Title says it all.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Title says it all.

G

No.

Yes it can be picked out in combat, if you as the tyranid player chooses to have the wound placed on the HT instead of the TG.

*edit* forgot to mention, why would you want to put wounds on the HT though. Maybe to give the TG the special rules for when the HT dies? I guess maybe the HT has only one wound left and then join it with the TG and see it the HT will not last and choose for it to die so the 3 TG has the special rules when the HT dies.

Hive Tyrants aren't ICs, so no.

Nice. I was not aware of that.

Thanks!
G

They join them as an IC though....??

MasterSlowPoke wrote:Hive Tyrants aren't ICs, so no.

actually, they are when they join tyrant guard. "may join a unit of tyrant guard exactly as if it were an independent character". there was an earlier thread about whether the hive tyrant could be shot at while with the tyrant guard and people seemed to be split on that. i'm personally of the opinion that if it joins as an IC, it uses the IC rules while with the squad so it can't be shot but can be singled out in assault. others thought that it's IC status is only for the joining of the squad and it then loses it's status. if you're on that side of the coin, they can't ever be singled out as the current new codex doesn't have a shoot the big ones type rule.

He joins as an IC but never loses his MC status either. So he may be picked out in CC or shooting.

ooops here we go again. HT is not an IC. Where in the HT rules that give it the IC rule? There isn't any. The TG has a rule that lets the TG to join the TG brood. It Dosn't give the HT an IC rules. If it did, then the HT would be able to leave the brood, wich it Can't. Once in the Brood it has to stay in the Brood.

Nid book, pg 35:

A single Hive Tyrant may join a unit of Tyrant Guard exactly as if it were an independent character.

yes, hive tyrant can be singled out. Same as eldrad or any other seer can be singled out of a warlock retinue. Read the codex. He joins exactly as if he were an independent character.

Davor wrote:ooops here we go again. HT is not an IC. Where in the HT rules that give it the IC rule? There isn't any. The TG has a rule that lets the TG to join the TG brood. It Dosn't give the HT an IC rules. If it did, then the HT would be able to leave the brood, wich it Can't. Once in the Brood it has to stay in the Brood.

oops is right as i quoted the rule above. it's joins as "exactly as an IC". if it's part of the unit and using the IC rules, it can be singled out in CC but not shooting. it can also leave the unit as it joined as an IC, which can leave non-retinue units. can you tell me where it says it can't leave? it doesn't. the crux of the arguement is whether you think it's IC status is only for the 1/100 of a second it takes to join the unit and then it loses it. if you do think it loses it, you'd have to stay with the tyrant guard since only the IC rules allow you to leave; there is nothing in shieldwall that allows you to leave them, just join.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:Nid book, pg 35:

A single Hive Tyrant may join a unit of Tyrant Guard exactly as if it were an independent character.

"May join a unit" (that is the ONLY action being taken) "exactly as if it were an independent character." In no other way is the HT acting like an IC.

So you're saying that they only follow the rules for the 1st bullet on pg. 48?

Does anyone know how this is being dealt with in official events and tournaments? I have an RTT coming up in February and I'd like to be able to address this in my announcements before the event starts.

-Dis.

they probably mean for the tyrant to join the Tyrant Guard for the purpose of wound allocation in shooting. Also, if you are in base contact with it, can't you attack it regardless? If we go by that logic I could make tons of scarab swarms for a tomb spyder and he can never be singled out in CC as both examples of a complex unit.

"The new Tyranid codex will not be used until it is FAqed"

would be my announcement. What a sloppy crap-codex!

Just as an aside, why has this rule been made so bloody obtuse and convoluted in this codex? In the previous codex the shieldwall rule was pretty straightforward so why has it been made so confusing now?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kurgash wrote:they probably mean for the tyrant to join the Tyrant Guard for the purpose of wound allocation in shooting. Also, if you are in base contact with it, can't you attack it regardless? If we go by that logic I could make tons of scarab swarms for a tomb spyder and he can never be singled out in CC as both examples of a complex unit.

This. I was under the impression that if a model was in base to base contact with the hive tyrant then it would have to allocate it's attacks against the hive tyrant. Any models within 2" of the hive tyrant can also choose to allocate attacks against it, or is this not the case?

Because some people either fail at reading comprehension or succeed at selective interpretation. Unless someone comes up with a concrete reason why not my swarmlord will always be able to be singled out in hand to hand, and if you play me so will yours.

The gramatical structure of "as if he were an IC", excludes him as not being an IC.If he were rules would simply state "he becomes an IC". It is a nonsensical statement if he is in fact an IC upon joining TGs. "As if" is being used in place of "like" or "in similar fashion to an IC".

He joins "as if he were an IC", this means he is not an IC. He is performing an action normally reserved for ICs. The rules are giving him permission to do so without becoming an IC.

He joins meaning when he joins the unit he is treated as an independent character that has joined a unit.

In the game I played last night, I counted the Tyrant as an IC when he was joined. We were very unsure of this as well. Now that I think about it, I think that the 'correct' answer would be that since he just "joins them as an IC", then he is not actually an IC come combat time any more than a Tyrant with wings is jump infantry when it is deployment time. Which is to say, he is not.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:So you're saying that they only follow the rules for the 1st bullet on pg. 48?

Deuce11 wrote:

Nurgleboy77 wrote:Nid book, pg 35:

A single Hive Tyrant may join a unit of Tyrant Guard exactly as if it were an independent character.

"May join a unit" (that is the ONLY action being taken) "exactly as if it were an independent character." In no other way is the HT acting like an IC.

