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.

Alright well the reason that the ethereal rule does not fit is because of how it is cleverly worded. The sentence "If a friendly Ethereal is killed then every unit of Tau on the Battlefield (not Kroot, Vespids or Drones) must take a Morale check..." does not in any way say that kroot, vespid or drones are not actually tau units, it is simply excluding them from this rule. If an enemy rule were to have say "preferred enemy" and elected tau as their "" than they would not exclude drones, vespid, kroot or any auxillary for that matter. They would gain that benefit over the entire army...

sephiroth00055 wrote:I am sorry, but the caste that they belong to has no direct coralation with them being tau models, or with the "Ork Fighter" RULE at all. That sentence is part of the background for the rule. It has nothing to do with the rule itself.

I beleive that you are mistaken when you say that the translations in each entry are only for the background. I beleive, the fact that they use the word tau in the entry makes them a tau model. There is no other background information in these entries. What makes you think that these would be the only one? I beleive that they are there for this reason exactly.

As you have stated this issue will not be solved until an errata comes out. As I see no compelling evidence that they do not benefit from the rule, I will play as if they do.

And by your same logic I can argue that there is no compelling evidence that they do benefit from the rule. I will challenge your decision to a roll off.

Those are excellent points gameandwatch. I think that it has been well proven that the drones are Tau models and benefit from the "Ork fighters" rule.

sephiroth00055 wrote:Those are excellent points gameandwatch. I think that it has been well proven that the drones are Tau models and benefit from the "Ork fighters" rule.

Why are we even taking into consideration other special rules that don't even apply to the situation? You can't "prove" anything when it is in debate, no matter how hard you wish it to be. But regardless, you can ignore the argument posts and be on your merry way, so whats the point.

Your post is IMHO trolling.

sephiroth00055 wrote:Those are excellent points gameandwatch. I think that it has been well proven that the drones are Tau models and benefit from the "Ork fighters" rule.

Excuse me? The points me and AffliKtion have kind of made your statement there a downright lie.

You have an opinion and I respect that. As I said I feel both Rules wise and Fluff wise they shouldn't get it, and I've brought up evidence to support it, but to just ignore our arguments is downright rude.

As I've said it is a Grey Area, and needs to be clarified by GW.

Until then let the mudslinging resume!

The Bringer wrote:I would say that only Tau (as in the actualy alien) get the special rule because it says, "Fire Caste warriors of the Farsight Enclave train heavily in hand to hand combat...."

This would imply that only the Tau get the special rule, not drones.

Well, now we're getting into fluff discussions. I have not read anything in the Codex to state that Drones are not part of the Fire Caste. They're in the trenches with the Firewarriors just like any other combatant, and can be a complete fighting unit by themselves. To say they would not get the benefit of a special rule because they are "robots" is not conclusive. Farsight could have instituted new HtH programming to Drones to parallel his Firewarriors extra HtH training. Simply because they are machines does not mean they cannot improve.

Drones are innocent of being Tau models until proven guilty. Outside of people's opinions and interpretations, the only RAW evidence provided for the claim that Drones are not Tau models are the "Price of Failure" special rules (and even then, as gameandwatch has said, at no where in that rule does it say they are not Tau Models, they are just exceptions). Even that evidence has been called into question by another special character's rule, Shadowsun's "Command Link Drone." Because there is a contradiction between rulings doesn't mean that Drones are "guilty" and forfeit their "Tau modelness." It means they walk away freely until new evidence surfaces (such as an errata).

However, until such time as said evidence arises, Drones do not lose their ability to be called models (tie goes to the defender). If this were a trial, the judge would throw out the case against the defendant (Drones) due to lack of sufficient evidence.

Everyone is, of course, entitled to their opinions. However, thinking you are right does not make you so, and that applies to everyone (including myself). BUT, as any level headed, stroller by can read, there is very little RAW evidence to claim that Drones are not Tau Models. What evidence there is has been contradicted. Mistrial.

synchronicity wrote:

The Bringer wrote:I would say that only Tau (as in the actualy alien) get the special rule because it says, "Fire Caste warriors of the Farsight Enclave train heavily in hand to hand combat...."

This would imply that only the Tau get the special rule, not drones.

