PDA

View Full Version : Aura of Slannesh and Generals



Selsaral
16-03-2007, 18:44
The Aura of Slannesh reduces the leadership by one of any unit that is in contact with one or more models with the Aura. But if the enemy's general isn't part of that unit, and is within 12", that means that the unit can use the general's leadership instead of their own (now modified at -1) leadership, right? So in this situation the Aura has essentially no effect?

ObiWan
16-03-2007, 18:50
Way I see it, you are correct, it has no effect because they can use the general's Ld.

sulla
16-03-2007, 19:04
Way I see it, you are correct, it has no effect because they can use the general's Ld.

Nice try. They use the general's leadership as their own, which is then reduced by one.

Shagrat
16-03-2007, 19:14
Hmm, I wonder, what effect takes precedence?
Maybe the unit get the Ld of the general FIRST, then reduce one for being in contact with a daemonette unit?
What is the order?

Greyfire
16-03-2007, 19:38
Hmm, I wonder, what effect takes precedence?
Maybe the unit get the Ld of the general FIRST, then reduce one for being in contact with a daemonnete unit?
What is the order?

I don't know that the order matters that much, at least I don't think it does. I guess it depends upon what the general's leadership is being used for.

If you're talking about a break test or a panic check, then isn't the wording "unit can use the general's leadership or their own"? I don't have my book sitting beside me or I'd know for sure before opening my mouth. But this was in another thread a while back. The general's leadership hasn't been reduced - only the unit's has been - so it could still use either.

That unit doesn't take on the leadership value of the general - it's allowed to use it for some tests.

This is about the same as the stubborn trait - you can either use the leadership of the stubborn unit or the leadership of the general. But if you use the leadership of the general then the units leadership doesn't change. It's still the same thing.

Maybe someone has the book handy to see if the wording is like that? Many thanks!

-=- Greyfire

kruzkal
16-03-2007, 21:05
The unit may use the general's leadership value but it does not mean that the leadership value is not subject to modifiers.

Atrahasis
16-03-2007, 21:27
it does not mean that the leadership value is not subject to modifiers.It does when the modifier specifically only affects the unit's Ld.

ObiWan
16-03-2007, 21:38
Nice try. They use the general's leadership as their own, which is then reduced by one.

I quote from the BRB, pag.82: "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)."

So there is no mention of using it AS THEIR OWN, they use the General's Leadership value. If the aura is not in contact with the general, there is no reason why it should be reduced since the rule for the Aura states that you reduce Ld by -1 for enemy unit in base contact.

Mazdug
16-03-2007, 21:59
On a side note, does this mean that when you have aura of slaanesh and are fighting the enemy general, anything within 12 inches of him only uses his reduced leadership for tests? I would assume so.

I have always played that you use the generals leadership -1 in the above mentioned situation, atleast insofar as taking break tests, it hasn't come up to much otherwise in my games.

ObiWan
16-03-2007, 22:04
On a side note, does this mean that when you have aura of slaanesh and are fighting the enemy general, anything within 12 inches of him only uses his reduced leadership for tests? I would assume so.


As I quoted from the rulebook, they always use the general's leadership unless their own Ld value is higher.

NakedFisherman
17-03-2007, 02:16
So there is no mention of using it AS THEIR OWN, they use the General's Leadership value. If the aura is not in contact with the general, there is no reason why it should be reduced since the rule for the Aura states that you reduce Ld by -1 for enemy unit in base contact.

So they use the general's leadership...and it's then reduced by 1.

Atrahasis
17-03-2007, 03:08
So they use the general's leadership...and it's then reduced by 1.

No, their own Leadership is reduced by 1 and then they take the general's.

beastgod
17-03-2007, 05:40
yes if the general is in an fight then he gets -1 in ld
Every one that want to use his Ld get the generals LD-1 because the general have -1.

sulla
17-03-2007, 13:05
So they reduce their Lde by 1 for in contact with the aura and then reduce it by whatever they lost combat by and then just use the generals ld? Is that what you suggest? That General's Ld is never modified by anything? You can't pick and choose which modifiers apply.

Masque
17-03-2007, 14:52
So they reduce their Lde by 1 for in contact with the aura and then reduce it by whatever they lost combat by and then just use the generals ld? Is that what you suggest? That General's Ld is never modified by anything? You can't pick and choose which modifiers apply.

A unit's Leadership is not modified by combat resolution. The break test roll is. See page 39 of the BRB.

Greyfire
17-03-2007, 14:55
So they reduce their Lde by 1 for in contact with the aura and then reduce it by whatever they lost combat by and then just use the generals ld? Is that what you suggest? That General's Ld is never modified by anything? You can't pick and choose which modifiers apply.

No, the general's leadership may still be reduced (or maybe improved if there is such an item) by magic or items or something. Anyone that uses his leadership would then get the modified leadership. There is no picking and choosing at all. It's just that you've got two things going on: one is having a leadership modified, the second being combat resolution. We'd all agree they aren't the same thing.

Combat uses the highest leadership available to it as a starting point for combat resolution. All the rest of the usual combat modifiers then apply. Aura of Slanesh is not a combat modifier - it's a leadership modifier which modifies the leadership of the unit that will not be used in this combat due to the general being within a foot. The Aura just won't affect anything in this scenario, IMHO. But like I said, I could be wrong.

Now get base to base with that general along with two or three combats around him, and resolve his combat last? Now that should put a damper on your opponents combat resolutions. :)

Does that sound right?

-=- Greyfire

NakedFisherman
17-03-2007, 14:56
No, their own Leadership is reduced by 1 and then they take the general's.

And then it's reduced by 1, which is exactly what I already said.

Greyfire
17-03-2007, 15:48
And then it's reduced by 1, which is exactly what I already said.

