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.

Assume Obyron is attached to a unit of Wraiths. He wants to use his ghostwalk helm to deep strike elsewhere, but prefers the wraiths stay where he left them. As independent characters are allowed to leave a squad they've joined during the movement phase, is this a legal tactic?

Kitzz wrote:Assume Obyron is attached to a unit of Wraiths. He wants to use his ghostwalk helm to deep strike elsewhere, but prefers the wraiths stay where he left them. As independent characters are allowed to leave a squad they've joined during the movement phase, is this a legal tactic?

You're allowed to leave a unit at the end of the phase - not before you move.
You're restricted to the speed of the slowest model.

No, what you described isn't legal unless Obyron or the Helm have some special rule.

Is this strictly speaking true?

Obyron and his unit can use the Ghostwalk Mantle (btw, it's a *mantle* guys, not a helmet) in their movement phase instead of moving normally. It's a movement action that places you more than 2" away from the unit. Speed doesn't enter into it, there's no speed involved, and if there were Obyron isn't moving any "faster" than the unit could have if it were coming along with him. Then, while Obyron may not be considered separate from his unit until the end of the phase, he certainly has the right to move away from them - and the rule says he can use the mantle in place of his normal movement.

Not sure I see the problem.

Is it in place of his movement or his and his units?

rigeld2 wrote:Is it in place of his movement or his and his units?

verbatim: "Obyron can use the Ghostwalk Mantle in his Movement phase instead of moving normally." It then goes on to say, "If he does, Obyron and his unit are removed from the tabletop..." etc, which raises the question of whether he can move independently of the unit in the movement phase when he's leaving them, which from BRB's wording of IC's leaving units, ie, pp48 "An independent character can leave a unit during the movement phase by moving out of coherency distance with it" he clearly can. There's no question of him "recovering" an IC movement ability during the move away, he (and the unit) still had the Ghostwalk ability while joined. (ie, no issue as if jump-capable IC moving away from non-jump capable unit.) Substituting wording for Ghostwalk Mantle special rule into BRB's IC leaving units rule gives us...

yellow - original wording
orange - specific wording
"Obyron [An IC] can leave a unit during the movement phase by using the Ghostwalk Mantle [moving] out of coherency distance with it."

I don't see the option to only move Obyron with that. Yes, he can leave the unit. Yes, he can use the mantle. Since the mantle says him and his unit, not him or his unit, I don't see permission to just move him with it.

Silly. You're saying that Obyron can't use the mantle unless he moves a unit with him. Obviously he can.

Kitzz, use the mantle to leave the unit. Provide the TO with the logic laid out in my second post here. You're good to go.

Randall Turner wrote:Silly. You're saying that Obyron can't use the mantle unless he moves a unit with him. Obviously he can.

Obviously? Why do you say that?
He can still use it solo because "his unit" is himself.

Kitzz, use the mantle to leave the unit. Provide the TO with the logic laid out in my second post here. You're good to go.

You don't have to absolutely dismiss my argument as if it has no basis.

Counter question - can a librarian GoI out of a unit?

rigeld2 wrote:Counter question - can a librarian GoI out of a unit?

Ah, I see the problem. Unfortunately for our brave Librarian, the GoI special rule doesn't contain the key phrase, "instead of moving normally". He doesn't (might not?) have the option of substituting the "displacement" move for the normal move away from the unit he's joined to. This hasn't come up in a game for me, is that how it's usually played?

No, you may not Mantle out of a unit, as it specifically includes any unit he is attached to.

Unless you can prove he is able to leave the unit without actually following the method laid out on page 48, then your "logic" has no rules basis and is dismissed as irrelevant

I agree with nos and rigeld2 here. The wargear specifically states that you move Obyron and his unit. If it had language that allowed you to parse that a little bit, say:

"If he is attached to a unit, then he may. . ." then you may have some wiggle room.

But there isn't. It simply says "Obyron and his unit". If you've used the Ghostwalk Mantle and removed Obyron from the tabletop, but did not also remove his unit, you've broken the rules of the Ghostwalk Mantle.

Agree as well. Unfortunately Obyron cannot use his Mantle to voluntarily leave his unit. Only when his buddy is assaulted is he allowed (forced) to leave his unit. Otherwise, the wording of the Mantle only allows him to teleport the entire unit he is with.

Well that f'ing well does it. I'm used enough to Rigeld2 supporting positions I know are wrong that I'm willing to play devil's advocate, but if two reasonable heavy-hitters don't see it that way, I'm cutting my losses here.

To be honest, when Rigeld2 pulled up the librarian example I was, "oh, dear". But enough is enough, and the Librarian rule is close enough that if it's not allowed for him, it shouldn't be allowed for Obyron.

Sorry for not throwing it in earlier, Rigeld2.

Randall Turner wrote:Well that f'ing well does it. I'm used enough to Rigeld2 supporting positions I know are wrong that I'm willing to play devil's advocate, but if two reasonable heavy-hitters don't see it that way, I'm cutting my losses here.

To be honest, when Rigeld2 pulled up the librarian example I was, "oh, dear". But enough is enough, and the Librarian rule is close enough that if it's not allowed for him, it shouldn't be allowed for Obyron.

Sorry for not throwing it in earlier, Rigeld2.

You don't have to apologize. It's not like discussions offend me :-)
To be honest, at first I thought you were right, I was just thinking it through.
I was going to respond to the GoI stuff you posted this morning :-)

Take a look at the Vargard's Duty section.
Verbatim
Furthermore, if an enemy unit launches an attack on Zahndrekh's unit, Obyron immediatly his unit and must pile in to that combat, regardless of how far from it he is - we assume he uses the Ghostwalk Mantle to reach his masters side.

that is the only way he can teleport away from his unit

And? That is a specific exception to the actual rules.

necrons_ftw wrote:Take a look at the Vargard's Duty section.
Verbatim
Furthermore, if an enemy unit launches an attack on Zahndrekh's unit, Obyron immediatly his unit and must pile in to that combat, regardless of how far from it he is - we assume he uses the Ghostwalk Mantle to reach his masters side.

that is the only way he can teleport away from his unit

Well, the question is more of a general one.

But, before going to a party and having a hangover all weekend, I did look through all the rules wording and all the FAQ's regarding IC's leaving, and I can't find anything that specifically prohibits this sort of thing. (Beaming out, in the general case.)

What we do have, though, is a bunch of problems if we consider the IC to be "leaving", ie, no longer attached, to a unit ON DECLARATION of INTENT to leave, rather than at the end of the movement phase. The convention of considering the IC as an indivisible part of the unit until the end of the movement phase is, as near as I can tell, just that - a convention. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.) I can't see wording that prohibits earlier "leaving". (ie, alternate interpretation.) What I did see, though, was the chance of a lot of "odd" things happening that might be hard to deal with. And that's when I went, "oh, I see the problem" above.

And I'm a big believer in regularity. Avoidance of sticky situations is a legitimate reason to adopt any rule interpretation.