Quick question about how these two rules interact. Since they both require physcic tests only one can be used per squad/IC per assault phase? Do these still stack if IC makes a Hammer Hand check and the Squad rolls force weapons, ie the squad is hitting at S5 with instant death?

That's exactly right!

Obviously each needs to roll separately, and I'm not entirely sure, after reading through the rules on NFW, that the IC causes instant death, but they are all at S5 and the squad does cause ID

Now how about a character like BC Stern, he's a psyker lvl 2, so can he roll his Hammerhand and force wep in the same cc provided he hasn't used any other powers yet, or are the psyker lvls only for shooting phase powers? I havn't used psykers under the new rules yet.

FAQ:
A Grey Knights Librarian may use the psychic disciplines found
in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook, instead of those in
Codex: Grey Knights. If he does so, generate a number of psychic
powers equal to his Mastery Level from the Divination,
Pyromancy or Telekinesis disciplines (in any combination)
before armies are deployed. If he does so he may not purchase
additional powers. Hammerhand cannot be exchanged in this
manner, but is instead retained in addition to the powers
purchased or generated by the Librarian.

So he can keep all of the powers he is given or he can roll2 powers in the BRB.

Also from the FAQ:
Q: As they follow the rules for a Brotherhood of Psykers, can squads
of Grey Knights that have more than one psychic power exchange
their non-Hammerhand power for a power from the psychic
disciplines like a Librarian?
A: No.

So - how it works is this: Every non inquisitor will ALWAYS have Hammerhand (Also in the FAQ - Psychic Communion cannot be traded out) in addition to whatever they get from their mastery level. Everyone that has a Mastery Level can either purchase powers per the GK Codex or just save the points and generate from the lists above. Special people who have a level and given powers can give up all powers EXCEPT Psychic Communion and Hammerhand and generate randomly like other psykers.

The only thing is - you cannot pick and choose - it is either or. So if you know you want to generate randomly - save the points...otherwise buy ALL the powers you want.

One way of looking at it is if your squad of Grey Knights is facing a unit of single-wound models, Hammerhand is the better choice. However, if the enemy unit is composed of multi-wound models, force weapon activation is the better option. And if your squad has an attached IC with Mastery Level of 2 or better, the best option to take on that multi-wound enemy unit is to have the IC pop Hammerhand followed by everyone triggering their force weapons when available.

One thing to keep in mind is that Perils of the Warp can no longer be saved against, which is why the Brotherhood Banner is worth every point for GK units that can take it.

SJ

Basically, unless they have a given Mastery Level, all GK units and characters are Mastery Level 1. meaning they can cast 1 power that takes 1 warp charge.


So a squad can cast either HH or activate their force weapons.

If there is an IC in the squad, he could cast HH, which effects everyone in combat, and then the squad could activate their Force Weapons. The IC could then activate his own force weapon as well(if he still had Warp Charges left and was Mastery Level 2-3)

Also, multiple castings of HH stack. So both the squad and IC could cast HH and have a cumulative +2str.

Since the IC is a member of the unit for all rules purposes, couldn't he cast HH, the squad cast HH, and if the IC causes a wound first have him activate Force - including the squad?

Or does the GK codex specify that the IC has to activate separately?

the IC doesn't have the Brotherhood of Psykers rule, which seperates the force weapon activation from the rest of the squad.

 Grey Templar wrote:
the IC doesn't have the Brotherhood of Psykers rule, which seperates the force weapon activation from the rest of the squad.

Except of course that activation of NFW isn't mentioned in BoP, just what to do with Perils and IC leadership note.
The NFW rule says that once activated the unit's NFWs inflict Instant Death that phase.

In 5th they were required to test separately because of how ICs were handled. That has changed in 6th.
(Had to dig out my codex...)

Indeed, it looks like as an IC is not longer a separate unit while in CC, he can activate the units forceweapons

Sweet, thats awsome.

Provided said character has the 'brotherhood of psykers' rule. Most don't. (in truth, every single 'independant' character does not, the only exception i can think of that has a high enough psychic mastery for this to matter is justicar thawn.)

Activating the NFW requires a psychic test, which BoP alters for the purposes of any models in the squad which have the BoP rule. The IC in the squad (while a member of the unit) does not benefit or suffer from the BoP rule and would therefore have to activate their own NFW seperately.

 Neorealist wrote:
Provided said character has the 'brotherhood of psykers' rule. Most don't. (in truth, every single 'independant' character does not, the only exception i can think of that has a high enough psychic mastery for this to matter is justicar thawn.)

Citation required - BoP doesn't mention this at all.

Activating the NFW requires a psychic test.

No one's said differently so I'm not sure what your point is.

Heh, i'm sure you are familiar with the BoP rule, but i'll quote the relevent text from it for you anyway:
"The unit uses the Leadership of its character, if there is one (and he is alive), or the unit, if there isn't a character (or he is dead), for Psychic tests. The unit can never use the leadership of an Independent Character for Psychic tests..."

And for force weapons:
"...He can immediately choose to activate it by expending a Warp Charge point and taking a Psychic test... ...if the test is failed... ...then there is no additional effect... "

TL;DR version: a psychic test is necessary to activate each force weapon normally, BoP modifies this as one Psychic check for the squad rather than each individual member. The IC may not benefit from the BoP rule since he doesn't have it.

That's absolutely incorrect.

The BoP says you can't use the ICs leadership for tests - but the squad isn't required to test. Read The NFW rules - once activated the unit benefits. Is the IC part of the unit?

Where on earth are you seeing an indication that the squad does not need to test to activate it's NFWs?

 Neorealist wrote:
Where on earth are you seeing an indication that the squad does not need to test to activate it's NFWs?

In the rules for NFW.
IC hits. IC wounds. IC tests. NFWs activated - the squad cannot test to activate even if they have a Warp Charge available. Page 54, C:GK. it's pretty clear that a unit only gets one chance to roll and is bound by it. Is the IC part of the unit?

No it's really not. The grey knight codex literally states:
"...Note that a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule needs to take only a single Psychic test to 'activate' all it's force weapons (although independant characters must still roll seperately). If the test is passed..."

Which unless i'm sorely mistaken, is the exact opposite from what you've been saying.

I missed that sentence, but I can't help but think that's a leftover from how 5th edition ICs were handled in combat. Because in 6th if you take that at face value and the IC rolls first - if he fails, the squad cannot even test because he's part of the unit, and the rest of the unit is "bound by the result of that Psychic test."

 Amaraxis wrote:
So - how it works is this: Every non inquisitor will ALWAYS have Hammerhand (Also in the FAQ - Psychic Communion cannot be traded out) in addition to whatever they get from their mastery level. Everyone that has a Mastery Level can either purchase powers per the GK Codex or just save the points and generate from the lists above. Special people who have a level and given powers can give up all powers EXCEPT Psychic Communion and Hammerhand and generate randomly like other psykers.

You might want to clarify your summary a little- only Librarians and Inquisitors have the option to get powers from then rulebook. Other models with Mastery levels (like Grandmasters and such) do not have the option to swap at all.

rigeld2 wrote:
I missed that sentence, but I can't help but think that's a leftover from how 5th edition ICs were handled in combat. Because in 6th if you take that at face value and the IC rolls first - if he fails, the squad cannot even test because he's part of the unit, and the rest of the unit is "bound by the result of that Psychic test."

The entire codex is a 'leftover' from 5th edition, that specific part of it is no exception. That said, there isn't anything new in the 6th edition FAQ/Update to indicate that process has changed at all.

The rule indicates that only models with BoP need/can test once to activate all their force weapons. The IC (barring justicar thrawn) does not have that special rule, and therefor is not subject to it's effects and restrictions. In essence if you roll for the IC to activate his force weapon and then later on you activate the squad's force weapons via BoP, you are still only activating the squads force weapons via the BoP rules and restrictions just once.

 Grey Templar wrote:


If there is an IC in the squad, he could cast HH, which effects everyone in combat,

This isn't quite true. Only the unit that the IC was attached to when he charged gets the HH. If a Libby is attached to a Termie squad, and both the Termies and a GKSS charge an enemy unit, only the Termies will get the Libby's HH. The GKSS will have to pass their own test to be at Str5.

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I missed that sentence, but I can't help but think that's a leftover from how 5th edition ICs were handled in combat. Because in 6th if you take that at face value and the IC rolls first - if he fails, the squad cannot even test because he's part of the unit, and the rest of the unit is "bound by the result of that Psychic test."

The entire codex is a 'leftover' from 5th edition, that specific part of it is no exception. That said, there isn't anything new in the 6th edition FAQ/Update to indicate that process has changed at all.

The rule indicates that only models with BoP need/can test once to activate all their force weapons. The IC (barring justicar thrawn) does not have that special rule, and therefor is not subject to it's effects and restrictions. In essence if you roll for the IC to activate his force weapon and then later on you activate the squad's force weapons via BoP, you are still only activating the squads force weapons via the BoP rules and restrictions just once.

Except then you're saying that the unit is not bound to the first test to activate - and yet the NFW rules require that.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
I missed that sentence, but I can't help but think that's a leftover from how 5th edition ICs were handled in combat. Because in 6th if you take that at face value and the IC rolls first - if he fails, the squad cannot even test because he's part of the unit, and the rest of the unit is "bound by the result of that Psychic test."

The entire codex is a 'leftover' from 5th edition, that specific part of it is no exception. That said, there isn't anything new in the 6th edition FAQ/Update to indicate that process has changed at all.

The rule indicates that only models with BoP need/can test once to activate all their force weapons. The IC (barring justicar thrawn) does not have that special rule, and therefor is not subject to it's effects and restrictions. In essence if you roll for the IC to activate his force weapon and then later on you activate the squad's force weapons via BoP, you are still only activating the squads force weapons via the BoP rules and restrictions just once.

Except then you're saying that the unit is not bound to the first test to activate - and yet the NFW rules require that.

The NFW rules say that ICs test separately. How much clearer can they be?

rigeld2 wrote:
Because in 6th if you take that at face value and the IC rolls first - if he fails, the squad cannot even test because he's part of the unit, and the rest of the unit is "bound by the result of that Psychic test."

This is not how Force weapons work. Force USR, p37:
"If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon...." So, each Psyker must pass his own test to activate the Force weapon. An IC is a Psyker, and a unit of GK is one Psyker (per the Brotherhood USR). There are two Psykers, therefore, each of which must pass its own test to use the NFW. Neither is bound by the other's result.

Elric Greywolf wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:


If there is an IC in the squad, he could cast HH, which effects everyone in combat,

This isn't quite true. Only the unit that the IC was attached to when he charged gets the HH. If a Libby is attached to a Termie squad, and both the Termies and a GKSS charge an enemy unit, only the Termies will get the Libby's HH. The GKSS will have to pass their own test to be at Str5.

sorry, thats what I meant.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
The NFW rules say that ICs test separately. How much clearer can they be?

If the IC rolls first then the unit is bound to that result.

Is the IC a member of the unit?
If so, why is the unit not bound the the result of the first psychic test? It's an issue because of how 6th treats ICs different from 5th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Elric Greywolf wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Because in 6th if you take that at face value and the IC rolls first - if he fails, the squad cannot even test because he's part of the unit, and the rest of the unit is "bound by the result of that Psychic test."

This is not how Force weapons work. Force USR, p37:
"If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon...." So, each Psyker must pass his own test to activate the Force weapon. An IC is a Psyker, and a unit of GK is one Psyker (per the Brotherhood USR). There are two Psykers, therefore, each of which must pass its own test to use the NFW. Neither is bound by the other's result.

Page 54 C:GK disagrees. The unit is bound by the result, pass or fail. Is the IC a member of the unit?

rigeld2 512876 5371522 wrote:Except then you're saying that the unit is not bound to the first test to activate - and yet the NFW rules require that.

That is correct, but only applies to the models with the BoP rule. Any non-BoP psyker casting their own powers do not count for the purposes of wether or not a psyker 'with' the BoP rule has manifested a power this turn or not.

rigeld2 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
The NFW rules say that ICs test separately. How much clearer can they be?

If the IC rolls first then the unit is bound to that result.

Is the IC a member of the unit?
If so, why is the unit not bound the the result of the first psychic test? It's an issue because of how 6th treats ICs different from 5th.

The unit isn't bound by the test because the NFW rules tell us that he tests separately. Testing separately means they're not bound by the same rolls. Again, how is this unclear?

So the unit is not bound by the result of the test?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 512876 5371522 wrote:Except then you're saying that the unit is not bound to the first test to activate - and yet the NFW rules require that.

That is correct, but only applies to the models with the BoP rule. Any non-BoP psyker casting their own powers do not count for the purposes of wether or not a psyker 'with' the BoP rule has manifested a power this turn or not.

That's not what NFW says. In 5th it said that because the IC was a separate unit while in combat. In 6th they are always the same unit.

Since they're the same unit and "the unit" is bound by the result...

rigeld2 wrote:
So the unit is not bound by the result of the test?

Correct, since the IC tests separately.

rigeld2 wrote:

That's not what NFW says. In 5th it said that because the IC was a separate unit while in combat. In 6th they are always the same unit.

Since they're the same unit and "the unit" is bound by the result...

The unit is bound by the same result when there isn't an exception to that rule. Having an IC in the squad is an explicit exception to that rule.

It's not an explicit exception to the last sentence of NFWs.
They explicitly test separately - but there isn't anything exempting them from where "unit" is mentioned.

rigeld2 wrote:
So the unit is not bound by the result of the test?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Neorealist wrote:

rigeld2 512876 5371522 wrote:Except then you're saying that the unit is not bound to the first test to activate - and yet the NFW rules require that.

That is correct, but only applies to the models with the BoP rule. Any non-BoP psyker casting their own powers do not count for the purposes of wether or not a psyker 'with' the BoP rule has manifested a power this turn or not.

That's not what NFW says. In 5th it said that because the IC was a separate unit while in combat. In 6th they are always the same unit.

Since they're the same unit and "the unit" is bound by the result...

The IC was not a separate unit while in combat in 5th. He was treated as one specifically for the purposes of allocating and resolving attacks only. Not for any other purpose.

And when do NFWs get activated? (Hint - while resolving attacks).

Sure, that's fine; just wanted to be clear about the nature of the IC relationship to the unit in HtH.

Sure - but for the purposes of this argument my statement was correct.

In 5th at the time of activating NFWs he was a separate unit. So the IC must activate separately.
In 6th that is not true. If the IC has a hammer and the unit wounds before he does, he is bound by their roll.

"Any further wounds caused by the unit's Nemesis force weapons that phase will be bound by the result of that Psychic test."

The "that" in the sentence is referring to the earlier Psychic test that the unit has taken. You know, the one where you roll one for the IC and one for the Unit...

Which made sense in 5th. In 6th the IC is explicitly part of the unit.
Which means that "Any further wounds caused by (the IC's) NFWs in that phase will be bound by the result of (the squad's) psychic test."

Asserting that isn't a valid interpretation means you're asserting that the IC is not a normal member of the squad. Which of course is breaking the IC rules.

Wow! Some of you guys are like way off on how Nemesis force weapon activation works.

Per pg. 54 of the GK Codex: " ... Note that a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule needs to take only a single Psychic test to 'activate' all of its force weapons (although independent charaters must still roll seperately). If the test is passed, all wounds that phase inflict instant death. If a unit is striking at different initiative orders, take the Psychic test to 'activate' the force weapons immediately after the first unsaved wounds are caused ..."

Example: one 10-man squad of GKT with mixed NFW (Halbards, Swords, Hammers), with an attached GM with a Halberd.

Initiative 10: GM casts Hammerhand, suceeds, all models in the unit gain +1 Str.
Initiative 9-8
Initivative 7: GM attacks, hits, scores a wound, no save, wound is assigned. All GK in the unit roll for activation. GM succeeds, GKT roll and succeed. All NFW active.
Intiative 6: GKT with Halberds attack, etc.
Initiative 5
Initiative 4: GK with Swords attack, etc.
Initiative 3-2
Initiative 1: GKT with Hammers attack, etc.

And that's it. If the GKT had a Banner, both of the rolls to activate would have been bypassed as automatic successes.

SJ

rigeld2 wrote:
It's not an explicit exception to the last sentence of NFWs.
They explicitly test separately - but there isn't anything exempting them from where "unit" is mentioned.

The wouldn't need to be exempted from it, they have their own test to pass or fail. In the context of the NSF rules, 'the unit' in the latter part of the rule is referring whichever models have passed their psychic test(s) as defined by the first part of it.

rigeld2 wrote:

Elric Greywolf wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Because in 6th if you take that at face value and the IC rolls first - if he fails, the squad cannot even test because he's part of the unit, and the rest of the unit is "bound by the result of that Psychic test."

This is not how Force weapons work. Force USR, p37:
"If a Psyker inflicts one or more unsaved Wounds with a Force weapon...." So, each Psyker must pass his own test to activate the Force weapon. An IC is a Psyker, and a unit of GK is one Psyker (per the Brotherhood USR). There are two Psykers, therefore, each of which must pass its own test to use the NFW. Neither is bound by the other's result.

Page 54 C:GK disagrees. The unit is bound by the result, pass or fail. Is the IC a member of the unit?

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Per pg. 54 of the GK Codex: " ... Note that a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule needs to take only a single Psychic test to 'activate' all of its force weapons (although independent charaters must still roll seperately)."

Here's two different readings of the GK codex. One of them is right. (It's the one that agrees with me.)

rigeld2 wrote:
Which made sense in 5th. In 6th the IC is explicitly part of the unit.
Which means that "Any further wounds caused by (the IC's) NFWs in that phase will be bound by the result of (the squad's) psychic test."

Asserting that isn't a valid interpretation means you're asserting that the IC is not a normal member of the squad. Which of course is breaking the IC rules.

No, really, the rule says that:

"Any further wounds caused by the unit's Nemesis force weapons that phase will be bound by the result of that Psychic test."

The bolded that refers to the psychic test that we are told is different from the unit's/IC's. Yes, it's different than how the BRB tells us to do it, but in case of conflict Codex>BRB in 6th edition. If it says to test once for the IC and once for the squad and the sentences are referring to the Psychic test then it stands to reason that the result could be different for the two, since they're not bound by the same test!

So the IC isn't a member of the unit?

It states the UNIT is bound by the result of that test. Who takes the test isn't important, the whole unit is bound by it. In 5th this excluded the ic, in 6th it includes it.

You're ignoring the Force USR,* the Brotherhood of Psykers USR,** and the explicit wording in the GK codex.*** No one is saying the IC isn't a member of the unit. But the rules are carefully worded to allow the IC to be a member of the unit AND pass his own test.

*each individual Psyker must pass his own test
**the GK unit (sans IC) is a single Psyker
***ICs must pass their own Force activation test


Here's an example of an IC being a member and not a member of a unit:
When I count my units for keeping in reserve, up to 50% can stay off the table. If my IC is part of a unit, does that count as only 1 for reserve counting? No, the rules explicitly state that an IC counts by himself, and the unit he might be attached to also counts as 1. He is part of the unit, though, deployed with them and only needing one reserve roll.

Damn you guys. Now I'm confused.

I am leaning towards agreeing with rigeld and Nos, simply because now in 6th ICs are members of the unit 100%

RAW anyway, GW would probably FAQ it the other way.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
So the IC isn't a member of the unit?

It states the UNIT is bound by the result of that test. Who takes the test isn't important, the whole unit is bound by it. In 5th this excluded the ic, in 6th it includes it.

I'd argue that the "unit" in that sentence is referring to the unit that took the psychic test.

Since the "Psychic test" obviously refers to the one we were told to take earlier in the rule, the "unit" arguably also refers to the "unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule" that was mentioned in the same sentence, the sentence that explicitly tells us to roll a separate test for Independent Characters. In this case, the Independent Character isn't part of the unit, as "unit" in this rule refers to the Grey Knight unit with Brotherhood of Psykers special rule that is being discussed.

Except there is, now, just a single unit. You cannot split into IC and non-IC, you have no permission to do so in the 6th edition rules, unlike in the 5th edition rules

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Except there is, now, just a single unit. You cannot split into IC and non-IC, you have no permission to do so in the 6th edition rules, unlike in the 5th edition rules

You're correct that there's no such permission in the BRB, but that's why the Codex tells us to test separately for the IC. If you're not testing twice you're not following the rule for Nemesis Force Weapons.

There's no way to argue this question.

GK Codex 54: "Note that a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule needs to take only a single Psychic test to 'activate' all of its force weapons (although independent charaters must still roll separately)."

Any IC that can join the GK unit--Inquisitor, Libby, Techmarine, Grand Master, Brother Captain--does not have the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule, either from the Codex or the BRB. Neither of these rules is shared with joined ICs (like some USRs are). And the quoted text points out, as clearly as is possible with human communication, that an IC MUST pass his own Force test.

It might work differently for other other powers. But, we're not talking about HH, or Warp Quake, or Prescience, or any other psychic power that could conceivably be cast on the unit. We're talking about this one particular power, which is incontrovertibly phrased in C:GK. Even if there is a possible conflict with the BRB regarding unit composition, codex overrides BRB. Read above quotation again.

Elric - again, you have missed the issue

The IC is bound by the result of the test made, as it states the IC is a normal member of the unit and the *unit* is bound by the result of the test.

If the unit fails, the IC can test separately all he wants - he is still bound by the result that the unit, which includes him, has failed.

Perhaps I have missed YOUR issue, but I haven't missed the issue.

The context of the rule (and I know you like context) is a unit with the Brotherhood of Psykers rule. The IC does not have this rule, and thus is not "part of the unit" for psychic checks. BoP does not get shared with ICs.

If he is part of the unit, then Perils from the unit's HH could go on an IC--which is certainly not the case.

You need to consider the BoP rule. And then you need to make an accounting of the quoted text regarding the explicit exception given for ICs.

"For all rules purposes" an IC is a member of the unit. This is a rules purpose.

But the C:GK's specific instruction in this instance overrules the BRB's general statement.
How do you deal with the explicit instruction in the C:GK? Because, as of now, you seem to be ignoring it.

I am not ignoring it, as I have shown.

The IC is bound by the result of the units test, as the parenthetical note is a reminder of 5th edition rules. It has no place as a reminder in 6th, as an IC is not a separate unit in combat when this rule would activate.

It is a member of the unit for ALL rules purposes. The GK rule ddoes not override this.

You believe that the word "unit" refers to the unit on the table, with whatever composition it happens to have at the time.
This would invalidate the wording of the Force USR, which states that each individual Psyker must take his own test. (A unit with BoP is "one" Psyker; a unit of IC BA Librarians would still have to take individual tests.)

I believe that, taken in context of the sentence (which explicitly makes joined ICs rely on their own tests) the word "unit" refers to the force org unit with the BoP rule.
This still allows for the Force USR to work as stated.

Since there is nothing in the FAQ about this issue, nor has there ever been, I can't agree that the parenthetical note only applied in 5th. If it should have been taken out, there would be an errata. There is not.

"should have" and "GW rules" really dont mix.

The point behind the rule for Nemesis force weapons is that every model in the unit rolls to activate at exact same timeupon the first unsaved wound being dealt. It doesn't matter how the unit is composed. It could have a GM, Libby, 3 Techmarines, and 10 GKT, they all roll for activation at the same time. Further, the rule reminds us that while the ICs still have to roll individually to activate their force weapon, the rest of the models with the BoP special rule only make one roll for all of them, as they are considered a single psyker per BoP.

So, in the example, the GM, Libby, and Techmarines would make their own seperate rolls, while the GKT would make a single role. Lets say the GM libby, and 1 Tech secceed, while the other 2 Techs and the GKT fail, with the GKT rolling 6's. GM's NFW is now active, Libby's NFW is now active, the one Techmarine's NFW is now active, however, the rest of the models' NFW remain inactive while the GKT Justicar sucks up a Perils wound (hopefully it was Thawn), and combat continues on.

SJ

Specific Rule (BoP) overrides USR. For the purposes of their NFWs and related Psychic Tests, the IC is not, actually, part of the unit. For all other intents and purposes, they are (unless those other intents and purposes provide specific wording that precludes having the IC as part of the unit).

nosferatu1001 wrote:
"should have" and "GW rules" really dont mix.

Funny, but still a dodge.

No, actually - the parenthetical statement is strictly a reminder. In 5th the ICs could not be bound by this, as they were separate units. Nothing about the context of the statement has changed, so "Unit" still means "unit"

"For all rules purposes". Is BoP a rule? Yes or No.

Well, lets say you had two librarians attached to a standard squad one is rank 1 and the other rank 2. . The opponent is Tyranids and has Deathleaper on the board which has targeted the rank 2 reducing his Ldr from 10 to 7. You would certainly not allow the lvl 2 psyker to use the Ldr value of the other psycher to make his tests to activate his powers. That is bold faced not allowed, pg 67, right hand column, under the psychic test rule.

