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 was playing a game the other day with a very experienced 40K player, and we disagreed on the way Telion's stealth rule works. My understanding was that her conveyed it to his squad, so they diddn't have to buy camo cloaks, and my opponent said it only affected him. Which is it, and why?

A strict, RAW reading of "Stealth" indicates it gives it to the unit, however GAP would be that you still buy the cloaks.

For the sake of not many points it saves the argument, and fits the "when two options are equally allowable, take the least powerful" ruleset I try to use.

RaW is that Tellion affects the whole squad. If your opponent doesn't like it, don't play with him.

nosferatu1001 wrote:For the sake of not many points it saves the argument, and fits the "when two options are equally allowable, take the least powerful" ruleset I try to use.

? right ... but if you do buy cloaks you need to buy him one as well ... which he can't take ...

I play that if it say you can do something you can unless told otherwise. You can take cloaks for the rest of them, it is not required but will help if Telion is killed prematurely.

Tri wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:For the sake of not many points it saves the argument, and fits the "when two options are equally allowable, take the least powerful" ruleset I try to use.

? right ... but if you do buy cloaks you need to buy him one as well ... which he can't take ...

I play that if it say you can do something you can unless told otherwise. You can take cloaks for the rest of them, it is not required but will help if Telion is killed prematurely.

Well, actually, where does it say you cannot buy Tellion any extra equipment? I know in Old Codices it states "Special Characters may not buy any additional equipment from the armoury", but that's because they had armouries. Now you get whatever options are in your unit entry. For example, Calgar can buy his Termie Armour optionaly. Yes, Tellion himself has no additional options, but that does not matter, as the rule says "The squad may have camo cloaks +x pts per model". Tellion is still a model, so RaW, if you buy camo cloaks, you must buy ANOTHER one for Telion (even though it has no effect). There is NO RULE whatsoever stating he may not get extra equipment. I know "it doesn't say you cannot" is not a good argument, but I find no rule forbidding him getting the Camo Cloak when the rule is clear that the squad may have camo cloaks at +x points per model.

However, you are right in saying that the Stealth rule affects the whole squad. However, it is lost if he dies, thus making the additional cost worth it.

Hm how would be the best way to convince this opponent(and others) that telion's stealth affects the whole unit? it says the Unit benefits from the +1, but not every model in the unit has Stealth (unless you buy camo cloaks, which i agree would be 15 points, not 12)

also, gwar, i love your new avatar.

One model with stealth in a unit without stealth is just as ambiguous as one model with defensive grenades in a unit without defensive grenades. In both cases, the rules are written using the term 'unit', and we're left to guess and extrapolate the effect of a single model without any guidance in the rules on how to do so.

If you want to ensure that the scouts all get stealth, buy everyone but the sergeant cloaks and then replace the sergeant with Telion.

The thing is you can't do that. you don't buy the cloaks for the models, you buy it for the unit at the rate of 3 points per model. Telion is a model, so you pay for the cloak on telion.

Stealth clearly says the entire unit gets the +1 cover save. I would have no problem with my opponent playing this way.
Tellion, to me, still seems pretty pointless anyway.

Its often missed but I believe Telion can glance AV13

Yes he can with rending of course

Telion himself cannot be given equipment. The sergeant receives special equipment first, then Telion replaces him and any equipment you took on the sergeant is gone.

thebetter1 wrote:Telion himself cannot be given equipment. The sergeant receives special equipment first, then Telion replaces him and any equipment you took on the sergeant is gone.

I fail to see your point? The Camo Cloaks do not say "Each Model" or "The Sergeant" it says the squad. So the whole squad must buy them or none at all.

Irdiumstern wrote:Stealth clearly says the entire unit gets the +1 cover save. I would have no problem with my opponent playing this way.
Tellion, to me, still seems pretty pointless anyway.

I think the issue is that the whole unit doesn't have stealth, just telion does.

spartanghost wrote:

Irdiumstern wrote:Stealth clearly says the entire unit gets the +1 cover save. I would have no problem with my opponent playing this way.
Tellion, to me, still seems pretty pointless anyway.