No, no. I was speaking specifically to the one line about "joining a unit." That's why I quoted you.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

daedalus wrote:In the game I played last night, I counted the Tyrant as an IC when he was joined. We were very unsure of this as well. Now that I think about it, I think that the 'correct' answer would be that since he just "joins them as an IC", then he is not actually an IC come combat time any more than a Tyrant with wings is jump infantry when it is deployment time. Which is to say, he is not.

QFT

A) he is only an IC when he joins TGs

or

B) he is not an IC but can do an IC thing.

As it is written, it does not state he becomes an IC, it states he does an action normally reserved to ICs.

If we read it by the other interpretation, it doesn't make sense as a sentence. How can an IC act as if it were an IC? It is or it isn't. If its an IC the correct and only way to write it is: "the HT is an IC when joined".

Nurgleboy77 wrote:So you're saying that they only follow the rules for the 1st bullet on pg. 48?

You remember this which some (including myself) campaigned against so heavily?

Space Wolves wrote:Jaws of the World Wolf is used as a PSA...

It's a PSA without any of the drawbacks of being a PSA....

Tyranids wrote:A single Hive Tyrant may join a unit of Tyrant Guard exactly as if it were an independent character.

Same story here I guess. Welcome to 5th edition, land of the "things that are like things but not really things".

More intelligently, I would try to argue that the as if part describes the action taken by the Hive Tyrant, not the unit identifaction or rules of the Hive Tyrant itself, or additionally see below:

"This balloon is exactly as red as an apple." Would you then try to eat said balloon thinking it was an apple?

warboss wrote:

MasterSlowPoke wrote:Hive Tyrants aren't ICs, so no.

actually, they are when they join tyrant guard. "may join a unit of tyrant guard exactly as if it were an independent character". there was an earlier thread about whether the hive tyrant could be shot at while with the tyrant guard and people seemed to be split on that. i'm personally of the opinion that if it joins as an IC, it uses the IC rules while with the squad so it can't be shot but can be singled out in assault. others thought that it's IC status is only for the joining of the squad and it then loses it's status. if you're on that side of the coin, they can't ever be singled out as the current new codex doesn't have a shoot the big ones type rule.

Ok there is another thread where this was argued, and until there is a GW FAQ for the nid book, this will not be resolved, here is a summary of results of the points made in that thread:

If you believe that the shieldwall rule statement of "may join a unit of tyrant guard exactly as if it were an independent character" just allows your tyrant join but not make the Tyrant and IC or follow any other of the rules for ICs, then you cannot pick out the tyrant for shooting or close combat because they are not ICs

If you believe that the shieldwall rule statement of "may join a unit of tyrant guard exactly as if it were an independent character" does not exclude you from following all of the IC rules, so you must follow ALL of them. So your tyrant may be picked out for shooting because it is still a monstrous creature acting as an IC, and may be picked out in CC all per the IC RAW.

These positions have been argued in another thread already.

I personally would like to think that GW did not intend to make the shieldwall rule totally useless, and intended to have it protect the hive tyrant like it did in the 4th ed codex rules, but they did not want to say it acts like retinue and transplant the 4th ed codex rules right over. So I would like to believe that the tyrant is allowed to just join the guard, and may not follow any of the other IC rules.

Until we hear from GW, it sounds like from the other thread that people are pretty entrenched on how they believe it should work, so at some point this will be the new does the Hive Tryant become an IC thread and the old arguments will pop up again from the other thread.

He isn't, nor does he become, an IC.

He is given a specific exception to perform a general action normally only allowed to ICs.

The rules does not give him any further exceptions, advantages nor disadvantages.

Wait back in the day, like two weeks ago, werent you still able to single out the tyrant?

I fail to see the relevance of how the rules used to work.
As such I cannot be bothered to look up the old rules.
Yeah, I'm that lazy.

Its not relevant to the argument, I was just curious.

Actually no it is. If the guy was not able to be singled out back in the day then I believe it would be the intent to keep it that way now.

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:Its not relevant to the argument, I was just curious.

Actually no it is. If the guy was not able to be singled out back in the day then I believe it would be the intent to keep it that way now.

the 4th ed codex tyrant guard acted specifically said they acted as a retinue for the hive tyrant, so they were essentially a unit where the hive tyrant was an upgrade character, exactly like a marine squad with a sergent, or an ork mob of boyz with a nob. So no they could not be singled out with the 4th ed codex in either shooting or CC.

I change my opinion then. That he simply joins as in IC. The other issue with this was him being able to be singled out with shooting, which would make the tyrant guard stupid.

I grappled the shoggoth wrote:I change my opinion then. That he simply joins as in IC. The other issue with this was him being able to be singled out with shooting, which would make the tyrant guard stupid.

If the tyrant must follow all of the IC rules, I believe that you would be spending 60-180 points plus for a unit that would allow a tyrant to get a cover save if the guard would receive a cover save. The only other benefit I could think of are that they do allow a Tyrant with wings with a unit of guard (you could not have a tyrant with wings joined by a guard unit in the 4th ed codex), so they could get a cover save from shooting until you needed him to charge, and then have him leave the unit, and have the guard unit go after another target.

"Joins" - that is the action the HY performs

"exactly as if..." - that is HOW they are performing the action.

THey are not an IC, never become or ever look like an IC. YOu cannot assign attacks (as they are *not* a seperate unit) against the HT in CC, merely the unit containing the HT. You also cannot pick them out for shooting as they are NOT a monstrous IC.

They simply JOIN the unit as an IC. Nothing else.

