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.

In the codex it says that all characters that can issue challanges must do so. For example Exalted Heroes and Sorcerers have this but chaos warriors and knights dont have it. So, does this only apply to units with the "eye of the gods" special rule?

I think you answered your own question. The special rule applies to the units with the special rule.

This was the way anyone with any logical rules reading read it, however the FAQ disagrees with you.

nosferatu1001 is correct. The FAQ indicates that all models that can issue challenges must do so. However the FAQ does state that a chaos model may refuse a challenge.

That's dumb. Is it worded so weird in the book that the question came up a bunch and got FAQ'd?

The FAQ pretty much says that everyone issues challenges all the time....too bad the FAQ isn't an errata.

It;s a horrifically badly worded rule. It is given to some entries only, thus indicating it is NOT army wide, however it then has words like "all chaos characters...." which indicates it is army wide.

I was firmly in the "no it does not require champs to challenge unless there is a warshrine" however apparently the FAQ writers thought the opposite.

Eye of the goods heh heh

The rule is actually fairly clear if read correctly. Any chaos model that can issue a challenge must do so(champions/characters).

The only thing the eye of the gods special rule does is give the character a roll on the table when he kills someone in a challenge/large target.

That's how I read it. Seemed pretty straightforward to me.

Except nothing states you should read the rule unless you have the rule in your unit entry. NOTHING about the rule text tells you it is something that applies to all models, in fact the entire way it is presented indicates it is only for specific models.

The rule is VERY badly worded - it really should have been:

Army special rule: all chaos characters (including champions) must challenge if able to do so.

EotG: chaos characters (or champions when a warshrine is present) who kill a target character in a challenge or kill a large target gain a roll on the table.

THis makes it very explicit, something which the rule does not do currently and is why they had to put it inthe FAQ.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Except nothing states you should read the rule unless you have the rule in your unit entry. NOTHING about the rule text tells you it is something that applies to all models, in fact the entire way it is presented indicates it is only for specific models.

The rule is VERY badly worded - it really should have been:

Army special rule: all chaos characters (including champions) must challenge if able to do so.

EotG: chaos characters (or champions when a warshrine is present) who kill a target character in a challenge or kill a large target gain a roll on the table.

THis makes it very explicit, something which the rule does not do currently and is why they had to put it inthe FAQ.

Are you implying "Chaos models that may issue challenges must do so whenever they are able." that this does not state all models? The only thing the faq does is restate what the army book says. The thing is when people are reading the eye of the gods special rule in the book they aren't realizing that the end of the small paragraph it has is the end of the special rule itself.

The paragraph break is supose to delinate between what the "eye of the gods" rule gives you and what applies to all models in general.
Poorly written but at this time everyone knows how it works if they have read the FAQ.

It really, really isn't clear, hence why it was FAQ'd

Can you state which part of it isn't clear? With reading comprehension you can easily see the faq states exactly the same thing the book does.

The part that suggest the entire section is part of the EotG rule, given that it has a seperate heading and follwos the same format as the Will of Chaos.

Given that the special rule "EotG" is only given to certain units, the standard implication of such is that the rule only applies to them as you have no permission to think otherwise.

They actually do a pretty good job of making the paragraph not a part of the eotg rule. First, it is a paragraph and spacing break which indicates that it is no longer a part of the rule. Next, they state in the first line "all chaos models" which means they are not talking about the eotg special rule but of an army wide rule. Lastly, they state another army wide rule for "roll on the following table when a character with the eotg special rule kills an enemy character". Why would they state someone with the eotg special rule under the eotg special rule? If it was a part of the actual section they wouldnt have to add that in and would instead only have to put when a character kills an enemy.

Stop trying to purposefully misread it, it is very clear.

Congratulations, someone pointed out that GW writes their rules badly. Most 5-year-olds, though, could have read the rule and correctly determined the intent of the rule without the FAQ. The FAQ (in this particular case) is for the people who live and die by RAW.

:rolleyes: nice ad hominem

If you did a search for the previous debate you would see the majority came down on the "only those with the rule" side.

It is still part of the same rule, as it does not have a seperate headfing. If you notice all discrete rules have their own headings.

You still avoid making any real argument. It appears as if you are purposefully trying to avoid the truth. You have nothing but a bunch of gossip to back up your claim. The faq is there for people like you who try and avoid the reality. In no world would someone write all chaos models and refer to only chaos models with the eye of the gods special rule and then write in the very next sentence characters with the eye of the gods special rule.

Kyz. Enough - have I denied the FAQ? No, I am simply explaining how people worked out what the rule said before the FAQ. If you would like to apologise for unwarranted personal attacks it would show you have a higher level of maturity than your posts so far suggest you possess. I don;t hold much hope however.

All special rules have a title, in all books. Seriously, go read them. The EotG special rule is split over 2 paragraphs, but so are:

Chaos Spawn: Lurching Horror - by your definition of "it's another rule as it has a seperate paragraph" this is now 2 rules

Giants: Their rule "Fall Over" is split over 7 paragraphs and a 4 item list. This is now 7 different rules by your "test"

This is from 5 seconds of looking at the same book.

So, if you wish to post further attacks, do so, I'll simply report them. Or you could actually think, read and understand how other people may read something.

Given a VAST amount of precedent ALL SPECIAL RULES HAVE TITLES and therefore a paragraph does not seperate them. This means that both paragraphs of "EotG" are a single rule, thus making it ambiguous. THIS is why there was a FAQ - the reasonable reading was, if they wanted a rule to affect ALL models there would have been somethiung more definite.

However, no doubt you will ignore this, claim I am "avoiding reality" or something else made up and whine until the mods close the thread. Bye.

Kyz: You're new here, so I'll be gentle.

First things first: Da Roolz

For the rest of you:

Now, when it comes to Eye of the Gods, there are no line breaks, so let's discount anything on that train of thought. Secondly, I thought the intent of the rule was rather clear the first time I read it. The reason they need to specify 'characters with the Eye of the Gods rule', is to denote that unit champions cannot benefit from the rule without a War Shrine, and certain other models (many of the special characters) cannot benefit at all. In fact, closer examination reveals that Daemon Princes ALSO do not have the Eye of the Gods rule.

Need I say more?

This is a topic that's been covered extensively, and one that got very nasty (which is to be expected...) on Warseer. It's clear from the intent of the rule, and from the FAQ response we got that everything that can, must challenge, but only characters can gain bonuses, whereas the other positive is only allowed on unit champions when, as Manfred says, the Warshrine is in play.

Yes, it's badly written, yes, you can take it either or, but this is how it's been lain down - there are plenty of ways to mitigate the downsides to the rule, but here is not the place to discuss the tactics involved.

(And it's good to see you here too Nosferatu!)

Yep, it got covered extensively, and we now know, through the FAQ, their intent.

It's just such a shame the book was sooooo badly written. Sigh.

Good to see you you lil rat Not long till Skaven, w00t!

Now, when it comes to Eye of the Gods, there are no line breaks, so let's discount anything on that train of thought. Secondly, I thought the intent of the rule was rather clear the first time I read it. The reason they need to specify 'characters with the Eye of the Gods rule', is to denote that unit champions cannot benefit from the rule without a War Shrine, and certain other models (many of the special characters) cannot benefit at all. In fact, closer examination reveals that Daemon Princes ALSO do not have the Eye of the Gods rule.

They wouldnt have to specify characters with the eye of the gods rule under the eye of the gods special rule though as champions do not have the rule(the warshrine has a clear rule in itself ignore that). Therefore, there is nothing to clear up the only thing this proves is my previous statement.



Edit: Please refrain from making insulting statements. --yakface

Kyz - I'd suggest, again, that you stop with the personal insults. It's a violation of the posting guidelines.

Secondly, as has already been pointed out to you, the previous thread(s?) on this had at least aan even split on this - mainly using the reasoning "why do you read the rule UNLESS you are told to do so?"

It;s like looking at war machine rules to determine how a stegadon works. Does a stegadon have 2like a war machine" or "war machine" in the rules? So why would you read the rules? Same situation here. You look at the rules for a DP - no eotg, so nothing in that rule and table affects him. Chaos Lord - EotG - therefore the rule applies.

However, given you have so far ignored any arguments that undermine your "points", and done nothing but insult posters who have tried to explain how people determined what the unclear rule said / meant, I don't hold out much hope.

Eye of the Gods, as written (even before 'clarification' by the FAQ) has two aspects:

1) All Chaos models that can issue a challenge must do so. Characters can not refuse challenges.

2) Characters (but not champions) with the Eye of the Gods rule can benefit from rolls on the Eye of the Gods table.

Personally, I think the rule in the book was written clearly enough. I allowed for some possible misreadings, but I 'got it' on my first read-through. I was disappointed, but I got it.

So, in summation, YES, they did have to specify 'characters with the Eye of the Gods special rule', because one aspect of the rule affects ALL Chaos models, and the second aspect only affects some.

Is this somewhat badly worded? Maybe. But if you take off your blinders and actually read what's in front of you, maybe you'll 'get it' too.

@Nosferatu: Read it again. A Daemon Prince still has to issue and accept challenges, as the rule rather clearly states ALL Chaos models. I think the reason they worded it the way they did was so that the didn't have to say, "...all Lords of Chaos, Exalted Heroes of Chaos, and Festus the Leechlord..." within the confines of the rule descriptor.

I think they could have avoided some confusion by doing it like this:

Seekers of Glory: All Chaos models that may issue challenges must do so. Such is their thirst for glory that Characters may not refuse challenges.

Eye of the Gods: Whenever a character with this rule...

And then have the War Shrine confer Eye of the Gods to unit champions.

If you look at the current wording of the rule in THIS fashion, it all makes more sense, methinks.

I think the big confusion comes from the force selection area where characters and such have it listed as a rule and other things don't. If they left that out and just had the blanket army rule at the start there would be no issue.

Exactly - it SHOULD have been written as 2 seperate rules, as there are 2 *seperate* rules that are included within it. By including it as a specific *unit* special rule and not army wide the "all chaos characters" part can only mean characters with this rule - if not you have to read and apply a rule that your special rules don't say you have.

We know what it should have been, and it was open to two readings - in fact the strict rule is you don't apply rules that you don't have access to, so the DP did not have to challenge for a while.

Thanks for the mature responses, it's made a change