Well, now we're getting into fluff discussions. I have not read anything in the Codex to state that Drones are not part of the Fire Caste. They're in the trenches with the Firewarriors just like any other combatant, and can be a complete fighting unit by themselves. To say they would not get the benefit of a special rule because they are "robots" is not conclusive. Farsight could have instituted new HtH programming to Drones to parallel his Firewarriors extra HtH training. Simply because they are machines does not mean they cannot improve.

Drones are innocent of being Tau models until proven guilty. Outside of people's opinions and interpretations, the only RAW evidence provided for the claim that Drones are not Tau models are the "Price of Failure" special rules (and even then, as gameandwatch has said, at no where in that rule does it say they are not Tau Models, they are just exceptions). Even that evidence has been called into question by another special character's rule, Shadowsun's "Command Link Drone." Because there is a contradiction between rulings doesn't mean that Drones are "guilty" and forfeit their "Tau modelness." It means they walk away freely until new evidence surfaces (such as an errata).

However, until such time as said evidence arises, Drones do not lose their ability to be called models (tie goes to the defender). If this were a trial, the judge would throw out the case against the defendant (Drones) due to lack of sufficient evidence.

Everyone is, of course, entitled to their opinions. However, thinking you are right does not make you so, and that applies to everyone (including myself). BUT, as any level headed, stroller by can read, there is very little RAW evidence to claim that Drones are not Tau Models. What evidence there is has been contradicted. Mistrial.

Where's your evidence that they are Tau, hrmm?? Because they're in the codex? Because they have fluff? Please post YOUR evidence for them being Tau. Until then, you cannot claim that they are Tau. We have posted plenty of evidence saying that they are indeed not Tau/Models that can benefit from the Special Rule 'Preferred Enemy: Orks', which for some reason has somehow in some form been contradicted... I've posted my evidence in rules, where is your contradiction to this? And where is your evidence? YOu cannot claim evidence by other Special Rules.

I could just as easily say Drones are guilty of being Tau models until proven innocent.

Drones are not Innocent or Guilty of anything!

synchronicity, no offence but that post is utter waffle and garbage.

AffliKtion wrote:Where's your evidence that they are Tau, hrmm?? Because they're in the codex? Because they have fluff? Please post YOUR evidence for them being Tau. Until then, you cannot claim that they are Tau. We have posted plenty of evidence saying that they are indeed not Tau/Models that can benefit from the Special Rule 'Preferred Enemy: Orks', which for some reason has somehow in some form been contradicted... I've posted my evidence in rules, where is your contradiction to this? And where is your evidence? YOu cannot claim evidence by other Special Rules.

I could just as easily say Drones are guilty of being Tau models until proven innocent.

I'm afraid that's not the way it works, even on the playground, to which you seem so familiar. It is your job, as the prosecutor, to prove with evidence that they are NOT Tau models, not the other way around. I've given a fair look at your side's claiming of the "Price of Failure" wording. I've countered with Shadowsun's "Command-link Drone" wording. The two rulings contradict each other, canceling out. Drones are still in the good so far.

There is no other RAW that has been posted to support your claim. If you would post the page number and paragraph, I would be happy to take a look at it. Until then, let's keep the school yard comebacks to a minimum. It is the internet, after all.

Gwar! wrote:Drones are not Innocent or Guilty of anything!

synchronicity, no offence but that post is utter waffle and garbage.

According to you, they are guilty of not being Tau models. I'm sorry my waffles don't fit your taste buds, but one mans garbage is another man's winning argument.

There are no rules anywhere that actually indicate one way or the other if drones are Tau for the farsight rules.

There are plenty of other rules where you can try to read into whether or not they are tau.

One of those rules (price of failure) specifically excludes drones as being tau units.

Another of those rules (shadowsun's command link drone) specifically doesn't exclude drones as being tau units.

Both of these rules reference "tau units" which isn't the same as the farsight rule anyway, which references "tau models"

Farsight's fluff refrences "fire cast warriors" which would exclude drones, since they're air cast. But fluff isn't rules.

It is a mess. You guys aren't going to find the answer, this discussion has been had many times here (search for farsight preferred enemy). No one has an answer, and it will remain that way until there is a FAQ.

In the meantime, I play farsight, and I play against orks regularly, and I don't re-roll drone attacks. Doesn't make it right, but when all you have left to go on is the fluff you just roll with it I guess.

