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.

So how does the bomber work? What does, "counts as firing a weapon." mean?

Can you place a webway portal on an objective? Because the webway is impassable, is it legal to place the webway on an objective and make the objective unattainable?

scuddman wrote:So how does the bomber work? What does, "counts as firing a weapon." mean?

Can you place a webway portal on an objective? Because the webway is impassable, is it legal to place the webway on an objective and make the objective unattainable?

Ya'll need to be a bit more specific, as I have no idea what you are talking about! :p

As for the WWP, without the Codex to hand I cannot be sure (there might be a clause about this in the codex for all I know), but from what I know, it is perfectly fine to do so, since the WWB is either 3" or 5" in diameter, which means models are still able to get within 3" of objectives (Between 1.5" of room and 0.5" of room depending on the size of the WWP which I don't know!) so it can't actually stop models contesting/capturing objectives.

It wouldnt be against the rules anyway, would it? Don't believe the rules have anything to say on the matter....

The WWP from all accounts is a repaint of the Vortex Grenade Apoc template "bubble", so just over 3" across from memory.

I believe it's a bit less than 3 inches.

Gwar! wrote:So, Current Q List:

Ranged Poison Weapons and Rerolls?
How do Poision Ranged weapons work at all?
Raider Sail - Counts as Hull?
Lelith - Capped at 10 attacks or no?
Crucible of Malediction works on enemy psykers engaged in a close combat? - Not sure if an issue.
The WWP says it functions as a Table edge. Does this mean Wolf Scouts can OBEL with it?
How does a Flickerfield work and what does it do? (Same issue as Bjorn - Sigh)

Any more make sure to sumbit! Been very busy IRL so no draft version uploaded, and I think I might just skip with that this time and launch 1.0 (tentatively) on the 5th of November, just to annoy GW.

The Codex has a section of army-wide special rules that explains how poisoned ranged weapons work. IIRC, it is entitled "Poisoned Range Weapons."

I don't think the sail should count as hull; I think it is most appropriately a manifestation of the "Enhanced Aethersails" vehicle upgrade. If you take that interpretation, you only need to include it on the model if you take that upgrade, and it is no more a part of the hull than a hunter-killer missile or searchlight on a Rhino would be.

Lelith's entry gives no limitation on the upper limit of the number of attacks. In fact, I believe the example they give is one where Lelith would result in 11 attacks.

I'm going down to the LFGS today to try to get in a game or two. Gonna take a notebook and jot down some ideas on vague areas. Unfortunately, I am not much of a crazy rules lawyer so I'll probably miss things that other people would pick up on.

I agree on the first two points, but not the third - no stat (other than Armor Value) may ever exceed 10. Now, depending on the exact wording of the rule, it may be a specific exception, but I don't have the codex yet (obviously), so I can't check that myself.

SaintHazard wrote:I agree on the first two points, but not the third - no stat (other than Armor Value) may ever exceed 10. Now, depending on the exact wording of the rule, it may be a specific exception, but I don't have the codex yet (obviously), so I can't check that myself.

There are a few things that push attacks above 10 without any caveat about the stat going over 10. Khorne Daemon weapons roll for attacks and the lord has what, 4 already? So, if your stat cannot go above 10, you're rolling 2D6 in hopes of getting 6 extra attacks? I'm at work so I can't quote any rules or even check my rulebook, but I don't think the stat cap applies to attacks.

puma713 wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:I agree on the first two points, but not the third - no stat (other than Armor Value) may ever exceed 10. Now, depending on the exact wording of the rule, it may be a specific exception, but I don't have the codex yet (obviously), so I can't check that myself.

There are a few things that push attacks above 10 without any caveat about the stat going over 10. Khorne Daemon weapons roll for attacks and the lord has what, 4 already? So, if your stat cannot go above 10, you're rolling 2D6 in hopes of getting 6 extra attacks? I'm at work so I can't quote any rules or even check my rulebook, but I don't think the stat cap applies to attacks.

Actually, that's a perfect example of a specific exception, which I said that Lelith might be, depending on the wording of the rule.

But just because there are specific cases that allow the Attacks stat to exceed 10 doesn't mean that Attacks can just exceed 10 anytime they want.

SaintHazard wrote:

puma713 wrote:

SaintHazard wrote:I agree on the first two points, but not the third - no stat (other than Armor Value) may ever exceed 10. Now, depending on the exact wording of the rule, it may be a specific exception, but I don't have the codex yet (obviously), so I can't check that myself.

