Skyhammer and Independent Characters

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.

**Happyjew**

gmaleron, the only rule I've seen you reference, is unit special rules don't confer.

If an IC joins an Assault Squad, is it still an Assault Squad? If not please cite a rule.
If an Assault Squad has permission to do something, does an IC joining that unit restrict that permission (not including outside restrictions such as having to be able to Deep Strike)? If so please cite a rule.

**Mr. Shine**

gmaleron wrote:
I am not confusing anything and I am not trying or even ignoring anything you have stated. If I'm doing that then you are doing the exact same thing on top of conveniently ignoring the entirety of the rules that are listed, saying "they" is not the entirety. I'm not confusing anything, it clearly states that special rules in regards to independent characters need to specifically say they can be conferred to them, if they don't then they don't get it.

Stubborn: Page 172 of the Warhammer 40k Rulebook:

"When a unit that contains at least one model with this Special Rule take Morale Checks or Pinning tests they ignore any negative Leadership modifiers. If a unit is bother Fearless and Stubborn it uses the rules for Fearless instead"

First Fire then the Blade:

"On the turn they arrive from Deep Strike Reserves, the Devastator Squads in a Skyhammer Assault Force have the Relentless Special Rule and the Assault Squads can charge even though they arrived from Reserves that turn."

Now looking at both the special rules they are not similar in the slightest in regards to how they effect a unit so I fail to see what point you're trying to make if any.

Would you agree that, eliminating the portion of First the Fire, then the Blade that refers to Devastator Squads (as we're dealing with Assault Squads here), the rule reads:

"On the turn Assault Squads from a Skyhammer Annihilation Force arrive from Deep Strike Reserves they can charge even though they arrived from Reserves that turn."

?

**gmaleron**

It would be an assault squad with an independent character attached. And if the independent character does not have that Special Rule or if the Special Rule does not specifically state that it confers to independent characters that join the unit then no he would not get it.

Page 166 of the Rulebook under Independent Characters:

"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. Special Rules are conferred to the unit only apply for as long as the Independent Character is with them."

Believe me I understand what you're trying to point out in regards to the Assault Squad, however the fact is First Fire Then The Blade is still listed as a Special Rule. Because it's listed as a special rule independent characters have to follow the guidelines with special rules as found on page 166 in the rulebook. how it is worded does not change the fact that it is a special rule, and according to my GW manager its probably why they listed it as a special rule to force independent characters to cite the special rules reference in their rules.

**Happyjew**

Who said anything about the rule conferring?

**Mr. Shine**

gmaleron wrote:
It would be an assault squad with an independent character attached. And if the independent character does not have that Special Rule or if the Special Rule does not specifically state that it confers to independent characters that join the unit then no he would not get it

Believe me I understand what you're trying to point out in regards to the Assault Squad, however the fact is First Fire Then The Blade is still listed as a Special Rule. Because it's listed as a special rule independent characters have to follow the guidelines with special rules as found on page 166 in the rulebook. how it is worded does not change the fact that it is a special rule, and according to my GW manager its probably why they listed it as a special rule to force independent characters to cite the special rules reference in their rules.

I'm talking about the wording of the rule itself, regardless of whether or not an Independent Character is attached. If we eliminate the bit that's irrelevant, can we effectively stitch the rule back together to read as I've stated, yes or no?

**gmaleron**

Mr. Shine wrote:

I'm talking about the wording of the rule itself, regardless of whether or not an Independent Character is attached. If we eliminate the bit that's irrelevant, can we effectively stitch the rule back together to read as I've stated, yes or no?

Yes we can read it as you have stitched it back together and I can see how that part is worded could make sense in the way you're describing. But it doesn't change the fact that it is still a special rule and independent characters still have to deal with special rules as described on page 166. It doesn't change the fact that it's not specified in the rule itself so it can't transfer over to the independent character so he still could not assault with the Assault Marines, and really doesn't surprise me that GW worded something poorly!

**Mr. Shine**

gmaleron wrote:
Mr. Shine wrote:

I'm talking about the wording of the rule itself, regardless of whether or not an Independent Character is attached. If we eliminate the bit that's irrelevant, can we effectively stitch the rule back together to read as I've stated, yes or no?

Yes we can read it as you have stitched it back together and I can see how that part is worded could make sense in the way you're describing. But it doesn't change the fact that it is still a special rule and independent characters still have to deal with special rules as described on page 166. It doesn't change the fact that the special rule doesn't specifically confer over to the independent character so he still could not assault with the Assault Marines, and really doesn't surprise me that GW worded something poorly!

