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.
2) Special rules are abiltiies per the BRB definition.
No, the Special Rules represent the abilities per the BRB definition. My congressmen represents me in the House of Representatives. That doesn't mean I show up and go to Washington, DC, when he does.
3) "Specified in the rule itself" does not require exact referencing of the IC. If it did, it would say that. All that is required is something 'specified in the rule itself' which I pointed to. You have not pointed to anything so far or presented a wording of Stubborn which would block the conferring of Stubborn per the IC Special Rules rule. Your argument isn'e even worthy of consideration. File it under house rule.
So you either did not really read it or just cannot refute anything specific, so you just dodge it and claim it as House Rules. Typical for your performance so far.
The only place the IC without Stubborn can be "specified" in the Stubborn special rule is the references to the unit. That is the only place. A condition of possession does not give, grant, transfer, nor confer anything.
The only thing that is given, granted, transferred, or conferred in the Stubborn special rule is the ability to ignore negative leadership modifiers, and that is only to the unit.
Therefore, all these Formation Special Rules that affect the unit, also affect the ICs which join them per the the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" rule.
col_impact wrote: Point to the rules that talk about "conditions" and "effects".
ICs and Ongoing Effects, for one.
Read the actual rule. It only deals with what happens when an IC leaves a unit that has been affected by a special rule or joins a unit that has not been affected. It simply does not apply.
Reading the rule and actually applying it when appropriate is important. Weapons have the Blind ability that causes a harmful effect. Ability does not equal affect.
I agree that reading the FULL rule and actually applying it is important. Read the very first sentence. Here, I will highlight the pertinent part in red for you:
Sometimes, a unit that an Independent Character has joined will be the target of a beneficial or harmful effect, such as those bestowed by the Blind special rule, for example. If the character leaves the unit, both he and the unit continue to be affected by the effect, so you’ll need to mark the character accordingly.
Conversely, if an Independent Character joins a unit after that unit has been the target of an ongoing effect (or joins a unit after himself having been the target of an ongoing effect) benefits and penalties from that effect are not shared.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/03/01 18:01:30
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
....and has been, in every single one of these threads. Their argument also changes everytime the prior argument is disproven, and then at some point it will be resurrected.
Theyre not arguing honestly. Trying to get them to admit that wont work.
Having read this thread, I have come to determine that my Wulfen won't benefit an IC joining them with a Run+Charge, coming out of a Storm Wolf.
I would like to believe that the "unit" having this rule means the IC which joined it would be now part of this unit... but if I run with the Iron Priest (for example) then that Iron Preists specific rule-set will deny the whole of the unit its Charge.
Much as reroll charge distance is denied to Cavalry if they have a bike join NOT SO if a jump pack joins, and uses the pack only during assault phase).
It would be nice, but however it's not the case.
The new formation, "Death Pack" has a similar thing (Start Collecting: Space Wolves! Starter box), in the unit having run+charge, but the Wolf Lord also has this rule so doesn't prevent the TWC from charging after a Run.
But, forming q unit comprised of Iron Priests on Wolf Mount to accompany him alone, he wouldn't convey this rule as he's prevented by the IP's.
Col_impact, I probably missed it (especially since I've been in Nurgles embrace the last few days). If so sorry. But just to clarify:
I have a special rule that says "When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule...". Does it confer to an attached IC, yes or no?
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia
MekLeN wrote: I would like to believe that the "unit" having this rule means the IC which joined it would be now part of this unit... but if I run with the Iron Priest (for example) then that Iron Preists specific rule-set will deny the whole of the unit its Charge.
How would the Iron Priest Run without the rest of the unit Running?
Or more to the point, how is the Iron Priest less a part of the unit for the Wulfen's rule than when the unit Runs?
MekLeN wrote: But, forming q unit comprised of Iron Priests on Wolf Mount to accompany him alone, he wouldn't convey this rule as he's prevented by the IP's.
A lot depends on how the Iron Priests join him, actually. Much of the confusion involved here is people confusing the relationship between models, units, and identifying what a special rule actually affects.
Remember, there are several levels of entities in the game. The smallest is Model. The next step up is units, which is made up of models. The next step up is detachments, which are made up of units. The last step is army which is made up of detachments and units (in the case of Unbound).
When Iron Priests join the Wolf Lord, and the Wolf Lord is operating independently, they all become Iron Priest models in the Wolf Lord unit. That unit has the capacity to Run and Charge via its Special Rule it has access to. Remember, the unit has the ability to override the restriction against Running and Charging. Also remember that the restriction against Running and Charging is made at the unit level, not the model level. The unit Runs and the models are moved. The Iron Priest model itself does not have the restriction against Running and Charging, just the Iron Priest unit, and he's not acting as an Iron Priest unit when this happens.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Happyjew wrote: Col_impact, I probably missed it (especially since I've been in Nurgles embrace the last few days). If so sorry. But just to clarify:
I have a special rule that says "When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule...". Does it confer to an attached IC, yes or no?
