PDA

View Full Version : Great Icon of Despair???



Xaskus
28-06-2008, 03:55
If a unit is within 12" of the Icon of Despair, and is within 12" of its Ld 9 general, but the general is not within 12" of the Icon, what is the effective Ld of the unit?

General's Unit [.....10 Inches.....] Unit [.....10 Inches......] BSB w/ Icon of Despair


Would it be Ld 7? (General's Ld minus 2) or Ld 9? (General's full Ld). Basically, the question is does the general's leadership apply before or after the modifications?

fubukii
28-06-2008, 04:49
They would be ld7

Loopstah
28-06-2008, 16:34
Really?

It says "their Leadership" not "for Leadership tests".
i.e. their Leadership value is lowered by 2. Not they take all Leadership tests at -2.


As they are not using "their Leadership" but the General's Leadership they get the full Ld 9 of the General as he is not affected by the standard.

decker_cky
28-06-2008, 22:17
They'd be Ld9. It's an identical situation to the Helm of Commandment (even almost identical wording). The unit's leadership is dropped by 2, but they can still use the General's leadership (which isn't modified).

However, on the other hand, Doom and Darkness affects the leadership used to test, which would mean they use a modification on the general's leadership.

Fulgrim's-Chosen
28-06-2008, 22:19
I disagree. I think if you ruled it like that, you would be decreasing the effectiveness of the 75-pt Battle Standard by a fairly sizeable degree.

I don't think, just because the General is out of range of the Icon, that troopers using his Leadership value instead of their own are immune to the effects of the Icon, if they THEMSELVES ARE within range of it.


The fairest way to play it, and the way I've seen it played so far, is take the enhanced Leadership of the General....which is still helping out the Icon-affected unit, no question......then modify that value by -2.


So a Leadership-7 unit of Ogres would NORMALLY be testing on Ldrship-5, if they were in range of the Icon and no General was present.


WITH their Leadership-9 Tyrant in range of them (but he, himself, still out of range of the Icon of Despair), they take that enhanced value (9), but still reduce it because they are, themselves, in range of the supernatural effects of the Icon of Despair, and drop down to Leadership-7 (their original base value).


This STILL results in an, effective, +2 bonus for the Ogres, as they get to test on basic Ld-7, instead of totally reduce Ld-5, just because their General is in range and helping them out.

BUT...the Icon of Despair still has SOME effect as well.


This is the fairest way for both armies, as well as the most logical way, that I have seen it resolved.


* trying to argue that it shouldn't work like this is, effectively, arguing that the Icon of Despair is 100% USELESS as long as the enemy player keeps his General far enough back that his command radius touches his army's units, but he, himself, is not touched by the Icon of Despair's radius of effect (12-inches). That's a bit ridiculous, IMHO. Do it the way that is fairest to both sides. *

theunwantedbeing
28-06-2008, 22:47
If you are in range of the banner and your general, the general's leadership is used, and unless the general is also within range of the banner, then the general's leadership will not be modified.

Unlike doom and darkness which is a blanket -3 penalty to leadership based tests, the greater icon lowers the leadership of unit's nearby.

Fulgrim's-Chosen
28-06-2008, 22:50
Exactly....but the unit, effectively, has it's Leadership value replaced (for the duration of the test they are taking) with the Leadership value of the General. So it "becomes" Ld-9, by virtue of the General being in range. Then you modify that by -2, because of the Icon's effect, down to Ld-7.


I think ruling it otherwise dramatically weakens the Icon as the ONLY way you are going to get any actual use out of it, is if you can manage to get the GENERAL in range of it too. Failing that, the Icon is useless....and I don't think that is/was the writer's intent of the ability.

Look for this in the July Daemons-FAQ though, hopefully !

decker_cky
28-06-2008, 23:08
Funny...that's the opposite of how the Vampire FAQ addresses the Helm of Commandment. The unit is Ld7, is modified to Ld5 by the banner, then uses the General's leadership so uses Ld9. There was no modification on the General's leadership.

And come on...the banner is worth every one of it's 75 pts even with it not modifying the general's leadership. Still works just as well against flanks, or the core of the army. If just means you have to put your super powerful banner in a position of risk to get the most out of it. Considering how the banner can collapse most of an army on a terror test, and how it combines with slaanesh magic and the masque, it's still a bargain for 75 pts.

