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.

Tom the rules do not tell us that. The issue here is a discussion on the RAW not RAI or HYWPI

 doctortom wrote:


Actually you disprove yourself by your own argument. You ignore the fact that when they say you override the other rule in advanced vs basic, you ignore the rule being overridden. The status of the IC being treated as part of the unit for all rules purposes overrides the solitary unit status of the IC, which means that for rules purposes you ignore the solitary unit status of the IC. If you are ignoring it because it is being overridden, that means for rules purposes the IC is not also treated as its own unit.

Here's the first 5 definitions of override from dictionary.com

1.to prevail or have dominance over; have final authority or say over; overrule:
to override one's advisers.
2.to disregard, set aside, or nullify; countermand:
to override the board's veto.
3.to take precedence over; preempt or supersede:
to override any other considerations.
4.to extend beyond or spread over; overlap.
5.to modify or suspend the ordinary functioning of; alter the normal operation of.

None of these say that you still keep the original thing being overridden, it says you disregard it, you supercede it, you suspend that rule being overridden. By trying to keep the solitary runit status of the IC as well as having him be part of the unit, you are ignroring what override means. So you're right in that "counts as" overrides the original rules, but you are wrong in your assertion that you still keep the rules being overridden (in this case, the IC being its own unit).

You should have realized this earlier when you quoted the pistol rules at Charistoph. There, it says "Pistols are effectively Assault 1 weapons. A Pistol also counts as a close combat weapon in the Assault phase." Note they had to use "also" to let it still have both functions. You do not have the rules saying the IC also counts as part of the unit, or counts as part of the unit as well as keeping its unit status.

Incorrect. The logic of 'override' and 'precedence' require that the rule being in place. Each time the rule is triggered it will be actively overridden by a more advanced rule that takes precedence.

You keep confusing functional relationship with actual relationship. When one rule takes precedence over another rule for (almost) all purposes, it might not matter functionally what the original rule was and so we could functionally treat it as wholly absent as a shorthand (but incorrect) description of what is going on. But technically the original rule is still there and recoverable by rules that specifically circumvent the advanced rule - See Soulburst, Kill Points, Psyker unit, and IC Special Rules rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 doctortom wrote:
Well, for all rules purposes (except where specifically mentioned in IC rules or in FAQs) he's treated as part of the unit, not just for the purpose of being a target. Which would mean for all rules purposes except for those mentioned in IC rules or FAQs he is NOT treated as being a unit of one.

So, for Col. Impact's edification, this means that he is only treated as his own unit when the rules tell us to treat him as his own unit when he's joined to another unit. We do not treat him as retaining his unit status overall while joined to another unit because that is overrideen; we are told to ignore that for rules purposes.

Where in the rules are we told to ignore or actually remove the unit status of the IC? Page and paragraph please.

The exceptions in the IC rules, Soulburst, Psyker rules, FAQ, and IC Special Rules rule work because there is no actual removal of the unit status of the IC.

The "override - conflict - precedence" system (as implemented by the BRB in the Basic Advanced rules) simply layers rules over other rules and redirects logical flow to the upper rule layers based on conditions in the upper rules. The lower layers are still there.

doctortom wrote:Actually, the pistol rules state that " A Pistol also counts as" a ccw in assault after stating pistols are effectively Assault 1 weapons. The "also counts as" would indicate that it's still an assault 1 weapon while counting as a ccw, not merely the "counts as". part. Citing the pistol doesn't help your argument.

Semantically speaking, I was interpreting the "also" as "in addition to that rule" rather than "in addition to that profile". I honestly haven't considered it as a statement to add a supplemental profile since the discussions on mutli-profile Weapons with one Ranged and one Melee profile. People were quite violently against the idea that you won't be able to pistol whip someone if they fired it in Overwatch or the Shooting Phase. I guess I dropped it from my considerations.

Ceann wrote:RULES.... RULES is the key word here.
You keep using the BASIC rules to make your point.

Because until I have instructions to use a different rule, I use the basic rules. I have stated this before, in fact, I stated it in the post you just quoted. You need to demonstrate where it breaks those rules.

