PDA

View Full Version : Does a Deamon have to fight ?



blindingdark
18-12-2008, 14:48
hi

I was just reading the Warriors of chaos book and noticed that the Eye of the gods special rule, is what forces a chaos character to challenge. I was under the impression this was an army wide rule, however it is only mentioned under the EOTG's rule, and no where else.

so...My question is this.

A deamon prince does not have EOTG's. does this mean he does not have to challenge, as it seems that way, even though it states 'Chaos models must issue a challenge when able to do so'. That statement seems pretty clear that it is everyone, not just those with the rule.

can anyone clear this up for me ?

thanks

shartmatau
18-12-2008, 15:11
Only models with the Eye of the Gods rule use the Eye of the Gods rule. It is an armywide rule because several units use it, but only units with that rule listed in their unit description actually use it.

So no DPs do not have to challenge, and they do not get to roll on the eye of the gods table if they do challenge and kill something.

nosferatu1001
18-12-2008, 15:18
Add agreement to that - "all chaos models" refers to "all chaos models that this rule applies to" - as it is under a specific rule. As the rule is not preceded with "all WoC units have the following rule" (cf to Daemons which does specify this) then it only applies to those units specifically mentioned as having the rule.

Djekar
19-12-2008, 05:36
I wish this would get FAQ'd (along with about 800 other things from the WoC book), because around here we play that he does. We read "all chaos models" to mean all chaos models. Is the DPrince a chaos model? Can he challenge? Get to it then you squishy git.
Not that I don't see the merit of what you are saying, just pointing out the vague-icity of the rule. Like so many other things in the list, you'll have to talk to your local players to get a consistant ruling until the FAQ comes out.

~Boots

Neckutter
19-12-2008, 07:06
i agree with dj, the WoC book is horribly written.
but yeah, a DP isnt a daemon, and doesnt have to challenge. plus he is a horrible fighter. pretty silly.
that said, for fluff reasons a DP is done "advancing" with gifts. he already has his gifts(through his points allowence) and has ascended to the plane of the gods.

Djekar
19-12-2008, 07:59
I'm gonna start worshiping new gods if these ones only reward my undying devotion and willingness to graft freaking armor onto my skin with a pat on the head, an admonition not to be to forceful while directing the legions under my control and break all my shiny metal toys and replace them with lackluster McDonald's happy meal toys referred to as "Gifts of the Gods"
Seriously, Sigmar is looking better and better nowadays....

~Transvestite

logan054
19-12-2008, 17:04
personally i woudl say it has to challenge (and it does need a faq), the thing to bear in mind is that what it says for the eye of the gods rule is

1) all model that can challenge must
2) and character with the eye of the gods rull that kills a charcater in a challenge or a large target get to roll on the chart.

The way i read this is that the rule tell me that rolling on the eye of the gods table is a result of the having the eye of the gods rule, challenge isnt. If you need the eye of the gods was required for the forced challenge rule then either 1) would mention it was a condition or 2) wouldnt mention eotg rule as a condition. The will of chaos also mentions that you require the text for the rule to apply..

Neckutter
19-12-2008, 18:28
DP's dont have EotG rule, so why should anything uner that entry affect them?

i agree its worded badly, but if you dont have the rule, then you dont have to follow it.

logan054
19-12-2008, 18:39
i think i just said why :p

blindingdark
22-12-2008, 13:54
personally i would say it has to challenge (and it does need a faq), the thing to bear in mind is that what it says for the eye of the gods rule is

1) all model that can challenge must
2) and character with the eye of the gods rull that kills a charcater in a challenge or a large target get to roll on the chart.

But...As you have pointed out, it is stated under the EOTG's rule, not the army wide rules. hence the question. :confused:

nosferatu1001
22-12-2008, 14:04
Procedure: Check for army wide rules

None listed - cf to Daemon book which states "all daemons are subject to" [not exact quote] - therefore only unnit Special rules apply

Procedure: Check for unit special rules

Result 1 - EOTG listed. Read EotG, apply rule. Must challenge if character and able.
Result 2 - don't read EotG, as nothing within that rule applies to you. No special requirements to challenge, not challenge etc, but no benefits for doing so.

Kind of simple - it is irrelevant what the rule says within it if you are not told that rule applies to you. The reference to "all chaos characters" in this case is exactly the same as "all chaos characters with this rule....." as only characters with the rule are told to read the rule. As it is not an army wide rule, just a rule that many units have, it does not apply to every unit, just those that are listed.

result is that a DP does NOT have to challenge.

