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.

So with the preview today of the new Custodes & GSC characters, I've immediately run into a "new to me" rule.
The Blademaster has his Consummate Swordsman rule, part of which reads "unmodified hit rolls of 1-3 always fail". I have no idea how this interacts with Gorechild's rule "Always hits on a roll of 2+, regardless of any modifiers".
So my real kicker here is whether or not Consummate Swordsman is a modifier or not.

At the end of the rulebook there is a section titled “Rare Rules”, one of these is “Attacker’s Priority”:
“While resolving attacks, you’ll occasionally find that two rules cannot both apply - for example, when an attacking model with an ability that enables it to always score a successful hit on a 2+ targets a model that has an ability that states it can only be hit on a 6+. When this happens, the attacking model’s rules take precedence.”

However, I’d expect it to get errata’d to work like Transhuman Physiology, so the defender rule wins, but that’s just my guess.

Conssumate Swordsman lacks the "irrespective of any other abilities" rider that Transhuman does.

The Consummate Swordsman rule, which says "unmodified hit rolls of 1-3 always fail" is not a modifier, so the part about "regardless of any modifiers" does not have any weight in this situation.

Therefore the "Consummate Swordsman" rule would take precedence in this case.

 DeathReaper wrote:
The Consummate Swordsman rule, which says "unmodified hit rolls of 1-3 always fail" is not a modifier, so the part about "regardless of any modifiers" does not have any weight in this situation.

Therefore the "Consummate Swordsman" rule would take precedence in this case.

It would not, due to Attacker's Priority as outlined earlier in this thread.

 MinMax wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The Consummate Swordsman rule, which says "unmodified hit rolls of 1-3 always fail" is not a modifier, so the part about "regardless of any modifiers" does not have any weight in this situation.

Therefore the "Consummate Swordsman" rule would take precedence in this case.

It would not, due to Attacker's Priority as outlined earlier in this thread.

Except for things like "Transhuman Physiology"...

There are always exceptions to the rule, and this is similar enough to "Transhuman Physiology" that I would expect it to be the same when the get around to the errata.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 MinMax wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The Consummate Swordsman rule, which says "unmodified hit rolls of 1-3 always fail" is not a modifier, so the part about "regardless of any modifiers" does not have any weight in this situation.

Therefore the "Consummate Swordsman" rule would take precedence in this case.

It would not, due to Attacker's Priority as outlined earlier in this thread.

Except for things like "Transhuman Physiology"...

There are always exceptions to the rule, and this is similar enough to "Transhuman Physiology" that I would expect it to be the same when the get around to the errata.

Transhuman is an exception because it specifically states that it applies "irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or the model making the attack may have".

The Consummate Swordsman ability lacks any such wording, so the basic "Attacker Priority" rule applies.

 Cheex wrote:
Transhuman is an exception because it specifically states that it applies "irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or the model making the attack may have".

The Consummate Swordsman ability lacks any such wording, so the basic "Attacker Priority" rule applies.

For now, sure, but wait for the errata.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Cheex wrote:
Transhuman is an exception because it specifically states that it applies "irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or the model making the attack may have".

The Consummate Swordsman ability lacks any such wording, so the basic "Attacker Priority" rule applies.

For now, sure, but wait for the errata.

It may be FAQ'd, but it's disingenuous to reply as if it already has been.

 MinMax wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Cheex wrote:
Transhuman is an exception because it specifically states that it applies "irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or the model making the attack may have".

The Consummate Swordsman ability lacks any such wording, so the basic "Attacker Priority" rule applies.

For now, sure, but wait for the errata.

It may be FAQ'd, but it's disingenuous to reply as if it already has been.

I didn't reply as if it already has been.

I just forgot about the "Attacker Priority" rule. (And I only read the OP's post).

There's no reason to assume this will get an erratum.

 Cheex wrote:
There's no reason to assume this will get an erratum.

You know, except for the wording of "Transhuman Physiology" which also has language that says an unmodified roll of 1-3 fails.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Cheex wrote:
There's no reason to assume this will get an erratum.

You know, except for the wording of "Transhuman Physiology" which also has language that says an unmodified roll of 1-3 fails.

Except, you know, the key phrase that Transhuman has.

There's no indication that GW intends for these rules to be the same. Could they errata it? Sure, but there is no reason to believe that they intend to.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Cheex wrote:
There's no reason to assume this will get an erratum.

You know, except for the wording of "Transhuman Physiology" which also has language that says an unmodified roll of 1-3 fails.

So because one rule has it every other rule has that?

On that logic attacker has priority rule was there first so one would expect transhuman get errataed first.

You DO know this rule and transhuman are two different rules don't you?

tneva82 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Cheex wrote:
There's no reason to assume this will get an erratum.

You know, except for the wording of "Transhuman Physiology" which also has language that says an unmodified roll of 1-3 fails.

So because one rule has it every other rule has that?

It shows intent.

If one thing has something that says an unmodified roll of 1-3 fails and gets an errata to over-ride a rule, it shows they intend for rules that say the same thing to over-ride that rule.

That is all I am saying.

TRANSHUMAN PHYSIOLOGY wrote:Until the end of the phase, each time an attack is made against that unit, an unmodified wound roll of 1-3 for that attack fails, irrespective of any abilities that the weapon or the model making the attack may have.

POISONED WEAPON wrote:Each time an attack is made with a poisoned weapon against a unit (excluding VEHICLE or TITANIC units), an unmodified wound roll of this value is always successful.

The highlighted text in Transhuman obviously has it override Poisoned Weapon.

Gorechild wrote:This weapon always hits on a roll of 2+, regardless of any modifiers.

The wording on Gorechild is old school, but can fairly be read to mean it hits on an unmodified Dice Roll 2+. Attackers advantage take place, just like it does against a Culexus Assassin.

Etherium: When resolving an attack that targets this model, the attacking model is treated as having a Weapon Skill and Ballistic Skill characteristic of 6+.

Only GW knows if they intended for it to beat out rules like Gorechild's, but existing precedence is that it they don't mind this interaction.

 DeathReaper wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Cheex wrote:
There's no reason to assume this will get an erratum.

You know, except for the wording of "Transhuman Physiology" which also has language that says an unmodified roll of 1-3 fails.

So because one rule has it every other rule has that?

It shows intent.

If one thing has something that says an unmodified roll of 1-3 fails and gets an errata to over-ride a rule, it shows they intend for rules that say the same thing to over-ride that rule.

That is all I am saying.

Conversely, the lack of exception listed in the Consummate Swordsman rule could indicate the specific intent for it to be different to Transhuman. Both are equally likely, but in the absence of a FAQ then we need to use the Attacker's Priority rule and cannot assume that they meant otherwise.

The "Rare Rules" on p 88 state,

"If attacking model and target unit have conflicting rules, the attacking model's rule takes precedence."

Kharn would hit on a 2+ against the Custodes.