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.

I'm confused about an Eldar power I think is called Mind War that I was told can target a specific model in a group. For example I was told that a Hive Tyrant with Tyrant Guard can still be directly attacked by Mind War, ignoring the tyrant guard. In the Tyranid codex it says on pg 36 that a Hive Tyrant cannot be picked out as a separate character from the guard. Does the Eldar codex specifically say that Mind War overrides tyrant guard/hive tyrant combination? If it does not, how can the tyranid codex be wrong since it is clear that the hive tyrant with guard cannot be separately targeted? Why would the eldar codex supercede the tyranid codex? Can some experienced players please answer this or correct me if I have am mistaken about what Mind War does in the eldar codex?

The Tyrant Guard Shieldwall ability means that the Hive Tyrant cannot be singled out from his unit, despite being a Monstrous Creature. However, the Eldar Mind War, and a few other models/abilities (Scout Sergeant Tellion, Vindicare Assasin) can elect to target a single model, as opposed to a unit.

Minmax has it right. The sheildwall ability helps the tyrant with wounds alocation rules.

I see this with the Broodlord that has a retinue of genestealers and is listed as an independent character (so after the stealers are killed he could join another unit of stealers). It says nothing in the tyranid codex whether Broodlords can be singled out. In the main rulebook it covers this by saying that the independent character cannot be singled out. If other codices say they can get around this main rulebook rule and target the independent character that is fine with me. The difference is that in the tyranid codex it states clearly the Hive Tyrant with tyrant guard cannot be singled out from the unit, but you guys are saying that yes it can (which contradicts the codex, even though codex rules override the basic rulebook (which says nothing about this that I can find). Therefore, in other army codices like the Eldar, if it says Mind War can single out a character and overrides the rulebook, I can see the Broodlord being susceptible, however with the Hive Tyrant w/guard we are getting into a case of my army codex overrides your army codex. I would like know what the exact wording in the Eldar codex is. Or the wording for the Vindacre assassin. If they provided a specific example that the hive tyrant (or a similar unit with similar codex rules) could be singled out that would be different.

Or you could read what minmax wrote

The Nid codex says says the HT can't be singled out *for being a Monstrous Creature*. Mindwar does not single out Monstrous creatures, so it does not help.

The Nid Codex does *not* prevent singling out in all cases, just those due to being a TMC.

Casper, Shieldwall does not have any effect on the wound allocation rules. Actually, SW no longer has any effect at all.

I read the codex entry again and I see your point - cant be singled out even though a monstrous creature (but nothing says it cannot be singled out for others reasons).

coredump wrote:Actually, SW no longer has any effect at all.

Nonsense. Shieldwall does two things:
1) Prevents your opponent from shooting JUST the tyrant. (The BGB otherwise allows MC characters to be picked out from any attached units.)
2) Prevents the Tyrant from being targeted in HtH. Instead, powerfist hits always seem to hit the Guard.

Janthkin wrote:

coredump wrote:Actually, SW no longer has any effect at all.

Nonsense. Shieldwall does two things:
1) Prevents your opponent from shooting JUST the tyrant. (The BGB otherwise allows MC characters to be picked out from any attached units.)
2) Prevents the Tyrant from being targeted in HtH. Instead, powerfist hits always seem to hit the Guard.

The second is already covered by having a retinue.

Janthkin wrote:

coredump wrote:Actually, SW no longer has any effect at all.

Nonsense. Shieldwall does two things:
1) Prevents your opponent from shooting JUST the tyrant. (The BGB otherwise allows MC characters to be picked out from any attached units.)
2) Prevents the Tyrant from being targeted in HtH. Instead, powerfist hits always seem to hit the Guard.

Nonsense?
1) What rule would allow the HT to be picked out by shooting?
2) What rule would allow the HT to be picked out in CC?

coredump wrote:

Janthkin wrote:

coredump wrote:Actually, SW no longer has any effect at all.

Nonsense. Shieldwall does two things:
1) Prevents your opponent from shooting JUST the tyrant. (The BGB otherwise allows MC characters to be picked out from any attached units.)
2) Prevents the Tyrant from being targeted in HtH. Instead, powerfist hits always seem to hit the Guard.

Nonsense?
1) What rule would allow the HT to be picked out by shooting?
2) What rule would allow the HT to be picked out in CC?

MC cant join squads/form squads in 5ed, as I do believe it. So.. that. Even if it wasnt the intended point.

coredump wrote:

Janthkin wrote:

coredump wrote:Actually, SW no longer has any effect at all.

Nonsense. Shieldwall does two things:
1) Prevents your opponent from shooting JUST the tyrant. (The BGB otherwise allows MC characters to be picked out from any attached units.)
2) Prevents the Tyrant from being targeted in HtH. Instead, powerfist hits always seem to hit the Guard.

Nonsense?
1) What rule would allow the HT to be picked out by shooting?
2) What rule would allow the HT to be picked out in CC?

You're right; it'd be better to say that Shieldwall saves you arguments over the issue. Tyrants aren't ICs.

There is, however, a rule that allows MCs who are also ICs to be picked out separately by shooting (p. 49, second paragraph).

Razerous wrote:MC cant join squads/form squads in 5ed, as I do believe it. So.. that. Even if it wasnt the intended point.

While ICs are generally prohibited from joining a single MC (p. 48, para. 1), the rules do allow for ICs who are MCs to join units. That said, I can't think of any current MC ICs who are allowed to join units.

There is, however, a rule that allows MCs who are also ICs to be picked out separately by shooting (p. 49, second paragraph).

Cool, did not know about that rule. I looked in the MC section....but not in the IC section. Thanks.

Also another quick point, a tyrant w/ guard also gets cover saves...or so I have heard.

Lukus83 wrote:Also another quick point, a tyrant w/ guard also gets cover saves...or so I have heard.

So long as the Guard would get cover, yup. (It's not that the Tyrant gets cover, it's that the unit gets cover.

great...that's quite cool

Can't we just have an updated codex with each new edition instead of having 3 generations of codexes shoved into a single set of rules that don't work half the time?

No. That would not be profitable.

It is more important to update the basic rules than to update an individual codex.

I am *much* happier to be playing 5E, instead of being stuck playing 4E for another 2-3 years until they can finish the other codices.

But a new codex would be nice.

I love Mind War, I've been packing that to my last two games; my DA opponent sure doesn't like losing his power fist assault marine or his chaplain in turn 1!!

Thank you... Seriously, would it be that hard to update every codex in conjunction with a new edition? I can bet that with three months of writing and playtesting constantly the codexes and rulebook could be updated together. I just don't like having upgrades that are completely useless.

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:Thank you... Seriously, would it be that hard to update every codex in conjunction with a new edition? I can bet that with three months of writing and playtesting constantly the codexes and rulebook could be updated together. I just don't like having upgrades that are completely useless.

3 months? It would take an afternoon and a crate of Beer and Häagen-Dazs to just change the wording to clear things up to get it working as it did, with useless upgrades having common sence applied to them (for example thornback adding +1 to combat res and SW "No Matter the Odds" just being replaced with "Gets Stubborn while in CC") but alas it seems this Huge price is too much for GW

Tek wrote:But a new codex would be nice.

I love Mind War, I've been packing that to my last two games; my DA opponent sure doesn't like losing his power fist assault marine or his chaplain in turn 1!!

Then your DA opponent is silly for not paying for Psychic Hoods...

Mattlov wrote:

Tek wrote:
I love Mind War, I've been packing that to my last two games; my DA opponent sure doesn't like losing his power fist assault marine or his chaplain in turn 1!!

Then your DA opponent is silly for not paying for Psychic Hoods...

And the Chaplain is surely a heretic anyway if he fails all his Inv saves.

Haha! Too true!

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:Thank you... Seriously, would it be that hard to update every codex in conjunction with a new edition? I can bet that with three months of writing and playtesting constantly the codexes and rulebook could be updated together. I just don't like having upgrades that are completely useless.

Things Eldar players have lost, and should be pissed about in 5E (IMHO):

Fleet of Foot
Vectored Engines
Shuriken Cannons as defensive
HB Acrobatic

I can go on. I suppose I shouldn't grumble because now I get them for free, but I'm really naffed off that my oponent gets them all too!

Grunt_For_Christ wrote:Seriously, would it be that hard to update every codex in conjunction with a new edition?

GW put outa FAQ for each codex when 5th edition was released.

Except Chaos Daemons >: (

The biggest problem with the FAQ is that it still leaves a lot of questions unanswered. Its good that they do it, but they could regularly update it once new issues come up and are resolved.