There are a few things that push attacks above 10 without any caveat about the stat going over 10. Khorne Daemon weapons roll for attacks and the lord has what, 4 already? So, if your stat cannot go above 10, you're rolling 2D6 in hopes of getting 6 extra attacks? I'm at work so I can't quote any rules or even check my rulebook, but I don't think the stat cap applies to attacks.

Actually, that's a perfect example of a specific exception, which I said that Lelith might be, depending on the wording of the rule.

But just because there are specific cases that allow the Attacks stat to exceed 10 doesn't mean that Attacks can just exceed 10 anytime they want.

But there's no wording in the Daemon weapon ruling that gives the attack profile permission to go above 10. It simply says roll 2D6.

And how else would attacks exceed 10 without "specific cases"? Can you think of anything that has 10 attacks base or has the ability to get up to 10 attacks without a "specific case"?

puma713 wrote:But there's no wording in the Daemon weapon ruling that gives the attack profile permission to go above 10. It simply says roll 2D6.

And how else would attacks exceed 10 without "specific cases"? Can you think of anything that has 10 attacks base or has the ability to get up to 10 attacks without a "specific case"?

Then Daemon weapons can only give you +2d6 attacks up to a maximum of 10.

Specific permission to exceed the normal cap of 10 is not given, therefore it may not be exceeded.

Same with Lelith.

SaintHazard wrote:

puma713 wrote:But there's no wording in the Daemon weapon ruling that gives the attack profile permission to go above 10. It simply says roll 2D6.

And how else would attacks exceed 10 without "specific cases"? Can you think of anything that has 10 attacks base or has the ability to get up to 10 attacks without a "specific case"?

Then Daemon weapons can only give you +2d6 attacks up to a maximum of 10.

Specific permission to exceed the normal cap of 10 is not given, therefore it may not be exceeded.

Same with Lelith.

Have to check the rulebook. I don't agree because it's counterintuitive, but I can't back it up because I don't have my rulebook.

It IS counterintuitive.

I could max out the characters allowed in these posts listing rules that are counterintuitive.

Doesn't stop it from being the rules.

Chalk one more up to GW's poor proofreading - and the necessity of the existence of an FAQ.

SH - you are wrong. BONUS attacks can push the attack stat above 10. Rulebook

Pg 37 of the Rulebook under Number of Attacks - Note after the third bullet for bonus attaacks. "Bonus attacks are an exception to the rules for characteristics' maximum modifiers and may bring a model's total attacks above 10."

One thing I'm curious about is if 2 units with the power (strength?) through pain rule in combat with a single unit kill it in CC, do they both get a pain token or is there only one to distribute between the 2 units?

Also does a unit with an IC yield 2 pain tokens or 1 when killed?

MrDrumMachine wrote:One thing I'm curious about is if 2 units with the power (strength?) through pain rule in combat with a single unit kill it in CC, do they both get a pain token or is there only one to distribute between the 2 units?

Also does a unit with an IC yield 2 pain tokens or 1 when killed?

People that have seen the codex say that you randomly distribute between the two units. Only 1 gets a pain point. The second question is a good one though. I would imagine 2.

Your first question is the two units only get 1 token to split between them (randomly give it to one.) The Second I would "think" would be 2 pain tokens as it is two units but I am not sure.

Edit : Ninja'd by Puma

nosferatu1001 wrote:SH - you are wrong. BONUS attacks can push the attack stat above 10. Rulebook

Sigmatron wrote:Pg 37 of the Rulebook under Number of Attacks - Note after the third bullet for bonus attaacks. "Bonus attacks are an exception to the rules for characteristics' maximum modifiers and may bring a model's total attacks above 10."

Well I'll be durned.

I am the brayn dumm.

Well, it's going to take someone a lot more intelligent than I am to pull out some good fodder for an FAQ on this new codex. Every time I think I find something in it that needs to be addressed, I find that it has already been addressed somewhere else in the codex.

The Flickerfield does need addressing, because it merely states that the vehicles "has a 5+ invulnerable save."

The section on Poisoned Ranged Weapons state that they never get a re-roll to wound due to their poison and cannot affect vehicles.

