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.

Nyhil wrote:you know the intended purpose of the guards,

Sorry, but unless the world was recently repopulated with clones of Robin Cruddace, we don't.

Nyhil wrote:Is this really up for debate?

Yes. Pointing out these sorts of flaws in the rules is one of the purposes of this forum.

Not to encourage people to play this way. But simply so that people are aware of it, and so can make an informed judgement on how to choose to play it, and how to respond when the guy on the other side of the table pulls something like this out in the middle of a game.

You are right. What could a Tyrant Guard possible exist for? If only their name, or their purpose in last edition could help.

I know! They must be a worthless point-sink!

Gwar, I respect you. I respect your knowledge of the rules, too. But seriously... you have got to see the absurdity of this.

Nyhil wrote:You are right. What could a Tyrant Guard possible exist for? If only their name, or their purpose in last edition could help.

A Name means nothing. Pink Horrors don't have to be pink. Grey Hunters do not have to be Grey. A Honour Guard doesn't actually have to guard anything.

And what about people who didn't play "last edition". How would they know what it's "intended" purpose was?

I know! They must be a worthless point-sink!

Possibly. Unless you are Robin Cruddace, you do not know.

Gwar, I respect you.

That's a first.

But seriously... you have got to see the absurdity of this.

I do. However, rules are rules. I personally think it's absurd that Power Weapons have no bonus of any kind against vehicles but I don't try and change the rules to suit me.

Assuming the arguments for this are accurate, which I cannot vouch for yet as the codex is not out and I won't be buying it anyway, I think the problem is that people expect units to always do exactly the same thing as they did in the last edition. The only reason so many people feel that Tyrant Guard stop you from attacking the Tyrant is because that's how it used to be (or is for a few days). If it weren't for that codex, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion, except maybe to find a use for them in the Tactics board.

thebetter1 wrote:Assuming the arguments for this are accurate, which I cannot vouch for yet as the codex is not out and I won't be buying it anyway, I think the problem is that people expect units to always do exactly the same thing as they did in the last edition. The only reason so many people feel that Tyrant Guard stop you from attacking the Tyrant is because that's how it used to be (or is for a few days). If it weren't for that codex, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion, except maybe to find a use for them in the Tactics board.

Actually alot of people have the codex, FYI. And I full-heartedly disagree that their ability to Guard the Tyrant in the last Codex is irrelevent to this Codex. I never played the last codex, and I can see that there is something fishy about guard not being able to guard...it's common sense.

Anywho...

My argument is simple,

"As if" does not equate to "Is"

You can act exactly as if you are a Tyrannosaurus-Rex, but that does not make you a fraking dinosaur. Cops act exactly as if they are criminals in infiltration jobs, but they are not criminals. A Hive Tyrant can join a unit of Guard exactly as if it was an IC, but it is not and IC.

If it's not an IC then it can't be targeted in shooting or assault. I think the argument is overall, rather silly. It may be a technicality, but that doesn't mean it's untrue.

Darth Bob wrote: It may be a technicality, but that doesn't mean it's untrue.

Technicalities are exactly what rules disputes should hinge on. Specifically, the exact wording used is what should determine the way the rule works.

In most miniature games, that comes down to precise wording and the use of defined keywords. GW makes it hard by writing their rules in a much looser style, which forces us to interpret more... but that doesn't mean that the actual meaning of the rules as written should just be ignored.


For what it's worth (and as I already mentioned) I agree with this interpretation. Although I'll obviously have to hold off final judgement until I see the actual codex...

This argument which I keep seeing which says "he only uses the IC rules to join and thus does not follow the IC rules that say MCs can still be picked out" is absolutely ridiculous.

The part of rules which say ICs joined to a squad can't be targetted seperately is in the same section as the bit that says MCs still can be, if he doesn't follow normal IC rules for being attached, you can still pick him out, because the IC rules saying you can't pick him out don't apply.

what people make of the RAI in this instance is obviously up to them, but the RAW is abundantly clear, there is absolutely no support in the RAW for not being able to pick the Hive Tyrant out seperate to his Guards.

Drunkspleen wrote:This argument which I keep seeing which says "he only uses the IC rules to join and thus does not follow the IC rules that say MCs can still be picked out" is absolutely ridiculous.

The part of rules which say ICs joined to a squad can't be targetted seperately is in the same section as the bit that says MCs still can be, if he doesn't follow normal IC rules for being attached, you can still pick him out, because the IC rules saying you can't pick him out don't apply.

what people make of the RAI in this instance is obviously up to them, but the RAW is abundantly clear, there is absolutely no support in the RAW for not being able to pick the Hive Tyrant out seperate to his Guards.

Wrong. What you just said is that he still follows the rules for being an IC even if he is not an IC. Which is asinine.

Big Red Book page 49 wrote:Independent characters that are Monstrous Creatures can always be picked out as separate targets, unless they've joined a unit of monstrous creatures or a unit with special rules that offers them protection.

For him to be picked out he must be an Independent Character AND a Monstrous Creature. Since he is not an IC, he does not follow this rule. RAW is abundantly clear that he is indeed protected. He is not following the rules for being an IC in the way he joins a unit, he is simply joining a unit in his own special way. The closest way to equate the way he joins a unit is to compare it to how an IC joins a unit.

For the last time, the Hive Tyrant is not an IC joining a unit. He is a normal MC that is able to join a unit (like or as if he were an IC) through a special rule known as "Shield Wall".

warboss wrote: the rule says:

"a single hive tyrant (including a swarmlord) may join a unit of tyrant guard EXACTLY as if it were an independent character." my emphasis

since it's EXACTLY like an independent character, it can't be singled out in shooting but can in close combat.

The word "exactly" modifies the action of joining, it does not modify the tyrant into an IC. For example, this car drives exactly like a boat when it rains. the car is not a boat, but it performs like one when it is raining. It is really unfortunate that we only have language to convey rules; it is more unfortunate that GW does not have a good command of the language. GW should be FAQing the hell out of the game books that they produce. In my opinion, they don't because they don't care all that much. They are a miniature/models company that produces rules as a marketing device to increase sales of their models.

Marcus Iago Geruasius wrote:They are a miniature/models company that produces rules as a marketing device to increase sales of their models.

QFT

Drunkspleen wrote:The part of rules which say ICs joined to a squad can't be targetted seperately is in the same section as the bit that says MCs still can be, if he doesn't follow normal IC rules for being attached, you can still pick him out, because the IC rules saying you can't pick him out don't apply.

You've got it a little twisted around there.

The IC rules state that an IC can't be picked out.
They go on to state that an IC who is also an MC can be picked out.
There is no rule that says that MC's in any other situation can be picked out.

So, the only way an MC could be picked out of a unit is if it is also an IC.

Darth Bob wrote:Wrong. What you just said is that he still follows the rules for being an IC even if he is not an IC. Which is asinine.

No I didn't. While I do believe "exactly as if" is sufficient for him to not only join the squad like an IC, but use all the IC rules WHILE joined to it, I'm not even necessarily claiming that.

What I am saying is this, there are rules for ICs which prevent them from being targetted seperately to units they have joined, these rules appear on page 49, NOT with the rules about joining units, the only way the Tyrant can effectively have access to those rules, is if he is using all the IC rules.

The rules that prevent ICs from being targetted when joined to a squad say such things as "Independent characters that have joined a unit are considered part of that unit and so may not be picked out as targets" so the only way the Hive Tyrant could benefit from this rule, is if we are considering the Hive Tyrant to BE an Independent Character.

If we are considering the Hive Tyrant to be an Independent Character, thus giving him access to the aforementioned protective rule, then we must also consider him to be one for the purposes of the rule saying a Monstrous Creature joined to non-Monstrous Creatures does NOT get that protection.

The alternative to accepting he must be considered an Independent Character is to totally reject that, which means he is allowed to join the squad, but then the rules saying he can't be picked out never kick in (because he is not a true IC) and thus, he can still be targetted seperately.

Darth Bob wrote:

Big Red Book page 49 wrote:Independent characters that are Monstrous Creatures can always be picked out as separate targets, unless they've joined a unit of monstrous creatures or a unit with special rules that offers them protection.

For him to be picked out he must be an Independent Character AND a Monstrous Creature. Since he is not an IC, he does not follow this rule. RAW is abundantly clear that he is indeed protected. He is not following the rules for being an IC in the way he joins a unit, he is simply joining a unit in his own special way. The closest way to equate the way he joins a unit is to compare it to how an IC joins a unit.

For the last time, the Hive Tyrant is not an IC joining a unit. He is a normal MC that is able to join a unit (like or as if he were an IC) through a special rule known as "Shield Wall".

Although not directed at me I felt I should include this in my post as it clearly demonstrates you subscribe to the idea he is NOT an IC at all, and thus should also believe he does NOT benefit from the rule saying he can't be picked out seperate from his squad.

Drunkspleen wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:Wrong. What you just said is that he still follows the rules for being an IC even if he is not an IC. Which is asinine.

No I didn't. While I do believe "exactly as if" is sufficient for him to not only join the squad like an IC, but use all the IC rules WHILE joined to it, I'm not even necessarily claiming that.

So let's use that logic. I am going to act exactly as if I am a Tyrannosaurus-Rex. Am I a Tyrannosaurus-Rex? Unless you can fullheartedly say that I am a Tyrannosaurus-rex (completely ridiculous, though awesome) then the phrase "exactly as if" is by no means sufficient in that it can equate to the phrase "is".

Drunkspleen wrote:
The rules that prevent ICs from being targetted when joined to a squad say such things as "Independent characters that have joined a unit are considered part of that unit and so may not be picked out as targets" so the only way the Hive Tyrant could benefit from this rule, is if we are considering the Hive Tyrant to BE an Independent Character.

He's not getting the rule. He's getting a rule that functions in a similar (like or as if) fashion. This ability is called Shield Wall.

Drunkspleen wrote:
If we are considering the Hive Tyrant to be an Independent Character, thus giving him access to the aforementioned protective rule, then we must also consider him to be one for the purposes of the rule saying a Monstrous Creature joined to non-Monstrous Creatures does NOT get that protection.

RAW says he is not an Independent Character, so that point is moot.

Drunkspleen wrote:
The alternative to accepting he must be considered an Independent Character is to totally reject that, which means he is allowed to join the squad, but then the rules saying he can't be picked out never kick in (because he is not a true IC) and thus, he can still be targetted seperately.

Sorry, mate, but this makes no sense whatsoever. You're saying he's not an IC, so he does not get the IC rules, and because he is not an IC he automatically defaults to being targetable. No, that is a fallacy. He is becoming a part of the unit, and is not targetable because he is no longer a seperate unit whilst he is attached to the guard (redundancy asside). Think of him almost as an upgrade character for the unit.


Cheers

Darth Bob wrote:So let's use that logic. I am going to act exactly as if I am a Tyrannosaurus-Rex. Am I a Tyrannosaurus-Rex? Unless you can fullheartedly say that I am a Tyrannosaurus-rex (completely ridiculous, though awesome) then the phrase "exactly as if" is by no means sufficient in that it can equate to the phrase "is".

No you are not a Tyrannosaurus-Rex, but so long as you are acting like one you must follow all the rules of a Tyrannosaurus-Rex.

Darth Bob wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:
The rules that prevent ICs from being targetted when joined to a squad say such things as "Independent characters that have joined a unit are considered part of that unit and so may not be picked out as targets" so the only way the Hive Tyrant could benefit from this rule, is if we are considering the Hive Tyrant to BE an Independent Character.

He's not getting the rule. He's getting a rule that functions in a similar (like or as if) fashion. This ability is called Shield Wall.

And why does this rule function similarly for part of the IC rules, but not similarly for another part which pertains to Monstrous Creatures.

Darth Bob wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:
If we are considering the Hive Tyrant to be an Independent Character, thus giving him access to the aforementioned protective rule, then we must also consider him to be one for the purposes of the rule saying a Monstrous Creature joined to non-Monstrous Creatures does NOT get that protection.

