PDA

View Full Version : Refused Challenges



Jetty Smurf
17-08-2009, 06:54
If a character in a unit refuses a challenge, does the unit still gain the benefits of having that character in the unit?

I.e. If the character grants the unit stubborn (by being stubborn), does the unit still have stubborn even if the character refuses a challenge?

I know the rules state that the character can not fight (to put it very simply), that his leadership can not be used for tests, and he can not use magic or magic items, but it does not mention anything about the other bonuses he may grant to a unit such as being stubborn.

Necromancy Black
17-08-2009, 08:26
Characters do not make units, stubborn. The unit may use the character's leadership, which has a similar affect but doesn't actually make the unit stubborn.

So in that case you can't use the character's leadership so no, you don't get the benefits of stubborn.

Basically anything the character can not do if he isn't in the front rank, he can't do if he's retired from refusing a challenge. Anything else would still work. For example, if the character causes fear the the unit would still be immune to fear.

Jetty Smurf
17-08-2009, 08:34
Page 78 of my BFSP rule book states:
"If a character that is stubborn himself joins a unit, then the unit can use the character's unmodified Leadership for Break tests (effectively becoming stubborn themselves if they are not already) as well as other Leadership tests."

So what this boils down to, is that if the unit can no longer use the characters Leadership value for tests, according to page 73 of my BFSP rulebook, this indirectly removes the stubborn bonus that character provides to the unit?

Necromancy Black
17-08-2009, 08:48
Exactly. If you can't use your character's Leadership then you don't get any advantage from him being stubborn.

It's the same as if you have a Battle Standard Bearer. If you can't use the banner (because he's not in the front rank) then you can't use the re-roll to break tests that it provides. The unit doesn't provide the re-roll, the character does.

Basically, remember that the unit isn't stubborn. The character is, and you just so happen to use his (unmodified) leadership.

Jetty Smurf
17-08-2009, 08:51
Ok thanks for your help :)

Was thinking of trying out an interesting build/idea but seeing that it relies on my character to not only accept the challenge but live through it, I might have to re-think some things, like where to scrape a couple points together for a champion to accept the inevitable challenge instead :p

xragg
17-08-2009, 08:52
One of the few exceptions is an eternal guard unit led by a noble. Any unit that includes a noble is stubborn, even if he is wetting his pants hiding in a back rank. Then again, the character isnt the one who is stubborn, its an ablity the unit gains.

Jetty Smurf
17-08-2009, 08:59
Yeah, I think the same can be said with a Slann in a unit of temple guard. It's a rule granted to the unit regardless of the fact that the Slann himself is not stubborn.

Milgram
17-08-2009, 10:34
humm... what about fear? a fear causing character joining the unit makes the unit immune to fear. with him refusing a challenge, could they autobreak? would he still count for fear-outnumbering when winning the combat?

(I'd say he still makes the unit immune to fear and counts for fear-outnumbering)

The Red Scourge
17-08-2009, 10:41
The character only grants immunity if he is in contact with the fear causing enemy, so once again there is no bonus. Same thing if the unit was charged in the rear, they'd still suffer the consequences of fear, as the character isn't in contact with the enemy :)

Festus
17-08-2009, 10:43
Hi


The character only grants immunity if he is in contact with the fear causing enemy, so once again there is no bonus. Same thing if the unit was charged in the rear, they'd still suffer the consequences of fear, as the character isn't in contact with the enemy :)

Do you happen to have a qoute from the BRB to back this up? Or is it something out of the blue?

Greetings
Festus

The Red Scourge
17-08-2009, 11:06
Not ATM, but you're welcome to read up on your rules and point out that I'm right :)

You should be able to find it in the section concerning characters and psychology under "Fear" :)

Gazak Blacktoof
17-08-2009, 11:22
I believe you're confusing one rule with another- a unit need only take a fear test if a charge would bring them into base contact with a fear causing enemy.

EDIT: Red Scourge, there's no rule in the character-psychology section that matches what you've posted.

Nuada
17-08-2009, 11:25
Do you happen to have a qoute from the BRB to back this up? Or is it something out of the blue?

Greetings
Festus

Here's a quote from the BRB concerning this topic.....

Page 78.... "units gain the same immunities as the character for as long as he is with them." So if the character causes fear, the unit will be immune to fear, but won't cause fear.

