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.

I'm at the shop and tell my opponent that my lone Astra Militarum tank commander can issue an order to himself. He asks for proof. Does that proof exist outside of random message board responses? Is there ANYTHING authoritative from GW on this crucial, yet frustratingly vague rule interpretation?

Yes its called rules doing what they say they can do

Tank Orders: This model can issue one order each turn to a friendly <REGIMENT> LEMAN RUSS at the start of your Shooting phase. To issue a tank order, pick a target LEMAN RUSS

A tank commander is a leman russ

Its not the least bit confusing theirs no ambiguity in that wording why would you need an faq

I'm sorry but saying "friendly Leman Russ" almost unequivocally implies another tank, not your own. I won't even bring up that at some point this apparently was ruled that they cannot do it.

Thanks for the smarmy, "warhammer guy" answer, though.

King_Stannis wrote:
I'm sorry but saying "friendly Leman Russ" almost unequivocally implies another tank, not your own. I won't even bring up that at some point this apparently was ruled that they cannot do it.

Thanks for the smarmy, "warhammer guy" answer, though.

Maybe the answer could have been phrased better but it's entirely correct. A Tank Commander has the Leman Russ keyword so is eligible to be targeted by his own rule for issuing tank orders. Anyone saying otherwise would need to show why this isn't the case as the rules are clear. I'm unaware of any previous situation where a similar interaction was ruled differently (barring an errata to change a keyword or rule).

King_Stannis wrote:
I'm sorry but saying "friendly Leman Russ" almost unequivocally implies another tank, not your own. I won't even bring up that at some point this apparently was ruled that they cannot do it.

Thanks for the smarmy, "warhammer guy" answer, though.

BRB, page 197 defines what the term "friendly" means. A Tank Commander can order issues to themselves and have been able to do so since the Codex first came out. It was ruled in the Index FAQ that you couldn't, but that FAQ doesn't apply, the FAQ ignored the RaW anyway, and the rules allow you to do so, so you can do it because the rules say you can do so.

A Tank Commander has the correct keywords, and is within range of the ability. If your opponent doesn't accept the actual rules as proof then there isn't much you can do.

King_Stannis wrote:
I'm sorry but saying "friendly Leman Russ" almost unequivocally implies another tank, not your own. I won't even bring up that at some point this apparently was ruled that they cannot do it.

Thanks for the smarmy, "warhammer guy" answer, though.

You're always considered in range of your own Auras.

Captains, until the introduction of Core, buffed themselves. Same with Lieutenants. Same with Troupe Masters, Shadowseers, Harker, Straken, Canonnesses, Masters...

Provided you have the correct keywords, you can buff yourself. (And yes, I know that Orders aren't Auras. But the targeting is the same.)

 BaconCatBug wrote:

King_Stannis wrote:
I'm sorry but saying "friendly Leman Russ" almost unequivocally implies another tank, not your own. I won't even bring up that at some point this apparently was ruled that they cannot do it.

Thanks for the smarmy, "warhammer guy" answer, though.

BRB, page 197 defines what the term "friendly" means. A Tank Commander can order issues to themselves and have been able to do so since the Codex first came out. It was ruled in the Index FAQ that you couldn't, but that FAQ doesn't apply, the FAQ ignored the RaW anyway, and the rules allow you to do so, so you can do it because the rules say you can do so.

A Tank Commander has the correct keywords, and is within range of the ability. If your opponent doesn't accept the actual rules as proof then there isn't much you can do.

It was never ruled in the index faq - a special snowflake faq to that effect was given to pask and then later removed it never applied to the tank commander and does not exist in 9th

King_Stannis wrote:
I'm sorry but saying "friendly Leman Russ" almost unequivocally implies another tank, not your own. I won't even bring up that at some point this apparently was ruled that they cannot do it.

Thanks for the smarmy, "warhammer guy" answer, though.

I'm sorry but "friendly Leman Russ" would actually mean that this proper noun called "Leman Russ" has the qualities of being "friendly", which means "kind and pleasant."

Maybe be more polite in online forums, especially as written text cannot convey intonations, rather than mocking someone who's taken time out of their day to respond to your query as being "smarmy".

The point stands - nothing in the rule explicitly cancels out the specific provisions as granted by the rule in question when targeting oneself with tank orders.

seconded you have your answer don't be rude

U02dah4 wrote:
seconded you have your answer don't be rude

LOL your original answer was incredibly rude. You made it seem like I was was semi stupid for asking a simple question, then it was brought up that it was ruled they couldn't give orders in an index, which is the reason for a lot of the confusion out there. Then you had to scramble and say that didn't matter... It was a "Snowflake faq" (huh?). Which is fine, it may have not mattered, but it absolutely contributed to the confusion.

Sorry, but you came off like a know it all, which everyone thinks of when they think of a stereotypical Warhammer guy.

King_Stannis wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:
seconded you have your answer don't be rude

LOL your original answer was incredibly rude. You made it seem like I was was semi stupid for asking a simple question, then it was brought up that it was ruled they couldn't give orders in an index, which is the reason for a lot of the confusion out there. Then you had to scramble and say that didn't matter... It was a "Snowflake faq" (huh?). Which is fine, it may have not mattered, but it absolutely contributed to the confusion.

Sorry, but you came off like a know it all, which everyone thinks of when they think of a stereotypical Warhammer guy.

I did not think he was being rude at all.

Though it is tough to gauge tone from just some text on a screen.

No your question being semi stupid, may have resulted in a precise rules answer to your question highlighting that.

I made no statement with respect to the person asking that question. Indeed your initial statement stated it wasn't you that was asking.

I only addressed the question as precisely as I can

But when the precise answer is you do what the rules say they do and their is no ambiguity or confusion i can understand why the person asking the question might feel the answer was a comment on them.... it wasn't it was just an answer to your question

The index is not valid in 9th
There was never a tank commander faq in 8th or 9th
The pask faq hasn't existed since the am codex at the beginning of 8th and wouldn't be valid in 9th even if it existed which it doesn't.

A snowflake faq is a special ruling that applies to one unit for no apparent reason that runs contrary to all other units of a similar type and other rulings. It a speciality of gw technical writing as BCB stated " that faq ruling ignored the RAW" with no explanation.

You have however insulted me twice which is rude.

You should be aware that if you post on YMDC, if you are lucky some "know it all's" may try and help answer your questions. Giving you the correct answer to your problem (subject to their being one). That's certainly what I want when I ask a question. If you do not want our help do not ask for it. But do not insult us when we give you your answer.

Nobody cares who was rude to whom.

As to the question, ask your opponent where it states that the Tank Commander can't target itself. After all, there are many abilities in Warhammer which say "another". I'll quote Kharn the Betrayer, for context:

Instead, those attacks automatically hit another friendly unit within Engagement Range of Khârn

Emphasis mine. The only reason Kharn cannot be hit by his own attacks is that his ability says "another" - ie, a friendly unit other than himself.

A Tank Commander can order a friendly Leman Russ, which includes itself.

Thank you all for your help.

Way to turn what should have been an easy question into a bunch of internet nonsense, people.

Regardless of how silly you think a question may be, there's no reason to be rude about it. Particularly when it's about a specific style of wording that's caused confusion in GW rules for 30 years now.

Moving on.