/head explodes from too many "rules" ;)

Lord Khabal
22-12-2008, 14:08
agreed. DP do not have to challenge. And I do agree that the WOC book is terribly written.

blindingdark
22-12-2008, 15:37
so... I am assuming that this is the case for any character without the EOTG's special rule, not just daemon prince's.

thanks for clearing it up for me

cheers

nosferatu1001
22-12-2008, 16:33
Same procedure would apply - if the rule isnt listed by your profile, adn it isn't army wide, then it doesnt apply.

Djekar
23-12-2008, 04:36
So what you're saying is that when we read the EotG rule (because I don't think anyone is advocating taking a single DP as all the characters in an 2000+ army) and the entry says that every model in the chaos army that can challenge must do so, I'm supposed to ignore the words "every model" and instead read it as if it said "models with this special rule"? While you may be correct, that doesn't sit well with me.

~Gosling

Neckutter
23-12-2008, 04:40
its supposed to be read every chaos model "with this rule"
it makes sense when you read the entry under shrines, where is mentions chaos unit champions being affected by EotG

Djekar
23-12-2008, 04:46
As I said, while you may be correct (and I'm not trying to say that you're not, I in fact would prefer it this way), the idea of changing the wording in the AB without an official FAQ is unsettling to me, that's all.

~Handmaiden

Neckutter
23-12-2008, 04:49
join the club. i hate the way the book is worded. i hate the whole feel of the book. it feels rushed and incomplete. it also seems like the people who playtested it never played hordes of chaos before, either.

and you never know, they have FAQ'd in the past and went totally against RAW. so who knows.

Djekar
23-12-2008, 04:52
Word. I want to be VP of the club, what do you say?

~Forensics

Ward.
23-12-2008, 05:18
So what you're saying is that when we read the EotG rule (because I don't think anyone is advocating taking a single DP as all the characters in an 2000+ army) and the entry says that every model in the chaos army that can challenge must do so, I'm supposed to ignore the words "every model" and instead read it as if it said "models with this special rule"? While you may be correct, that doesn't sit well with me.

~Gosling

No, you're not supposed to start following the rule if unit/ chracter in question doesn't have it.

Necromancy Black
23-12-2008, 05:26
So what you're saying is that when we read the EotG rule (because I don't think anyone is advocating taking a single DP as all the characters in an 2000+ army) and the entry says that every model in the chaos army that can challenge must do so, I'm supposed to ignore the words "every model" and instead read it as if it said "models with this special rule"? While you may be correct, that doesn't sit well with me.

~Gosling

No, your not supose to add any words. The rules for challanging come under the Eye of the Gods. Why should any model have to obey this when they don't have the actual rule?

The wording is just so god damn poor it's easily read as applying to anything that doesn't have the actual rule.

Djekar
23-12-2008, 05:59
I just hope that you also allow the Hellcannon to move and fire, since this is awfully close to saying "since the Hellcannon doesn't have the 'Warmachine' rule it can move and fire no problem". Not saying that either interpretation is wrong, I am just hoping that you are being consistent.

~Birch

Necromancy Black
23-12-2008, 07:08
If the hell cannon isn't a war machine then it can happily move and fire. It already charges which war machine can not do.

I have no idea if a hell cannon is not a warmachine like you said, but if it isn't then why should it have to follow the warmachine rules?

Neckutter
23-12-2008, 07:42
i dont think it can move AND fire, since it would be amazingly unbalanced. plus im pretty sure they intended "fires like a stonethrower" to mean it cant move and fire, because a stonethrower cant move and fire.

however if it can move AND fire, it would sell alot of hellcannon models. how much are hellcannons? like $60?

EDIT: i dont want to argue the hellcannon point either. im just saying my opinion.

nosferatu1001
23-12-2008, 11:09
I just hope that you also allow the Hellcannon to move and fire, since this is awfully close to saying "since the Hellcannon doesn't have the 'Warmachine' rule it can move and fire no problem". Not saying that either interpretation is wrong, I am just hoping that you are being consistent.

~Birch


If it fires as a stonethrower, why wouldn't it follow all the rules for firing a stonethrower? You're not told to limit it in any way, so really it shouldn't stand and shoot. A stone thrower fires as a warmachine, therefore no stand and shoot - a fires as b fires as c. It isn't that game breaking though, as the crew must move with it so it canonly ever move 3 inches a turn.

