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.

This thread isn't about taking Relics on Special Characters.

At a tournament I went to yesterday, a player frustratingly argued with me that I wasn't allowed to take a free Relic, the Sanctic Halo, on my Space Marine Captain, because I had Roboute Guilliman in my list. His reasoning, was because Guilliman already has a Relic, the Armour Indomitus(even though Guilliman's Armour Indomitus is entirely different...)

That sounded completely wrong, but I didn't feel like arguing and said "feth it just play you annoying so-and-so" but more polite.

Is that correct, or wrong? That you cannot take a free Relic on a generic character, because you have a Special Character in your army who already has a "Relic"?

I don't see anything that supports that interpretation.

"If your army is led by a Space Marines Warlord, you may give one of the following Chapter Relics to a Space Marine CHARACTER in your army.. Named characters... already have one or ore artefacts, and cannot be given any of the following relics."

There's nothing here about only being allowed one relic in your army. It's just that you can only give one of the relics listed here to a character in your army, and you can't give them to certain of your characters (the special ones).

Also note that Guilliman doesn't have something called "The Armour Indomitus", and so there's no argument to be made that you already had one of "the following Chapter Relics".

Yeah, he argued you out of your relic as far as I can tell.

I haven't been to a tournament before, isn't this a question for a judge to answer? Also did you beat the guy?

Indeed, if you are at a Tournament then the only person who's opinion matters is the Organizers.

Azuza001 wrote:
Yeah, he argued you out of your relic as far as I can tell.

I haven't been to a tournament before, isn't this a question for a judge to answer? Also did you beat the guy?

I'm not experienced much with Tournaments, and this one had a rather tight schedule. I should've gotten a TO to arbitrate.

I did end up winning the match, and the tournament. It was a local charity tournament, only 18 participants. I can't take all the credit; I played a list with Guilliman in it.

In such a situation, simply inform your Opponent that your list was Organizer Approved and move on.

If he actually wants to start down the pedantic rules lawyer route on this, you can out pedantic him with the same rule he's trying to use. You're limited to one Relic but even though they can't take Relics, named Characters don't already have Relics as your opponent is arguing. They have artifacts. Since there's no restriction on artifacts, no restriction on having both Relics and artifacts, and since named Characters don't have (and can't take) Relics, they do not in any way prevent you from taking a Relic on someone else.

As a regular tourney guy, I advise to bring in the TO; that's his job. Don't back down and feel, "Oh, I'm just being a bother."

Especially if you're a Top Table contender ... which I, 97% of the time, am not.