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.

Sorry Vengis, just because you have a strong opinion it doesn't mean you have a definitive answer.

General Boneripper is supported by the RAW, but is also justifiable in the fluff. To reiterate my earlier post which was ignored in favour of comments on Skarsnik which can explain this:

Orlanth wrote:
In a very similar way Boneripper is not an add on to Thanquol, they are a partnership just like Felix and Gotrek. Bonerippers status is IMHO an oversight by GW and the characrter is supposed to be Thanquols loyal slave, but that is not the RAW. If you want go make Boneripper general go ahead, grey seers are powers behind thrones anyway, so its not as stupid for Boneripper to be titular army head as it at first looks.

Boneripper is a puppet, but he is big and impressive. If Thanquol says 'follow Boneripper' and Boneripper rears up roars and makes beckonging arm movements before lumbering forward I can see the Skaven army following him with Thanquol tagging along safely at the back. The more I look at it this is a very valid way for Thanquol to operate and Skaven are nothing if not easily led.

Now you might disagree, but until you give good reasons why you and anyone else disagrees the discussion is still open. The 'Vengis has spoken so everyone else need shut up' arguement holds less water than you think.

You're right, I shouldn't have added that last line.

Personally, I'm going to play by "If the ruling is unsure, play by the option that is least advantageous to you", or whatever the exact wording is.

The thing is, with this argument, the rules are actually not unsure in the least. It's just that people don't like what they actually say.

What about the Wood Elf sisters? I forget off the top of my head but at least here are 2 more characters bought with the same slot... How would you use this to argue.

Deminyn wrote:What about the Wood Elf sisters? I forget off the top of my head but at least here are 2 more characters bought with the same slot... How would you use this to argue.

Excellent example btw (specifically of two models in same slot)
Sadly, top of their profile says neither can be your Army General. :(

strange_eric wrote:So i see you're not reading my whole posts. I clearly don't play this way. I'm engaging in a RAW discussion. Secondly, I am not taking Thanquol. I am taking
"Thanquol and Boneripper" One is not greater or lesser than the other in the rules. And RAW isn't common sense, to some degree, its a direct interpretation of the rules. (its a different brand of "common sense" i suppose "common logic" or "straight reasoning" might be better words suited in this case)

Clear intent is also immaterial in a RAW discussion, since in a RAW discussion we're not here to discuss how was intended to be fielded but how the rules allow him to be fielded.

And nevermind that GW has also said in the various FAQs that sometimes a strict RAW interpretation is a clear violation of the spirit of the rules. There comes a point where you need to pull your head out of wherever you put it, realize that GW effed up again, grin and bear it, admit that NO ONE should be taking Boneripper as a general, and move on to more relevant topics of discussion.

Nope.

1. Boneripper can be army general until FAQed.

2. There are valid fluff reasons to do so. Its a very Skaven thing to do.

The answer is not to complain but to counter. General Boneripper has a lot of disadvantages. as mentioned above you have two characters to protect, the death of either kills your general.

More tellingly Boneripper as a Rat Ogre is hard to hide. The Skaven general that lives is not the badass one but the hidden one in a reserve unit right behind another unit. Also as a set special character your opponent knows his loadout, Skaven have some nasty magic item combos that offer a better deal than Boneripper.

Also ld10 bubble is common for Skaven anyway due to ranks, the only real advantage is that you get it on the flanks and for smaller units.

I'm not sure why this is still being discussed since the rules state that Boneripper is only a modified Rat Ogre (with his improved stats and the warpfire thrower arm), not a Rat Ogre character. When someone can show where RAW states a Rat Ogre can be the general, I'll totally allow it. I really don't care if he's listed under the Lord section, RAW states he's a Rat Ogre and not a Rat Ogre character thus he can't be the general, regardless of leadership.

Where does it say that Thanqual is a character?

I can't believe this thread has gone on this long. Thanquol is a character because he is bought as a character choice. He is described as "a grey seer of distinction", which is a character choice. Boneripper is described as a "mutant rat ogre bodyguard", which is not a character.

Skyth - there isn't a description/rule in any of the character's that say "Character". Of course, when his description says that "he is a grey seer and therefore a Lvl 4 wizard", that might be a clue.

Orlanth - as far as the LD 10 bubble - actually the best you can get is straight up LD8 on Queek, which is then modified by the rank bonuses, which can be negated by flanking attacks. Note the flanking portion, which is why they didn't want LD10 guys running around a Skaven army - it would be make them too powerful.

I know your arguing simply for the argument of RAW vs RAI and don't play it that way - but come on - at some point it gets silly. The longer it goes on and the more arguing the fact that you could take Boneripper as the general leads me to believe that either A. Your really playing it that way or B. You don't understand the difference between RAW vs RAI.

Settle the dispute though - email GW and ask them for a ruling. Couldn't hurt.

My point is that there are exactly the same rules that make Thanquel a character as there are that make Boneripper one.

Technically, until it's FAQ'd or Errata'd, Boneripper has to be your general unless you and your opponent agree to change the rules you are playing by.