Fulgrim's-Chosen
29-06-2008, 00:32
Look, Deck, don't get me wrong...it's a great Icon ! Even though I've yet to run it in any of my armies, I can imagine it's potency and have heard about how good it can be from other's Battle Reports. BUT....I don't know if any of them have actually had it ruled the way some people are interpreting it to work or not.

I'd be very curious to ask Neg Money back home on D-Legion how it was ruled in the Baltimore R.T.T.-GT he won, as I think he ran pure Slaanesh with that Icon. :eyebrows:

----------

I think the problem with it working as you and a few others are suggesting is that, like you noted, the ONLY way you could get use out of it is either running it (on a T-3 Herald, remember) down one flank, (hopefully) far away from the enemy General and main body of the Army to (maybe) scare away a small flank unit, Light Cavalry, etc. on Turn-1 or 2 (2, more likely).


The problem with taking it into range for it to do anything truly helpful in the battle, like, oh I don't know, ACTUALLY reducing the Leadership of the enemy army ;) :p , would be to get so close to the enemy's key units/central force that you have his General within range of your Herald/Icon....12-inches....which means close enough to get counter-charged by anything he's got (in most cases).


If this is the way you would have to use the Icon to get any benefit out of it, I think it's questionable how useful it can be, since Heralds of Slaanesh are the frailest out there (well, okay, Tzeentch is probably a bit worse, but they can Fly and are not likely to be engaged in combat nearly as much as Heralds of Slaanesh will be), and they would have to be so close to the enemy that they will get smashed the very next enemy turn, if the Icon is resolved (relative to the enemy Generals) the way some are suggesting.

decker_cky
29-06-2008, 01:12
If you want resilience....put it on a nurgle BSB in a unit of plaguebearers and march him up the middle. There's nothing Slaanesh only about the banner....they just happen to have a dozen other options that build on the leadership punishment it causes.

Loopstah
29-06-2008, 10:26
Just think if you get the banner within 12" of the enemy general though.

All units within 12" of the banner would be using the Generals Ld at -2.
All units outside the banners 12" reach would have to use their own Ld as the Generals would be less/ the same as theirs.

You could effectively limit most armies to a 7/8 Ld max and combined with other Ld reducing effects it would be quite deadly.

Fulgrim's-Chosen
30-06-2008, 04:29
Right....hmm...I still think it seems kind of half and half in terms of people even on this thread going one way or the other in interpretation.

It seems "fairer" to take the General's Leadership...if applicable, then modify it by -2 if the unit in question is in range of both General AND Icon, but the Icon is not in range of the General, himself.

That way BOTH sides of the issue (Daemons and their Foe) are getting SOME benefit - - - the Foe is getting a (85% of the time) better (even modified) Leadership value using the General -2, then he would have using the basic troopers -2, AND the Daemon is still getting some utility out of his 75-pt Battle Standard.


In my view, it seems the fairest way to resolve it - and, like I said, seems to be the way other people are seeing it (some) - while some are resolving it Decker's method/suggestion.

I just innately dislike the "feel" of the Decker-method as it essentially neuters the Icon unless you manage to get within range of the enemy General....as long as the enemy can keep that General backk, just barely, out of range from that Icon, he can continue to toss out his (in some cases MUCH) higher Leadership values to his army's units. This seems like such an easy way around the Icon's effects, as to be ...."too easy".

Like I said...I hope this is a FAQ question....I'd be curious how GW would rule on it (and honestly, with their answers in several FAQ's of late, can you have any REAL clue HOW they will rule on anything, anymore ? ;) :p).

EvilMinion
01-07-2008, 02:45
I would call direct services ... it seems they really screwed up on the most powerful army out there!!

Loopstah
01-07-2008, 10:07
It seems "fairer" to take the General's Leadership...if applicable, then modify it by -2 if the unit in question is in range of both General AND Icon, but the Icon is not in range of the General, himself.

That way BOTH sides of the issue (Daemons and their Foe) are getting SOME benefit - - - the Foe is getting a (85% of the time) better (even modified) Leadership value using the General -2, then he would have using the basic troopers -2, AND the Daemon is still getting some utility out of his 75-pt Battle Standard.