Ceann wrote:Being an IC is a special rule, the rule that you are quoting as a contradiction is a basic rule. It is superseded by a special rule, a special rule that states that it applies for ALL purposes. If you are shooting at a unit, using the shooting rules, THAT is a purpose and for all purposes he COUNTS AS that unit. I am not putting Marines in a Librarian unit, I am attempting to apply wounds to the librarian model, in the librarian unit. The librarian model in the librarian unit has a rule that directs me to COUNT HIM AS belonging to the other unit for ALL purpose, my current purpose is to allocate wounds, anything that happened previously up until that point is now becoming superseded by a special rule. I now have to allocate wounds while COUNTING HIM AS PART OF the tactical unit. They do not join his unit, he tells me to count him as THEIR unit. The wound allocation rules for A UNIT is to apply them to the nearest model to the source of fire. So for the PURPOSE of being a target, he COUNTS AS the tactical unit.

Then your assertion must be that the Librarian unit cannot be seen or interacted with, since the model which makes up that unit is now part of another one.

Because THE RULES, including the Independent Character rules, do not allow for the shenanigans in the process you are describing. Just because the model is part of a different unit, doesn't change the fact that the unit he is now in WAS NOT THE TARGET UNIT, and the models in that unit are also NOT PART OF THE TARGET UNIT.

Nothing in the Independent Character rules states that I must change my target to the Tactical Squad the Librarian is joined to. It is only if we no longer cannot recognize the Librarian unit, that I have no ability to single that model out by shooting a unit he is the lone member of. If I can target the Librarian unit, nothing in the original Tactical/Veteran/Terminator/Mcguffin Squad can have Wounds allocated to it, because it was not the target unit.

Here's a hint to why I do not ascribe to your assertion, nothing in the Independent Character rules states that the target unit changes when the IC joins the unit. Nothing in the Independent Character rules states that Wounds allocated to the IC from its unit are then allocated to the unit he joined. Nothing in the Independent Character rules tells us the UNIT counts as part of the other unit, just the model.

Without those points in a special rule, there is no Advanced rule overriding the Basic rule (and yes, that is also proper terminology, look up Basic vs Advanced in the front of your BRB).

Ceann wrote:The argument you have been attempting to make is that there are two decisions trees one of which involves firing at each unit and because it was never explicitly states that one of those units ceased to exist then you SHOULD be able to shoot at it.

That is correct, but only if we do not consider the use of "counts as" in other parts of the game.

Ceann wrote:Taken literally, yes you can shoot at it. Does the unit have anything to stop you from shooting it? No. A unit is a container for models and in general units do not have rules, models in the units tend to have rules.

Units do not have Special Rules. There are plenty of basic rules that units have to abide by.

Ceann wrote:In this cirumstance you are asserting that nothing in the IC unit is being done to change it from being anything other than what it originally was before it joined so that logically you can still shoot at it.

Nothing is being done to the IC unit, not necessarily in. It's pretty obvious that the model that makes up the IC unit has another unit connected to it.

Ceann wrote:I have not seen any evidence to the contrary and I would agree that literally you can shoot at it as it is normally a target and you have not been instructed that cannot.

Thank you for acknowledging that point. It's amazing all the loops people put themselves through just to come to recognize little things like this. It's actually the main reason I keep coming back to it.

Ceann wrote:Once you attempt to apply a purpose to a model in the unit, be it shooting, a charge, psker powers or whatever there is a point where direct interaction with a model within a unit takes place. At this point the individual model in the unit contains a rule which states purposes that interact with that model are to be counted as model being a part of ANOTHER unit. That is all that rule directs us to do, is to count him as that other unit. It doesn't say to continue treating him as an his original unit at that point. We are not being provided an option, or an ALSO such as was the case for the pistol. We are being told to treat him as a part of that other unit EXPLICITLY.

Now you are starting to understand what I mean about the "counts as" concept being put forth, and I even put it in the previous post you quoted.

In order for "counts as" to do as you are saying (and incidentally, how I stated I play it), then the Librarian's connection to the Librarian unit must be replaced (temporarily) by the Tactical Squad. If that is the case, then the Librarian unit has no models on the table and cannot be seen or measured to. If the Librarian unit cannot be seen, it cannot be shot. Another term for this concept is "recognized".

Therefore, you are not Shooting the Librarian unit, you are Shooting the Tactical Squad. The Tactical Squad is the actual "target unit" and Wound Allocation proceeds as you are used to doing it.

This avoids a situation where you have to try and justify Wounds being allocated to a unit that is not the target unit with zero instructions to do so (basic or advanced).