----Back on topic :)--------

This is also totally different to the EotG special rule - you only apply rules that apply to you. EotG is not an army wide rule so stop trying to apply it to every model on the table without being given permission to do so.

You are given permission to read AND apply the rule when the rule is listed on your profile, and at no other time.

It is therefore completely and utterly 100% irrelevant what the rule actually says - if you don't have that rule, and haven't inherited it (e.g. with Shrine) you cannot read it. It could say all chaos characters must be modelled as pink bunnies with 3 carrots held in each hand, and it still wouldnt apply to a daemon prince, as the daemon prince does not have that rule! ;)

EotG requires NO interpretation whatsoever, it just requires following what you are told to do and no more. The reason i added "with this rule" was to make it clear what the subject of the sentence was - while it may say "all" it is only "all" if the rule is army wide. At no point are you told it is army wide (unlike with Daemons - can someone please look at the difference in wording?) therefore it isn't. They just decided that, instead of defining the rule each and every time it is listed they would list it as a special rule in one place. Guess they should have known that would confuse some people :rolleyes:

Djekar
23-12-2008, 11:32
... so... since the Hellcannon (which is told to fire as a stone thrower) does not have the special rule "Warmachine" (see the elven bolt throwers), by your logic I am only supposed to read and apply the rules for Stone Throwers. No where in that section is the prohibition against moving or shooting.
I don't really want to argue the Hellcannon point, but if you're saying that the Daemon Prince doesn't have to challenge because he doesn't have the EotG rule, then at least be consistent and apply that methodology to other oddities as well (i.e. the Hellcannon).
I didn't hear you over the sound of how haughty you are... maybe you could repeat yourself when you get off that high horse and take the stick out of your bum? I would like to point out that there are 2 people (myself and Neckutter) who agree that the EotG (at least) is a little vague. To say that it requires no interpretation whatsoever makes you come off a tad condescending, and really that makes people (myself included) tend to disregard the point that you're trying to make.
You see, when I "follow what I am told to do" (yes, O beneficent one, I bask in the glory of your knowledge) "Chaos models that may issue challenges must do so whenever they are able. Futhermore, such is their thirst for glory that Chaos characters may not refuse challenges. Roll on the following table when a character with the Eye of the Gods special rule kills ..." (emphasis mine, obviously) I am forced to ask myself 3 questions. Is the DP a Chaos model? Is he a character? Does he have the EotG special rule? The way that it is worded, with the clause for rolling on the table only if you have the special rule seems out of place if the entire rule only effects those models which do not have the special rule. This has been brought up before in this thread, by someone who is not, nor was paid by, me. I am really rather stunned that you think of yourself so highly as to assume that the way that you read (i.e. interpret)something is the only possible way that such a thing can be read. Face it. The WoC book is badly worded, and really needs to have a few questions answered.


It is therefore completely and utterly 100% irrelevant what the rule actually says lol, sig'd

Necromancy Black
23-12-2008, 11:47
Actually you can easily argue that the Hell Cannon can move and shoot. It's not a war machine, and the rules say fire's as a stonethrow. The stone thrower rules say nothing about not moving and shooting, they only give details on using the template and firing. All moving and shooting rules are covered under war machines.

Man, this book is really badly written :s

But I realised this rule isn't the first time this has happened. Grab a Dark Elve book, go to the sorcerous and notice the Rule they have that lets them use as many power dice as they want to cast a spell. Notice that the way this rule is worded it says something like "All Dark Elve wizards". It doesn't say "All that have this rule". Yet go through and every wizard has it except for Malekith. So, is he allowed to use the rule when he's the only one who does not have it? The rules says "All Dark ELve Wizards", why can't he use it?

That rule is another example of a non-army wide rule stating that every model of a certain type has or benifits that rule, but then goes and lists some without it.

I still say, that but not having the EotG rule, DP do not follow any of the rules of it at all.

Also from a useless fluff perspective, they've already pleased their gods,
that's what got them to being DP's. Why would they still have to dance for their god's like lowly mortals?

blindingdark
23-12-2008, 13:39
The malekith issue is a fair point.

But i feel my question has been answered as the general consensus is that if the rule is not listed for that character, then the rule does not apply, even though the rule states all Chaos models.

thanks for your help, im gonna go with that.