You can't say it's fair when you cheat because you don't like the rules for something and want to make it better.

The rules are crystal clear that the penalty only applies to the leadership value of the units in range. Not to their leadership tests.

Daemons are powerful enough without altering the rules to make them better.

Fulgrim's-Chosen
01-07-2008, 18:48
I think it's semantics though, Loopstah.

GW failed to account for people arguing that "well it's only a Leadership VALUE..that's modified..." - not a Leadership TEST...haha ! See !

;)

I think the INTENT (RAI) is for whatever is testing, no matter whose Leadership value they are USING...to have that value/number/etc. reduced by -2 if they are within range of the Icon.


I hope to see this FAQd/errated to make it clearer though, one way or another. Everyone I've seen playing with (or against) this so far have interpreted it that you give the boost from the General, if applicable, then modify that new Leadership stat by -2, before taking the test.

logan054
01-07-2008, 20:05
Exactly....but the unit, effectively, has it's Leadership value replaced (for the duration of the test they are taking) with the Leadership value of the General. So it "becomes" Ld-9, by virtue of the General being in range. Then you modify that by -2, because of the Icon's effect, down to Ld-7.

This would be the correct interpretation, you guys need to stop looking for so many silly loopholes, it just isnt cool.

Loopstah
01-07-2008, 20:44
This would be the correct interpretation, you guys need to stop looking for so many silly loopholes, it just isnt cool.

Ah, you never told us you were Mat Ward. Thanks for clearing that up.

blurred
01-07-2008, 20:59
There is no room for interpretation here IMO: the unit can use the general's unmodified leadership value.

And believe me, the banner is still worth every single one of its 75 points.

logan054
01-07-2008, 21:00
please this comes down to "how can i ignore this rule" thats all this is, as per usual people pick apart whatever they can just to get a edge, just the same as the silly saves for bloodthirsters question or the debate on daemonic standards.


There is no room for interpretation here IMO: the unit can use the general's unmodified leadership value.

And believe me, the banner is still worth every single one of its 75 points.

so then along that line of thinking i take it when a unit loses combat by 3 i still use the generals unmodified leadership? pretty much the same thing.

OldMaster
01-07-2008, 21:28
But, do I understand it correctly then that a general targeted by Doom and Darkness still radiates his full Ld at other units?
That's just silly.

Loopstah
01-07-2008, 21:40
But, do I understand it correctly then that a general targeted by Doom and Darkness still radiates his full Ld at other units?
That's just silly.

HAHA! Yes, actually by RAW he does.

Doom & Darkness does not lower the Generals Leadership, merely sets a penalty on all tests he himself takes.

Units within 12" would use his unmodified Leadership.

theunwantedbeing
01-07-2008, 22:53
Makes things more interesting, thats all.
Not that silly at all really....the general is still around, he may look a bit glum but he's still the general.

Simialrly, the banner....yes big spooky banner, but the general is nearby looking heroic so the big spooky banner isnt so spooky.

Just like how when you charge a terror causing enemy and you really dont feel like it, but you glance over and see the general and your (perfectly plasauble fear) is ignored and you charge the big scary dragon and get brutally murdered by it.

Doesnt seem so silly now does it?

Lord Aries
02-07-2008, 01:03
I would rule that the unit uses general's LD -2. I'm not going to get into it, there is not a ruling on the matter officially, and until there is... this is a rules question you and your opponent will HAVE to dice off on if you see it each way. That is the RAW. You see it one way, the opponent sees it the other... there is no official ruling, as of yet.


HOWEVER- one thing you cannot do, is try and argue for rulings based on OTHER rulings. Just because most legal systems are based on the idea of precedence, as well as the rulings for certain games like Magic the Gathering, does not mean it applies to every game. The only precedence in GW is that they are going to rule some things one way, and for no reason rule the other way on others. They NEVER use past ruling precedence at tournaments, it either got an official ruling, or it doesn't. At tournaments, if something comes up... and there is no ruling... they usually rule in the way that keeps the game going and doesn't rain on anyone's parade.



Those are at least my opinions based on my experience. I'm a veteran of some of the biggest tournaments in the US, as well as running hundreds of large tournaments.

decker_cky
02-07-2008, 05:48
Actually....wouldn't Doom and Darkness still affect units using the general's leadership because they're using the general's leadership for the test, so his leadership test would be at -3? Don't have the exact wordings here, but when I looked at this earlier, that's what I quickly thought at a glance.

