PDA

View Full Version : Slann BSB + Palanquin = ...useless?



ReveredChaplainDrake
07-06-2007, 12:29
I'm willing to bet this has been asked before, but the Warseer search engine gives nothing but irrelevant junk whenever I type in "Slann BSB".

Everyone says that a Slann with a BSB gives the whole cold-blooded re-rollable (on break tests) Ld9. However, the BRB says that BSBs not in the fighting rank loses all their benefits. But Slanns are never forced to be in their fighting rank, unless they want the benefits. And if they do get into combat, the only way to get out is for the opponent to be dumb enough to declare a challenge for the Slann to refuse and move back. But this forfeits the effects of the BSB, which far outweighs the Slann's crap-tacular combat abilities. So it seems that, from a strict reading, I basically have two choices with my Slann: Fight with him, or waste the use of the BSB. (Suddenly, that Flaming Sword of Rhuin is looking like a really good idea...)

Is there any loophole that Slanns have that lets their joined unit get banner bonuses when not in the front rank?

Or do people just run their Slanns alone? I think that's the only way to subvert this little BSB rule oversight. (Of course, how can a Slann be in a fighting rank when it isn't in a unit at all?)

EvC
07-06-2007, 13:21
Well there have been threads about it (Your search should have shown you this thread: http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77118&highlight=Slann+BSB it did when I put the terms ins!), but the answer is inconclusive. It really needs an FAQing.

You'll still get the benefits of the BSB's break test re-roll and any ability the Palanquin gives, but you can't technically have the +1 combat resolution bonus.

T10
07-06-2007, 13:25
The 7th edition rules may result in rules from older army books being rendered useless or weird, the Beasts of Chaos Raiders rule is one example.

As you pointed out, the letter of the rule is that a Slann in the second rank cannot provide the benefits of being the general and battle standard bearer, except for what is specifically allowed for in the army book. So the army book allows you to do stuff that doesn't make sense.

You could house-rule it different though.

-T10

E-Dog
08-06-2007, 16:04
The 7th edition rules may result in rules from older army books being rendered useless or weird, the Beasts of Chaos Raiders rule is one example.

You could house-rule it different though.

-T10

My thoughts exactly, the at least 4 wide rule for beatmen is another, I rank 'em 5 wide its common sense.

Ninsaneja
09-06-2007, 03:38
I'd say the intention is that he can lead the regiment from the second rank - that is, count as being in the first rank for the purposes of being a character but not for combat. As such, the unit may use his leadership and his banner. This is how I play it.