogre Shaggoth, but there is one that is a character.

Said Dragon Ogre Shaggoths use to have the option to be bought as either a Rare Choice or Character Choice. Said Dragon Ogre Shaggoth Lord is a Character as he's given special magic items, rules, is (I'm almost positive) mentioned with specific leadership effects in mind, etcetera.

Boneripper has special items and rules. Kholek does not have special leadership rules btw.

A gutter runner is not a character, so that means that an Assassin isn't?

Are you even trying? "A Night Goblin is not a Character, does that mean a Night Goblin Big Boss isn't a character"? That's the exact same thing you're saying.

No, that's the same exact thing that you're saying. It's the same argument that A Rat Ogre is not a character so Boneripper is not a character.

The fact that Boneripper shuts down without Thanaqol does not bring in any ambiguty as to whether he is a character. The general has to be the character that has the highest leadership barring a rule that says otherwise.

Thus with a leadership 10, Boneripper HAS to be the general unless you have another character that has leadership 10.

Bone Ripper is not a character. He cannot declare challenges, he cannot be attached to units, etcetera.

He cannot join units because he's unbreakable not because he isn't a character. He should be able to declare challenges as he IS a character.

All the arguments that I've heard against Boneripper being the general boil down to 'I don't like that rule and you're a bad person if you play by it'.

By your logic: The highest leadership in my Goblin Army is a Leadership 7 model. However, it ties with the leadership of a Gigantic Spider. Could I thus make a Gigantic Spider my army's general: After all, said Gigantic Spider would be intimidating. It also is in the same character slot as my Goblin Big Boss, and there's nothing stating it doesn't count as a character. If my opponent says no, it's just them being a meanie because they don't like me having a monster as my general.

I would say that mounts aren't characters. However, nothing in the rules actually define what makes something a character.

Warpsolution wrote:
So yes, Thanquol is a character. He's a Lord choice. Half of one. Boneripper is the other half.

Yes, I think you hit on how to word this correctly. Boneripper is half a lord choice, and so is Thanquol. They are just like Felix and Gotrek in this regard, in fact the two pairs are often seen as the anthersis of each other and are possibly destined to meet for a final confrontation, who knows.

Warpsolution wrote:
So what I (and I would believe Orlanth) is trying to say is this: Boneripper should have something, some little phrase or rule, that makes him unable to be the army general, or, better yet, make him part of Thanquol's equipment, or part of his special rules.

You have quoted me correctly, Boneripper ought to have had the special rule omiting him from leadership if that was what waas intended. Point being he doesnt.

Even more important he need not have. Boneripper makes sense as a puppet general. The theme fits Thanquol and Grey Seer mentality perfectly. The problem is not his general status but Ld10.

The entry needs fixing but I would sooner see Boneripper as potential puppet general with leadership reduced to about 8 and the unbreakable special rule.

skyth wrote:Neither is a Dragon Ogre Shaggoth, but there is one that is a character.

I'm pretty certain this one would be listed in the 'special characters' section of the book. Is he an add-on to an existing character?

A gutter runner is not a character, so that means that an Assassin isn't?

Gutter runners are listed in the rare choices section (incidentally just like Rat Ogres). Assassins, on the other hand, are in the character section of the book.

The fact that Boneripper shuts down without Thanaqol does not bring in any ambiguty as to whether he is a character. The general has to be the character that has the highest leadership barring a rule that says otherwise. Thus with a leadership 10, Boneripper HAS to be the general unless you have another character that has leadership 10.

If you really want to face LD 10 + up to 5 for ranks skaven, be my guest. I play skaven myself and think that would be grossly overpowered.

Or to quote a Spaniard: "You keep using those words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

skyth wrote:That he shuts down without Thanqol has no effect on whether he's a character or not.

The Green Knight has to stay within a certain area...Are you saying that he's not a character?

Hunh? You mean like, on the board? Because there are no limitations on where the Green Knight can go, only where he appears at.

This is why YMDC gets abit hard to read sometimes.
Instead of trying to figure out whats really intended in the rules , it always ended up into a debate to "who is right" , instead of "what should the rule really be"
Now im seeing people selecting only certain parts of sentence to discuss on , almost like avoiding answering the main point of the post.

