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.

I have a couple of questions about the Heralds of the great wolf formation that seem to be the topics of contention in my gaming area.

Firstly can all of the priest take normal upgrades such as Thunder wolf or cyberwolf for the Iron priest, and Bikes for the wolf priest?

Secondly can independent characters join the formation, and if so would the unit still benefit from the -1 to ballistic skill to opponents who shoot it? I understand that the independent character would not gain the other two benefits, but some people at my store are saying that if a independent character is allowed to join then the whole unit would somehow not be able to use the last benefit.

The unit is -1 to shoot at; the IC is a normal member of the unit, therefore this is still the Heralds unit and still gets -1BS.

There are no restrictions on mounts given, so it suggests they can. Complete no brainer to give them more mobility.

Thanks for the answer. Am I right that the IC would not get the other benefits from the formation?

If they apply specifically to the models, then no. If they affect the unit as a whole, then raw they get the benefit ps, although some posters here will go to great lengths (of posts) to make you believe otherwise , literally making up meanings of words as they do so.

This is another variation of the IC’s and unit special rules debate.
No matter how much nosferatu likes to pretend that his view of things is ‘raw’ and that ‘it works’; unfortunately, it is not that clear. There are very long threads on YMDC arguing about this same issue. And instead of giving such a useless, polarizing answer like him, I’ll let you know the stance of both sides briefly.

One side of the debate is that things like this doesn’t transfer over to IC’s because of this sentence in the BRB.
“When an Independent Character joins a unit, it might have different special rules from those of the unit. Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn special rule), the unit’s special rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character, and the Independent Character’s special rules are not conferred upon the unit.”
Attached IC’s would not gain or benefit from the effects of unit special rules unless specified in the rule itself.

The other side is that things like this does work because when the IC joins the unit, the unit does not intrinsically change at all. Allowing special rules that effect a unit, to also effect attached IC’s.

This is just the super bare-bones version of both sides. If you want to know every argument both sides have made, there is a 20 page thread on it in the front page that got closed because it was going nowhere.

For your specific question, Heralds; in both cases, the enemy units would get -1 BS regardless of if you have attached IC's or not. The ability has nothing to do with IC's or unit special rules. It effects enemy units.
The point of contention will be the Iron Priest ability of ignoring the first failed saving throw made by a Herald each phase.
Which turns it into the same question of IC's and unit special rules that a lot of people have argued about before.

Both sides have not come to a consensus and probably never will until an official FAQ comes out (never). It is not as clear as some would have you believe. Since you live in Canada, I will note that the ITC/NOVA have ruled that things like this doesn’t work. If your gaming area likes to use ITC/NOVA rules, then you don’t really have a choice.

No doubt, me attempting an honest top-down view of the whole situation will cause some more tirades.

Rasko wrote: l]This is another variation of the IC’s and unit special rules debate.
No matter how much nosferatu likes to pretend that his view of things is ‘raw’ and that ‘it works’; unfortunately, it is not that clear. There are very long threads on YMDC arguing about this same issue. And instead of giving such a useless, polarizing answer like him, I’ll let you know the stance of both sides briefly.

My answer IS RAW, as was proven. Your dissenting opinion made up rules, changed words frequently, and when pushed you could not support your stance in any meaningful way while ignoring the vry relevant rules.

Rasko wrote:One side of the debate is that things like this doesn’t transfer over to IC’s because of this sentence in the BRB.
“When an Independent Character joins a unit, it might have different special rules from those of the unit. Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn special rule), the unit’s special rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character, and the Independent Character’s special rules are not conferred upon the unit.”
Attached IC’s would not gain or benefit from the effects of unit special rules unless specified in the rule itself.

The bold bit is a lie, of course. It relies on the very deliberate misreading of the word "confer" to mean "benefit", when of course confer does not mean that. Resko will pretend otherwise, but notice that this little "..or benefit" was slipped in there, as if it has the same origin as the (correct) gain? Very disingenuous, especially having been corrected on this very point likely 20 times in the last thread they threw themselves into

Rasko wrote:The other side is that things like this does work because when the IC joins the unit, the unit does not intrinsically change at all. Allowing special rules that effect a unit, to also effect attached IC’s.