Okay, let's colour it in, compared with the rules for Stubborn:

"When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule takes Morale checks or Pinning tests, they ignore any negative Leadership modifiers."

"On the turn Assault Squads from a Skyhammer Annihilation Force arrive from Deep Strike Reserves they can charge even though they arrived from Reserves that turn."

You'll notice that they're structurally exactly the same. Red denotes the condition for the rule being conferred, green denotes who the rule is conferred to and blue denotes the effect being conferred. Both apply an effect to the unit, on the basis of a condition being met. The effects are different and the conditions to be met are different, but in both instances the recipient is exactly the same; "they" or "a unit"/"Assault Squads".

**gmaleron**

The biggest difference however in probably the most important is that it says that:

"When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule"

This means that just a single model has to have this rule to affect the entire unit, whereas there is nothing in the "First Fire then the Blade" Special Rule that says anything like this. It specifically mentions Assault Squads taken in this Formation can charge the turn they arrive from Reserves and the Special Rule First Fire then the Blade is what allows them to do that. An Independent Character could join the squad but he would still have to follow the guidelines for special rules that all ICs have to.

**BlackTalos**

Mr. Shine wrote:
gmaleron wrote:
Mr. Shine wrote:

I'm talking about the wording of the rule itself, regardless of whether or not an Independent Character is attached. If we eliminate the bit that's irrelevant, can we effectively stitch the rule back together to read as I've stated, yes or no?

Yes we can read it as you have stitched it back together and I can see how that part is worded could make sense in the way you're describing. But it doesn't change the fact that it is still a special rule and independent characters still have to deal with special rules as described on page 166. It doesn't change the fact that the special rule doesn't specifically confer over to the independent character so he still could not assault with the Assault Marines, and really doesn't surprise me that GW worded something poorly!

Okay, let's colour it in, compared with the rules for Stubborn:

"When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule takes Morale checks or Pinning tests, they ignore any negative Leadership modifiers."

"On the turn Assault Squads from a Skyhammer Annihilation Force arrive from Deep Strike Reserves they can charge even though they arrived from Reserves that turn."

You'll notice that they're structurally exactly the same. Red denotes the condition for the rule being conferred, green denotes who the rule is conferred to and blue denotes the effect being conferred. Both apply an effect to the unit, on the basis of a condition being met. The effects are different and the conditions to be met are different, but in both instances the recipient is exactly the same; "they" or "a unit"/"Assault Squads".

I like this explanation, it quite clearly denotes the point.

The same point repeated over and over and over for now what? 16 Pages?

The effects of the Rules get applied to the whole Unit, including the IC. Because "First Fire then the Blade" Special Rule says it applies to Units.

**gmaleron**

BlackTalos wrote:

The effects of the Rules get applied to the whole Unit, including the IC. Because "First Fire then the Blade" Special Rule says it applies to Units.

First Fire then the Blade:

"On the turn they arrive from Deep Strike Reserves, the Devastator Squads in a Skyhammer Assault Force have the Relentless Special Rule and the Assault Squads can charge even though they arrived from Reserves that turn."

Yes it applies to the Assault Squads or "units" as you put it but that doesn't change the fact it's a Special Rule. Lookup independent Characters in the Rulebook they have to deal with special rules differently than other rules.

**BlackTalos**

gmaleron wrote:
Yes it applies to the Assault Squads or "units" as you put it but that doesn't change the fact it's a Special Rule. Lookup independent Characters in the Rulebook they have to deal with special rules differently than other rules.

Yes, "Narthecium" is a Special Rule that the Apothecary has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.
Yes, "Stubborn" is a Special Rule that "a model" has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.

Repeated: The IC cannot be "conferred" the "First Fire then the Blade" Special Rule: He cannot "get" that Rule.

But what the "First Fire then the Blade" Special Rule actually does, can apply to an IC.

**Rommel44**

This debate in question centers around the wording of a special rule correct? Even if the wording is poor it is still a special rule so the Independent Character would still have to treat it like every other Special Rule. Now how it is written under Independent Characters dealing with Special Rules supports Gmaleron in his reasoning why it cannot be taken, and it would be kind of cheese even for GW to let beefed up characters charge after coming in from reserve.

**gmaleron**

BlackTalos wrote:

Yes, "Narthecium" is a Special Rule that the Apothecary has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.
Yes, "Stubborn" is a Special Rule that "a model" has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.

Narthecium is a piece of Wargear that gives the Special Rule not a Special Rule itself so that doesn't work.

**BlackTalos**

gmaleron wrote:
BlackTalos wrote:

Yes, "Narthecium" is a Special Rule that the Apothecary has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.
Yes, "Stubborn" is a Special Rule that "a model" has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.

