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.

Okay, during a game two questions popped up regarding two different situations:

1) Vindicare fires on a Death Guard character with warlord trait "Hulking physique". The trait goes that all wound rolls of 1-3 fail, IRRESPECTIVE of any abilities that the weapon or the attacking model itself may have. The exitus rifle always wounds infantry on a 2+ (which the target is). Also, in the BRB there is the "Attacker's priority" rule which states that if two rules are conflicting, the attacker can use his rule.

So, is the "Attacker priority" stronger, or is it the wording IRRESPECTIVE of any abilites of the attacking model stronger? Does the Vindicare need 2+ or 4+ to wound?

2) Sagittarum custodians of the Emmisaries Imperatus which have the "Each time a model makes an attack, you can ignore any or all modifiers to the hit roll and wound roll, decide to fire both profiles of the adrastus bolt caliver (think combi weapon - you have two weapon profiles, if you decide to use both, substract one from the attack roll), AFTER ADVANCING (both weapon profiles are Assault). So do they suffer any penalties to the attack roll, due to their rule, and if yes, which do they suffer, the one due to advancing and firing or the one due to firing both profiles?

thanks

1) Attacker priority trumps the other rules if there is a conflict.

2) Trait 2 says "ignore any or all modifiers to the hit roll and wound roll."

Why would they suffer any penalties to the attack roll if you are told to ignore all modifiers?

 DeathReaper wrote:

Why would they suffer any penalties to the attack roll if you are told to ignore all modifiers?

Because "Any or all" is not "All", you can choose for *any* modifiers to be ignored or all

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

Why would they suffer any penalties to the attack roll if you are told to ignore all modifiers?

Because "Any or all" is not "All", you can choose for *any* modifiers to be ignored or all

No one is going to keep the negative modifiers... They will only keep the positive modifiers, if they get to choose.

The death guard rule overrides the vindicare rule because of the "IRRESPECTIVE of any abilities that the weapon or the attacking model itself may have" part.

 p5freak wrote:
The death guard rule overrides the vindicare rule because of the "IRRESPECTIVE of any abilities that the weapon or the attacking model itself may have" part.

Except Attacker's priority is not an ability that the weapon or the attacking model itself has.

So Attacker's priority is used when two rules cannot both apply.

In the OP's case, the two rules cannot both apply, so we follow Attacker's priority.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
The death guard rule overrides the vindicare rule because of the "IRRESPECTIVE of any abilities that the weapon or the attacking model itself may have" part.

Except Attacker's priority is not an ability that the weapon or the attacking model itself has.

So Attacker's priority is used when two rules cannot both apply.

In the OP's case, the two rules cannot both apply, so we follow Attacker's priority.

The FAQ doesnt apply here, because there is no conflict. The wound on 2+ is an ability of the weapon, which is overruled by the death guard rule, which says "IRRESPECTIVE of any abilities that the weapon or the attacking model itself may have". If the death guard rule would not have the "IRRESPECTIVE....." part then attackers priority would apply.

Attacker's priority is used when two rules cannot both apply.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Attacker's priority is used when two rules cannot both apply.

They both dont apply, because of the "IRRESPECTIVE....", this overrides the vindicare rule.

I agree with p5

The irrespective means the vindicares rule never gets looked at.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I agree with p5

The irrespective means the vindicares rule never gets looked at.

but it says "IRRESPECTIVE of any abilities that the weapon or the attacking model itself may have"

Attacker's priority is not an ability that the weapon or the attacking model itself has.

Before you get to attackers prio, the vindicares rule has been discarded for any wound rolls of 2,3, because you don't care about it. You know the weapon CANNOT wound you on those values.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Before you get to attackers prio, the vindicares rule has been discarded for any wound rolls of 2,3, because you don't care about it. You know the weapon CANNOT wound you on those values.

The exitus rifle always wounds infantry on a 2+

Always.

Seems like there is a conflict.

But it is one for an FAQ.

There is no conflict. Rules are clear.

1: Deathguard rule supersedes Vindicare rule since his rule specifically ignores Vindicare's rule meaning you don't have to go to attackers priority because one rule kills the other, there is no conflict and the rules are clear.

2: You ignore all modifiers...so yeah, you get to hit on 2s with both profiles.

Update, contacted GW via chat, and guess what - you can get rules answers...now I know that, and so does anyone else reading this

Anyway, here is the chat copy-pasted:

Hi there! Thanks for getting in touch today.
We can help with that indeed! What would you like to know?
well there was a situation during a game the ither day
vindicare fires at a death guard character
said character has warlord trait that say it is wounded on a 4+ IRREGARDLESS of and ability the attacking model may have ( or weapon)
and it the rulebook it states the attacker's rule priority - when rules are conflicting the attacker's rule has priority
so does the vindicare wound on a 2+ (his rule) or the 4+ ( death guard warlord trait)
The Vindicare would wound him on a 2+ in this instance
so attacker's priority takes precedence, and the wording "IRREGARDLESS" isn't as strong as any other "wound on 4+" - for example the dark angels' ones?
That's right yes - when you come across rules like this, with an Always Wounds or Always Hits, or Wounds on X+, the attacking model would take precedence. For example the other way around, Culexis Assassins can only ever be hit on a 6+, but Dark Reapers always hit on 3s - the Dark Reapers hit on 3s in this case.
OK, thanks a lot!
You're most welcome!
Many thanks for getting in touch today.

So, the Vindicare wounds on 2+.

From tbe Tenets of You Make Da Call:

2. The only official sources of information are the current rulebooks and the Games Workshop FAQs. Emails from Games Workshop can be easily spoofed and are notorious for being inconsistent and so should not be relied on.

The same would go for the chat.

The answer is that the Transhuman effect (can only be wounded on 4+) takes precedence due to that Irrespective wording. This is the commonly accepted answer, and is the answer that would be issued by judges everywhere.

If you disagree with this, if you attend an event and get called on this, it will be ruled against you. This is how this is ruled. A "chat" with GW is never considered binding for the exact reason specified in the Tenets.

Curious that these events you mention are ruling the direct opposite of the FAQ that covers such instances of conflict. Attacker’s priority is pretty damn clear.

 DeathReaper wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Before you get to attackers prio, the vindicares rule has been discarded for any wound rolls of 2,3, because you don't care about it. You know the weapon CANNOT wound you on those values.

The exitus rifle always wounds infantry on a 2+

Always.

Seems like there is a conflict.

But it is one for an FAQ.

That's an ability yes? Yes
So it is ignored for the purpose of the DG trait, as you are instructed to ignore such abilities.
Thus there are no rules in conflict. A wound roll of a 2 fails. A wound roll of a 3 fails.

This is how it works. This is how it has worked since the attackers prio rule was out in place, and is ruled at every single event I know of.

Frankly the attackers prio rule is mostly useless, as most defensive abilities have similar wording meaning the rule is ignored, so you never trigger attackers prio as you never have a conflict.

Never forget the old adage when it comes to GW and rules clarifications:

"Ask GW a rules question and you will get three answers, each one different and wrong."

Their "ruling" contradicts the simple wording that p5 pointed out.

ThulsaDoom wrote:
Update, contacted GW via chat, and guess what - you can get rules answers...now I know that, and so does anyone else reading this

Anyway, here is the chat copy-pasted:

Hi there! Thanks for getting in touch today.
We can help with that indeed! What would you like to know?
well there was a situation during a game the ither day
vindicare fires at a death guard character
said character has warlord trait that say it is wounded on a 4+ IRREGARDLESS of and ability the attacking model may have ( or weapon)
and it the rulebook it states the attacker's rule priority - when rules are conflicting the attacker's rule has priority
so does the vindicare wound on a 2+ (his rule) or the 4+ ( death guard warlord trait)
The Vindicare would wound him on a 2+ in this instance
so attacker's priority takes precedence, and the wording "IRREGARDLESS" isn't as strong as any other "wound on 4+" - for example the dark angels' ones?
That's right yes - when you come across rules like this, with an Always Wounds or Always Hits, or Wounds on X+, the attacking model would take precedence. For example the other way around, Culexis Assassins can only ever be hit on a 6+, but Dark Reapers always hit on 3s - the Dark Reapers hit on 3s in this case.
OK, thanks a lot!
You're most welcome!
Many thanks for getting in touch today.