So you're saying that the Aura is a combat modifier and not a leadership modifier?

The wording is "must use the generals leadership unless theirs is higher" not "take it". His leadership is still the same so when they use it, wouldn't it still be the same since his leadership isn't reduced?

Not trying to argue (much - hope it feels more like a debate than just petty arguing) but I just want to understand this better before I fight Slannesh again. Those little daemonettes just became target #1 for my handgunners. :)

-=- Greyfire

Negativemoney
17-03-2007, 16:26
While agree with the fact that the -1 LD should be applied to the generals leadership as well the rules do not support that. However because of this Daemons may never use the General's leader ship value for any Instablity tests they must take as the wording for Instablity states the units Leadership Value. Just some food for thought.

Masque
17-03-2007, 16:43
While agree with the fact that the -1 LD should be applied to the generals leadership as well the rules do not support that. However because of this Daemons may never use the General's leader ship value for any Instablity tests they must take as the wording for Instablity states the units Leadership Value. Just some food for thought.

The section on General's Leadership on page 82 says that a unit use the General's Leadship rather than their own for 'any Leadership-based test.' Why wouldn't this apply to Instability?

NakedFisherman
17-03-2007, 18:41
So you're saying that the Aura is a combat modifier and not a leadership modifier?

No.

I'm saying that the -1 leadership is constant. There's no sequence. They use the general's leadership...which is reduced by 1.

Festus
17-03-2007, 19:02
Hi

I'm saying that the -1 leadership is constant. There's no sequence. They use the general's leadership...which is reduced by 1.
And you keep being wrong, no matter how often you repeat yourself.

The units Ld is reduced by one. (say from 7 to 6) Then they will still use the General Ld (which stays the same as it is not subject to the mdifier).

Of course, there is a different side to it: If the General/ his unit is in contact, his Ld will be reduced to one, so other units wanting to use the General's Ld will have to use the actual reduced value due to the Aura.

Festus

NakedFisherman
17-03-2007, 20:47
And you keep being wrong, no matter how often you repeat yourself.

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).

They use the General's leadership value instead of their own...and the leadership is reduced by 1. The unit doesn't get some conjured extra 'General's leadership' tacked on. Their own leadership value becomes that of the General. It doesn't say they use the General's leadership, it says they use the General's Leadership value instead of their own.


Then they will still use the General Ld (which stays the same as it is not subject to the mdifier).

That rule does not exist.

kruzkal
17-03-2007, 21:46
After some thinking, I think this is something that could go either way. Consider the following code representation of the rules.


auraOfSlaanesh(Unit u)
{
u.LD -= 1;
}

generalsLeadership(Unit g, Unit u)
{
if(u.distance(g) <= 12)
u.LD = g.LD;
}

So Greyfire, NakedFisherman et al. are saying:


unit.LD = 8;
general.LD = 9;

generalsLeadership(general, unit);
// The unit uses the general's LD.

auraOfSlaanesh(unit)
// But suffers from the aura anyway.

ptintln(unit.LD);

The outcome is 8.

And Atrahasis, Festus et al. are saying:


unit.LD = 8;
general.LD = 9;

auraOfSlaanesh(unit)
// The unit suffers from aura.

generalsLeadership(general, unit);
// But uses the general's LD anyway.

ptintln(unit.LD);

So the outcome is 9.

Really it all depends on which order you apply the two rules.

Greyfire
18-03-2007, 04:18
So Greyfire, NakedFisherman et al. are saying:

The outcome is 8.


Actually, I'm on the side that says the unit tests against an unmodified nine leadership. ;)

But, like in your example and several of the other messages, I think it really is dependent upon the order of resolution (I think I've seen that theme in several discussions of late). I thought I had it down, but I'm willing to listen to others that can show I'm not doing it right. As long as I start to play better (by better, I mean fairer, and not winning more - both games were total loses for me today :( ) I'm cool with doing it either way.

And as a programmer, I really like your example. A big fan of Java, huh? :)

-=- Greyfire

Festus
18-03-2007, 08:47
Hi

I am sorry to say that it is not the sequence, which is relevant, but the wording:

A unit's Ld in contact with AoS is modified by -1 down to Ld2. There is no problem there (or is there?). So the unit has a new value for its leadership.

If it took over the Gneral's Ld as its own, this too would be modified by -1.

But by the rules this is not the case: The unit just uses the Generals Ld for the tests it makes - see the wording of the rule - and this Ld is not modified, as long as not any model with AoS modifies it.

The General does not change the Ld value of the unit in any way. And it is not modified by a model witt AoS which is not in contact.

Festus

Mazdug
19-03-2007, 16:02
But the wording says they use the generals leadership not their own, not that they use the generals unmodified leadership. So you replace the units leadership with the generals if they are in range, and then apply any modifiers for things like aura of slaanesh, screaming skull catapult hits, etc...

kruzkal
19-03-2007, 16:06
I am sorry to say that it is not the sequence, which is relevant, but the wording:

It is precisely the wording that cause the different interpretations of sequences.

Atrahasis
19-03-2007, 18:06
But the wording says they use the generals leadership not their own, not that they use the generals unmodified leadership. So you replace the units leadership with the generals if they are in range, and then apply any modifiers for things like aura of slaanesh, screaming skull catapult hits, etc...

if you do that, you are modifying the General's Leadserhip. Aura of Slaanesh does not tell you to do so.

Festus
19-03-2007, 18:11
if you do that, you are modifying the General's Leadserhip. Aura of Slaanesh does not tell you to do so.
Heartily agreed and QFT

Festus

NakedFisherman
19-03-2007, 18:55
It is precisely the wording that cause the different interpretations of sequences.

The problem is that people think there is a sequence.

There is no timeframe to apply the -1 modifier; whatever the leadership is, it's one less.


if you do that, you are modifying the General's Leadserhip.