This again! This really annoys me EXACTLY AS IF I were Keith Olbermann

Volkov wrote:This again! This really annoys me EXACTLY AS IF I were Keith Olbermann

Hey! Look, It's Keith Olbermann! Quick, get his Autograph!

Hey! Look, It's Keith Olbermann! Quick, get his Autograph!

Clearly no amount of quoting and/or analogies will change anyone's mind on this matter

I have to say joining a unit as an IC is not being an IC. If they wanted to make the HT an IC but limit him to joining a brood of Tyrant Guards that would have been as easy to put down.

As it is, they said join as an IC, but nothing else in the IC rules would apply to an HT as he is not an IC. It is really very simple.

The purpose is of the Tyrant Guard is to keep the Tyrant alive in both HTH and from being targeted in shooting.

but can they deepstrike if they have wings... oh wait

jgemrich wrote:I have to say joining a unit as an IC is not being an IC. If they wanted to make the HT an IC but limit him to joining a brood of Tyrant Guards that would have been as easy to put down.

As it is, they said join as an IC, but nothing else in the IC rules would apply to an HT as he is not an IC. It is really very simple.

The purpose is of the Tyrant Guard is to keep the Tyrant alive in both HTH and from being targeted in shooting.

Yeah, i don't think he can be picked out either, he can in CC,if theyre BTB, but not in shooting. If he could there would be absoloutly no point of tyrant guard at all.

Eldar Own wrote:

jgemrich wrote:I have to say joining a unit as an IC is not being an IC. If they wanted to make the HT an IC but limit him to joining a brood of Tyrant Guards that would have been as easy to put down.

As it is, they said join as an IC, but nothing else in the IC rules would apply to an HT as he is not an IC. It is really very simple.

The purpose is of the Tyrant Guard is to keep the Tyrant alive in both HTH and from being targeted in shooting.

Yeah, i don't think he can be picked out either, he can in CC,if theyre BTB, but not in shooting. If he could there would be absoloutly no point of tyrant guard at all.

Can I pick out your Powerfist guy in CC if I get in BtB with him as well then?

Eldar Own wrote:

jgemrich wrote:I have to say joining a unit as an IC is not being an IC. If they wanted to make the HT an IC but limit him to joining a brood of Tyrant Guards that would have been as easy to put down.

As it is, they said join as an IC, but nothing else in the IC rules would apply to an HT as he is not an IC. It is really very simple.

The purpose is of the Tyrant Guard is to keep the Tyrant alive in both HTH and from being targeted in shooting.

Yeah, i don't think he can be picked out either, he can in CC,if theyre BTB, but not in shooting. If he could there would be absoloutly no point of tyrant guard at all.

NO, you *cannot* pick the HT out in CC - you can only "pick out" (i.e. Direct) Attacks at seperate UNITS - the HT is not an IC, and is therefore NOT a seperate unit in close combat.

The purpose is of the Tyrant Guard is to keep the Tyrant alive in both HTH and from being targeted in shooting.

Clearly. And the counter-argument for this rests on an ambiguity in the language. Which for the record I don't think even exists

Nurgleboy77 wrote:He joins as an IC but never loses his MC status either. So he may be picked out in CC or shooting.

This needs a FAQ to keep people from shafting Nidz players.

G

If he could be picked out in combat like an IC, wouldn't he also not get bonus penetration dice like a MC would? I don't think he can be picked out based on that.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:If he could be picked out in combat like an IC, wouldn't he also not get bonus penetration dice like a MC would? I don't think he can be picked out based on that.

What in the world are you talking about.

I'm saying he'd either be an IC in combat or an MC, not some strange hybrid of the two. How would we know which MC rules to keep and which IC ones to adopt instead?

He doesn't lose any MC rules.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:I'm saying he'd either be an IC in combat or an MC, not some strange hybrid of the two. How would we know which MC rules to keep and which IC ones to adopt instead?

Why would he lose any MC rules? It doesn't say under shieldwall that he loses rules. It says that he, a monstrous creature, joins a squad of Tyrant guard as an IC would. That means he has to be adjacent to them, and has all of the implicit joining restrictions concerning movement that ICs have when they try to join a squad.

Hilarious other ramification I thought of. Strictly speaking, there is no provision for him to leave the squad as an IC would; He can only join.

I'm not saying he does. I'm just not sure how we're supposed to know which IC rules he follows and which MC rules he follows if he is supposed to be a hybrid. He'd have to be one or the other.

He is not an IC. At all. Hive Guard allow him to join as if he were one, but that's it.

Even if he were an IC, there is no conflict between the IC and MC rules - he could be both with no problems whatsoever, and even WAS an MC IC until the new codex.

This needs a FAQ for sure.

Yo to SlowPoke... where do you play at? I am over in Largo.

G

THere is a difference between *joining* a unit, being *part* of the unit, and *leaving* the unit.

The HT can Join like an IC. It is not part of it like an IC, and it cannot leave like an IC.


In the previous codex, the guard would *deploy* just like and MC. That did not mean it also attacked like an MC, or moved like and MC.

What are the rules for an IC to *join* a unit, those are the only rules that apply to the HT. Once it has already joined, the rule ceases to be relevant.

I'm not saying he does. I'm just not sure how we're supposed to know which IC rules he follows and which MC rules he follows if he is supposed to be a hybrid. He'd have to be one or the other.

There is no rule that keeps a model from being both an IC and an MC -- so your point is a non issue. In fact the IC rules address how such a model works (there just hasn't been one in a long while -- since the 3ed Eldar codex I think)

What are the rules for an IC to *join* a unit, those are the only rules that apply to the HT. Once it has already joined, the rule ceases to be relevant.

