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.

How do mindshackle scarabs interact with Crowe's (or any other model's) use of The Perfect Warrior?

They make the model attack his own unit if he fails the test right?

In that case I would say that the owning player simply chooses what attack he uses against himself. Which would naturally be Shield of Blades so he actually doesn't hurt himself.

IDK if Mindshackle only works on ICs or just models in BtB. Crowe is NOT and IC FYI, just a unit consisting of a single infantry model.

Kitzz wrote:How do mindshackle scarabs interact with Crowe's (or any other model's) use of The Perfect Warrior?

Definite grey area here. Both effects occur at exactly the same time (after assault moves are made but before any blows are struck), so there is no indication which one should be done 'first' per se.

The Perfect warrior is not an ability or penalty granted via a weapon, so I don't think Scarabs give you any control over it, so definitely no choosing which stance by the Necron player no matter what.

So I think the GK player is going to get to choose the stance no matter whether the model is mindshackled or not. Whether or not he has to (or gets to) choose the stance before or after seeing who Mindshackle Scarabs target (and if they're successful) is completely ambiguous, but I feel kind of like the stance needs to be picked before the Mindshackle target and Ld test occur (don't know why exactly, just how I feel).

Of course, then there's the question of whether the Mindshackle rule about making attacks against your own unit would override the special rules of the perfect warrior anyway? I'm guessing no, since the Perfect Warrior stances are not 'attacking normally', which is what the Scarabs allow you to replace.

Honestly I don't know. Its a complete toss-up (needs to go in the INAT for the next update for sure!).

Not to run off track this thread; but:

Do MSS's only work in the initial "charge" of the assault, and nothing in subsequent locked turns?

gregor_xenos wrote:Not to run off track this thread; but:

Do MSS's only work in the initial "charge" of the assault, and nothing in subsequent locked turns?

Every assault phase the model with Mindshackle Scarabs is locked in combat, you're rolling for Mindshackle Scarabs regardless of who charged who or if the combat is ongoing.

SWEET!!! Thanks Yak.... Youre my hero.

I cannot find a single action that both players have to perform at the same time (such as Pile-in moves at the end of the Assault Phase), that, unless otherwise stated, is not done first by the player whose turn it is. So, if it the Necron player's turn, he should, by precedence, perform his Mindshacle roll first. If it is the Grey Knight player's turn, then he should choose his Battle Stance first.

Either way, the Necron player isn't going to be able to choose the battle stance so the GK player can simply used Blade Shield and avoid the danger of the Scarabs. ANd on the GK turn the GK player could simply opt to do his action after the roll for the scarabs to see if he is safe or not.

Grey Templar wrote:ANd on the GK turn the GK player could simply opt to do his action after the roll for the scarabs to see if he is safe or not.

Ghenghis Jon wrote:I cannot find a single action that both players have to perform at the same time (such as Pile-in moves at the end of the Assault Phase), that, unless otherwise stated, is not done first by the player whose turn it is. So, if it the Necron player's turn, he should, by precedence, perform his Mindshacle roll first. If it is the Grey Knight player's turn, then he should choose his Battle Stance first.

What reasoning do you have for the Grey Knight player not performing his mandatory actions first on his turn?

Ghenghis Jon wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:ANd on the GK turn the GK player could simply opt to do his action after the roll for the scarabs to see if he is safe or not.

Ghenghis Jon wrote:I cannot find a single action that both players have to perform at the same time (such as Pile-in moves at the end of the Assault Phase), that, unless otherwise stated, is not done first by the player whose turn it is. So, if it the Necron player's turn, he should, by precedence, perform his Mindshacle roll first. If it is the Grey Knight player's turn, then he should choose his Battle Stance first.

What reasoning do you have for the Grey Knight player not performing his mandatory actions first on his turn?

Edit: Removed, I misread Ghengis's quote.

Luide wrote:Considering that he just said that if it is GK players turn, GK player performs mandatory action (choosing Battle Stance) first, I don't really understand your question.

