Librarium Online Forums banner

Sgt Telion

4K views 24 replies 6 participants last post by  Moglun 
#1 ·
Can anyone tell me if it is possible to add a Camo Cloak to Sgt Telion? The army builder does not allow it to be added and I am in question as to if it is a design flaw or does the Sgt not quilify for a cloak.
 
#3 · (Edited)
In the Space Marine Codex on page 88 Telion does indeed have the special rule of stealth that improves all of that units cover saves by +1.

And the squad he is with can have Camo Cloaks (page 134).

Now Camo Cloaks [page 100] just echo the rules for stealth.

So if you follow all of this you will see that if you class Telion as part of that squad you could indeed waste your points on doubling up on the same ability but if you class Telion as a complete replacement for the sergeant and all of his rules then you can not since he does not have that wargear option.

I would lean towards the second option, no cloak for him because his rules do not give permission for it. Army Builder is correct.

All this means is that you don’t have to spend the points on cloaks because he has one as default.
[Notice the pic from page 88 and you will see a cloak on him anyway.]

Cheers.
 
#4 ·
Well in the SM codex on pg 134 it says that the sergeant is replaced by Sgt. Telion. Then you can upgrade all the models in the unit to have the camo cloak.

So, yes you can give the camo cloak to Telion (in fact you have to give him a camo cloak if you give the unit cloaks). However, camo cloaks do not give you the +1 to the cover save. They give the model the Stealth special rule (SM Codex, pg 100 ). Since Telion already has the Stealth rule, giving him a cloak does nothing.
 
#5 ·
What?

Camo Cloaks use the rules for ‘Stealth,’ Telion has ‘Stealth,’ and ‘Stealth’ is a +1 cover save so how do you conclude that ‘camo cloaks do not give you the +1 to the cover save?’

The squad as described in the rules has the option of cloaks.

The character as described does not.

So you replace the normal sergeant character and his rules for Telion – rules and all.

To do otherwise would allow Telion to take the squad sergeants options since he is the replacement after all and this is patently ridiculous.

Thanks.
 
#7 · (Edited)
Ok, I did not want to go to this extent but…………

By strict RAW, Telion has an ability that he can’t legally use due to the fact that you can-not take the same rule twice. The squad has the USR and so does he, but how do you reconcile this in a game?

Simply by treating him as a complete replacement for the squads Sergeant.

If you don’t do this the Telion can ALL the options that the normal Sergeant could have taken and then you start down the track of getting beyond what Telion is intended.

So I would use RAI here otherwise he could end up with such craziness as being armed with a ballistic skill 6 missile launcher.

The intention as far as I am concerned here is that the cost of his ‘stealth’ is already paid for in his entry price.

And the result is that ‘Stealth’ being a unit upgrade and not a model upgrade, the normal Scouts would not have to bother with buying cloaks at all since Telion provides the benefit for them.

Cheers.
 
#8 · (Edited)
If the upgrade says 'the scouts and sarge can buy camo cloaks at +X pts' (or otherwise specifies the sergeant), then Wicky is right because Telion is not the sarge and does not have the same equipment options as the sarge would. On the other hand, if it says 'the unit can buy camo cloaks' then M_M is right because Telion is part of the unit... unless Telion's description includes "must be fielded exactly as shown, no additional equipment may be purchased", which is a common disclaimer for characters.

EDIT: And of course, as everyone has mentioned the cloak wouldn't do anything for him either way (or the rest of the squad, at least as long as he was alive) since he already has stealth.
 
#9 ·
Just to reiterate here, Stealth is a UNIT upgrade.

If one model has it in that unit then they all do.

And you can’t upgrade the upgrade by buying cloaks for a Telion equipped unit since Stealth originally comes with him as part of his cost.

So there are two options here –
1. Go the route of having a normal sergeant and buy cloaks all round,
2. Or go the route of buying Telion and the cloaks come supplied.

The option you can’t consider is buying Telion and then buying cloaks as you can-not double up on wargear bonuses.

The confusion here stems from the fact that the USR of stealth equals the wargear of camo cloaks and these are not an individual upgrades but unit ones and as such they only need to be bought once.

Cheers.
 
