| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
|
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
2016/08/21 00:22:10
Subject: Re:Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Not as Good as a Minion
|
Spell my name right, there is no 'e'.
How can I keep up with someone who keeps propelling themselves down a slippery slope I have no intention of riding? That's why I keep sending these dummies down the slope which you say cannot be.
col_impact wrote:When a IC is joined to a unit he is always considered joined to the unit.
He is either a unit in a unit.
Or he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes.
True, and look who who is truncating now?
But (and this is where you keep losing me describing your slope) you stated that this does not apply to the final phrase of the sentence which states, " though he still follows the rules for characters", which means that for any Character rules, this does not apply.
Is Look Out Sir! a Character Rule?
Does it specifically state it accounts for the Character being joined to a larger unit?
col_impact wrote:++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+When it comes to the Character and Moving rules the IC is a unit in a unit.+
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My case is golden.
No quote, no support. You said earlier that Character and Moving does not matter and does not carry the recognition of the IC as part of the unit. Now all of a sudden it matters? Quote the exact line in Character and Moving where it states that the IC is a unit in a unit.
Which you truncated out earlier in this post as if it didn't matter, but matters now. You also indicated that the "though" is exclusionary to the previous statement. Look Out Sir is part of the rules for Characters and is nowhere else (aside from the adjustment made in IC rules).
So, which is it?.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/21 00:23:00
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.
|
|
|
 |
|
2016/08/21 00:28:46
Subject: Re:Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Try to keep up.
When an IC joins a unit he is always joined to the unit. He will be either a 'unit in a unit' or 'counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes'.
Most of the time he "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes".
That clause though is not in effect for the Character rules.
For the Character rules he is a 'unit in a unit'
So Look Out, Sir works just fine.
The Destroyer Lord attached to a unit of wraiths can Thrust move in the Assault phase.
A unit of Wulfen can Bounding Lope when an IC is attached.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/21 00:40:36
Subject: Re:Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Not as Good as a Minion
|
col_impact wrote:Try to keep up.
When an IC joins a unit he is always joined to the unit. He will be either a 'unit in a unit' or 'counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes'.
Most of the time he "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes".
That clause though is not in effect for the Character rules.
For the Character rules he is a 'unit in a unit'
So Look Out, Sir works just fine.
The Destroyer Lord attached to a unit of wraiths can Thrust move in the Assault phase.
A unit of Wulfen can Bounding Lope when an IC is attached.
If he is a "unit within a unit" (no quote to support that, yet again), then we still adhere to the same premise as used as you are using for Movement. Nothing in Look Out Sir allows for a Wound to be reallocated to the joined unit, just to another model in THE SAME UNIT, not the JOINED UNIT.
If he counts as "part of the unit" and not a "unit within a unit" for Look Out Sir, he counts as "part of the unit" and not a "unit within a unit" for the purposes of Movement. There is no defining differences stated in either section to indicate otherwise. If you can support it, please provide the quote and highlight the relevant passages from these two sections (quotes from IC are irrelevant and will be considered spam).
Now, to further support your claim, find me one paragraph in the entire rulebook that actually states, "unit within a unit" or with any synonyms of "within" to support your assertion. And remember, "Independent Character" does not translate as "unit" anywhere, as it is a model-only rule.
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/21 19:35:28
Subject: Re:Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
 Charistoph wrote:col_impact wrote:Try to keep up.
When an IC joins a unit he is always joined to the unit. He will be either a 'unit in a unit' or 'counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes'.
Most of the time he "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes".
That clause though is not in effect for the Character rules.
For the Character rules he is a 'unit in a unit'
So Look Out, Sir works just fine.
The Destroyer Lord attached to a unit of wraiths can Thrust move in the Assault phase.
A unit of Wulfen can Bounding Lope when an IC is attached.
If he is a "unit within a unit" (no quote to support that, yet again), then we still adhere to the same premise as used as you are using for Movement. Nothing in Look Out Sir allows for a Wound to be reallocated to the joined unit, just to another model in THE SAME UNIT, not the JOINED UNIT.
