Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, they action I am asked to perform is to choose which unit to join. That is the action.

Not (choosing) is not (an action)

Correct - not choosing is not an action.
But by choosing to join one you are also choosing not to join the other. Two actions for the price of one, so to speak.

The situation is entirely comparable. Dont ignore it.

It's not. It's not an either/or situation. It's not a "declare which service you are joining" with which being an implied singular.
It's not comparable. It's ignored.

Gravmyr wrote:
Is it possible to stay more then 2" away from a unit you are part of? Movement rules say no making it impossible to stay 2" away from unit A while joining unit B. The units still wouldn't be joined but would include one model with the benefits and drawbacks of both.

Except ICs are given explicit permission to move out of coherency. Therefore it is entirely "possible" to move out of the bubble.

Tactical_Genius wrote:
If you do not intend to join unit A, then:
BRB p.39 wrote:
If an Independent Character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must (where possible) remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase

(emphasis mine)
If you had taken the care to read my argument correctly, you would have noticed this is what happens:

-IC is attached to A.
-IC wants to join B
-Since it is already joined to A, it does not intend to join A, as you have stated.
-It does not intend to join to A, so "must remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the movement phase".

100% this.

Indisputable proof that you can not join or be joined to more than one unit at a time.

If you had taken the care to explain it more carefully, like you did there, it would have made sense.

Accepted, point conceded. Good argument

nosferatu1001 wrote:
If you had taken the care to explain it more carefully, like you did there, it would have made sense.

Accepted, point conceded. Good argument

Apologies for the lack of clarity.

You too

Tactical_Genius wrote:

Gravmyr wrote:
The counter to that is that he is already part of that unit therefor doesn't count that unit as it is not a unit he can join, he has already joined it.

Exactly. If he cannot join it, he cannot intend to join it either.

Tactical_Genius wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
TG - NO, I intend to *stay joined to* unit A I *intend* to *join* unit B.

Two different tenses.

Find me a rule talking about already being joined to a unit. Read page 39, note the context is a solo IC being near two units, NOT an IC already joined.

You are *completely* missing my point.

If you do not intend to join unit A, then:

BRB p.39 wrote:
If an Independent Character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must (where possible) remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase

(emphasis mine)
If you had taken the care to read my argument correctly, you would have noticed this is what happens:

-IC is attached to A.
-IC wants to join B
-Since it is already joined to A, it does not intend to join A, as you have stated.
-It does not intend to join to A, so "must remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the movement phase".

The IC by itself is it's own unit. It is necessarily permitted to end it's movement within 2 inches of it's own unit and unit A. It does so and joins unit A. Now it is for all rules purposes with unit A. The next turn comes around. The same allowance for its own unit applies now when it ends it's move 2 inches from unit B.

Point is, I don't see that the IC is within 2 inches of more units than it was in the initial joining to unit A. Obviously it's own unit is disregarded towards the number of units it can end near or it would never be able to join a unit mid game.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Abandon wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Gwyidion wrote:
There is no support for that exclusion in the rules, though - you're injecting it.

I've done no such thing.
By definition if you choose to join one thing you have also chosen not to join another.

Choosing not to join and leaving are not the same thing.

If you have chosen not to join, how can you claim to be joined?

Please explain.

Because you were are already a member of the unit. If you haven't noticed, specific action is required to leave the unit and the IC per RAW is a member until it preforms said action. The non-action of not joining is not stated to cause it to become detached. It is therefore still a member of the unit regardless of which unit the IC chooses to join in future movement phases.

Icculus wrote:I'm going to get to the bottom of this, because this is the silliest argument i've seen on here in awhile. I'll have to check my rulebook when i get home for some direct pages.

"the player must declare which unit it is joining"

So the "it" in that sentence is referring to the IC. in the description of the IC it says that it is a member of the unit for all rules purposes. Which means if the IC was joined to two units, then the two units would be effectively one. So if you can find anywhere in the book that allows two units to join, then you go right ahead.