#10 · (Edited)
Just a question WRT this. Stealth, from my interpretation of the USR, is not lost by an IC or gained by a unit (or vice versa) in any permutation of the rules. So why would Telion give his unit stealth?

The way I read it, all the Scouts are in the locker room before the big game, then Telion (with his stealth cloak already on) walks into the locker room, and says, 'cloak up boys your with me today!'

And at the end of the day, its 3 points, so to prevent arguing why not give Telion a cloak as well.

Edit: I've just realised why you think Stealth is a unit upgrade 'all the units cover saves are improved by +1'
......bugger......
 
#11 ·
Edit: I've just realised why you think Stealth is a unit upgrade 'all the units cover saves are improved by +1'
......bugger......
Bingo!

It is a rules ‘faux pas’ to allow a unit upgrade twice like this and I still maintain that the ‘intention’ is that Telion overrides the squad rule for cloaks.

Cheers.
 
#14 ·
Hi,
This is dragging out, but yes, if a character has no choice but to have a unit upgrade then how has does the rest unit not have it?

You could well see it as “If you replace the sergeant with Telion the unit will receive…….” Again note well that ALL of the unit benefits – not just the model.
(Read the USR on page76.)

(I did cover all this in post 9.)

To word all this is a different manner –
• A +1 cover save is optional with Scouts and their Sergeant and costs per model,
• A +1 cover save is compulsory if you include Telion and at no extra cost.

That’s how I see it due to the fact its not possible to give Stealth to just one model in a unit.

Cheers.

P.S. I really don’t know what else to say here and as such I will try to leave it for others to determine the outcome of all this.
 
#15 ·
What I was getting at (poorly, perhaps) is that I don't think one model having stealth should be sufficient for the whole unit to benefit from it.

"All of the unit's cover saves are improved"
You believe that this means "The cover saves of all of the unit", correct?
I contend that it means "All of the cover saves of the unit". In this case, the 'unit' is Telion, not the scouts.
A USR like Fleet uses exactly the same wording, but if we were in the same situation with Fleet instead of Stealth I don't think many people would be claiming the extra movement without paying the cost for the rest of the unit. Similarly, I doubt that having a sergeant who was Vulnerable to Blasts when the rest of the unit was not would mean the entire unit becoming vulnerable.

I realize that RAW since Telion and the scouts are actually the same unit the use of 'unit' instead of 'model' in the text means that the whole group benefits regardless (like it would with Fleet), but given that only one model actually has the USR, not the whole unit, and you normally need to buy it for each model I think the intention was otherwise.
 
#18 · (Edited)
Fleet is an IC model and unit ability and has additional rules – see the asterisk placed next to it on page 75, so it doesn’t come close to comparison here.

The quote of –
“The scouts+Telion are also a complex unit, and the uncloaked scouts also do not have the Stealth rule.”

The uncloaked scouts DO have the benefit of Stealth if you can legally give one member of the unit that ability, and guess what, you can

(Necron Codex is at home at the moment but I will look it up and get back to you about this. But are you really going to invoke a Necron FAQ as a solution for a Space Marines question? Further Tomb Syders and Scarab Swarms have different saves unlike Scouts and all their Sergeants, so for removing causalities and taking saving throws it would make much more of a difference with the Necron example.)

Cheers.
 
#19 · (Edited)
Fleet is an IC model and unit ability and has additional rules – see the asterisk placed next to it on page 75, so it doesn’t come close to comparison here.
Fleet, like Stealth, is a unit ability. ICs are units, so obviously they can have both Fleet and Stealth. The asterisk means that an IC with the rule joined to a unit without loses it, and vice versa. Since Stealth doesn't have this asterisk, the IC/joined unit wouldn't lose that one. Easy so far.
Now take the case of an IC with retinue. Let's say, a Broodlord with Genestealers. The Broodlord does NOT count as an IC so long as his retinue is alive, but instead is an upgrade character - just like Telion and his Scouts, except that Telion does not become an IC when the Scouts are dead. The Genestealers have Fleet, Fleet applies to the unit, the BL is part of the unit. By RAW and your reasoning, the BL benefits from Fleet so long as he is part of that unit.