Force weapons are activated in the exact same manner as psychic powers, you expend a warp charge, declare the target (whatever just failed its save), then take the psychic test. The rule book even calls it a psychic test. Nemesis force weapons require an unsaved wound before they can be activated. The Grey Knight codex calls activating a NFW a psychic test. NFW are just force weapons with a different name to let you distinguish when the model gains an additional advantage for weilding a weapon of that type, such as the +1 to invunrable saves in close combat for using a NFW sword.

Brotherhood of Psykers trait specifically says the unit can never use the leadership value of on independant character for making psychic tests, which would include activating any kind of force weapon. This is in both the Grey Knight codex and the 6th ed rulebook. Therefore it would be against the rules for an independant character to activate his NFW to trigger the unit's NFW.

It would seem the rule about once a GK has activated his NFW all the members of the unit's force weapons being activated is there because otherwise the unit would have to expend a warp charge (and make a seperate test) for each member that caused an unsaved wound. That would have greatly reduced the effectiveness of NFW against groups of multiwound opponents. It also helps with the different initiatives in a group problem.

Finally, if all of a Brotherhood's NFW activated from an IC making a psychic test, then the Brotherhood members wouldn't have to expend a warp point to activate their weapons, as the cost is paid before the psychic test is made.

I do wonder if a psyker with 2 warp points could make a second attempt to activate a force weapon if the first one failed. I didn't see any rule this in the standard FAQ or GK FAQ. I would make the argument that since activating a force weapon is so similar to activating a psychic power that you could not since you can only attempt to activate a force power once per turn, even if you fail the first time.

The point I am making is *not* to exempt ICs from making the test, just that as they are a mmeber of the unit they ARE bound by the BoP result - because it states the whole unit is bound by it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The point I am making is *not* to exempt ICs from making the test, just that as they are a mmeber of the unit they ARE bound by the BoP result - because it states the whole unit is bound by it.

This. The IC is still required to test and expend charges separately, but if the BoP models roll first he's bound by that roll - pass or fail.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The point I am making is *not* to exempt ICs from making the test, just that as they are a mmeber of the unit they ARE bound by the BoP result - because it states the whole unit is bound by it.

You've misread. Models in the 'unit' are not bound by the results of the activation roll. The rule states that "wounds" caused by models in the unit are bound by the result of the activation roll. As in, if the roll is passed, then all wounds cause by that unit will be ID, while if the roll is failed then all wounds caused by that unit will be treated as having come from normal power weapons.

To reoterate the example: baseline GM and unit of GKT with mixed NFW

Assault Phase Starts: GM rolls for Hammerhand, succeeds
Initiative 10-7
Initiative 6: Halberds strike, unsaved wound is dealt, all GK in the unit roll to activate NFW, all unsaved wounds dealt by the activated weapons will ID
Initiative 5
Initiative 4: Swords strike, all unsaved wounds dealt by the activated weapons will ID
Initiative 3-2
Initiative 1: Hammers Strike, all unsaved wounds dealt will ID pretty much anything left standing

Here is an example of how activation would work with some failed rolls: Mordrak and 4 ghosts with Halberds, 1 with Sword (from a wound)

Assault Phase Starts: Mordrak rolls for Hammerhand, succeeds
Initiative 10-7
Initiative 6: Halberds strike, unsaved wound is dealt, all Ghosts roll to activate NFW per BoP, succeed, all unsaved wounds dealt by Ghosts will ID, Mordrak is ML1 and has not Warp Charges left
Initiative 5
Initiative 4: Sword strikes, any unsaved wounds dealt by the activated weapons wound ID
Initiative 3-2
Initiative 1: Hammers Strike, all unsaved wounds dealt to T5 models will ID, only unsaved wounds dealt by the Ghost would ID T6+ models

Mordrak in the above example does not have an activated NFW, because he expended his Warp Charge on Hammerhand. Not really and issue as he has a Hammer. Also, Mordrak was not bound to the BoP roll because he does not have the BoP special rule, yet he is not an IC. Since Mordrak has Mastery Level 1, he does have a Warp Charge in his own right, which is in addition to the single Warp Charge his Ghost Knights have due to BoP (Although technically the Ghost are using Mordrak's LD since he is their "Justicar", even though both Mordrak and his Ghosts have LD10).

Here is an example of the similar unit with a Challenge Mode Librarian (Staff, Warp Rift, Sanctuary)

Movement Phase Starts: Mordrak rolls for Psychic Communion, succeeeds
Assault Phase Starts: Libby rolls for Hammerhand, succeeds
Initiative 10-7
Initiative 6: Halberds strike, unsaved wound is dealt, all Ghosts and the Libby roll to activate NFW per BoP, succeed, all unsaved wounds dealt by Ghosts and Libby will ID
Initiative 5
Initiative 4: Sword and Staff strike, any unsaved wounds dealt by the activated weapons wound ID
Initiative 3-2
Initiative 1: Hammers Strike, all unsaved wounds dealt to T5 models will ID, only unsaved wounds dealt by the Ghost would ID T6+ models

In the above example, Mordrak used Psychic Communion in the movement phase, denying himself a Warp Charge for the Assault Phase (Libby had him cover ... this time).

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The point I am making is *not* to exempt ICs from making the test, just that as they are a mmeber of the unit they ARE bound by the BoP result - because it states the whole unit is bound by it.

You've misread. Models in the 'unit' are not bound by the results of the activation roll. The rule states that "wounds" caused by models in the unit are bound by the result of the activation roll. As in, if the roll is passed, then all wounds cause by that unit will be ID, while if the roll is failed then all wounds caused by that unit will be treated as having come from normal power weapons.

You're right, I did misread.

So is the NFW text a rule?
If so, why is the IC not a member of the unit for those purposes? He's causing wounds and is part of the unit for all rules purposes.

Jeffersonian - so wounds caused by members of the unit are bound by the result. Transitive.

The IC is, for ALL RULES PURPOSES, a member of the unit.

Ignoring yoru example, as youa re still failing to answer or address the argument at all in any substantive manner.

Is the IC a member of the unit for all rules purposes? Yes, or no

Is BoP a rule? Yes, or no

Is NFW activation a rule? Yes, or no

If you can answer those, directly, you may possibly understand the argument.

Yes, BoP is a rule.

Does any IC in the Grey Knight codex have that rule? Yes or No.
Is BoP transferable to a joined IC? Yes or No.

Elric Greywolf wrote:
Yes, BoP is a rule.

Does any IC in the Grey Knight codex have that rule? Yes or No.
Is BoP transferable to a joined IC? Yes or No.

Both questions are irrelevant. Read the NFW rules.

Jeffersonian, I would like to point out that your Mordrak example is flawed. Mordrak is not an IC, but a character in the ghost knight unit.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Jeffersonian - so wounds caused by members of the unit are bound by the result. Transitive.

The IC is, for ALL RULES PURPOSES, a member of the unit.

Ignoring yoru example, as youa re still failing to answer or address the argument at all in any substantive manner.

Is the IC a member of the unit for all rules purposes? Yes, or no

Is BoP a rule? Yes, or no

Is NFW activation a rule? Yes, or no

If you can answer those, directly, you may possibly understand the argument.

The answer to all three of your questions is "yes, as long as there's not an exception". The parenthesis that you treat as a reminder is still worded in such a manner that it still works as a rule; Normally, the IC wouldn't have to test on his own, but in this case he still does, despite the general rules saying he doesn't, because thefe's a specific exception to the rule.

Elric Greywolf wrote:
Yes, BoP is a rule.

So, for the purposes of that rule the IC is treated as a normal member of the unit? YEs, or no

Elric Greywolf wrote:
Does any IC in the Grey Knight codex have that rule? Yes or No.

Irrelevant

Elric Greywolf wrote:
Is BoP transferable to a joined IC? Yes or No.

No, but then you have yet again not been anywhere near precise enough in terminology. Stealth is not transferred to an IC if he joins a unit with the rule, but he benefits from it just the same.
If you are going to ask questions actually be precise in terminology, otherwise you end up not actually asking the question you shoudl be asking (I do this for a living as an auditor, btw )


Automatically Appended Next Post:
AW - it states he must test separately, but thsi deos not (because in 5th it COULD not) alter his status as a member of the unit, and does NOT exempt him from being bound by the result

Nos, Nos, Nos, what can be said?

The 'unit' in question is the legal body of models group per the rules. In my recent example, the 'unit' would be Mordrak, his Ghost Knights, and a Librarian (1 IC, 1 BoP, 1 ML1 non-IC, for a total of 3 activation rolls on the first unsaved wound). In my first example several posts back, we had a 'unit' composed of 1 GM, 1 Libby, 3 Techmarines, and 10 GKT (5 ICs, 1 BoP, for a total of 6 activation rolls on the first unsaved wound).

Per the Force Weapon rules on pg. 37 of the BRB: each Psyker is responsible for the activation of their own Force weapon upon the first unsaved wound dealt by that specific Psyker his or her Force weapon.

Per the Nemesis Force Weapons rules on pg. 54 of the GK Codex, if a unit with the BoP special rule inflicts an unsaved wound, everyone in the unit activates their Force weapons, yet reminds us that ICs still roll on their own while those with BoP roll a single attempt. What is interesting about this rule is that if a unit of GK does not have the BoP special rule, such as a GM, Libby, and 3 Techmarines attached to each other, each individual IC has to inflict an unsaved wound on their own in order to trigger an activation attempt. It is only when a BoP is present that all the GK models roll on the first unsaved wound. In the case of Mordrak and his Ghost Knights, the Ghost have BoP, Mordrak doesn't, yet Mordrak is also no an IC, so his activation would be on a single roll with the Knights (he'd still expend his Warp Charge along with their Warp Charge).

So, yes, an IC is a member of the unit for all rule purposes, per the rules for ICs joining other units.

Yes, BoP is a special rule, because the BoP rule tells us it is a special rule.

Yes, NFW activation is a rule, because rules are printed for NFW activation in the GK Codex.

I understand the argument, however, several of this thread's posters do not seem to understand the rules involved in the argument despite the number of quotes and examples.

To restate: if BoP is not present, all Force weapon wielders are on their own for activating their Force weapons per the rules on pg. 37 of the BRB. If BoP is present, all Force weapon wielders in the same unit have the ability to activate their Force weapons immediately upon the first inflicted unsaved wound regardless on who in the unit inflicted the wound as long as it was done by a Psyker with a Nemesis Force Weapon. All the rules for the actual activation are followed per the BRB, with the exception that those with BoP roll once for all BoP models (because they are considered to be a single Psyker for all purposes).

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
To restate: if BoP is not present, all Force weapon wielders are on their own for activating their Force weapons per the rules on pg. 37 of the BRB. If BoP is present, all Force weapon wielders in the same unit have the ability to activate their Force weapons immediately upon the first inflicted unsaved wound regardless on who in the unit inflicted the wound as long as it was done by a Psyker with a Nemesis Force Weapon. All the rules for the actual activation are followed per the BRB, with the exception that those with BoP roll once for all BoP models (because they are considered to be a single Psyker for all purposes).

And if the NFW rules referred to BoP every time there'd be no issue.

As it stands the *unit's* wounds are bound to a single roll.

Jeff, Jeff, Jeff. Or how about you drop the condescension, for once?

The UNITS wounds are bound by the result. The IC is a normal member of the unit for ALL rules purposes.

So how is the IC not bound by the result? Page and para, as you have so far entirely missed the mark with your examples.,

On a second readthrough, I suppose you're right.

Rigel, I'm not sure if that was an agreement or a disagreement.

Nos, again, not sure if that was an agreement or a disagreement.

Could either of you clarify your statements, please?

SJ

It was disagreement, as you have fundamentally missed the point. The Ic, as a normal member of the unit for ALL rules purposes, is bound to the result of the unit - pass or fail.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It was disagreement, as you have fundamentally missed the point. The Ic, as a normal member of the unit for ALL rules purposes, is bound to the result of the unit - pass or fail.

I'd suggest you re-read the rule in question. Your conclusion is incorrect.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It was disagreement, as you have fundamentally missed the point. The Ic, as a normal member of the unit for ALL rules purposes, is bound to the result of the unit - pass or fail.

I'd suggest you re-read the rule in question. Your conclusion is incorrect.

You mean the NFW rule that says exactly that the units wounds are bound by the first result?

Is the IC not part of the unit?

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
It was disagreement, as you have fundamentally missed the point. The Ic, as a normal member of the unit for ALL rules purposes, is bound to the result of the unit - pass or fail.