Never claimed RAI or HYWPI. This is a pure RAW absurdity debate that is effectively meaningless as far as how the game will (should) be played and should only be taken as a lessen in how ridiculous pure RAW can be.

To be clear, the claim is that the two units would still be separate with one shared member... It still hurts my head.

 Abandon wrote:
The IC by itself is it's own unit. It is necessarily permitted to end it's movement within 2 inches of it's own unit and unit A. It does so and joins unit A. Now it is for all rules purposes with unit A. The next turn comes around. The same allowance for its own unit applies now when it ends it's move 2 inches from unit B.

Point is, I don't see that the IC is within 2 inches of more units than it was in the initial joining to unit A. Obviously it's own unit is disregarded towards the number of units it can end near or it would never be able to join a unit mid game.

Pure RAW is what Tactical posted.

Nothing more or less.

The rules about ending within 2 inches are written to give the IC a choice between two units that he is close to. Its own unit(The unit is is joined to) is not disregarded, unless you have a rules citation, but I know you are not going to find one.

It can join a unit mid game, because the IC, when moving into coherency with a unit to join it, is not within 2 inches of a different unit. The fact that he is a unit does not matter because the IC rule allows him to join other units, but does not allow him to join other units when already attached to a unit.

You can not be a member of 2 units because the rules do not allow such.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
The IC by itself is it's own unit. It is necessarily permitted to end it's movement within 2 inches of it's own unit and unit A. It does so and joins unit A. Now it is for all rules purposes with unit A. The next turn comes around. The same allowance for its own unit applies now when it ends it's move 2 inches from unit B.

Point is, I don't see that the IC is within 2 inches of more units than it was in the initial joining to unit A. Obviously it's own unit is disregarded towards the number of units it can end near or it would never be able to join a unit mid game.

Pure RAW is what Tactical posted.

Nothing more or less.

The rules about ending within 2 inches are written to give the IC a choice between two units that he is close to. Its own unit(The unit is is joined to) is not disregarded, unless you have a rules citation, but I know you are not going to find one.

It can join a unit mid game, because the IC, when moving into coherency with a unit to join it, is not within 2 inches of a different unit. The fact that he is a unit does not matter because the IC rule allows him to join other units, but does not allow him to join other units when already attached to a unit.

You can not be a member of 2 units because the rules do not allow such.

Except that the IC itself is it own when unattached. Necessarily it must end its move within 2 inches of its own unit as well as another unit in order to join a unit at all. Your interpretation denies this.

Also of note. If several ICs are joined to a unit, per your interpretation they'd still have to stay 2 " away from each other, which would make those multi-IC units very difficult to keep together.

Let me fix your argument for you:

The rules about ending within 2 inches are written to give the IC a choice between two units that he is close to. Its own unit(itself) is not disregarded, unless you have a rules citation, but I know you are not going to find one.

It can't join a unit mid game, because the IC, when moving into coherency with a unit to join it, is within 2 inches of a different unit(its own unit). The fact that he is a unit does matter because while the IC rule allows him to join other units, it does not aloow him within 2 inches of his own unit and another unit at the same time.

This would be the correct conclusion of your interpretation of "If an Independent Character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must (where possible) remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase"

It seems to me however, quite obvious the ICs own unit is disregarded for this purpose.

 Abandon wrote:
Except that the IC itself is it own when unattached. Necessarily it must end its move within 2 inches of its own unit as well as another unit in order to join a unit at all. Your interpretation denies this.

Not at all.

The IC is its own, but it may never be within coherency of a squadmate so it does not matter that he is his own unit. He has rules that allow him to join a unit...

Also of note. If several ICs are joined to a unit, per your interpretation they'd still have to stay 2 " away from each other, which would make those multi-IC units very difficult to keep together.

Again the IC's become a normal member of the unit, no issues.

Let me fix your argument for you:

The rules about ending within 2 inches are written to give the IC a choice between two units that he is close to. Its own unit(itself) is not disregarded, unless you have a rules citation, but I know you are not going to find one.

