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.

Do named characters "block" regular units from achieving agenda tallies, and the experience that comes from these?

The reason I ask is because recently, a friend and I played a crusade match. I had picked Reaper as one of my agendas. At the end of the battle Celestine had 2 tallies for Reaper, and another of my units had 1. The description for Reaper reads, "The unit in your army that has the highest combat tally of enemy units destroyed during the battle earns 2 experience points. If two or more units are tied, you choose which unit achieves this Agenda."

Now, if both units had 2 tallies this wouldn't be an issue. But since Celestine can't gain experience, does she still block the second highest unit from scoring the Reaper agenda? I've searched around, but can't find an answer to my question. The consensus in our wargaming group is that it would be okay to let the second highest scoring unit get the experience since Celestine can't. But I just wanted to make sure there wasn't some rules wording I've missed that would clarify this.

That's actually a good question. I don't think there is really enough information as to whether "never gain experience" means they are ignored completely, or that they just fail to gain the experience when instructed to.

This would be a valid invocation of TMIR, imo. Unless I missed something obvious.

Yeah, there's (IMO) a difference between "never gain experience" and "do not mark agenda tallies" for named characters. Which just makes this particular situation more unclear.

Also, since I've only had one cup of coffee, could you explain what TMIR means?

 EscherBacon wrote:
Yeah, there's (IMO) a difference between "never gain experience" and "do not mark agenda tallies" for named characters. Which just makes this particular situation more unclear.

Also, since I've only had one cup of coffee, could you explain what TMIR means?

TMIR is The Most Important Rule. Often misunderstood to say "I can challenge anything to force a roll off", The Most Important Rule actually boils down to "If the rules do not adequately cover a situation that arises, roll off with your opponent, and the winner decides the resolution of the conflict." It's only valid to invoke when the rules genuinely do not clearly explain what to do in a given situation.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
It's only valid to invoke when the rules genuinely do not clearly explain what to do in a given situation.

Agreeing whether the rules genuinely do not clearly explain something is easier said than done though, as many many threads in this forum are a testament to.

You surely can't just say "You can't invoke TMIR here, because I'm certain I'm right and therefore it's clear."

 EscherBacon wrote:
Do named characters "block" regular units from achieving agenda tallies, and the experience that comes from these?

The reason I ask is because recently, a friend and I played a crusade match. I had picked Reaper as one of my agendas. At the end of the battle Celestine had 2 tallies for Reaper, and another of my units had 1. The description for Reaper reads, "The unit in your army that has the highest combat tally of enemy units destroyed during the battle earns 2 experience points. If two or more units are tied, you choose which unit achieves this Agenda."

Now, if both units had 2 tallies this wouldn't be an issue. But since Celestine can't gain experience, does she still block the second highest unit from scoring the Reaper agenda? I've searched around, but can't find an answer to my question. The consensus in our wargaming group is that it would be okay to let the second highest scoring unit get the experience since Celestine can't. But I just wanted to make sure there wasn't some rules wording I've missed that would clarify this.

I fail to see any ambiguity in this question. Celestine got the highest tallies for Reaper, so the experience award goes to her. That experience award is null since she doesn't gain experience as a named character. If you want to play strictly by the rules, don't take Reaper when Celestine is likely to get the most kills.

As for your groups house rule to ignore her for the purposes of the Reaper, not a bad solution, just not the rules.

To my reading, named characters are only unable to gain XP. No part of the rule disallows them from achieving agenda, so in this case, Celestine achieve reaper, and must be the recipient t of the xp. Which she then cannot accept.

I agree with this assesment. If you don't want to lose/waste XP in Crusade, dont take named characters. Its that simple.

 alextroy wrote:

 EscherBacon wrote:
Do named characters "block" regular units from achieving agenda tallies, and the experience that comes from these?

The reason I ask is because recently, a friend and I played a crusade match. I had picked Reaper as one of my agendas. At the end of the battle Celestine had 2 tallies for Reaper, and another of my units had 1. The description for Reaper reads, "The unit in your army that has the highest combat tally of enemy units destroyed during the battle earns 2 experience points. If two or more units are tied, you choose which unit achieves this Agenda."

Now, if both units had 2 tallies this wouldn't be an issue. But since Celestine can't gain experience, does she still block the second highest unit from scoring the Reaper agenda? I've searched around, but can't find an answer to my question. The consensus in our wargaming group is that it would be okay to let the second highest scoring unit get the experience since Celestine can't. But I just wanted to make sure there wasn't some rules wording I've missed that would clarify this.

I fail to see any ambiguity in this question. Celestine got the highest tallies for Reaper, so the experience award goes to her. That experience award is null since she doesn't gain experience as a named character. If you want to play strictly by the rules, don't take Reaper when Celestine is likely to get the most kills.

As for your groups house rule to ignore her for the purposes of the Reaper, not a bad solution, just not the rules.

I agree with this. RAW I think the bonus is lost.

 tauist wrote:
I agree with this assesment. If you don't want to lose/waste XP in Crusade, dont take named characters. Its that simple.

I believe if it was that simple, GW would've made the drawbacks to taking named characters in Crusade a little more clear to new players. My group's interpretation is that the rule that named chars don't get experience is to balance out their unique abilities. Blocking others from earning XP seems like unintended double negatives. Then again, there are only a few agendas where this is an issue in the first place.

RAW, I agree that the XP is simply lost. It's Crusade, so if ever there was a game mode where you and your opponent could (and should) discuss irregularities like this, this would be it.

HIWPI, ignore named characters for purposes of determining which units have the highest Agenda tallies.

 tauist wrote:
I agree with this assesment. If you don't want to lose/waste XP in Crusade, dont take named characters. Its that simple.

This.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 EscherBacon wrote:

 tauist wrote:
I agree with this assesment. If you don't want to lose/waste XP in Crusade, dont take named characters. Its that simple.

I believe if it was that simple, GW would've made the drawbacks to taking named characters in Crusade a little more clear to new players. My group's interpretation is that the rule that named chars don't get experience is to balance out their unique abilities. Blocking others from earning XP seems like unintended double negatives. Then again, there are only a few agendas where this is an issue in the first place.

Some characters might make things easier, and why should number two get experience for leaning on some superhero’s special powers?