I'm afraid that's not the way it works, even on the playground, to which you seem so familiar. It is your job, as the prosecutor, to prove with evidence that they are NOT Tau models, not the other way around. I've given a fair look at your side's claiming of the "Price of Failure" wording. I've countered with Shadowsun's "Command-link Drone" wording. The two rulings contradict each other, canceling out. Drones are still in the good so far.

There is no other RAW that has been posted to support your claim. If you would post the page number and paragraph, I would be happy to take a look at it. Until then, let's keep the school yard comebacks to a minimum. It is the internet, after all.

Wow, personal attacks? I think you're the one who needs the playground.

Also bring up "innocent until proven guilty" in ANY context regarding war gaming is is pedantic to the point of idiocy.

It's not my Job to prove anything. The Rule says "Tau Models". A Drone is not a Tau. There is your proof. What proof do you have that the Drone is a Tau model? (and remember Tau model != Model in the Tau Army.)

synchronicity wrote:
I'm afraid that's not the way it works, even on the playground, to which you seem so familiar. It is your job, as the prosecutor, to prove with evidence that they are NOT Tau models, not the other way around. I've given a fair look at your side's claiming of the "Price of Failure" wording. I've countered with Shadowsun's "Command-link Drone" wording. The two rulings contradict each other, canceling out. Drones are still in the good so far.

There is no other RAW that has been posted to support your claim. If you would post the page number and paragraph, I would be happy to take a look at it. Until then, let's keep the school yard comebacks to a minimum. It is the internet, after all.

You obviously didn't read my posts then. I did not bring up any other special rules and even said that they have no value in this discussion.

This isn't a damn criminal court, you have just as much to prove as we do, and it sure as hell isn't trial based either.

And I'm glad you lower yourself to such a level to personally insult me, as I had only refuted your lack of evidence to support them being considered a 'Tau Model'.


Keep the mud on your side please.

lambadomy wrote:Farsight's fluff refrences "fire cast warriors" which would exclude drones, since they're air cast. But fluff isn't rules.

Honestly, I would happily accept this, accept that I can't find it anywhere where Drones are listed as Air Caste. In fact, everything that I have scoured points them to being Fire Caste. In novels such as Kill Team and For the Emporer (both feature the Tau), I haven't seen anything to suggest they are thrown in with the same classification as pilots and ship captains. I don't think because they "float" instead of "walk" that it makes them pilots. That is, of course, my very humbled opinion, I don't claim to know everything Tau rules and fluff...

You're correct that its a pointless debate. Nothing said here will change how I play them, and I'm sure I'm doing no one a service by stating I'm right. I guess it all comes down to who your opponent is

Gwar! from my perspective, your posts are way to intense, you could use a chill out.

I've always been of a mind that when a rule indicates 'tau' models or 'space marine' models, or 'ork' models, they are merely referring to models from the 'tau' codex, or 'space marine' codex etc. Is a wave serpent an 'eldar model'? Well the answer had better be yes, or you wouldn't legally be able to cast fortune or guide on it. But it is an inanimate object. It isn't of the eldar race is it?

The units that have exceptions to their blanket special rules are inconsistent, and work against any argument towards a uniform set of 'tau' models. If there are such a thing as 'tau' models then who has it right, the ethereals or shadowsun?

But I won't argue as passionately as some. Just passing by...

@synchronicity:

For the castes - page 21 of the codex has information on the tau language. Second paragraph indicates that:

Shas = fire
Fio = Earth
Kor = air
Por = water

Since Drones are listed as "Kor'vesa" as their Tau name on page 38, it is assumed they are Air caste and not Fire caste.

lambadomy wrote:@synchronicity:

For the castes - page 21 of the codex has information on the tau language. Second paragraph indicates that:

Shas = fire
Fio = Earth
Kor = air
Por = water

Since Drones are listed as "Kor'vesa" as their Tau name on page 38, it is assumed they are Air caste and not Fire caste.

And Vesa is a term for Auxillary/Friend of the Tau.

@lambadomy: Nice. I stand corrected!

All of you need to go into the way back machine and read the materials that were introduced with the Tau's first codex and product launch. The problem here is where GW assumes that certian things from the first dex don't have to be restated in the next and for most this is true. But for competitive/tourny rules lawyering it doesn't fly.

