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.

Does a dark eldar Archon's shadowfield and a eldar farseer's fortune stack together if they are in the same unit?

From the Eldar FAQ:

Q: Do Dark Eldar allies count as Eldar for the Farseer psychic
powers Fortune and Guide? (p28)
A: No.

Can you explain why it doesn't work?

Where does it say fortune cannot affect a DE model? It cannot target them but if you have a Eldar squad and have the Archon join you target the squad and it would be affected. Having said that... well I'll just field 7 flyers (not necron) and laugh at you anyway.

For shadowfield, if the save IS EVER failed, the field is destroyed all together (RAW). The condition for fortune only allows the user to only re roll saves that are Failed. In turn, the trigger effect for fortune comes into effect when the initial save is failed, whether or not you pass or fail your re roll the initial save was unsuccessful and the shadowfield is destroyed. I don't believe that fortune saves shadowfield from not being destroyed if, the re roll is saved. Once the invulnerable save is fail its gone for the remainder of the game.

Q: Do Dark Eldar allies count as Eldar for the Farseer psychic
powers Fortune and Guide? (p28)
A: No.

The argument most would make for this ruling is that an archon would be able to benefit from the Farseer's psychic power Fortune as it joins a unit being an IC and a battle brother. The fortune would affect the entire group of Eldar but because an Archon is from the DE codex and not the Eldar codex, it would not be able to benefit from this psychic power, even though fortune is cast on the entire unit.

A dark eldar that joins a group of eldar can in no way or fashion become an eldar.

sounddemon wrote:
For shadowfield, if the save IS EVER failed, the field is destroyed all together (RAW). The condition for fortune only allows the user to only re roll saves that are Failed. In turn, the trigger effect for fortune comes into effect when the initial save is failed, whether or not you pass or fail your re roll the initial save was unsuccessful and the shadowfield is destroyed. I don't believe that fortune saves shadowfield from not being destroyed if, the re roll is saved. Once the invulnerable save is fail its gone for the remainder of the game.

Q: Do Dark Eldar allies count as Eldar for the Farseer psychic
powers Fortune and Guide? (p28)
A: No.

The argument most would make for this ruling is that an archon would be able to benefit from the Farseer's psychic power Fortune as it joins a unit being an IC and a battle brother. The fortune would affect the entire group of Eldar but because an Archon is from the DE codex and not the Eldar codex, it would not be able to benefit from this psychic power, even though fortune is cast on the entire unit.

A dark eldar that joins a group of eldar can in no way or fashion become an eldar.

Im sorry, But you are wrong. When an IC joins a unit it becomes that unit for all rule purposes. Check the USR of "independant Character". Shaddowfields are usable with fortune. Plain and simple. There has already been multiple threads regarding this. The have all been locked do to mods getting fed up with people arguing over it. Weather people like it or not, it is legal as the rules are written.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Other threads covering this....

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/478092.page#4802431

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/475016.page

For the sake of recency and argument the BRB is older than the faq ruling. The faq is more recent and takes priority. You can not overrule an faq ruling.

sounddemon wrote:
For the sake of recency and argument the BRB is older than the faq ruling. The faq is more recent and takes priority. You can not overrule an faq ruling.

Which has no relevance.
Fortune only cares about Eldar for targeting.
Once a valid target has been selected, the entire unit benefits.
Guess who a normal member of the unit is.

For the sake of sanity please read the codex and the faq. Dark Eldar do not count as eldar. farseer cannot "Nominate" a DE unit. Archon is a member of a seer council. Farseer Nominates seer council. "The unit re-rolls any failed save it makes..." for the faq to pevent this from working the wording would need to be... "all eldar models in the unit re-rolls any failed save it makes..."

As far as the "failed save" argument, read the rules about re rolling dice in the faq. the first result, and all effects are effectively discarded.

How can you disregard an faq ruling and saying something complete different from what GW rules the rule to be?

sounddemon wrote:
How can you disregard an faq ruling and saying something complete different from what GW rules the rule to be?

I'm not disregarding it at all. It fits literally exactly what I said.
The FAQ says that Dark Eldar are not Eldar for the purposes of Fortune.
Fortune only cares about Eldar as far as targeting is concerned - once a unit is targeted and the power goes off there's no racial restriction to the benefit.
A Tau model, DE model, or whatever battle brother model is a normal member of the unit while attached. Therefore he benefits from Fortune.

And yeah, you're wrong about the re-rolling thing too - or do twin linked plasma weapons still Get Hot if they roll a 1 on the first die?

You always ignore the first roll of a re-roll. Thats how it is.

PLEASE READ THE OTHER THREADS I LINKED.

We do NOT need another one of these pointless threads. Everything has been covered on the other threads I linked. The horse has been beaten dead so many times.