If he counts as "part of the unit" and not a "unit within a unit" for Look Out Sir, he counts as "part of the unit" and not a "unit within a unit" for the purposes of Movement. There is no defining differences stated in either section to indicate otherwise. If you can support it, please provide the quote and highlight the relevant passages from these two sections (quotes from IC are irrelevant and will be considered spam).
Now, to further support your claim, find me one paragraph in the entire rulebook that actually states, "unit within a unit" or with any synonyms of "within" to support your assertion. And remember, "Independent Character" does not translate as "unit" anywhere, as it is a model-only rule.
1) The IC is a unit. He has an ALE. This is indisputable.
2) There is no rule that takes away his unit onto himself status. This is indisputable.
3) The Independent Character rules allow the IC to join other units. When the IC joins a unit he becomes a part of the unit. That is what "join" means. So based on the definition of "join" the IC is a unit that becomes part of a unit, ie a 'unit in a unit'. The IC is part of the unit he joined and in the same unit as the unit he joined.
4) There is an Independent Character rule that affects all rules interactions except for the Character rules.
So for all rules interactions except for the Character and Independent Character rules, the IC is a unit that counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes.
5) To underscore, with regards to the Character rules, the IC is a unit that becomes part of a unit, but not necessarily for all rules purposes. The IC can act as a unit onto himself in the context of the Character rules, and in particularly the Character and Moving rules.
6) Look Out Sir works no problem. The IC is in the same unit as the models he would allocate wounds to. The Destroyer Lord is able to Thrust move while attached to a unit of Wraiths. He is able to move as a unit onto himself and is not subject to the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" with regards to movement.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/21 19:37:53
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/22 16:13:52
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
col_impact wrote:My argument is that ICs in a unit can move independently of the unit following only the restrictions of the Character and Moving rule and the Independent Charcter rules, free of the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" clause.
And yet you haven't proven that he moves independently of a unit or provided the actual quotations that have him moving independently other than being able to leave a unit. The Character rules for moving as his model type are not something that has him moving independently of the unit, and there's nothing else in the character section that does. The only thing in the IC rules is special permission to leave a unit. Unless his move is to leave the unit he is still following the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" clause.
col_impact wrote:Incorrect. We are dealing with units that have not arrived from Reserves that turn and that are moving in the Assault Phase. Is that clear?
Well, it that's what you're talking about, units that haven't arrived from reserves that turn don't get to move in the Assault Phase because they're still in reserve and didn't come in at the beginning of the turn. I think you're confusing yourself here. Automatically Appended Next Post:
What if the IC is a teetotaler, or prefers a different alcoholic beverage?
col_impact wrote:
2) There is no rule that takes away his unit onto himself status. This is indisputable.
Well, other than the section of the rules defining units indicating that he's not counting when he's part of a collection of models. And the part of the rules in Independent Characters that says that when the rest of the unit is killed he again becomes a unit of one - indicating that he wasn't a unit of one before the rest were killed (and shooting down your assertion). And probably other areas too if we did down further. It's very much disputable.
3) The Independent Character rules allow the IC to join other units. When the IC joins a unit he becomes a part of the unit. That is what "join" means. So based on the definition of "join" the IC is a unit that becomes part of a unit, ie a 'unit in a unit'. The IC is part of the unit he joined and in the same unit as the unit he joined.
Nobody disputes he becomes part of the unit. It doesn't say he retains unit status, only that he joins a unit.
col_impact wrote:
4) There is an Independent Character rule that affects all rules interactions except for the Character rules.
So for all rules interactions except for the Character and Independent Character rules, the IC is a unit that counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes.
But the rules for Characters and for Independent Characters don't deal with units counting as units when they join another unit - except for that "again become a unit of one" thing. So, according to the IC rules, he DOESN'T count as a unit of one while he's joined to the other unit! That means he's merely a part of the unit, a model that has some other special rules he may access.
col_impact wrote:5) To underscore, with regards to the Character rules, the IC is a unit that becomes part of a unit, but not necessarily for all rules purposes. The IC can act as a unit onto himself in the context of the Character rules, and in particularly the Character and Moving rules.
He the Character rules do not deal with characters acting as units unto themselves. They can't, as not all characters are independent characters, and never count as an independent unit. You seem to have a problem with that concept. The Character and moving rules specifically talk about moving as models of its type, but never say anything about it being a unit. You seem to have a problem with that concept. Since it's not dealing with units, citing it does nothing to back your assertions.
col_impact wrote:6) Look Out Sir works no problem. The IC is in the same unit as the models he would allocate wounds to. The Destroyer Lord is able to Thrust move while attached to a unit of Wraiths. He is able to move as a unit onto himself and is not subject to the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" with regards to movement.
They normally work with no problem. With what you have asserted for the IC to move independently as a unit within a unit (because you say there's no mentioning of it counting as part of the unit), taking your same logic to other special rules would mean that Look Out Sir wouldn't apply because it doesn't have that clause either. That means you're being inconsistent with your argument. Since we know that Look Out Sir will work for Independent characters joined to the unit, then the argument you're using about movement not saying that the IC counts as part of the unit is invalidated.
|
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/08/22 16:42:54
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/22 19:16:34
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
 doctortom wrote:col_impact wrote:My argument is that ICs in a unit can move independently of the unit following only the restrictions of the Character and Moving rule and the Independent Charcter rules, free of the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" clause.
And yet you haven't proven that he moves independently of a unit or provided the actual quotations that have him moving independently other than being able to leave a unit. The Character rules for moving as his model type are not something that has him moving independently of the unit, and there's nothing else in the character section that does. The only thing in the IC rules is special permission to leave a unit. Unless his move is to leave the unit he is still following the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" clause.
I have proven in my argument above (see point 5) that the IC can act as a unit onto himself in the context of the Character rules, and in particularly the Character and Moving rules. He simply executes the unit status which was never taken away and which is no longer subject to the counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" clause.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
doctortom wrote:col_impact wrote:Incorrect. We are dealing with units that have not arrived from Reserves that turn and that are moving in the Assault Phase. Is that clear?
Well, it that's what you're talking about, units that haven't arrived from reserves that turn don't get to move in the Assault Phase because they're still in reserve and didn't come in at the beginning of the turn. I think you're confusing yourself here.
No confusion on my part. Units that were on the battlefield at the beginning of the turn haven't arrived from reserves that turn.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
doctortom wrote:col_impact wrote:
What if the IC is a teetotaler, or prefers a different alcoholic beverage?
col_impact wrote:
2) There is no rule that takes away his unit onto himself status. This is indisputable.
Well, other than the section of the rules defining units indicating that he's not counting when he's part of a collection of models. And the part of the rules in Independent Characters that says that when the rest of the unit is killed he again becomes a unit of one - indicating that he wasn't a unit of one before the rest were killed (and shooting down your assertion). And probably other areas too if we did down further. It's very much disputable.
col_impact wrote:
3) The Independent Character rules allow the IC to join other units. When the IC joins a unit he becomes a part of the unit. That is what "join" means. So based on the definition of "join" the IC is a unit that becomes part of a unit, ie a 'unit in a unit'. The IC is part of the unit he joined and in the same unit as the unit he joined.
Nobody disputes he becomes part of the unit. It doesn't say he retains unit status, only that he joins a unit.
You have to provide proof that the IC loses his unit status. So far you have failed to do so. For this reason, you cannot dispute this point in my argument.
|
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/08/22 19:23:51
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/22 19:29:17
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
col_impact wrote:
I have proven in my argument above (see point 5) that the IC can act as a unit onto himself in the context of the Character rules, and in particularly the Character and Moving rules. He simply executes the unit status which was never taken away and which is no longer subject to the counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" clause.