Which is the correct side, as the rule "normal member of the unti for all rules purposes" applies. So, when considering if the UNIT is affected, you MUST consider the IC to be a normal member of the unit - and of course remember that the IC unit does not exist while the IC is joined, which is explained in the IC rules

Rasko wrote:For your specific question, Heralds; in both cases, the enemy units would get -1 BS since it has nothing to do with attached IC's.
The point of contention will be the Iron Priest ability of ignoring the first failed saving throw made by a Herald each phase.
Which turns it into the same question of IC's and unit special rules that a lot of people have argued about before.

Both sides have not come to a consensus and probably never will until an official FAQ comes out (never). It is not as clear as some would have you believe. Since you live in Canada, I will note that the ITC/NOVA have ruled that things like this doesn’t work. If your gaming area likes to use ITC/NOVA rules, then you don’t really have a choice.

No doubt, me attempting an honest top-down view of the whole situation will cause some more tirades.

Characterising your misrepresetnation as "honest" wont cause "tirades", just pointing out where you are being deliberately disingenuous, and therefore not debating honestly.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
... Tirading...

I think you can see what side nosferatu is on. Everything he said has actually been addressed in the 20 page thread.
As nothing he said here is new, I don't feel the need to address any of it. No point turning this into another 20 page thread, repeating the exact same things.

No tirade. Also, dont edit quotes like that - its rude and violates rule 1. Again

I pointed out your dishonesty. Feel free to edit your posts to remove your "error" in claiming "confer" means "benefit".

I am on the side that follows ALL the rules and doesnt make up new meanings for words. Make of that what you wish.

Thanks for your answers.Sorry I did not realize that this was a issue already being addressed.

No problem man! The thread got closed because it was going nowhere. It might be getting addressed but it'll never be resolved. Haha.

The important thing is to have fun and speak to your opponent if you plan to run something like this. More so if you live in NA because of the prevalence of ITC/NOVA. Cheers.

Just remember to talk to the TO about ITC - ITC only offers suggestions, you o not have to follow ALL of their houserules if the TO does not wish to do so

Its why it would be good if the ITC split their deliberate changes to RAW such as this from the clariffications on the actually ambiguous topics.

Billymac321 wrote:
Firstly can all of the priest take normal upgrades such as Thunder wolf or cyberwolf for the Iron priest, and Bikes for the wolf priest?

It depends on the Restrictions of the Formation, but without any, any upgrades available on their Datasheet are fair game.

Billymac321 wrote:
Secondly can independent characters join the formation, and if so would the unit still benefit from the -1 to ballistic skill to opponents who shoot it? I understand that the independent character would not gain the other two benefits, but some people at my store are saying that if a independent character is allowed to join then the whole unit would somehow not be able to use the last benefit.

It depends on how the rule directs its effect.

If it directs it at a unit, so long as that unit passes all the requirements of the rule, then the IC will be affected ala Stubborn or Fleet. If it directs it based on a unit-directed action, but limits it to the rule possessors, then only if the IC is from the Formation will it benefit, ala Counter-Attack. If it does not designate a recipient or states models being affected, than an included IC will not benefit from the rule without possessing it (i.e. coming from the Formation), ala Relentless.

Just follow the rules as directed and you should be fine. They really aren't complicated most of the time, but people try to make them more than they are half the time.

Some believe a specific phrase is required, which pretty much means only USRs can work since so few non-IC unique rules ever use even a similar phrase as Stubborn and also ignores what those rules actually state. Some believe that the IC and unit are never considered to be the same unit, which would mean that Stubborn would not even work. There's even one who will tell you that when a rule references a unit name, it is not actually referring to a unit.

I'm sensing a lot of passive-aggressiveness in this thread. As Rasko said, there are two sides to this argument, neither of which has a conclusive case. I would err on the side of caution and discuss this with your opponent. And everyone please remember that they're just toy soldiers. Have fun with them.