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.

Many people have asked about the Exarch's defend ability and whether or not it's cumulative. Most people say it is not, but my Eldar friend is unmoving, saying that it does stack up. No matter what argument I present him, he refuses to concede that it's simply -1 from attacks. He also says that he will not change his mind about this until it says something in the FAQ for his codex... The FAQ says nothing about it. So, to avoid arguing with him, I find myself not charging into H2H with his DA's. Is there an official reference I can check and prove to him the RAI?

The hell does he mean by cumulative? Is he under the impression that each turn you lose one attack, in addition to the one attack you lost last turn? Because that's definitely not what the rule says.

You don't by happenstance have any units that receive +1 of something? Start taking +1 every round and see what he says.

If I remember correctly it's -1 attack down to a minimum of 1 attack , and it is cumulative in that way. I will check my roolbook tonight...

Your friend is criminally wrong.

Not sure what he's trying to get at. The only thing I can think of is if an Exarch and a Phoenix Lord have the same Exarch power, it states they do not stack.

The only instance i can think of where this could POSSIBLY apply would be in a da unit containing and Exarch and pheonix lord... but the PL entry states multiple powers are not cumulative.

Other than that the wording of defend states you loose 1 attack for every assault phase when directing attacks at the exarch's unit. Nowhere does it say that this attack loss is permanant or cumulative.

I can see how hes able to misinterpret the rule, hes under the impression that the loss of an Attack from the power is permanent. But the rule tells you the attack is only lost "in each assault phase." The way I see it, as soon as the the assault phase is over, those models no longer lose one attack. As soon as the next assault phase arrives, they will once again lose one attack.

Really it shouldn't be an issue, but if hes going to be like that, you might as well break it down for him.

I've tried to break it down for him. Nothing convinces him. I even shot GW an e-mail asking for clarification, but never heard from them. Even the INAT FAQ says NOTHING about Dire Avengers. I know what the rules say, how they're intended to be interpreted, but I can't find any official proof of it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spetulhu wrote:You don't by happenstance have any units that receive +1 of something? Start taking +1 every round and see what he says.

No... Sadly. That would be cool, though.

I have been looking and cant find anything official either; most likely because there aren't enough people trying to abuse the rule like he is. I have found several FAQs about it in various forums and the story is all the same. "is defend cumulative?" "No, but it applies every phase."

You're gonna have to either hold his hand through the sentence, word by word, and point out that the penalty no longer applies once each assault phase is over, or not play with him.

Sarigar wrote:Not sure what he's trying to get at. The only thing I can think of is if an Exarch and a Phoenix Lord have the same Exarch power, it states they do not stack.

No, he's saying that each successive turn, I loose 1 more attack.

Round one: -1
Round two: -2
Round three: -3 ... yeah.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Falconlance wrote:I have been looking and cant find anything official either; most likely because there aren't enough people trying to abuse the rule like he is. I have found several FAQs about it in various forums and the story is all the same. "is defend cumulative?" "No, but it applies every phase."

You're gonna have to either hold his hand through the sentence, word by word, and point out that the penalty no longer applies once each assault phase is over, or not play with him.

Yeah.... But he's my ONLY opponent at the moment. I hear Eldar are getting a new codex sometime in the near future, so maybe it will be worded a little different, or changed all-together.

Defend: The Exarch leads his squad in a complex pattern of parries and dodges designed to avoid enemy blows. Enemy models directing their attacks towards the Exarch's squad lose one attack in each assault phase (to a minimum of 1).

That is the exact phrase from the book, page 30.

No where does it say it stacks, or that this is a continuing ability. Like all abilities they are declared or used at the beginning of each turn.

That is kinda like firing a flamer and keeping the templet there for the rest of the game.

Avrik_Shasla wrote:Defend: The Exarch leads his squad in a complex pattern of parries and dodges designed to avoid enemy blows. Enemy models directing their attacks towards the Exarch's squad lose one attack in each assault phase (to a minimum of 1).

That is the exact phrase from the book, page 30.

No where does it say it stacks, or that this is a continuing ability. Like all abilities they are declared or used at the beginning of each turn.

That is kinda like firing a flamer and keeping the templet there for the rest of the game.

I know. I've tried that argument. He says it does. "In every assault phase ... to a minimum of 1." He interprets that meaning that it eventually GOES to a minimum of 1.

Is there anywhere that says the number of attacks reset to their normal value at the beginning of each assault phase? Because that's the best argument I have right now...

[edited content to be more clear]

I will do some research. But from now on, assualt his DAs with infantry with two close combat weapons, in the rules it says that for each close combat weapon you get an extra attack in the assualt phase...so that should cancel it out. X3

It's hard to go against someone who is so ignorantly forward about a rule. Avoid close combat with them. Infact, you should play guard, or Tau...large blast templets of death.

The defend rule states that one attack is lost in each assault phase. Once the next movement phase comes, you are no longer in an assault phase, so the rule no longer applies.

If he wants to claim that it persists because it does not specify when the effect ends, then try explaining to him that by that logic, if a tac marine ever fired his missile launcher, he would never be able to assault for the rest of the game.

Avrik_Shasla wrote:I will do some research. But from now on, assualt his DAs with infantry with two close combat weapons, in the rules it says that for each close combat weapon you get an extra attack in the assualt phase...so that should cancel it out. X3

It's hard to go against someone who is so ignorantly forward about a rule. Avoid close combat with them. Infact, you should play guard, or Tau...large blast templets of death.

