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.

"not unequivocally part of the unit" is incorrect. The rules for ICs say they have joined the unit. They only COUNT AS a seperate unit in close combat, and then only for a specific subseciton of the phase.

Unit's special rules == the rules every member of the unit has, regardless of an UC or IC. The clue, as has been stated, is that they apppear under "special rules" in the unit entry.

Units special rules /= special rules the unit gains when a UC / IC appears. One is inherent, one is not. The distinction isnt even a technicality, but an entirely different concept.

"not unequivocally part of the unit" is incorrect. The rules for ICs say they have joined the unit. They only COUNT AS a seperate unit in close combat, and then only for a specific subseciton of the phase.

Unit's special rules == the rules every member of the unit has, regardless of an UC or IC. The clue, as has been stated, is that they apppear under "special rules" in the unit entry.

Units special rules /= special rules the unit gains when a UC / IC appears. One is inherent, one is not. The distinction isnt even a technicality, but an entirely different concept.

What I have gathered is this:

It works because of the difference between the "Special Rules"entry under the unit and the other special rules a unit may have via war gear or otherwise. While the Doc's Tools and Snikrot's ambush are
special rules by nature, they aren't "Special Rules" by definition. Therefore they circumvent the stipulations outlined on page 48. It makes sense when broken down, but it doesn't make sense in the
wording.

That's why joining IC's can't get Red Thirst as it's a units "Special Rule" but you can get ambush because it is a special rule that isn't listed under the unit's "Special Rules" section.

So essentially the rules are unclear and necessarily muddled. It's the difference between "Special Rules" and special rules. Pretty lame but I suppose it works.

It isnt that they arent "special rules" - they ARE special rules. However the ones in question are not the UNITS special rules - they are special rules that belong to a character - upgrade or otherwise.

It isnt that they arent "special rules" - they ARE special rules. However the ones in question are not the UNITS special rules - they are special rules that belong to a character - upgrade or otherwise.

As I said in my above post, I do see that. They are the unit's special rules and yet are not "Unit Special Rules". It is really badly worded but makes sense.

No, you still dont get it.

Members of the unit have inherent and, potentially, conferred special rules.

A units inherent special rules are the Unit's special rules. Special rules which the unit may gain (by an IC joining, bying an upgrade character) are NOT the Units special rules, but the special rules of the character.

For example the Exarch Power bladestorm is NOT a Unit Special Rule. It is a special rule which affects the unit, but it is not theirs intrinsically - when the Exarch dies they forget how to do it.

You are confusing special rules that the unit gains with inherent rules the unit always has.

No, you still dont get it.

Members of the unit have inherent and, potentially, conferred special rules.

A units inherent special rules are the Unit's special rules. Special rules which the unit may gain (by an IC joining, bying an upgrade character) are NOT the Units special rules, but the special rules of the character.

For example the Exarch Power bladestorm is NOT a Unit Special Rule. It is a special rule which affects the unit, but it is not theirs intrinsically - when the Exarch dies they forget how to do it.

You are confusing special rules that the unit gains with inherent rules the unit always has.

Right, things like Bladestorm are a special rule the unit gets from a member of the unit, not a "Unit Special Rule". I get exactly what people are saying. All I am saying is that by giving bladestorm to a unit, it is a unit's special rule, however this is not what the BRB is referencing as "Unit Special Rule" like the ones outlined in a codex entry. Despite some of the attempts at explaining the difference, I was able to piece it together.

!EDIT!

I am blitzed out of my mind right now, disregard this last message!

Ambush doesn't transfer to IC because it doens't state that it does so.

Can a Farseer skyleap with Swooping Hawks?

codex eldar, exarch powers:

....

Note that Exarch powers only ever affects Aspect warriors and Autarchs ....

General_Chaos wrote:Ambush doesn't transfer to IC because it doens't state that it does so.

Brilliant contribution. Any rules to back that up?

"And his UNIT" is more than sufficient to include the IC. You know the IC that is joined to Snikrots unit, is a normal member of said unit in every phase of the game outside of part of assault, etc.

