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.

Right, i recently used a list with 4 eldritch lances in a Necron royal court, but my opponent said that i can only have one as it is a specific bit of wargear, but i had been told by the many people here on dakka who had helped me write the list that it was allowed...WHICH IS IT??

:/

Your opponent doesnt know what theyre talking about.

Wargear OPTIONS are unique. You see that bit where, when you upgrade to Harbinger of X you are forced to change your Staff for something else? That piece of wargear is by definition NOT optional

The wording is a bit unclear, but there is a nice proof under the Royal Court entry. In the paragraph where it specifies that you cannot take duplicate Cryptek wargear, it specifically mentions that having multiples of the same type of Harbinger is allowed. There is no way to take multiples of the same type of Harbinger without taking multiples of their default weapons (e.g. Eldritch Lance, Voltaic Staff), which makes it pretty clear that you can take 2 or more of those items.

I thought so, we always have arguments like this, well at least i know now that I *might* have been able to win after all XD

The rule is only unclear if you forget the word "options" is there.

Eldritch lance is NOT an option, so is not unique. It is THAT simple.

I guess he just read it as an upgrade, and therefore assumed it was unique wargear

nosferatu1001 wrote:The rule is only unclear if you forget the word "options" is there.

Eldritch lance is NOT an option, so is not unique. It is THAT simple.

Obviously, it is unclear to many players. That's why this dispute keeps coming up. I assume people will consider Lance an option as the Harbinger upgrade is optional itself...who knows. The easiest way to avoid a dispute is to point to the wording that specifically allows multiples of each Harbinger.

you could argue that none of the items are listed as unique, so you can take them all as often as you want.

-Matt

HawaiiMatt wrote:you could argue that none of the items are listed as unique...

The items are unique to the specific type of Harbinger that can take those items.

HawaiiMatt wrote:you could argue that none of the items are listed as unique, so you can take them all as often as you want.

-Matt

Yet there is a rule saying any wargear Option is unique to that court. So, no, that argument holds no water

Thanks for the help guys

This question has come up more frequently than I would've expected. I agree that only the optional wargear items are limited to one per court. I posted an article with a lengthier explanation here.

Hope this helps!
-GK

I fail to see how this is still an issue...

It's written right into the codex.

"* Any number of Crypteks that are in a Royal court can be upgraded to a single, specific type of Harbinger. Whilst you can have any number of Harbingers of a specific type, each of the Harbinger's unique wargear options can only be chosen once in each Royal Court."

Proof by contradiction, initial argument was invalidated by specific wording, ergo it is not correct.

Now if we assume that the rules are not self-contradictory (obviously), then that means that "unique wargear options" cannot possibly be a reference to the staff, and thus therefore must reference the other wargear options any specific Harbinger may take.

And of course, if we looked at the non-optional staff upgrades as being exclusive, we wouldn't be able to get multiple harbingers of a specific type -- which contradicts the clause immediately preceding.

The sentence is rather poorly written, but there is nevertheless only one real conclusion you can derive. I'm not awarding Ward any points for clarity, but he's at least managed to be nonambiguous this time.

Hopefully other necron players will see this and it will help them...even though I'm not playing 'crons no more...