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.

A unit of eternal conquerors necron warriors obsec unit is within range of an objective marker, and there is another enemy obsec unit within range of that marker as well. Because both units have obsec you count the total number of models, as if no unit had obsec. Do the necron models within range of the marker still count as one additional model when determining control of the marker ?

Eternal Conquerors
Units with this code have the Objective Secured ability. If a model in such a unit already has this ability, that model counts as one additional model when determining control of an objective marker.

Objective Secured
A player controls an objective marker if they have any models with this ability within range of that objective marker, even if there are more enemy models within range of that objective marker. If an enemy model within range of an objective marker also has this ability (or a similar ability), then the objective marker is controlled by the player who has the most models within range of that objective marker as normal.

Yes. If you didn't double-count Warriors when an opposing ObSec unit was within range, what would be the point of that rule?

Yeah, pretty clearly reads to me that units that already had obsec count as 2 in all circumstances when determining control of an objective.

Obsec cancels out when both units have it, then its like no unit has obsec. How can eternal conquerors still count as one additional model, when they dont have obsec anymore ?

 p5freak wrote:
Obsec cancels out when both units have it, then its like no unit has obsec. How can eternal conquerors still count as one additional model, when they dont have obsec anymore ?

What specific wording makes you think they don't have Obsec any more?

Obsec isn't negated they still both have the ability. So your warriors each count as 2 for determining control.

 p5freak wrote:
Obsec cancels out when both units have it, then its like no unit has obsec.

Citation needed.

Read the objective secured rule. When both units have obsec you count the total number of models as normal. Even models without obsec now count. If obsec is now negated/ignored/canceled, whatever you want to call it not counting, how can eternal conquerors still count as one additional model when it requires obsec ?

 p5freak wrote:
Read the objective secured rule. When both units have obsec you count the total number of models as normal. Even models without obsec now count. If obsec is now negated/ignored/canceled, whatever you want to call it not counting, how can eternal conquerors still count as one additional model when it requires obsec ?

You count all models, but that doesn't mean the models lose ObSec. It's just a part of the ObSec rule. There's nothing that would make the models actually lose the rule, so Eternal Conquerors still applies.

Again, what would that part of the rule do otherwise?

Aelyn wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Read the objective secured rule. When both units have obsec you count the total number of models as normal. Even models without obsec now count. If obsec is now negated/ignored/canceled, whatever you want to call it not counting, how can eternal conquerors still count as one additional model when it requires obsec ?

You count all models, but that doesn't mean the models lose ObSec. It's just a part of the ObSec rule. There's nothing that would make the models actually lose the rule, so Eternal Conquerors still applies.

Again, what would that part of the rule do otherwise?

100% agree. Nothing in the rules quoted states you actually lose ObSec, just expands upon the exiting rule should both units have it.

 p5freak wrote:
Read the objective secured rule. When both units have obsec you count the total number of models as normal. Even models without obsec now count. If obsec is now negated/ignored/canceled, whatever you want to call it not counting, how can eternal conquerors still count as one additional model when it requires obsec ?

And which part of the rule says you don't have obsec?

Just because way to count who wins changes doesn't mean you don't have obsec rule.

Even GW isn't stupid enough to make whole double count rule irrelevant like that.

Both units still have obsec rule. The way to count it in that way doesn't require either unit to lose the actual rule from their datasheet like you claim they do. The...rule...is...still...there. Without it you wouldn't even have the "count all models" rule to use for!

Simple rule reading 101 or abc.

 p5freak wrote:
Read the objective secured rule. When both units have obsec you count the total number of models as normal. Even models without obsec now count. If obsec is now negated/ignored/canceled, whatever you want to call it not counting, how can eternal conquerors still count as one additional model when it requires obsec ?

I read the objective secured rule. It does not say what you claim, which was "Obsec cancels out when both units have it"

Where do the rules say "Obsec cancels out when both units have it"?

Because I can not see anything about cancelling the Obsec rule.

When both units have obsec you count the number of models as normal. Thats like no unit has obsec anymore.

 p5freak wrote:
When both units have obsec you count the number of models as normal. Thats like no unit has obsec anymore.

But the unit doesn't actually lose ObSec.

 Valkyrie wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
When both units have obsec you count the number of models as normal. Thats like no unit has obsec anymore.

But the unit doesn't actually lose ObSec.

Ok, they dont lose obsec. But you count models as normal, what happens to obsec ? Is it still there, but inactive ? Ignored ? Doesnt count ?

 p5freak wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
When both units have obsec you count the number of models as normal. Thats like no unit has obsec anymore.

But the unit doesn't actually lose ObSec.

Ok, they dont lose obsec. But you count models as normal, what happens to obsec ? Is it still there, but inactive ? Ignored ? Doesnt count ?

It's still there. You don't ignore it.

 p5freak wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
When both units have obsec you count the number of models as normal. Thats like no unit has obsec anymore.