I'd suggest you re-read the rule in question. Your conclusion is incorrect.

SJ

]


What, the rule that says that all members of the unit are bound by the result? That rule? You HAVE read that part, yes?

I suggest you reread it, reread the IC rule stating they are a normal member of the unit for all rules purposes and then try to actually answer the argument directly. You ha ve yet to do so, just made yet more baseless assertions. Some rules would be helpful, and are also part of the tenets of this forum

It seems that the two sides are split by an understanding of the word "unit" in the NFW rule.

The belligerent side believe that the word "unit" refers to the unit on the table, with whatever composition it happens to have at the time.
This would invalidate the wording of the Force USR, which states that each individual Psyker must take his own test. (A unit with BoP is "one" Psyker; a unit of two Librarians would still have to take two individual tests, and would gain or not gain ID based on the result of each respective test.)

The other belligerent side believes that, taken in context of the sentence (which explicitly makes joined ICs rely on their own tests) the word "unit" refers to the force org unit with the BoP rule, such as a GKSS sans IC.
This still allows for the Force USR to work as stated.

Elric Greywolf wrote:
The belligerent side believe that the word "unit" refers to the unit on the table, with whatever composition it happens to have at the time.
This would invalidate the wording of the Force USR, which states that each individual Psyker must take his own test. (A unit with BoP is "one" Psyker; a unit of two Librarians would still have to take two individual tests, and would gain or not gain ID based on the result of each respective test.)

The Force USR is modified by the NFW rule. Nothing is broken whatsoever.
If we were to take the Force rule at face value there'd be no requirement for NFW whatsoever.

Two Librarians (that don't have NFW) test separately and aren't bound by each other's results because they aren't using the NFW rules.
Nothing is broken or invalidated - codex overrides rulebook when there's a conflict and in the case of you thinking the rule is "invalidated" that's a clear conflict.

And I'm not being belligerent.

Well, we don't need to go to the dictionary to define simple words and conclude whether or not behaviour is belligerent (like mine probably is). And I didn't point out any particular person with the adjective, I included everyone in the thread (which also implicates myself); but it's good to know that you do not think you are being belligerent.

Niceties aside, could Nos and/or Rig say whether this sequence is correct, according to their reading:
GKGM strkes at I5, before Termies I4, and hits.
Both IC and Termies take separate Force tests (since ICs must take separate test).
GM fails, but Termies pass. GM and Termies all gain ID, since GM is part of unit.

Elric Greywolf wrote:
Niceties aside, could Nos and/or Rig say whether this sequence is correct, according to their reading:
GKGM strkes at I5, before Termies I4, and hits.
Both IC and Termies take separate Force tests (since ICs must take separate test).
GM fails, but Termies pass. GM and Termies all gain ID, since GM is part of unit.

No. The "ICs must take separate tests" is a reminder from 5th edition when ICs were considered separate units while resolving attacks.
If they all have NFW it's a single test for all.

To bounce off of that answer, which leadership is used for the test? The character or the squad?

Or do you use the Leadership of which ever model is triggering the psychic test? So if you had a Grandmaster with a sword in a unit of Halberd purifiers, when the halberds caused the first wound you would us the purifiers leadership for the test. While if the grandmaster had a Halberd(I7) you would use his leadership.

rigeld2 wrote:
The "ICs must take separate tests" is a reminder from 5th edition when ICs were considered separate units while resolving attacks.
If they all have NFW it's a single test for all.

So then, we are allowed to ignore clauses in the codex. How can I tell which parts of codices are defunct leftovers from old editions, and which are still viable? I'm not always going to trust people to have clear reasoning and good thinking, and not many people are as dedicated to hashing out rules as YMDC. How can I know whether people are ignoring things that should be ignored, or just ignoring what they feel like ignoring?

Who is condescending now, Nos?

The rules in question are:

Independent Character (pg. 39, BRB)

While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters.

Brotherhood of Psykers (pg. 21, GK Codex)

Units of Grey Knights are psykers and use their mental might to enhance their abilities or unleash psychic attacks.
A Grey Knight unit can use one psychic power each turn. The unit counts as a single psyker and follows all the normal rules for psykers, with the following clarifications:
• A Grey Knight unit uses the Leadership of its Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive), or the unit (if he is dead) for Psychic tests.
• If the Grey Knight unit suffers Perils of the Warp, or any attack the specifically targets psykers, it is resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive), or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead.

Psyker Mastery Levels (pg. 21, GK Codex)

Codex: Grey Knights uses Mastery Levels, shown in brackets after the Psyker special rule, to determine how many psychic powers a character can use each turn. For each Mastery Level a character has, he use one psychic power per turn.

Nemesis Force Weapons (pg. 54, GK Codex)

Force Weapons: All Nemesis force weapons are force weapons, as detailed in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook. Note that a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule needs to take only a single Psychic test to ‘activate’ all of its force weapons (although independent characters must still roll separately). If the test is passed, all wounds caused by the unit’s Nemesis force weapons that phase inflict instant death. If a unit is striking at different initiative orders, take the Psychic test to ‘activate’ the force weapons immediately after the first unsaved wounds are caused. Any further wounds are caused by the unit’s Nemesis force weapons that phase will be bound by the result of the Psychic test.

So, what about these rules causes an issue? The specific part where it states that is the unit has the Brotherhood of Psykers special rules, only one roll to activate is made, with the exception of Independent Characters which must make their own rolls. Also, there is the part the states that all unsaved wounds dealt after the activation are bound by the results of that roll.

Why is this an issue? Because Independent Characters are for all intents and purposes count as members of whatever unit they join for all unit rules. This means that ICs count as having the BoP special rule while they are joined to a BoP unit. Which would also means that ICs would be counted in with the other BoP models in their unit, if it wasn’t for their Psyker Mastery Level and the following Q and A:

6th edition GK FAQ 1.3

Q: If a unit with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule, a unit of Inquisitorial Henchmen with one or more Psykers in it, or any other similar unit containing multiple Psykers is within 12” of a Culexus
Assassin, does the presence of that unit add +1 to the Animus Speculum’s Assault value or +1 for each Psychic model present in the unit? (p53)
A: Such a unit contributes +1 to the Animus Speculum’s assault value no matter how many Psykers it consist of, unless those Psykers have the Independent Character special rule in which case each such Psyker contributes a +1.

Per the precedent set above, Independent Characters, while counted as part of a unit for all rules purposes, stands on their own for psyker related rules. This creates an interesting interaction between the Nemesis Force Weapon rules, the Brotherhood of Psykers rules, and Mastery Level rule.

If we have a unit with the BoP special rules, say a squad of GKT, the NFW and BoP rules allow that unit to activate their NFW on a single Psychic test roll immediately after the first unsaved wound is caused. If we add a character with a Mastery Level to that squad, such as Justicar Thawn, Thawn would follow all rules for BoP with the exception that he has 2 Warp Charges and may use 2 powers each turn where the rest of his unit has 1 Warp Charge and can only use 1 power per turn. On their first unsaved wound caused, the entire unit can activate their NFW on a single Psychic test roll using Thawn’s Leadership, with all further unsaved wounds inflicting Instant Death.

Another example of a similar situation is Grand Master Mordrak and his Ghost Knights. As the Ghost Knights have BoP, and Mordrak counts as the unit’s upgrade character while also not being an Independent Character, Mordrak also falls under the BoP rule for NFW activation. Yet, if we add an IC to Thawn’s or Mordrak’s units, the BoP rule interaction with NFW activation becomes more complex. A Librarian added to Mordrak’s Ghost Knights or Thawn’s GKT squad would have to roll separately for their own NFW activation (per the NFW rules). Once the Libby’s NFW is active, any further wounds inflicted by the Libby with his NFW wound cause Instant Death just like the rest of the BoP unit.

Example: Librarian join a GKT squad with Thawn. Thawn comes equipped with a Halberd, while the Librarian has a Staff, and the GKT have Swords and Hammers. If Thawn scores an unsaved wound, he and his squad (including the Libby) immediately roll a Psychic test to activated their NFW. Thawn rolls for his squad per the BoP rule, while the Libby roles on his own per the BoP rule. Once the two rolls are completed, and if both pass, all of the wounds inflicted by the unit’s NFW with cause ID from that point on. Note that the Libby has yet to swing his Staff in combat, yet his NFW is already activated when his initiative step is reached. Any wounds he causes with his NFW that round are bound by the results of that activation roll.

Let’s say the Libby passed his check while Thawn failed his with a double 6. Thawn dies on initiative step 6, and his remaining GKT go without NFW activation, yet the Libby’s Staff is fully active when
initiative step 4 is reached. In this case, only the Libby’s inflicted unsaved wounds will ID, as the remaining GKT are bound by their failed activation roll.

Nos, Rigel, please inform the rest of us how you think the activation sequence works, with examples and citations. That is, only if you feel that I am wrong.

SJ

*edit for spacing, spelling, Dyslexia

Op- yes, you are correct

nosferatu1001 wrote:

What, the rule that says that all members of the unit are bound by the result? That rule? You HAVE read that part, yes?

spam deleted.
reds8n

Jeffersonian - except the IC is bound to the units result, as he is a member of the unit. While he passed his roll the unit failed (thanks to thawn) and so his weapon is NOT active.

This alone tells you that the *reminder* text in parens is just that - reminder of an old rule.

You also made an unsupported leap in your claim that "for psychic purposes" an IC is considered differently to the unit - *just* for Animus Speculum, as that is the full context AND answer to the question raised do they add +1. You cannot leap and make the claim that this is somehow true for all psychic purposes.

It should faq-ed anyway!

I have never, ever, in any game of 40k I've ever played in, seen this rule played as Nos and his cadre are saying it should be played. This includes big tournaments such as NOVA and Adepticon. If this were in any way in doubt, don't you think that in all the time the GK book has been out these guys would have picked up on it?

I don't understand how GW could have been clearer about IC's taking thier own psychic tests.

EDIT: I can't spell.

First off, GW is notoriously slow in catching rules issues. Their track record is clear on this, although they have shown signs of improvement.

Second, I highly doubt Nos and company actually play it like this. They are simply showing what the RAW is. Its not necessarily how they play it in their games.

People simply need to be aware that they need to specifically alter the rules to have things play the other way(the "correct" way)


6th has only been out for little while, some of the more subtle rules issues can easily slip under the radar till someone rereads something and a new can of worms is opened.

IMO both sides make valid arguments. I agree with Eduh, that I've never seen it played in 6th edition the way nos and crew a stating (that does not mean their side is wrong). Personally I am of the opinion that while the IC is a member of the unit for all rule purposes, he may not be a normal member of the unit for all rule purposes (see debate on whether an allied IC joined to a unit can embark in their transport).

By "those guys" I mean TO's of big events who take a look through books looking for FAQ issues.

Samurai_Eduh wrote:
By "those guys" I mean TO's of big events who take a look through books looking for FAQ issues.

You assume that those guys are incapable of overlooking things. They can miss things just like anybody else.

They also have better things to do other than sitting down with the rulebook, and every codex, cross referencing every rule interaction. They have to deal with getting venues organized, collecting entry fees, getting prizes, etc... The stuff that actually makes the tournament worth going to.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jeffersonian - except the IC is bound to the units result, as he is a member of the unit. While he passed his roll the unit failed (thanks to thawn) and so his weapon is NOT active.

This alone tells you that the *reminder* text in parens is just that - reminder of an old rule.

You also made an unsupported leap in your claim that "for psychic purposes" an IC is considered differently to the unit - *just* for Animus Speculum, as that is the full context AND answer to the question raised do they add +1. You cannot leap and make the claim that this is somehow true for all psychic purposes.

The "reminder" text in question does tell us to count ICs as different at that point, just as the Animus Q and A reminds us that ICs counts on their own as Psykers. Two (2) examples that support this. In point of fact, you cannot take a "leap of faith" and say that my statement is not fully supported by RAW until such time as you actually bother to prove it. I have shown via RAW how ICs in a BoP unit activate NFW. You may disagree, but you have not shown any form of support as to why you disagree. I only ask that you do try to support your claim that if the BoP unit fails while the ICs succeed, the the ICs do not activate their NFWs. Please support your argument.

SJ

Sorry, I havent "bothered" to prove it? I have done, repeatedly over 4 pages. You just ignore it each time.

ONE example, the FAQ for Animus Speculum, says they are different. Not two (2), One (1)

Please, show the rules for your leap of faith. There aren't any, but you have so far not even argued that point - so I do consider you have conceded that not for all "psychic purposes" does an Ic count as different.

