A Tale of Two Coteaz

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.

**thedunator**

Can Coteaz from the Inquisitor book interact with an allied GK attachment the same way as if he was fielded as a GK? Or will rules prevent him from being a fully functional GK as well as a fully functional Inquisitor?

**DeathReaper**

You use the rules for the codex or dataslate you get the unit from.

**Sigvatr**

thedunator wrote:
Can Coteaz from the Inquisitor book interact with an allied GK attachment the same way as if he was fielded as a GK? Or will rules prevent him from being a fully functional GK as well as a fully functional Inquisitor?

You can't field two Corteaz at the same time.

**TheKbob**

Wow, yea this wasn't supposed to go this long.

As far as I'm concerend, poorly written RAW is yes, you field both if you wish. RAI, I wouldn't.

And I love the first post lambasting me about being upset that Coteaz was changed. I was. However it's because we already had significant precedent that the warbands should have gotten objective secured through how Pedro was FAQ'd. But sure, hand wave rational logic away for GW Brand Finelogic™

**Frozen Ocean**

Ultimately this thread has shown, TheKbob, that you will face three kinds of opponent if you do this. The first is the one who will not really care, and allow it on basis of vague rules. The second is the one who will disallow it on basis of RAI, and the third is the one who will disallow it because they don't like it, and will outright refuse to play you and consider you a bad person.

**Yoshidwyn**

portugus wrote:
I think having the same name is enough for unique to limit it.

Unique Models
...... are noted as being Unique in their Army List Entry. Unique models include named characters and extraordinary units or vehicles, of which there is only one known example in the whole galaxy. Because of this, you can only ever include one of each Unique model in an army.

You just hit the nail on the head though because the army each have one therefore it is unique to each army to as opposed to a singular army thus I would vote you could have both no matter how akward it is

**Hollismason**

RETURN TO YOUR GRAVE YOU DO NOT BELONG AMONG THE LIVING!