No EOTG's rule = doesnt have to challenge / no roll on EOTG's.

Thank you all

nosferatu1001
23-12-2008, 14:54
... so... since the Hellcannon (which is told to fire as a stone thrower) does not have the special rule "Warmachine" (see the elven bolt throwers), by your logic I am only supposed to read and apply the rules for Stone Throwers. No where in that section is the prohibition against moving or shooting.

-------------Cut really, really long unformatted text which really doesn't actually say anything-------


Hmm, or could it be that it's getting tiring responding to the same point?

Right - Hellcannon point. I have already given you the reason why it shouldn't move and fire, really i have- just look at my post without going off in a spluttering fit. I stated "fires AS a stone thrower" which fires "as a war machine" - a fires as b which fires as c, a fires as c. It does not need the rule specifically as it is inherited by the weapon type it is emulating.

Cf if you like to, say, Stegadon bolt thrower. This is only allowed to fire on the move as it is given a specific exemption to do so. The Hunter is not allowed to move and fire as he does not have this exemption. They both fire as a bolt thrower, which is, ta dah! a warmachine. So, do you feel you might be wrong now? Do you see how this isnt the same question as to whether a non-army wide rule applies to a model that doesn't have that special rule? Do you really think it is applicable?

------Again! back on point----------

So, when you read the rule which tells you characters challenge, why did you do so? Answer that simple question, if it's not too much to ask.

If you can't work out why you have read the rule, then you fail at basic rule comphrension. You are allowed to use rules only when told to do so, the entire basis of the rule system. This is either:

A) Army wide rule that applies to all models [which EotG isnt]
B) LIsted as a special rule on your profile [which EotG isn't for DP]

If the rule does not apply to you, then why are you reading it? If you aren't reading it, then the contents don;t matter to you. If you can get off YOUR inflated position for a bit you will understand this.

It does not matter what a rule says if that rule does nto apply to you - is THAT clear enough? For example, if I don't have warmachines in my army, would I read through the warmachine rules to see if any appplied to my unit of Skinks?

So - the rules are clear:

1) If you have an army wide rule, apply it to all models in an army
C1A) EotG is not listed or described as an Army wide rule, therefore it does not apply to all models in an army. Only apply it to models with the specific rule.
C1B) Models without that rule are not subject to anything contained within the rule. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch

2) If you have special rules for a unit, apply them for that unit
C2) EotG is a special rule for some units, it is therfore applied to those units. A DP does not have the rule therefore nothing contained within the rule is applicable to the unit "DP"

So, that's two different ways of explaining the same concept. If you are able to read this without hurling baseless insults in my direction then please do so. If you can do me the courtesy I do you it would be appreciated. The next lot of insults get reported.

Edit: Also, your sig is wildly out of context - in the context of rules that are irrelevant, the content of those rules are also irrelevant. Your attempt at "humour" is misplaced and not appreciated. If you want I could sig that you don't understand the difference between rules that apply to you and rules that don't, and getin a hissy fit and throw insults when confronted with it. But i won't, as that is mildly unfair - I don't know you are this bad at comprehending all rules, just these ones. See, context.

Neckutter
23-12-2008, 20:03
great idea, nos

Djekar
24-12-2008, 04:39
Nos, I won't use insults again, but I think that you'll agree that we have both been a bit touchy on this issue. The implication that my reading comprehension is subhuman because I don't agree with you is not a sentiment designed to engender my respect, nor is it one that seeks to avoid raising my ire. Being condescending and then getting huffy when I get angry doesn't seem to be the right response from either of us.

Let us agree to disagree, shall we? As I said before, my group around here plays it this way, and I don't think that I shall change them, mostly because I'm the WoC player and they'll imagine I'm trying to one up them.

About the sig: I must admit that your statement truly made me laugh. While I understand that in the context of the rest of my angry post, it sounds like I'm patronizing you (which would, I imagine really tick you off considering that's what my "really long unformatted text which really doesn't actually say anything" was trying to convey anger about) but I assure you, in as much as I can on a text only board, that I was not trying to patronize you or invalidate your argument. I really do like the line, because while it is out of context - and I'll argue that most funny sigs are out of context - I really enjoyed reading it. If you'd rather, I'll gladly take your name from it, but I will not relinquish the entirety of it.