No, you haven't proven in your argument, because I've shown where your "proof" was fallacious or nonexistent. And, saying he executes the unit status is complete codswallop. If he has that status and can execute it, then why does he need special rules for joining and leaving a unit that can only occur during the movement phase? Since you say his movement is no longer subject to the "counts as" clause, then he would not be subject at any time. And you just resort to "no longer subject to he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes clause statement" without actually bothering to provide the atatements in the Character rules that actually back your point up. I've pointed out how the Characters and Moving rules don't back you up, as there is no mention of unit status, and the Character rules are written to cover both independent and non-independent characterrs, so without a specific mention of them acting as an independent unit there it doesn't apply as proof of being an independent unit. If you can't provide the actual quote from the character ruless, specifically the Character and Moving rules section that you claim backs you up, then you are showing that you have no argument to rely on.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/22 19:30:42
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/22 19:30:16
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
doctortom wrote:col_impact wrote:
4) There is an Independent Character rule that affects all rules interactions except for the Character rules.
So for all rules interactions except for the Character and Independent Character rules, the IC is a unit that counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes.
But the rules for Characters and for Independent Characters don't deal with units counting as units when they join another unit - except for that "again become a unit of one" thing. So, according to the IC rules, he DOESN'T count as a unit of one while he's joined to the other unit! That means he's merely a part of the unit, a model that has some other special rules he may access.
"Again become a unit of one" simply means the undoing of the joining and "counts as" clause. So rather than being a unit that counts as part of a unit for all rules purposes he again becomes a unit of one model.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/22 19:34:00
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
col_impact wrote:
"Again become a unit of one" simply means the undoing of the joining and "counts as" clause. So rather than being a unit that counts as part of a unit for all rules purposes he again becomes a unit of one model.
How hard is it to understand that "again becomes a unit of one" means he wasn't considered a unit of one just before that happened? It seems pretty hard in your case. It doesn't matter if you want to claim that it's an undoing of the joining and "counts as" clause, because even if that is all it is, it still means the rules are that you aren't treating him as a unit of one while he is joined to the other unit. Your argument, therefore, turns out to be irrelevant.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/22 19:34:34
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/22 19:40:08
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
doctortom wrote:
col_impact wrote:5) To underscore, with regards to the Character rules, the IC is a unit that becomes part of a unit, but not necessarily for all rules purposes. The IC can act as a unit onto himself in the context of the Character rules, and in particularly the Character and Moving rules.
He the Character rules do not deal with characters acting as units unto themselves. They can't, as not all characters are independent characters, and never count as an independent unit. You seem to have a problem with that concept. The Character and moving rules specifically talk about moving as models of its type, but never say anything about it being a unit. You seem to have a problem with that concept. Since it's not dealing with units, citing it does nothing to back your assertions.
I have proven that the IC never relinquishes his unit status and that he is not subject to the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" with regards to the Character rules. So when the IC moves he can freely move as a unit onto himself and is only restricted by the Character rules and the Independent Character rules. This allows the Destroyer Lord to Thrust in the Assault Phase while attached to a unit of Wraiths or the Wulfen models to benefit from Bounding Lope while the attached IC does not. Automatically Appended Next Post: doctortom wrote:col_impact wrote:
"Again become a unit of one" simply means the undoing of the joining and "counts as" clause. So rather than being a unit that counts as part of a unit for all rules purposes he again becomes a unit of one model.
How hard is it to understand that "again becomes a unit of one" means he wasn't considered a unit of one just before that happened? It seems pretty hard in your case. It doesn't matter if you want to claim that it's an undoing of the joining and "counts as" clause, because even if that is all it is, it still means the rules are that you aren't treating him as a unit of one while he is joined to the other unit. Your argument, therefore, turns out to be irrelevant.
He was a unit that was part of a unit before he again becomes a unit of one. My argument introduces no contextual problems.
Automatically Appended Next Post: doctortom wrote:
col_impact wrote:6) Look Out Sir works no problem. The IC is in the same unit as the models he would allocate wounds to. The Destroyer Lord is able to Thrust move while attached to a unit of Wraiths. He is able to move as a unit onto himself and is not subject to the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" with regards to movement.
They normally work with no problem. With what you have asserted for the IC to move independently as a unit within a unit (because you say there's no mentioning of it counting as part of the unit), taking your same logic to other special rules would mean that Look Out Sir wouldn't apply because it doesn't have that clause either. That means you're being inconsistent with your argument. Since we know that Look Out Sir will work for Independent characters joined to the unit, then the argument you're using about movement not saying that the IC counts as part of the unit is invalidated.
See my point 3
So Look Out Sir works no problem. The IC is able to allocate the wound to a model in the same unit.
|
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/08/22 19:48:03
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/22 19:48:57
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
col_impact wrote: doctortom wrote:
col_impact wrote:5) To underscore, with regards to the Character rules, the IC is a unit that becomes part of a unit, but not necessarily for all rules purposes. The IC can act as a unit onto himself in the context of the Character rules, and in particularly the Character and Moving rules.
He the Character rules do not deal with characters acting as units unto themselves. They can't, as not all characters are independent characters, and never count as an independent unit. You seem to have a problem with that concept. The Character and moving rules specifically talk about moving as models of its type, but never say anything about it being a unit. You seem to have a problem with that concept. Since it's not dealing with units, citing it does nothing to back your assertions.
I have proven that the IC never relinquishes his unit status and that he is not subject to the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" with regards to the Character rules. So when the IC moves he can freely move as a unit onto himself and is only restricted by the Character rules and the Independent Character rules. This allows the Destroyer Lord to Thrust in the Assault Phase while attached to a unit of Wraiths or the Wulfen models to benefit from Bounding Lope while the attached IC does not.
This is futile. You haven't proven it, you haven't given any quotes to back you up, and when asked for quotes you just go back to "I have proven" blah blah blah. It's time for you to put up some rules quotes from the relevant sections that you claim back you up. Saying the Character rules, especially the Character and Movement rules haven't shown any proof at all. We've shown that him not relinquishing his unit status is disproved by statements in the Independent Character section. If you're not going to post rules quotes to back your statement, as I had done, then just admit you don't have the rules quotes to back you up. Automatically Appended Next Post: col_impact wrote:
He was a unit that was part of a unit before he again becomes a unit of one. My argument introduces no contextual problems.
That's just plain wrong; it introduces plenty of contextual problems. Charistoph pointing out the Look Out Sir problems and my pointing out that he could be targeted by shooting are just two things indicating there are contextual problems.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
doctortom wrote:
col_impact wrote:6) Look Out Sir works no problem. The IC is in the same unit as the models he would allocate wounds to. The Destroyer Lord is able to Thrust move while attached to a unit of Wraiths. He is able to move as a unit onto himself and is not subject to the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" with regards to movement.
col_impact wrote:See my point 3
So Look Out Sir works no problem. The IC is able to allocate the wound to a model in the same unit.
It doesn't work no problem with your interpretation of him being a single unit as well as joined to a unit, specifically how you insisted that for other cases (notably for movement) there had to be in the special rule "this unit is considered part of the unit for xxxx" (in this case, movement). Well, substitue "Look Out, Sir!" for "movement" and your exact argument would say that Look Out, Sir! doesn't work. So, there's something wrong with the argument about needing to have a statement "an independent character joined to the unit is considered part of the unit for xxx" for special rules. Yes, the IC is able to allocate the wound to a model in the same unit. No, the IC can not move independently of the unit except when using the rule for leaving the unit; in any other case he is considered part of the unit for movement. He's not a special snowflake in that case, and you haven't offered the proof otherwise. P
Once again, please quote from the Characters and Movement rules what rule there makes him an independent unit as you insist, or that he gets free movement at any time. Or just admit it's not there.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/22 19:58:52
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/22 20:05:38
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
doctortom wrote:
This is futile. You haven't proven it, you haven't given any quotes to back you up, and when asked for quotes you just go back to "I have proven" blah blah blah. It's time for you to put up some rules quotes from the relevant sections that you claim back you up. Saying the Character rules, especially the Character and Movement rules haven't shown any proof at all. We've shown that him not relinquishing his unit status is disproved by statements in the Independent Character section. If you're not going to post rules quotes to back your statement, as I had done, then just admit you don't have the rules quotes to back you up.
ICs have Army List Entries.
Therefore ICs are units.
No rule exists that takes away the unit status of the IC.
So when the IC joins a unit he is a unit that is part of the unit he joined.
"He again becomes a unit of one model" means that he is no longer a unit that is part of the unit he joined.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
doctortom wrote:
It doesn't work no problem with your interpretation of him being a single unit as well as joined to a unit, specifically how you insisted that for other cases (notably for movement) there had to be in the special rule "this unit is considered part of the unit for xxxx" (in this case, movement). Well, substitue "Look Out, Sir!" for "movement" and your exact argument would say that Look Out, Sir! doesn't work. So, there's something wrong with the argument about needing to have a statement "an independent character joined to the unit is considered part of the unit for xxx" for special rules. Yes, the IC is able to allocate the wound to a model in the same unit. No, the IC can not move independently of the unit except when using the rule for leaving the unit; in any other case he is considered part of the unit for movement. He's not a special snowflake in that case, and you haven't offered the proof otherwise. P
Once again, please quote from the Characters and Movement rules what rule there makes him an independent unit as you insist, or that he gets free movement at any time. Or just admit it's not there.
3) The Independent Character rules allow the IC to join other units. When the IC joins a unit he becomes a part of the unit. That is what "join" means. So based on the definition of "join" the IC is a unit that becomes part of a unit, ie a 'unit in a unit'. The IC is part of the unit he joined and in the same unit as the unit he joined.
5) To underscore, with regards to the Character rules, the IC is a unit that becomes part of a unit, but not necessarily for all rules purposes. The IC can act as a unit onto himself in the context of the Character rules, and in particularly the Character and Moving rules.
|
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/08/22 20:15:27
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/23 20:25:34
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Enough with all the unit within a unit nonsense.
The reason that the unit can run and still charge even with an attached IC has nothing to do with units within units. The reason that the unit can run and charge is because the FAQ states that the unit can run and charge.
The FAQ states that the unit can use Bounding Lope even when an IC is attached.
Just like For Glory, For Russ!
Just like Counter charge.
It's very clear.
The only thing that is not clear is how to implement this ruling as the FAQ does not explain what to do with the IC or what "the IC does not benefit" means.
The scenario that makes the most sense to me is that the whole unit runs, but only the wulfen can charge, leaving the IC standing there. Since the unit must maintain coherence, the way this would have to work is for the IC to be out in front so that after the wulfen have charged, the IC is still within 2" of at least one other wulfen.
The only problem with this interpretation is that we are not told what to do if the unit breaks coherency during the charge. Otherwise, it follows the RAW with FAQ answer.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/23 20:49:17
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Hardly nonsense. If you follow the rules you wind up with an IC who is a unit that is part of a unit when he joins a unit. There is no rule that takes away his unit status.
A nonsensical approach would be to pretend there is a rule that takes away his unit status.
The FAQ writers seem to share my RAW read of the rules.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/23 20:51:06
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/23 21:47:01
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
col_impact wrote:
Hardly nonsense. If you follow the rules you wind up with an IC who is a unit that is part of a unit when he joins a unit. There is no rule that takes away his unit status.
Therel are definitions for units indicating he isn't, and rules in the independent character rule section that indicate that he is not a "unit of one" (which would be an indication of IC status) when joined to a unit. What isn't in the rules is any indication that he retains unit status when joining a unit, especially given their indications that he isn't treated as a unit at that point.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/23 21:47:17
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/23 22:13:19
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
doctortom wrote:col_impact wrote:
Hardly nonsense. If you follow the rules you wind up with an IC who is a unit that is part of a unit when he joins a unit. There is no rule that takes away his unit status.
Therel are definitions for units indicating he isn't, and rules in the independent character rule section that indicate that he is not a "unit of one" (which would be an indication of IC status) when joined to a unit. What isn't in the rules is any indication that he retains unit status when joining a unit, especially given their indications that he isn't treated as a unit at that point.
I have already disproved both of your assertions. There is nothing barring an IC from being a unit that is part of a unit when he joins a unit.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/23 22:24:29
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
col_impact wrote: doctortom wrote:col_impact wrote:
Hardly nonsense. If you follow the rules you wind up with an IC who is a unit that is part of a unit when he joins a unit. There is no rule that takes away his unit status.
Therel are definitions for units indicating he isn't, and rules in the independent character rule section that indicate that he is not a "unit of one" (which would be an indication of IC status) when joined to a unit. What isn't in the rules is any indication that he retains unit status when joining a unit, especially given their indications that he isn't treated as a unit at that point.
I have already disproved both of your assertions. There is nothing barring an IC from being a unit that is part of a unit when he joins a unit.
When Overwatching a unit with an attached IC, can you declare the IC as the unit being overwatched?
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/23 22:52:33
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
When Overwatching a unit with an attached IC, can you declare the IC as the unit being overwatched?
Are there separate rules for Character and Overwatch?
If there are no separate rules for Characters and Overwatch then the 'counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes' is in effect.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/23 22:52:50
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/23 23:25:29
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Regular Dakkanaut
|
col_impact wrote:
Hardly nonsense. If you follow the rules you wind up with an IC who is a unit that is part of a unit when he joins a unit. There is no rule that takes away his unit status.
A nonsensical approach would be to pretend there is a rule that takes away his unit status.
The FAQ writers seem to share my RAW read of the rules.
It is nonsense in that discussing it it is irrelevant to this discussion. Whether or not he is a "unit within a unit" does not change the fact that the FAQ gives permission for the unit to charge with an IC attached.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/23 23:30:11
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
 NightHowler wrote:col_impact wrote:
Hardly nonsense. If you follow the rules you wind up with an IC who is a unit that is part of a unit when he joins a unit. There is no rule that takes away his unit status.
A nonsensical approach would be to pretend there is a rule that takes away his unit status.
The FAQ writers seem to share my RAW read of the rules.
It is nonsense in that discussing it it is irrelevant to this discussion. Whether or not he is a "unit within a unit" does not change the fact that the FAQ gives permission for the unit to charge with an IC attached.
I think the FAQ is only providing a clarification of the rules here and not adding any permission that didn't already exist.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/24 18:34:15
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
col_impact wrote: NightHowler wrote:col_impact wrote:
Hardly nonsense. If you follow the rules you wind up with an IC who is a unit that is part of a unit when he joins a unit. There is no rule that takes away his unit status.
A nonsensical approach would be to pretend there is a rule that takes away his unit status.
The FAQ writers seem to share my RAW read of the rules.
It is nonsense in that discussing it it is irrelevant to this discussion. Whether or not he is a "unit within a unit" does not change the fact that the FAQ gives permission for the unit to charge with an IC attached.
I think the FAQ is only providing a clarification of the rules here and not adding any permission that didn't already exist.
I would say that the FAQ stating that the unit still gets the ability but the IC doesn't benefit from it hardly counts as a "clarificaton", given the questions and discussion that ensued from it.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/24 18:37:25
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
doctortom wrote:
I would say that the FAQ stating that the unit still gets the ability but the IC doesn't benefit from it hardly counts as a "clarificaton", given the questions and discussion that ensued from it.
That's because you are not adhering to the rules as they are written.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/24 18:51:47
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
col_impact wrote: doctortom wrote:
I would say that the FAQ stating that the unit still gets the ability but the IC doesn't benefit from it hardly counts as a "clarificaton", given the questions and discussion that ensued from it.
That's because you are not adhering to the rules as they are written.
You don't have to act like that. I was referring to other people in the thread before I got here, whether the IC got to move or not, and does he get a charge bonus. That's nothing to do with what we were talking about most recently, and you don't need to cop an attitude like you are. The RAW certainly isn't as clear on those as you are trying to portray it as being, hence the "clarification" being better off with some further clarification.
|
|
|
|
|
2016/08/24 18:58:02
Subject: Wulfe, ICS, and Charging
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
doctortom wrote:
You don't have to act like that. I was referring to other people in the thread before I got here, whether the IC got to move or not, and does he get a charge bonus. That's nothing to do with what we were talking about most recently, and you don't need to cop an attitude like you are. The RAW certainly isn't as clear on those as you are trying to portray it as being, hence the "clarification" being better off with some further clarification.
No attitude intended. Many people simply overlook the latter part of this rule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