Vulcan wrote:

skyth wrote:Neither is a Dragon Ogre Shaggoth, but there is one that is a character.

I'm pretty certain this one would be listed in the 'special characters' section of the book. Is he an add-on to an existing character?

A gutter runner is not a character, so that means that an Assassin isn't?

Gutter runners are listed in the rare choices section (incidentally just like Rat Ogres). Assassins, on the other hand, are in the character section of the book.

And Boneripper is in the character section of the book. Thanqal is just an add-on for Boneripper.

If you really want to face LD 10 + up to 5 for ranks skaven, be my guest. I play skaven myself and think that would be grossly overpowered.

Stats can't go above 10, and Rank bonus is limited to +3. You'd be facing Leadership 10 with Thanqal as the general most of the time also. To me it doesn't matter...I am just saying what the rules actually say.

Green Knight has to stay within a certain area...Are you saying that he's not a character?

Hunh? You mean like, on the board? Because there are no limitations on where the Green Knight can go, only where he appears at.

The problem you get in when you start discussing intent is that you have no point of reference. Common Sense arguments hold more weight in general than intent arguments simply because none of us are the designers and do not know what they intended when they wrote the rules. What we can do is look at the rules and see what makes sense. In this case the common sense approach would be to say that Boneripper cannot be the General. The rules at this point ambiguous and as such the best option at this part is to take the least advantageous approach.

Other than there is no ambiguity in his rules at all.

I would say the Bodyguard of Thanquol rule provides a significant amount of ambiguity.

Seriously Skyth do you think that when the FAQ comes out it will allow Boneripper to be the General?

I think they screwed up and he shouldn't be the general, but by the rules, it is unambiguous that he must be the general.

Negativemoney wrote:
Seriously Skyth do you think that when the FAQ comes out it will allow Boneripper to be the General?

As someone who just read all of this from a neutral position I would say quite clearly none of them who are talking this point expect that, all folks are saying is, right now RAW says you can. Thats a more damning situation regarding the way the book has been written, rather than those pointing it out.

Personally I find it amusing whoever wrote the book missed that out, and in the meantime I like Orlanth's view, it does seem a very Thanqol thing to do.

No doubt in my mind it'd be FAQ'd to say Boneripper can't be General though, if and when GW get round to doing that of course. Maybe the polite thing to do is send a email to GW to point it out that RAW at the moment regarding this issue is maybe not as they had planned.

skyth wrote:I think they screwed up and he shouldn't be the general, but by the rules, it is unambiguous that he must be the general.

"Boneripper is a specially modified Rat Ogre constructed to guard the Grey Seer" If he is constructed to guard then how can he lead?

That's fluff not actual rules. There is no 'Boneripper cannot be the general' in the rules.

Its in the Special Rules section and is the first line. I would not consider that to be Fluff but actual rules.

It describes the rule and is fluff...It has no game effect. No where in Boneripper's rules does it say that he cannot be the general.

No it describes what type of model he is.

Thanquol -> Grey Seer
Boneripper -> Rat Ogre

a Rat Ogre is not a character I don't know where the confusion really is

Negativemoney wrote:No it describes what type of model he is.

Thanquol -> Grey Seer
Boneripper -> Rat Ogre

a Rat Ogre is not a character I don't know where the confusion really is

Irrelevant.

Boneripper is called 'Boneripper' not 'Rat Ogre' or 'Rat ogre bodyguard'.

He is a character of the subset called special characters. Special characters exist partly outside the rules. So you can have a special character who is of a type that is normally a monster or mount. Chaos has a special character dragon. he is a character not a mount even though Chaos dragons are normally only mounts for Chaos lords. The clue is in the name and entry special characters are individually named and have their own entry.

Boneripper is very clearly a special character.

There is no rule that states that Galrauch explicity states he is a Chaos Dragon but rather rules that say the he uses the same breaths as a chaos dragon as is considered a Dragon Sorcerer. There is no indication that he is the same as a Chaos Dragon apart from those references.

Where as Scyla's entry states that he is a chaos spawn but gives special permission for him to issue and accept challenges but is by all means not a character. This is the best example to compare Boneripper to.

The rules for Boneripper state that he is a Rat Ogre there is no indication that he is character and nothing that overrides the fact that he is nothing more than a Named Rat Ogre.

Other than he's unbreakable, has better stats and different equipment. It's made excessively clear that Boneripper is NOT a normal Rat Ogre.

Having the Name and being in the Lord section is all that matters really. It is 100% clear via the rules that he is a character.

What you are doing is the equivalent of trying to argue that a Night Goblin Boss is not a character because a regular Night Goblin isn't.

skyth wrote:Other than he's unbreakable, has better stats and different equipment. It's made excessively clear that Boneripper is NOT a normal Rat Ogre.

Correct he is a mindless construct completely under the power of Thanquol.

skyth wrote:
Having the Name and being in the Lord section is all that matters really. It is 100% clear via the rules that he is a character.

I would agree if he had his own army choice selection in the rules but he doesn't He must be taking with Thanquol and Thanquol must be alive and within 12" of him to work. He is 100% dependent on another model to survive. This is another example of why he is not a character.

skyth wrote:What you are doing is the equivalent of trying to argue that a Night Goblin Boss is not a character because a regular Night Goblin isn't.

That's a streach as the main argument here is that Boneripper is a 'SPECIAL' Character where as you are talking about a Character. What I am saying that that this supposed Special Character has a rule that states he is a Rat Ogre.

What you are doing here is ignoring and dismissing a clear indication that Boneripper is not a character.

I am dismissing it because you have not provided any proof from the rules (not the background, but the rules) that he isn't a character.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This situation is analagous to having an O&G army with only Orcs in it...Plenty of Black Orcs, Big'uns, and Boar riders...With the only character being a Goblin hero with no magical equipment. The background tells us that no way would the Goblin Hero be the general as one of the Orc champions would have disposed of him and taken over...However, by the rules, the Goblin IS the army general.

ok so lets look at this shall we?
ok body gaurd rule states hes a modified rat ogre constuct tasked to gaurd Thanq. it also states the Thanq is the master, and thus boneripper is subservient to Thanq and will shut down if over 12 inches away from Thanq.
so the logical answer is :

NO!! he is not allowed to be a character.


however if you wish to play alone with yourself, and/or get dragged outa your local club and lynched repeatedly while listening to the just ridicule of your peers. i say go for it, just make sure before anouncing your intensions that someone has a vid camera so it can be put on youtube for all our enjoyment....

i truely wonder if people dare to ask questions like this outside of the internet.

None of that precludes him being a character, but nice of you to bring up the 'I don't like this rule and you're a bad person if you follow it' argument. Especially with the implied threat of physical violence.

not implied at all, if your willing in RL to face the consequenses of your actions with your peers i say go for it, what your peers do to you is their business, i just wanna watch .

as for 'I don't like this rule and you're a bad person if you follow it' i didnt say that at all. the OP is clearly trying to break a rule and use it for his own benifit.

but your right, he is a characte, he just cant be the army general. my fauxpas.

And what you are doing is a logical error, which I believe is called 'Argument via force or threat'.

The OP is also not breaking any rules...
If he is a character, the character with the highest leadership MUST be the army general barring a rule specifying otherwise otherwise. Boneripper is a character and does not have a rule specifically saying that he cannot be the general. Thus he must be the general.

And what you are doing is a logical error, which I believe is called 'Argument via force or threat'.

silly, but ok i retract the statement, im sure no one would do more than give the person a good talking too.

The OP is also not breaking any rules...

bull.
if your bending a rule to breaking to gain advantage, your playing in an unsportsman like manner. go and try the rule but i wont allow it at the table i play.

If he is a character, the character with the highest leadership MUST be the army general barring a rule specifying otherwise otherwise. Boneripper is a character and does not have a rule specifically saying that he cannot be the general. Thus he must be the general.

nope, i dont buy it. a body gaurd isnt going to be a general, especially a construct that fallows around another character. the Bonerippers job is is protection, not leading. period.

Then find a RULE that says otherwise...

body gaurd of thanquol.

Job done.

I see nothing in that rule that prevents him from being the General.

The main argument here must be Is Boneripper a Character or not. This is the central point and will lead to all the answers.

Those that are for it being a character say the following (correct me if I am wrong)
1. He is selected as part of a lord choice
2. He has a name.
3. Any non mount with a name that is purchased as a lord choice is in fact a character.

Those opposing the fact that he is a character say the following
1. He must be purchased with Thanquol and cannot exist without him, or operate if to far from Thanquol.
2. He is a Rat Ogre (this is a rule not fluff)
3. Has a Rule that indicates he is the bodyguard of Thanquol.

What must be resolved is what makes a character a character. That is not answered in the rules and if any one can point to a rule stating that anything purchased in the Lord or Hero slot that is not ridden by a character is considered to be a character. This rule does not exist, it is something that we just infer.

According to page 97 of the Skaven book, characters come out of the Lord and Hero slots, whereas troops come out of the other slots. As Boneripper comes out of a Lord slot, he is therefore a character unless otherwise stated.

well if thats true you can only use boneripper in the army at 3000 plus points cause if he counts as a lord then hes allowed in a 2000 pt army and up, but what about thanq? you need thanq to run boneripper, thats 2 lord slots by your thinking. BY THE RULES: you can have 2 lords at 3000 points (stated in the chart on page 97). obviously the rule wasnt intened this way but hey neither was boneripper ever intended to be the general....

Yeah!!! fight cheese with cheese!

and here we go, it does not state that they come as a pair (go ahead find where it says), it only says thanq AND boneripper but no where does it say that they are bought together (hey im really getting into this IT DOESNT SAY type of rules interpritation) the points cost for thanq and bone ripper is 450pts a peice. a peice... so to have boneripper you have to pay 900 points. as it clearly does not say that they are bought as a pair.

That's a pretty lame argument. There are lots of entries in army books where you can add things to entries that don't take up an extra slot, both in 40k and Fantasy. I'm pretty sure if I had my book on me that it would be pretty easy to point out what you are brutallizing with that arguement. I'm guessing its on the fact that is, as you said, says Thang and bonripper, which is like anyother combination in fantasy (wood elf sisters, all regiments of renown) where you can't just take 1 character and not the other, or the regiment of renown without it's hero...

but more importantly, JUST GIVE IT UP. The 2 lords argument was shot down already, which is pretty much the same as the 2x points argument. Unless you have something new to add to the debate, just ignore it.

Im making a point that the 2 lords arguement is as silly as boneripper being the general... sacrasm in the face of silly

Given up as requested

skyth wrote:Other than there is no ambiguity in his rules at all.

The simple fact that this thread exists means that there is clearly ambiguity. Your personal opinion on the matter does not mean that there is no ambiguity.

This thread is exactly why RAW is a bad idea. I guarantee you that if we didn't have RAW, this discussion wouldn't be happening.

If you really want to take the position that Boneripper is a Lord-level character, the you MUST take the position that you cannot field Thanquol and Boneripper at less than 3000 points. From the Empire book (as this is repeated verbatim in all other books): "Characters are divided into two categories: Lords and Heroes. The maximum number of characters an army can include is shown on the chart below. Of these, only a certain number can be Lords."

If Boneripper is also a Lord-level character, then you cannot include the pair in anything less than a 3000-point game. To claim otherwise is to pick and choose which rules you're reading by RAW.

Play the Game, not the Rules.

If they use up a single slot (1 Lord) then they are taken together as the entry shows.
You cannot take one without the other.
The characters do not give up any VP's unless both are killed as they have a joint cost for points.

Common sense would suggest he cant be the general (Being a labotomised rat ogre and all)
But since when has that stopped people from hunting for loopholes to gain an advantage?

The only ambiguity is that the fluff and rules don't match perfectly...The actual rules have no ambiguity.

JD21290 wrote:
But since when has that stopped people from hunting for loopholes to gain an advantage?

This, of course, is the point of the thread in my opinion. My previous post was written to highlight what I believe to be the absurdity of this discussion.

skyth wrote:The only ambiguity is that the fluff and rules don't match perfectly...The actual rules have no ambiguity.

Out of curiosity , and rule lawyering aside i would like to get your opinion on this.

Do you feel they gave Bone Reaper LD 10 for

a) so he can be skaven general
or
b) so he can do his job as body guard properly and move around within reasonable distance to block any threat to Thanquol?

Please pick one.

It doesn't matter why he has higher leadership. I am only talking about what the rules actually say. There is no ambiguity in the rules, just complaining that people don't like what the rules actually say.

skyth wrote:It doesn't matter why he has higher leadership. I am only talking about what the rules actually say. There is no ambiguity in the rules, just complaining that people don't like what the rules actually say.

Well if you dont want to reply my question , then i have nothing else to say. And im sure others feels the same.

Quoting the wise " play the game , not the rules " especially we know how awesome GW rules are written am i right guys?

Since I am not arguing intent (Which is impossible), your question is meaningless.

skyth wrote:Since I am not arguing intent (Which is impossible), your question is meaningless.

If you think knowing the intent is impossible , then so be it.

LunaHound wrote:If you think knowing the intent is impossible , then so be it.

You can't know intent unless you are the one that is writing the rules or have directly asked those that did what their intent was. Anything else is just speculation.

JD21290 wrote:The characters do not give up any VP's unless both are killed as they have a joint cost for points.

Almost correct. Given the rules you can only get points for killing Thanquol and no points for killing Boneripper. I think this is another nail in the coffin for Boneripper not being the army General.

Negativemoney wrote:

LunaHound wrote:If you think knowing the intent is impossible , then so be it.

You can't know intent unless you are the one that is writing the rules or have directly asked those that did what their intent was. Anything else is just speculation

Not entirely true - if they then USE the rule ina published medium that also gives you intent. So, if they were to have a Bat Rep and did not have BR as general that will tell you they did not intend BR to be the general.

Possibly

The problem with the Battle Rep is unless the person that wrote the book is one of the guys participating in it and writing about it, you can't take much from that article. Also you have no idea about when that battle rep took place. If you think about it it most took place about 4 to 5 months before the book was published and the rules could have change slightly since then (Battle Reps in WDs could be play test games).

Just saying unless there is a direct quote about intent it is almost impossible know what that intent was.

The "they" in context was the rules writer, sorry if that wasnt clear.

In addition the book is finalised 4months before, as it takes that long to print, ship from china and distribute...the leads times are insane, which is why mistakes are such a pain to recitfy!

They also make mistakes all the time in Battle Reports...Like they had a 4th edition one where Chaos Space Marines were not automatically entangled when thier Rhino got destroyed.

However in this case it would still show intent of the author - if JV honestly believes BR cannot be the General, then he wont play it as such. It is only a "mistake" when there is a clear rule covering it, and here the rule is not clear.

The rule itself is absolutely clear...It's just that people don't like the rule so they try to claim it's unclear.

skyth wrote:The rule itself is absolutely clear...It's just that people don't like the rule so they try to claim it's unclear.

Your funny. Clear to you isn't clear to everyone else. Sure, as an arguement in RAW vs. RAI, go argue for 20 pages, and you can make whatever statements you like to prove it. Just don't think anyone else will actually buy into them.

But move into the real world, where a Tournament Organizer gets to "Make the Call", and you won't be seeing BR as a general. Be as absurd as you want in an interenet forum, it won't affect how the game is actually played by others.

Yes, a TO has the right to change any rule that they want to. However, by RAW, the answer is clear...The only issue is when RAW intersects with percieved RAI (Also known as 'what I want the rules to say').

Except that I won't be changing rules.)

Doubt it will come up at all, as I just don't see anyone trying to get away with it.

skyth wrote:The rule itself is absolutely clear...It's just that people don't like the rule so they try to claim it's unclear.

Actually no , the rule isnt clear.
Its why this thread exist.
"Liking" the rule or not has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.
Im sorry that you feel like it does , but you see , im also a Skaven player.

Now lets see what units have the highest LD in skaven army. Skaven war lord and Vermin Lord , both at LD 8.
So the vermin lord cant be army general , and we are left with Warlord.