~Groundhogs

nosferatu1001
24-12-2008, 09:44
Yes, I think a big "sorry" on both sides is called for here. Posting while tired and stressed is never good :)

However - from curiosity can you answer the question I posited? I am interested to understand why you are reading the rule in the first place, in order to get to the "all chaos characters" line. I really don't see it as an army wide rule, as it is not described as such outside of the rule, however your interpretation would be good.

(it wasn't your reading i was questioning, just your rules comphrension i.e. why you read rules and when you do so - it just wasnt well put) Thanks for the sig. Looking back it is a funny line - I still liked my CHaos champs as pink bunniues with 3 carrots though :)

Djekar
25-12-2008, 04:37
Indeed, I am sorry for getting mad. Glad we can come to an agreement - both about the anger and the sig :)

I was saying that the reason that I was reading the rule in the first place was because I had a character model other than the DPrince in my army, and thus needed to read the EotG rule, and therein found that sentence.

I see your point, and you make good arguments to that effect, but I still have trouble not seeing the words "all models" to mean just that. In that respect, I think that the rules could have been worded more clearly - either by putting in the clause after "all chaos models" to read "with this rule" or to omit the clause from later in the same rule. That is really the part that I am uncomfortable with - it seems, to me, to be 2 separate conditions, the first is being a chaos model and the second is to be a model with the EotG rule.

Again, while I see your point, I wish that it would be FAQ'd just so I could be with it 110%, so that I could even backtrack 10% and still be completely behind it!

~Darkplace

Jerrus
25-12-2008, 10:20
Just to make everything even more twisted....

Would "Eye of the Gods" force Beasts of Chaos and/or Daemons of Chaos to challenge if they were up against Warriors of Chaos? They are also "Chaos Models/Characters", are they not?

Condottiere
25-12-2008, 10:49
That's an interesting question. Different Army Book/list or does it need a FAQ?

Neckutter
25-12-2008, 18:08
beasts of chaos and Daemons dont have the EotG rule.
therefore they arent affected. same reason why DPs dont have to fight.

nosferatu1001
26-12-2008, 21:42
You could argue that a Warshrine may affect beastmen / daemon champions, however I would argue that "chaos character" is not specific enough to cross Army Books - unlike the Daemon banner whcih was "All Daemons are stubborn....." whcih does apply to the other players Daemons, this is not nearly so specific.

Talash
27-12-2008, 02:07
My god this seems to be a case of something apparently being far more complicated than it actually is. You only need to follow a special rule if you actually have it/are affected by it. Ergo, if you have the EOTG rule you must challenge, otherwise you are free to do as you wish. Now, that wasnt hard was it?

Its a shame, though. I would love it if my Star Dragon also had ASF, or if my Wraiths were classed as Vampires...

AMWOOD co
27-12-2008, 03:45
Ah, but that's the crux of the issue, isn't it: Who has the rule and what does it mean for them?

1. Models with the Eye of the Gods rule roll on the Eye of the Gods table when they accomplish the conditions for doing so.
2. Other models must still issue challenges.
3. Characters are not allowed to refuse challenges.

That's the limit I'll draw as absolutely conclusive from the rule. I furthur draw for my own purposes that my champions may not refuse challenges (it seems to be the intention of the rule). It is worth noting that this has changed nothing for me. I still take full command in all fighting units (which is all units).

My Daemon Prince does issue challenges when he can. Kholek and Galruach must also issue challenges (neither of them have Eye of the Gods). These immortal characters simply no longer benefit furthur from the Chaos Gods watching them (it is expected of them).

I will agree that this is not the best written rule (how many debates of this are there?), but it seems to be just like Greenskin animosity. That rule isn't written on individual units, it defines which ones don't use it. It has caused a good deal of confusion with old greenskin players in regards to Squig Hoppers, who must take animosity tests.

Neckutter
27-12-2008, 09:59
the thing is, EotG isnt an army-wide rule, whereas animosity plainly is.

and i agree animosity affecting squigs is weird, but funny. and that is why you play O+Gs.
anyways, this subject has been debated and debated. nothing new can be said that hasnt already been said.

nosferatu1001
27-12-2008, 19:14
Anwood - why are you reading the rule that tells you you must challenge? Please answer this single question - you have not justified why you must read the qwuestion and apply it to every model.

1) It is not an army wide rule - which means that units must have the rule as one of their special rules. We know this as it is not preceded by "all models in the army" or something similar.

2) It is not a special rule for the DP, therefore the DP does not have to challenge. Unit champions also do not have to challenge unless there is a warshrine.

How hard was that?

did you just ignore the previous pages? As you have added nothing new to the debate, and given nothing to support your position, I assume you did.

popisdead
04-01-2009, 16:42
If it does not have the EotG rule (DP, Kholek) the model does not have to issue a challenge.

Not that it matters, Kholek doesn't as he'd do a full Overkill in any challenge anyway, and a DP kinda still sucks :/

Neckutter
05-01-2009, 04:33
my slaanesh giant ate kholek for breakfast two days ago. thump with club!

AMWOOD co
11-01-2009, 03:24
I've read the responses you all made to me, but you seem to ignore the thing that I read in the very rule. It says that ALL models that can issue a challenge must issue one if able. Technically, the way you all seem to be interpretting it, that would mean that Scyla (I don't have my book on me to check the spelling of his name) would also be able to ignore the Eye of the Gods rule inspite of getting the benefit of rolling on the Eye of the Gods chart (he doesn't have Eye of the Gods, he has something called 'Hero's Fate' or something simillar).

The real issue is, then, "Is Eye of the Gods intended to be an Army-wide rule?"

I say "yes". It is put in the same place as Will of Chaos, a rule stated for every unit that can suffer from panic, and Eye of the Gods does have a clause that justifies it being written on some units while not being written, yet still having effects, on others (reread the section on who gets to roll on the Eye of the Gods chart).

nosferatu1001: I did simply jump in without reading the whole thread as there have been at least a half dozen threads on this very topic, none of which have stated any form of conclusion. I believe you and I were part of one such thread. I have now corrected that aggrevious error.

The rules for animosity for greenskins, the 3 dwarf rules (Ancestral Grudge, Resolute and Relentless) and probably a few others (undead for TK?, bull charge for ogres?), are all stated at the beginning of the bestiary section and appear nowhere else. These rules state they apply to the whole army or to certain parts of the army. There is a precedence for certain rules applying to units that meet certain requirements yet not appering on such units.

Also note that the High Elf rule of Speed of Assuryan is stated on Every unit, yet states in it's own text that it doesn't apply to mounts. At the same time, we do see it listed for chariots and cavalry. There is a precedence for a rule not applying to a part of a unit while still being listed. I admit it would be nice if Eye of the Gods were more clear than that, but one must account for different authors' styles.

As I read the Eye of the Gods, it is apparant to me that the only significance of having the Eye of the Gods on the unit entry is the ability to roll on the Eye of the Gods chart. Otherwise, it IS an army-wide rule as it states that certain parts apply to all characters or all models that may issue a challenge. This means that it applies unit champions already. The benifit of gaining the rule of Eye of the Gods thus allows champions to roll on the Eye of the Gods chart.

Let the repitition of old arguements commence! (and please spell my name correctly...)

Lord Dan
11-01-2009, 07:11
It's no different with the DE. There is an armywide rule about recieving hatred, though a couple of units do not have the special rule in their unit entry (harpies come to mind, as well as a couple of mounts) and thus do not recieve those benefits.

Likewise with the EoTG, why would you say a model is "partially" affected by a rule? "You need to issue challenges because the rule says so, however since you don't have the rule in your unit entry you don't get to roll on the EoTG table."

Really?

nosferatu1001
11-01-2009, 11:59
the rule is not "army wide" however it is a rule which is unique to the army. The convention therefore is to put the rule in one place - as I've said it doesn't make sense to include it under every unit.

You don';t read rules that don't apply to you; the rule "EotG" is not listed under the DP entry, therefore it does not apply to the DP.

The Will of Chaos also only applies to units which have the rule; if memory serves the only units that don't are ones immune to panic anyway, but it doesn;t make it an army wide rule!

Nothing outside the rule tells you it applies to the entire army, therefore it doesn't. It is simply a unique rule applicable to WoC - much as War Machines have unique rules. You don't read the war machine rules until you are told to, the same would apply to this.

Lord Dan
11-01-2009, 18:08
If the words "chaos models must issue a challenge" is under the wording for EoTG this conversation shouldn't even exist. That would be like if the words: "All lizardmen may move through water without penalty" was under the rules for "aquatic", and people tried using that with models that didn't have the aquatic rule.