Lord Aries....even by RAW there isn't really a case for the banner modifying the general's leadership. The entire wording is that units use the general's leadership. There isn't wording about replacing leadership at all.

Loopstah
02-07-2008, 08:43
Actually....wouldn't Doom and Darkness still affect units using the general's leadership because they're using the general's leadership for the test, so his leadership test would be at -3? Don't have the exact wordings here, but when I looked at this earlier, that's what I quickly thought at a glance.

No because the penalty only applies to the unit hit by the spell. You don't test with the General, just use his Leadership value for the units test.

The question is does the Generals Leadership Value replace the Units Leadership Value if they are within 12" or do they just use his value while retaining their own?

DeathlessDraich
02-07-2008, 11:28
But, do I understand it correctly then that a general targeted by Doom and Darkness still radiates his full Ld at other units?
That's just silly.

Seems consistent with the rules.


Actually....wouldn't Doom and Darkness still affect units using the general's leadership because they're using the general's leadership for the test, so his leadership test would be at -3? Don't have the exact wordings here, but when I looked at this earlier, that's what I quickly thought at a glance.


D&D is cast on a unit:

1) Cast on a unit and the general is 10" away:
The general's Ld must be used as usual (pg 82) and this suffers a -3 penalty for any Ld test.

2) Cast on the general's unit or the general alone:
Again *only* the unit the spell is cast on, is affected.
i.e. the general's unit suffers a -3 Ld penalty. or the general suffers a -3Ld penalty.
His *Ld value* is still the same and this value is unmodified when it is passed on (*must be passed and used*) to friendly units within 12".

Loopstah
02-07-2008, 11:37
Doom & Darkness is the main support for the "they use the full Leadership of the General" because it specifies it is a penalty to Leadership Tests rather than to the Leadership Characteristic.

If GW just used the same wording on all things that effect Leadership there wouldn't be a problem but the fact that there is clearly something that only effects tests (and not the characteristic) and things that appear to only effect the characteristic.

A big question though is if a unit is within 12" of the General is their Leadership Value replaced with his or do they keep their value but must roll using his?

If it is replaced, then the penalty would apply as their leadership is now the same as the generals, if they keep theirs and just use his, then the penalty wouldn't apply as it only affects "their" leadership.

DeathlessDraich
02-07-2008, 11:49
Not sure of your question considering we seem to agree on how D&D works?

The general's Ld *must* always be used if he is within range - pg 108.

The unit's Ld value = General's Ld if he is within range and he would have been within range through several phases before D&D.

Maybe your question is:
What happens if the general was within range when the spell was cast and out of when the LD test is taken?

Still no problem here because the Ld value = unit's Ld when the general is out of range for the Ld test.

Loopstah
02-07-2008, 12:04
Not sure of your question considering we seem to agree on how D&D works?

The general's Ld *must* always be used if he is within range - pg 108.


I'm talking more in regards to the Icon and similar items that affect a units Leadership, than Doom and Darkness.

When a unit is within 12" of the General, if their Leadership value is replaced by the Generals Leadership value then the Icon would provide a -2 penalty to the unit, even if they use the Generals Leadership, as it has replaced theirs so suffers the effect. I.e Their Leadership value becomes the Generals.

If the unit keeps their Leadership Value but just doesn't use it, and instead rolls against the Generals value, then the Icon and other similar effects can not effect them, as the Generals Leadership does not get modified. I.e Their Leadership value is modified but isn't used.

decker_cky
02-07-2008, 16:30
The general's Ld *must* always be used if he is within range - pg 108.

Keep reading the sentence you took that quote from.... ;)

I've just read doom and darkness and agree. It only affects the unit targeted, so the general would pass on his full leadership.

On the other hand, a unit affected by the icon of despair but within the range of the general (who is not within 12" of the icon) can still use the general's unmodified leadership.

But if the general is within 12" of the icon, his leadership is actually lower so any unit wanting to use his leadership is using the modified leadership.

OldMaster
02-07-2008, 18:44
So, the General would actually be the most cowardly guy on the battle field in such a situation..?
Hey, it is possible... but that sure is a way to bypass the Slaaneshi Ld decreasing madness : D

DeathlessDraich
02-07-2008, 19:59
Keep reading the sentence you took that quote from.... ;)

:p Obviously you haven't read the page because I typed in the wrong page - meant to be pg82.:D



On the other hand, a unit affected by the icon of despair but within the range of the general (who is not within 12" of the icon) can still use the general's unmodified leadership.

But if the general is within 12" of the icon, his leadership is actually lower so any unit wanting to use his leadership is using the modified leadership.

Several permutations here, dealt with below.


I'm talking more in regards to the Icon and similar items that affect a units Leadership, than Doom and Darkness.

When a unit is within 12" of the General, if their Leadership value is replaced by the Generals Leadership value then the Icon would provide a -2 penalty to the unit, even if they use the Generals Leadership, as it has replaced theirs so suffers the effect. I.e Their Leadership value becomes the Generals.

If the unit keeps their Leadership Value but just doesn't use it, and instead rolls against the Generals value, then the Icon and other similar effects can not effect them, as the Generals Leadership does not get modified. I.e Their Leadership value is modified but isn't used.

Understood but there are several situations here:

1) D&D cast on a characterless unit < 12" from the Icon. General >12" from the unit AND >12" from the Icon

Easiest scenario. Unit's Ld is used and is reduced by the Icon AND by D&D.


2) D&D cast on a characterless unit < 12" from the Icon. General is < 12" from the unit AND <12" from the Icon

Unit uses the General's Ld which is reduced by the Icon. D&D further reduces this Ld value for the unit.


3) D&D cast on a characterless unit <12" from the Icon. General is <12" from the unit AND >12" from the Icon

Unit uses the general's Ld which is unmodified nullifying the Icon effectively. D&D reduces the 'passed-on' Ld.


4) D&D cast on a unit which has a character. The unit is < 12" from the Icon. General is < 12" from the unit AND <12" from the Icon.

a) Same effect as (2) if the character is <12" from the icon except the General's 'passed-on Ld is reduced by the Icon.

b) However if the character is >12" from the Icon which is possible, then some players might argue that the character's Ld valued is not affected by the Icon.
[Pg 48 etc does not clearly state that a variable Ld unit has a *unit Ld* of the model with the highest Ld value - it states the highest is *used*.]

I doubt whether any player would adopt this interpretation - consider the warmachine, chariot etc. It has to be assumed that a *unit's Ld* = model with highest Ld.

Net result = same as (a) above.


5) D&D cast on the general's unit . The unit is < 12" from the Icon. General is > 12" from the Icon.

Same as 4 (b) above.

Belerophon709
03-07-2008, 15:15
This situation is somewhat like the discussion that went on regarding the old Daemonette Aura, where models in BtB with the Daemonettes had their Ld reduced by 1.

If the general was within 12" and he himself was not under the influence of the aura, the unit in BtB with the Daemonettes did indeed take any Ld-tests on the general's unmodified Ld.

If however, the general himself was in BtB with the daemonettes, the Ld he would be able to pass on to units within 12" of him would be his own Ld-1.

That was the conclusion back then and it's the conclusion this time around as the exact same mechanics are at play.

The answer was simply found in the BRB on page 82, which reads:
"All friendly units within 12" of the General model always use the General's Leadership value instead of their own when making any Leadership-based test (unless their own Leadership is higher, of course)."

It says that they use his "value instead of their own". Imagine the following:

Unit with Ld7 is withing 12" of the Despair Icon. They now have a Leadership value of 5.
General (with Ld 9) is within 12" of the above unit, but more than 12" away from the Despair Icon. He has a Leadership value of 9.
The unit now uses the General's Leadership value of 9 instead of their own (5). The keys here are the terms "value" and "instead of". The first indicates that they use his value and not merely his basic Ld. This means that if the general was indeed within 12" of the Despair Icon, his Ld-value would be 7, while his Ld would still be set at 9.
The next key is the "instead of" bit. They use his value instead of their own. It is important to note that this is completely different from saying "They use his value as their own." If this was the case, they would indeed use his value of 9 as their own and since it was then their own, it would be modified by the banner. This is not the case, however. As it stands they use his value instead of their own, meaning that their own Ld-value (which is the one suffering from the Despair Icon-penalty) is completely irrelevant. They would test on the General's unmodified Ld-value of 9.