Narthecium is a piece of Wargear that gives the Special Rule not a Special Rule itself so that doesn't work.

Granted, but it still distributes a Special Rule in the same way "First Fire then the Blade" does.

Oh and you skipped "Stubborn"? Too dangerous to cover?

**Mr. Shine**

Rommel44 wrote:
This debate in question centers around the wording of a special rule correct? Even if the wording is poor it is still a special rule so the Independent Character would still have to treat it like every other Special Rule. Now how it is written under Independent Characters dealing with Special Rules supports Gmaleron in his reasoning why it cannot be taken, and it would be kind of cheese even for GW to let beefed up characters charge after coming in from reserve.

It supports gmaleron in the sense that the rule makes no mention of attached Independent Characters, but it supports no one in that I can't think of any special rule off the top of my head that mentions attached Independent Characters.

The Independent Character rules themselves say the rule must specify whether it confer to any joined Independent Characters and then points us to Stubborn as an example of a rule which does confer to joined Independent Characters, except the rules for Stubborn make no mention whatsoever of being conferred to joined Independent Characters.

**gmaleron**

BlackTalos wrote:
gmaleron wrote:
BlackTalos wrote:

Yes, "Narthecium" is a Special Rule that the Apothecary has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.
Yes, "Stubborn" is a Special Rule that "a model" has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.

Narthecium is a piece of Wargear that gives the Special Rule not a Special Rule itself so that doesn't work.

Granted, but it still distributes a Special Rule in the same way "First Fire then the Blade" does.

Oh and you skipped "Stubborn"? Too dangerous to cover?

Not at all no need to get so worked up about it. and there is a big difference between a piece of war gear giving a special rule then just having the special rule. And no it does not apply to the IC because it is a special rule that is allowing them to do in the first place.

**Mr. Shine**

gmaleron wrote:
The biggest difference however in probably the most important is that it says that:

"When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule"

This means that just a single model has to have this rule to affect the entire unit, whereas there is nothing in the "First Fire then the Blade" Special Rule that says anything like this. It specifically mentions Assault Squads taken in this Formation can charge the turn they arrive from Reserves and the Special Rule First Fire then the Blade is what allows them to do that. An Independent Character could join the squad but he would still have to follow the guidelines for special rules that all ICs have to.

That's because First the Fire, then the Blade only needs the unit to be an Assault Squad in a Skyhammer Annihilation Force, which a joined Independent Character counts as part of.

**Rommel44**

Really Blacktalos? this is a discussion not a fight, no need to act like a "tough guy" on a public forum.

And Mrshine an Independent Character is still an independent character even if he is attached to a unit or not . And stubborn is covered by "a model" which to me means it could be anything including a character. I will say though it is a poor example but no one can be faulted for following the rules as written in the rulebook.

**Mr. Shine**

gmaleron wrote:
Not at all no need to get so worked up about it. and there is a big difference between a piece of war gear giving a special rule then just having the special rule. And no it does not apply to the IC because it is a special rule that is allowing them to do in the first place.

Please explain the difference, with rules support.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rommel44 wrote:
And Mrshine an Independent Character is still an independent character even if he is attached to a unit or not . And stubborn is covered by "a model" which to me means it could be anything including a character. I will say though it is a poor example but no one can be faulted for following the rules as written in the rulebook.

And when joined to a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes.

Stubborn requires one model to have the special rule for the unit to benefit, while First the Fire, then the Blade requires the unit to be an Assault Squad in a Skyhammer Annihilation Force. That doesn't say, or even remotely mean, "the unit" for one includes Independent Characters while "the unit" for the other does not.

**gmaleron**

If a piece of Wargear gives a special rule like Terminator Armor and independent character joins the unit without wearing Terminator armor he would not have relentless like they do.

On that note, where does it say in the First Fire then the Blade special rule that independent characters ignore the guidlines for special rules that they have to follow?

**Rommel44**

Correct he does count as part of the unit EXCEPT for Special Rules which is made it quite clear in the rulebook. There is no difference between the term unit but there still is a difference for independent characters, they still have to follow the rules in regards to Special Rules. If it was not listed under a Special Rule I would agree with you but the fact of the matter is that it is listed as a special rule and Independent Characters have to follow that

**BlackTalos**

I don't get worked up anymore, i've had 40 pages discussion with users much more riling than this...

I'm just making sure your interpretation, which i believe is incorrect, adds up properly.
If i can point out to you that it does not, we might achieve agreement.

So would you reply with you opinion on:

Yes, "Stubborn" is a Special Rule that "a model" has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.