There are a whole host of rules that can be argued to apply to any model that joins as if it were an IC. We don't know where those rules begin and end -- because the shieldwall rule is ambiguous. There's also a whole host of issues if he simply joins and can't leave (like KPs for one). Not making a slippery slope argument, just saying it is not crystal clear because the RAW is not clear enough. I wish it were clear cut but it isn't, at least in my opinion.

My tyrant guard won't hit the table until an FAQ is released because I hate dealing with ambiguity on a game by game basis, so I am crossing my fingers for a quickly released one like the SWs.

winterman wrote:My tyrant guard won't hit the table until an FAQ is released

And what am I, Chopped Liver?

Green Blow Fly wrote:This needs a FAQ for sure.

Yo to SlowPoke... where do you play at? I am over in Largo.

G

Anthem Games in Tampa, I like the atmosphere better than Armada and it's a lot closer. Largo is over by Skull-N-Bonez, right? I've heard good things about that store.

Gwar! wrote:

winterman wrote:My tyrant guard won't hit the table until an FAQ is released

And what am I, Chopped Liver?

A big steaming pile of it.

So basically, no-one knows, everyone has their own interpretation of the rule and there doesnt seem to be any one universal consensus. Blimey, when I read the new nid codex I thought 'hmm that rule seems a little vague' but this is bloody ridiculous! Did no-one at GW think to proof read or test this stuff before it gets printed?

They do not believe in the practice of Proof Reading.

If the rules as written don't work, then your not playing right. Stop being a WAAC gamer and just play the game.

This message is brought to you by the letters B and S.

I don't see how people can claim the language makes the HT an IC? He joins as an IC, that is one action he performs.

If you claim he stays as an IC (with no backing in the rules for this) then the Tyrant Guard is entirely useless which should tell you something.

The only issue with the rule as it stands pertains to KPs but I'd assume that although he joins as an IC and none of the other rules apply he should be a seperate KP, but technically as it stands he doesn't? Is that right?

Except the rule ISNT ambiguous, people are just seeing the word "IC" and thinking it applies to more than the rule specificially states it does.

He JOINS the unit, and does this exactly AS IF an IC. Not an IC then!

Lack of reading comphrension for the loss..

Exactly. He uses one part of the IC section, joining a unit of Guard. That's it.

I feel he would be a separate KP, as the guard are "basically" a "retinue" as no rules allow him to leave it.

It depends - if he joins the unit of TG before the game starts (as part of IC joining is the abilty to start the game deployed) then it is only worth 1KP - there is a single unit at the start that is NOT a retinue.

A retinue is something an IC can have - the HT is not an IC.

Hence the quotation marks, he can not be targeted in HtH, just like if it were a retinue, or he was an upgrade char.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except the rule ISNT ambiguous, people are just seeing the word "IC" and thinking it applies to more than the rule specificially states it does.

He JOINS the unit, and does this exactly AS IF an IC. Not an IC then!

Lack of reading comphrension for the loss..

IMO, I would call 3 pages of 20 different people all arguing their own interpretation of the same rule pretty damn ambiguous. At the very least, it would suggest that the rule needs tightening somewhat. The very fact that these type of threads keep popping up would suggest that rule is not as clear cut as it could be. The fact that you think that you are correct is irrelevant and so is everyone else opinion for that matter - this debate is going to keep going on and on until such time as a FAQ exists.

What makes it even worse is that in no way am I remotely a WAAC gamer and can quite happily agree to a house rule or chat about rules with friends when discrepancies occur just for the sake of keeping the game moving and enjoyable but I have to say that this is really quite a bad example and what is more frustrating is that it needn't be so. Why leave in all this guff about the HT joining a guard unit and leave it open to debate when you could easily clarify the rule by stating baldly whether it can be picked out or not? All it needs is a little forethought by the author, something that seems to be sadly lacking.

IMO, I would call 3 pages of 20 different people all arguing their own interpretation of the same rule pretty damn ambiguous. At the very least, it would suggest that the rule needs tightening somewhat.

People think it is OP so want it to work differently. The rules are very clear as to why they didn't labour the point as you suggest? Well the codex is only so big and if they have to re-print every rule from the BRB that applies to every model the codex would be near endless.

The rule is consice and clear. He joins exactly as an IC he doesn't become and IC and he doesn't do anything else as an IC just joins, plain as day right there in the text.

People think it is OP so want it to work differently. The rules are very clear as to why they didn't labour the point as you suggest? Well the codex is only so big and if they have to re-print every rule from the BRB that applies to every model the codex would be near endless.

The rule is consice and clear. He joins exactly as an IC he doesn't become and IC and he doesn't do anything else as an IC just joins, plain as day right there in the text.

I'm going to have to disagree there; I don't find the rule concise & clear. IIRC in the previous Nids codex, the shieldwall special rule stated explicitly that the tyrant guard protected the tyrant from being picked out - so I could see at first glance of that rule what it meant and whether taking tyrant guard was a good idea or not. With the new rule, I now have to cross reference it back to the BRB rules for MC and IC and then make a judgement call on whether I think that the tyrant counts as an MC, IC, separate unit or whatever when it comes to shooting, assaulting etc. As it happens, as I read the rule I agree with you that he only joins the unit as an IC but that doesn't change the fact that it is poorly worded and unclear when, if we are being honest, it didnt need to be.