So once again, logan054 is dead wrong.

Lord Aries
03-07-2008, 15:47
I still don't think that anyone has an answer that is solid. Its a case of a question without a solid answer, then you revert to the first rule- Roll off to see which way it should work.

Belerophon709
03-07-2008, 17:46
I still don't think that anyone has an answer that is solid. Its a case of a question without a solid answer, then you revert to the first rule- Roll off to see which way it should work.

The answer is terribly simple and very solid - by reading the rules word for word and not paraphrasing as you go along, my above example, shows exactly how it's done, conforming with every single rule on the subject.

There is no other way to play it, unless you are playing by assumptions or "wishful thinking concerning how things 'should' or 'should not' be". You are free to do as you wish with your own game, but when it comes to the rules, this is how they read. Any arguments to the contrary are the results of either a) ignoring one or more rules or b) not being able to fathom the differences of wording as explained in my previous post or c) not having a grasp of the rules and feeling (falsely) confident enough so as to not read the relevant sections of the rulebook(s) or d) a+b+c (or any combination thereof).

Lord Aries
03-07-2008, 18:01
I think you are guilty of doing each of those things on your list.

I fully understand the rules, and how to read... and this is an issue with unresolved conflicts within the wording. You are using incorrect logic in your interpretation of the rules. You are using arguments based on a different structure than what is being interpreted.

If you and I were to play, and you read it one way and I read it another we have one option... roll off and wait for a FAQ to answer it.

Belerophon709
03-07-2008, 18:40
You can't even read my post it seems. I'm basing the arguments on the rules, with basis in a situation that has been around for ages that uses the exact same mechanics. There is no interpretation in my post. There is a walk-through of the rules and the meaning of the w-o-r-d-s contained therein.

All explained in my post. Read carefully.

Dice-rolling is a bad solution, unless rules are conflicting. This is not the case here. Otherwise, I could claim that ASF actually meant ASL and force a roll just by being stubborn. Not a good idea.

Sarcasm intended.

Nothing more to say here. I'm leaving this discussion now. Further attempts at rebuttal: See my previous posts for a full rebuttal of your arguments.

Andrew Luke
03-07-2008, 18:41
Using your method Lord Aries, if you and I were to play, you'd have to be rolling 4+ to do pretty much anything whenever I felt like it. These rules are very clear, the banner of *********** is already OP, is it still not strong enough for you to win that you have to feign ignorance and force a roll off? ;) Props to Belepheron for yet another clear and articulate rules clarification.

Devon Harmon
04-07-2008, 05:06
Like Lord Aries, I do not feel that the answer to this issue is "terribly simple and very solid." It is all semantics that can be used to arrive at either conclusion. In such cases it is prefectly rational to follow "The Most Important Rule!" and dice for it. It isn't a matter of feigning ignorance.

However, now that the cat is out of the bag, I feel the preferred course of action would be to discuss the interaction of the item and the general with your opponent before the match. It makes more sense to raise and discuss such an issue before the game starts, as opinions will only become more heated when the matter first arises in the heat of battle.

Belerophon709
04-07-2008, 10:31
However, now that the cat is out of the bag, I feel the preferred course of action would be to discuss the interaction of the item and the general with your opponent before the match. It makes more sense to raise and discuss such an issue before the game starts, as opinions will only become more heated when the matter first arises in the heat of battle.

I completely agree, although the die-roll is still a bad idea.

If read word for word, the rules concerning using the Ld of the general are crystal clear and are only open to discussion if someone misreads (intentionally or not) that particular part of the rulebook.

T10
04-07-2008, 11:09
Since the Great Icon of Despair affects the leadership value of the unit the Daemon player will be wise to attempt to bring the enemy general within range. This will usually be sufficient to rob the "core" of the enemy army of the improved Leadership in addition to apply the "full effect" of the icon on nearby enemy units.

-T10

EvC
04-07-2008, 11:15
Just remember everyone, the rules arguments you make affect the tone of the games you play. If you insist that units affected by the Great Icon of Despair can still use the general's full leadership, then don't be surprised when your Daemon opponent's next army contains a Bloodthirster wearing two suits of armour for a ridiculously high save...

Loopstah
04-07-2008, 11:21
Just remember everyone, the rules arguments you make affect the tone of the games you play. If you insist that units affected by the Great Icon of Despair can still use the general's full leadership, then don't be surprised when your Daemon opponent's next army contains a Bloodthirster wearing two suits of armour for a ridiculously high save...

The difference being one is following the rules, and the other is using the fact there are no rules to do what they want.

EvC
04-07-2008, 11:53
Be careful of high horse syndrome there. I'm sure the Daemon players feel it's precisely the other way around ;)

Belerophon709
04-07-2008, 12:40
feel

That word has no bearing whatsoever in a rules discussion. ;)

DeathlessDraich
04-07-2008, 14:33
Just remember everyone, the rules arguments you make affect the tone of the games you play.

It won't affect the tone of any of my games actually as the explanations I offer here is very different from how I approach rules' problems in real gaming which is nearly always -"Okay we'll play it your way":D as soon as my opponent insist that his interpretation is right.

How would you respond to such an opponent?

Furthermore I would love to play against a Bloodthirster.

EvC
04-07-2008, 14:56
I let my opponents set the tone, if they're going to check every word and phrasing for nuances that benefit them and refer me to page 46, sub-section F which clearly states that the word test and statistic should be treated differently (Or similarly, on alternating Thursdays and depending on what army they're fielding), then they can expect me to do the same (Until I get bored: very importantly!). If they play fast and simply, then as long as they're not abusing the rules, everything will go smoothly ;)

decker_cky
04-07-2008, 15:56
Just remember everyone, the rules arguments you make affect the tone of the games you play. If you insist that units affected by the Great Icon of Despair can still use the general's full leadership, then don't be surprised when your Daemon opponent's next army contains a Bloodthirster wearing two suits of armour for a ridiculously high save...

Funny....how upon analysis there's a clear difference between doom and darkness and the icon of despair, meaning there's situations where the icon doesn't have a real effect on a unit within 12" (and it's not even a rules laywery interpretation), but because the daemon player wants the item to be gamebreaking, they should drop down to rules lawyer mode and try to make the game as unpleasant as possible?

Anyways, in rules lawyery, the side claiming the daemoninc armours don't combine have a stronger argument than those claiming they do.

theunwantedbeing
04-07-2008, 16:06
I wonder if people would argue that doom and darkness makes it easier for a banshee scream to have more of an effect.

Look at the +1 toughness -1 ws3 armour for VC's. What weaponskill does he get when a Nearby vamp lord gives him ws7?
Ws4?...nope, ws7.

The greater icon of despair/general leadership works in the exact same way (although on leadership not weaponskill).
So you get the general's unmodified leadership, not his leadership with a -2 penalty on it.

Sure it means the banner isnt quite as rediculously uber as you first hoped...so?
Put it in range of the general and his leadership is now at -2, so he can only pass a maximum of ld8 around.

EvC
04-07-2008, 16:27
Funny....how upon analysis there's a clear difference between doom and darkness and the icon of despair, meaning there's situations where the icon doesn't have a real effect on a unit within 12" (and it's not even a rules laywery interpretation), but because the daemon player wants the item to be gamebreaking, they should drop down to rules lawyer mode and try to make the game as unpleasant as possible?

You seem to be having trouble distingishing cause and effect. I'm certainly not saying the Daemon player should go rule lawyer and try and combine the armours or pull out any number of the many dodgy combos available to the army- but people shouldn't be surprised that when they delve that deeply into the exact wording and semantics used on a banner that's designed to make nearby units have less leadership and conclude that the banner doesn't actually work on them (Which is probably correct from the wording), if the Daemon player doesn't delve just as deeply to come up with just as "valid" interpretations (Like armours stacking, combos to destroy units in one go, etc)...

decker_cky
04-07-2008, 17:22
stuff

Fair enough. Most people I've played with will concede the point if you've got references that are pretty clear in the rules.


I wonder if people would argue that doom and darkness makes it easier for a banshee scream to have more of an effect.

Look at the +1 toughness -1 ws3 armour for VC's. What weaponskill does he [get when a Nearby vamp lord gives him ws7?
Ws4?...nope, ws7.

The greater icon of despair/general leadership works in the exact same way (although on leadership not weaponskill).
So you get the general's unmodified leadership, not his leadership with a -2 penalty on it.

Sure it means the banner isnt quite as rediculously uber as you first hoped...so?
Put it in range of the general and his leadership is now at -2, so he can only pass a maximum of ld8 around.

I agree completely, since the Helm of Commandment is an identical situation. Here's the texts of the Helm and of general's leadership:


Here's the Helm of Commandment:
"If the wearer is not in combat, one friendly Undead unit within 12" (not mounts may use his Weapon Skill instead of their own for that Close Combat phase."

Here's the General's Leadership:
"All friendly units within 12" of the General model always use the General's Leadership value instead of their own when making any Leadership based test..."

Almost identical wording. You use another's stat instead of your own for a situation.

Then here's the VC FAQ on the subject that makes it crystal clear:


Q. If a Vampire Lord is wearing the Helm of
Commandment and the Accursed Armour (-3
to WS) what Weapon Skill does he pass onto a
friendly unit? WS7 or WS4?
A. He passes his WS of 4 to the unit.

Q. If a Vampire Lord is wearing the Helm of
Commandment and passes his Weapon Skill
on to a friendly unit containing a Vampire
Thrall with the Accursed Armour (-3 to WS),
what Weapon Skill will the Thrall fight with?
WS7 or WS4?
A. He will use the Lord’s WS of 7.

Q. If a friendly Undead unit is targeted by an
enemy spell or ability which modifies the
Weapon Skill of the unit (e.g. ‘Blinding Light’
from the Lore of Light) and a Vampire Lord
wearing the Helm of Commandment wishes to
pass his Weapon Skill onto the unit, which
takes precedence? Is the unit's Weapons Skill
considered to be 7 and then modified per the
spell or ability, or will they use the Vampire
Lord's Weapon Skill in such an instance?
A. They will use the Lord’s WS of 7. We
recommend casting the spell on the Lord
instead!

I know this has all been mentioned, but it's nice to see all the relevant text together in one spot.

Lord Inquisitor
04-07-2008, 17:33
Just to confuse things:

The old VC Lahmians. Wasn't it the case that they gave a unit in contact -1 Ld, and the idea was that you work out whatever Ld they use (characters, generals, etc) and then took -1 from that?

decker_cky
04-07-2008, 17:37
From the Lahmian bloodline: "All units in base contact with one or more Lahmia Vampires suffers a -1 to their Leadership. Work out which Ld value the model would use (its own, the General's, etc) and reduce that number by 1."

There's extra instructions for it affecting the general's leadership. Not to mention that they might have worded the general's leadership information differently in the 6th edition rulebook.

So that doesn't really confuse things at all. :)

Fulgrim's-Chosen
04-07-2008, 19:05
They should have (GW) included that excellent, additional, Lahmian clarification for Great Icon of Despair, perhaps....it might have made it a bit more clear. GW often seems to PRESUME that players will play something a certain way, then seem "shocked" when players have doubts and it shows up in a FAQ.

GW will respond sometimes with "It should be done this way, of course. Or, "naturally, it should be...." - etc. - as if the answer was obvious all along and we are being foolish for even asking it or finding it confusing :rolleyes:.


BTW - I'm inclined to agree, after some thought, "functionally" with Decker and the others if you go purely from the wording on the Icon and the whole General-leadership thing in the BRB....all I'm saying is from a RAI (as opposed to RAW) point-of-view, I think GW wanted it to affect whatever the finalized Leadership value is (General's applied first, etc.), with a -2 penalty.

Ideally they will address this in the FAQ, due out in a week or two, IIRC.

Loopstah
04-07-2008, 21:35
Ideally they will address this in the FAQ, due out in a week or two, IIRC.

Probably not, they'll probably be too busy answering questions such as "Is a Juggernaut a cavalry mount?" "Can I pick Lore of Tzeentch as my Lore from the BRB for Master of Sorcery?" and "Can my Bloodthirster wear 3 suits of armour?"

decker_cky
04-07-2008, 22:15
You forgot "Can I take more than 1 of the same Daemonic Icon?", "Is Skulltaker really only MV4?", "Can Epidemus, The Masque, Skulltaker and the Blue Scribes join units of other gods?" and "Are the Blue Scribes able to join units at all?"

Actually...I find it pretty funny that the FAQs are now apparently someone's full-time job.