I have asked him a similar question with a more specific terminology.
If an Imperial Fists Chaplain (without Counter-attack) joins a Grey Hunter Pack (with Counter-attack) and gets Charged, does the Chaplain gain +1 Attack that Phase?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/01 18:00:20
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
Happyjew wrote: Col_impact, I probably missed it (especially since I've been in Nurgles embrace the last few days). If so sorry. But just to clarify:
I have a special rule that says "When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule...". Does it confer to an attached IC, yes or no?
I have asked him a similar question with a more specific terminology.
If an Imperial Fists Chaplain (without Counter-attack) joins a Grey Hunter Pack (with Counter-attack) and gets Charged, does the Chaplain gain +1 Attack that Phase?
Already answered. Please keep up.
There is nothing magic about the wording. It just accomplishes logically what the IC Special Rules rule requires.
It's entirely feasible for a rule to use entirely different wording and logic to accomplish the same thing.
It's also entirely feasible for a rule to include that exact wording BUT additional logic that could undermine the logic of the clause already provided to the point that it logically asserts the opposite. That is just the way logic can work. So pay attention to ALL the logic specified in the rule.
So it is not a magic phrase. Just a phrase that is popularly used by the BRB, which is a hint that it is significant, but nothing more than a hint. You need to examine each case and apply the IC Special Rules rule.
nosferatu1001 wrote: "A unit" is as specific as "a unit that contains..." Neither specified the IC. Both require you to use the IC is a member of... Rule in order to know the IC is a part of the unit.
Done. My alternative is complete. Your concession is accepted.
The IC Special Rules ruled that special rules of the unit do not automatically confer to the IC. Your inability to adhere to rules has been noted. You have a nice house rule. Talk to me when you want to talk about RAW.
Dodging again I see
I pointed out the specification in Stubborn, and aske dyou to explain why you magically have required the "at least one model..." addenda, despite this being no more specific than "a unit with" as far as ICs go
in return I get this dodge of a response, and you hilariously talk about others inabilityt to adhere to rules?
Just stop. You lost credibility in rules arguments about 9 threads ago.
Guys - just ignore Col. they know theyre wrong, clearly, based on how often their argument has changed. Its just an attempt to drone on long enough that others may be convinced that Cols "argument" has merit. IT doesnt
Just let it be.
The RAW is well known in this thread, and has been proven.
I keep pointing out to you the obvious. You keep just flat out ignoring the plainly stated IC Special Rules rule. You aren't really even participating in a RAW discussion
The IC Special Rules ruled that special rules of the unit do not automatically confer to the IC and has provided exception to the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" rule. So "a unit . . ." does not cut it for the IC Special Rules rule which has set 'no conferring' as default for when an IC joins a unit.
A unit "that contains at least one model with the special rule" has logic that incorporates models that have been attached to the unit. That logic allows the IC to be granted the ability.
col_impact wrote:
Read the actual rule. It only deals with what happens when an IC leaves a unit that has been affected by a special rule or joins a unit that has not been affected. It simply does not apply.
Reading the rule and actually applying it when appropriate is important. Weapons have the Blind ability that causes a harmful effect. Ability does not equal affect.
I agree that reading the FULL rule and actually applying it is important. Read the very first sentence. Here, I will highlight the pertinent part in red for you:
Sometimes, a unit that an Independent Character has joined will be the target of a beneficial or harmful effect, such as those bestowed by the Blind special rule, for example. If the character leaves the unit, both he and the unit continue to be affected by the effect, so you’ll need to mark the character accordingly.
Conversely, if an Independent Character joins a unit after that unit has been the target of an ongoing effect (or joins a unit after himself having been the target of an ongoing effect) benefits and penalties from that effect are not shared.
The rulebook does not define special rule as effect. Special rules are abilities. You are getting ability confused with effect and directly contradicting how the BRB defines special rule..
Blind is the ability of a weapon granted by a special rule to cast a harmful effect on a unit. That effect is simply "all models in the unit are reduced to Weapon Skill and Ballistic Skill 1 until the end of their next turn" and is not the Blind ability itself.
In fact, all lines of reasoning seeking to treat special rules as 'effects' can be filed away as house rules. The BRB defines special rules for us and they are abilities.