The argument has been supported, 20 times now, with the same rule you have yet to manage to even mention in your response here. The IC is a NORMAL member of the unit for ALL rules purposes. Show how this is not true for anything other than this single Animus Speculum, or yet again you have conceded a point.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The IC is a NORMAL member of the unit for ALL rules purposes. Show how this is not true for anything other than this single Animus Speculum, or yet again you have conceded a point.

Does that include for embarking into a battle brother's transport? I know we have had this discussion before, but I forget your stance on it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Sorry, I havent "bothered" to prove it? I have done, repeatedly over 4 pages. You just ignore it each time.

ONE example, the FAQ for Animus Speculum, says they are different. Not two (2), One (1)

Please, show the rules for your leap of faith. There aren't any, but you have so far not even argued that point - so I do consider you have conceded that not for all "psychic purposes" does an Ic count as different.

The argument has been supported, 20 times now, with the same rule you have yet to manage to even mention in your response here. The IC is a NORMAL member of the unit for ALL rules purposes. Show how this is not true for anything other than this single Animus Speculum, or yet again you have conceded a point.

Whatever, Nos. Neither you nor Rigel will back up your statements, while both of you will shot down the arguments of others based on a non-supported view of RAW. I have explained how the process works, the OP has been answered correctly by myself and others. You and Rigel can continue to play in your fantasy world where the rules don't function. Good Luck!

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
You and Rigel can continue to play in your fantasy world where the rules don't function. Good Luck!

SJ

See this isn't exactly necessary and is not conducive to an intelligent discussion.

 Happyjew wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
You and Rigel can continue to play in your fantasy world where the rules don't function. Good Luck!

SJ

See this isn't exactly necessary and is not conducive to an intelligent discussion.

Not sure what you mean, Happy. I play in a fantasy world where the rules work, which goes by the name Warhammer 40,000. All I wished Nos and Rigel was good luck in their fantasy world (which also happens to be Warhammer 40,000). It is just a waste of time to argue with them, as they do not support the forum tenets in presenting their side of any argument, forcing everyone else to constantly have to produce proof they will never except (while never actually supporting their point of view in a logical manner with citations). So I wished them the best, as I will no longer be continuing this one-sided argument with them.

As far as I'm concerned, their lack of support within the rules as written means they have no argument.

SJ

They have supported their side of the rules, you seem to be purposfully ignoring where they have done that. Thats not cool man.

rigeld2 wrote:
The "ICs must take separate tests" is a reminder from 5th edition when ICs were considered separate units while resolving attacks.
If they all have NFW it's a single test for all.

So then, we are allowed to ignore clauses in the codex. How can I tell which parts of codices are defunct leftovers from old editions, and which are still viable?

Yeah i'd wondered that one myself. What rule or position renders that last part of the rules text about ICs testing seperately any more or less relevent than anything else found in the codex?

 Happyjew wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
You and Rigel can continue to play in your fantasy world where the rules don't function. Good Luck!

SJ

See this isn't exactly necessary and is not conducive to an intelligent discussion.

Quite.

No more comments like this please.

Jeffersonian - we supported our argument in the first 3 pages, showed where you were making unsupported, ruleless assertions which undeermined your entire argument, and have simply bene poinitng you to where you have failed to actually show anything rule-based ever since.

That isnt "failing to support" our argument. It is pointing you to where that support is found, which you then consistently ignore

It is indeed a one sided argument. I accept you have conceded the point, and will ignore any further posts from you that fail to cite rules.

Elric Greywolf wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The "ICs must take separate tests" is a reminder from 5th edition when ICs were considered separate units while resolving attacks.
If they all have NFW it's a single test for all.

So then, we are allowed to ignore clauses in the codex. How can I tell which parts of codices are defunct leftovers from old editions, and which are still viable?

By reading the codex and understanding context. In the context of 5th edition, it was a reminder. A parenthetical statement should be able to be removed from the sentence and not change the meaning whatsoever.

In 5th removing that statement changed nothing as the IC was a separate unit during combat resolution.

Oh, and I'm rigeld2, not Rigel, SJ. In case you want to direct your insults correctly.

I think that nosferatu1001's and rigeld2's argument is primarily based upon the status of an independent character joining a unit. I think they're wrong based upon the fact that Brotherhood of Psykers doesn't transfer to ICs.

p. 39 BRB - Independent Character, Special Rules
"When an Independent Character joins a unit, it might have different special rules from those of the unit. Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn special rule), the unit's special rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character, and the Independent Character's special rules are not conferred upon the unit. Special rules that are conferred to the unit only apply for as long as the Independent Character is with them"

So, an IC isn't affected by a special rule unless the rule specifically says that it transfers (stealth is another good example of one that does).

p. 21 Codex Grey Knights - Grey Knights Special Rules, Brotherhood of Psykers
Basically it's a rule that certain GK units have, "as denoted in the unit entries", other special rules include Psychic Pilot, ATSKNF, Combat Squads, and The Aegis.
Bottom Line: BOP does not have the "if a unit contains a model with" verbiage (most BRB USRs use this specific phrase) or any remotely similar language to indicate that an IC who joins gains that rule.

Now, Nemesis Force Weapons (p. 54, GK Codex):
"All Nemesis force weapons are force weapons, as detailed in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook. Note that a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule needs to take only a single Psychic test to "activate" all its force weapons (although independent characters must still roll separately). If the test is passed, all wounds caused by the unit's Nemesis force weapons that phase inflict instant death If a unit is striking at different initiative orders, take the Psychic test to "activate" the force weapons immediately after the first unsaved wounds are caused. Any further wounds caused by the unit's Nemesis force weapons that phase will be bound by the result of that Psychic test".

The rules for force weapons and their activation is covered in BRB. The above section is merely clarifying how this rule works for a unit with the BOP special rule, because the force weapon rules only discuss a single model armed with one. As further clarified by the GK FAQ, a unit of Grey Knights with the BOP special rule counts as a single psyker. The "unit" being discussed in the paragraph is a GK unit with the BOP special rule, and what follows applies to said unit (because other unit types are covered in BRB).

This aside, Independent Characters are still Independent Characters, even if they are part of a unit (they can leave, have different rules, etc). So it is perfectly acceptable in 6th edition for a rule to separate ICs from their units. And furthermore, it is not FAQ'd, so it is still RAW (which ironically seems to be the fallback for arguing against it).

So, in summary:
BOP doesn't transfer to ICs that join units with BOP
The unit being referred to in the NFW entry is a GK unit with the BOP special rule
It explicitly states ICs must roll and activate separately

GreyKnight12...
We've tried that line of reasoning at least twice in this thread. Nos and Rig believe that the NFW use of the word "unit" refers to the unit composition on the table, and does not refer to the unit composition in the Force Org.

As you correctly point out (and I have also pointed out), the parenthetical clause in the NFW rule must be ignored to roll the way the other side wishes.

This is the primary difference between the two sides.

Elric Greywolf wrote:
As you correctly point out (and I have also pointed out), the parenthetical clause in the NFW rule must be ignored to roll the way the other side wishes.

This is the primary difference between the two sides.

And as I pointed out for a parenthetical statement to be used correctly it must not change the sentence if you remove it.
Using my and nos' argument, removing the parenthetical changes nothing (because its a leftover from 5th and means nothing anyway).
Use your argument, removing the parenthetical phrase significantly changes the meaning of the sentence.

If we're going to ignore parenthetical clauses then we should follow an actual convention of standard english, namely that the subject of a sentence/paragraph remains the subject until modified by specific reference. In this case, "unit" first refers to a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule. The only reference to any other unit composition is when ICs are mentioned in the parenthetical statement, which states very simply how they interact with this rule (and if we ignore said statement they are not mentioned at all). As a sidenote, no GK ICs have the BOP special rule.
The meaning is not changed if you remove the parenthetical, the paragraph is still talking about a unit of grey knights with the BOP rule activating force weapons. Earlier the Librarian example was used, stating how they are different because they don't have the same rules. Well, ICs do not have said rule under any circumstances, and so it doesn't apply to them, only to units with BOP, which as I showed before does not transfer to the IC.

And even if it it is a carryover, it is still RAW. Even if it is in parenthesis.

Elric - of course it refers to the Unit on the table, at the time. Explain why it isnt, using rules. (You have "explained" but have yet to support)

Greyknight - then you can never use BoP, because the unit is not a unit with the BoP rule; it is a unit where some of the models have the BoP rule. Or, you follow the IC rules which is that "for ALL rules purposes" they are a normal member of the unit; a normal member of the unit is a model with BoP

nosferatu1001 wrote:
...Or, you follow the IC rules which is that "for ALL rules purposes" they are a normal member of the unit; a normal member of the unit is a model with BoP

I'm sorry, what? Do you honestly believe that being a normal part of a unit confers USRs that do not explicitly indicate they are conferred or for that matter that every member in a unit has to have the same USRs effecting them in order to be considered part of that unit?

BRB p. 39, Independent Character, Joining and Leaving a Unit:
"While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters" (emphasis mine)

BRB p. 127, Purge The Alien, Primary Objectives:
"Remember that Independent Characters and Dedicated Transports are individual units and award Victory Points if they are destroyed"

I respectfully suggest that you have a misunderstanding of how ICs interact with the units that they join. Per precedent and explicit reference, Independent Characters can join units and fight alongside them and can't be called out for targeting purposes; however, they and the unit retain their own special rules and wargear. ICs, even if joined to a squad of troops are a separate entity on the tabletop and can do different things.

While yes, your argument is supported by half a sentence here and there, a thorough reading of the IC rules makes the separate activation argument (which is already the more reasonable and common application of the rule) to be the correct one by RAW as well.

Furthermore, while that section of the NFW rules by my interpretation are referring to a GK unit with BOP, they do acknowledge that characters can join and change composition of said unit, and how this works...hence the parenthetical statement. In other words, "here's how a unit with BOP activates force weapons (if an IC joined he has to activate his/her own)."

I can understand Nos and RIGEL's view on how ICs are treated when attatched to a BoP unit. The only issue I have with their stance on the subject is that they ignore RAW on how ICs attached to BoP units actually work. As has been pointed out, you cannot support a "RAW" argument by stating "ignore the RAW that disagrees with my interpretation of RAW".

We see that in a BoP unit without attached ICs, the BoP models are treated as a single Psyker and roll once to activate their NFW immediately after the first unsaved wound is dealt. No one is arguing this.

We see that in a unit composed of only ICs with NFW each Psyker is treated seperately and may only attempt an activation independantly from the other ICs in the unit upon their own individually scored unsaved wound. No onw is arguing this, either.

When the two are combined, we see an oddity of rules interaction: In a unit with the BoP special rule, only one roll is required to activate all NFW (except for ICs which still roll seperately). Side A argues that this means immediately upon the first unsaved wound being dealt, each IC with an NFW rolls for their own activation while the remaining BoP models roll once collectively for their NFW activation, with each model bound by the result of its respective roll. Side B is arguing that only one roll is ever made, that roll is done using the BoP's Leadership only, and all attached ICs are bound by the results of that roll.

Per RAW, the only side that is correct is the one that is not ignoring a section if the actual Rules As Written (Side A, in this instance).

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Per RAW, the only side that is correct is the one that is not ignoring a section if the actual Rules As Written (Side A, in this instance).

So Side A is not ignoring that the rule uses the word "unit"? And that ICs are members of the unit for all rules purposes?

As GK12 just stated above, Side A sees that the word "unit" is taken in context of the sentence as a whole: the word explicitly references a unit with the BoP rule, a rule which is not conferred to ICs.

Here's two counter-examples for "Side B": the USR BoP (in the BRB) says: "A unit with this special rules counts as a Mastery Level 1 Psyker." Since the word "unit" is used, does that mean that my Level 2 Tzeentch Herald becomes part of the Level 1 BoP Horrors when he joins them, and thus unable to cast his own powers?
The GK BoP: "A Grey Knight unit can use one psychic power each turn." Since the word "unit" is used, does the Libby who joins a GK Termie squad lose his Mastery Levels and thus become unable to cast his own powers?

Upon review of the codex it looks like Justicar Thawn does not have Brotherhood of Psykers either, but can only be fielded with a squad of terminators.

Logically (along the same lines as Elric's previous response), does side B feel that it was intended that he only have the ability to manifest one power per turn until such time as he ends up by himself (and/or the Mastery level 2 written in his rulestext was a typo of some sort?)


