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.

Pretty sure I know the answer to this one but I'd like to be sure anyway.

In the new Dark Angels book, under Azraels rule for Rites of Battle it states that all models in the codex use his leadership for checks. Now what I'm curious about is if you were facing Tyranids and the Deathleaper dropped his leadership value by 3, would that pass on to every other model in the army?

That could be quite a nuisance...!

Yes, as Azrael's Leadership is (X-D3). If it said unmodified Leadership, that'd be different.

This just made me realize they changed the "may use" from 4th & 5th edition to "uses" for 6th edition.

Note to self bring Deathleaper next time I go up against Azrael and his "friends".

 Happyjew wrote:
Yes, as Azrael's Leadership is (X-D3). If it said unmodified Leadership, that'd be different.

Yeah, I figured as much, thanks.

I guess Dark Angels are just terrified of that one super scary Lictor!

Just as an aside can anyone think of any other leadership modifiers that might cause this?

Hmmm...

Stubborn means you ignore negative Leadership modifiers. So, maybe not gonna hurt an Azrael greenwing force that much after all.

Who has Stubborn?

90% of the Dark Angels. It's their stand in for Combat Tactics.

Everything that isn't Fearless gets Stubborn (aka Grim Resolve). So the things that don't ignore negative modifiers are already Fearless so aren't going to fail anyway.

How does stubborn help? They're not being targeted by negative modifiers. Azrael is, and he doesn't ignore a negative modifier.

Because stubborn says it ignores ANY negative leadership modifier.

This is a set value replacement

nosferatu1001 wrote:
This is a set value replacement

It would be a negative modifier if it were setting the unit's leadership to lower than it normally is though, which means drops in Azrael's leadership wouldn't negatively effect the rest of the force (other than in that they lose his LD 10, they won't be worse off for having him there though).

 Drunkspleen wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
This is a set value replacement

It would be a negative modifier if it were setting the unit's leadership to lower than it normally is though, which means drops in Azrael's leadership wouldn't negatively effect the rest of the force (other than in that they lose his LD 10, they won't be worse off for having him there though).

Not true at all. They aren't subtracting anything from their Leadership, they are simply having a different set number.

I don't think a modifier has to be subtracting to be negative, a negative modifier is simply any modifier which produces a negative outcome for the unit.

The wording on modifiers supports this:

"Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model's characteristics positively or negatively by adding to it (+1, +2, etc.), multiplying it (x2, x3, etc.) or even setting its value (1, 8, etc.)"

The definition of a negative modifier is a modifier that is negative. Setting a value or a positive number can never be a modifier that is negative.

As above; it is a modifier, as it is a set value, however it is not positive or negative, but neutral as there is no + or - associated with it, by definition

Tyranid codex, page 59, Deathleaper entry, "It's after me!" rule:

Roll a D3. Whilst Deathleaper is still alive, that model's Leadership is reduced by the result rolled.

That is not changing it to a set number, that is subtracting.

Nivek - yes, but only to AZRAEL. Every other model on th board has their LD replaced by azraels, This is a set value

The Stubborn rule says ignore ANY negative modifier.

Nivek5150 wrote:
The Stubborn rule says ignore ANY negative modifier.

Does Azrael have Stubborn?

No. Therefore he does not ignore the modifier.

What LD number is passed along?

Assuming the d3 comes up a 3, 7. Not 10-3 the Stubborn unit never sees a negative modifier and therefore can't ignore it.

Stubborn says you ignore any negative leadership modifiers. It does not say negative leadership modifiers the unit has been targeted with. Any negative modifier.

Nivek5150 wrote:
Stubborn says you ignore any negative leadership modifiers. It does not say negative leadership modifiers the unit has been targeted with. Any negative modifier.

And the unit with stubborn is not receiving a negative modifier. Az's leadership is not 10-3 it is 7.
By your argument no one in the army could receive a negative leadership modifier if a single unit in the army has Stubborn.

I certainly agree with Rigeld here, the initial minus 3 is applied to a model without Stubborn and affects him normally, his leadership is reduced to 7.

Other models with Stubborn cannot inherit his normal leadership of 10 because that's not his leadership anymore, the only value they can possibly recieve from Azrael's Rites of Battle at that point is 7.

I continue to hold my earlier beliefs regarding what constitutes a negative modifier, but given the disagreement there revolves around how one defines "negative", I really don't think it's worth debating, there's not going to be anything new to bring up.

Nivek5150 wrote:
Stubborn says you ignore any negative leadership modifiers. It does not say negative leadership modifiers the unit has been targeted with. Any negative modifier.

The set value is not a modifier; the rulebook defines what is meant by modifier.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Nivek5150 wrote:
Stubborn says you ignore any negative leadership modifiers. It does not say negative leadership modifiers the unit has been targeted with. Any negative modifier.

The set value is not a modifier; the rulebook defines what is meant by modifier.

Nos, you're demonstrably wrong on this. Set value is explicitly a modifier, as per page2. Now, it might not be negative modifier, but that is completely different debate.
Page 2, "Modifiers": Certain pieces of wargear or special rules can modify a model's characteristics positively or negativelyby adding to it,multiplying or even setting its value. (examples of each modifier type removed to make the sentence more readable)

Gah, where I was going that it isnt postivie or negative as far as modifiers go - it is a set value.

Apologies for confusion on this, bad monday

In fact for more proof that a set modifier is not a negative modifier (which is what Stubborn ignores):

GK FAQ wrote:Q: Are units with either the Stubborn or Mob Rule! special rules
effected by the ‘They’re horrible’ result of the psychotroke grenade?
(p60)
A: Yes, such units will be reduced to Leadership 2. However a
unit with the Mob Rule! special rule that has 11 or more
models will still be Fearless.

Being set to 2 is a specific value. It specifically says 2, and it always will be 2.

Having a number reduced by a random number between 1-3 is not being set to a specific value. That's called subtraction, and the result will be different each time it is used. That is not a set value.

If you guys want to say only Azrael is affected by it, that's one thing, I can see your point. This is YMDC, nobody convinces anybody of anything, so I'm not going to bother arguing it any further. But saying x = 2 is the same as x = (y - d3) is simply not accurate.

Nivek5150 wrote:
Being set to 2 is a specific value. It specifically says 2, and it always will be 2.

Having a number reduced by a random number between 1-3 is not being set to a specific value. That's called subtraction, and the result will be different each time it is used. That is not a set value.

If you guys want to say only Azrael is affected by it, that's one thing, I can see your point. This is YMDC, nobody convinces anybody of anything, so I'm not going to bother arguing it any further. But saying x = 2 is the same as x = (y - d3) is simply not accurate.

For Azrael you're correct - he gets a negative modifier.
Other units only ever see one value.