It might technically work right now, but note that the precedent set by IG orders is that independent characters do NOT receive the benefit given to "an IG unit". Abuse it while you can, because once GW realizes their FAQ didn't answer it convincingly enough it's gone.

For shadowfield (RAW) if the save is EVER failed, implying that even if it saved on a re roll then the effect of shadowfield is gone. This is pretty obvious.

Also in regards to the faq why make a ruling that has no effect, makes no sense.

For the sake of clarity, I truly believe this topic should be further discussed. Hopefully this will be one of merit and not of rage and discord.

The problem is it says that They can NEVER be buffed by something from an Eldar Codex, if they are DARK eldar

You can go around this, by putting an archon in the group of eldar models. ANd then BUFF the unit that is (Technically) Eldar. And then the DARK ELDAR, would get the buff from the ELDAR ability.

This does not seem like rules as intented. And it does say that can never get buffs from them. I don't know. I think its really stickler rule lawyer thing to put an IC in the group of Not-Your-main-army unit. That's just going around the rule, atleast I think.

Rerollable 2+ is another situation in itself. Because WHEN it fails. (Meaning that you roll your fortune BECAUSE you FAILED your 2+ invulnerable save) you do NOT get that 2+ anymore.

Its really odd..

The faq was written because people were trying to say that DE=Eldar. Saying that because they are the same race, they are the same thing. And therefor you could directly cast fortune and guide on dark eldar units. This is what the FAQ addressees. If the faq was about shadowfield, it would say that. So are you going to tell me that Tau IC's can benefit from fortune when joined with an eldar unit but a DE can not?

If GW didnt want the 2++ re-rolls, they would have made it very clear.

And the attempted ruling of shadowfield you layed forward here is quite funny. But when re-rolling the dice, YOU ALWAYS IGNORE the first roll, the second roll is what counts. Its like it never happened.

sounddemon wrote:
For shadowfield (RAW) if the save is EVER failed, implying that even if it saved on a re roll then the effect of shadowfield is gone. This is pretty obvious.

No. If you re-roll a die it's not final, you ignore the result entirely. A save isn't failed until you're done rolling it, modifying it, etc, and have a final number on the die.

Also in regards to the faq why make a ruling that has no effect, makes no sense.

Of course it has an effect, a Farseer can't target, for example, a Ravager with a psychic power that is restricted to Eldar units. It just doesn't clearly rule out shadowfield abuse since the target is still arguably an Eldar unit.


However, like I said, it's not going to matter much longer. The IG FAQ clearly gives GW's position that ICs joined to a unit don't benefit from "a {army} unit gains X" type abilities, so once they realize they didn't take out shadowfield abuse yet they'll just give Eldar the same FAQ.

sounddemon wrote:
For shadowfield (RAW) if the save is EVER failed, implying that even if it saved on a re roll then the effect of shadowfield is gone. This is pretty obvious.

You know what else happens whenever a save is failed, the target unit takes a wound, the justification you are trying to use for a shadowfield ceasing to work when re-rolling a failed wound would also render re-rolling any failed wound entirely pointless, because you already failed the save and thus take the wound, in fact, the justification you are trying to use makes re-rolling a save a liability, because the only in game effect it would have would be to cause a unit who fails a save to be in danger of failing a further save and taking 2 wounds instead of 1.

In short, you are totally wrong, regardless of your opinions on the whole targeting an Eldar unit with an Archon attached thing, if an Archon has a re-rollable save with his Shadowfield, that re-roll includes keeping the Shadowfield operational, this is not up for debate, there is no reasonable way you can claim otherwise without ruining the entire game.

Also in regards to the faq why make a ruling that has no effect, makes no sense.

It doesn't have no effect, it has the effect of clarifying that you can't simply target a Dark Eldar unit and claim they are a subset of the broader category Eldar, that only units from the Eldar codex are Eldar units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Monasou wrote:
The problem is it says that They can NEVER be buffed by something from an Eldar Codex, if they are DARK eldar

No it doesn't

Rerollable 2+ is another situation in itself. Because WHEN it fails. (Meaning that you roll your fortune BECAUSE you FAILED your 2+ invulnerable save) you do NOT get that 2+ anymore.

No it doesn't

Shadowfield is a combo that can be paired with fortune. It should be clear that DE and Eldar are two different armies. They both have different codexes.

Refering back to the rolling, why even say Ever in the rules for shadowfield. How do you ignore something that directly included in the rules. I do agree that TL is ignored for sakes of rolling but this is a unique case.

The way I see is if shadowfield ever fails then the ability to have a 2+ invulnerable is gone, but the roll for fortune still happens and shadowfield fades.