So, what are we left with? A list of rules that some are general and some specific to help guide us.

First, Is the rule in question specific or general in nature? If specific then you use the specific rules to guide and with general questions you use general rules.

This statement seems more general than sqecific and IMHO the general rule to apply for this would be the who benefits from a markerlight rule seeing as the wording is exactly the same.

Using the markerlight rule it is questionable because nothing is stated specifically as to what are Tau models. But then there are the Sniper Drones as emperical evidence to shore up the argument that drones are Tau and therefore benefit from marker lights.

Is it perfect? No.
Could the rules be clearer? Yes
Should GW have to print it in a manner as if they are talking to 3&4 year olds where every unit is mentioned every time? H*** NO! We are supposed to be civilized adults that can work somethings out for ourselves.
Will an errata or FAQ help? Somewhat, but only hardcore tourney players would have a real use for it and with some of the illogical rulings I've seen it should only be a refuge of last resort.

@ Gwar!, BTW The sniper spotter is a pathfinder which is fire caste.

"FLUFF"wise drones are considered as living parts of Tau society and there name has less to do with caste than the actual meaning of "Little Helper/Friend".

As to the Price of Failure and the Comand-Link drone arguments. These are 2 rules affecting leadership through 2 different means. Price of failure is an emotional reaction the drones are incapable of. The Command-Link affects leadership through improved communication technology which the drones are perfectly able to comprehend. These explanations aren't just personal opinion but rather rulings from GW back when they answered calls. Is it enough for a tourny? No, but it is common sense.

The Drones CAN be programmed for HtH which is why they have a WS. IMHO(see how easy that is), The reason for it being low is more do to lack of options as a solid hunk of tech rather than a lack of ability to be programed.

Right well, I have seen the light!

Oh great synchronicity allow me to beg for mercy at the feet of... Psyche!

The reason I have changed my mind is because if you have Drones (or pretty much anything Tau) in CC with orks, you are doing it wrong, and need all the help you can get anyway.

I love the way back machine!

I honestly think that the Drones just bash the crap out of anyone in combat by ramming them. Those things are heavy man! Or they spin alot and run into stuff.

@ Gwar, Now you get the Joke that is the Farsight Ork fighter rule. It's rumored that the guy that wrote the Ork fighter rule is now doing 3 shows nightly in Vegas.

It was originally +1 to WS before the current 'dex, which was actually pretty strong.

Yeah,
If a Space Marine has Prefered Enemy: TAU
does he get to reroll against drones/Kroot/vespids?
I think he does... because they are in codex Tau/ they are apart of the Tau army/ they are Tau models.


So
IMO it makes sense that TAU Drones are Tau Models and thus get Prefered enemy...
This is how I'd play it (If i played Tau...)

Panic...

Panic wrote:Yeah,
If a Space Marine has Prefered Enemy: TAU
does he get to reroll against drones/Kroot/vespids?
I think he does... because they are in codex Tau/ they are apart of the Tau army/ they are Tau models.


So
IMO it makes sense that TAU Drones are Tau Models and thus get Preferred enemy...
This is how I'd play it (If i played Tau...)

Panic...

Actually he shouldn't. If he had "Preferred Enemy: T'au Empire" then he Would. As it is "Preferred Enemy: T'au" does nothing. Even if it did, Kroot and Vespid aren't T'au. By your logic I can take "Preferred Enemy: Space Marines" and get to use it against any Grey Knights Allied to the SM force (which you cant, just to nip that in the bud) or against Chaos Space Marines.

As i said, the devil is in the detail. "T'au Unit" != "T'au Model" and "T'au" != "T'au Empire"

Edit: Spelling

Gwar! wrote:

Panic wrote:Yeah,
If a Space Marine has Prefered Enemy: TAU
does he get to reroll against drones/Kroot/vespids?
I think he does... because they are in codex Tau/ they are apart of the Tau army/ they are Tau models.


So
IMO it makes sense that TAU Drones are Tau Models and thus get Preferred enemy...
This is how I'd play it (If i played Tau...)

Panic...

Actually he shouldn't. If he had "Preferred Enemy: T'au Empire" then he Would. As it is "Preferred Enemy: T'au" does nothing. Even if it did, Kroot and Vespid aren't T'au. By your logic I can take "Preferred Enemy: Space Marines" and get to use it against any Grey Knights Allied to the SM force (which you cant, just to nip that in the bud) or against Chaos Space Marines.

As i said, the devil is in the detail. "T'au Unit" != "T'au Model" and "T'au" != "T'au Empire"

Edit: Spelling

No offense. That is the worst bit of logic I've ever seen. If something states Preferred Enemy: (insert army name). If refers the the codex as a whole, not the origin of the model. So if it says preferred enemy against space marines, you have preferred enemy to everything in the space marine codex. If it says preferred enemy to Tau, you have preferred enemy to everything in the Tau codex.

Edit: You need to look at the rules and think logically about them. If you have been playing 40k long enough you will know that when reading GW rules you have to use a bit of your own logic. You can't always take words at face value. I personally do not think GW needs to go out of their way to specify that if you have preferred enemy rule against Tau that this may includes all models which can be fielded in your Tau army(you see what I did there. Kroots and Vespids are part of the Tau army and as such prefered enemy is taken into account when fighting them)

Plastic People wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Panic wrote:Yeah,
If a Space Marine has Prefered Enemy: TAU
does he get to reroll against drones/Kroot/vespids?
I think he does... because they are in codex Tau/ they are apart of the Tau army/ they are Tau models.


So
IMO it makes sense that TAU Drones are Tau Models and thus get Preferred enemy...
This is how I'd play it (If i played Tau...)

Panic...

Actually he shouldn't. If he had "Preferred Enemy: T'au Empire" then he Would. As it is "Preferred Enemy: T'au" does nothing. Even if it did, Kroot and Vespid aren't T'au. By your logic I can take "Preferred Enemy: Space Marines" and get to use it against any Grey Knights Allied to the SM force (which you cant, just to nip that in the bud) or against Chaos Space Marines.

As i said, the devil is in the detail. "T'au Unit" != "T'au Model" and "T'au" != "T'au Empire"

Edit: Spelling

No offense. That is the worst bit of logic I've ever seen. If something states Preferred Enemy: (insert army name). If refers the the codex as a whole, not the origin of the model. So if it says preferred enemy against space marines, you have preferred enemy to everything in the space marine codex. If it says preferred enemy to Tau, you have preferred enemy to everything in the Tau codex.

Edit: You need to look at the rules and think logically about them. If you have been playing 40k long enough you will know that when reading GW rules you have to use a bit of your own logic. You can't always take words at face value. I personally do not think GW needs to go out of their way to specify that if you have preferred enemy rule against Tau that this does not include models which can be fielded in your Tau army(you see what I did there. Kroots and Vespids are part of the Tau army and as such prefered enemy is taken into account when fighting them)

Show me a current codex named Codex: Tau and i'll be happy to concede that point.

You know just as well as I do as to what the intended rules are when it comes to preferred enemy. You also know that the current Tau codex is named Tau Empire, and is named for this because it includes Tau and auxillaries. If you can't see this then there isn't much else I can do besides shake my head and not reply again. If you want to nitpick words then by all means you can. I'm just saying that RAI refers to when you have preferred enemy against an army(in this case Tau), you have preferred to everything that can be fielded in the Tau codex.

Gwar I just don't understand why you are arguing this so fiercly. every time i've played against the Tau with my orks i've kicked their teeth in..

Naz you're back!

What I think is funny is that I thought initially that drones wouldn't get the ork fighter bonus, but after taking a good look at the codex I'm convinced otherwise. Sadly though, I can't see where it'll make a difference.

Naz, I wish to disrupt your statement. If you ever played my Tau you'd be singing a different tune.

Gwar! wrote:Show me a current codex named Codex: Tau and i'll be happy to concede that point.

If you have perfered enemy Space Marines you still get it against the sevitors, if you have perfered enemy Eldar you also get it against Dark Eldar. What makes Tau any different? The only part that is right about you arguement is that this is a vauge topic in the Tau codex and there is not an official answer for it. it all comes down to what you define a Tau model as. I define tau models as a model from the tau codex. From what I can tell most of your arguement is based on background, which although nice is no substitue for the rules.