But the unit doesn't actually lose ObSec.

Ok, they dont lose obsec. But you count models as normal, what happens to obsec ? Is it still there, but inactive ? Ignored ? Doesnt count ?

You're still ObSec. Therefore the Eternal Conquerors ability is still applied to that model.

The issue here may stem from a colloquial definition of how ObSec works, where it's often said that two ObSec units "cancel each other out". That's usually accurate enough a description but in some cases - such as this - it's important to look at what the rules actually say rather than relying on the common, but misleading, understanding.

Or to but it another way, opposing units with ObSec "effectively" cancel out the ability since you go back to the normal method of counting all models. "Effectively" is not "literally".

 Valkyrie wrote:

It's still there. You don't ignore it.

So, its still there, but you count the models as normal, right ? If so, eternal conqueror models can't count as an additional model, because that's not normal.

 p5freak wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

It's still there. You don't ignore it.

So, its still there, but you count the models as normal, right ? If so, eternal conqueror models can't count as an additional model, because that's not normal.

I think you're clutching at straws there. ObSec tells you to count the number of models within range of an objective marker. Conquerors states that each model counts as one additional model when determining control of an objective marker. The "as normal" refers to determining how many models there are, which you then augment with the EC additions.

Is this an actual rules question that's ever likely to come up, or an attempt to pull a "gotcha, these rules don't work everybody!"

 p5freak wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

It's still there. You don't ignore it.

So, its still there, but you count the models as normal, right ? If so, eternal conqueror models can't count as an additional model, because that's not normal.

That's incorrect. You do what the Eternal Conquerors rule says. It's not unusual for a special rule to override a more general one.

Yeah-unless the Warriors actually LOSE ObSec, they'd still count as two models.

They do not lose ObSec if an enemy ObSec model is within range of the objective. It NORMALLY wouldn't do anything, but it's still there.

We know you want it to be the one way, but its the other way.

 p5freak wrote:

 Valkyrie wrote:

It's still there. You don't ignore it.

So, its still there, but you count the models as normal, right ? If so, eternal conqueror models can't count as an additional model, because that's not normal.

Alright. Let's resolve this once and for all.

An Objective is controlled by the player with the most models within range (3" horizontally and 5" vertically).

If one player has any models with Objective Secured (or similar rule) with in range, they control the objective regardless of the number of models the opponent has within range of the objective.

If both players have models with Objective Secured (or similar rule) with in range of the objective, the player with the most models in range controls the objective.

Eternal Conquerors has each model with Objective Secured count as two models whenever you compare the number of models within range of an objective to determine control.

Any questions?

Ok so this actually has me reading the rules for eternal conqueror and now I have a related question.

If a rule causes a unit of necron warriors to lose the obsec such as a psychomancer harbinger of despair ability, does eternal conquerors give the necron warriors the obsec ability back? Since that rule reads units without obsec have obsec. So the warriors don't count as double anymore but they would still have obsec.

Not sure how the rule layering works in a situation like this.

 Punisher wrote:
Ok so this actually has me reading the rules for eternal conqueror and now I have a related question.

If a rule causes a unit of necron warriors to lose the obsec such as a psychomancer harbinger of despair ability, does eternal conquerors give the necron warriors the obsec ability back? Since that rule reads units without obsec have obsec. So the warriors don't count as double anymore but they would still have obsec.

Not sure how the rule layering works in a situation like this.

Eternal Conquerors makes them count as 2 models for the purposes of controlling an objective, if they already have ObSec. So, in the case of warriors, they would not have the ObSec ability anymore, thus they would also not count as two models either.

Is my read of it anyway.

 Kcalehc wrote:

 Punisher wrote:
Ok so this actually has me reading the rules for eternal conqueror and now I have a related question.

If a rule causes a unit of necron warriors to lose the obsec such as a psychomancer harbinger of despair ability, does eternal conquerors give the necron warriors the obsec ability back? Since that rule reads units without obsec have obsec. So the warriors don't count as double anymore but they would still have obsec.

Not sure how the rule layering works in a situation like this.

Eternal Conquerors makes them count as 2 models for the purposes of controlling an objective, if they already have ObSec. So, in the case of warriors, they would not have the ObSec ability anymore, thus they would also not count as two models either.

Is my read of it anyway.

That is how I think it should work too but it's not clear really. My own view is rooted in the "Can't trumps can" philosophy of rules parsing, so I would say that "lose trumps gain" when it comes to rules parsing, but sadly the RaW isn't really 100% clear, so you'd have to invoke TMIR every time.

 Kcalehc wrote:

Eternal Conquerors makes them count as 2 models for the purposes of controlling an objective, if they already have ObSec. So, in the case of warriors, they would not have the ObSec ability anymore, thus they would also not count as two models either.

Agreed. EC says : "If a model in such a unit already has this ability.....". They dont have obsec, because the psychomancer removed it.