Another interesting example: Does a non-psychic ordo malleus inquisitor in TDA armed with a nemesis daemon hammer count as having it activated if he is attached to a squad with BoP and the choice is made to activate the squads weapons?

Greyknight - except they are not a seperate unit; only for purge the alien and counting VPs do they count as such

Jeffersonian - it isnt ignoring the RAW, actually.

The IC is bound by the units result, because he is a member of the unit. He is free to test all he likes, but pass or fail he is bound by the same result as the unit, because that is what the rule AS WRITTEN states

Neo - no, I am not claiming that. I am claiming that for determining if the "unit" is bound, you treat him as a normal member of the unit for that pupose. Otherwise you can never activate BoP with an IC (or mordrak) around, because you never havea unit with BoP- you havea unit which is partially BoP, which does not meet the rules requirements.

This was more ambiguous in 5th, and previous (do a search for Shrouding (3rd edition codex rule) and attached non-Shrouding ICs as a simple example) editions, but is concrete now

So, do you agree or disagree that the IC is a normal member of the unit?

Also - to your final point. He can manifst two per turn, as he is mastery 2. ONLY for NFW (because that mentions BoP, you are going from BoP outwards, which is the wrong way round) is he bound by the result of the unit.

The big issue here is that the definition of units, and how ICs interact with them, has changed.

In 5th, when the GK codex was written, the IC was not part of the unit for all purposes. Really only for movement, leadership, shooting, and embarking purposes. He was seperate for combat and force weapon activation(because of how Force Weapons worked)

Now, the definition of unit has changed. The IC is part of the unit for all purposes now.


This definition has altered what the BoP can mean by unit. It may not be what was intended, but an edition change can alter a rule radically.

nosferatu1001 wrote: ...Neo - no, I am not claiming that. I am claiming that for determining if the "unit" is bound, you treat him as a normal member of the unit for that pupose. Otherwise you can never activate BoP with an IC (or mordrak) around, because you never havea unit with BoP- you havea unit which is partially BoP, which does not meet the rules requirements...

So you are saying that a unit that is only partially comprised of models with the BoP rule does not count as a unit 'with' the BoP rule? This strikes you as a better interpretation than one which the unit as a whole 'does' count as having the BoP rule because some of it's models have it?

My concern with your interpretation is that it does not account for the possibility that any given 'unit' could be comprised of models with different special rules; which i find fairly counter-intuitive to the way the game currently exists. There are 'numerous' examples of perfectly legal units that nontheless contain some models which do not have nor benefit from a given specific rule, in fact there is an actual rule which goes so far as to say 'all' USRs work this way unless otherwise explicitly noted within their rules-text.

In this case saying that an IC which has joined a unit with it is bound by the BoP rule itself despite not having it; is akin to saying that a model that has joined another unit with the Swarm USR takes double the unsaved wounds from a template weapon from wounds assigned to that specific model.

 Neorealist wrote:
In this case saying that an IC which has joined a unit with it is bound by the BoP rule itself despite not having it; is akin to saying that a model that has joined another unit with the Swarm USR takes double the unsaved wounds from a template weapon from wounds assigned to that specific model.

Except for the fact that Swarm is a model based rule and not a unit based rule.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

So, do you agree or disagree that the IC is a normal member of the unit?

BRB p. 39: Independent Character

Joining and Leaving a Unit:
"While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters"

Special Rules
"When an Independent Character joins a unit, it might have different special rules from those of the unit"

Read those sentences again please. No, the IC is not a "normal" member of the unit, he is an "abnormal" member. He is still a part of the unit, but he has his own special rules. Your assertion completely ignores the last part of sentence about being part of a unit, namely "he still follows the rules for characters" In this case, the rules for characters are that they have to activate their own force weapons. Even if we take "unit" in this case to mean the most generic unit possible, there is still a specific clause regarding ICs. However, I believe that the "unit" in question is a unit with the BOP special rule, and it is entirely possible in 6th edition to apply different special rules to different parts of a unit depending on its composition. Part of the unit has BOP, and follows the rules for that while the other part has an individual test.

Grey knight.

And, again, you are ignoring the phrasing of NFW, namely ALL members of the unit are bound by the result

Is the IC a member of the unit? Yes or No.

To clear this up somewhat, as GW has not specifically defined what they mean by "unit" in the context of the NFW rules, we can correctly assume from the rule itself that "unit" refers to a grouping of models with NFWs. If this is indeed the case, then when the NFW rule refers to a "unit" with the BoP special rule, that "unit could be any composition from just the BoP unit to the BoP+ICs. This can be inferred based on the inclusion of the IC reminder in parenthesis.

As I've pointed out in previous posts, the NFW rules states that NFW are Force weapons that follow all Force weapon rules, except for when those Force weapons are in a unit of Brotherhood of Psykers (BoP). If BoP is present, treat the first unsaved wound dealt as the trigger for activating all NFW in the unit following normal Force weapon activation rules except that BoP models in the unit roll only once as if they are a single Psyker. And that's it. We treat the entire unit (BoP+ICs) as a single entity for determining the trigger point, and then we treat each Psyker as a separate entity for their activation rolls (remember, BoP models in the same unit are considered a single Psyker for using Psychic powers, including Force weapon activation).

On the note of a non-Psyker Inquisitor with a Daemonhammer, we would simply treat him as if he has 0 Warp Charges (which is true).

Example (because I love examples!):

Librarian with Staff, Might of Titan, and Warp Rift.
Inquisitor with Psycannon, TDA, and Daemonhammer (not a Psyker).
Techmarine with "I Win!" grenades.
10man GKT with Thawn and mixed NFW (Halberds, Swords, Hammers)

Assault phase starts: Thawn casts Hammerhand, Librarian casts Might of Titan
Initiative 10-7
Initiative 6: Halberds strike, an unsaved wound is dealt, all Psykers with NFW roll to activate (Libby rolls a 7, Thawn rolls an 8), all GK NFW are now active, all GK NFWs now inflict ID
Initiative 5
Initiative 4: Staff strikes, Swords strike, Tech power weapon strikes, all unsaved wounds dealt by GK NFWs inflict ID.
Initiative 3-2
Initiative 1: Hammers strike, Tech servo arms strike, all unsaved wounds dealt by GK NFWs inflict ID, Inquisitor's Hammer may ID T5 or lower models (because he has a +2 Str bonus before doubling), Tech servo arms may inflict ID T4 or lower models (because they hit at an unmodified Str 8).

As you can see, neither the Inquisitor nor the Techmarine rolled to activate because the Inquisitor is not a Psyker, and the Techmarine is not equipped with a NFW, yet both are in a unit with the BoP special rule. Also, the Librarian rolled separately from Thawn for activation, following the NFW special rule. Further, Thawn rolled for all his GKT per the BoP special rule, as Thawn is not an IC yet is the Justicar for his BoP unit. Finally, the Inquisitor had Str 10 due to Hammerhand stacking with Might of Titan per the Might of Titan special rule (MoT is cumulative with HH, which is applied before doubling for the Hammer). Not even going to mention the Rad and Psychotropic grenades.

Yes, I can see why people say GKs are broken.

SJ

Happyjew wrote:Except for the fact that Swarm is a model based rule and not a unit based rule.

Brotherhood of Psykers doesn't indicate every model within the unit is effected by it either, just the unit as a whole.

Which interpretation seems more logical: That any psyker-models joining said unit become part of said unit for the purposes of Psychic checks (which directly contradicts the rule itself), or that they are independant of the unit for the purposes of Psychic checks (which directly supports it's current wording) and therefore not included in it's effects?

I'm not really sure tbh. There is a reason I'm staying out of this. That being said, HIWPI is the IC counts as a separate unit for the purpose of activating NFW.

 Neorealist wrote:

Happyjew wrote:Except for the fact that Swarm is a model based rule and not a unit based rule.

Brotherhood of Psykers doesn't indicate every model within the unit is effected by it either, just the unit as a whole.

Which interpretation seems more logical: That any psyker-models joining said unit become part of said unit for the purposes of Psychic checks (which directly contradicts the rule itself), or that they are independant of the unit for the purposes of Psychic checks (which directly supports it's current wording) and therefore not included in it's effects?

And, again, you have mis-stated the argument. The argument is plain as the rule itself - the IC is a member of the unit for all rules purposes, and THIS RULE states that THE UNIT, which *must* include the IC, is bound by the result. The IC is *free* to test seperately, but is still bound by the result of the unit. Because thats wht the rule actually states

Please, argue the actual text, not what you *think* it is saying

I have been I assure you. I'd suggest not arguing what you 'believe' I am saying so much as the actual content within the post.

You seem to be missing a couple of points:
1) Another rule which states how a given model is bound by the results of a psychic test. (hint: it's the rule for activating a force weapon, 'and' the rules for Psykers)
2) The rule for NSF 'clearly' refers to models within a unit that have the BoP rule when referencing 'the unit' later in it's rules text. You cannot simply ignore this and presume it means the unit as a whole and still expect the rule to function properly. (ie: activating non-psykers' force weapons, activating Non-BoP ICs' force weapons without a check of their own, and/or lowering the mastery of psyker ICs with a higher mastery level than the BoP grants and other such silliness)

So when it says "unit" it doesnt mean the definition of unit, but another definition of unit you have just made up?

Almost. When it says unit within the context of the rules we are discussing, its referring to the part (models) of the unit that does not contravene this part: "The unit can never use the leadership of an Independent Character for Psvchic tests." or this part: "...independant characters must still roll seperately..." or this part "...if the test is failed ... then there is no additional effect..."

The rules in question very clearly go out of their way to indicate that independant characters' leadership cannot be used for this purpose, that they have to roll seperately, and that they must abide by the results of that specific roll.

OK, so now find the part where they redefine what unit means.

Nothing you have posted states that, at all.

1) The unit not being able to use the Ld of any attached ICs != the IC is not a member of the unit
2) ICs must test separately != the IC is not a member of the unit
3) if the test is failed.... != the IC is not a member of the unit

You are backed into a corner by attempting to argue this, as you are arguing a rule which has fundamentally changed between editions. In 5th the reminder text in parens was true, in 6th it has no function.

Why on earth do they have to redefine what 'a unit' is when they've very clearly defined what parts of that unit the rule applies to and more importantly for this argument (ie; Independant characters) which parts of the unit it does not?

So, just ignoring everything showing youre wrong?

Carry on.

They have simply stated that the unit is bound by the result. Please, prove that "unit" does not mean "unit", as defined in the 40k BRB. Prove that the IC is not a member of the unit for ALL rules purposes, as defined in the 40k rulebook.

You have yet to do so.

"While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters"

"he still follows the rules for characters"
You keep forgetting to quote that part.

The rules for characters in this case are that he must roll separately for his weapon. The first "unit" specified is "a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule". It follows logically that the "unit" in the rest of the paragraph is a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule. Separate rolls=separate results.

Pulling out a single sentence, yes you are correct in your interpretation. But in reading the NFW paragraph as a whole, the amplifying rules of BOP, as well as the full section on independent characters (not just half a sentence); you are incorrect.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
...deleted non-relevent though amusingly presumptuous opinion...
They have simply stated that the unit is bound by the result. Prove that the IC is not a member of the unit for ALL rules purposes, as defined in the 40k rulebook.

This is simple: The IC in this scenario has to test seperately and is bound by the roll it makes for this test, not the one governing the rest of the unit. Ergo, it is not treated the same as the rest of the unit in this regard.

Got all that?

"This is simple: The IC in this scenario has to test seperately and is bound by the roll it makes for this test, not the one governing the rest of the unit"

Bolded your entirely unsupported leap of an assertion. The parens does NOT say he is not bound by the units roll, as that isnt how 5th edition worked for ICs during the Attacks part of close combat. The negative would be required to take the IC out of being bound by the units result (the IC must test separately and is not bound by the rest of the units result) is what is required. Of course, in 5th this would have been a nonsense rule, as the IC never had a "rest of unit" to worry about when this rule would activate.

Citation required to show tht "the unit is bound" excludes the IC from "unit". Note; the parens does not do this.

Page and paragraph as to where a new definition of unit is created

It wasnt presumptuous. I pointed out for each argument you made why it was rwrong. You then ignored that response, and carried on.

Greyknight - I am not ignoring that rule one jot. You are ignoring that the unit is composed of BoP+IC, and nothing excludes the IC from that definition of unit - unlike for VPs in Purge the Alien, for example.