So to put it in text, with units and models, we start deployment as:
Captain
* Chapter Master

Tactical Squad
* Sergeant
* Marine
* Marine
* Marine
* Marine

Then either during the game or deployment we join the Chapter Master to the Tactical Squad. If we take it literally, with "counts as" being a supplement, not as a supplement, the game sees:
Captain
* Chapter Master

Tactical Squad
* Chapter Master
* Sergeant
* Marine
* Marine
* Marine
* Marine

The Captain unit is seen, can be shot, and Wound Allocation only goes the target unit, Captain, which only has Chapter Master as its model. The only time we can consider allocating Wounds to a Marine is if the Attacks were directed at Tactical Squad. The Chapter Master does not get to act as a conducting rod for Wound Allocation to the other models of the Tactical Squad.

However, when we consider the "counts as" to be a replacement, i.e. the unit identity the model identifies itself as part of, we get:
Tactical Squad
* Chapter Master
* Sergeant
* Marine
* Marine
* Marine
* Marine

No Captain unit is available to be seen or recognized because it has no model on the tabletop. It is not considered a kill for kill points, because the models have not been removed as casualties, yet. This is a lot better for the game, over all, and allows for fewer shenanigans.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
Tom the rules do not tell us that. The issue here is a discussion on the RAW not RAI or HYWPI

Please review the Tenets of You Make Da Call (YMDC), particularly #4.

Using HYWPI or RAI is fine, so long as you are recognizing it as such.

 Charistoph wrote:

Ceann wrote:Once you attempt to apply a purpose to a model in the unit, be it shooting, a charge, psker powers or whatever there is a point where direct interaction with a model within a unit takes place. At this point the individual model in the unit contains a rule which states purposes that interact with that model are to be counted as model being a part of ANOTHER unit. That is all that rule directs us to do, is to count him as that other unit. It doesn't say to continue treating him as an his original unit at that point. We are not being provided an option, or an ALSO such as was the case for the pistol. We are being told to treat him as a part of that other unit EXPLICITLY.

Now you are starting to understand what I mean about the "counts as" concept being put forth, and I even put it in the previous post you quoted.

In order for "counts as" to do as you are saying (and incidentally, how I stated I play it), then the Librarian's connection to the Librarian unit must be replaced (temporarily) by the Tactical Squad. If that is the case, then the Librarian unit has no models on the table and cannot be seen or measured to. If the Librarian unit cannot be seen, it cannot be shot. Another term for this concept is "recognized".

You are making up your own terms here ('replaced', 'recognized') while the BRB provides a perfectly adequate logical system (override - conflict - precedence) to accomplish already with RAW what you think you need to invent with House Rule.

No Houe Ruling required!

The Librarian's unit status does not need to be house ruled as 'replaced' to get the rules to work. The membership of the Tactical Squad overrides the unit status of the Libarian and takes precedence over the unit status for all rules purposes (except exceptions).

Override and precedence means you cannot select the IC unit as a target unit in the shooting phase. The Shooting Phase rules do not circumvent the override that requires you to give precedence to the Tactical Squad membership.

So Charistoph, instead of making up your own terms via House Rules and making a mess of things, why don't you instead simply read and adhere to the BRB and apply the rules as they are written?

I have understood it the entire time, you have been under this false impression that I have not.

Units do have rules, for example Objective Secured, or formation bonus's that are applied to your units. There is nothing on a units datasheet that indicates it has formation granted ability's.

BRB pg 120. - "For example, the units in a Combined Arms Detachment benefit from the Ideal Mission Commander and Objective secured rules."

How I read the Chapter Master DOES get to act as a conducting rod for Wound Allocation to the other models of the Tactical Squad. You are instructed to treat him as that for all purposes. It is a special rule, so I don't see what your contention is that this is not permitted to happen.

You don't get to make the determination that the Captain in your example does not count as a that unit, you do not have a choice. The Captain Unit does not the IC ability, the model in the unit does, so only once you get to a point where rules apply to the model can you direct them to interact with the joined unit.

The Captain unit is technically available but the "all" clause of his special rule creates the scenario of the unit effectively not being able to be seen or recognized because he is the only model of that unit.

col_impact wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Ceann wrote:Once you attempt to apply a purpose to a model in the unit, be it shooting, a charge, psker powers or whatever there is a point where direct interaction with a model within a unit takes place. At this point the individual model in the unit contains a rule which states purposes that interact with that model are to be counted as model being a part of ANOTHER unit. That is all that rule directs us to do, is to count him as that other unit. It doesn't say to continue treating him as an his original unit at that point. We are not being provided an option, or an ALSO such as was the case for the pistol. We are being told to treat him as a part of that other unit EXPLICITLY.

Now you are starting to understand what I mean about the "counts as" concept being put forth, and I even put it in the previous post you quoted.

In order for "counts as" to do as you are saying (and incidentally, how I stated I play it), then the Librarian's connection to the Librarian unit must be replaced (temporarily) by the Tactical Squad. If that is the case, then the Librarian unit has no models on the table and cannot be seen or measured to. If the Librarian unit cannot be seen, it cannot be shot. Another term for this concept is "recognized".

You are making up your own terms here ('replaced', 'recognized') while the BRB provides a perfectly adequate logical system (override - conflict - precedence) to accomplish already with RAW what you think you need to invent with House Rule.

No Houe Ruling required!

The Librarian's unit status does not need to be house ruled as 'replaced' to get the rules to work. The membership of the Tactical Squad overrides the unit status of the Libarian and takes precedence over the unit status for all rules purposes (except exceptions).

Override and precedence means you cannot select the IC unit as a target unit in the shooting phase. The Shooting Phase rules do not circumvent the override that requires you to give precedence to the Tactical Squad membership.

So Charistoph, instead of making up your own terms via House Rules and making a mess of things, why don't you instead simply read and adhere to the BRB and apply the rules as they are written?

Spoiler:

Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules. For example, the basic rules state that a model must take a Morale check under certain situations. If, however, that model has a special rule that makes it immune to Morale checks, then it does not take such checks – the advanced rule takes precedence. On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence.

This is a hugely important distinction in this discussion. Replace would mean the original unit status is no longer present. Overriding or taking precedence means it retains both unit statuses at all times.

Ceann wrote:
I have understood it the entire time, you have been under this false impression that I have not.

Because you kept saying things like the unit counts as part of the unit, which was in clear violation of the statement. You also stated that the IC can act as a conducting rod between his own unit and the unit he joined. Hard to believe someone is understanding you when the terminology they use does not match up at all with either the written rules or the terminology you are using.

Ceann wrote:
Units do have rules, for example Objective Secured, or formation bonus's that are applied to your units. There is nothing on a units datasheet that indicates it has formation granted ability's.

BRB pg 120. - "For example, the units in a Combined Arms Detachment benefit from the Ideal Mission Commander and Objective secured rules."

You are actually better off looking at the definition of Command Benefits and the Formation legend under a 7th Edition codex.

But in and of themselves, units do not have Special Rules. The Datasheet legend states, "Special Rules: Any special rules that apply to models in the unit are listed here. Special rules that are unique to models in that unit are described in full here, whilst others are detailed either in the Appendix of this EPUB or in the Special Rules section of Warhammer 40,000: The Rules."

And some of those Special Rules are then applied back to the unit, such as Stubborn, Fearless, and Fleet.

Ceann wrote:
How I read the Chapter Master DOES get to act as a conducting rod for Wound Allocation to the other models of the Tactical Squad. You are instructed to treat him as that for all purposes. It is a special rule, so I don't see what your contention is that this is not permitted to happen.

I quoted it, you quoted it. I underlined it several times. It is that Wound Allocation is applied only to models in the target unit. If the Tactical Squad was not the targeted unit, then Wounds cannot be allocated to models that are exclusively in the Tactical Squad, a Joined IC or no.

There are zero instructions in the Independent Character rules which state that the Marines and Sergeant count as part of the Captain unit. There are zero instructions in the Independent Character rules which state that all Attacks directed at the Captain unit be directed at the Tactical Squad.

Any step to do so will literally be adding rules to the game.

Ceann wrote:
You don't get to make the determination that the Captain in your example does not count as a that unit, you do not have a choice. The Captain Unit does not the IC ability, the model in the unit does, so only once you get to a point where rules apply to the model can you direct them to interact with the joined unit.

As I have stated before, this only applies if "counts as" is a complete replacement of condition. Without it, YOU do not get to state that the Chapter Master is connected exclusively to that unit.

To which point, if the Chapter Master is no longer counting as a member of the Captain unit. The Captain unit has no model, and therefore cannot be seen. If it cannot be seen, it cannot be Attacked. If the Captain unit cannot be Attacked, the only way Wounds will reach the Chapter Master is by Wounding the Tactical Squad.

Ceann wrote:
The Captain unit is technically available but the "all" clause of his special rule creates the scenario of the unit effectively not being able to be seen or recognized because he is the only model of that unit.

No, it does not. As I have stated before, without treating "counts as" being a complete replacement of condition, this statement only means that if anything happens to that unit or if that unit does anything, the IC model will be affected by it and is expected to perform along with it for the duration of the described situation. It does NOT work the other way around without explicit direction.

The IC counts as part of the unit it joins. It is not, the IC and the unit count as part of each others' units.

I never said that units had special rules, I said they have rules. You added the "special" part all on your own.

You say this...

It is that Wound Allocation is applied only to models in the "target"unit.

And state NOTHING can supersede or take precedence over that. Because you are quoting how shooting works out of the book.

IC is a special/advanced rule.

Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules. For example, the basic rules state that a model must take a Morale check under certain situations. If, however, that model has a special rule that makes it immune to Morale checks, then it does not take such checks – the advanced rule takes precedence. On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence.

Therefore, the IC rule on the model takes PRECEDENCE over the rules you are quoting. You are quoting a rule that is being ignored. If you are ignoring his association to the joined unit then you are not following the IC for all purposes. In this case the model with the IC rules, does not care that you targeted his unit, any rule you point to, once it interacts with the model, becomes subjected to this and then it begins counting him as the unit he joined. It doesn't care what came before that, the rule is now being told to follow an advanced rule instead.

Fhionnuisce wrote:
This is a hugely important distinction in this discussion. Replace would mean the original unit status is no longer present. Overriding or taking precedence means it retains both unit statuses at all times.

Overriding and taking precedence may or may not have an affect, largely depending on what other instructions are also provided with it. Sadly, there are no instructions to replace, override, or give precedence to the joined unit's connection from its original unit in favor against the IC's original unit.

And that is part of why this thread is so long. Very few have been willing to admit that. They try and twist and turn every word beyond its meaning to say something it never actually states or is implied anywhere else in the rulebook. They are trying to push their RAI as RAW.

And that lack of specific instructions are part of the the rule's problem. We then have to extrapolate onward in order to have a clean and orderly game, which pretty much all of us have. Whatever path we choose to take, I am not aware of anyone who takes this instruction set in such a literal manner as to recognize for any game purpose the IC's original unit when it joins another unit.

Because, let's face it, if an IC's unit is 100% interactable on the table while joined to another, then aside from forcing a Multiple Charge or to tank shots against a better unit, there would be zero reason to join an IC to a unit.

And it would have to be 100% interactable, if at all, for balance. It wouldn't be balanced to b able to be non-interactable while the unit he is joined to is taking shots, but interactable while receiving a Charge, for example.

Indeed, it was one of the factors of why I think many of the IC FAQ rulings are explicitly counter to the written rules regarding an IC's interaction with a unit's or a detachment's unique rules. They are part of the unit for all rules purposes, except for the Wulfen want to Run and Charge. They are part of the unit for all rules purposes, unless the unit can deploy in a unique way. Never mind that none of these rules require all models to have the rule to work, like Fleet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ceann wrote:
It is that Wound Allocation is applied only to models in the "target"unit.

Because that is what the basic rule states.

Ceann wrote:
And state NOTHING can supersede or take precedence over that. Because you are quoting how shooting works out of the book.

Because nothing actually states otherwise.

Ceann wrote:
Where advanced rules apply to a specific model, they always override any contradicting basic rules. For example, the basic rules state that a model must take a Morale check under certain situations. If, however, that model has a special rule that makes it immune to Morale checks, then it does not take such checks – the advanced rule takes precedence. On rare occasions, a conflict will arise between a rule in this rulebook, and one printed in a codex. Where this occurs, the rule printed in the codex or Army List Entry always takes precedence.

Therefore, the IC rule on the model takes PRECEDENCE over the rules you are quoting. You are quoting a rule that is being ignored. If you are ignoring his association to the joined unit then you are not following the IC for all purposes.

You are mixing up concepts here, and being inconsistent. Make up your mind.

Either the models counts as part of that unit only, or he does not. (The rule itself never states only, by the way.)

If it is part of that unit only, then I cannot even target the Captain unit in the first place. All my target options in that area would be are the Tactical Squad.

If I can shoot at the Captain unit, then the Chapter Master is not only counting as a member of the Tactical Squad. When Wounds are being allocated to the Chapter Master from Attacks to the Captain unit, the Wounds are not being allocated to the Chapter Master of the Tactical Squad, but the Chapter Master of the Captain unit. The Marines have not been included as being part of the Captain unit, so no Wounds can be allocated to them.

The Independent Character rules do not override anything in the Wound Allocation process in regards to the target unit. The only thing it does modify in regards to Wound Allocation is changing Look Out Sir from a 4+ to a 2+. Indeed, if you could find and quote where "wound allocation" can be found within the Independent Character rule, I will find myself corrected. However, I have spent years studying the Independent Character rule over 3 editions, so I am fairly confident you will find no literal statement of "wound allocation". The next instance after Independent Character in the BRB can be found in Precision Shots, the previous is in Barrage.

Charistoph wrote: Sadly, there are no instructions to replace, override, or give precedence to the joined unit's connection from its original unit in favor against the IC's original unit.

ALL PURPOSES, sounds like an instruction to me.

Moving = Purpose
Shooting = Purpose
Wound Allocation = Purpose

In fact I don't think there is any action in the game you can take that could be considered as not having a purpose.

Ceann wrote:

Charistoph wrote: Sadly, there are no instructions to replace, override, or give precedence to the joined unit's connection from its original unit in favor against the IC's original unit.

ALL PURPOSES, sounds like an instruction to me.

Moving = Purpose
Shooting = Purpose
Wound Allocation = Purpose

In fact I don't think there is any action in the game you can take that could be considered as not having a purpose.

As I explained before, as a literal statement, all it does is include the IC as being part of the unit whole for when decisions are made for it or actions are taken against it. It is only a one way statement, period.

If the unit Runs, the IC counts as Running, even if he didn't move. If the unit takes Hits, the IC can be counted on to be part of the model list Wounds are allocated against. If the IC doesn't have Fleet, while the rest of the models do, they cannot use Fleet. If the IC doesn't have Deep Strike, joining him to a unit will preclude the unit from Deep Striking. If the unit has Stubborn, the IC's Ld is not reduced while taking Morale Checks.

Unless you receive directions to either ignore the IC's unit, give precedence to the joined unit in all interactions, or count the joined unit as part of the IC's unit, that's all it means without modifying the language to mean something else.

 Charistoph wrote:

Fhionnuisce wrote:
This is a hugely important distinction in this discussion. Replace would mean the original unit status is no longer present. Overriding or taking precedence means it retains both unit statuses at all times.

Overriding and taking precedence may or may not have an affect, largely depending on what other instructions are also provided with it. Sadly, there are no instructions to replace, override, or give precedence to the joined unit's connection from its original unit in favor against the IC's original unit.

Incorrect. The "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" overrides normal rule interactions such as those found in the Shooting Phase when you go to select a target unit. The Independent Character cannot be selected as a unit independently of the Tactical unit he joins since the Shooting Phase rules do not provide a way to specifically circumvent the "counts as" clause in the IC rule.

 Charistoph wrote:

And that is part of why this thread is so long. Very few have been willing to admit that. They try and twist and turn every word beyond its meaning to say something it never actually states or is implied anywhere else in the rulebook. They are trying to push their RAI as RAW.

You are projecting here. You are the one trying to push HYWPI as RAW by coming up with concepts that are nowhere to be found in the BRB.

When you stick to the logical relationship between Basic and Advanced (override, conflict, precedence) you can come to no other conclusion than that the unit status of the IC is overridden by the Tactical squad unit status and that the Tactical squad unit status takes precedence over the unit status of the IC for all rules purposes.

Simply read the BRB. It's all there. You are just unwilling to accept the plain English. There is no twisting and turning of any word. In fact, you are the one who is having to resort to inventing concepts out of the blue to push your HYWPI.

Just read the BRB and adhere to the logic.

 Charistoph wrote:

Indeed, it was one of the factors of why I think many of the IC FAQ rulings are explicitly counter to the written rules regarding an IC's interaction with a unit's or a detachment's unique rules. They are part of the unit for all rules purposes, except for the Wulfen want to Run and Charge. They are part of the unit for all rules purposes, unless the unit can deploy in a unique way. Never mind that none of these rules require all models to have the rule to work, like Fleet.

The fact that your argument can't make sense of the IC FAQ rulings underscores how faulty your argument is.

If you simply adhere to the logic of Basic vs Advanced (override, conflict, precendence) then you will find that the IC FAQ rulings are in fact not counter to the written rules at all. This is because override does not eradicate the underlying and separable unit nature of the IC. The IC Special Rules rule maintains a degree of separation between the IC unit and the unit he joins. The IC Special Rules rule provides specific exemption to the "counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes" which is why an IC does not get to run and charge like a Wulfen unit if the IC joins them.

But, since you've become personally invested into making up your House Rules you have lost sight of the fact that the rules make perfect sense in this regard all by themselves.

If you simply read the rules as they are and apply the concepts the BRB gives you and not make up your own faulty ones then you wind up with a sensible game, at least in this regard.

I think this has gone around in circles for long enough.