Spoiler:
Whenever a creature or weapon has an ability that breaks or bends one of the main game
rules, it is represented by a special rule. A special rule might improve a model’s chances of
causing damage by granting it poisoned weapons or a boost to its Strength. Conversely, a
special rule may improve a model’s survivability by granting it resistance to pain, or the
ability to regrow damaged flesh. Special rules allow snipers to target the weak spots of
their foes, scouts to range ahead of the army and anti-aircraft guns to blow flyers out of
the skies.
So present a line of reasoning that treats special rules as abilities or mark your argument a house rule.
3) "Specified in the rule itself" does not require exact referencing of the IC. If it did, it would say that. All that is required is something 'specified in the rule itself' which I pointed to. You have not pointed to anything so far or presented a wording of Stubborn which would block the conferring of Stubborn per the IC Special Rules rule. Your argument isn'e even worthy of consideration. File it under house rule.
So you either did not really read it or just cannot refute anything specific, so you just dodge it and claim it as House Rules. Typical for your performance so far.
The only place the IC without Stubborn can be "specified" in the Stubborn special rule is the references to the unit. That is the only place. A condition of possession does not give, grant, transfer, nor confer anything.
The only thing that is given, granted, transferred, or conferred in the Stubborn special rule is the ability to ignore negative leadership modifiers, and that is only to the unit.
Therefore, all these Formation Special Rules that affect the unit, also affect the ICs which join them per the the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" rule.
Incorrect.
First, the IC Special Rules rule has provided exception to the 'counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes' in the case of special rules.
Moreover, on top of being overwritten by the IC Special Rules rules, 'counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes' isn't specified in the rule itself.
You keep ignoring what the rule asks you to do. Find the part of the Stubborn special rule that would logically re-incorporate the IC that has been detached from the unit for the purposes of determining if a special rule confers. You keep holding up your hands and pretending to fail to find it, but the BRB has instructed you to find it and you cannot ignore the BRB.
The clause, "that contains at least one model with the special rule", logically incorporates models that are attached to the collective entity described (in this case the collective entity is a unit). The scope of the rule has been 'specified in the rule itself' by that clause.
But I should remind you that there is nothing magic about that phrase - it just satisfies the IC Special rule and wound up being a very popular way for the BRB to do it. The magic is not the clause per se but that there is specific logic included in the special rules themselves which establish specifically how ICs joined to units are conferring their special rules to one another.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2016/03/02 05:36:41
I have kept up. You did not answer the question then, you do not answer it now. Instead, you just dodge it by ignoring it.
Answer directly, if an Imperial Fists Chaplain (without Counter-attack) joins a Grey Hunter Pack (with Counter-attack) and gets Charged, does the Chaplain gain +1 Attack that Phase? Please explain your answer.
col_impact wrote: There is nothing magic about the wording. It just accomplishes logically what the IC Special Rules rule requires.
Your interpretation of it is magical, since it does not do what you say it does.
col_impact wrote: It's also entirely feasible for a rule to include that exact wording BUT additional logic that could undermine the logic of the clause already provided to the point that it logically asserts the opposite. That is just the way logic can work. So pay attention to ALL the logic specified in the rule.
Yes, please pay attention to ALL the logic specified in Stubborn AND the Independent Character rule. A notice of possession is NOT a method of transference. This phrase you love is useful in identifying the scope of the target of transference, but it does not transfer anything on its own.
That is why it doesn't work for Counter-attack. The actual target is not "a unit which contains at least one model with this special rule", but only "models with this special rule", while Stubborn it is simply the "they" who are "a unit which contains at least one model with this special rule", and more specifically just "a unit" since an IC without this special rule is not represented with "which contains at least one model with this special rule".
col_impact wrote: I keep pointing out to you the obvious. You keep just flat out ignoring the plainly stated IC Special Rules rule. You aren't really even participating in a RAW discussion
Yeah, we really aren't since you aren't actually using the literal written words, just your voodoo grammar version of them.
col_impact wrote: The IC Special Rules ruled that special rules of the unit do not automatically confer to the IC and has provided exception to the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" rule. So "a unit . . ." does not cut it for the IC Special Rules rule which has set 'no conferring' as default for when an IC joins a unit.
Incorrect. That is only your interpretation based on your own desire to limit the situation. There is no separation between unit and IC noted in the IC Special Rules section, only a prevention of mixing special rules between them.
col_impact wrote: A unit "that contains at least one model with the special rule" has logic that incorporates models that have been attached to the unit. That logic allows the IC to be granted the ability.
Only by using the "counts as a part of the unit for all rules purposes". The IC is never mentioned in that phrase except if we have already established this connection that addressing a unit with a rule also addresses the IC as a model in the unit. And even then, this only establishes a target parameter. Nothing in this phrase actually performs anything on the target.