How on earth is some random robot body guard that falls apart when the master die can suddenly be a general at LD 10
you say the rule's intent is impossible to know , well i beg to differ.

Then we look at what his role is , and what he is capable of. He is capable of acting independently to an extent without the need to stay in unit
coherency to Thanquol , which means he is free to roam around and intercept enemy units. Now it makes sense why he is LD 10 .

Skyth, I won't argue that by the letter of the rules your argument has some merit. I just don't see how using the letter of the rules in this instance makes for a better game.

Skaven with a LD 10 General would be insanely hard to deal with. Period. So much so they would be not very fun to play with, much less against. But then, that is just my opinion.

Play the game any way you want to... so long as you can actually find an opponent who will agree to let you do it.

I, for one, will not.

EDIT: I take that back. Since I play skaven too, I'll do the same thing. Then our LD 10 generals cancel out and the game becomes fair again.

Vulcan wrote:Skyth, I won't argue that by the letter of the rules your argument has some merit. I just don't see how using the letter of the rules in this instance makes for a better game.

Skaven with a LD 10 General would be insanely hard to deal with. Period. So much so they would be not very fun to play with, much less against. But then, that is just my opinion.
.

Which is the basis of the argument...You don't like the rule.

Yes Mikhaila, you would actually be changing the rules if you say Boneripper is not the General of a Skaven army.

That this thread exists does not mean that the rules aren't clear. I keep on seeing threads pop up about guys on horses having Halberds or BSB's having shields...It doesn't mean that the rule itself isn't clear. It's more of a case of people don't like the rule.

And just for the record, I don't play Skaven and I am not arguing how I think the rule should be played...I agree that Boneripper shouldn't be the General...I just can't find rules to back that assertion up.

skyth wrote:
Yes Mikhaila, In My opinion, which is only my opinion, and doesn't seem to be shared by anyone else, you would actually be changing the rules if you say Boneripper is not the General of a Skaven army.

You really need the part I added. It shows that you recognize that other people have opinions, and that you don't think the universe revolves around you. Otherwise people might think you have some sort of Napolean syndrome.


Hmm, wait....I get it. This is just a plot to argue some obviously wrong point to death, thus proving RAW isn't always the correct route to interpret rules for toy soldiers. You picked something that has a small sense of logic to it, but that no one would ever agree with you on. Then argue it to the point of absurdity, and keep telling people how they are breaking/changing rules. Making yourself, your arguement, and RAW itself seem very silly, discrediting all three.

Very devious sir. A worthy plot that Thanquol himself might come up with. Except he can't be the general now because his halfdead, brainless, mutant lump of a bodyguard is now in charge.

Actually, several people have agreed that the rules say that Boneripper MUST be the general. Other people don't like that the rules say that so try to say that they don't when they actually do.

What the rules say is a fact...Which is the only thing I am arguing. Whether the rule should be followed is an opinion, which I am not debating.

And where in the rules is a fact called "Boneripper can be the General"?

There isn't. Your spin on how you interpret the rules led you to this 'fact'. The aguement of 'just debating the rules' is just a ruse by which you imply anyone who disagrees with you isn't discussing the rules.

That's like saying that a General of the Empire ability to be the general is an opinion.

I haven't heard any rules-based arguments against Boneripper being the general.

Skyth: no it isnt, and stop trying to put word in his mouth he has a valid point.

Im starting to agree your just arguing for arguments sake. your line is silly, pure and simple. it dont say so , so there.... its getting old. can we move on? you havent shown any proof either from your side of the discussion. so put up or.... now how does that rhyme go????

any way this thread has reached for all intent and purpose an empass. mod?

Since you gain the points for killing Thanquol and not bone, it goes to show he is the character, while ripper remains a brainless bodyguard.
To be honest, if someone does try to do this, i think ill start up daemons and just play broken rules against broken rules.

I haven't heard any rules-based arguments against Boneripper being the general.

Then maybe open your eyes and read what people write, rather than just ignore them and plead you are right.
so please, point out where it states he CAN be the general of an army.