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.

Fragile wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Jinx, I think he believes that when O'Vesa joins a unit, the unit is also somehow joining O'Vesa. This isn't the case. Joining isn't a two way street. It's an act that an Independent Character performs. A unit of Crisis Suits that happens to also contain Farsight has absolutely no ability to join any other unit. How can it possibly be a two way street if only one side of the equation has the ability to join?

However, since Farsight is part of the group, Ovesa is joining an IC as well.

O'Vesa is allowed to join an IC. He's just not allowed to join an MC... which he isn't doing.

Angelic wrote:
If you perceive that as an assumption of illegality, that is your perception at fault.

If you don't perceive it as illegal, then why did you bring it up in the first place? I'm addressing your hypothetical situation.

I'm not sure what you mean by that second to last sentence, because everything written must be interpreted. Every writing has multiple interpretations. Many jobs depend on that fact.

He's stating the fact that RAI and RAW are often very different. Refusal to acknowledge that is ... being unfamiliar with GW.

 wilsmire wrote:

Angelic wrote:

 wilsmire wrote:
Why does this issue keep coming up? Codex trumps BRB in this case and it clearly states: that when you take a farsight enclave you have access to a special unit called farsights command team. The key word there is unit and it goes on to say that the "unit" (with farsight) is an hq unit that does not take up a force org slot

Because it doesn't say that. It makes no mention of them being a unit. It calls them an "HQ choice".

I know I can read https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1494120047507952&id=100007299128315&set=pcb.1494120467507910&source=48 look under farsights command team

Read the Errata:

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Downloads/Product/PDF/Warhammer-40k/7th-faq/Farsight_Enclaves_v1.1_May14.pdf


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

Angelic wrote:
If you perceive that as an assumption of illegality, that is your perception at fault.

If you don't perceive it as illegal, then why did you bring it up in the first place? I'm addressing your hypothetical situation.

Because there is a situation in which everyone agrees an illegality occurs. Ovesa joins a unit of Crisis suits. Farsight then attempts to join the same unit. I believe everyone agrees that is explicitly prohibited. The premise being put forth is that moving Ovesa and not Farsight means it is then legal. I believe that is a silly distinction making the rule irrelevant and that it is not written that way.

@Jinx-- Again you misinterpret me. I understand and agree that the ruleset is permissive. I just happen to read the rule as revoking an already granted permission instead of granting permission to perform an action in the way put forth while prohibiting its (realistically) meaningless opposite. I also agree we aren't going to convince each other. We just see the writing differently, and that's okay. Reasonable people can disagree.

rigeld2 wrote:

Angelic wrote:
If you perceive that as an assumption of illegality, that is your perception at fault.

If you don't perceive it as illegal, then why did you bring it up in the first place? I'm addressing your hypothetical situation.

I'm not sure what you mean by that second to last sentence, because everything written must be interpreted. Every writing has multiple interpretations. Many jobs depend on that fact.

He's stating the fact that RAI and RAW are often very different. Refusal to acknowledge that is ... being unfamiliar with GW.

Wasn't refusing anything. The "I" is usually "intended", not " interpreted". Due the the nature of language, not every word has a singular definition. That's why I asked for clarification. I am familiar that RAW and RAI are too often contradictory terms to GW.

Angelic,
Given that Wilsmire's position appears to be that the Farsight Command Team is the equivalent of a single Army List Entry, and therefore a Single Unit, the Errata has not proven this stance incorrect. It clearly states that this 'Command Team' is selected instead of the usual 'Bodyguard Team,' which does make it look as if it is a specific Unit. It goes on to state that this choice consists of up to seven Suits, very much in the same was as a Unit Composition would inform you what needs to be located within it at the start of the Game. I will review a portion of the Rule book later to confirm, but I believe there are specific mention of older Codex's and Supplements formatting Army List Entries in unusual ways and this piece of Errata can easily have been written to fit within the format of the 6th Edition Supplement it is addressing.

It also states that all Models in this Team have the Independent Character Special Rule.
Once more highlighting that they had many chances to exempt O'Vasa from this Rule in some fashion but clearly did not do so.

As for the section being a removal of a Permissions gained that was addressed to me:
It is a Restriction designed to remove permission, because it specifically removes the Independent Character's ability to join Monstrous Creatures. What you have failed to show is that it also removes the Monstrous Creatures ability to join an Independent Character, probably because the Restriction does not mention it at all. The closest explanation that has been presented is that they are 'joining each other simultaneously,' even though the Written Rules makes it impossible for that to occur, and nothing to prove that concept even is possible.

At this time I simply will ask again: Post the Rules that support your position as I have clearly highlighted and shown my Rule support on this.
The only counter that I have seen put forth is that I am misinterpreting the meaning of words used within the Rule itself, but I can not fathom what the words "an Independent Character simply has to move" mean if it doesn't relate to the Model being moved....

Angelic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Angelic wrote:
If you perceive that as an assumption of illegality, that is your perception at fault.

If you don't perceive it as illegal, then why did you bring it up in the first place? I'm addressing your hypothetical situation.

Because there is a situation in which everyone agrees an illegality occurs. Ovesa joins a unit of Crisis suits. Farsight then attempts to join the same unit. I believe everyone agrees that is explicitly prohibited. The premise being put forth is that moving Ovesa and not Farsight means it is then legal. I believe that is a silly distinction making the rule irrelevant and that it is not written that way.

So it's irrelevant and not written that way? I'm not sure I understand.
It's also explicitly prohibited to have a single marine chilling with a LasCannon.
My point is that your hypothetical situation is irrelevant - you can't make assumptions about rules by just walking up to a table.
In 6th edition, you walk up to a table and see a Tyranid Prime joined to a Hive Tyrant. Exact same situation as your hypothetical, except it's also perfectly legal - because the unit has lost the two Tyrant Guard that allowed it to happen in the first place.

Order matters. In many places in the rules that's true. I'm not sure why you're so adamant that it's irrelevant here.

JinxDragon wrote:

, and nothing to prove that concept even is possible

"They can join other Independant Characters, though, to form a powerful multi-character unit!"

That sentence does not support the concept that they are joining each other's Unit 'simultaneously.' This is likely because that sentence does not mention anything about how an Independent Character goes about Joining other Independent Characters. Those instructions are found within the next section, titled Joining and Leaving a Unit, which I keep bringing up because your interpenetration is not supported by what is written in this section of the book. Within the actual instructions for Joining other Units are a few which make it entirely possible for O'Vessa to be the Model which is moving into Coherency, meeting all the requirements for her to join another Unit.

Besides, permission to Join other Independent Characters does nothing to address the Restriction in question.

There is simply nothing in what you have just posted which states that a Monstrous Creature with the Independent Character Special Rule can not join other Independent Characters. If anything that posted sentence, when isolated as you have done so, actually supports the opposite conclusion so I can't fathom what you believed it would do in this debate. A Monstrous Creature with the Independent Special Rule would still be a Model with the Independent Character Special Rule, and that sentence states that they can join other Independent Characters. In order to do so it would have to follow the instructions within the next section, titled Joining and Leaving a Unit, which I keep bringing up because your interpenetration is not supported by what is written in this section of the book.

Angelic wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:

, and nothing to prove that concept even is possible

"They can join other Independant Characters, though, to form a powerful multi-character unit!"

Now find the line where it says that an IC joining another IC isnt also a one sided action.

Page and graph

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Angelic wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:

, and nothing to prove that concept even is possible

"They can join other Independant Characters, though, to form a powerful multi-character unit!"

Now find the line where it says that an IC joining another IC isnt also a one sided action.

Page and graph

Two ICs move within 2" of each other, who is the "one side"?

JinxDragon wrote:
That sentence does not support the concept that they are joining each other's Unit 'simultaneously.' This is likely because that sentence does not mention anything about how an Independent Character goes about Joining other Independent Characters. Those instructions are found within the next section, titled Joining and Leaving a Unit, which I keep bringing up because your interpenetration is not supported by what is written in this section of the book. Within the actual instructions for Joining other Units are a few which make it entirely possible for O'Vessa to be the Model which is moving into Coherency, meeting all the requirements for her to join another Unit.

Besides, permission to Join other Independent Characters does nothing to address the Restriction in question.

There is simply nothing in what you have just posted which states that a Monstrous Creature with the Independent Character Special Rule can not join other Independent Characters. If anything that posted sentence, when isolated as you have done so, actually supports the opposite conclusion so I can't fathom what you believed it would do in this debate. A Monstrous Creature with the Independent Special Rule would still be a Model with the Independent Character Special Rule, and that sentence states that they can join other Independent Characters. In order to do so it would have to follow the instructions within the next section, titled Joining and Leaving a Unit, which I keep bringing up because your interpenetration is not supported by what is written in this section of the book.

No idea why you keep saying "interpenetration". In any event, "though" indicates that it is a condition that is possible when the preceding condition (sentence) is prohibited. The preceding sentence regards MCs. It does not override the sentence, but merely compliments it. You said nothing indicates 2 ICs joining each other was possible, I showed that it is.

The one who is declaring joining, the other is the joined.

Again, page and graph stating that ICs joining each other - which is not the case here - is a two sided join, unlike the normal IC join which aboslutely is (and must be) ONE sided.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The one who is declaring joining, the other is the joined.

Again, page and graph stating that ICs joining each other - which is not the case here - is a two sided join, unlike the normal IC join which aboslutely is (and must be) ONE sided.

You first, page and paragraph that says anything about declarations in this situation. And two ICs are joining each other here, they just happen to be joining a unit as well.