I'm going to have to disagree there; I don't find the rule concise & clear. IIRC in the previous Nids codex, the shieldwall special rule stated explicitly that the tyrant guard protected the tyrant from being picked out - so I could see at first glance of that rule what it meant and whether taking tyrant guard was a good idea or not. With the new rule, I now have to cross reference it back to the BRB rules for MC and IC and then make a judgement call on whether I think that the tyrant counts as an MC, IC, separate unit or whatever when it comes to shooting, assaulting etc. As it happens, as I read the rule I agree with you that he only joins the unit as an IC but that doesn't change the fact that it is poorly worded and unclear when, if we are being honest, it didnt need to be.

No judgement call is required, he counts as part of the unit is an MC but not an IC. You don't have to reference the book at all except to find out how an IC joins a unit. For shooting etc you justy use the normal rules that you have to "look up" in the BRB anyway. You should know or hacve access to the rules in the BRB the codexes shouldn't have to repeat ad infinitum.

So are you now saying that all shooting weapons shoul dhave the entire shooting section from the BRB in their rules so you don't have to cross reference? Same for all ICs? Same for everything else?

It states one rule that you have to "look up" with regards to how and IC joins a unit. It is completely clear.

No judgement call is required, he counts as part of the unit is an MC but not an IC. You don't have to reference the book at all except to find out how an IC joins a unit. For shooting etc you justy use the normal rules that you have to "look up" in the BRB anyway. You should know or hacve access to the rules in the BRB the codexes shouldn't have to repeat ad infinitum.

So are you now saying that all shooting weapons shoul dhave the entire shooting section from the BRB in their rules so you don't have to cross reference? Same for all ICs? Same for everything else?

It states one rule that you have to "look up" with regards to how and IC joins a unit. It is completely clear.

Clearly we are not going to come to an agreement here whatever either of us say but look at it this way - if the rule was as clear and as precise as you say, why are these threads appearing? I don't believe you can just put it down to people arguing the toss over rules they feel should / shouldn't work differently otherwise we would see the same level of debate over every special rule. This goes beyond simple rules lawyering I feel. Anyway, would be nice to see what the 'official' stance is if and when a FAQ is produced.

I don't believe you can just put it down to people arguing the toss over rules they feel should / shouldn't work differently otherwise we would see the same level of debate over every special rule.

We practically have for this codex, certainly every special rule of value has been argued over even when clear. Even really obvious and pointless things like people claiming winged Tyrants don't get to DS despite the rule being very clear in this.

Some of it is badly written rules and things left unclear (Terror from the deep, Tyranid close combat weapons) some of it is people trying to find a loop whole to spanner the new army...

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except the rule ISNT ambiguous, people are just seeing the word "IC" and thinking it applies to more than the rule specificially states it does.

He JOINS the unit, and does this exactly AS IF an IC. Not an IC then!

The question is to what extent the "as if" goes.

Does he not have to stay in coherency?
Does he not have to assault if the unit does?
Can he be picked out by shooting/assault?
Can he leave the unit?
Does the unit move at the speed of the slowest model?

ALL of these are rules for ICs joining units. Do we just pick which ones since it only says "as if" or do we use all of them?

1) Does he not have to stay in coherency? He has joined the unit and is part of the unit. Is there any unit that doesnt have to stay in coherency? Just follow the general rules for coherency, there are no exceptions granted either way.

2) Does he not have to assault if the unit does? Again, he is part of the unit. no question under any interpretation.

3) Can he be picked out by shooting/ assault? If he is an IC then we have special rules for ICs in an assault. His rule says he joins the unit exactly as if he were an IC, this means that he is not actually an IC however. The assault rules dont deal in any way with him joining the unit, so he isnt treated as an IC for assault.

4) Can he leave the unit? How would he leave the unit? There are no provisions in any way for him to do so.

5) Does the unit move at the speed of the slowest model? Again, he is part of the unit, ALL units have to follow this rule.


Number 3 is the one question that has some room for discussion, the other rules are all open and shut. Because the only time we use the IC rules are for the JOINING part, we cant use them for anything else here.



Sliggoth

nosferatu1001 wrote:A retinue is something an IC can have - the HT is not an IC.

It is something any character can have. People keep reading "independent" without the word being there. In fact it is easily argued that the Swarmlord becomes an IC if the Tyrant Guard die.

Nurgleboy77 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except the rule ISNT ambiguous, people are just seeing the word "IC" and thinking it applies to more than the rule specificially states it does.

He JOINS the unit, and does this exactly AS IF an IC. Not an IC then!

The question is to what extent the "as if" goes.

Does he not have to stay in coherency?
Does he not have to assault if the unit does?
Can he be picked out by shooting/assault?
Can he leave the unit?
Does the unit move at the speed of the slowest model?

ALL of these are rules for ICs joining units. Do we just pick which ones since it only says "as if" or do we use all of them?

Incorrect, all of your questions are about how to treat an an Independent Character/Upgrade Character (P.47-48) after it has joined a unit. The Tyrant/Swarmlord is not, and does not become, either of these.

I think questions regarding 'as if' have been sufficiently answered. Just look to the debates surrounding FC and CA. Being treated as if you were something, does not in fact make you that thing. The Tyrant's Unit Type is Monstrous Creature. Despite being treated as an IC for the purposes of joining the Tyrant Guard, it's Type never changes.

-Yad


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Naughty kirsanth.

If you accept that at no point prior to the destruction of the Tyrant Guard is the Tyrant/Swarmlord ever considered a Character, then for you to say that the Tyrant/Swarmlord becomes an Independent Character upon the Tyrant Guard's destruction you would have to invent a new game mechanic.

Only Independent Characters reclaim their Type once the special unit (i.e., retinue, bodyguard, etc) is destroyed.