It can't join a unit mid game, because the IC, when moving into coherency with a unit to join it, is within 2 inches of a different unit(its own unit). The fact that he is a unit does matter because while the IC rule allows him to join other units, it does not aloow him within 2 inches of his own unit and another unit at the same time.

This would be the correct conclusion of your interpretation of "If an Independent Character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must (where possible) remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase"

It seems to me however, quite obvious the ICs own unit is disregarded for this purpose.

The Context of the IC rules are talking about any units other than himself (Because he may never join his unit, as he starts as his own unit and may never leave his own unit because he can never move out of coherency with himself). Clearly you must have gotten that from the IC rules right?

Well, looks like the no-joining multiple units argument has it!

Rats, and I wanted my 4 Jugger Heralds to be able to join 60 Flesh Hounds and multi-charge every thing in the opponent's army at once!

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
Except that the IC itself is it own when unattached. Necessarily it must end its move within 2 inches of its own unit as well as another unit in order to join a unit at all. Your interpretation denies this.

Not at all.

The IC is its own, but it may never be within coherency of a squadmate so it does not matter that he is his own unit. He has rules that allow him to join a unit...

Why can't he be in coherency with a squad-mate? Not exactly sure wht you trying to say here but it sounds like you arbitrarily trying to draw a distinction between when the IC is a member of unit IC(itself) and when it is a member of unit A. The rule makes no distinction between when the ICs unit is unit IC and when the ICs unit is unit A. As no difference is mentioned in the rules why would you think the rules would treat them differently? You must find permission to do so.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Also of note. If several ICs are joined to a unit, per your interpretation they'd still have to stay 2 " away from each other, which would make those multi-IC units very difficult to keep together.

Again the IC's become a normal member of the unit, no issues.

According to you an ICs squad-mates count as a unit for the 'can't end within 2 inches of more than one unit' rule.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Let me fix your argument for you:

The rules about ending within 2 inches are written to give the IC a choice between two units that he is close to. Its own unit(itself) is not disregarded, unless you have a rules citation, but I know you are not going to find one.

It can't join a unit mid game, because the IC, when moving into coherency with a unit to join it, is within 2 inches of a different unit(its own unit). The fact that he is a unit does matter because while the IC rule allows him to join other units, it does not aloow him within 2 inches of his own unit and another unit at the same time.

This would be the correct conclusion of your interpretation of "If an Independent Character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must (where possible) remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase"

It seems to me however, quite obvious the ICs own unit is disregarded for this purpose.

The Context of the IC rules are talking about any units other than himself (Because he may never join his unit, as he starts as his own unit and may never leave his own unit because he can never move out of coherency with himself). Clearly you must have gotten that from the IC rules right?

When an IC is with a unit, that is its unit. When an IC is by itself, that is its unit. Your trying to draw a distinction that is not noted to effect the rules for joining units.

 Abandon wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
Except that the IC itself is it own when unattached. Necessarily it must end its move within 2 inches of its own unit as well as another unit in order to join a unit at all. Your interpretation denies this.

Not at all.

The IC is its own, but it may never be within coherency of a squadmate so it does not matter that he is his own unit. He has rules that allow him to join a unit...

Why can't he be in coherency with a squad-mate?

Because he does not have anyone else in his unit so he has no squadmates...

Not exactly sure wht you trying to say here but it sounds like you arbitrarily trying to draw a distinction between when the IC is a member of unit IC(itself) and when it is a member of unit A. The rule makes no distinction between when the ICs unit is unit IC and when the ICs unit is unit A. As no difference is mentioned in the rules why would you think the rules would treat them differently? You must find permission to do so.

The rules draw the distinction, he he joins a unit and becomes a normal member of that unit...

According to you an ICs squad-mates count as a unit for the 'can't end within 2 inches of more than one unit' rule..