So, the Vindicare wounds on 2+.

What account did you contact for this?

There is no ‘account’. He used the live Chat to talk to someone, an option a lot of companies are adding or so I hear.

Two other people here should pic different dates/times to ask the same question in a slightly different way.

I'd be interested to see what responses they get.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Two other people here should pic different dates/times to ask the same question in a slightly different way.

I'd be interested to see what responses they get.

Well after a GW chat they send you a copy of said chat to your e-mail adress (that they ask you to provide at the beginning of the chat). As can be seen from these screenshots I was chatting with "Daniel". Also, this was on July 11th, but got the mail on the 12th.

So you can try to chat as well, and maybe if also "Daniel" enters the chat you tell him it's nothing and try until you get someone else?

ThulsaDoom wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Two other people here should pic different dates/times to ask the same question in a slightly different way.

I'd be interested to see what responses they get.

Well after a GW chat they send you a copy of said chat to your e-mail adress (that they ask you to provide at the beginning of the chat). As can be seen from these screenshots I was chatting with "Daniel". Also, this was on July 11th, but got the mail on the 12th.

So you can try to chat as well, and maybe if also "Daniel" enters the chat you tell him it's nothing and try until you get someone else?

I'm questionable about this guy's ruling because he uses the Dark Reaper vs Culexus Assassin as an example, which is a totally different situation. The Culexus Assasin does not say that it "can only ever be hit on a 6+" as Daniel says, it actually says " When resolving an attack that targets this model, the attacking model is treated as having a Weapon Skill and Ballistic Skill characteristic of 6+." This means that even though the Dark Reapers BS is 6+, they always hit on 3+ because of their special rule. This is a totally different case and makes me question his understanding of the rules interactions.

For what it's worth, I agree that the word "irrespective" trumps the attack ability, otherwise what is the point of using that working at all. GW makes a lot of exceptions to the exceptions and from the way it's templated, I would rule that the DG ability prevents the Vindicare's ability from being regarded in any way, so even though they have attacker priority, it doesn't matter because the ability is ignored before you get that far.

ThulsaDoom wrote:
Okay, during a game two questions popped up regarding two different situations:

1) Vindicare fires on a Death Guard character with warlord trait "Hulking physique". The trait goes that all wound rolls of 1-3 fail, IRRESPECTIVE of any abilities that the weapon or the attacking model itself may have. The exitus rifle always wounds infantry on a 2+ (which the target is). Also, in the BRB there is the "Attacker's priority" rule which states that if two rules are conflicting, the attacker can use his rule.

So, is the "Attacker priority" stronger, or is it the wording IRRESPECTIVE of any abilites of the attacking model stronger? Does the Vindicare need 2+ or 4+ to wound?

2) Sagittarum custodians of the Emmisaries Imperatus which have the "Each time a model makes an attack, you can ignore any or all modifiers to the hit roll and wound roll, decide to fire both profiles of the adrastus bolt caliver (think combi weapon - you have two weapon profiles, if you decide to use both, substract one from the attack roll), AFTER ADVANCING (both weapon profiles are Assault). So do they suffer any penalties to the attack roll, due to their rule, and if yes, which do they suffer, the one due to advancing and firing or the one due to firing both profiles?

thanks

If the attacking model's ability also says "regardless of any abilities or modifers" etc.

Then its down to the attacking player has priority.

If the attacking models ability says always wound on 2+, but nothing more. Then the defender who says cannot be wounded on unmodified wound roll of 1-3 regardless of abilities or modifers would come out on top.

Its that last little bit, they have to be a conflicting rule to equal power. Without that last little bit that says "regardless of abilities or modifiers" then the model with that rule always wins.

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:


If the attacking model's ability also says "regardless of any abilities or modifers" etc.

Then its down to the attacking player has priority.

If the attacking models ability says always wound on 2+, but nothing more. Then the defender who says cannot be wounded on unmodified wound roll of 1-3 regardless of abilities or modifers would come out on top.

Its that last little bit, they have to be a conflicting rule to equal power. Without that last little bit that says "regardless of abilities or modifiers" then the model with that rule always wins.

^^^ This, much better explained than I did. ^^^