[/quoteCan a Farseer skyleap with Swooping Hawks?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brilliant contribution. Any rules to back that up?

I got about eight thousand threads and a million posts on various forums all across the internet including this one that boils down to nobody can prove it works either way. So to sit here and talk about this topic like it's something new is really a joke.

Well, you can prove it, just some people dont agree. Doesnt make it any less true, however.

Additionally INAT disagrees with you. For all that matteers

Yes, you can ambush with Ghaz. Yes, you can get FNP on a warboss with a painboy nob squad. Yes an apothecary will give FNP to a captain.

All rely on exactly the same wording and the exact same permission. Disagreeing on any one disagrees with all.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Additionally INAT disagrees with you. For all that matteers

It doesn't matter.

It's nice that INAT answered the question to get a standard in some tournaments, but it doesn't make it right. Only GW can do that,look at the Doom ruling, how much more wrong could INAT have been on that.

Why do people keep stating that Snikrot allows his unit to outflank? That word is not anywhere in his rules, and yet people keep repeating it.

It's Ambush and it's different. It's not a USR, so you can put an IC in the unit (Ghaz) and he can Ambush with Snikrot.

General_Chaos wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brilliant contribution. Any rules to back that up?

I got about eight thousand threads and a million posts on various forums all across the internet including this one that boils down to nobody can prove it works either way. So to sit here and talk about this topic like it's something new is really a joke.

8000 threads?

1000000 posts?

Cool, care to provide any of them that actually reference the rules to support their claims?

I can go post 625 posts per thread(really now?) on various websites and messageboards about how I think that a furioso librarian can take blood talons, but it doesn't matter how many times I make a false statement, it will still be false.

And seen as you 'got about' could we have the 8000/1000000 links please? To some at least?

ChrisCP wrote:And seen as you 'got about' could we have the 8000/1000000 links please? To some at least?

I'd actually like the full million, personally... since he tried to use it as proof when asked for rules.

Tenets and all that...
1. Don't make a statement without backing it up.

General_Chaos wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Additionally INAT disagrees with you. For all that matteers

It doesn't matter.

It's nice that INAT answered the question to get a standard in some tournaments, but it doesn't make it right. Only GW can do that,look at the Doom ruling, how much more wrong could INAT have been on that.

And yet in the end a TO can also do its own ruling and end any other discussions about it as well if he/she wants to.

This same old argument again? Sigh.


Again, it all comes down to what level of specificity you think is needed for a special rule to apply to a joined IC. The rulebook examples of such specificity point to some universal special rule which clearly specify exactly how they interact with joined ICs, so it is a perfectly valid assumption for some players to feel that this level of specificity is required for a special rule to apply to a joined IC.

However, the rules also don't spell out that the example given is the only level of specificity that is allowed. In many (if not most) players minds, a special rule that says it applies to 'a unit' or 'all models in a unit' is written specifically enough to also apply to joined ICs.


With our first ruling on the matter in the INAT, we took the more hardline approach of the first stance. The problem with this, is the rule ONLY applies to 'special rules', so things like psychic abilities and wargear would be exempt (and would therefore apply to joined ICs). This got to be really, really tricky when dealing with a piece of wargear that provided a unit WITH a special rule (like Doks Tools giving the unit 'Feel No Pain')...did that apply to joined ICs or not?

We made our hard line decision but over time it became clear that this was very confusing for most players to understand when these types of 'provided' special rules should be applying to joined ICs and when they shouldn't. And to exacerbate things, after watching hundreds of games played at Adepticon last year we noticed that the vast majority (if not all) players seemed to be ignoring the ruling when it came to some of the more common situations where it occurs, namely something like the Chaplain's 'Liturgies of Battle' rule...EVERYBODY seems to naturally play that this rule applies to a joined IC.

But the problem is, if you look at the poll I've run before regarding Ghaz ambushing with snikrot, back then you saw that MOST people seemed to agree that Ghaz was *not* allowed to ambush with Snikrot:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/225132.page#486075


But really the two rules are really, really close to being similar...certainly nothing enough that one should apply to joined ICs while the other shouldn't.