(Necron Codex is at home at the moment but I will look it up and get back to you about this. But are you really going to invoke a Necron FAQ as a solution for a Space Marines question?)
For RAW, no. But we already agree on that. For intent, I'll do it while singing a jaunty tune! With the Spyder and Scarabs you have a unit with some models with the Stealth rule and some without. The intent for this scenario has been explicitly stated as "Only the models in the unit who actually have the rule get the benefit, the ones who don't have it do not".

EDIT:
Further Tomb Syders and Scarab Swarms have different saves unlike Scouts and all their Sergeants, so for removing causalities and taking saving throws it would make much more of a difference with the Necron example.
How's that? They're both complex units; you're separating the wounds from the Scouts and Telions regardless of whether the armour is different. What does their armour save have to do with their special rules?
 
#20 · (Edited)
Hi Mate,
The ruling for Complex Units is just an extra step in allocating wounds and having differing saves on models in the unit to me would have an enormous impact and who gets ’allocated.’


Look, this is getting crazy (I should have left this beast alone before, more fool me).

I have stated how I would play it so how would you?

Thanks for your time here.

P.S. If you consider that Telion costs the price of 3 Scouts on top of the normal sergeant, then its not unreasonable that the cost of dry cleaning the extra cloaks comes with him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moglun
#21 · (Edited)
The ruling for Complex Units is just an extra step in allocating wounds and having differing saves on models in the unit to me would have an enormous impact and who gets ’allocated.’
Again, Telion's wounds are allocated separately regardless. Differing saves and how Stealth is adjucated are irrelevant in this respect. The end result is that wounds are split no matter what, and the FAQ stated that in this case Stealth only applies to the models that actually have it, not the rest of the unit.

I have stated how I would play it so how would you?
I would not give the rest of the squad the benefit of Stealth unless I bought the cloaks for them. Further, this is one of the few (in my opinion, anyway) things that I would put my foot down about if my opponent were to do it, RAW be damned.

P.S. If you consider that Telion costs the price of 3 Scouts on top of the normal sergeant, then its not unreasonable that the cost of dry cleaning the extra cloaks comes with him.
This is indeed something I've considered! The difference in points between a full Scout squad with cloaks and a full Scout squad with Telion is +20. For those 20 points they get Telion's improved profile, Eye of Vengeance, Voice of Experience, and the Stalker boltgun.


To summarize my thinking:
- Precedent is that in a mixed Stealth unit where some models have stealth and some do not, only the actual Stealth models get the benefit.
- Scouts and similar units that I'm aware of pay for Stealth by the model, not by the unit.
- Telion's point cost does not reflect giving Stealth to the entire unit and gaining all his other benefits.
- Fluffily, Stealth gives the bonus because the stealthy unit is good at hiding. If the Scouts don't have cloaks, they aren't good at hiding, so they shouldn't get the bonus.

P.S. Having worked at a drycleaner I can tell you that those cloaks would need to be washed and not drycleaned, given the mud, grass, etc. they would likely accumulate.
 
#22 ·
Wicky finally finds the long forgotten Necron Codex and arouses it from slumber in its stasis tomb from beneath the pile of buried Codices…


So, your claimed precedent follows the winding and tortuous path of using a different armies Heavy Support of a Tomb Spyder (page 20 codex) that ‘hovers’ above the table, it then creates a Scarab Swarm (page 19 codex) that has the differing rule of the ‘Small Target’ USR that no longer exists in 5th Ed, they then operate as a combined unit on the table but conflict with a ‘unit’ based rule being given to part of that unit only and the finally resolved with an FAQ.
(And note well that Stealth never was part of the equation here.)

Whereas as I am using just………RAW?

I can see your logic in progress here and applaud your lateral thinking, but it’s a huge leap to compare a different Codex, in a different rules set, with indeed a different rule to what is currently written.

In fact the FAQ you rely on was written to solve the ‘Small Target’ deletion from the current rules set so that it works within the new frame work of a combined ‘Vulnerable to blast templates and Stealth’ and this follows true line of sight more closely for the complex unit of both hovering and ‘smaller’ harder to hit swarms.

And, I agree that Stealth is usually pointed on a model-to-model basis but it is always given to the entire unit until stated otherwise, and therein lies the problem.

So where does this leave us?

Begging for an FAQ on this I suppose.

But consider this, if I had an opponent rock up in a game with Telion and claim the unit wide benefit of Stealth is given for him AND the entire squad I would be embarrassed to trundle out your supplied precedent against the undeniable statement to the contrary.

In short, I wouldn’t argue against him in a game.

Cheers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackDragonZero
#23 ·
Wicky finally finds the long forgotten Necron Codex and arouses it from slumber in its stasis tomb from beneath the pile of buried Codices…
Heh.

So, your claimed precedent follows the winding and tortuous path of using a different armies Heavy Support of a Tomb Spyder (page 20 codex) that ‘hovers’ above the table, it then creates a Scarab Swarm (page 19 codex)
Yep, because this is the only unit in the game for which the issue has been formally addressed, and because the only relevant aspects (complex unit, some models with stealth some without) are identical.

that has the differing rule of the ‘Small Target’ USR that no longer exists in 5th Ed, they then operate as a combined unit on the table but conflict with a ‘unit’ based rule being given to part of that unit only and the finally resolved with an FAQ.
(And note well that Stealth never was part of the equation here.)
...
I can see your logic in progress here and applaud your lateral thinking, but it’s a huge leap to compare a different Codex, in a different rules set, with indeed a different rule to what is currently written.
...
In fact the FAQ you rely on was written to solve the ‘Small Target’ deletion from the current rules set so that it works within the new frame work of a combined ‘Vulnerable to blast templates and Stealth’ and this follows true line of sight more closely for the complex unit of both hovering and ‘smaller’ harder to hit swarms.
Wrong, sir. Check the Swarms USR in the rulebook (p.76) and the relevant part of the Necron FAQ ( http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA.../m1180146_Necrons_FAQ_2004-08_5th_Edition.pdf ). Units with the Swarms rule automatically have Stealth, and the FAQ specifically refers to how to resolve the cover save granted by Stealth. 'Small Target' never comes up.

But consider this, if I had an opponent rock up in a game with Telion and claim the unit wide benefit of Stealth is given for him AND the entire squad I would be embarrassed to trundle out your supplied precedent against the undeniable statement to the contrary.

In short, I wouldn’t argue against him in a game.
Maybe not (if I was in a good mood). But I'd give him a thorough talking to afterwards so it doesn't come up again.
In a gray area, I can accept others playing it differently than I would. But this isn't a gray area. This is exactly the same argument as having a Broodlord fleeting across the battlefield with his retinue, or a Spyder becoming vulnerable to blasts when he makes his Scarabs. The intent is clear, and when intent is clear it trumps RAW and ignoring it is incompatible with fair play.

If a (presumed) misprint in the rules stated "The first player to shout Ooknabah automatically wins", would you play that way?
 
#24 ·
Hi,
I have of course read all the FAQ’s, Codex entries, USR’s etc, etc.

‘Small Targets’ indeed does come up due to the fact that it is one of the Scarabs Special Rules (page 19 as supplied previously) in the Codex and it no longer exists in the main rules book as it is the exactly the same as Stealth and replaced by it.

The new FAQ tells you that the +1 is for Stealth now, so would you additionally claim another +1 for the Codex based Small Target rule? I doubt it so you have to figure in that rule as a substitute.

Small target is no more, it is played as Stealth now and only applies to Scarabs – that’s part of the meaning of the FAQ.

And if the rules said "The first player to shout Ooknabah automatically wins", I simply wouldn’t play but I wouldn’t stand my ground and deny it.

Honestly I think that we have torn lumps out each other enough here.

Cheers.
 
#25 ·
Whether Stealth is in addition to Small Targets or instead of it, the fact remains that the Scarabs/Spyder are a unit of mixed Stealth, and this is resolved as described.
Further, Vulnerable to Blasts affects 'units' exactly the same way as Stealth affects 'units', and it is also only applied to models that actually have it, just like with Stealth. You cannot claim that the Stealth splitting is an exception for Scarabs "only because it replaced Small Targets" when VtB uses the same criteria and is resolved in the same way.
'Small Targets' is irrelevant here.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top