-Yad

kirsanth wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:A retinue is something an IC can have - the HT is not an IC.

It is something any character can have. People keep reading "independent" without the word being there. In fact it is easily argued that the Swarmlord becomes an IC if the Tyrant Guard die.

Except that, you know, the fact that he's not. Does Telion become an IC once the rest of his scout squad are dead?

I have to agree with FlingitNow on this one, this is such an easy rule to interpret that it boggles the mind that people are getting it wrong. He joins the unit like an IC, no other IC rules apply because he's not an IC.

Think of the Hive Tyrant as an upgrade character, like Telion or Creed. All the same rules apply except you can choose whether he becomes part of the squad or not. If that doesn't help, think of the Hive Tyrant as a Wolf Guard joining a squad of Blood Claws. All the same rules apply except that you can choose when he joins the unit, and once the Hive Guard are dead I suppose the Hive Tyrant could conceivably join a different unit of Hive Guard mid-battle.

Come on guys, it's one special rule, and it seems like everyone is freaking out and thinking all these other basic rules don't apply because it looks slightly different.

unbeliever87 wrote:

Think of the Hive Tyrant as an upgrade character, like Telion or Creed. All the same rules apply except you can choose whether he becomes part of the squad or not. If that doesn't help, think of the Hive Tyrant as a Wolf Guard joining a squad of Blood Claws. All the same rules apply except that you can choose when he joins the unit, and once the Hive Guard are dead I suppose the Hive Tyrant could conceivably join a different unit of Hive Guard mid-battle.

Come on guys, it's one special rule, and it seems like everyone is freaking out and thinking all these other basic rules don't apply because it looks slightly different.

Yes, because of the Shieldwall rule the Hive Tyrant could join another unit of Hive Guard if that unit's Tyrant was dead. It couldn't however join any other unit, as it's not an IC.

-Yad

Yeah, none of the books are written for a lawyers ear,

People need to be lighter on the interpretations,

Yad wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:
Naughty kirsanth.

If you accept that at no point prior to the destruction of the Tyrant Guard is the Tyrant/Swarmlord ever considered a Character, then for you to say that the Tyrant/Swarmlord becomes an Independent Character upon the Tyrant Guard's destruction you would have to invent a new game mechanic.

-Yad

First, I do not accept that. Look up "Unique" in the BRB. Also read page 85 in the Tyranid codex about legendary creatures.
Then actually read the retinue rules.

They already have a mechanic for making a character into an Independent Character.

First, I do not accept that. Look up "Unique" in the BRB.

How do these rules apply to the Swarmlord their is no mention of a "unique" model that is not a Character it requires you to be either an upgrade character (which he isn't but he doesn't fit that definition) or an IC which again he isn't. If you're using this argument then Deathleaper can join units as an IC as can the Doom and all other unique Tyranid models.

The Swarmlord is not and never becomes an IC he performs exactly 1 act like an IC which is joining the unit. Otherwise none o fthe IC rules apply to him. I don't see why this is causing anyone a problem are you just that desperate to be able to target him in CC or at range? Have you that little confidence in your gaming ability you have to desperately claim a ludicrous position to try to stop a special rule working?

The extent of this rule is that the HT is able to join only one unit in the entire army, rather than giving him the IC special rule and allowing him to join broods of carnifexes (or any other brood).

This comes down to RAI for the time being, so follow your precedents, the intention of a guard for a Tyrant, and god (or any other mystical being) forbid, we use a little common sense on why the unit would be put into this codex.

It honestly infuriates me that someone would enforce a rule that does not allow a guard to jump in the way of its synaptic controller. Finding the intent of rules should be the first question we ask about rules "crudely" written

The notion that a tyrant guard cannot guard a tyrant is ludacris and absolutely rediculous and goes beyond bad sportsmanship.

FlingitNow wrote:

First, I do not accept that. Look up "Unique" in the BRB.

How do these rules apply to the Swarmlord their is no mention of a "unique" model that is not a Character it requires you to be either an upgrade character (which he isn't but he doesn't fit that definition) or an IC which again he isn't. If you're using this argument then Deathleaper can join units as an IC as can the Doom and all other unique Tyranid models.

Wrong in many ways.
Unique = special character.
Special character is a character.
Characters in a unit they cannot leave is the definition of a retinue.
Retinue being killed causes the character to become an IC.

Deathleaper is a special character, not an IC.

kirsanth wrote:

Yad wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:
Naughty kirsanth.

If you accept that at no point prior to the destruction of the Tyrant Guard is the Tyrant/Swarmlord ever considered a Character, then for you to say that the Tyrant/Swarmlord becomes an Independent Character upon the Tyrant Guard's destruction you would have to invent a new game mechanic.

-Yad

First, I do not accept that. Look up "Unique" in the BRB. Also read page 85 in the Tyranid codex about legendary creatures.
Then actually read the retinue rules.

They already have a mechanic for making a character into an Independent Character.

Incorrect. Hive Guard are also never strictly called a Retinue. The Shieldwall rule says the Hive Tyrant may join a unit as if it were an IC, nothing about it leaving the unit.

The "Unique" and "Legenday Creatures" rules have nothing to do with this either.

Edit: Let's leave the personal insults out of this, k guys?

Nothing needs to be called a retinue to be treated as one. Please read the sections I referenced.

kirsanth wrote:Nothing needs to be called a retinue to be treated as one. Please read the sections I referenced.

I did, very thoroughly. I can see where you're coming from, I really can, but it just doesn't work.