RAW says he is not an Independent Character, so that point is moot.

So then why can't he be picked out from his squad, because the rule which says things joined to units can't be picked out specifically mentions ICs.

Darth Bob wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:
The alternative to accepting he must be considered an Independent Character is to totally reject that, which means he is allowed to join the squad, but then the rules saying he can't be picked out never kick in (because he is not a true IC) and thus, he can still be targetted seperately.

Sorry, mate, but this makes no sense whatsoever. You're saying he's not an IC, so he does not get the IC rules, and because he is not an IC he automatically defaults to being targetable. No, that is a fallacy. He is becoming a part of the unit, and is not targetable because he is no longer a seperate unit whilst he is attached to the guard (redundancy asside). Think of him almost as an upgrade character for the unit.

No I am saying that there is no rule saying that a Hive Tyrant joined to a Tyrant Guard squad is not a seperate target, normally they would be seperate targets before you utilize the Shield Wall special rule, and nothing in that special rule says this ceases to be the case, the only place such a rule appears is in the IC rules, which he either is 100% following, or is not 100% following, and either way the end RAW result is that he can be picked out as a seperate unit despite having joined another unit.

Darth Bob wrote:RAW says he is not an Independent Character, so that point is moot.

This is correct. It is moot.Thus the discussion. It is also wrong. Nowhere does it say a Hive Tyrant is NOT an IC.

kirsanth wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:RAW says he is not an Independent Character, so that point is moot.

This is correct. It is moot.Thus the discussion. It is also wrong. Nowhere does it say a Hive Tyrant is NOT an IC.

Damnit you beat me to it!

I am too lazy to do the quoting thing over so I'm going to do bullets for each.

- You are missing the point. The point is just because something acts "as if" it is something else, does not mean it becomes the something else. Another example would be if a replica gun looks exactly like it is real, that does not mean it is real. Just because it looks like a real gun doesn't mean it is going to fire bullets.

- Because the entry explicitly states "he joins" as if he were an IC. It does not say "he functions" as if he were an IC.

- Again, doesn't matter, he's not an IC. It does not say he is an IC...so by how his rules are written (and they are written with nothing telling us he is an IC) we can find nothing that says he is an IC, so therefore he isn't an IC. It either is or it isn't; there's nothing saying he is, so therefore, he isn't.

-

Tyranid Codex, page 35 wrote:A single Hive Tyrant (including the Swarmlord) may join a unit of Tyrant Guard exactly as if it were an independent character.

It says he joins the unit, and is therefore no longer a seperate unit. They have become a single unit. He is not follwing the rules for an IC because he is not an IC. He is simply joining the unit because he is able to through the use of Shield Wall. If he is not an IC (which he isn't), he is not targetable. End of story.


Edit: Perhaps I need to find a different word than moot, as I do not think it was the right word...the word I was looking for is "irrelevent." Funny that's about the opposite of what it means . . .

Darth Bob wrote: Moot

I think this word can mean something other than what you think it means. . .

But I agree with it, technically.
This issue is subject to debate.

kirsanth wrote:

Darth Bob wrote: Moot

I think this word can mean something other than what you think it means. . .

But I agree with it, technically.
This issue is subject to debate.

I forgot the meaning of moot.... Disregard any comments where I used moot and replace them with irrelevent.

3 Pages lol. Yea I have to agree if you don't know what there purpose is then yea gl in life. Any one that is a big enough jerk to try and rule otherwise will just not get a game with me. And the way I read it, is they just made it so they can attach and detach which to me makes them slightly, maybe not really, more useful. On a side note I doubt I will ever waste points on them. They are just so darn expensive three of them almost buys you a Tervigon.

Except Darth Bob has a better grasp on what the written sentence reads in proper english. The term "as if" or its modified term "exactly as if" does not denote a state of being in the english language.

For example, if I said that John was running around exactly as if he were possessed, I would not be denoting that John was possessed (state of being) but that his action "running around" was similar to what a possessed person would do. Nor am I inferring that John shares any other traits of a possessed.

I think what some people are argueing is that the rules state "HT may join HG and become IC" or "HT that join a HG count as an IC". But it is obviously not written that way.

Now you may say that it is GW intentions that HT that join HG become IC, and GW may even rule this way in thier upcoming FAQ. GW has clearly proven in the past that they do not have the soundest grasp on technical writing. But one must still admit that this is a RaI arguement, not a RaW arguement as some are claiming.

Darth Bob wrote:It says he joins the unit, and is therefore no longer a seperate unit. They have become a single unit. He is not follwing the rules for an IC because he is not an IC. He is simply joining the unit because he is able to through the use of Shield Wall. If he is not an IC (which he isn't), he is not targetable. End of story.

I continue to maintain that a Model who is normally targetted seperately to the tyrant guard, who has no special rule saying he cannot be targetted seperately to the tyrant guard, can still be targetted seperately to the tyrant guard.

Drunkspleen wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:It says he joins the unit, and is therefore no longer a seperate unit. They have become a single unit. He is not follwing the rules for an IC because he is not an IC. He is simply joining the unit because he is able to through the use of Shield Wall. If he is not an IC (which he isn't), he is not targetable. End of story.

I continue to maintain that a Model who is normally targetted seperately to the tyrant guard, who has no special rule saying he cannot be targetted seperately to the tyrant guard, can still be targetted seperately to the tyrant guard.

There is no rule (that I know of) in the BRB that states that to be the case, so that doesn't really fly that well RAI or RAW since there's no rule to be interpereted as such.

So if it said, counts as an IC when joining tyrant guard, would that change this at all?

Yes, because at that point the unit would take on all characteristics of an IC.

As it stands, shield wall only lets a HT join a unit of TG; it doesn't transfer any other attributes of IC onto the HT.

If a model is joined to a unit like it were an independent character, how could the unit be shot at except using the independent character rules, which allow MCs to be singled out? Where is the provision for models that aren't independent characters to be joined to units?

Darth Bob wrote:

Drunkspleen wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:It says he joins the unit, and is therefore no longer a seperate unit. They have become a single unit. He is not follwing the rules for an IC because he is not an IC. He is simply joining the unit because he is able to through the use of Shield Wall. If he is not an IC (which he isn't), he is not targetable. End of story.

I continue to maintain that a Model who is normally targetted seperately to the tyrant guard, who has no special rule saying he cannot be targetted seperately to the tyrant guard, can still be targetted seperately to the tyrant guard.

There is no rule (that I know of) in the BRB that states that to be the case, so that doesn't really fly that well RAI or RAW since there's no rule to be interpereted as such.

My thoughts exactly. Excluding the rule for MC that are also IC, there are no BRB rules that allow you to target separate models within a complex unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

thebetter1 wrote:Where is the provision for models that aren't independent characters to be joined to units?

The rules for shield wall are the provision.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

thebetter1 wrote:If a model is joined to a unit like it were an independent character, how could the unit be shot at except using the independent character rules

IMO, by using the normal rules for shooting at a unit, with defender being able to allocate shots.

wyomingfox wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:There is no rule (that I know of) in the BRB that states that to be the case, so that doesn't really fly that well RAI or RAW since there's no rule to be interpereted as such.

My thoughts exactly. Excluding the rule for MC that are also IC, there are no BRB rules that allow you to target separate models within a complex unit.

but the IC rules for joining units list very specific things that is involved in that joining process, none of which is the loss of the ability to target the IC as a standalone unit, that is why you still can (unless the later IC rules also apply as they do with most ICs).

I don't play nids, and ruling against Tyrants getting any real advantage from using guards would be in my favor.

That said, I would slap the hell out of anybody that tried to tell a guy that the 180 points of models he spent on subpar two-wound attackers is absolutely useless in protecting his tyrant. I know that the idea of taking any initiative and imagination of a unit that is named tyrant guard (as in, they are meant to guard the tyrant) protecting the tyrant is hard for people, but seriously. This isn't like trying to use a 5 point mortar to make a Master of Ordinance amazingly accurate, this is simply making it so a 60 point unit that is explicitly meant to protect a tyrant can do their job.

Seriously, this is why we can't have nice things.