And he is right. You are in your own lala land that reinterprets words and grammar to suit your objectives in your head, and it is very hard to get people to leave their lala lands even when proven that is all that it is.
col_impact wrote: Read the actual rule. It only deals with what happens when an IC leaves a unit that has been affected by a special rule or joins a unit that has not been affected. It simply does not apply.
Reading the rule and actually applying it when appropriate is important. Weapons have the Blind ability that causes a harmful effect. Ability does not equal affect.
I agree that reading the FULL rule and actually applying it is important. Read the very first sentence. Here, I will highlight the pertinent part in red for you:
Sometimes, a unit that an Independent Character has joined will be the target of a beneficial or harmful effect, such as those bestowed by the Blind special rule, for example. If the character leaves the unit, both he and the unit continue to be affected by the effect, so you’ll need to mark the character accordingly.
Conversely, if an Independent Character joins a unit after that unit has been the target of an ongoing effect (or joins a unit after himself having been the target of an ongoing effect) benefits and penalties from that effect are not shared.
The rulebook does not define special rule as effect. Special rules are abilities. You are getting ability confused with effect and directly contradicting how the BRB defines special rule..
You really are going to be dense about this, aren't you?
An ability is "Possession of the means or skill to do something". An effect is a "change that is a result or consequence of an action or other cause". So, an effect is the what happens when an ability is used.
A Special Rule's ability may have an effect on the unit. It's one of those things called a "component" or part of a Special Rule. Every Special Rule establishes a target, timing, and an effect. The target in Stubborn is stated in that phrase you love so much. The timing in Stubborn is when the target takes a Morale Check or Pinning Test. The effect of Stubborn is ignoring negative Leadership Modifiers.
Do not be too rigid in your definitions, you are often losing the forest for the poplars.
col_impact wrote: Blind is the ability of a weapon granted by a special rule to cast a harmful effect on a unit. That effect is simply "all models in the unit are reduced to Weapon Skill and Ballistic Skill 1 until the end of their next turn" and is not the Blind ability itself.
That is the effect of the Blind ability, correct.
col_impact wrote: In fact, all lines of reasoning seeking to treat special rules as 'effects' can be filed away as house rules. The BRB defines special rules for us and they are abilities.
Correct, to a point. Especially when we have never stated nor approached that concept as a case. That does not mean that special rules do not carry effects within them. That would be like saying a unit does not have models.
col_impact wrote: First, the IC Special Rules rule has provided exception to the 'counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes' in the case of special rules.
No, it hasn't. That is only your interpretation which has no connection to the language in that section. No actual separation between IC and unit is stated to occur. No exception is stated to occur. All that is stated is the transference of the rules themselves is prohibited. What they represent nor the effects of those abilities is ever reference or actually suggested.
And you are still dodging the review of Stubborn itself.
col_impact wrote: Moreover, on top of being overwritten by the IC Special Rules rules, 'counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes' isn't specified in the rule itself.
Which rule? The Joining and Leaving a unit section or IC Special Rules?
The last paragraph is:
While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters.
Well THIS section definitely specifies it. This then establishes the standard by which we operate when the previous conditions of the section have been met. They stand unless specifically noted otherwise.
All the IC Special Rules section states the special rules are not given to each other. This is not in a vacuum, so the standards of the previous sections apply. Just as they apply when operating with Stubborn or Fleet.
col_impact wrote: You keep ignoring what the rule asks you to do. Find the part of the Stubborn special rule that would logically re-incorporate the IC that has been detached from the unit for the purposes of determining if a special rule confers. You keep holding up your hands and pretending to fail to find it, but the BRB has instructed you to find it and you cannot ignore the BRB.
I don't have to because they have not been detached. How can I prove a negative?
Please highlight in the following where it specifically states, "the IC does not count as part of the unit in regards to Special Rules", I would even accept "separate":
Special Rules 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 that are conferred to the unit only apply for as long as the Independent Character is with them.
Do note, "not conferring" does not mean they are separated. Conferring does not mean "join" in any use of a dictionary or the rulebook.
col_impact wrote: The clause, "that contains at least one model with the special rule", logically incorporates models that are attached to the collective entity described (in this case the collective entity is a unit). The scope of the rule has been 'specified in the rule itself' by that clause.
Incorrect. Nothing about incorporating is involved. The incorporation has to occur BEFORE this phrase is even attempted in order for it to work. This whole phrase is just a method of identification. Its language simply does not support anything else. The verb contain in this use means "Have or hold (someone or something) within" or "Be made up of (a number of things); consist of". How the heck is that an inclusionary verb? It is reliant on the inclusion having already been established.
col_impact wrote: But I should remind you that there is nothing magic about that phrase - it just satisfies the IC Special rule and wound up being a very popular way for the BRB to do it. The magic is not the clause per se but that there is specific logic included in the special rules themselves which establish specifically how ICs joined to units are conferring their special rules to one another.