A Retinue definitely needs to be called a Retinue to be a Retinue. Just because it looks like a retinue doesn't make it one. Shieldwall bypasses the entire Retinue rule.

Ok then, from the section you read on page 48 "(which is normally called a 'retinue', 'bodyguard' or similar)".
Emphasis mine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The actual description that needs to be met for the retinue rules to apply is immediately preceding it, "Some Codex books allow you to field characters together with a special unit that they cannot leave during the game"

Since we have established the HT cannot leave his brood then they are pretty much a true retinue for all practical purposes and such I would play he can't be singled out as such.

G

Does it make sense for a unit to have a special rule to invalidate their one and only real use? If they can't be used to protect the HT they're useless.

Using the same string of logic I could easily argue that Telion also becomes an IC when his scout squad dies.

Unique = special character.
Special character is a character.
Characters in a unit they cannot leave is the definition of a retinue.
Retinue being killed causes the character to become an IC.

Telion is "Unique". Unique = special character.
Therefore Telion is a character.
As a squad upgrade, Telion cannot leave his unit. Characters in a unit they cannot leave is the definition of a retinue.
Retinue being killed causes the character to become an IC.

Therefore Telion becomes an IC.

Your logic just doesn't hold up.

Why not?
I agree about Telion.

Because the Retinue rule is part of a larger set of rules called "Independent Characters Joining & Leaving Units", so it only applies to Independent Characters. Which neither Telion nor Hive Tyrants are, hence the flaw in your logic.

The Retinue section of the rule set (or atleast the part you're trying to argue) only applies to when the IC leaves the retinue, not when it joins.

That is no flaw. The rules are in the IC section because they can create one. The character leaving the unit (by virtue of it being destroyed) is then an IC. Any time a character is with a retinue having that retinue destroyed "creates" an IC -- as the character is an Upgrade Character while in a retinue.

In fact, there is nothing in the retinue section even mentioning joining a unit.

kirsanth wrote:Ok then, from the section you read on page 48 "(which is normally called a 'retinue', 'bodyguard' or similar)".
Emphasis mine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The actual description that needs to be met for the retinue rules to apply is immediately preceding it, "Some Codex books allow you to field characters together with a special unit that they cannot leave during the game"

We went round and round on this before, but I'll give it another try...

Your whole argument is predicated on the Tyrant/Swarmlord being a Character, which it's not. It's a Monstrous Creature. Nowhere in it's unit entry does it say it's an

A.) Independent Character
B.) 'Special' or Upgrade Character
C.) Unique

Yes, there's a section on Legendary Tyranid creatures, but I don't recall that section designating any of those creatures as Independent Characters. Unfortunately I don't have my codex with me for that bit.

Furthermore, doesn't the Retinue/Bodyguard/Or Similar section on P.48 directly referencing Independent Characters. Meaning that section only pertains to ICs? Exceptions to that general rule would have to come from the specific codex. Last I checked the Tyrant Guard are not Typed as retinue, bodyguard, or similar. I think you are inferring that from their fluff.

The problem I have with your logic is that by saying the Tyrant/Swarmlord becomes an IC after the Tyrant Guard are destroyed means that it can join any other infantry unit, not just Tyrant Guard. This is plainly wrong. It is only the Shieldwall rule that lets it join a unit, and that unit can only be the Tyrant Guard. Unit Type is inviolate. Unless there is a specific rule that changes the Unit Type of a non-IC to an IC, you can't do it. And no, the Retinue section on P.48 does not do this.

So the Tyrant/Swarmlord can join a unit of Tyrant Guard as if it were an IC, without being constrained by any of the IC rules. This means that:

1. It cannot be directly targeted by shooting attacks.
2. It cannot be directly targeted by close combat attacks.
3. It cannot leave the Tyrant Guard unit. NOTE: Not because the Guard unit is a retinue/bodyguard/or similar, but because the Tyrant is not an IC.

I'm curious, are Vet Sergeants upgrade characters? If so, do you believe that once the unit he's in is destroyed he becomes an Independent Character able to join any other infantry unit per the IC rules on P.48?

EDIT: The Retinue section does not specify Independent Characters, just characters. My argument still holds though as neither the Tyrant or Swarmlord are strictly typed as characters. Also, the Tyrant Guard unit entry does not say to treat either the Tyrant or the Swarmlord as an upgrade character, or even a character period. Your inferring that they are because they can't leave the unit. In a sense, you've got the cart before the horse.

-Yad

kirsanth wrote:In fact, there is nothing in the retinue section even mentioning joining a unit.

Great, no joining requirement huh? Next game I play, Telion is going to declare my Land Speeder as his retinue.

The Retinue rule needs to be taken in context, it only applies to an IC because it's in the IC rule set. It doesn't work because you're taking a section of one rule(the retinue rule) and applying it to a unit that doesn't use it.

Yad wrote:Your whole argument is predicated on the Tyrant/Swarmlord being a Character, which it's not. Nowhere in it's unit entry does it say it's


C.) Unique

Read your Tyranid codex again.

Tyrant isn't unique...

Kirsanth the rules under retinue only apply to IC as they are part of the IC rules. Upgrade Characters do not become ICs after their unit has died no matter how much you may want them to.

kirsanth wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:A retinue is something an IC can have - the HT is not an IC.

It is something any character can have. People keep reading "independent" without the word being there. In fact it is easily argued that the Swarmlord becomes an IC if the Tyrant Guard die.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Since we have established the HT cannot leave his brood then they are pretty much a true retinue for all practical purposes and such I would play he can't be singled out as such.

G

FlingitNow wrote:Tyrant isn't unique...

