ICs gaining retinue's USR - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Tyranid Warrior Fanatic Phalanx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    29
    Posts
    2,668
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    146 (x7)

    ICs gaining retinue's USR

    Hey, I was reading a different forum and someone mentioned a post on a different forum giving a good arguement for ICs with a retinue gaining its USRs as they aren't ICs when with a retinue, but upgrade characters.

    Here's the post (origionally posted on The Tyranid Hive, quote taken from Warpshadow):

    peppermintcat wrote:

    Hi all,

    I've been watching these boards for some time now, loving the tactics and painting forums especially. I've been a 40k player since 2e and a 'nid player since 4th.

    Right, my question. I'm intrigued by the new rules on characters with retinues because of the possible connotations for BL's with genestealer retinues. Obviously infiltrate is a lovely bonus for helping to get around the usual 'they're too slow' issue, but we can buy 'stealers that ability with scuttlers anyway (though I'm willing to concede that adding a BL to your unit for just 34 pts, isn't a bad deal if you were going to buy scuttlers and hold the 'stealers back in reserve in any case).

    The thing that interests me most is whether or not the unit keeps the Fleet USR or not, given that the BL does not count as an IC, but as an Upgrade Character, whilst with his retinue.

    The relevant sections in the 5e rule book state that:


    * UCs are effectively the same as any other model in the unit bar their stat/ability/wargear differences. (p.47, second bullet)
    * Any character bought with a retinue or bodyguard counts as a UC not as an IC (p. 48, last paragraph)
    * The USR section only specifically mentions IC's when talking about units and IC's losing USRs when joining those missing a particular USR (p.74, preamble to list of rules in the section regarding asterisked USRs)


    At the moment, as I understand it, it plays out like this:

    BL is not an IC whilst with his retinue, he's an upgrade character therefore he should be treated exactly as another trooper in the unit (just with different stats, etc.). Therefore the whole unit has fleet (and infiltrate courtesy of BL) whilst the 'stealer retinue is alive, but as soon as it's dead (quite likely that the BL will be last man standing given that standard wound allocation applies and he's differently equipped) he would lose fleet because he becomes an IC at that point.

    Adding further 'weight' to my argument here is the fact that the paragraph preceding the one on P.48 regarding retinues is one regarding ICs joining units and special rules that is essentially a reiteration (or, in fact, a pre-iteration, as it comes before the USR section!) of the USR section, just with a specific example. Why say that characters with retinues count as UCs not ICs unless you intend this to be one of the consequences and why specifically talk about ICs with regard to USRs unless you want to differentiate them from UCs in this respect?

    I'm not sure whether this was an intended consequence of the 5e upgrade character/character/retinue rules or not, but I think it's rather difficult to argue against the conclusion I've come to (in fact I've come here to test it more vigorously than just amongst my gaming friends, none of whom are 'nid players and all of whom reluctantly agree with my reasoning). I was hoping there would be clarification in the new FAQ, but sadly there isn't.
    Anyways, what it says in a nutshell is that as ICs count as upgrade characters and not independant characters when they're in a retinue, they don't force the unit to lose USRs that the unit would lose when joined by an IC without them (as its not an IC). It strikes me as fairly rules lawyer-y, but it seems to work going by RAW. Why the main guy that benefits seems to be the broodlord, it can probably benefit some other characters which is why I'm posting this here rather than in the nid forum.

    40K armies: Tyranids (2001), Space Wolves (2008), Sisters of Battle (2011)
    Current Rep: 1337

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Suffer not the Unclean InquisitorAffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Age
    36
    Posts
    2,251
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    381 (x8)

    That's not holding any water in my book. The post does quite conclusively demonstrate that the stealers don't lose fleet. However, that's not enough You need a rule that shows that the Broodlord *GAINS* it. The unit moves at the rate of the slowest member. One member who can't fleet = unit that can't fleet. (Or infiltrate, or Hit&Run, or anything else.)

    The OP even says it himself:
    * UCs are effectively the same as any other model in the unit bar their stat/ability/wargear differences. (p.47, second bullet)
    ability differences, One model in the unit doesn't have a special rule that the rest do = ability difference. It is in no way shown that he *gains* the rule, only that they don't lose it, which is not adequate for the unit as a whole to use it.
    Last edited by InquisitorAffe; July 22nd, 2008 at 01:16. Reason: original was needlessly sarcastic

  4. #3
    The ORIGINAL Sniper Puss eiglepulper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Age
    57
    Posts
    2,841
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    596 (x8)

    A Retinue is still just a unit which can be joined by an IC. It is referred to as a "special" unit because it a) usually will have specialist members and b) the IC may not leave it until all its members have been removed from play.

    A "normal" unit can be joined by an IC but he may choose to leave it in any Movement Phase, subject of course to certain conditions to do with Assault/Combat/Falling Back and similar.

    The rules about conferring or removing abilities apply equally to both types of unit and the joining IC. If the relevant USR has an asterisk, then that ability is lost if one or other elements does not possess it.

    The bit where the BRB says that ICs "count as upgrade characters for the unit" (P.48 BRB ) is merely reinforcing the point that these guys can't leave the Retinue. A Vet Sgt is an upgrade character; he can't wander off on his own. That's why the BRB uses him as an example of what the IC counts as.

    Note also that the 2nd bullet point on P.47 BRB no longer says that "...the following rules do not apply to them" as it did in 4th Ed. This makes the point that although the IC has 'become' an Upgrade Character for the Retinue unit, all the rules pertaining to ICs still apply to him. This includes the ones about USRs and abilities being gained or lost.

    E.
    "Tau Commandment #226: Participants who use Velocity Trackers in the Tau Clay Pigeon Tournament will be disqualified"

  5. #4
    Tyranid Warrior Fanatic Phalanx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    29
    Posts
    2,668
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    146 (x7)

    Thats kinda what I figured. As I said before, it did look pretty rules-lawyer-y in the first place. I just wanted to see if anyone could make some good points either way.
    40K armies: Tyranids (2001), Space Wolves (2008), Sisters of Battle (2011)
    Current Rep: 1337

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts