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.

Thank you for presenting a logical argument, DoW.

The only problem here is that you are creating a comparison that does not hold water. The rules for shooting have nothing to do with the rules for the WTT. Therefore it proves nothing specific to this argument and only muddies the waters.

I see what you are saying but you are writing your interpretation into the wording. The word "or" does not definitely prove that only one WTT may trigger, or even imply it really.

It is not an inclusive statement in the way you are reading it. The word "or" here is indicating that the the model may use his wargear even if he is not the specific target of the power but simply a member of a unit that is. Therefore, the rule still allows each model with the wargear to trigger the ability so long as either they, or the squad they are with is targeted by a psychic power. Following this, if more than one member of the unit has this ability and meets the conditions for its use, the ability triggers.

Nothing in that rule prohibits more than one from going off, it simply isn't there. The language implies that more than one may trigger, it would have to explicitly state the contrary to not be so in this case.

Let's break down the rule:

"If a model with a WTT..."
Does the model have a WTT? Yes.

"...or the unit he is with..."
Is that model in a unit? Yes.

"...is affected by an enemy psychic power..."
Is that model or the unit it is in affected by a psychic power? Yes.

"...roll a D6, on a 5+ that power is nullified."
Does the wargear trigger? Yes.

Those are the facts of the rule. Nowhere in that rule does it state or imply that only one may be used. It just isn't there.

The rule specifies an individual model, not the unit. Therefore, the rule applies to each model with the ability as nowhere does it state or imply that only one may go off.

I appreciate your logical presentation, though. It provided an interesting take on the rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@jy2

edited to consolidate argument
Again, this comparison doesn't hold water. The FnP and Furious Charge bubbles from the Priest DO stack in a sense. They all give the units in range FNP and Furious Charge, which each unit benefits from. Each priest isn't giving a bonus to stats, they are giving a USR out. If 1,000 units each provide a USR to every unit in range, then they still only get the one rule. It is a totally different scenario and honestly, has nothing to do with the WTT. The WTT has very specific rules which dictate how it works.

Again, the only thing that matters in this case is what is explicitly stated in the rule and the BGB.

The BGB offers nothing on the WTT other than to specify what a unit is and what an IC is.

The SW codex clearly states what the WTT does which we have covered. It also covers what happens in the case of a failed save: the power is not stopped. However, only one needs to succeed as the rule explicitly states that if the WTT triggers and you roll a 5+ the power is stopped form affecting that model and the unit it is with. Therefore, only one needs to succeed. That aspect of it is quite clear, IMO.

Reecius - so despite the rules stating the IC is a normal member of the unit, in the quote from the BRB I have given you *twice* now, you still believe they are a separate unit?

Really?

No. An IC joined to a unit is a normal member of that unit. There is now, apart from during close combat attacks, ONE UNIT and ONE UNIT ONLY. One member of the unit has the special rule "IC", which is not lost (despite your assertion otherwise, whcih has no rules backing and follows no logic) whcih allows them to leave the unit, and become their own individual unit again - but while joined they are a single unit.

You are confusing unit type and unit. IC is a unit type, but not always exists as a discrete unit.

We actually went down a tangent with that whole IC argument. It actually doesn't apply to this situation. And besides, that rule is in regards to ICs interacting with a unit during assault. It really doesn't apply here. And I didn't assert that an IC loses its status when joined to a squad, my point was the exact opposite. They are a unique unit within another unit that interacts with that unit in certain specific ways.

But again, it is a moot point.

The rule says is "If a MODEL with a WTT..."

It doesn't matter if the specific model is an IC, sarge, mook, or whatever (it just so happens that only ICs have access to the WTT). Each MODEL with the wargear triggers the effect so long as they, or a unit they are with, is affected by a psychic power.

The rules specifies the model and the piece of wargear. The number of units in play is not relevant.

Reecius. No.

For the last time, read the damn quote. Note how it talks about AFTER an assault the IC returning to the same state it was in BEFORE the assault. THis means that *gasp* the rule is NOT about during an assault - if it does so please, please for the love of terra show everyone how you are getting that from the plain as day rule, ok? Rather than simply ignoring the quotes proving you to be incorrect, actually do what the tenets of YMDC require you to do, which is back up your assertion with an actual rule.

You can ignore this plain as day rule all you like, but while an IC is joined to a unit there is ONE unit and ONE unit only, except during the resolving attacks part of combat, exactly as it states in the quote. It really couldnt be any simpler.

They are no longer a separate unit, but can become one if they leave (your postulate was that, if they are not a separate unit then they would lose IC status - which is incorrect as they are not a separate unit and dont lose IC status. A trivial argument to prove wrong)

You even admit as much when you recanted your error that ICs take break checks separately from their squad - thus proving they must be the same unit!

If a model has X, then any number of models with X satisifies this rule exac tly once. Or are you saying a nob squad with 10 waagh banners is WS10?

Reece,

When an IC joins a unit he becomes part of that unit...that's what 'joining' means. You do NOT then have two units operating together, you have ONE unit (as the IC has joined it). That's why when you go to move or shoot with the unit, the IC does so at the same time, because he is part of said unit while joined to it.

The most explicit example of this that I always like to fall back on is the Doom of Malan'tai, which automatically does a bunch of hits to every unit within range. Another example would be the Necron Monolith's Gauss flux arcs (which also shoot at every unit within range).

Would you play that an IC joined to a unit would be subject separately to these rules? So the Flux Arc would fire once on the unit he's joined to and then again on the IC that's part of the unit? Would the Doom of Malan'tai similarly inflict wounds on both the unit and then separately on the joined IC?

If you answer that (sensibly) as no, then you have to accept that when an IC joins a unit he is part of that unit and no longer a unit on his own until he chooses to leave the unit he is joined to.

And once you accept that fact, the Wolf Tail Talisman rules are perfectly clear...no matter how many models you have with the ability in the same unit, if the unit is affected then the rule for the Wolf Tail Talisman kicks in and you'd make one roll to attempt to nullify.

Yakface saying things far more elegantly than I manage....

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yakface saying things far more elegantly than I manage....

He sure does, and he is much less abrasive in the process. You need to calm down a tad when arguing rules, it changes the discussion from a debate about the rule into a contest of wills between you and who you are arguing against. It makes people a lot less apt to listen to what you have to say when you mix insults in with any good information you have to offer (which you did have some good info to provide). When you put someone on the defensive, they get angry, which does nothing to get your point across.

At any rate, I will deffer to Yakface as usual as he will write it into the INAT FAQ if he has not already and while I disagree with the interpretation in this case as I feel the rule is specifying each model with its wargear, he makes a sensible argument that follows logically. We use the INAT FAQ here as a tournament standard so the rules I will follow!

Well, the Wolfstar armies I face around here will be a lot easier to take down, now

Reecius wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yakface saying things far more elegantly than I manage....

He sure does, and he is much less abrasive in the process. You need to calm down a tad when arguing rules, it changes the discussion from a debate about the rule into a contest of wills between you and who you are arguing against. It makes people a lot less apt to listen to what you have to say when you mix insults in with any good information you have to offer (which you did have some good info to provide). When you put someone on the defensive, they get angry, which does nothing to get your point across.

At any rate, I will deffer to Yakface as usual as he will write it into the INAT FAQ if he has not already and while I disagree with the interpretation in this case as I feel the rule is specifying each model with its wargear, he makes a sensible argument that follows logically. We use the INAT FAQ here as a tournament standard so the rules I will follow!

Well, the Wolfstar armies I face around here will be a lot easier to take down, now

That makes PBS that much better against them.