No. Simply wrong. Nothing in the rules infers anything of the sort.

Atrahasis
19-03-2007, 23:40
No. Simply wrong. Nothing in the rules infers anything of the sort.The unit is using the General's Leadership. If you modify the leadership they are using, you must therefore be modifying the general's Leadership. Aura of Slaanesh tells us to modify the unit's Leadership, which is fine, because the unit isn't using it.

NakedFisherman
20-03-2007, 04:25
The unit is using the General's Leadership. If you modify the leadership they are using, you must therefore be modifying the general's Leadership.

Could you point that out in the rules for me?

Masque
20-03-2007, 05:06
Could you point that out in the rules for me?

BRB, Page 82
"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)."

Nowhere in that does it say that the unit's LD becomes the General's LD or that they get his LD, just that they use it for tests.

HoC, Page 35
"Any enemy unit in base contact with one or more models with the Aura of Slaanesh reduces its Leadership value by -1, to a minimum of 2."

That reduces the unit's LD as opposed to modifying the test in any way.

BRB, Page 81
"If a fleeing unit includes a musician, it will gain a +1 Leadership bonus in any attempt to rally, up to a maximum of Leadership 10."

Here's a counter-example of how something modifies the LD used for a test instead of modifying the unit's LD.

NakedFisherman
20-03-2007, 12:50
No, I asked for rules pertinent to the quote. Random rules already quoted beforehand don't answer my inquery.

If you choose to play Aura of Slaanesh as not affecting units if the general is in range, then you'll also have to ignore the rules about the general entirely.

If the total is greater than the unit's Leadership (Ld) value then the unit has broken and will flee. Pg. 39

When taking Psychology tests, roll 2D6 and compare the result to the Leadership value of the unit taking the test. If the result is less than or equal to the unit's Leadership score, the test is passed and all is well. Pg. 48

monkeyboyalpha
20-03-2007, 13:35
You use the generals LD which is then modified by 1.

The unit is temporarily replacing their LD value with that of the general's, he is barking orders which they will follow.

However the unit may be following the orders of the general, but they are still personaly being affected by something that is weakening their will and resolve, so they act on the general's instructions, but still with a -1 to represent the weakening of their resolve...

MASQUE has mentioned something there relating to a musician.

If a unit using the general's LD cannot be affected by an outside negative source, then it cannot benefit from an outside positive source.

If you say you do not reduce the LD roll by -1 because it's the general's LD, then I'm afraid a unit within range of the general and using his LD to rally cannot use the musician as this is an outside source and you will modifying the general's LD value, and you have been claiming an outside source cannot affect the general's LD value.....

If you claim that you can't have a negative modifier to the general's LD, then nor can you have a positive modifier to his LD...

You can't have your cake AND eat it!

Also? What would happen if I was attacking the general directly with this ability, I suppose his own LD can't suffer the -1, with him being the general and all that...... :wtf:



MBA

Selsaral
20-03-2007, 14:46
If you say you do not reduce the LD roll by -1 because it's the general's LD, then I'm afraid a unit within range of the general and using his LD to rally cannot use the musician as this is an outside source and you will modifying the general's LD value, and you have been claiming an outside source cannot affect the general's LD value.....


This appears to be a good and relevant point.

Although my 'spirit of the rules' detector has been telling me that the Aura of Slannesh WOULD modify the borrowed general's leadership, I didn't think that the reading of the rules supported that.

But this point has forced me to reconsider.

Festus
20-03-2007, 15:04
Hi

A musician will allow the unit to *gain a +1 Ld bonus*, it does not add +1 to the unit's Ld. A musician lets the unit add +1 to any Ld they may or may not be using: The wording is again important here.

Festus

Avian
20-03-2007, 15:11
Yeah, but not counting the -1 Ld modifier due to the AoS is (at least to me) like not modifying a unit's Leadership score when it takes a break test and is within range of the general. In any other case, you replace the unit's basic Leadership with that of the General's and then apply modifiers on top of that. Don't see why this should be different.

Selsaral
20-03-2007, 15:52
Hi

A musician will allow the unit to *gain a +1 Ld bonus*, it does not add +1 to the unit's Ld. A musician lets the unit add +1 to any Ld they may or may not be using: The wording is again important here.

Festus

I just can't buy that one at all. Gaining 1 leadership is the same as adding one leadership. Sure, the writers were sloppy, but my 'spirit of the rules' detector is glaring loudly at me after reading your post.

Masque
20-03-2007, 17:11
Yeah, but not counting the -1 Ld modifier due to the AoS is (at least to me) like not modifying a unit's Leadership score when it takes a break test and is within range of the general. In any other case, you replace the unit's basic Leadership with that of the General's and then apply modifiers on top of that. Don't see why this should be different.

Here's how a Break Test works according to page 39 of the BRB:

"Firstly, nominate the unit for which you are testing and then roll 2D6. Add the difference between the winner's combat result score and the loser's. If the total is greater than the unit's Leadership value then the unit has broken and will flee."

See how combat result does not modify LD in any way? It modifies the die roll.

Avian
20-03-2007, 17:26
Speaking as a mathematician, that is the exact same thing.

Atrahasis
20-03-2007, 18:40
Speaking as a mathematician, that is the exact same thing.

It has the same result, but it is certainly not the same thing.

DeathlessDraich
21-03-2007, 10:20
Well that was a long read of what I initially thought was an easy question.


If you choose to play Aura of Slaanesh as not affecting units if the general is in range, then you'll also have to ignore the rules about the general entirely.


Not necessarily. The general's Ld rules does not mention the Aura and vice versa so cross referencing and an interpretation is required. More below*


BRB, Page 82
"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)."

Nowhere in that does it say that the unit's LD becomes the General's LD or that they get his LD, just that they use it for tests.

HoC, Page 35
"Any enemy unit in base contact with one or more models with the Aura of Slaanesh reduces its Leadership value by -1, to a minimum of 2."

That reduces the unit's LD as opposed to modifying the test in any way.

BRB, Page 81
"If a fleeing unit includes a musician, it will gain a +1 Leadership bonus in any attempt to rally, up to a maximum of Leadership 10."

Here's a counter-example of how something modifies the LD used for a test instead of modifying the unit's LD.

Well put but you have misquoted the rule for the Aura. [added word underlined]. There are other ways of interpreting some key words. See below*



The unit is temporarily replacing their LD value with that of the general's, he is barking orders which they will follow.
MBA

Best to stick with the words used in the rules. 'Replace' distorts the overall picture.

* The important phrases here are:

1) Aura of Slaanesh :"...reduces its Leadership by ..."
2) General's Ld "always use the General's Leadership value"

1) AOS:
"its Leadership" - could mean
a) the unit's intrinsic or original Ld - MBA, Masque, Festus etc
b) The Ld it can use at present with or without other modifications - NF

Compare this with other clearer rules e.g. Bow of Loren or Warpstone Stars - "may throw as many stars as attacks on its profile".

There is an important missing phrase in the AOS rule.
It does not state Leadership 'on its profile' or 'original' Ld.

This is why option (b) is still a possible interpretation


2) General's Ld:
"Leadership value" - This shows there is no transference of actual Ld. It gives more weight to the view that this is a Ld modification as opposed to a Ld replacement.
It also supports Festus' interpretation of what happens when the general's unit is subjected to AOS.

Final Word:
Comparing Aura with Doom and darkness:
Aura's states it "reduces its Ld"
Doom and Darkness states it enforces a "-3 penalty to Ld based tests"

Aura is not a 'penalty' in the same sense as D&D.

Masque
21-03-2007, 11:08
Well put but you have misquoted the rule for the Aura. [added word underlined].

I see the word 'value' in my original quote of the rules. Do you not see it?

the vicar
21-03-2007, 11:56
This is all a bit of rules lawyering, isn't it?

I mean, ultimately, it's all about somebody not wanting to suffer an unfortunate effect from those pesky daemonettes.

But let's think about this a bit. Or no, let's not think about this any more, because that's what's getting people into a general state of confusion in the first place, over-thinking what seems to be a relatively simple issue.

Daemonettes do bad things to your people. It's what they do, and they do it well, and die pretty d**ned fast to missile fire. Is it not enough that the unit under attack gets the benefit of the general's leadership to begin with? Now it must somehow be a nigh-impervious figure that, unless the rules state it in a certain mystical way, can never be modified?

Wow. Lawyers.

Hey, I have a question:
What's the difference between a penguin and a lawyer?

Aelyn
21-03-2007, 12:09
Hardly, the Vicar. This isn't lawyering at all - it's attempting to understand an unclear rule.

From my perspective, it's quite simple. The unit's Ld is reduced by 1 when in base contact with Daemonettes. However they can use the General's value instead of their own. Why would it be reduced by minus 1 - after all, it's a choice of (for instance) 7-1 or 8, and they have to go for the 8.

Look at it another way. If the general is in base contact, his Ld stat gets -1 - meaning EVERYTHING within 12" is effectively affected by the Daemonettes!

I'm with the "unmodified general's Ld" crowd. I've read the thread, but I simply can't see how else it can be interpreted. The unit doesn't gain the General's Ld, it gets to use the General's Ld.

It's not rules lawyering - I'd say those saying "modified Ld" are trying to lawyer it that way, if anything.

The Vicar: A penguin is a chocolate bar. A lawyer isn't.

NakedFisherman
21-03-2007, 14:28
The unit doesn't gain the General's Ld, it gets to use the General's Ld.

So, what is this mystical 'General's Ld'? Where does it attach to the characteristics of a model? Where are the rules for this magical extra ability that gets conjured up whenever the General is in range?

In the case of a Leadership test, roll 2D6. If the result is equal to or less than the model's Leadership value, the test has been passed. Pg. 5

If the total is greater than the unit's Leadership (Ld) value then the unit has broken and will flee. Pg. 39

When taking Psychology tests, roll 2D6 and compare the result to the Leadership value of the unit taking the test. If the result is less than or equal to the unit's Leadership score, the test is passed and all is well. Pg. 48

There is no mention in the rules of how to use this 'General's leadership' ability that some of you have tried to demonstrate. All references in the rulebook are to the leadership of the unit or model taking the test, and as such this infers that no extra ability or characteristic is generated when the General is in range of such a model or unit.

They 'use the General's Leadership value instead of their own'. The value has nowhere else to go besides to replace ('instead of their own') the Leadership value on the unit or model.

The rules give no support for how the game would work were it any other way.

Atrahasis
21-03-2007, 14:36
"use [...] instead of their own" does not in any way mean replacement. The rule for general's leadership supercedes the rules earlier in the rulebook telling us to use the unit's Leadership.

DeathlessDraich
21-03-2007, 14:38
I see the word 'value' in my original quote of the rules. Do you not see it?

You replied without checking first. The word 'value' should not be there. Thats why I underlined it.

Masque
21-03-2007, 14:45
You replied without checking first. The word 'value' should not be there. Thats why I underlined it.

I quoted page 35, not page 49. The wording for Aura of Slaanesh is slightly different on those pages.

Aelyn
21-03-2007, 16:00
They 'use the General's Leadership value instead of their own'. The value has nowhere else to go besides to replace ('instead of their own') the Leadership value on the unit or model.So you're saying the General's Ld effectively replaces theirs on their profile?

Exactly, they use the General's Leadership value instead of their own. And theirs has a -1 penalty from Aura of Slaanesh, but the General's doesn't because the General isn't in base contact.

Put it another way. If the General was in contact with Daemonettes, do you feel units within 12" should use their native Ld, that of the General at the time, or that on the General's profile?

Shagrat
21-03-2007, 16:11
People, use the common sense! The General being close doesn't change the fact that the daemonette is closer! -1 to the leardership always! The Daemonettes ARE this hot!!!

Festus
21-03-2007, 16:21
People, use the common sense! The General being close doesn't change the fact that the daemonette is closer! -1 to the leardership always! The Daemonettes ARE this hot!!!
... and this point of view is based on what rule exactly :rolleyes:

How insightful :wtf:

DeathlessDraich
21-03-2007, 16:48
I quoted page 35, not page 49. The wording for Aura of Slaanesh is slightly different on those pages.

Apologies, it should be " reduce its Leadership value" for the Daemonettes Aura as you mentioned.
I should have checked not you. :p

This shifts the argument in favour of using the General's Ld and reducing it by 1.

The General passes on its "Ld value" - pg 82.

The "Ld value" pg 35 HOC is changed by -1 by the Aura.
Again this might mean its intrinsic Ld or the value of the general's Ld passed on.

There's a stronger reason to adopt the latter.

Belerophon709
21-03-2007, 16:52
Festus is right - NakedFisherman is wrong.

The AoS tells us that enemies withing the aura range has its Ld reduced by one.

Imagine a Daemonette unit fighting a unit with Ld 7 on their profile. This would now be Ld 6.

The enemy unit is within 12" of their army general, who is OUTSIDE the aura range. His Ld for this example is 9.

So, the rules tell us that the unit must use their generals leadership INSTEAD of their own. (Notice that it doesn't say AS their own)

What this means is that for any Ld tests that they will have to take, while still under the influence of AoS, they will use the generals leadership of 9 (not modified since the general himself is not subject to the AoS) instead of their own Ld 6 (already modified down from 7 since they are subject to the AoS).

Now, if the rule had said "...use the general's Ld AS their own..." they would have to swap their own original Ld of 7 with the general's Ld of 9, effectively swapping the Ld value as long as they remain within 12" of him. This new Ld of 9 would then be modified, since the Ld is now the unit's "own" Ld.

However, this is not the case. Rules say the units within 12" of the general uses his Ld INSTEAD of their own. Since the Ld is not their own, it is not subject to any modifiers that affects the unit in question, and hence, not subject to the -1 modifer from AoS.

If we look at the other example, imagine that the general himself, but no other units, is under the influence of AoS. His Ld would then receive the -1 modifier, bringing his Ld down to 8. Any of his friendly units within 12" of him who use HIS Ld INSTEAD of their own will use his modified Ld of 8, not his original Ld of 9, since he is currently under the influence of AoS.


Belerophon

NakedFisherman
21-03-2007, 17:48
The AoS tells us that enemies withing the aura range has its Ld reduced by one.

Imagine a Daemonette unit fighting a unit with Ld 7 on their profile. This would now be Ld 6.

The enemy unit is within 12" of their army general, who is OUTSIDE the aura range. His Ld for this example is 9.

So, the rules tell us that the unit must use their generals leadership INSTEAD of their own. (Notice that it doesn't say AS their own)

No rule exists for checking the leadership of anything but the unit. There is no rule in the Psychology, Close Combat, or Characteristics section that mentions how a test is done against a characteristic that the unit or model do not possess (ie. 'General's leadership').

Please show me which rule states how to check against the 'General's leadership' and I'll agree with you.

NO SUCH RULE EXISTS.

Festus
21-03-2007, 18:01
NO SUCH RULE EXISTS.
Absolutely no need to shout, or is there?

AngelofSorrow
21-03-2007, 18:01
As much as I hate to agree with naked fisherman i'm going to have to join him. Ive played lots of games with my daemonettes and not one person has asked this question.
There are alot of rules lawyers where I'm from and not one of them has misinterpreted this rule. NF is right.
There s nothing to interpret here its -1 ld

I think the quote on festus' profile is a big help in this situation.

Belerophon709
21-03-2007, 18:30
No rule exists for checking the leadership of anything but the unit. There is no rule in the Psychology, Close Combat, or Characteristics section that mentions how a test is done against a characteristic that the unit or model do not possess (ie. 'General's leadership').

Please show me which rule states how to check against the 'General's leadership' and I'll agree with you.

NO SUCH RULE EXISTS.

Neither does it explicitly say that the unit or model has to possess the characteristic it checks against, which is the case here... It says that the model or unit must check using their Ld value (which it possesses). When checking against the general's leadership it says "...instead of their own...", meaning instead of the Ld-value that they "possess" - which means that they don't possess the general's Ld, which means that the AoS doesn't reduce the general's Ld by 1, since only the models/units affected have THEIRS (the Ld value they possess) reduced.

It's pure logic. The dice that come with the game have dots to represent the value of each side. By your logic, you could argue that rolling a six is the same as rolling 6 ones (since there are, in fact, 6 single dots on that side of the die). Since miscasts take presedence over irresistible force, you could argue that rolling two sixes would cause a miscast, since you rolled 12 ones...

Or is that a six-double micast? ;)

Shagrat
21-03-2007, 20:34
... and this point of view is based on what rule exactly :rolleyes:

How insightful :wtf:

Cmon Festus, as I said it's based in the rule of the "common sense"!

Don't be angry at me!!! I don't want to start an argument with you, I cannot argue with some one with a avatar like THAT!!!!
Put yourself in that poor/lucky soldier's position...:D

But if you REALLY want rules insight, what about Lahmian Vampires? They have a similar effect(-1 Ld) to the enemy, but you work out with Ld to use FIRST(his own or the general's), then reduce this number by -1.
VC Army Book, Pg 52.

Now, why should a Daemonette be less alluring than a Lahmian? Just bad rule writing?:cries:
Who wrote the Hordes of Chaos Army Book????Hmmm, oh him....

Greyfire
21-03-2007, 20:55
But if you REALLY want rules insight, what about Lahmian Vampires? They have a similar effect(-1 Ld) to the enemy, but you work out with Ld to use FIRST(his own or the general's), then reduce this number by -1.
VC Army Book, Pg 52.

Now, why should a Daemonette be less alluring than a Lahmian? Just bad rule writing?:cries:
Who wrote the Hordes of Chaos Army Book????Hmmm, oh him....

Not to egg anyone on, but, in theory, you could argue that being that alluring is a special trait of the Lahmian Vampires, that they are better at it then Daemonettes. I mean nearly naked can be more alluring than totally naked sometimes, and that's what I remember these models looking like. And then you can work the background of these two armies together to describe more on these differences. And then come up with some special rules to use when Lahmians fight Daemonettes. And then you could.... er, nevermind. This is a silly post. I think we need a silly post in this thread now. :p

-=- Greyfire

Belerophon709
21-03-2007, 21:06
But if you REALLY want rules insight, what about Lahmian Vampires? They have a similar effect(-1 Ld) to the enemy, but you work out with Ld to use FIRST(his own or the general's), then reduce this number by -1.
VC Army Book, Pg 52.



If you reduce something by -1, you actually ADD 1 to something... ;)

Just following Greyfire's example of silly posts here :D

Shagrat
21-03-2007, 21:50
If you reduce something by -1, you actually ADD 1 to something... ;)



Ohh, blame that to the VC Army Book, I just copied it!!!:eek:

Palatine Katinka
22-03-2007, 01:53
64 posts on modified Ld tests and not one person has mentioned Skaven.

Take a Skaven unit with one rank. Its Ld is 5+1=6.
Now put it within 12" of a Skaven Warlord (by himself, not in a unit). It tests on Ld 7+1=8.
Now put the Warlord in a unit with three ranks. The original one-rank-unit still tests on Ld 7+1=8 while within 12"

The unit adds its rank bonus to its Ld (either its own or the Generals if within 12").

I would expect the Aura of Slaanesh modifier to work in the same way.

Some quotes from the Strength in Numbers rule (Skaven Army Book p10)
"All units in the Skaven army always add their current rank bonus to their Leadership value for any Leadership based test.

First work out the Leadership of the unit as normal (character in the unit, General within 12", magic bonuses/penalties, etc) and then add the rank bonus of the unit to this value.
...
Note that the General confershis basic Leadership and then the units modify it with their own rank bonus - do not modify the Leadership of the General with the ranks of his own unit and then pass this modified Leadership on to every unit within 12"!"

I feel that the negative modifier from Daemonettes should work in the same way as this positive modifier.

On an aside, as someone has already mentioned that combat resolution is added to your dice roll, not deducted from your Ld, there is a Tomb Kings Magic Weapon that does nothing. Something like 50 points to double the negative modifier to the opponents Ld when they take a Break Test!

NakedFisherman
22-03-2007, 02:26
64 posts on modified Ld tests and not one person has mentioned Skaven.

Well, they follow their own special rules.

Palatine Katinka
22-03-2007, 03:03
But surely it could be taken as a good suggestion of how to work a similar situation? (Precedent/example of designer intent.)
Situation: Unit has modified Ld but is in range of General.
Resolution: Unit uses Generals Ld, which is modified by any modifiers that apply to the unit (but not modifiers that apply to the General).

I'm not the only one to have compared it to another armies rules. (See post about Lahmians earlier.)

As I said, I would expect the Aura of Slaanesh modifier to work in the same way.

Selsaral
22-03-2007, 14:21
However, this is not the case. Rules say the units within 12" of the general uses his Ld INSTEAD of their own. Since the Ld is not their own, it is not subject to any modifiers that affects the unit in question, and hence, not subject to the -1 modifer from AoS.


If this were true, rallying units using the general's leadership could not use their musician, correct?

monkeyboyalpha
22-03-2007, 15:18
If this were true, rallying units using the general's leadership could not use their musician, correct?

I allready said that... You're not the first to use solid arguements! haha...

This topic has become like flogging a dead horse, time it was locked methinks?



MBA

Belerophon709
22-03-2007, 15:36
If this were true, rallying units using the general's leadership could not use their musician, correct?

Difference here (as I see it) is that it's a situational bonus:

"If a fleeing unit includes a musician, it will gain a +1 Leadership bonus in any attempt to rally , up to a maximum of Leadership 10." (BfSP RB p81)

The AoS rules (HoC AB p35) says: "reduces its Leadership value", thereby implying the units own Ld (keyword: "its").

Musician adds a situational bonus to the units Leadership (which could be further improved by other "bonuses" such as the general being within 12"), while the AoS reduces the units own Ld (a Ld value that has no effect if the general is within 12", since the unit's own Ld value would then be "situationally" replaced).


Ohh, blame that to the VC Army Book, I just copied it!!!:eek:

Funny thing is that GW made a doodoo in the AoS wording: They did the "reduced by -1" there as well, so ppl should actually be ADDING 1 to their Ld when fighting daemonettes ;) So basically I just shot my own argumentation straight to hell...

Selsaral
22-03-2007, 16:07
Thanks everyone for your input. I still hold out hope that more discussion can help form a consensus.

My 'spirit of the rules' detector is telling me that all this word parsing is unnecessary, and that the writers expect us to have a cup of tea and understand that they weren't trying to draw distinctions by wording these rules slightly differently.

In your post above Belerophon709, even after reading it ten times I cannot find a substantive difference between the rules wording you quoted, nor can I detect any implied 'situational bonus' when that wording is never even hinted at. My gaming group in our 15-year history has never come across such an interpretation.

The rules for musicians and rallying, and the skaven rules (even though it's more specific than the general rule in the 7th ed book for musicians) are pushing me hard to believe that AoS works just like musicians and rallying. I don't know anything about vampire Counts, but the comments above about their rule further reinforces my impression.

However that's really all I have to go on. If there were no rules about musicians, vampires, or skaven, I'd be hard pressed (other than my vague 'spirit of the rules' detector) to find anything in the wording that would indicate this.

Belerophon709
22-03-2007, 17:02
Well put.

Everything is in the eye of the beholder, and this is no exception. The "most important rule" should really be used here if you can't find the explanation from reading the rules. Your gaming group might see it differently from mine and that's just fine. Not my place to tell you how to play the game at all. I'm just giving you my interpretation of the rules and the interpretation of my gaming group.

As for the difference, the first one is a bonus added to the attempt. It's not a bonus that is added to the Ld value of the unit in question (again: this is how I read it).

AoS (as I read it) adds a permanent (as long as they are in BtB) penalty to the units own Ld for all purposes.

Aelyn
22-03-2007, 17:31
Well, having read the rules for the General and the Aura, I still feel the exact wording leads to the General's Ld not being reduced.

However, having read the precedent and similar rules (Skaven Strength in Numbers, the phrasing of the Musician rule, and so forth) I would say it seems the designers intended for the Aura to reduce the General's granted Ld by 1 as well, and the error is most likely simply due to the fact that Hordes of Chaos was written for a different edition, which could have had different wording.

I would be perfectly OK with my unit getting a -1 penalty even when using the General's Ld.

Selsaral
22-03-2007, 17:33
Well put.

Everything is in the eye of the beholder, and this is no exception. The "most important rule" should really be used here if you can't find the explanation from reading the rules. Your gaming group might see it differently from mine and that's just fine. Not my place to tell you how to play the game at all. I'm just giving you my interpretation of the rules and the interpretation of my gaming group.


Very true.



As for the difference, the first one is a bonus added to the attempt. It's not a bonus that is added to the Ld value of the unit in question (again: this is how I read it).


Thanks, this made more sense this time.

But the rule says it adds one to the leadership, not subtract one from the rallying die roll (which would be an explicit way of communicating your interpretation).

"it will gain a +1 Leadership bonus in any attempt to rally" looks identical to a bonus added to the leadership value (to me at least).



AoS (as I read it) adds a permanent (as long as they are in BtB) penalty to the units own Ld for all purposes.

The only difference my interpretation is finding between these two things is that one only applies to rallying, and the other applies to all leadership-based tests.

But as you say, individual interpretations are bound to vary and there's no cosmic reason we must agree.

Thanks again for helping me figure this out.

Selsaral
22-03-2007, 20:10
I talked to one of my gaming buddies and he was under the impression that a musician should never add +1 leadership to a rally attempt if the unit is using the general's leadership. This was against my impression but at least it's consistent with the idea AoS doesn't modify a unit who is using the general's leadership.

So now I am leaning the other way. Which direction we end up playing with isn't critically important, but it must be consistent for me to be satisfied.

My friend owns the skaven book. I am going to get ahold of it and carefully read their special rule to see if it's equally consistent. Cause we have been playing for years that skaven can use the general's leadership and then add the rank bonus to it.

Palatine Katinka
22-03-2007, 23:50
My friend owns the skaven book. I am going to get ahold of it and carefully read their special rule to see if it's equally consistent. Cause we have been playing for years that skaven can use the general's leadership and then add the rank bonus to it.

The important thing is that the Skaven unit adds its own rank bonus to the General's Ld when they are using his Ld and they do not add the rank bonus of the unit he is in. The modifier that applies to the unit continues to apply when using the General's Ld. The modifier to the Skaven General's Ld does not apply to units other than the one he is in.

sulla
23-03-2007, 06:36
Thanks everyone for your input. I still hold out hope that more discussion can help form a consensus.

On the internet?:rolleyes: Good luck.:evilgrin: It would probably be a first if the internet led to consensus.

Selsaral
23-03-2007, 13:13
The important thing is that the Skaven unit adds its own rank bonus to the General's Ld when they are using his Ld and they do not add the rank bonus of the unit he is in. The modifier that applies to the unit continues to apply when using the General's Ld. The modifier to the Skaven General's Ld does not apply to units other than the one he is in.

(I haven't gotten ahold of the book yet). Is there any language that specifically says that nearby units can borrow the general's leadership and then add the rank bonus to it? If not, then that's a powerful precedent that musicians and AoS stack on the general's leadership. If so, then it appears that Skaven have a special rule that let's them use the general's leadership where musicians and AoS cannot.

Selsaral
23-03-2007, 13:14
On the internet?:rolleyes: Good luck.:evilgrin: It would probably be a first if the internet led to consensus.

Yeah a 10% agreement rate on the internet could probably be called a 'strong consensus'. :D

Palatine Katinka
23-03-2007, 14:06
(I haven't gotten ahold of the book yet). Is there any language that specifically says that nearby units can borrow the general's leadership and then add the rank bonus to it? If not, then that's a powerful precedent that musicians and AoS stack on the general's leadership. If so, then it appears that Skaven have a special rule that let's them use the general's leadership where musicians and AoS cannot.

My first post about Skaven quoted the relavent sections of the rule. The only bits I left out were examples of how it works and examples of when Skaven lose the Ld bonus (when they lose rank bonus, attacked in flank, fleeing already). Here's those bits again...


Some quotes from the Strength in Numbers rule (Skaven Army Book p10)
"All units in the Skaven army always add their current rank bonus to their Leadership value for any Leadership based test.

First work out the Leadership of the unit as normal (character in the unit, General within 12", magic bonuses/penalties, etc) and then add the rank bonus of the unit to this value.
...
Note that the General confers his basic Leadership and then the units modify it with their own rank bonus - do not modify the Leadership of the General with the ranks of his own unit and then pass this modified Leadership on to every unit within 12"!"

After re-reading this, I think Skaven Slaves may be immune to AoS. If they are not within 12" of the General, their Ld is 2 and can't be reduced by AoS, "and then add the rank bonus of the unit to this value." A small mercy for rubbish troops who'll probably still fail the test anyway!

Selsaral
23-03-2007, 15:11
My first post about Skaven quoted the relavent sections of the rule. The only bits I left out were examples of how it works and examples of when Skaven lose the Ld bonus (when they lose rank bonus, attacked in flank, fleeing already). Here's those bits again...



After re-reading this, I think Skaven Slaves may be immune to AoS. If they are not within 12" of the General, their Ld is 2 and can't be reduced by AoS, "and then add the rank bonus of the unit to this value." A small mercy for rubbish troops who'll probably still fail the test anyway!

Aha, sorry, I read that wrong originally and thought you were paraphrasing rather than giving me exactly what I wanted.

Thanks, that's exactly what I needed. Skaven have extremely specific special rules that let them do it.

I am now feeling confident that the AoS and musicians have no effect if a unit is borrowing the general's leadership. Skaven, as it should be, can indeed add ranks to the borrowed general's leadership.

And wow, that nerfs AoS pretty badly. It's not like daemonettes were overpowered if it worked the other way.

DeathlessDraich
23-03-2007, 16:04
Thanks, that's exactly what I needed. Skaven have extremely specific special rules that let them do it.

I am now feeling confident that the AoS and musicians have no effect if a unit is borrowing the general's leadership. Skaven, as it should be, can indeed add ranks to the borrowed general's leadership.


As a Skaven player I'm confident it does:p :
Strength in numbers:
"First work out the LD of the unit as normal (General within 12", magic bonuses penalties etc) and then add the rank bonus"

Belerophon709
23-03-2007, 17:31
And wow, that nerfs AoS pretty badly. It's not like daemonettes were overpowered if it worked the other way.

Actually, it depends on how you use your daemonettes. If they are actually in base contact with the general, they reduce his Ld by 1 - this means that any enemy units who could use their general's Ld now use his reduced Ld - if you look at it that way, the AoS is quite powerful ;)

Bele

Palatine Katinka
24-03-2007, 03:43
I was actually trying to suggest that the Skaven rules be taken as precedent on how to deal with modified Ld because their army-wide rules go into more detail than other unit specific and relatively minor rules do.

I feel that the -1 Ld for AoS should apply to the unit regardless of what Ld they are using (their own, that of a leading character or the general if within 12") and modifers that apply to the general (or his unit) should not apply to other units within 12".

Belerophon709
25-03-2007, 08:30
I feel that the -1 Ld for AoS should apply to the unit regardless of what Ld they are using (their own, that of a leading character or the general if within 12") and modifers that apply to the general (or his unit) should not apply to other units within 12".

The way that I think of the "using the general's Ld"-rule is like this:

The unit about to test look to their general who is close and see him fighting valiantly, drawing renewed courage and determination from him.
If they look to the general and he looks like he's about to poop (just a little) in his pants (being under the influence of AoS - the general that is), they might not be as inspired to hold their ground.

Festus
25-03-2007, 09:14
Hi

I feel that ...
This may or may not be the case, but the rules say otherwise AFAI am concerned.

Festus

Palatine Katinka
25-03-2007, 16:01
This may or may not be the case, but the rules say otherwise AFAI am concerned.

Not if you take the Skaven rules as precedent. I know they are rules for another army but being army-wide rules with a third of a page going into detail and clarifications on how to deal with a modified Ld value and General's Ld interaction, I wouldn't be surprised if a small paragraph about a unit specific rule was supposed to work the same way but they couldn't dedicate as much page space to it.


The way that I think of the "using the general's Ld"-rule is like this:

The unit about to test look to their general who is close and see him fighting valiantly, drawing renewed courage and determination from him.
If they look to the general and he looks like he's about to poop (just a little) in his pants (being under the influence of AoS - the general that is), they might not be as inspired to hold their ground.

And if Skaven look to their General, surrounded by his finest Stormvermin (boosting his Ld in the same way as AoS would deminish it) they aren't affected by his unit's extra ranks. As I've said, I'm looking to the more important, more in depth rules for an army-wide Ld modifier as precedent on how to deal with minor, unit-specific Ld modifiers that can't be given a third of a page to explain their rules.

Atrahasis
25-03-2007, 17:12
As I've said, I'm looking to the more important, more in depth rules for an army-wide Ld modifier as precedent on how to deal with minor, unit-specific Ld modifiers that can't be given a third of a page to explain their rules.The commonly used phrase "clutching at straws" is far more concise. ;)

Palatine Katinka
25-03-2007, 17:18
And using the "only the unit's Ld is modified, not the Ld they are using" argument isn't clutching at straws?

Festus
25-03-2007, 17:32
No, it is reading the rules as they are...

Selsaral
26-03-2007, 13:04
Actually, it depends on how you use your daemonettes. If they are actually in base contact with the general, they reduce his Ld by 1 - this means that any enemy units who could use their general's Ld now use his reduced Ld - if you look at it that way, the AoS is quite powerful ;)

Bele

True. Against Skaven for instance, the general is generally cowering behind endless units of rats, and I rarely get a chance to engage him.

Aganist chaos or dwarves for example, whose generals are usually standing up front hoping to get into a fight, it might be more effective.