Joining and Leaving a Unit (Independent Characters USR)

"the player must declare which unit it is joining."

 BlackTalos wrote:
Joining and Leaving a Unit (Independent Characters USR)

"the player must declare which unit it is joining."

That is only when an IC is within 2" of two separate units, which is why I said "this situation". Each IC is only attempting to join one unit, the other IC.

If an Independent Character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must (where possible) remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase.

I had never heard of this rule before... IC cannot get close to MC, Vehicles and other Units???


Automatically Appended Next Post:

"In order to join a unit, an Independent Character simply has to move so that he is within the 2" unit coherency distance of a friendly unit at the end of their Movement phase.2

Then.

That RaW clearly denotes 1 IC, and not "the other" (or the Unit)

They can join other Independent Characters, though, to form a powerful multi-character unit!

Also denote an action by one IC upon the other

 BlackTalos wrote:

If an Independent Character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must (where possible) remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase.

I had never heard of this rule before... IC cannot get close to MC, Vehicles and other Units???


Automatically Appended Next Post:

"In order to join a unit, an Independent Character simply has to move so that he is within the 2" unit coherency distance of a friendly unit at the end of their Movement phase.2

Then.

That RaW clearly denotes 1 IC, and not "the other" (or the Unit)

However, based on what you quoted, both ICs must intend to join the other. If one does not, then it must remain more than 2" away, thus rendering the "join" impossible. At least in the context of 2 ICs only.

Isn't this easily answered in that you're not actually moving both ICs at the same time? You move the first into position (or leave him where he is) and then move the second into coherency at which point the second chooses to join the first. The first can't choose to join the second because his portion of the movement phase has completed and you moved on to moving another unit (the second IC).

Therefore, you can't say that two ICs move into coherency with each other because you're never moving two units simultaneously. You pick one, move it and then pick the next.

Angelic wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The one who is declaring joining, the other is the joined.

Again, page and graph stating that ICs joining each other - which is not the case here - is a two sided join, unlike the normal IC join which aboslutely is (and must be) ONE sided.

You first, page and paragraph that says anything about declarations in this situation. And two ICs are joining each other here, they just happen to be joining a unit as well.

ONly one IC has moved so that it is within 2" of the other, that is the one joining.

Again, two sided join rule please. Page and graph. Furhter ducking will mean everyone will assume you have no such rule.

Angelic wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

If an Independent Character does not intend to (or cannot) join a unit, it must (where possible) remain more than 2" away from it at the end of the Movement phase.

I had never heard of this rule before... IC cannot get close to MC, Vehicles and other Units???


Automatically Appended Next Post:

"In order to join a unit, an Independent Character simply has to move so that he is within the 2" unit coherency distance of a friendly unit at the end of their Movement phase.2

Then.

That RaW clearly denotes 1 IC, and not "the other" (or the Unit)

However, based on what you quoted, both ICs must intend to join the other. If one does not, then it must remain more than 2" away, thus rendering the "join" impossible. At least in the context of 2 ICs only.

No, because it is "at the end of the Movement phase".

That clause is only in effect if that is the End result. If that IC is joined, they form 1 Unit and the rule is no longer evoked.

(Same as moving IC 0.5" from a MC and ending his move there. The MC can still move away before the end of the phase.)

This is how I see it based on the presented rules.

We'll assume Farsight is alone and O'Vesa is alone.

Scenario 1:
Farsight moves first. He ends his movement more than 2" away from O'Vesa. O'Vesa moves second. He ends his movement within 2" of Farsight. O'Vesa has complied with the requirement to "move so that he is within 2" unit coherency of a friendly unit". Farsight didn't fulfill this requirement. O'Vesa was the one doing the joining. This is a legal join.

Scenario 2:
O'Vesa moves first. He ends his movement more than 2" away from Farsight. Farsight now moves, but cannot end his movement within 2" coherency as he cannot join a MC and must stay at least 2" away from any unit he cannot join. No join occurs.

Strictly speaking, once joined, the unit moves as one. You don't have to worry about ending Farsight's movement within 2" of the existing O'Vesa containing unit because Farsight is already a part of the unit.

At this point we have shown clearly how we are obeying the Written Rules themselves, so how can the result be illegal?
In this digital age, please post the actual Rule that was broken getting to this conclusion instead of simply stating the conclusion is illegal.

Exacly.
As long O'vesa is the one making the final step before joining-its legal.

If you want to add yet another IC to the team later though, You'll have to brake the team apart (by moving everyone EXCEPT o'vesa), join the new IC and then bring back O'vesa. failure to follow this process will make it illegal (unless your opponent is willing to streamline the identical end result ofc)


Talos what you miseed is that the not "end of THE movement phase" its "end of THEIR movement phase", two very different sentences.


Eihnlazer is to most funny "It's obvious that RAI he cannot." obvious that RAI farsight cannot be joined by one of his bodyguards?

What I find humorous is the concept that the Authors intended for all Units containing both a Monstrous Creature and an Independent Character to be illegal by default.
Under that mentality O'Vesa could never be fielded, being a Unit of One would not prevent it from still being a Unit with both a Monstrous Creature and an Independent Character within....

JinxDragon wrote:
At this point we have shown clearly how we are obeying the Written Rules themselves, so how can the result be illegal?
In this digital age, please post the actual Rule that was broken getting to this conclusion instead of simply stating the conclusion is illegal.

It is illegal for Farsight to join a unit containing a MC.
O'vesa is a MC.
A unit containing O'vesa contains a MC.
Farsight cannot join a unit containing O'vesa.

By rule, Farsight must remain more than 2" from any such unit at the end of his movement phase, which means he has either left a unit or failed to join one. If Farsight hasn't remained more than 2" from any unit containing O'vesa at the end of the movement phase, a rule has been broken.

Angelic wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
At this point we have shown clearly how we are obeying the Written Rules themselves, so how can the result be illegal?
In this digital age, please post the actual Rule that was broken getting to this conclusion instead of simply stating the conclusion is illegal.

It is illegal for Farsight to join a unit containing a MC.
O'vesa is a MC.
A unit containing O'vesa contains a MC.
Farsight cannot join a unit containing O'vesa.

By rule, Farsight must remain more than 2" from any such unit at the end of his movement phase, which means he has either left a unit or failed to join one. If Farsight hasn't remained more than 2" from any unit containing O'vesa at the end of the movement phase, a rule has been broken.

I underlined where you used two very different phrases to mean the same thing.

They don't. And only one of them is the actual rule.

rigeld2 wrote:

Angelic wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
At this point we have shown clearly how we are obeying the Written Rules themselves, so how can the result be illegal?
In this digital age, please post the actual Rule that was broken getting to this conclusion instead of simply stating the conclusion is illegal.

It is illegal for Farsight to join a unit containing a MC.
O'vesa is a MC.
A unit containing O'vesa contains a MC.
Farsight cannot join a unit containing O'vesa.

By rule, Farsight must remain more than 2" from any such unit at the end of his movement phase, which means he has either left a unit or failed to join one. If Farsight hasn't remained more than 2" from any unit containing O'vesa at the end of the movement phase, a rule has been broken.

I underlined where you used two very different phrases to mean the same thing.

They don't. And only one of them is the actual rule.

I stand corrected, it is "the" movement phase.

Angelic wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
At this point we have shown clearly how we are obeying the Written Rules themselves, so how can the result be illegal?
In this digital age, please post the actual Rule that was broken getting to this conclusion instead of simply stating the conclusion is illegal.

It is illegal for Farsight to join a unit containing a MC.
O'vesa is a MC.
A unit containing O'vesa contains a MC.
Farsight cannot join a unit containing O'vesa.

By rule, Farsight must remain more than 2" from any such unit at the end of his movement phase, which means he has either left a unit or failed to join one. If Farsight hasn't remained more than 2" from any unit containing O'vesa at the end of the movement phase, a rule has been broken.

Only if he wishes to join. If he has already joined, there is no issue

Any two sided joining rule found yet? Or are you ducking yet again?

I am still trying to figure out where Angelic is getting permission to Resolve two Independent Character Special Rules simultaneously.
Once we Resolve O'Vesa there is no longer a Unit within 2 inches of Farsight, so how are we in violating his Independent Character Special Rule when it comes time to check it's conditions?

I dont know, and am assuming they have no real argument, as their core argument - that IC joining is the only 2 sided join - has absolutely no basis.

The rest seems to be waffle right now.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Angelic wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
At this point we have shown clearly how we are obeying the Written Rules themselves, so how can the result be illegal?
In this digital age, please post the actual Rule that was broken getting to this conclusion instead of simply stating the conclusion is illegal.

It is illegal for Farsight to join a unit containing a MC.
O'vesa is a MC.
A unit containing O'vesa contains a MC.
Farsight cannot join a unit containing O'vesa.

By rule, Farsight must remain more than 2" from any such unit at the end of his movement phase, which means he has either left a unit or failed to join one. If Farsight hasn't remained more than 2" from any unit containing O'vesa at the end of the movement phase, a rule has been broken.

Only if he wishes to join. If he has already joined, there is no issue

Any two sided joining rule found yet? Or are you ducking yet again?

Not ducking anything. I've already quoted the rule. You just don't accept it, despite the fact that 2 IC's actually have to intend to join each other or stay away from each other. And the rule requiring them to stay away says if it "cannot" join. Doesn't matter if he has joined a unit already.

Angelic wrote:
Doesn't matter if he has joined a unit already.

Please explain that thought.