When i replied to

gmaleron wrote:
Yes it applies to the Assault Squads or "units" as you put it but that doesn't change the fact it's a Special Rule.

**Drager**

How can you tell if a special rule can apply to independent characters or not? What criteria denotes this?

**gmaleron**

Mr. Shine wrote:

And when joined to a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes.

Stubborn requires one model to have the special rule for the unit to benefit, while First the Fire, then the Blade requires the unit to be an Assault Squad in a Skyhammer Annihilation Force. That doesn't say, or even remotely mean, "the unit" for one includes Independent Characters while "the unit" for the other does not.

Rommel nailed it on the head, independent characters still do not ignore what they have to check in regards to special rules found in the unit. ICs do count as part of the unit for all rule purposes, but that refers to when taking casualties, checks, movement, shooting ect. The fact that it is a special rule means he still has to follow the guidelines for special rules.

BlackTalos wrote:
Yes, "Stubborn" is a Special Rule that "a model" has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.

Because the rule of Stubborn says that one model in the unit which could be the unit itself or the IC gives it to the entire unit whereas in the formation it does not.

**BlackTalos**

Rommel44 wrote:
Correct he does count as part of the unit EXCEPT for Special Rules which is made it quite clear in the rulebook.

Incorrect. It is not a blanket "Special Rules don't apply" Statement. The exact Quote is:

the unit's special rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character

What does this mean?

It means that an Independent Character without Special Rule "X" does not get Special Rule "X" if the Unit has it. Agreed?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Drager wrote:
How can you tell if a special rule can apply to independent characters or not? What criteria denotes this?

A Special Rule applies to what the Special Rule itself describes it applies to.

"Stubborn" applies to: "a unit"

"First Fire then the Blade" applies to: "Assault Squads"

Automatically Appended Next Post:

gmaleron wrote:
BlackTalos wrote:
Yes, "Stubborn" is a Special Rule that "a model" has. You still apply that rule to attached ICs.

Because the rule of Stubborn says that one model in the unit which could be the unit itself or the IC gives it to the entire unit whereas in the formation it does not.

No, the rule of Stubborn requires "contains at least one model with this special rule takes Morale checks or Pinning tests" in order to be applicable to "a unit".

The rule of First Fire then the Blade requires "On the turn (...) arrive from Deep Strike Reserves" in order to be applicable to "Assault Squads".

When both above requirements are met, which models benefit?

**Rommel44**

I never said special rules don't apply don't put words in my mouth. And yes he does not get that special rule, and because Assault Marines get that ability because of a special rule he is unable to use it. This is sounding more and more of an attempt to exploit a loophole due to poor writing by GW, thankfully it's still listed as a special rule which means people can't and most decent players won't try to abuse.

**BlackTalos**

Rommel44 wrote:
I never said special rules don't apply don't put words in my mouth. And yes he does not get that special rule, and because Assault Marines get that ability because of a special rule he is unable to use it.

Correct, the IC never gets the "First Fire then the Blade" Special Rule.

Just as the IC never gets the "Stubborn" Special Rule.

But when a Pinning test comes up, all models in the Unit get affected by the "Stubborn" Special Rule.
And when arriving from Deep Strike Reserves, all models in the Unit get affected by the "First Fire then the Blade" Special Rule.

Rommel44 wrote:
This is sounding more and more of an attempt to exploit a loophole due to poor writing by GW, thankfully it's still listed as a special rule which means people can't and most decent players won't try to abuse.

Can we discuss Rules? I have no interest about who's Whining.

**gmaleron**

BlackTalos wrote:

When both above requirements are met, which models benefit?

The entire unit get stubborn thanks to how the rule is written but the IC is still not able to assault after deep strike because he does not have first fire then the blade Special Rule and he was not part of the formation army list entry. Because it is a special rule he has to follow the guidelines that all independent characters do for special rules, he cannot use it no matter how hard you try to word it.

**BlackTalos**

gmaleron wrote:
BlackTalos wrote:

When both above requirements are met, which models benefit?

The entire unit get stubborn thanks to how the rule is written but the IC is still not able to assault after deep strike because he does not have first fire then the blades special rule and he was not part of the formation army list entry.

Very true, he does not have first fire then the blades special rule and he was not part of the formation army list entry.

He is part of the Unit when they arrive from Deep Strike Reserves though, and thus the allowance to charge that gets applied to the Unit when they "arrive from Deep Strike Reserves" applies.

**Thimn**

He doesn't need to have the Special Rule the effect is being granted from the unit when it arrives from reserves. If the unit is allowed to assault it will allow the IC to as well.