No, the GK player is saying that he could 'opt' to do his action AFTER the Scarabs' roll even on the GK turn.

Grey Templar wrote:ANd on the GK turn the GK player could simply opt to do his action after the roll for the scarabs to see if he is safe or not.

Ghenghis Jon wrote:

Luide wrote:Considering that he just said that if it is GK players turn, GK player performs mandatory action (choosing Battle Stance) first, I don't really understand your question.

No, the GK player is saying that he could 'opt' to do his action AFTER the Scarabs' roll even on the GK turn.

Grey Templar wrote:ANd on the GK turn the GK player could simply opt to do his action after the roll for the scarabs to see if he is safe or not.

Ah, sorry. I misread your quote, thinking that it was the previous poster responding to your post, instead you responding to him. Editing my previous post to remove it now.

I agree that there really are only two ways you can really make simultaneous (ie action at the exactly same time as far as game is concerned) actions like this work together:
1) Controlling player is always first in order to do the "simultaneous" action.
2) Controlling player chooses in which order "simultaneous" actions are done

Number 1 has definitely better precedents going for it, but you can easily make arguments for number 2 also.

So true way to be safe (assuming number 1 interpretation) is in GK turn choose Shield of blades (before Mindshackle are rolled) and in Necron turn, see mindshacle results before choosing Battle Stance.

Luide wrote:1) Controlling player is always first in order to do the "simultaneous" action.
2) Controlling player chooses in which order "simultaneous" actions are done
Number 1 has definitely better precedents going for it, but you can easily make arguments for number 2 also.

Number 2 is a really interesting idea. What arguments do you suspect would support this?

There are no timing guidelines for abilities regarding who is the controlling. player.

On the subject, it would seem that both these abilities trigger together and are mutually exclusive. So I would roll off each time.

I know..the Ultimate Warrior, not the Perfect.
It was just what popped into my head.


..

Ghenghis Jon wrote:

Luide wrote:1) Controlling player is always first in order to do the "simultaneous" action.
2) Controlling player chooses in which order "simultaneous" actions are done
Number 1 has definitely better precedents going for it, but you can easily make arguments for number 2 also.

Number 2 is a really interesting idea. What arguments do you suspect would support this?

Like I said, number 1 has far better precedents. Basically only precedent for number 2 is when we have multiple "simultaneous" assaults going on, controlling player chooses in which order to resolve them (pg 34).
Rules really don't spell out how to resolve things that happen at exactly same time. Like copper said, you could just roll off each time. But that is IMO poor choice, I'd personally talk with opponent before game and ask him does he prefer number 1 or 2 as the way to resolve things or offer to roll off between those two.
Both number 1 and number 2 are fair ways to resolve the problem.

copper.talos wrote:There are no timing guidelines for abilities regarding who is the controlling. player.

No, but there is precedent for the player whose turn it is to perform all of his "simultaneous" mandatory actions before the other player (pg 34, Defender's React, pg 40, Pile-In!).

copper.talos wrote:So I would roll off each time.

That would be fair and maybe even fun. Do you think the Chronometron could effect a roll off?

Luide wrote:Basically only precedent for number 2 is when we have multiple "simultaneous" assaults going on, controlling player chooses in which order to resolve them (pg 34).

Bottom of the right column, "the player whose turn it is can decide which order in which to resolve the combats". I do not think that deciding the order to resolve combats is the same as deciding the order in which simultaneous events controlled by you and your opponent are the same thing. Your opponent only has reactionary duties to being assaulted.

Luide wrote:Both number 1 and number 2 are fair ways to resolve the problem.

I agree that they are fair, but 1 is in more keeping with the flow of play in this turn based game in which the player whose turn it is performs his actions first.

Ghengis Jon wrote:That would be fair and maybe even fun. Do you think the Chronometron could effect a roll off?

Only if you, not your models, are part of the Crypteks unit. Of course if you are, I think humanity has bigger problems.