There is nothing in fortune that says anything about special rules, its just the wound and nothing more.

I would like to hear different perspectives from other players, of all armies.

sounddemon wrote:
The way I see is if shadowfield ever fails then the ability to have a 2+ invulnerable is gone, but the roll for fortune still happens and shadowfield fades.

"Fails a save" is a very specific concept, and you don't fail a save until you have finished rolling, re-rolling, modifying, etc the outcome and reach a final result that is lower than the required value to succeed.

I would like to hear different perspectives from other players, of all armies.

I don't play either army and this is a stupid argument. And let's be honest here, you're just looking for an excuse to break an overpowered combo. You wouldn't be making this absurd "the reroll doesn't count" argument if it was a 6+ rerollable save instead of a 2+.

 Drunkspleen wrote:

sounddemon wrote:
For shadowfield (RAW) if the save is EVER failed, implying that even if it saved on a re roll then the effect of shadowfield is gone. This is pretty obvious.

You know what else happens whenever a save is failed, the target unit takes a wound, the justification you are trying to use for a shadowfield ceasing to work when re-rolling a failed wound would also render re-rolling any failed wound entirely pointless, because you already failed the save and thus take the wound, in fact, the justification you are trying to use makes re-rolling a save a liability, because the only in game effect it would have would be to cause a unit who fails a save to be in danger of failing a further save and taking 2 wounds instead of 1.

In short, you are totally wrong, regardless of your opinions on the whole targeting an Eldar unit with an Archon attached thing, if an Archon has a re-rollable save with his Shadowfield, that re-roll includes keeping the Shadowfield operational, this is not up for debate, there is no reasonable way you can claim otherwise without ruining the entire game.

Also in regards to the faq why make a ruling that has no effect, makes no sense.

It doesn't have no effect, it has the effect of clarifying that you can't simply target a Dark Eldar unit and claim they are a subset of the broader category Eldar, that only units from the Eldar codex are Eldar units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Monasou wrote:
The problem is it says that They can NEVER be buffed by something from an Eldar Codex, if they are DARK eldar

No it doesn't

Rerollable 2+ is another situation in itself. Because WHEN it fails. (Meaning that you roll your fortune BECAUSE you FAILED your 2+ invulnerable save) you do NOT get that 2+ anymore.

No it doesn't

You can't create 1 wound into 2 wounds. You can't create something out of nothing, this isn't the federal reserve. This is comparable to feel no pain as you fail a wound and roll to see if nothing happen. In this case, its almost identical.

Ever is a specific concept, it happens whenever doesn't matter even if its a saved re roll.

It doesn't really have to "make sense".
It is the rules that we are working with, and until GW further clarifies those rules we go with what they actually say.

sounddemon wrote:
I still haven't gotten a response on the EVER wording on the shadowfield. You don't just ignore it like you would any other re roll and if that were the case why would the rule makers include it. Makes no sense.

"Ever" is just a way of saying "if this happens once", it isn't some special way of making an exception to how re-rolls normally work. There is no ambiguity at all here unless you deliberately set out to find even the flimsiest excuse to kill the combo.

Steelmage99 wrote:
It doesn't really have to "make sense".
It is the rules that we are working with, and until GW further clarifies those rules we go with what they actually say.

This seems to be a common trend in warhammer. Just dealing with it seems to be the answer for many strong things.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

sounddemon wrote:
I still haven't gotten a response on the EVER wording on the shadowfield. You don't just ignore it like you would any other re roll and if that were the case why would the rule makers include it. Makes no sense.

"Ever" is just a way of saying "if this happens once", it isn't some special way of making an exception to how re-rolls normally work. There is no ambiguity at all here unless you deliberately set out to find even the flimsiest excuse to kill the combo.

That's exactly all you need is once. If it wasn't an exception then why even introduce it in the first place. It would just be applied normally like any other re rollable save.

You act like the dark eldar codex (specifically the shadowfield section) was written with being fortuned in mind. And therefore was written to have the "ever" part in there to make sure it nerfs the fortune on itself. It wasnt. And that would be the only way that save could be re-rolled (that i can think of). So you argument is invalid.

sounddemon wrote:
That's exactly all you need is once. If it wasn't an exception then why even introduce it in the first place. It would just be applied normally like any other re rollable save.

It isn't introducing anything.

And again, this would not be an issue if it was a 6+ rerollable save instead of a 2+. It's very obvious that you're desperately searching for even the flimsiest excuse to break the combo, so if you really feel that strongly about it just make a house rule that Fortune doesn't apply.

Assigning motivations to someone on the other side of an rules argument is a straw man position, and it's often rude; don't do it.

That said, we've had this conversation adequate numbers of times of late; this one doesn't need to continue.