Kirsanth the rules under retinue only apply to IC as they are part of the IC rules. Upgrade Characters do not become ICs after their unit has died no matter how much you may want them to.

I mentioned only the Swarmlord, who is, in fact, Unique.
Whether I want him to become an IC is as important as whether you want him not to, which is to say not at all. The rules for retinues are what they are, and do not require a model to start as an IC -- as a matter of fact it is impossible for a IC to have a retinue, the rules change them to an upgrade character in that case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Others did bring the HT back into the discussion, but look back at what I wrote, for I did not.

I mentioned only the Swarmlord, who is, in fact, Unique.
Whether I want him to become an IC is as important as whether you want him not to, which is to say not at all. The rules for retinues are what they are, and do not require a model to start as an IC -- as a matter of fact it is impossible for a IC to have a retinue, the rules change them to an upgrade character in that case.

So exarchs become IC after their squad has died. You can't apply this rule to the Swarmlord without applying it to every upgrade Character in the game (Sergeants, Shas'ui, Exarchs, Warlocks, Mobz etc etc etc). Just because he's Unique doesn't a) make him a Special Character he's a legendary creature b) subject to eth independant characters rules on pages 47 - 49. Please note the "retinues" section you refer to is in the larger section "Independant Characters joining & leaving units" Still contest it has nothing to do with ICs joining and leaving units?

Here's an analogy for using "AS IF".

I can escort you into the restricted area as if you had the security clearance. You don't have the security clearance but you are allowed in there as if you had it.

Therefore, Hive Tyrant can join a Tyrant Guard squad as if it had the IC rule. It doesn't have the IC rule but is allowed to join as if it had it.

That's my take on the as if rule.

To be honest, the way that I look at it is the following:

1. The Swarmlord/Hive Tyrant is never an IC, since they are never listed as such (unlike the Tyranid Prime).
2. The Swarmlord/Hive Tyrant may join the Tyrant Guard's unit, in a similar way to an IC joins one BUT it may not then leave. (No IC, no option to leave).
3. This means the Swarmlord/Hive Tyrant may not be directly targeted by shooting or close combat, in a similar way a sergeant can't.

If the Tyrant Guard die, however, he counts as a MC again and can be targeted normally.

What i'm also interested in though, is while the Swarmlord is with that unit, does he count as moving like them? (In a similar way to a jump infantry character moves like the unit he joins on foot)? If that is the case, then the Swarmlord could in theory appear out of a Trygon tunnel! Which would solve the 'delivery method' problem with him, since he doesn't even have fleet, let alone a mycetic spore option.

What i'm also interested in though, is while the Swarmlord is with that unit, does he count as moving like them? (In a similar way to a jump infantry character moves like the unit he joins on foot)? If that is the case, then the Swarmlord could in theory appear out of a Trygon tunnel! Which would solve the 'delivery method' problem with him, since he doesn't even have fleet, let alone a mycetic spore option.

Is the unit infantry? No as the Tyrant is a MC so it is mixed. So my guess is not.

Not confinced fleet makes a huge difference as a delivery method now that everyone can run anyway. Delivery method requires target saturation present your opponent is a more appealing target and the Swarmlord will be fine. Even if he could come up through the Trygon whole attempting this would cause more problems than it would solve. There's a good chance he'd either come on before the Trygon or on the same turn as the Trygon in either case he's then walking on from the back edge. Is that worth the risk for the small chance he actually arrives after the Trygon (about a 25% chance)?

I really don't see another delivery method for the Swarmlord other than getting a Flyrant. Though I'm open to suggestions.

I guess i'll have to stick with my idea of spamming a screen of gaunts or whatever infront of him then, with a Tervigon giving them feel no pain and the screen giving his unit a 4+ cover save.

Ok, on page 2 right now, but want to say this. For people who say when I join my HT with a TG that he becomes an IC, then Once he joint the TG, he will leave it and then join a brood of 30 gaunts. No were in the rules does he say he looses his IC if he leaves the TG, so by going your way, if he is an IC he stays an IC and then can join anyother squat or brood he wants.

He is not an IC, all shield wall does as stated numours times, is let the HT joint a brood of TG as if he was an IC since no other unit can join anthour unit excpet IC.

Ok now back to page 3 of this thread.

*edit* wow debate still going on. Only an errata will sovle this as many people on this board says FAQ's don't mean much. We want an Official Ruling, not a GW house rule. So it will have to be an Errata that will solve this answer once and for all.

Davor wrote:*edit* wow debate still going on. Only an errata will sovle this as many people on this board says FAQ's don't mean much. We want an Official Ruling, not a GW house rule. So it will have to be an Errata that will solve this answer once and for all.

(Almost) no one cares about the distinction.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

Davor wrote:*edit* wow debate still going on. Only an errata will sovle this as many people on this board says FAQ's don't mean much. We want an Official Ruling, not a GW house rule. So it will have to be an Errata that will solve this answer once and for all.

(Almost) no one cares about the distinction.

Well I hope that it will be settled once and for all, but if it's a FAQ, I have the feeling some debates will be goin on no matter what.

Davor wrote:Well I hope that it will be settled once and for all, but if it's a FAQ, I have the feeling some debates will be goin on no matter what.

That is GW;s own fault for spouting nonsense about "their houserules" instead of having a pair .

A-P wrote:

Davor wrote:Well I hope that it will be settled once and for all, but if it's a FAQ, I have the feeling some debates will be goin on no matter what.

That is GW;s own fault for spouting nonsense about "their houserules" instead of having a pair .

Yes, yes it is.