I think the issue is that the whole unit doesn't have stealth, just telion does.

Ok work with me if one model has stealth what do you do? lets read the stealth rules "the unit adds +1 to its cover save". So what does that mean? Well you add +1 to the unit cover save simples.

I know that FAQs aren't "rules" per se, but many tournaments use them as guidelines. With that said, using the Adepticon INAT FAQ v2.2:

"SM.88A.01 – Q: If Telion is taken does his entire unit benefit from Stealth even if they don’t take Camo Cloaks?
A: No, only the models with Stealth actually benefit from it [clarification].
Ref: RB.76F.01"

Telion has Stealth so that when you buy all of your other marines Camo Cloaks, everyone has the Stealth rule. You don't spend +3 points on Telion for a camo cloak because he already has one.

Seems to be an issue of Occam's razor: All things being equal, the simplest answer is most often the correct one, or "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity."

Which is more simple? It doesn't give stealth and you buy camo-cloaks for everyone else to give the entire unit stealth.

Or, it does give stealth to everyone and you buy camo-cloaks as a back-up in case Telion gets killed, but since you must buy it for the unit, you have to buy Telion an extra one, even though he can't use it?

Seems pretty simple to me.

Thats just another example of the INAT FAQ disguising Rule Changes as "Clarifications"

puma713 wrote:I know that FAQs aren't "rules" per se, but many tournaments use them as guidelines. With that said, using the Adepticon INAT FAQ v2.2:

INAT is written by some very good player but is not in fact backed in any way by games workshop. If the tournament is using it that is fine but other wise it has nothing to do with me.

"SM.88A.01 – Q: If Telion is taken does his entire unit benefit from Stealth even if they don’t take Camo Cloaks?
A: No, only the models with Stealth actually benefit from it [clarification].
Ref: RB.76F.01"

Telion has Stealth so that when you buy all of your other marines Camo Cloaks, everyone has the Stealth rule. You don't spend +3 points on Telion for a camo cloak because he already has one.

No you must also by him a camo cloak even though it will do nothing as all models in the unit must take it.

Seems to be an issue of Occam's razor: All things being equal, the simplest answer is most often the correct one, or "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity."

Which is more simple? It doesn't give stealth and you buy camo-cloaks for everyone else to give the entire unit stealth.

Or, it does give stealth to everyone and you buy camo-cloaks as a back-up in case Telion gets killed, but since you must buy it for the unit, you have to buy Telion an extra one, even though he can't use it?

Seems pretty simple to me.

Me to. Stealth give +1 to the units cover save. One model has stealth the unit get +1 to its cover save. The End.

I agree that Telion should confer the save, but the people i'm trying to convey that to are very sen in their ways that since only telion has the rule, he is the only model in the unit that can benefit from it. Their main argument is that saying it affects the whole unit because it says "the unit" is a weak argument. They compared it to saying Shrike may not give a unit infiltrate because he doesnt sdtart the game in the unit with them.

spartanghost wrote:I agree that Telion should confer the save, but the people I'm trying to convey that to are very set in their ways that since only telion has the rule, he is the only model in the unit that can benefit from it. Their main argument is that saying it affects the whole unit because it says "the unit" is a weak argument. They compared it to saying Shrike may not give a unit infiltrate because he doesn't start the game in the unit with them.

Weak argument? Right lets start with shrike he indeed can't give infiltrate to a unit because once he has joined them its to late to infiltrate because he's on the board. What he can do though is out flank with a unit.

Telion is in the unit. -- can they argue with that .. no
Teilion has stealth. -- again no argument against that.
Stealth gives the unit +1 to its cover save. -- Any argument? What unit, means the model? Well if that's true unit would be named on the other USR
Feel no pain "the model", Furious charge "models with this skill" , Relentless "Relentless models can" -- No they seem to be good at calling individuals models. What Fleet, hit & run, move through cover, scouts and turbo-boosters all say unit?
The special rules marked with an asterisk (*) are lost by an independent character joining a unit that does not have the same special rule -- so those are lost then. What? but ? no if buts or maybe those are the rules live with them.