The IC rules, in context tell us that if he joins a unit he becomes a normal member of that unit. at the end of the movement phase if he is within 2 inches of a terminator squad, and within 2 inches of the tac squad he is within 2 inches of two different units. One he is joined to, and one he is not. this is, in context, whatt he rules are sayting.

 Abandon wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

The Context of the IC rules are talking about any units other than himself (Because he may never join his unit, as he starts as his own unit and may never leave his own unit because he can never move out of coherency with himself). Clearly you must have gotten that from the IC rules right?

When an IC is with a unit, that is its unit. When an IC is by itself, that is its unit. Your trying to draw a distinction that is not noted to effect the rules for joining units.

No, that is not its unit, that is the unit he is is joined to, he becomes a member of that unit, they do not become a member of the IC's unit...

Please do not ignore the context this time.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
Except that the IC itself is it own when unattached. Necessarily it must end its move within 2 inches of its own unit as well as another unit in order to join a unit at all. Your interpretation denies this.

Not at all.

The IC is its own, but it may never be within coherency of a squadmate so it does not matter that he is his own unit. He has rules that allow him to join a unit...

Why can't he be in coherency with a squad-mate?

Because he does not have anyone else in his unit so he has no squadmates...

I think you are confused. When an IC is with a unit, that is indeed its unit, it has no unit of its own any more. So it's either part of its own unit (member of unit IC, albeit the only part) or its part of unit X.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Not exactly sure wht you trying to say here but it sounds like you arbitrarily trying to draw a distinction between when the IC is a member of unit IC(itself) and when it is a member of unit A. The rule makes no distinction between when the ICs unit is unit IC and when the ICs unit is unit A. As no difference is mentioned in the rules why would you think the rules would treat them differently? You must find permission to do so.

The rules draw the distinction, he he joins a unit and becomes a normal member of that unit...

No, it really doesn't. The IC rules for joining unit never draw a distinction between when the IC is its own unit or when it's part of a different unit. Either way, the IC is always a member of a unit.

 DeathReaper wrote:

According to you an ICs squad-mates count as a unit for the 'can't end within 2 inches of more than one unit' rule..

The IC rules, in context tell us that if he joins a unit he becomes a normal member of that unit. at the end of the movement phase if he is within 2 inches of a terminator squad, and within 2 inches of the tac squad he is within 2 inches of two different units. One he is joined to, and one he is not. this is, in context, whatt he rules are sayting.

 Abandon wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

The Context of the IC rules are talking about any units other than himself (Because he may never join his unit, as he starts as his own unit and may never leave his own unit because he can never move out of coherency with himself). Clearly you must have gotten that from the IC rules right?

When an IC is with a unit, that is its unit. When an IC is by itself, that is its unit. Your trying to draw a distinction that is not noted to effect the rules for joining units.

No, that is not its unit, that is the unit he is is joined to, he becomes a member of that unit, they do not become a member of the IC's unit...

Please do not ignore the context this time.

Really? Does it say units other than itself? No, it just says units. Also, he can join his own unit as silly as that sounds and per your interpretation must intend to do so if he moves to within two inches of himself. Hmmm, still looks like you must be incorrect and the ICs unit is discounted concerning how many units it can end its movement within two inches of.

 Abandon wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Abandon wrote:
Except that the IC itself is it own when unattached. Necessarily it must end its move within 2 inches of its own unit as well as another unit in order to join a unit at all. Your interpretation denies this.

Not at all.

The IC is its own, but it may never be within coherency of a squadmate so it does not matter that he is his own unit. He has rules that allow him to join a unit...

Why can't he be in coherency with a squad-mate?

Because he does not have anyone else in his unit so he has no squadmates...

I think you are confused. When an IC is with a unit, that is indeed its unit, it has no unit of its own any more. So it's either part of its own unit (member of unit IC, albeit the only part) or its part of unit X.

Indeed, I thought we were talking about an IC on his own, as I responded to the underlined...

No, it really doesn't. The IC rules for joining unit never draw a distinction between when the IC is its own unit or when it's part of a different unit. Either way, the IC is always a member of a unit.

Not sure I see your point here.

Really? Does it say units other than itself? No, it just says units. Also, he can join his own unit as silly as that sounds and per your interpretation must intend to do so if he moves to within two inches of himself. Hmmm, still looks like you must be incorrect and the ICs unit is discounted concerning how many units it can end its movement within two inches of.

Do not ignore context. If you keep ignoring context there can be no debate.

 DeathReaper wrote:

No, it really doesn't. The IC rules for joining unit never draw a distinction between when the IC is its own unit or when it's part of a different unit. Either way, the IC is always a member of a unit.

Not sure I see your point here.

Point is, An IC is always a member of a unit. When it says the IC 'can't move tow within 2 inches of a unit it doers not intent to join' its own unit is necessarily discounted for it to ba able to join any unit at all.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Really? Does it say units other than itself? No, it just says units. Also, he can join his own unit as silly as that sounds and per your interpretation must intend to do so if he moves to within two inches of himself. Hmmm, still looks like you must be incorrect and the ICs unit is discounted concerning how many units it can end its movement within two inches of.

Do not ignore context. If you keep ignoring context there can be no debate.

Its simply a matter of me not seeing any context that indicates the ICs unit, when by itself, does not count for the rule. It seems to me the ICs unit either counts or it does not and I can't find one word in the rule that distinguishes between if it's alone or not.

In the context the IC never counts himself for the purposes of being within 2 inches of two different units, because if it is just 1 unit and 1 IC trying to join that unit, that is not two different units that he is within 2 inches of. In that case he (His unit) is only within 2 inches of a single unit.

BRB p.39 wrote:
If an Independent Character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must (where possible) remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the whole point here that when the IC is already joined to Unit A he does not need to choose unit A to join because he is already in it and instead chooses to join unit B.

If so then the IC has no intention to join unit A (as he is already a part of unit A) and does not need to remain further then 2' away from unit A. And the situation still applies.

Further I can name of the top of my head 1 way in which these units benefit from having a single character attached as they can still shoot. Namely if the attached character is a cadre fireblade with two units of fire warriors, who has succesfully passed his morale test for split fire. As he is now able to fire independently of the unit he joint. Allowing both units of fire warriors to shoot as the independant character may already target a unit other then them. And presumably allowing both units of fire warriors to benefit from the supporting volley rule for an extra shot.

 DeathReaper wrote:
In the context the IC never counts himself for the purposes of being within 2 inches of two different units, because if it is just 1 unit and 1 IC trying to join that unit, that is not two different units that he is within 2 inches of. In that case he (His unit) is only within 2 inches of a single unit.

Yes, that is the context I do not find here.

 Abandon wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
In the context the IC never counts himself for the purposes of being within 2 inches of two different units, because if it is just 1 unit and 1 IC trying to join that unit, that is not two different units that he is within 2 inches of. In that case he (His unit) is only within 2 inches of a single unit.

Yes, that is the context I do not find here.

Then there is nothing else I can help you with as you are missing the context.

I think you, DR, may be missing part of the context. What is the reason for staying 2" away from a unit? Per the IC rules it is to show that he is not a member of that unit. If you make it clear that he is not leaving the first unit and is joining the second you are meeting both the RAW as well as the context for staying 2" away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What it boils down to is you do not have permission to move the IC 2" away from unit A unless you are leaving it. As you are not leaving it you do not have permission to move him 2" away, meeting the where possible cause of staying 2" away. You can then have him join unit B. The context of moving him away from the first unit would have to be to show he was not a member of said unit, except that he is. As long as you are making this clear you are meeting what is set fourth in the rules. Is it RAI? I severely doubt it but again it's one of those times that something came up that GW thought it had made clear.

Gravmyr wrote:
As you are not leaving it you do not have permission to move him 2" away, meeting the where possible cause of staying 2" away.

You are looking at this wrong.
"Must" means that he "must" move 2" away. The fact that you don't want him to leave does not meet the "where possible" clause, as it is possible to move away, as you have blanket permission to leave whenever you like in the movement phase.

Please cite permission to move him away without intent of him leaving the unit for him to move 2" away. The IC rules do not give you permission to do so therefor without the intent of him leaving the unit he cannot, per unit coherency rules, move 2" away. You are right I have permission to leave the unit but without the intent to leave I do not have permission therefor it is not in fact possible to do so. Must is included but then follows it up with where possible which modifies the must to when you have the ability to do so. I still have yet to see anyone address the fact that without my intent to leave that I do not have permission and therefor the ability to move more then 2" away from the first unit.

I still think it's silly to do this as you have just basically locked two units in place and subjected the IC to wounds from both units. Not to mention the list of other reasons which has been brought forth as to the limits it then puts on the model. He can't fire or use any ability that would require him to fire, he can't move and there for neither squad can move out of coherency nor charge. There are others of course but the minor gains you would install are far outweighed by the draw backs.

Agreed Gravmyr, at no point are we arguing that we want to play it this way, Nor that the rule intended to let us do it. Its just that as the wording currently stands, we DO have the abillity to do it. Yes this is rules lawyering. That term entirely came about from the similair situation that lawyers look for these kind of loopholes on a daily basis to protect the intrests of their clients. That practice to only exists because the laws as written are binding and when a lawyer presents a judge with such a loophole the judge is often forced to admit this loophole and only afterwards can steps be taken to amend it. You can gloss over the fact that the rules allow this and say that they were not intended to allow it. You can then read the rule as you feel it was intended. However intention is always something that you subjectively read based on your own previous experience. Intentions have no value when the cold hard letter of the law reads otherwise. As pointed out before, YMDC is not solely intended to find a way to make the rules work, its to point out glaring errors so that when we have established something doesn't work as it should we can THEN with the knowledge that the rule as written is in error look for a way to fix it at the game table with our opponents. The point is that if we agree that this problem exists within the rules we then have solid evidence to point out the error when this dicussion actually comes up in play at the table. No one who has argued that the rules indeed allow this action has said that they would play it that way because they have all made it clear they to feel it is a violation of the spirit of the rules. However denying the problem exists infact only prolonges a discussion that could have ended on page one with a firm, yes the rule is in error but playing it this way causes multiple other actions for the unit to grind to a halt. (Movement, assaulting, wound allocation, and in most cases shooting.) And thus provide a clear and concise refrence point to which we can say, look at this discussion, we must house rule this whenever we are actually at the table with an opponent. Denying the way the rules are written to argue the intentions or the way you want to play it is only convulting the point of the thread. Which is to indentify a problem and either resolve it within the rules, or mark the problem as requireing attention when encountered in play. No matter how much we argue we cannot change the rules as they are written, so trying to get people to agree to how it should be played rather then how the rules allow it to be played adds pointless baggage to the thread.

Tactical_Genius wrote:

Gravmyr wrote:
As you are not leaving it you do not have permission to move him 2" away, meeting the where possible cause of staying 2" away.

You are looking at this wrong.
"Must" means that he "must" move 2" away. The fact that you don't want him to leave does not meet the "where possible" clause, as it is possible to move away, as you have blanket permission to leave whenever you like in the movement phase.

As I've pointed out, even if the IC leaves the unit he is with, it is still a member of its own unit. Even though it is the only member the rule draws no distinction between the two scenarios. Per the wording, there is no difference between when the IC is a member of unit(IC) and when the IC is a member of unit(A) for intents and purposes of joining unit B. It's always in a unit. Saying it has to leave the unit it's in to move within 2 inches of another is an impossible requirement. That is why I say the ICs unit, either way, is necessarily discounted for this purpose. If the rule did draw some kind of distinction between when the IC is by itself and when it is with a larger unit, this thread would likely not exist.

@NickOnwezen: Well said.