Happyjew wrote:Only if you, not your models, are part of the Crypteks unit. Of course if you are, I think humanity has bigger problems.

This is the answer I was looking for. Thanks!

Actually, the rules are that in the event of simultanious actions the player whose turn it is decides what happens first. So either way the GK player will know what the result of Mindshackle before he picks his stance.

"Actually, the rules are that in the event of simultanious actions the player whose turn it is decides what happens first."

Thats a WHFB rule (page 10) not a WH40k rule


Automatically Appended Next Post:
to make it clear: there is nothing inherently "blocking" about these two actions. The GK player can choose, and the 3D6 roll made, without them, without requiring the knowledge of one to determine the other.

The GK player would *like* to know the result before choosing, but choosing first, then rolling (or rolling at the same time the GK player chooses) would be the most fair way of doing it. Cf to Mephiston (et al) choosing to become S10 or not

I have been thinking about this specific case wrong. Whatever Perfect Warrior Stance the Gray Knight player chooses, if he fails his 3D6 Leadership Test, he would still have make D3 attacks at his strength and with the close combat weapon of the Necron player's choice against his unit.

I still think that the order of simultaneous actions between two players would be done by the player whose turn it is first.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The GK player would *like* to know the result before choosing, but choosing first, then rolling (or rolling at the same time the GK player chooses) would be the most fair way of doing it.

I agree, but other than your opinion that this would be fair, why do you think this makes the most sense with the current rule set?

As I explained - neither blocks the other

Ghenghis Jon wrote:I have been thinking about this specific case wrong. Whatever Perfect Warrior Stance the Gray Knight player chooses, if he fails his 3D6 Leadership Test, he would still have make D3 attacks at his strength and with the close combat weapon of the Necron player's choice against his unit.

I still think that the order of simultaneous actions between two players would be done by the player whose turn it is first.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The GK player would *like* to know the result before choosing, but choosing first, then rolling (or rolling at the same time the GK player chooses) would be the most fair way of doing it.

I agree, but other than your opinion that this would be fair, why do you think this makes the most sense with the current rule set?

If the GK player chooses blade shield, the brotherhood champion cannot make any attacks that turn. It specifically says under the stance "The brotherhood champion cannot attack this turn..."

MSS causes hits not attacks.

Dok - except the MSS makes you hit, not attack

So, other than the semantics in this particular case, does anybody else have an opinion about the fundamental game structure concerning actions to performed at the same time by both players? copper.talos's opinion to roll off every time is definitely supported by the process of placing Seize Ground Objectives and Infiltrating and Scouting units, as opposed to mine of the player whose turn it is performing his actions first like all Assaults and Pile-In! moves.

There are no guidelines concerning actions performed at the same time by both players. In most cases both resolve independently. If one action of one player goes against that of the opponent, I use the faq:

Q: When two special rules or effects contradict each
other how is this resolved? (p2)
A: Roll off using ‘The Most Important Rule!’.

The problem lies in convincing the opponent that these two rules contradict each other.

rigeld2 wrote:MSS causes hits not attacks.

GW disagrees with you however. Taken from their FAQ for necrons

"Q: If a single model fails the Leadership test caused by
mindshackle scarabs, will his Attacks be resolved
against himself? (p81)
A: Yes.

Q: If an Independent Character that has joined a unit is
affected by mindshackle scarabs will his attacks be
resolved against the unit he has joined? (p81)
A: Yes."

Emphasis mine.

Blood Hawk wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:MSS causes hits not attacks.

GW disagrees with you however. Taken from their FAQ for necrons

"Q: If a single model fails the Leadership test caused by
mindshackle scarabs, will his Attacks be resolved
against himself? (p81)
A: Yes.

Q: If an Independent Character that has joined a unit is
affected by mindshackle scarabs will his attacks be
resolved against the unit he has joined? (p81)
A: Yes."

Emphasis mine.

GW doesn't disagree with me - they disagree with their own codex which specifies hits, not attacks.