"Settle the dispute though - email GW and ask them for a ruling. Couldn't hurt. "

I think that would kill us all.

Or in a more meaningful way: GW answering an email wont answer anything. It needs errata.

skyth wrote:Where does it say that Thanqual is a character?

It's in the first line of his rules. "Thanqual is a Grey Seer and therefore a Level 4 wizard."

As I stated above, according to RAW, Thanqual is a Grey Seer and Boneripper is a Rat Ogre. Thus of the two of them, anything character rules related would fall to Thanqual and not Boneripper, as Rat Ogres are not characters and Grey Seers are.

What rule makes a Grey Seer a character? Units can be wizards as well (See also horrors)

That Boneripper is a Rat Ogre does not mean that he isn't a character also. In the WoC army, it is well accepted that Kholek is a character (And can be the general) even though he is a Shaggot.

strange_eric wrote:"Settle the dispute though - email GW and ask them for a ruling. Couldn't hurt. "

I think that would kill us all.

That's not even the half of it...

I was just reading my Skaven book and I found the solution to this arguement...

p97 "Make sure that your opponent knows which character is your General is your General when you deploy your army."

That duplicate "is your General" CLEARLY shows that GW sucks at rules and therefore I stamp this RAW legal, RAI wrong and sportsmanship is the swing vote.

Only play Boneripper as General if you don't care about what your opponent thinks.

I've been discussing this on a couple of other forums as I really really wanted a valid arguement to stop it...

BUT:

We could not find a conclusive arguement against Boneripper as general using RAW.

I'd say yes.... but you'd be getting low sports from me in a tournament and filthy looks in a friendly game.

You guys DO realize that when GW is forced to FAQ this, they're going to have nasty things to say about anyone defending this, right?

Manfred von Drakken wrote:You guys DO realize that when GW is forced to FAQ this, they're going to have nasty things to say about anyone defending this, right?

By the time that comes out in 5 years , i think most of us would have forgot about this silly discussion...

Manfred von Drakken wrote:You guys DO realize that when GW is forced to FAQ this, they're going to have nasty things to say about anyone defending this, right?

They are as likely to have nasty things to say about someone saying that he can't be the general.

They should have nasty things to say about themselves.

GW says nasty things all the time.

What I'm pissed off about the most is that GW isn't going to actually fix this with a SOLID ruling, FAQ's are just house rules. Now, if they made these FAQ's law, this would be much easier...

If they Errata the entry to state boneripper cannot be the General, that will be "law"

I get what you're saying. I'm sorry on behalf of everyone who misunderstood and said unkind things thinking you were a rule-twisting jerk. It's a silly rule problem and GW needs to fix it.

RAW speaking, there isn't anything that says that Boneripper can't be your general. It's weird; one Lord Choice, two seperate, independent models. How can one Character slot produce two models? It's almost like their each half.

Hey, can Thanquol/Boneripper even be your general at all if their each only half a character? Or do you have to buy a chieftain or a bare-bones warlock engineer to be your general, or can Thanquol and Boneripper both be your general?

All in all, GW should fix this. Bully for noticing. And that Boneripper can join rat swarms.

So, in theory: You buy a named character on a dragon.
The rules state said character cannot be a general.
The dragon takes up a hero slot, meaning he can lead the army?

TBH: GW has fethed up once again with thier quality wording.
I dont see how a mindless rat ogre could lead an army

Given that Rat Ogres are not very bright (and in 6E at least, Boneripper wasn't even alive, he was effectively a mindless bone golem under Thanaqol's control) anyone trying to use one as a general is... silly. Poor sportsmanship at the very least.

AS far as the post arguing 'is Grey Seer Thanaqol a character'... I point out that Grey Seers are Lord level characters, where Rat Ogres are merely Rare choice units.

I'd say that makes it pretty clear right there.

(A note in passing: my main army is Skaven. It would be sweet to have a LD 10 general. A little too sweet. Almost not a challenge anymore sweet.)

I would agree with the way that Vulcan looks at this. While there is nothing that explicitly states that Boneripper is not a character there is more than enough evidence to indicate that he is just a single ogre sized infantry model that does not count as a character.

Also I will go back to a statement that I made in a different thread. If there is a large amount of ambiguity with a rule its best to play it in the least advantageous way until the FAQ is released. Its the most sportsmanlike way to play.

The thing is, there is no ambiguity in the rule at all...

There is as Boneripper cannot exsist without Thanaqol and also is listed as just a specially modified Rat Ogre. As Vulcan stated previously a Rat Ogre is not Character.

Neither is a Dragon Ogre Shaggoth, but there is one that is a character.

A gutter runner is not a character, so that means that an Assassin isn't?

The fact that Boneripper shuts down without Thanaqol does not bring in any ambiguty as to whether he is a character. The general has to be the character that has the highest leadership barring a rule that says otherwise. Thus with a leadership 10, Boneripper HAS to be the general unless you have another character that has leadership 10.

All the arguments that I've heard against Boneripper being the general boil down to 'I don't like that rule and you're a bad person if you play by it'.