Ultimately we decided that we needed to reverse the ruling because in *MOST* situations in the game *MOST* people play that these types of 'provided' special rules apply to joined ICs, and it is FAR easier to grasp and understand then trying to play the other way.



The truth is, there is absolutely no 'clear' answer on this, as is the case with many rules issues. At the end of the day it boils down to what level of specificity you believe a special rule has to have in order to apply to a joined IC.

I now personally believe that if the rule says it applies to the unit or all the models in the unit that's good enough to apply to an IC joined to the unit as well, and I'd wager that's how the folks in the studio play as well when it comes to the vast majority of these types of situations, even if they don't play that way specifically with Snikrot's ability.

If you have decided to play it the first way (that a special rule MUST specifically mention how it affects an IC in order to affect an IC) then you'll need to make sure to apply this ruling in all facets of the game...and good luck figuring out a consistent way to play when it comes to wargear or psychic powers that give a USR to a unit!

So I guess bringing snikrot off the back side of the table with two warbosses on warbikes would be frowned at.

It's a minimum of 410 pionts iirc for that particular trick. So really, if you want to have a fairly large cunk of a 2500 point army missing untill they feel bothered to come on, yeah, i'll frown but mostly at the 'Free Beats' I'll be dealing

RustyNails wrote:So I guess bringing snikrot off the back side of the table with two warbosses on warbikes would be frowned at.

Depends who you're playing with I guess. I don't have a problem with it, especially given the GW rulebook FAQ clarification that ICs joined to a unit that arrive from Reserves cannot leave it the unit the turn they arrive. That means your super unit is stuck together for that one turn they arrive, which really lessens the impact of such a maneuver.

Well I feel that RAW Snikrot does allow you to bring an IC off the back side of the table, but at the end of the day if someone doesn't feel the same, it's cool, it's just a game. I'm in it to have fun and getting an IC behind you isn't going to make or break a game for me. I rather dodge 15 mins of BRB thumping and just throw dice!

It's a minimum of 410 pionts iirc for that particular trick. So really, if you want to have a fairly large cunk of a 2500 point army missing untill they feel bothered to come on, yeah, i'll frown but mostly at the 'Free Beats' I'll be dealing

Free Beats Welcome LOL

It would at least make you wonder what the heck I was thinking. Knowing that a possiible 3 targets wern't safe could be unsettling.

One just stops hugging board edges

thats a lot of not hugging with bikes coming in and spliting off and their threat range, which pushes you closer to my main battle group, which is in the end the idea. Ideally. But you are correct its a lot or dough to tie up into an unreliable delivery of your main tactic. I have used and seen it work once, but by the time they got on the table they were just helping with clean up and didn't really do much in the way of destruction, they just pushed the Guard player closer to my side, so they worked... kinda. lol

RustyNails wrote:thats a lot of not hugging with bikes coming in and spliting off and their threat range,

They can't do that the turn the come on, which is the key to why it's not 'broken', 6" move, 6" fleet with waaagh and 6" assault at one squad with 7 models, will probably be difficult against a savvy player to achive a multi and then there's very little chance two or even one warboss isn't going to make you win combat! then it's leaning on 4+ cover from exhaust. Hope you don't lose your 6+ boys and be forced to start taking LD checks >_<

So an IC has to stay with the unit they are attached to for the first turn they are on the table? Or that they come on to the table with? Then on the Second turn they can then break away?

RustyNails wrote:So an IC has to stay with the unit they are attached to for the first turn they are on the table? Or that they come on to the table with? Then on the Second turn they can then break away?

You got it. An IC that arrives on the table via reserves joined to a unit cannot leave it the same turn he arrives (he'd have to wait until his next turn to do so). Check out the GW rulebook FAQ for more details.

Since this is about special rules could I ask about SitNW and IC's? My understanding was Commissar Lord/Priests were lost because the unit's bought rule only applied to the conscripts. Is this because of how the SitNW rule is worded (no dex on hand, thought it said all models with wargear) or was this thrown for a loop as well?

From memory it states it brings back conscripts, and additioanlly the GW FAQ covers it - both from memory, cant check from here...