I know it is not magic, I told you that several times already. Your interpretation definitely is from a Fantasyland, though.
If this phrase is specifically how they are joined together, then why that same phrase not used in the IC's Joining and Leaving a Unit section, or the IC Special Rules section?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/03/02 07:40:34
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
"A unit that contains at least one model" is NO MORE specific with ATTACHED models than "a unit". That is proven
No matter what you say, you cannot counter the rules argument presented. Your literally made up rules cannot counter the argument, and your change of tack every single time you are proven wrong doesnt counter the argument either.
Guys - just give up responding to Col. Its a waste of time.
I am not sure what the debate even is here, to be honest I have seen a lot of picking at the IC's special rules like they do not allow this in some way. Im not going to quote them here cus they have been quoted like a million times here over andover. but here is the simple answer to this.:
- it very clearly says that when an IC joins a unit they count as part of the unit for all rules purposes. This is backed up by how leadership works, allowing the unit to use the highest leadership for the unit. That is almost always the IC.
- they also move as models of their type. Which is the same type as the wolfen themselves. Meaning they can choose to make move, run, and charge moves following the normal rules.
-the difference between this rule and other special rules is that it doesn't have to confer anything to IC. the RAW SPECIFICALLY says it covers the UNIT, as that would include IC's in that unit! Because the IC is part of the unit as defined by the IC rules that character can run and charge with the wolfen. Because the rule blankets the entire unit it applies to any character that becomes part of the unit as well. This is not the same as most other special rules as it specifically points out the UNIT and not a MODEL. RAW that is very cut and dry.
-no where under the IC does it specifically say that they can not do this, the follow normal movement, and this special rule that applies tot he whole unit supercedes normal movement for the unit, assuming they all move the same. I.E. not on a bike or are cavalry etc. . PERIOD. If you argue that it does not supersede normal movement then the entire unit of wolfen can not run and charge, even if they didn't have a IC with them. and that is CLEARLY not the case.
"A unit that contains at least one model" is NO MORE specific with ATTACHED models than "a unit". That is proven
No matter what you say, you cannot counter the rules argument presented. Your literally made up rules cannot counter the argument, and your change of tack every single time you are proven wrong doesnt counter the argument either.
Guys - just give up responding to Col. Its a waste of time.
I will not continue the dialogue of the death.
I don't know why you guys keep replying to him. I put Colon-Impact on "ignore" a long time ago and Dakka has been immensely more pleasant ever since.
MekLeN wrote: I would like to believe that the "unit" having this rule means the IC which joined it would be now part of this unit... but if I run with the Iron Priest (for example) then that Iron Preists specific rule-set will deny the whole of the unit its Charge.
How would the Iron Priest Run without the rest of the unit Running?
Or more to the point, how is the Iron Priest less a part of the unit for the Wulfen's rule than when the unit Runs?
MekLeN wrote: But, forming q unit comprised of Iron Priests on Wolf Mount to accompany him alone, he wouldn't convey this rule as he's prevented by the IP's.
A lot depends on how the Iron Priests join him, actually. Much of the confusion involved here is people confusing the relationship between models, units, and identifying what a special rule actually affects.
Remember, there are several levels of entities in the game. The smallest is Model. The next step up is units, which is made up of models. The next step up is detachments, which are made up of units. The last step is army which is made up of detachments and units (in the case of Unbound).
When Iron Priests join the Wolf Lord, and the Wolf Lord is operating independently, they all become Iron Priest models in the Wolf Lord unit. That unit has the capacity to Run and Charge via its Special Rule it has access to. Remember, the unit has the ability to override the restriction against Running and Charging. Also remember that the restriction against Running and Charging is made at the unit level, not the model level. The unit Runs and the models are moved. The Iron Priest model itself does not have the restriction against Running and Charging, just the Iron Priest unit, and he's not acting as an Iron Priest unit when this happens.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Happyjew wrote: Col_impact, I probably missed it (especially since I've been in Nurgles embrace the last few days). If so sorry. But just to clarify:
I have a special rule that says "When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule...". Does it confer to an attached IC, yes or no?
I have asked him a similar question with a more specific terminology.
If an Imperial Fists Chaplain (without Counter-attack) joins a Grey Hunter Pack (with Counter-attack) and gets Charged, does the Chaplain gain +1 Attack that Phase?
It seems simple enough, and if you can't state it simple - then you don't know it well enough:
The UNIT has the rule.
The IC doesn't have the rule.
The IC joins the Unit, yes, but when it comes time to check conditions after the run is performed, when determining if can charge, the IC isn't able to Charge cuz it performed a Run move (without the rule, itself). Some things like "Scout" -Do- confer, meaning I can join the Iron Priests into a Scout squad and do a 12" scout move (keeping coherency) then move out of the Scout squad during the move phase for an additional 12", then do yet another d6" which is NICE.
BUT
unless this rule states that it confers, It Does Not.
I would be a sneak to try pulling off this argument in any other way against my opponents, taking advantage of them and ruining the satisfaction of a hard-earned victory.
It seems simple enough, and if you can't state it simple - then you don't know it well enough:
The UNIT has the rule.
The IC doesn't have the rule.
The IC joins the Unit, yes, but when it comes time to check conditions after the run is performed, when determining if can charge, the IC isn't able to Charge cuz it performed a Run move (without the rule, itself). Some things like "Scout" -Do- confer, meaning I can join the Iron Priests into a Scout squad and do a 12" scout move (keeping coherency) then move out of the Scout squad during the move phase for an additional 12", then do yet another d6" which is NICE.
BUT
unless this rule states that it confers, It Does Not.
I would be a sneak to try pulling off this argument in any other way against my opponents, taking advantage of them and ruining the satisfaction of a hard-earned victory.
The IC joins the Unit, yes, but when it comes time to check conditions after the run is performed, when determining if can charge, the IC isn't able to Charge cuz it performed a Run move (without the rule, itself).
This part is crap because:
When Iron Priests join the Wolf Lord, and the Wolf Lord is operating independently, they all become Iron Priest models in the Wolf Lord unit. That unit has the capacity to Run and Charge via its Special Rule it has access to. Remember, the unit has the ability to override the restriction against Running and Charging. Also remember that the restriction against Running and Charging is made at the unit level, not the model level. The unit Runs and the models are moved. The Iron Priest model itself does not have the restriction against Running and Charging, just the Iron Priest unit, and he's not acting as an Iron Priest unit when this happens
Whether or not a model moves can change how effective it will be in the Psychic or Shooting phases.
"Different Movement Distances Within a Unit"
Spoiler:
Sometimes, a unit will contain models that move at different speeds. When this is the case, each model can move up to its maximum movement allowance so long as it remains in unit coherency.
There has already been a determination that one who uses a unit that contains both Bikes and Jump Packs are not able to reroll charge distance, no? Nor can the Turbo-Boost rule confer to the Jump Packs, instead the Jump Packs will run d6" and the Bikes will Turbo-Boost, but must remain in Coherency.
Yes, the unit has this awesome Run+Charge rule, but when we check whether or not the Iron Priest MODEL can charge, it cannot because looking back at the Shooting phase we see he used his Run, and the rules state a model counts as having Run.
"Run"
Spoiler:
Models in the unit may then immediately move up to that distance in inches. They (the models) may choose not to move after the roll is made, but still count as having Run.
I would like to state, however, for everyone here:
Spoiler:
Units that Run in the Shooting phase cannot charge in the following Assault phase.
This does apply to the UNIT, right? And the rules state:
Spoiler:
Bounding Lope: This unit can Run and charge in the same turn, and can re-roll failed charge rolls.
likewise the Deathpack formation for in the "Start Collecting!: Space Wolves" Starter box just released says:
Spoiler:
The Wolf Lord, and any units from the Deathpack that are within 12" of him at the start of your Shooting phase, can ... Run and still be able to charge in the same turn.
SO - the ONE RULE that states "Run units cannot charge in the following Assault phase" is not applied to the Unit that has this special rule, as though it didn't exist/apply to them.
Any thoughts, anyone?
a rule doesn't exist unless it's written, and the one instance denying Run + Charge is nullified in this case...
I'm not interested AT ALL (!) in yammering on about rules discrepancies - however believe I may have something worth a touch of discussion. Please?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/02 20:21:43
It seems simple enough, and if you can't state it simple - then you don't know it well enough:
The UNIT has the rule.
The IC doesn't have the rule.
The IC joins the Unit, yes, but when it comes time to check conditions after the run is performed, when determining if can charge, the IC isn't able to Charge cuz it performed a Run move (without the rule, itself). Some things like "Scout" -Do- confer, meaning I can join the Iron Priests into a Scout squad and do a 12" scout move (keeping coherency) then move out of the Scout squad during the move phase for an additional 12", then do yet another d6" which is NICE.
BUT
unless this rule states that it confers, It Does Not.