(page 78) .."if an enemy wishes to charge a unit containing a fear/terror causing character, test for fear only if a charge will result in the unit fighting the character in question"



When you refuse a challenge it says you lose all of the characters advantages.
I think this applies on page 73......"As long as a character remains in the back ranks he cannot fight (even with a spear) or use magic or magic items. Also the unit cannot use his leadership value for tests"

It doesn't mention you lose the benefits received from a fear causing character

The Red Scourge
17-08-2009, 11:38
I'll look into it, when I get within reach of my BRB to give you real rules smackdown Gazak - I warn you, I've got the collectors edition, so it'll hurt ;)

Necromancy Black
17-08-2009, 12:53
I'll look into it, when I get within reach of my BRB to give you real rules smackdown Gazak - I warn you, I've got the collectors edition, so it'll hurt ;)

Mate, you were absolutely completely wrong. Feel free to smack yourself if you want to :D

A fear causing character only has to join a unit to grant that unit immunity to fear. However, the unit does not cause fear.

This means if they charge the enemy unit only has to take a fear test if the character comes into base to base contact with them.
Likewise, if an enemy unit charges the unit with the fear causing character, they don't have to make a fear test unless they come into base to base contact with the fear causing character.

However, the entire unit is still immune to fear, no matter if the character is in base to base or not.

rtunian
17-08-2009, 15:07
humm... what about fear? a fear causing character joining the unit makes the unit immune to fear. with him refusing a challenge, could they autobreak? would he still count for fear-outnumbering when winning the combat?

(I'd say he still makes the unit immune to fear and counts for fear-outnumbering)

if they are immune to fear, then they won't autobreak if defeated by a fear causing enemy that outnumbers. if the enemy causes terror and outnumbers, they will autobreak, because terror is fear to fear (lol)

if you meant that the char would still count to autobreak the enemy, then the enemy would have to have US less than the char, because only the actual models that cause fear count when determining if you are an outnumbering fear causer... in this thread's example, the unit doesn't count because the unit itself doesn't cause fear.

mr_vespa
17-08-2009, 15:16
Why is this thread making me think of a certain stubborn character joining an already fear-causing unit? ;)

Though what it comes down to is that once a character refuses a challenge, he steps back in shame and his surrounding troopers lose faith in his leadership abilities. Henceforth, for the next break test, said character is being booed. Skaven get around this with their 'Lead from the back' ability. If memory serves, it also applies to challenges. Confirmation?

highelfmage
18-08-2009, 03:04
sorry to jack your thread but i did not want to make another thread

when a nurgle deamon character refuse a challange does the unit loses regen? thanks.

Sarah S
18-08-2009, 03:06
Red Scourge, you are incorrect, unless your "collector's edition" rulebook has rules that our regular books don't.

stripsteak
18-08-2009, 03:37
sorry to jack your thread but i did not want to make another thread

when a nurgle deamon character refuse a challange does the unit loses regen? thanks.

yes the locus of ____ rule is part of the herald (see pg86 and pg88 of the daemon book).

Festus
18-08-2009, 10:45
Hi

I'll look into it, when I get within reach of my BRB to give you real rules smackdown Gazak - I warn you, I've got the collectors edition, so it'll hurt ;)
I know my rules pretty well, thank you.

I know that the rules you said applied were not in the BRB, collector's edition or not. I just wanted you to re-read, and not find it ;)

Greetings
Festus

nosferatu1001
18-08-2009, 11:11
It isn't on the list of thigns a character in the back ranks cannot use (not a magic item, not a ld bonus, etc) therefore it is not lost if the character moves to the back ranks.

The BRB specifies exactly what things arelost; loci is not one of them.

Grunge
18-08-2009, 12:00
Just to spare Mr. Red Scourge some time, just read page 78 and then come here and apologise to Festus :P

Seems to me that apart from fighting, using magic or magic items and using his LD value, nothing else is lost. Simply put, the character is stubborn but being in the back ranks, the unit can't use his LD value.

Adran
19-08-2009, 08:22
I believe you also lose standard bonuses, so no +1 due to battle standard and no re-roll.

nosferatu1001
19-08-2009, 10:23
Thats covered by "standards must be int eh front rank" as well.

Necromancy Black
19-08-2009, 10:27
Thats covered by "standards must be int eh front rank" as well.

Oh thank god I'm not the only one who does that all the bloody time!

As for the BSB, yes, the rules do indeed make specific mention that it doesn't work if the character is hiding in the ranks.

Milgram
19-08-2009, 10:43
Thats covered by "standards must be int eh front rank" as well.

uhm... no, it is not. a BSB that moves to the flank in order to get into a fighting rank is most likely not in the front rank anymore. the bsb is more like a 'special ability' from the character that is threatened like his leadership.

Atrahasis
19-08-2009, 11:07
The Battle Standard's bonus applies if he is either:

1. In the front rank
2. In a fighting position

or both. This is different from a unit standard, which must be in the front rank (except Brets) to function, even if the model is in a fighting position.

EvC
19-08-2009, 13:34
It isn't on the list of thigns a character in the back ranks cannot use (not a magic item, not a ld bonus, etc) therefore it is not lost if the character moves to the back ranks.

The BRB specifies exactly what things arelost; loci is not one of them.

Doesn't it specify "all advantages"?

Would especially suck to see a Daemon Herald with Banner of +D3 combat res refuse a challenge and then still claim that bonus as it isn't listed as the things lost... unless it, as with all advantageous bonuses, were to be covered by the "all advantages" clause.

Necromancy Black
19-08-2009, 14:02
Doesn't it specify "all advantages"?

Would especially suck to see a Daemon Herald with Banner of +D3 combat res refuse a challenge and then still claim that bonus as it isn't listed as the things lost... unless it, as with all advantageous bonuses, were to be covered by the "all advantages" clause.

That clause says something like as per the rule for not being in the front rank. So I don't think they'll be lost.

Atrahasis
19-08-2009, 14:05
No, it doesn't. It says they lose all their advantages and to refer to the rules for characters in a rear rank.

Referring to those rules does not limit the nature of the advantages lost.

Necromancy Black
19-08-2009, 14:53
Then what is an advantage then? It's not defined anywhere. Is it character abilities, abilities they give to the unit, abilities units get from having the character or just things that can only be done with the character in the front rank?

It says refer to the rules for characters in a rear rank, so it appears that these are the kind of advantages lost.

So as far as I can read this, if the character doesn't have to sue a magic item or an ability that says it has to be in the front rank, it's not lost. Abilities given simply from a character being in the unit don't get lost when move to a rear rank, as the condition for the ability still remains.

Atrahasis
19-08-2009, 14:59
Any beneficial rule is an advantage. That's what "advantage" means.

The Eternal Guard ability you allude to is not lost because it is a unit advantage, and not a character advantage.

Necromancy Black
19-08-2009, 15:04
Fair enough, but I don't see it that way and we'll have to stop here to disagree. I'm still of the opinion that advantages is a meaningless and undefined term, and that they lose things that apply when in the front rank, which is why they say refer to those rules (thus giving some definition to what an advantage is in game terms).

And for the love of god, don't anyone say use common sense. I think we should all now by now that only works in the rarest of time when it comes to warhammer rules (mostly because it doesn't say who's common sense to use).

Atrahasis
19-08-2009, 15:09
Why do you concentrate on "advantage" when looking for an in-game definition?

Why not ask what the in-game definition of "the", "a", or "one" is?

If the game doesn't define something, then the English definition is default.

EvC
19-08-2009, 15:34
Yeah come on NB, if you don't want to use common sense that's fine, but you do have to use common dictionary definitions or the rulebook simply doesn't work! Very simply, is X an advantage? If someone is arguing vehemently that his unit should retain regeneration or whatever, then it's probably because it's an advantage that he'd lose ;)

Sarah S
20-08-2009, 07:46
I think we should all now by now that only works in the rarest of time when it comes to warhammer rules

I think ew should all <k>now by now that only works in the rarest of time when it comes to anything at all in the entire world.

"F" common sense!

Atrahasis
20-08-2009, 11:40
I think ew should all <k>now by now that only works in the rarest of time when it comes to anything at all in the entire world.

Being clever when quoting someone is dangerous, I think ew [sic] can all agree. ;)

Sarah S
20-08-2009, 23:19
Hahah! yes.

Good catch. :angel: