ICs versus Shooting Wound Allocation - Let's close this loophole

[Chapters Unwritten]

So, at my club this week I heard about a game in which a player had a very survivable unit due to the fact that it was two independent characters attached to one another, and he was allocating all wounds onto one of them, leaving the other unscathed. I immediately figured this was a mistake and so we all looked it up after the fact. The player who did this cites this bit of the rules as his reason:

"Independent characters that have joined a unit are considered part of that unit and so may not be picked out as targets. If the unit they have joined is hit, the controlling player can choose to allocate hits against the characters just like the other members of the unit."

This seems very clear to me: the bit is there to let you know that, yes, you can allocate wounds to the IC as a part of the unit. Our player, however, has interpreted this to mean you can choose to allocate as many or as few wounds to the IC as you like, and can soak them up without having other wounds on the unit.

I think we all know the answer to this one, but I was having a hard time articulating it in any concrete way other than pointing to standard would allocation rules and pointing out that no one in a unit can have a second wound until everyone has a first, but his argument is that since this is two ICs attached to each other he can do as he pleases, since this rule lets him allegedly choose not to put wounds on some ICs while putting all wounds on others.

This seems very clearly wrong to me because it would obviously break the game in half in so many units. Help me to explain it in a more irrefutable way, if at all possible!

* * * * * * * * *

The Bonus Question: The same player, using Grey Knights, was able to make his Culexus assassin's Str5 AP1 weapon have tons of shots due to proximity with other psykers, somehow. He argued that a particular unit (not GKs, Henchmen I think) yielded one extra shot per model because they were psykers, and that while the Grey Knights count as one for this purpose this other squad somehow didn't. This one, I am just curious on, but it seemed off to me and came up in the same argument.

[copper.talos]

The "...just like the other members of the unit." means that the IC can have the 1st wound allocated on him like any other member of the unit and can have a 2nd wound allocated on him when all other models have had 1 wound allocated on them, just like any other member of the unit.

[Konovalev]

The Bonus Question: The same player, using Grey Knights, was able to make his Culexus assassin's Str5 AP1 weapon have tons of shots due to proximity with other psykers, somehow. He argued that a particular unit (not GKs, Henchmen I think) yielded one extra shot per model because they were psykers, and that while the Grey Knights count as one for this purpose this other squad somehow didn't. This one, I am just curious on, but it seemed off to me and came up in the same argument.

Psyker battle squad or whatever they're called do individually add to the Culexus' shots since all members of the squad are psykers.

[Chapters Unwritten]

The "...just like the other members of the unit." means that the IC can have the 1st wound allocated on him like any other member of the unit and can have a 2nd wound allocated on him when all other models have had 1 wound allocated on them, just like any other member of the unit.

Though I pointed this out, he is pretty certain the part before the "just like" bit is the part that is allowing the circumvention of the normal rules, as the wording, according to him, tells him he CAN allocate to them - not that he has to. I need a more concrete argument, unfortunately.

[blurrymadness]

I agree with the gamey player. The controlling player can CHOOSE whether or not to allocate hits to the IC. Because one of the ICs is the unit and the other is the IC, he can decide when you shoot which is the IC and which is the unit; and then choose NOT to allocate hits; assuming I'm reading the rule correctly (and you quoted it correctly.)

This is where the loophole is; the loophole is NOT in the "just like", but in the fact that one of these IC's counts as the unit and the other counts as the IC attached to "the unit"


EDIT:
The way to read the passage is that the player "can choose to allocate hits" just like other members, which means that they "can choose NOT to allocate hits" just like other members. Because of this choice the player chooses not to allocate hits onto the "attached IC" and allocated them to the "unit IC" (which is chosen by them since it's ambiguous. <= that bit is common sense logic and not in the rules => I could be wrong)


Frankly, until this rules posting I always allocated hits like normal to ICs, but I see now that they can hide behind the unit until combat comes along; which is a neat thing to note.

[Nurgling Chieftain]

The way to read the passage is that the player "can choose to allocate hits" just like other members, which means that they "can choose NOT to allocate hits" just like other members.

I don't see how that offers ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER from other members. You have exactly the same ability to allocate - or not allocate - to the IC as you have to any other model. That's what you, yourself, just wrote. I don't see how you're coming to exact opposite conclusion as your own interpretation directly states.

Random observation: Hits are not allocated to specific models, wounds are. As stated, the rule doesn't actually make any sense in the first place.

[Chapters Unwritten]

I agree with the gamey player. The controlling player can CHOOSE whether or not to allocate hits to the IC. Because one of the ICs is the unit and the other is the IC, he can decide when you shoot which is the IC and which is the unit; and then choose NOT to allocate hits; assuming I'm reading the rule correctly (and you quoted it correctly.)

This is where the loophole is; the loophole is NOT in the "just like", but in the fact that one of these IC's counts as the unit and the other counts as the IC attached to "the unit"


EDIT:
The way to read the passage is that the player "can choose to allocate hits" just like other members, which means that they "can choose NOT to allocate hits" just like other members. Because of this choice the player chooses not to allocate hits onto the "attached IC" and allocated them to the "unit IC" (which is chosen by them since it's ambiguous. <= that bit is common sense logic and not in the rules => I could be wrong)


Frankly, until this rules posting I always allocated hits like normal to ICs, but I see now that they can hide behind the unit until combat comes along; which is a neat thing to note.

Not really. Some faults in the logic:

1.) The standard rules for wound allocation point out you can't allocate any extra wounds until all models in "the unit" have one. And per the sentence right before the one I quoted, ICs are considered "a part of the unit they join."

2.) There is no distinction between the IC and the "unit IC" anywhere. There is no distinction between ICs and the units they have joined. You target the unit, as a whole - which, per the sentence referenced above, is all one unit for the purposes of shooting.

The rule exists to let you know that when I target a squad, you can use the IC in it as part of the wound allocation; not that you can ignore it.

[Mr Zoat]

The Bonus Question: The same player, using Grey Knights, was able to make his Culexus assassin's Str5 AP1 weapon have tons of shots due to proximity with other psykers, somehow. He argued that a particular unit (not GKs, Henchmen I think) yielded one extra shot per model because they were psykers, and that while the Grey Knights count as one for this purpose this other squad somehow didn't. This one, I am just curious on, but it seemed off to me and came up in the same argument.

This resulted in a rather long thread last time it came up. I am of the opinion that they don't, due to the fact that they lack both the rule Psyker and the ability to use psychic powers individually. As I recall the thread was split more or less down the middle.

Reasonably coherent discussion here and here

[Egaeus]

The rule exists to let you know that when I target a squad, you can use the IC in it as part of the wound allocation; not that you can ignore it.

It's one of those situations (there are a number of them in the rules) where GW's attempt to clarify things actually seems to lead to more confusion. We are told the IC is considered part of the unit. Why do we really need to be told anything more?

I think the more interesting side-effect here is that if this is true then the IC actually prevents the unit from taking more than 1 wound apeice, does it not? The rules say you cannot put a second wound on a model until all models in the unit have taken one...if we aren't required to put a wound on the IC (who by the rules "is considered part of that unit") and choose not to then we haven't fulfilled the requirement of assigning one to each model, so no further wounds can be allocated?

[Chapters Unwritten]

Yet another glaring reason why it is almost certainly incorrect, and why no one save this one person in my years playing this game has interpreted it as such.

Nowhere does it say you aren't required to put wounds on an IC, or that you can put wounds on ICs to avoid them hitting the unit. The IC is in the unit. All it tells you is that, when the time comes, yes, the IC can have the shooting wounds applied to him.

If you want to mince words and glide by on the technicality, you can argue it. But as always, the game is a permissive ruleset - it tells us only what we are allowed to do. Nowhere does it say ICs are not subject to the normal rules, so the normal rules fill in all the blanks, and as I already pointed out they seal the deal in favor of the common game-as-played interpretation. Just not decisively enough for me to convince the fellow who thought up this whole thing.

[TheGreatDalmuti]

We all know that the "you may choose" means that if the unit with IC is 10 models and it suffers 6 wounds you may choose to allocate a wound to the IC or you may choose not to. Because the sentence doesnt have a full stop after the choosing part, the sentence is "you may choose just like normal members". And normal members don't have a choice if the wounds are more than the models of the unit.

[meltedwing]

Wait, what??? He had an IC attached to another IC? You can't do that. IC's cannot be attached to a unit consisting of one model.

[Tethylis]

Wait, what??? He had an IC attached to another IC? You can't do that. IC's cannot be attached to a unit consisting of one model.

They cannot join units that always consist of a single model, they can most certainly join other IC's.

BRB pg 48 "They can join other independent characters though, to form a powerful multi-character unit."

Ironically its the sentence after the one you are thinking of.

[meltedwing]

They cannot join units that always consist of a single model, they can most certainly join other IC's.

BRB pg 48 "They can join other independent characters though, to form a powerful multi-character unit."

Ironically its the sentence after the one you are thinking of.

Doh! Thank you for correcting me.

I probably had that wrong because of ******* GK HQ's that aren't IC's. My bad.