Tri wrote:

puma713 wrote:I know that FAQs aren't "rules" per se, but many tournaments use them as guidelines. With that said, using the Adepticon INAT FAQ v2.2:

INAT is written by some very good player but is not in fact backed in any way by games workshop. If the tournament is using it that is fine but other wise it has nothing to do with me.

Funny, Adepticon is a GW-sanctioned tournament and is, in every way, a part of the GW tournament circuit. As is the Adepticon INAT FAQ v2.2.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tri wrote:Me to. Stealth give +1 to the units cover save. One model has stealth the unit get +1 to its cover save. The End.

And it is interesting that there are other entries that say ". .has stealth (this ability is conferred to any unit he joins)." Why would they need to distinguish if everyone got the stealth rule? And, when something is conferred to other parts of the unit (see: Stubborn) it makes a note to say that the entire unit is affected.

For me, I will listen to Adepticon because, yes, GW does. And, because that makes the most rational sense.

But, if people start playing it that way, great. I can attach a Commissar with a camo-cloak to a combined squad of 50 Guardsman and give everyone stealth! Because that's RAI, isn't it? A single camo-cloak giving 50 men a +1 to their cover. Right. . .

It may or may not be RAI, but it is RAW.
Sounds like an interesting army build, infantry horde with Lord Commissars hiding the whole thing.
Now think about the irony of using commissars to make your army more stealthy (Catachan)

Irdiumstern wrote:It may or may not be RAI, but it is RAW.

That's debatable.

"All of the unit's cover saves are improved by +1"
RAW

Irdiumstern wrote:"All of the unit's cover saves are improved by +1"
RAW

Yeah, I get it. I have been reading the same rulebook as you. The only reason I argue (I haven't even been up against Telion yet) is because the Adepticon FAQ rules against it. And, at the tournaments I go to (and some of the GW-sanctioned tournaments) use this FAQ. The "debatable" part is the fact that RAW = RAI in many games. Even Gav Thorpe attributed the same notion in his blog (which Gwar reasons could be a forgery ).

puma713 wrote:
And it is interesting that there are other entries that say ". .has stealth (this ability is conferred to any unit he joins)." Why would they need to distinguish if everyone got the stealth rule? And, when something is conferred to other parts of the unit (see: Stubborn) it makes a note to say that the entire unit is affected.

Well with those other entry its obvious that the writer missed the fact their is no asterisk. If stealth only boosted the models cover save it would read "A model with stealth adds +1 to their cover save"

Funny, Adepticon is a GW-sanctioned tournament and is, in every way, a part of the GW tournament circuit. As is the Adepticon INAT FAQ v2.2.

Games workshop sanctioned? if you go to their website you'll note "Warhammer, Warhammer 40K, Warhammer 40000, Warhammer Fantasy & other terms ®, © Games Workshop, Ltd. No infringement of their copyright is intended. Click here for full details. " follow the link and "Games Workshop: General- This web site is completely unofficial and in no way endorsed by Games Workshop Limited." .... and from the games workshop site "Adepticon Council will again be organizing the largest community-led ..."

... Sanctioned does not mean it has any thing to do with GW other then the fact it uses GW models. Find me a GW run tournament, that uses the INAT FAQ.

Tri wrote:

puma713 wrote:Funny, Adepticon is a GW-sanctioned tournament and is, in every way, a part of the GW tournament circuit. As is the Adepticon INAT FAQ v2.2.

Games workshop sanctioned? if you go to their website you'll note "Warhammer, Warhammer 40K, Warhammer 40000, Warhammer Fantasy & other terms ®, © Games Workshop, Ltd. No infringement of their copyright is intended. Click here for full details. " follow the link and "Games Workshop: General- This web site is completely unofficial and in no way endorsed by Games Workshop Limited." .... and from the games workshop site "Adepticon Council will again be organizing the largest community-led ..."

... Sanctioned does not mean it has any thing to do with GW other then the fact it uses GW models. Find me a GW run tournament, that uses the INAT FAQ.

How do you figure that it doesn't have anything to do with GW other than the fact it uses their models when the Adepticon Tournament affects your standing in the GW circuit? If you don't go play at Adepticon (using the INAT FAQ), then you will lose points in the GW circuit standings (rather, just not gain points). So how does that not have anything to do with GW? Not only that, but the Adepticon has a GW Circuit Invitational. . .and it has nothing to do with GW?

puma713 wrote:

Tri wrote:

puma713 wrote:Funny, Adepticon is a GW-sanctioned tournament and is, in every way, a part of the GW tournament circuit. As is the Adepticon INAT FAQ v2.2.

Games workshop sanctioned? if you go to their website you'll note "Warhammer, Warhammer 40K, Warhammer 40000, Warhammer Fantasy & other terms ®, © Games Workshop, Ltd. No infringement of their copyright is intended. Click here for full details. " follow the link and "Games Workshop: General- This web site is completely unofficial and in no way endorsed by Games Workshop Limited." .... and from the games workshop site "Adepticon Council will again be organizing the largest community-led ..."

... Sanctioned does not mean it has any thing to do with GW other then the fact it uses GW models. Find me a GW run tournament, that uses the INAT FAQ.

How do you figure that it doesn't have anything to do with GW other than the fact it uses their models when the Adepticon Tournament affects your standing in the GW circuit? If you don't go play at Adepticon (using the INAT FAQ), then you will lose points in the GW circuit standings (rather, just not gain points). So how does that not have anything to do with GW?

You use the rules give at the event. At Adepticon that is the INAT FAQ. So what ... INAT FAQ is not used across the board, is not written by GW or used by GW.

Just because its part of the circuit doesn't mean GW has anything to do with how they run. IF the INAT FAQ was gospel then it would appear on the GW website. It doesn't because it isn't. If you want to play all your games to rules in the INAT FAQ that's fine but don't be surprised if its used in other places, people disagree with you.

Tri wrote:

puma713 wrote:

Tri wrote:

puma713 wrote:Funny, Adepticon is a GW-sanctioned tournament and is, in every way, a part of the GW tournament circuit. As is the Adepticon INAT FAQ v2.2.

Games workshop sanctioned? if you go to their website you'll note "Warhammer, Warhammer 40K, Warhammer 40000, Warhammer Fantasy & other terms ®, © Games Workshop, Ltd. No infringement of their copyright is intended. Click here for full details. " follow the link and "Games Workshop: General- This web site is completely unofficial and in no way endorsed by Games Workshop Limited." .... and from the games workshop site "Adepticon Council will again be organizing the largest community-led ..."

... Sanctioned does not mean it has any thing to do with GW other then the fact it uses GW models. Find me a GW run tournament, that uses the INAT FAQ.

How do you figure that it doesn't have anything to do with GW other than the fact it uses their models when the Adepticon Tournament affects your standing in the GW circuit? If you don't go play at Adepticon (using the INAT FAQ), then you will lose points in the GW circuit standings (rather, just not gain points). So how does that not have anything to do with GW?

You use the rules give at the event. At Adepticon that is the INAT FAQ. So what ... INAT FAQ is not used across the board, is not written by GW or used by GW.

Just because its part of the circuit doesn't mean GW has anything to do with how they run. IF the INAT FAQ was gospel then it would appear on the GW website. It doesn't because it isn't. If you want to play all your games to rules in the INAT FAQ that's fine but don't be surprised if its used in other places, people disagree with you.

No, I understand that. I don't use it as "gospel". I use it as a good guideline with how to resolve issues quickly. I was simply answering to the fact that you said the INAT FAQ has nothing to do with GW when you must use it, at least once, to get full points in the GW circuit, which has everything to do with GW. Therefore, it does have something to do with GW. So, if you roll up to Adepticon, expecting to use Telion to give everyone stealth and to help walk away with those tournament circuit points, you might be sorely disappointed.

What does the INAT FAQ have anything to do with the RaW?