I'd love to have a secondary army... But a: I love the orks so much, and b: money.

Yeah, I play orks... That makes this argument so much more curcial for me to win. lol


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Falconlance wrote:The defend rule states that one attack is lost in each assault phase. Once the next movement phase comes, you are no longer in an assault phase, so the rule no longer applies.

If he wants to claim that it persists because it does not specify when the effect ends, then try explaining to him that by that logic, if a tac marine ever fired his missile launcher, he would never be able to assault for the rest of the game.

I'll try that one... But he'll probably claim I'm grasping at straws.

Rottooth wrote:

Avrik_Shasla wrote:I will do some research. But from now on, assualt his DAs with infantry with two close combat weapons, in the rules it says that for each close combat weapon you get an extra attack in the assualt phase...so that should cancel it out. X3

It's hard to go against someone who is so ignorantly forward about a rule. Avoid close combat with them. Infact, you should play guard, or Tau...large blast templets of death.

I'd love to have a secondary army... But a: I love the orks so much, and b: money.

Yeah, I play orks... That makes this argument so much more curcial for me to win. lol


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Falconlance wrote:The defend rule states that one attack is lost in each assault phase. Once the next movement phase comes, you are no longer in an assault phase, so the rule no longer applies.

If he wants to claim that it persists because it does not specify when the effect ends, then try explaining to him that by that logic, if a tac marine ever fired his missile launcher, he would never be able to assault for the rest of the game.

I'll try that one... But he'll probably claim I'm grasping at straws.

I just wouldn't play with him until he realizes that he is being a . He needs to understand that yes, Games-workshop does at times slip up, but if this ability was stacking, they would put that in the rules.

Then tell him hes being a beardy douche. His codex is written clearer than most of the newer ones, he has to put out a greater effort than most to misinterpret a rule.

This is taken from Warseer.


Nope. Because the only attacks that are reduced are the ones directed to the Dire Avenger's Exarch's Squad (Including himself) So therefore, since each model can only direct attacks on one squad, you will only ever reduce the attacks by 1.

Don't matter who's controlling it.
__________________

Wait wait.. are you multicharging more than one dire avenger unit and directing attacks at both of them from the same models? Because THAT will cause you to lose more than 1 attack.

Avrik_Shasla wrote:This is taken from Warseer.


Nope. Because the only attacks that are reduced are the ones directed to the Dire Avenger's Exarch's Squad (Including himself) So therefore, since each model can only direct attacks on one squad, you will only ever reduce the attacks by 1.

Don't matter who's controlling it.
__________________

Yeah, we both clearly understand that. But the way he sees it, so long as my boyz are in CC with his DA's there will be a continual reduction of my attacks toward that squad to a minimum of 1. The whole "lose an attack in each assault to a minimum of one" to him (and a few others he's asked) means I keep losing attacks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Falconlance wrote:Wait wait.. are you multicharging more than one dire avenger unit and directing attacks at both of them from the same models? Because THAT will cause you to lose more than 1 attack.

No, he only has one squad of them.

Out of curiosity, as orks, what are you assaulting them with thats allowing them to live through more than one phase?

Falconlance wrote:Out of curiosity, as orks, what are you assaulting them with thats allowing them to live through more than one phase?

I rarely ever assault them. I did the other day, and I think that was the first... Snikrot and a full compliment of Kommandos took care of them after a cleverly placed flamer.... Killed them all, of course. He keeps them behind the lines, so it's hard to get to them. Once I do, say with a mob of regular boyz, there's usually not many of my guys left. bladestorm...

If any of you guys find anything concrete, please let me know. I'll check back here tomorrow. Pleasant dreams to you all till then.

Just turn tables on him - take boyz with Slugga and Choppa, insist that whenever they charge they get + 1A from charging, +1S and +1I from Furious Assault, +1A from having two cc weapons. Once you reach his Dire Avengers in the backfield, they should not be a problem for some strength 7 boyz who strike at I6 with 10 attacks each. GW didn't faq/errata that either.

I'm reading it as:
a) 1 additional attack less per turn in combat,
but I'd use it as:
b) 1 less attack total.

But, see here:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Dire_Avengers
"Defend: Models attacking the Exarch and his squad in close combat lose an attack per turn (minimum 1)"
To me, that reads as "a".

I'm building up an Eldar army, and didn't want to work it around the wrong rule.

I'd just let it slide because, seriously, there should be nothing left of those DA after the first turn of combat if you're playing Orks.

If you play 2k, attach Ghaz in Snikrot's unit and multiassault his units from his table edge with your guaranteed 6" WAAAGH! on turns 2-3.

Nowhere in the book does it say which attack you have to lose, nor how many times you can lose it.

Turn 1, lose the attack for bonus ccw. Next turn, lose the attack again.

Its the wording "in each" that is poorly written.
The way I read the rule, as written, its actually one lost attack in first, two attacks lost in second etc, or they could just have written "any enemy directing attacks at the unit loose one attack (to a minimum of 1)". To add "in each assault phase" only make sense if the loss was meant to continue.
Its not the way I play it, or even claim its supposed to work, but I agree its not a strange or even far fetched interpretation

No, "in each assault phase" tells you it happens every assault phase, not that it is cumulative.

It is impossible for it to be cumulative, as "each assault phase" is a discrete directive.

If "in each assault phase" was missed off, people would argue that it only counts in the first round.