I would be a sneak to try pulling off this argument in any other way against my opponents, taking advantage of them and ruining the satisfaction of a hard-earned victory.
It literally is that simple. The special rule overrides the standard movement that says models can not run and charge. it does this at the unit level which the IC is part of. You can say no its not as much as you want but the wording is very clear. It covers the entire unit because it never specifically says it does not. ( i would link the wording of the rule but I don't believe i am allowed) But it says that Special rules that are applied to the unit cover the IC so long as they are part of the unit. VERY clearly.
- it very clearly says that when an IC joins a unit they count as part of the unit for all rules purposes. This is backed up by how leadership works, allowing the unit to use the highest leadership for the unit. That is almost always the IC.
Using this rule to support your argument is kind of like reading in the BRB that a walker is a vehicle, and reading no further. Since you don't read and consider the entirety of rules regarding walkers, you would claim that since it is a vehicle, it is always hit on its rear armor in melee, has a WS of 1, cannot be locked in combat, etc, which is blatantly incorrect.
If you continue to read the independent character rules, it goes on to specify the relationship between ICs, their unit, and special rules. Quote: "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 that are conferred to the unit only apply for as long as the Independent Character is with them."
So, the default question to the answer "does an IC get the special rule of the unit it is joined to" is NO - unless the rule allows it. And that is the eternal debate, same as the skyhammer. Is the rule worded in such a way to apply to the IC?
My personal opinion is that unless there is a clause that specifically allows sharing, or is worded like 'if one model has the rule, the entire unit benefits", than it's a no-go. And that interpretation is backed up from the direct rules quote above regarding the effect of special rules and ICs in units.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/03/02 20:37:18
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment." Words to live by.
Whether or not a model moves can change how effective it will be in the Psychic or Shooting phases.
"Different Movement Distances Within a Unit"
Spoiler:
Sometimes, a unit will contain models that move at different speeds. When this is the case, each model can move up to its maximum movement allowance so long as it remains in unit coherency.
There has already been a determination that one who uses a unit that contains both Bikes and Jump Packs are not able to reroll charge distance, no? Nor can the Turbo-Boost rule confer to the Jump Packs, instead the Jump Packs will run d6" and the Bikes will Turbo-Boost, but must remain in Coherency.
Yes, the unit has this awesome Run+Charge rule, but when we check whether or not the Iron Priest MODEL can charge, it cannot because looking back at the Shooting phase we see he used his Run, and the rules state a model counts as having Run.
"Run"
Spoiler:
Models in the unit may then immediately move up to that distance in inches. They (the models) may choose not to move after the roll is made, but still count as having Run.
I would like to state, however, for everyone here:
Spoiler:
Units that Run in the Shooting phase cannot charge in the following Assault phase.
This does apply to the UNIT, right? And the rules state:
Spoiler:
Bounding Lope: This unit can Run and charge in the same turn, and can re-roll failed charge rolls.
likewise the Deathpack formation for in the "Start Collecting!: Space Wolves" Starter box just released says:
Spoiler:
The Wolf Lord, and any units from the Deathpack that are within 12" of him at the start of your Shooting phase, can ... Run and still be able to charge in the same turn.
SO - the ONE RULE that states "Run units cannot charge in the following Assault phase" is not applied to the Unit that has this special rule, as though it didn't exist/apply to them.
Any thoughts, anyone?
a rule doesn't exist unless it's written, and the one instance denying Run + Charge is nullified in this case...
I'm not interested AT ALL (!) in yammering on about rules discrepancies - however believe I may have something worth a touch of discussion. Please?
You have quoted several rules here that are superseded by the way that special rules work in general. The one about different unit types doesn't even make sense to include in this conversation. i don't understand why you are. I don't belive that anyone is going to claim a unit on a bike, can run and charge in the same turn because bikes cant run. You are intentionally muddying the argument.
Actually, special rules are NOT conferred from unit to IC. Is the Wulfen unit rule a special rule?
Is the Deathpack formation rule a special rule?
Yes - a rule isn't existing unless it is stated so. And rules that are made exceptioned no longer have effect; unit applied rules will be negated by unit applied counter-rulings.
MekLeN wrote: Actually, special rules are NOT conferred from unit to IC. Is the Wulfen unit rule a special rule?
Is the Deathpack formation rule a special rule?
Yes - a rule isn't existing unless it is stated so. And rules that are made exceptioned no longer have effect; unit applied rules will be negated by unit applied counter-rulings.
Meklan, does Stubborn confer? How do we know? If it does confer, where in the rules for Stubborn does it say it confers?
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia
I'm providing information. As you read further on in my post, the rule question (not statement) is whether the Unit-applied rule preventing charges affects simply unit-level or affects individual models, too.