Again: you are attempting to shoehorn a rule written for an entirely different editions combat mechanic into 6th and say it still operates. It doesnt. That is absolutely clear - the rule requires the IC, as a member of the unti for ALL RULES PURPOSES, to be bound by the result, while still being able to test separately. Now, the intention is probably clear - especially as they cannot use his Ld to test, even if he is the one activating it (GKGM with halberd, for example, warpspeed libby, etc) - however you are amusingly still arguing a rule despite having no written argument against it. You have nothing.

nosferatu1001 wrote:...once again deleted interesting, though amusingly unsubstantiated opinions regarding the veracy of my argument which fails to specifically address the content within them......you are attempting to shoehorn a rule written for an entirely different editions combat mechanic into 6th and say it still operates. It doesnt. That is absolutely clear - the rule requires the IC, as a member of the unti for ALL RULES PURPOSES, to be bound by the result, while still being able to test separately. Now, the intention is probably clear - especially as they cannot use his Ld to test, even if he is the one activating it (GKGM with halberd, for example, warpspeed libby, etc) - however you are still arguing a rule...

What part of "if the test is failed... ...then there is no additional effect." and "...independant characters must still roll (their test) seperately..." is tripping you up? These are actual rules, quoted from the actual codex and 6th edition main book. It's not the first time i've referenced either one, for that matter. They clearly (again, i cannot stress this enough) state that the IC must be treated independantly from the rest of the unit for this specific purpose in order for the rules to be fulfilled as written.

You cannot both have a IC be bound to the results of their own force activation 'and' bound to the results of an exclusive (and potentially opposite) one. To read such via your 'interpretation' is to invite sophistry like an non-psychic inquisitor having an activated force weapon solely by virtue of being a part of a unit with the contested rule when the initiative step came to activate 'their' weapons.

So, you have answered the points 1,2 & 3 above? Point it out please, I must have missed it.

Nothing has tripped me up. Given your inability to answer the specific points I raised, without simply repeating the rules I have already shown do not say what you repeatedly assert (as in, without any proof you are making claims that are unsupported in text) I will leave you to your condescension.

In short - provide a real counter. You have yet to do so.

Tell you what, i'll humour you and answer your 3 points even more clearly than i have up to this point. In return, please feel free to address why you think essentially ignoring the independant character exceptions in the BoP and NSF rules is RAW.

nosferatu wrote:1) The unit not being able to use the Ld of any attached ICs != the IC is not a member of the unit
2) ICs must test separately != the IC is not a member of the unit
3) if the test is failed.... != the IC is not a member of the unit

1) The IC is a normal member of the unit. It however uses it's own leadership for Psychic checks (as per the normal rules for Psykers) instead of that of the unit. in fact, the Leadership of the IC cannot be used for the Psychic checks required for BoP to function.
2) The IC is a normal member of the unit. It is however given a specific exception to test seperately instead of having to abide by the test of the unit.
2) The IC is a normal member of the unit. It however has to follow the results of it's own Psychic test even if they are different than the BoP units psychic test.

You cannot treat the IC as a normal member of the unit bound to all the rules that you keep insisting that the unit is bound by. Why? Because those very rules list a few exceptions that the IC must follow instead. You know what else lists exceptions that an IC must follow? The Independant character rules in general, but this phrase specifically: "While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters."

Neo, arguing with Nos is pointless. His goal is to find supposedly "broken" rules and beat posters over the head with them. In this case, Nos happens to be wrong, yet he will never admit it.

We've shown the correct sequence the NFW rule works through over the various unit compositions one can have with NFW activation. No need to feed the trolls at this point.

SJ

Jeffersonian - please fllow the tenets, helpfully stickied at the top of the forum. You have so far provided no argument, an d jst another personal attack. Reported.

Neo - So it is "humouring" to actually answer the points raised? Amusing.

One. So you agree that your initial point does NOT show that the IC is not a member of the unit? Because that was your contention.

Two - he still has to abide, as it just reminds you he must test separatelym, as a reminder that in 5th he was not a member of the unit. Which, of course, has changed in 6th. You continually ignore this, which is also highly amusing . Again, try to actually answer what the rules as actually WRITTEN say, not as how you are attempting to interpret them.

Three - again, you have made yet another logical leap. The rules do not say "It however has to follow the results of it's own Psychic test even if they are different than the BoP units psychic test. ", that is something you have simply made up.

Again, real written rules disagree with your assertions. You can keep on making ruleless assertions, with no rules backing, anbd I will keep pointing this out.

nosferatu1001 wrote:One. So you agree that your initial point does NOT show that the IC is not a member of the unit? Because that was your contention.

Now i may be getting senile in my old age or somesuch, so could you do me a favour? quote the post where i said that? (that the IC is not a member of the unit) Thanks.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Three - again, you have made yet another logical leap. The rules do not say "It however has to follow the results of it's own Psychic test even if they are different than the BoP units psychic test. ", that is something you have simply made up.

Really? So the IC does 'not' have to follow the results of it's own Psychic test? Or is what you are saying that it has to follow both somehow? Perhaps you can explain to me what the effects an activated 'and' unactivated force weapon has then? For example if the IC fails his test, but the BoP unit succeeds at theirs.

Furthermore, how do you reconcile this: "Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn special rule), the unit's special rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character, and the Independent Character's special rules are not conferred upon the unit. " with how you claim BoP works?

And Nos, while you're at it, answer this one (which I posted above; it was ignored).

The USR BoP (in the BRB) says: "A unit with this special rule counts as a Mastery Level 1 Psyker." Since the word "unit" is used, does that mean that my Level 2 Tzeentch Herald becomes part of the Level 1 BoP Horrors when he joins them, and thus unable to cast his own powers?

Neo - you stated that there was a new context where "unit" did not mean "BRB unit" but "those models with the BoP rule". You said it repeatedly, and then posted up "1)" as proof. I pointed out it did not actually state that.

"The IC is a member of the unit"- yes or no.

If YES then the IC is bound by the result of the test, because that is what the literal rule states.

Please answer the quesiton, and prove that "is bound by" means "apart from when I decide they arent"

Elric - off topic hence ignored. This is not the same situation, so desist or make a new thread (note that there is entirely different wording here)

codex GK tells you to test for force weapons seperatly for the unit and IC's attached
being part of a unit, does not make you THE unit,

or do you think that powers the psyker can cast only on himself (who in your opinion is THE unit) now affect unit en masse? because I would LOVE to reroll all hits, wounds, and saves when i get lucky on divination.

and that is exactly the kind of illegal shenanigains you support by, wrongly, equating being part of the unit to being THE unit.

besides codex GK overides BRB, and it tells you to take a seperate test for the IC and for the unit

end of story,

its very clear and obvious from codex GK that the IC and the unit test seperately, with neither test affecting the other.

the BRB changing from 5th to 6th doesnt change codex GK at all in this respect, and its just inventing confusion where none actually exists

I think the others have shown Nos to be interpreting only parts of the rules as a whole that fit with his argument. Neo and others have quoted broader and specific RAW that refute Nos's assertions. I go with Neo's RAW.. But that's just my $.02 (which aint worth much...)

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Elric - off topic hence ignored. This is not the same situation

Alright, here's a different (same?) example for you to wrestle with, using one of the rules in question--C:GK Brotherhood of Psykers.

The GK BoP: "A Grey Knight unit can use one psychic power each turn." Since the word "unit" is used, does the Libby who joins a GK Termie squad lose his Mastery Levels and thus become unable to cast his own powers?

nosferatu1001 wrote:


Elric - off topic hence ignored. This is not the same situation, so desist or make a new thread (note that there is entirely different wording here)

Actually Nosferatu, he is entirely ON-topic and his point is very relevant to this situation. If you read the entirety of the rules quoted for you in numerous posts above, you'll see that you are incorrect. I haven't seen you respond to any of those RAW quotes yet. You just keep reposting the same parsed excerpts from one line and treating it as if it is the rule in it's entirety...

This discussion seems to be pretty clear-cut to me, which is a bit surprising... The quotes provided from the relevant rules define this nicely... Thanks guys... I'll have to remember this one.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Neo - you stated that there was a new context where "unit" did not mean "BRB unit" but "those models with the BoP rule". You said it repeatedly, and then posted up "1)" as proof. I pointed out it did not actually state that.

"The IC is a member of the unit"- yes or no.

If YES then the IC is bound by the result of the test, because that is what the literal rule states.

Please answer the quesiton, and prove that "is bound by" means "apart from when I decide they arent"

I'm sorry, is there a question in there somewhere? Tell you what: I've answered enough of your questions for now i think, how about for a change of pace you address one of mine?

To wit: You are not allowed to use the IC's leadership for the BoPs psychic checks, and (regardless of how much you'd really like this to be out-dated reminder text) You also clearly have to roll seperately for psychic checks done on behalf of an IC. Why at this point do you presume that the IC would not be bound specifically to the results of that check (like the Psyker rules indicate) rather than the one done on behalf of the rest of the unit?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Jeffersonian - please fllow the tenets, helpfully stickied at the top of the forum. You have so far provided no argument, an d jst another personal attack. Reported.

So, you don't remember the following as posted on pg. 3 of this very thread?

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Who is condescending now, Nos?

The rules in question are:

Independent Character (pg. 39, BRB)

While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters.

Brotherhood of Psykers (pg. 21, GK Codex)

Units of Grey Knights are psykers and use their mental might to enhance their abilities or unleash psychic attacks.
A Grey Knight unit can use one psychic power each turn. The unit counts as a single psyker and follows all the normal rules for psykers, with the following clarifications:
• A Grey Knight unit uses the Leadership of its Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive), or the unit (if he is dead) for Psychic tests.
• If the Grey Knight unit suffers Perils of the Warp, or any attack the specifically targets psykers, it is resolved against the Justicar or Knight of the Flame (if he is alive), or against a random non-character model in the squad if the Justicar or Knight of the Flame is dead.

Psyker Mastery Levels (pg. 21, GK Codex)

Codex: Grey Knights uses Mastery Levels, shown in brackets after the Psyker special rule, to determine how many psychic powers a character can use each turn. For each Mastery Level a character has, he use one psychic power per turn.

Nemesis Force Weapons (pg. 54, GK Codex)

Force Weapons: All Nemesis force weapons are force weapons, as detailed in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook. Note that a unit of Grey Knights with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule needs to take only a single Psychic test to ‘activate’ all of its force weapons (although independent characters must still roll separately). If the test is passed, all wounds caused by the unit’s Nemesis force weapons that phase inflict instant death. If a unit is striking at different initiative orders, take the Psychic test to ‘activate’ the force weapons immediately after the first unsaved wounds are caused. Any further wounds are caused by the unit’s Nemesis force weapons that phase will be bound by the result of the Psychic test.

So, what about these rules causes an issue? The specific part where it states that is the unit has the Brotherhood of Psykers special rules, only one roll to activate is made, with the exception of Independent Characters which must make their own rolls. Also, there is the part the states that all unsaved wounds dealt after the activation are bound by the results of that roll.

Why is this an issue? Because Independent Characters are for all intents and purposes count as members of whatever unit they join for all unit rules. This means that ICs count as having the BoP special rule while they are joined to a BoP unit. Which would also means that ICs would be counted in with the other BoP models in their unit, if it wasn’t for their Psyker Mastery Level and the following Q and A:

6th edition GK FAQ 1.3

Q: If a unit with the Brotherhood of Psykers special rule, a unit of Inquisitorial Henchmen with one or more Psykers in it, or any other similar unit containing multiple Psykers is within 12” of a Culexus
Assassin, does the presence of that unit add +1 to the Animus Speculum’s Assault value or +1 for each Psychic model present in the unit? (p53)
A: Such a unit contributes +1 to the Animus Speculum’s assault value no matter how many Psykers it consist of, unless those Psykers have the Independent Character special rule in which case each such Psyker contributes a +1.

Per the precedent set above, Independent Characters, while counted as part of a unit for all rules purposes, stands on their own for psyker related rules. This creates an interesting interaction between the Nemesis Force Weapon rules, the Brotherhood of Psykers rules, and Mastery Level rule.

If we have a unit with the BoP special rules, say a squad of GKT, the NFW and BoP rules allow that unit to activate their NFW on a single Psychic test roll immediately after the first unsaved wound is caused. If we add a character with a Mastery Level to that squad, such as Justicar Thawn, Thawn would follow all rules for BoP with the exception that he has 2 Warp Charges and may use 2 powers each turn where the rest of his unit has 1 Warp Charge and can only use 1 power per turn. On their first unsaved wound caused, the entire unit can activate their NFW on a single Psychic test roll using Thawn’s Leadership, with all further unsaved wounds inflicting Instant Death.

Another example of a similar situation is Grand Master Mordrak and his Ghost Knights. As the Ghost Knights have BoP, and Mordrak counts as the unit’s upgrade character while also not being an Independent Character, Mordrak also falls under the BoP rule for NFW activation. Yet, if we add an IC to Thawn’s or Mordrak’s units, the BoP rule interaction with NFW activation becomes more complex. A Librarian added to Mordrak’s Ghost Knights or Thawn’s GKT squad would have to roll separately for their own NFW activation (per the NFW rules). Once the Libby’s NFW is active, any further wounds inflicted by the Libby with his NFW wound cause Instant Death just like the rest of the BoP unit.

Example: Librarian join a GKT squad with Thawn. Thawn comes equipped with a Halberd, while the Librarian has a Staff, and the GKT have Swords and Hammers. If Thawn scores an unsaved wound, he and his squad (including the Libby) immediately roll a Psychic test to activated their NFW. Thawn rolls for his squad per the BoP rule, while the Libby roles on his own per the BoP rule. Once the two rolls are completed, and if both pass, all of the wounds inflicted by the unit’s NFW with cause ID from that point on. Note that the Libby has yet to swing his Staff in combat, yet his NFW is already activated when his initiative step is reached. Any wounds he causes with his NFW that round are bound by the results of that activation roll.

Let’s say the Libby passed his check while Thawn failed his with a double 6. Thawn dies on initiative step 6, and his remaining GKT go without NFW activation, yet the Libby’s Staff is fully active when
initiative step 4 is reached. In this case, only the Libby’s inflicted unsaved wounds will ID, as the remaining GKT are bound by their failed activation roll.

Nos, Rigel, please inform the rest of us how you think the activation sequence works, with examples and citations. That is, only if you feel that I am wrong.

SJ

*edit for spacing, spelling, Dyslexia

I wound so much love to see you, Nos, cite any rule at all to support your argument. Because, you know, that would actually allow you to be following the forum tenets for once rather than trolling the other posters.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
We've shown the correct sequence the NFW rule works through over the various unit compositions one can have with NFW activation.

If there was a poll on this, I'd vote for you two. Seems pretty cut and dried by following the rules as written. The other side seems to want to delete arbitrary words for whatever reason which is a non-starter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
A parenthetical statement should be able to be removed from the sentence and not change the meaning whatsoever.

Parenthesis are used to clarify or offer further explanation. exa: "You can understand this (unless you can't read)." If we remove the parenthetical statement then the meaning is very much altered. Parenthesis simply interrupt the flow of the sentence; what's contained within isn't junk to simply be tossed away when you feel like it.

NEo - there was a question in there, and it is one you ducked answering

Is the IC a member of the unit?

Are members of the unit bound by the result of the test?

Once you have answered those, with actual straightforward Yes or No answers, we can perhaps move on.

Jeffersonian - I've cited rules plenty of times. You have ignored them. That doesnt mean I didnt cite them, just that you ignored them. Apparently your constant breaking of rule 1 doesnt count here.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
NEo - there was a question in there, and it is one you ducked answering

Is the IC a member of the unit?

Are members of the unit bound by the result of the test?

Once you have answered those, with actual straightforward Yes or No answers, we can perhaps move on.

Jeffersonian - I've cited rules plenty of times. You have ignored them. That doesnt mean I didnt cite them, just that you ignored them. Apparently your constant breaking of rule 1 doesnt count here.

Nos, you seem to insist on willful obtuseness... Nobody is saying the IC is not a part of the unit. But that is not the end of the ruleset at issue. There are conditions, allowances and restrictions to his "being part of the unit" as defined multiple times for you through direct rule quotes that do not conflict, but rather further clarify, the IC riole as a memeber of the unit... Being a part of the unit is not the end of the story here, it is just the preamble. Try opening the aperture of your focus to include rule exceptions, clarifications and expansions that are written into the BRB... They have all been quoted quite nicely for you...

Beast - another ruleless post.

I have answered all of the rules queries raised by the opposing side, and shown how they do not actually provide the exception the side belives they do.

There is no exception for ICs to NOT be bound; they are told they must test separately, but as a member of the unit they are STIL lbound by the result

If you disagree with my posts, be specific and argue the argument. Just spamming "me too", which is what your post devolves to, isnt helping matters.

I will not respond to you further in this thread, unless you make a rules argument. "Me too" is not a rules argument.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Beast - another ruleless post.

I have answered all of the rules queries raised by the opposing side, and shown how they do not actually provide the exception the side belives they do.

There is no exception for ICs to NOT be bound; they are told they must test separately, but as a member of the unit they are STIL lbound by the result

If you disagree with my posts, be specific and argue the argument. Just spamming "me too", which is what your post devolves to, isnt helping matters.

I will not respond to you further in this thread, unless you make a rules argument. "Me too" is not a rules argument.

Nos, it really is not possible for me to care any less if you respond to me or not. I was expressing my agreement with the specific rules quotes by others in their attempt to lay out for the greater DAKKA community how the RAW works here. Last time I checked, agreeing with a position didn't break any tenets of Dakka. cheers.

I did not say you broke any tenets, so please retract the sideways accusation that I did.

This thread is currently done, as no rules argument has so far proven that the IC is not bound by the result - does this cause issues? Yes. Does that actually matter in this discussion? No

(Neo - there is your answer. Whether the correct reading of a rule causes issues elsewhere isnt an argument against that reading. All it means is that GW wrote a poor ruleset - who knew)

I'm glad it is done for you Nos. Sorry you can't see the RAW though... Cheers.

Again: I have demonstrated understanding of the argument and counter argument, and have asked simple questions which have been ducked and avoided, or told they dont apply with any actual rules support.

Sorry you cant see the RAW.

This forum is for discussing rules, not trading barbs. Anyone who cannot offer an answer based on rules they cite in their post or who does not have a question about some rule should consider posting elsewhere on the site, such as Proposed Rules.

Edit- Discretion= better part of valor and all that... Thanks Manchu...

Independant Characters do indeed count as 'part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters". (BRB Pg 39)

Additionally, When an IC joins a unit "he might have different SR's from those of the unit. Unless specified in the rule itself the units SR's are not conferred upon the IC" (BRB Page 39)

The GK's in question are a unit with the "Brotherhood of Psychers" SR. This SR is not conferred upon the IC that has joined the unit.

The Nemesis Force Weapons are "force weapons as detailed in" BRB. In ADDITION to this, "A unit of GK with the BoP SR needs to take only a single psychic test (although IC's must still role separately)" .. when we continue on "If the test is passed" (which test? The BoP's test of course as we are now reading about the test required for a number of models in the BoP Unit, in which the IC has not had BoP conferred upon it) "all wounds caused by the units NFW that phase inflict instant death." .. "Any further wounds caused by the units NFW's that phase will be bound by the result of that Psychic test".

Which psychic test are they refering to? The BoP psychic test.
The BoP SR did not confer to the IC
The IC's separate (as outlined in the rule) test is his own, while the BoP's single test is there's.

RAW, The BoP is bound by it's test (as the NFW + BoP rule states), the IC is bound by it's own test (as it is not bound by the BoP SR and so anything beyond "all NFW's are force weapons" is irrelevant to the IC, further outlined by telling you that the IC tests separately).

""Any further wounds caused by the units NFW's that phase will be bound by the result of that Psychic test".
"

So, is the IC a member of the unit? If so, and he causes a wound with his NFW he is bound by the result of that test.

At no point am I claiming he has BoP, or has it conferred. I AM however saying he is a member of the unit (true) and there is a rule saying ALL members of the unit are bound by the test

So, again - in order to say the IC is not bound by this rule, you have to prove he is not a member of the unit. This was trivial in 5th edition (at the time of activation he wasnt) and is untrue in 6th.

This is due to a core ruels change. Shockingly enough such a significant rules change to a core mechanic such as combat was not catered for in a prior edition codex, and has exposed some holes in the rules

I am really unsure why some people are seemingly taking this so personally.

Nos, you keep coming back to the status of the IC as a member of the unit. He is. But he also has some exceptions that have been repeatedly quoted for you. In all seriousness, do you not understand what those exceptions mean? He is not bound by the test that the rest of the unit takes because he has an exception that says he is not bound by it. He has his own test that he takes and is bound by... There is nothing broken here. The rules from the various, relevant parts of the BRB and Codex are not in conflict and actually complement each other to create a workable rule...

Edit for fat fingers...

nosferatu1001 wrote:
""Any further wounds caused by the units NFW's that phase will be bound by the result of that Psychic test".
"

So, is the IC a member of the unit? If so, and he causes a wound with his NFW he is bound by the result of that test.

The IC is a member of "the unit" yes. The IC is not a member of "the BoP". The IC is bound by the result of his own test. "that psychic test" is still talking about the BoP.

At no point am I claiming he has BoP, or has it conferred. I AM however saying he is a member of the unit (true) and there is a rule saying ALL members of the unit are bound by the test

Again, the rule is discussing the members of the BoP and their test. In all cases the BoP members are referred to as "The unit" or "A unit of GK with BoP", regardless of other non BoP members in "the unit". When discussing BoP rules, they continue to reference "the unit" even though the rule is referring specifically to the GK's with BoP. Perhaps this is simply implied or inferred, but that is definatley how it reads to me.

So, again - in order to say the IC is not bound by this rule, you have to prove he is not a member of the unit. This was trivial in 5th edition (at the time of activation he wasnt) and is untrue in 6th.

This is due to a core ruels change. Shockingly enough such a significant rules change to a core mechanic such as combat was not catered for in a prior edition codex, and has exposed some holes in the rules

I am really unsure why some people are seemingly taking this so personally.

As am I. Your reading of the rules in question (and thus, your interpretation of the RAW) is different than others reading of the rules (and thus, their own intepretation of RAW) in this case. Either one COULD be correct, depending on how you read the rule. Without a FAQ, I would tend to go with the IC tests separately from the BoP members and each are bound by their own test as that is the way I read all rules involved.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Jeffersonian - I've cited rules plenty of times. You have ignored them. That doesnt mean I didnt cite them, just that you ignored them. Apparently your constant breaking of rule 1 doesnt count here.

Nos, I'd like to point out to you at this time that over the 6 pages so far of this thread, you have not once cited a single rule to support your claim that ICs with NFW are bound by a BoP unit's roll to activate. Not a single rule. Zero.

In fact the only rules you have cited with the FAQ Animus Q and A that I had previously cited, yet only to refute my point but not to support yours. Regil, on the other hand, cited pg. 54 only once, although he was wrong in his reference.

Please try again, sir.

SJ

nosferatu1001 wrote:(Neo - there is your answer. Whether the correct reading of a rule causes issues elsewhere isnt an argument against that reading. All it means is that GW wrote a poor ruleset - who knew)

one interpretation results in a host of related issues inherent in that interpretation. The other one does not.

That said: I still posit that the psyker rules, specifically: "...If the test is passed, the psychic power is manifested successfully and can be resolved... ...If the test is failed, the psychic power does not work, and nothing happens..." Indicates quite clearly that the psyker is bound to the results of his own leadership check, pass 'or' fail. Can you explain a method whereby the psyker can 'also' be bound to the BoP psychic check, even if both those checks are mutually exclusive? Can 'nothing happens' and 'the force weapon inflicts instant death' be fulfilled simultaniously?

Jeffersonian - again. you ignoring rules citations doesnt mean they do not exist. Good trolling by you as ever though, to claim otherwise.

Prove "the unit" does not contain the IC, with page and paragraph. An explicit statement.

Until someone can do that, this thread is done as far as rules, and I will take my leave as this is, literally, a waste of time.

And this question of mine has been ignored twice before. I'll just keep posting it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Elric - off topic hence ignored. This is not the same situation

The GK BoP: "A Grey Knight unit can use one psychic power each turn." Since the word "unit" is used, does the Libby who joins a GK Termie squad lose his Mastery Levels and thus become unable to cast his own powers?

being part of the unit for all purposes, (while still following IC rules)

is not the same as being THE unit, and doesnt override the fact that codex GK specifically states the unit and attached IC's test separately

It like what Manchu said was ignored. Just an observation - that is all.

I thought there was a redundancy rule that you could only repeat your position 5 times on a thread? (Forum Rules p.1)

Consider:
C:GK, p.21 BoP states "A Grey Knight unit can NEVER use the Leadership value of an independent character for Psychic tests". This is why there are separate Psychic test rolls and these rolls apply to the model, (BoP) or IC, that made them.