The Crucible may need some type of clarification. It is used in the shooting phase in lieu of firing another weapon, but is not defined as a shooting attack. It merely states that all enemy psykers with 3d6" have to make a leadership test or be removed from play. Psykers locked in assault are not mentioned at all.

I thought I had found something with the Beastmasters, as they are listed as unit type: Beast, but the Beastmasters themselves are riding Skyboards (which change your unit type to Jump Infantry). However, upon reading the entry page for Beastmasters, I find this clause: skyboard (this is the same as the hellions' skyboard on page 28, except that the Beastmasters' unit type is beasts rather than jump infantry).

The codex states only dark eldar may use the WWP.

The Hellion Stunclaw which lets you pull an IC out of combat when doing a Hit and Run doesn't say that the IC is no longer attached to a squad he was attached to before, just says "it is moved with the Hellions... When their Hit and Run move is finished, leave as many Hellions in base contact with the 'snatched' model as possible - this new combat will be resolved next turn." Seems to me that by RAW, if he was attached to a squad, that squad will be forced to consolidate back into the fight.

Bladevanes inflict their hits on "one unengaged, non-vehicle unit that lies under the line", you are never told how this unit is determined if multiple units are passed during the turbo-boost.

Power from pain deals entirely with units "Each pain token confers a special rule to the entire unit". Beastmaster units consist of a number of different models including Beastmaster models, and 3 different types of beasts, the Beastmaster is the only model in the unit with the Power from Pain rule, it seems the RAW would mean the unit (including the beasts themselves) has power from pain till the Beastmasters die, but it's certainly vague.

The Incubi Murderous Assault rule which allows the Klavex (Sergeant) to nominate an enemy IC says "The Klavex has Preferred Enemy when attacking that model", while the intent is clear, I'm not sure this sufficiently restricts his Preferred Enemy to only attacks against the IC, for example, the Klavex could split attacks between the IC and the unit the IC is attached to, he is attacking the nominated model, thus satisfying the Murderous Assault rule requirements, and thus, is granted Preferred Enemy for all his attacks, even those against other models.

Regarding the earlier bomber question I think I see what he was going for, it does its bombing attack in the movement phase, on a model it passed over, and the rule states "Note that this counts as using a weapon." but the restrictions on firing weapons in the rulebook are given as "The number of weapons a vehicle can fire in the Shooting phase depends on how fast it has moved in that turn's Movement phase". Given the bomber has a special rule allowing it to fire all weapons at cruising speed, that's not an issue, however, it potentially could be argued that by RAW, the bomber can perform a 36" flat out move and still drop the bomb, even though it counts as using a weapon, because it's not doing so in the shooting phase.

Baron Sathonyx allows an army to "[add] one to the dice roll when determining which side chooses deployment zone." This roll of course in the rules is a roll to determine who chooses to go first or second.

Drazhar is given both Klavex powers, one grants a bonus to the Klavex, the other grants a bonus to the Klavex and Incubi in his squad, neither of them would affect Drazhar as he is not a Klavex or an Incubi but a Drazhar.

The Dais of Destruction says "The Dais of Destruction must begin the game carrying nine models in addition to Vect himself." But a Dedicated transport can only carry "the unit it was selected with (plus any independent characters)." So there's no way to start the game with 9 extra models in it.

The Animus Vitae is called a special close combat weapon, although it's not given any bonuses in close combat, and its effects would presumably work even if you weren't using it to attack ("If the bearer kills one or more enemy models in a round of combat"). Only an issue if like me you subscribe to the idea that simply having 2 special close combat weapons on your person is sufficient to prevent you from gaining a bonus attack for two close combat weapons, and not really hard to understand, but strange still.

Crucible of Malediction + Psykers in transports? Given the way GW ruled in the Tyranid FAQ that nothing affected models in transports, I imagine they will say this doesn't either, but RAW I think it would.

Drunkspleen wrote: The Dais of Destruction says "The Dais of Destruction must begin the game carrying nine models in addition to Vect himself." But a Dedicated transport can only carry "the unit it was selected with (plus any independent characters)." So there's no way to start the game with 9 extra models in it

Unless he can take a retinue ofcourse . . . having not seen the codex yet I don't know. But this is the only way it would work by RAW. =]

Oshova

Mr. Drunkspleen, If I ever manage to get a passport, a majillion dorrah and fly over to Prison Isle, I owe you an ale!

Drunkspleen wrote:The Hellion Stunclaw which lets you pull an IC out of combat when doing a Hit and Run doesn't say that the IC is no longer attached to a squad he was attached to before, just says "it is moved with the Hellions... When their Hit and Run move is finished, leave as many Hellions in base contact with the 'snatched' model as possible - this new combat will be resolved next turn." Seems to me that by RAW, if he was attached to a squad, that squad will be forced to consolidate back into the fight.

Unless it explicitly states that the IC leaves the unit, he does indeed remain part of the unit until the begining of the IC's next movement phase, so the Unit would be forced to Pile in towards the Helions that turn, and the next turn should the H&R be done in the opponents Assault phase. Very Interesting and very FAQ worthy!

Drunkspleen wrote:Bladevanes inflict their hits on "one unengaged, non-vehicle unit that lies under the line", you are never told how this unit is determined if multiple units are passed during the turbo-boost.

I would assume that you simply get to pick one, since it mentions a specific number.

Drunkspleen wrote:Power from pain deals entirely with units "Each pain token confers a special rule to the entire unit". Beastmaster units consist of a number of different models including Beastmaster models, and 3 different types of beasts, the Beastmaster is the only model in the unit with the Power from Pain rule, it seems the RAW would mean the unit (including the beasts themselves) has power from pain till the Beastmasters die, but it's certainly vague.

Agreed. The rule allows all members of the unit to benefit, even if they don't have the rule (See the USR "Stealth" for another example), but as soon as the models with that rule are all dead, no-one benefits (See Telion with Scouts that have no Camo cloaks for an example). Lots of room for confusion though, and worth an FAQ entry!

Drunkspleen wrote:The Incubi Murderous Assault rule which allows the Klavex (Sergeant) to nominate an enemy IC says "The Klavex has Preferred Enemy when attacking that model", while the intent is clear, I'm not sure this sufficiently restricts his Preferred Enemy to only attacks against the IC, for example, the Klavex could split attacks between the IC and the unit the IC is attached to, he is attacking the nominated model, thus satisfying the Murderous Assault rule requirements, and thus, is granted Preferred Enemy for all his attacks, even those against other models.

Here I would have to say only attacks made towards the IC benefit, since "attacking that model" seems to be rather unambigous! What is ambigous however is what exactly "Preferred Enemy" does (as opposed to "Preferred Enemy: Tau/Ork etc"), as it would need to be started that it works against everything.

Drunkspleen wrote:Regarding the earlier bomber question I think I see what he was going for, it does its bombing attack in the movement phase, on a model it passed over, and the rule states "Note that this counts as using a weapon." but the restrictions on firing weapons in the rulebook are given as "The number of weapons a vehicle can fire in the Shooting phase depends on how fast it has moved in that turn's Movement phase". Given the bomber has a special rule allowing it to fire all weapons at cruising speed, that's not an issue, however, it potentially could be argued that by RAW, the bomber can perform a 36" flat out move and still drop the bomb, even though it counts as using a weapon, because it's not doing so in the shooting phase.

You are indeed 100% Correct. You can drop it in the movement phase and still fire all weapons at Cruising speed and even drop it when moving flat out. What the "counts as firing a weapon" does is prevent you from being unable to do anything at all, since the rules for Blast Weapons and causing wounds etc are only found in the Shooting Phase, so things like that that happen in the movement phase technically do nothing!

Drunkspleen wrote:Baron Sathonyx allows an army to "[add] one to the dice roll when determining which side chooses deployment zone." This roll of course in the rules is a roll to determine who chooses to go first or second.

I hate you GW... so... very... much...
THEY EVEN MADE AN ERRATA THIS FOR BJORN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BELGIUM!

Drunkspleen wrote:Drazhar is given both Klavex powers, one grants a bonus to the Klavex, the other grants a bonus to the Klavex and Incubi in his squad, neither of them would affect Drazhar as he is not a Klavex or an Incubi but a Drazhar.

Lovely. Glad to know GW still have the same playtesting groups.

Drunkspleen wrote:The Dais of Destruction says "The Dais of Destruction must begin the game carrying nine models in addition to Vect himself." But a Dedicated transport can only carry "the unit it was selected with (plus any independent characters)." So there's no way to start the game with 9 extra models in it.

Here I am not so sure. Does it say it is a Dedicated Transport as opposed to just a model that can carry doods that you need a certain IC for? What my main issue was the wording that some people could think you get the 9 models for free (which you don't, so Vect ends up costing 440+Unit cost!).

Drunkspleen wrote:The Animus Vitae is called a special close combat weapon, although it's not given any bonuses in close combat, and its effects would presumably work even if you weren't using it to attack ("If the bearer kills one or more enemy models in a round of combat"). Only an issue if like me you subscribe to the idea that simply having 2 special close combat weapons on your person is sufficient to prevent you from gaining a bonus attack for two close combat weapons, and not really hard to understand, but strange still.

Agreed. While you would have to either "use" it (which wouldn't do anything special, so you just attack with your base characteristics) or choose to use a different Special CCW (and thus loose the bonus attack), you still get the additional benefit for killing things even if you use a different weapons (as the weapon, from what you have said here, doesn't require it to be the weapon used to kill something, only that he kills something while having it upon his/her personage).

Drunkspleen wrote:Crucible of Malediction + Psykers in transports? Given the way GW ruled in the Tyranid FAQ that nothing affected models in transports, I imagine they will say this doesn't either, but RAW I think it would.

Agreed. RaW it affects them (and those in CC). Not much argument here.

Gwar! wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:The Incubi Murderous Assault rule which allows the Klavex (Sergeant) to nominate an enemy IC says "The Klavex has Preferred Enemy when attacking that model", while the intent is clear, I'm not sure this sufficiently restricts his Preferred Enemy to only attacks against the IC, for example, the Klavex could split attacks between the IC and the unit the IC is attached to, he is attacking the nominated model, thus satisfying the Murderous Assault rule requirements, and thus, is granted Preferred Enemy for all his attacks, even those against other models.

Here I would have to say only attacks made towards the IC benefit, since "attacking that model" seems to be rather unambigous! What is ambigous however is what exactly "Preferred Enemy" does (as opposed to "Preferred Enemy: Tau/Ork etc"), as it would need to be started that it works against everything.

Fly in the ointment, the Decapitator had the alternate wording of having Preferred Enemy "for attacks made against this model", his similar rule was definitely much more clear in that he cannot split his attacks and gain the bonus.

Gwar! wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:The Dais of Destruction says "The Dais of Destruction must begin the game carrying nine models in addition to Vect himself." But a Dedicated transport can only carry "the unit it was selected with (plus any independent characters)." So there's no way to start the game with 9 extra models in it.

Here I am not so sure. Does it say it is a Dedicated Transport as opposed to just a model that can carry doods that you need a certain IC for? What my main issue was the wording that some people could think you get the 9 models for free (which you don't, so Vect ends up costing 440+Unit cost!).

I can't say for sure how it was listed in the proper army list, but in the earlier unit entries with the fluff and special rules etc, the Dais is described as "a special Raider dedicated transport with three Dark lances".

Fair enough. If it IS a DT, then it is indeed unusable!

A Quick update, since I managed to get a look at the codex today for realsies and, despite what will need an FAQ, there is a lot that doesn't that would have needed to in the past.

For example, poison shooting weapons are indeed covered in the special rules (the special rule is even called "Poison Shooting Weapons"). I am shocked and appalled that GW would do such a thing! D:

Expect some TFGs arguing that Delfdars aren't fleet, since everything has "the Fleet special rule", not "the Fleet Universal Special Rule as detailed in the Warhammer 40k rulebook".

Wytches Dodge save has been explicitly fixed to apply ONLY to CC attacks, so no more arguments about scattering Blasts.

Reavers "Bladevanes" rule is a little unclear. It causes D3 hits per model, but doesn't explicitly state if it's D3*x hits or xD3 hits (where x ois the number of models), it just says D3 per model.

That being said, the Cluster Caltrops say that a model with them does D6 at a different Strength, so It implies that it might be xD3, though it could just as easily be (D3*x)+(D6*y). FAQ worth for sure I feel. It also happens in the movement phase, so the standard "How does this work at all" question needs to be addressed.

Another hint that it is xD3 however is the Gravtalon, which is a Bladevane that cause pinning if it causes a wound. Since it is used the same way as a bladevane, you would have to roll it separately, but again, you can argue that it becomes (D3*x)+(D6*y)+(D3*z). HerpDeDerp!

Beastmasters are a mess of rules sadly. Having checked the Power from Pain rule, it says "Whenever a Delfdar unit with PfP destroys a non-vehicle enemy unit" they get the Pain Token. Since not everyone has PfP in the unit, if there are any beasts, they cannot earn Pain Tokens on their own.

That being said, the rule then goes on to say "each pain token confers a special rule to the ENTIRE UNIT". Therefore, while the Beastmaster unit cannot earn Pain Tokens by themselves, if they have them, everyone in the unit benefits so long as one model with PfP is alive. Lots of FAQ stuff there.

Oh, and one of the beasts has "the Rending Special rule" (Zee Rule! SHE DOES NOZEENG!) -Le Sigh-

One of the Incubi "Exarch powers" gives him "Preferred Enemy" against an IC. PE on its own without a race doesn't actually do anything RaW.

Mandrakes don't seem to have any issues here, though the lack of an Armour save is disturbing. ;P

Razorwings seem to have no problems, but the Voidraven falls into the pit of calling a Blast Marker a template. Their Implosion Missile is NOT worded to be able to snipe models however, though a reminder will be added.

The Baron does indeed suffer from Useless Special Rule Syndrome (also known as Bjornitis), so a change to the Who goes first rule is needed. They did nip the Stealth Arguments in the bud by making him grant the stealth USR to any unit he is with while he is with them though.

I am once again shocked and appalled at GW clarifying what happens with Multiple WS with Lelith with regards to her extra attacks, as well as explicitly labeling them Bonus attacks (so she ends up getting 13 when she assaults Fire Warriors.

GW make you chuckle evilly when you place The Decapitator, (BUT FORGET TO DEFINE WHAT EVIL CHUCKLE MEANS OMFG!) but otherwise suffers from the poor Preferred enemy wording.

The Duke has a special rule that says he MUST be deployed with a unit of Warriors or Trueborn, but doesn't go into what happens if you don't have a unit of them in your army, nor does it explicitly require you to have one. It also doesn't explicitly tell you what happens to their upgraded poisons should he die or leave, but the wording seems to indicate they keep the bonus regardless of what happens to him.

As pointed out in another thread, a reminder that you cannot assault out of Raiders that Deep Strike via the Dukes special rule (as the Wargear explicitly forbids it, but the duke doesn't, despite it being forbidden by the main rules anyway).

Drahzah suffers from PheonixLordNotAbleToUseExarchPoweritis (fitting as he is rumored to be Arhra - "The fallen Phoenix" of the Striking Scorpions - in disguise. He also has a very odd rule that lets him move an unlimited distance at the beginning of any combat (that is, after all assault moves) he is in so long as he remains in BTB with the enemy and in coherency with his doods. Not sure how useful that is, but interesting nonetheless. A Reminder that it is indeed UNLIMITED MOVEMENT!!!!!!!!

Lady Malys has the same issue as Khârn does, in that she (and her unit) are "completely immune" to psychic powers", with no indication if "Indirect powers" like Enhance, Sanguine Sword or Quickening are ignored also.

She also has a straight up Invul, not just in Close Combat, which might confuse people! D:

Her redeploying power says "after both sides have deployed" but doesn't make mention of where scout moves come into this. I would assume Before from the wording however.

Plasma Grenades don't work. Same reason as IG frags. Useless pillocks the lot of you! And you started off so well!

The CoM is still a nasty Wargear item, though I can't see how the enemy being in CC would be a problem. Need to clarify if it affects embarked Psykers of course (it does) and how it affects units with multiple psykers (each one takes a test! )

-Me goes to sleep then gets to work-

What if an independent character with a pain token were to join a combat with say a group of witches. The character was not initially joined to the unit but the combat goes on for a few rounds and in the controlling players turn ends up within the 2" distance for joining a unit. Does the pain token then get counted for the whole new "unit"?

I'd suggest doing an addative thing: ie - before IC(1), squad(0) , enemy squad gets killed resolving 1 token, after IC(1+1), squad (0+1)

I guess I worded my question poorly. Let me clarify. You have IC(1) unattached to wych squad (0). Both DE units assault a unit and 1 full game turn are still in combat with that unit. The IC is now within 2" of the wych squad in your movement phase. Can you then count the IC as joining the wych unit and grant them fnp for the assault phase?

I'd be rolling with a no for that, although I'd say the IC still gets it. But that's just my logic.