As we can see from what I also mentioned the movement speed is not in question, rather the ability to ignore the SINGLE instance stating units cannot charge that've Run.
Automatically Appended Next Post: It says so clearly, a unit that contains at least one model gains benefit. Just like scout, and many others
Automatically Appended Next Post: In terms of stubborn
Automatically Appended Next Post: But -if the stubborn model no longer lives/joins the unit, then the "check" doesn't trigger Stubborn. This happens each time it's required to check, throughout the phase as many times as it happens
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/03/02 20:41:50
Special rules that are conferred to the unit only apply for as long as the Independent Character is with them.
Is the part of this that very simply makes it work. that one sentence CLEARLY states that if it covers the unit.
"While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules
purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters."
MekLeN wrote: Actually, special rules are NOT conferred from unit to IC. Is the Wulfen unit rule a special rule?
Is the Deathpack formation rule a special rule?
Yes - a rule isn't existing unless it is stated so. And rules that are made exceptioned no longer have effect; unit applied rules will be negated by unit applied counter-rulings.
Meklan, does Stubborn confer? How do we know? If it does confer, where in the rules for Stubborn does it say it confers?
Stubborn rule, quote, BRB:
"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. If a unit is both Fearless and Stubborn, it uses the rules for Fearless instead."
Stubborn is specifically worded to allow sharing the rule as long at the unit contains one model. That is why an IC with stubborn gets to share it. So, with commissar in a guardsmen squad, only one model in that entire squad has stubborn. But the stubborn rule allows the entire unit to benefit from that one model's special rule. This is the exception, not the rule.
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment." Words to live by.
Thus,in context: if the Wolf Lord dies the TWC no longer can Charge after Run,and if the Wulfen all die and the IC forms his own unit again at beginning of next phase, the rule no longer apllies
Automatically Appended Next Post: The unit has benefit, but doesn't gain the rule accross each model.
Automatically Appended Next Post: It's specifically the wording that says "Unit" in the sentence of Run preventing a charge that has my curiosity ... it says nothing of models.
It says nothing of what the IC entry does, in terms of not gaining the special rules of the unit, instead it checks the unit special rules.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/03/02 20:47:11
MekLeN wrote: Thus,in context: if the Wolf Lord dies the TWC no longer can Charge after Run,and if the Wulfen all die and the IC forms his own unit again at beginning of next phase, the rule no longer apllies
Automatically Appended Next Post: The unit has benefit, but doesn't gain the rule accross each model.
Yes, once the part of the unit applying the rule dies it drops. That is all very clear to everyone. That is specifically addressed. "If an Independent Character joins a unit, and
all other models in that unit are killed, he again becomes a unit of one model at the start
of the following phase."
but not until the beginning of the of the following phase.
Special rules that are conferred to the unit only apply for as long as the Independent Character is with them.
Is the part of this that very simply makes it work. that one sentence CLEARLY states that if it covers the unit.
"While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules
purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters."
Again. You cannot read one out-of-context line from the rule and apply in in all situations. Or, rather, you could, except for the fact that there is a simple, specific, and direct rule regarding the effect of special rules on and by ICs and their unit. This is after the rule you quote, and is in the paragraph entitled 'special rules'.
"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."
This is non-negotiable. Whether or not the rule is written loosely enough to apply to all models in a combined unit, is.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/02 20:48:26
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment." Words to live by.
Skyhammer prevents IC's from gaining awesomeness, right?
Who's ruling is this? GW? No... it's of the tournaments themselves - acts of balance determined by groups of players.I concede, that playing with opponents in determining these rulings, we should find whether they follow a tournaments rulings (in entirety) or not. If not,then I'm thinking the BRB states that the unit is the check, not the model.
MekLeN wrote: Actually, special rules are NOT conferred from unit to IC. Is the Wulfen unit rule a special rule?
Is the Deathpack formation rule a special rule?
Yes - a rule isn't existing unless it is stated so. And rules that are made exceptioned no longer have effect; unit applied rules will be negated by unit applied counter-rulings.
Meklan, does Stubborn confer? How do we know? If it does confer, where in the rules for Stubborn does it say it confers?
Stubborn rule, quote, BRB:
"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. If a unit is both Fearless and Stubborn, it uses the rules for Fearless instead."
Stubborn is specifically worded to allow sharing the rule as long at the unit contains one model. That is why an IC with stubborn gets to share it. So, with commissar in a guardsmen squad, only one model in that entire squad has stubborn. But the stubborn rule allows the entire unit to benefit from that one model's special rule. This is the exception, not the rule.
So Counter-attack gets conferred?
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia
