MC's that are trying to hide...

[ArmouredWing]

Here's one that I've been mulling over for a couple of days now.

 

I'm going to keep this question fairly vague to start off with to see if anyone's come up against this. The question is;

 

Apart from the 50% obscured rule is there any case where a Monstrous Creature can claim a cover save?

 

There you go, I give it a while to get some responses and then give the whole story

[El Magnifico]

i'd say no - but that applies to pretty much every model in 40k now so i cant really see what you're getting at.

 

there are ot many ways for an MC to "hide".. the only one i can think of is a hive tyrant with guard but i dont think that is what you were after.

 

 

can you elaborate on what you actually mean

[nighthawks]

Wow am I ever wrong - not if the MC is an IC, as area for cover doesn't apply.

[ArmouredWing]

there are ot many ways for an MC to "hide".. the only one i can think of is a hive tyrant with guard but i dont think that is what you were after.

 

Spot on, give the man a goldfish. :P

 

So the issue I've got is that when a HT is deployed with a TG which way does the ruling go? In favour of the MC rules or in favour of the retinue rules?

[Gaz1858]

retinue rules as the hive tyrant doesnt count as an IC and therefor part of a monstrous unit

[boreas]

retinue rules as the hive tyrant doesnt count as an IC and therefor part of a monstrous unit

Problem with that is that HT is not an IC. He's basically a MC in a unit of MC, so AFAIK doesn't benefit form the standard ritenue rule, but rather from his own codex rule. So if someone targetted him specifically (say a vindicare assassin) while he's in area terrain with his TG, he wouldn't get is cover save I guess...

 

Phil

[WarpSpawn]

Dunno about that. The Tyranid codex definitely refers to them as a unit. Whether it is character and retinue or some kind of proprietary monstrous unit rule, I'd have to assume the rules in BRB5 for units partially in cover would still apply.

 

Not sure how the Vindicare works with non-monstrous targets in this situation but I would assume it is the same for them.

[muddc73]

So if I have a unit of wraithguard in front of a wraithlord and the wraithlord was shot at wouldnt the wraithlord get a cover save?

[WarpSpawn]

I think that depends on if, from the firer's PoV, at least half of the model is obscured (with borderline cases presumably getting the 5+ save instead).

[Imriel]

retinue rules as the hive tyrant doesnt count as an IC and therefor part of a monstrous unit

Problem with that is that HT is not an IC. He's basically a MC in a unit of MC, so AFAIK doesn't benefit form the standard ritenue rule, but rather from his own codex rule. So if someone targetted him specifically (say a vindicare assassin) while he's in area terrain with his TG, he wouldn't get is cover save I guess...

 

Phil

1) Tyrent Guard aren't MC.

 

2) Shield Wall prevents the Tyrent from being targeted seperately due to being a MC, so only models that can choose to target a perticular model, such as a Vindicare or a Farseer with Mind War, could target the tyrent seperatly.

 

3) Since cover for MC works like vehicles, I would say we might look to the Squadron rules to see it MC get cover Saves from other members in their unit being in cover. There we find "use the rules for vehicles to determain if determine if each squad member is in cover ( ignoring other members of the squad as if they were not there) and then the for normal units to work out if the entire squad is in cover or not (64, BBB)." So I would say yes, a MC would count as in cover if at least half its unit is in cover, even if it wasn't itself.

[boreas]

3) Since cover for MC works like vehicles, I would say we might look to the Squadron rules to see it MC get cover Saves from other members in their unit being in cover. There we find "use the rules for vehicles to determain if determine if each squad member is in cover ( ignoring other members of the squad as if they were not there) and then the for normal units to work out if the entire squad is in cover or not (64, BBB)." So I would say yes, a MC would count as in cover if at least half its unit is in cover, even if it wasn't itself.

 

Emphasis mine..

 

Ok, let's use the whole rule for vehicule squadrons then. "Use the rule for vehicules..." so that 50% obscured. "to determine if each squad member is in cover " so each member (HT and Tyrant Guard) must be 50% into cover. The way I read that argument, TG don't give the HT the possiblity to hide in area terrain, the HT takes aways from the TG the possibility to hide in area terrain (since the whole squad works as vehicles).

 

That being said, I don't agree that since MC and Vehicles both use the 50% obscured rule they both should use the vehicle sqaudron rule. That rule is for vehicle squadrons, that's it.

 

The way I read it, if a unit of a HT and 3 TG in area terrain gets sniped by something that can target the HT specifically (Vindicare, Culexus,...) the HT gets no cover (as MCs don't get cover save and members of the same unit don't provide cover save). If the whole unit is hit and the hits are redirected to the TG, then they get a cover save (not being MCs). Now, mind you, I don't know how wounds distribution to that unit are managed as I don't have my Nids codex here (and haven't read it since 5th ed came out...).

 

Phil

[nighthawks]

the TG are clearly a retinue from C:'nids, and Retinues, p 48 BBB5 says that characters with a retinue count as upgrades, not ICs, until the retinue is destroyed.

 

Nothing in the MC rules changes that.

 

the FAQ, which is obviously still a 4th ed document, states that the HT is NOT an IC, but DOES count as an upgrade character in his retinue - supporting the test from the 5th ed BBB.

 

so unless the assassins or farseer or othe rspecial rule allows you to pick out a model in a unit, the MC is "hidden" for all intents and purposes. no need to bring vehicle rules into this.

[Imriel]

Ok, let's use the whole rule for vehicule squadrons then. "Use the rule for vehicules..." so that 50% obscured. "to determine if each squad member is in cover " so each member (HT and Tyrant Guard) must be 50% into cover. The way I read that argument, TG don't give the HT the possiblity to hide in area terrain, the HT takes aways from the TG the possibility to hide in area terrain (since the whole squad works as vehicles).

The fact that they use the normal rule to determine if the unit is in cover means "If half or more of the models in the target unit are in cover, then the entire unit is deemed to be in cover and all the models may take cover saves (22, BBB)."

 

That being said, I don't agree that since MC and Vehicles both use the 50% obscured rule they both should use the vehicle sqaudron rule. That rule is for vehicle squadrons, that's it.

 

The fact that they both use 50% obscured rules was not why I looked to the Squadron rules, but rather the fact that the rules say of MC "Cover for them works exactly as for vehicles (51, BBB)."

 

so unless the assassins or farseer or othe rspecial rule allows you to pick out a model in a unit, the MC is "hidden" for all intents and purposes. no need to bring vehicle rules into this.

 

My bringing the Vehicle rules into had nothing to do with whether or not they were hiddin within the unit but rather if the could claim cover if their unit is in cover but they are not actually 50% obscured.

 

 

On further reading, MC only deviate from the infantry rules where detailed in the Unit type section. The MC rules only changes how a model interacts with cover, not how a unit does, and it isn't models in cover that get cover saves, but rather units in cover get them. There by the MC would get a Cover Save if its unit is deemed to be in cover even if it isn't in cover itself.

[InquisitorPhred]

It's a member of a unit. If 50% of the members of the unit are in cover from the firer's position, all members of the unit get cover saves. I believe it's as simple as that. If the Tyrant were to count toward the 50% who are in cover, then he as a model would need to meet the 50% model obscured rule. Tyrant in the open + 3 guards in cover = cover saves for all 4 models. They're a unit, those are the rules for units.

[boreas]

It's a member of a unit. If 50% of the members of the unit are in cover from the firer's position, all members of the unit get cover saves. I believe it's as simple as that. If the Tyrant were to count toward the 50% who are in cover, then he as a model would need to meet the 50% model obscured rule. Tyrant in the open + 3 guards in cover = cover saves for all 4 models. They're a unit, those are the rules for units.

 

Yes, but a HT is a also MC. Quote BBB: For a monstrous creature to be in cover, at least 50% of it's body (as defined on page 16) has to be in cover from the point of view of the majority of the firing models. Also, standing in area terrain does not automatically confer a cover save - the 50% rule takes precedence.

 

Emphasis mine again. Yes it's a unit. But that does in any way nullify it's MC status. So which rule to use when he can claim both? I'd definitely would go with the MC rule as it clearly states that it take precedence over to area terrain rule.

 

Also, it says that unit partially into cover has to be determined by working out "how many models are in cover from the point of view of the majority of the firing models that are in range". In the case of targeting the HT specifically through a special rule, a case could be made that from the point of view of the firing model (eg Vindicare assassin) no targeted model (ie the HT) is in cover as it's a MC in area terrain that's targeted, not the unit per se.

 

Phil

[Whoopxi]

I agree with Boreas on this one.

 

 

Remember that when wounds are taken by the unit they are still allocated 1 per model like any unit.

 

So with the above interpretation with a unit of 1 HT and 3 TG in a really sparse area terrain, let assume they get hit by 4 plasma wounds...

 

Wound distribution:

TG X

TG X

TG X

HT X

 

Saves:

3 TG saved rolled together using cover (PG 22 of the BRB under "Exceptions")

 

HT could only roll a cover save if the area terrain actually obscured it as it is a MC. (PG 51 of the BRB under "Shooting")

 

 

Seems pretty straight forward to me I think.

[nighthawks]

but then you are breaking the retinue rules (BBB5 p48), the units partially in cover rules (BBB5 p22-23), and the specific rules for the TG in c:'nids (P36).

 

if the squad gets cover saves, then the WHOLE squad gets them. as it is a retinue, the tyrant can't be excluded from this, MC or not, unless and until it is clarified by GW.

 

the codex makes specific (dated) mention to the pages in the BBB4 where to find info on MCs, fearless, etc... so we can see that BBB5 definitions take precedence. I don't like it, (I have a thing about bugs...) but I think the retinue rules have to be followed. Nothing about P51 and MCs deletes the requirements of the retinue, and the codex further supports this in the "shieldwall" rule definition.

 

Following what Phred said seems correct to me.

[boreas]

if the squad gets cover saves, then the WHOLE squad gets them. as it is a retinue, the tyrant can't be excluded from this, MC or not, unless and until it is clarified by GW.

 

Well, I'd say it's clarified by this:

 

"standing in area terrain does not automatically confer a cover save - the 50% rule takes precedence." (BBB p. 51). It clearly says that the 50% rule takes precedence over the automatic cover save from area terrain. It doesn't say that being into a unit changes that.

 

Phil

[InquisitorPhred]

if the squad gets cover saves, then the WHOLE squad gets them. as it is a retinue, the tyrant can't be excluded from this, MC or not, unless and until it is clarified by GW.

 

Well, I'd say it's clarified by this:

 

"standing in area terrain does not automatically confer a cover save - the 50% rule takes precedence." (BBB p. 51). It clearly says that the 50% rule takes precedence over the automatic cover save from area terrain. It doesn't say that being into a unit changes that.

 

Phil

 

Neither does the fact that it states area terrain does not have any influence on the MC's personal cover status have any thing at all to do with eligibility for a save as part of a unit in cover.

 

The rule on p51 says for a monstrous creature to be in cover, it must be 50% covered. It does *not* say for a monstrous creature to receive a cover save at all, it must be 50% covered.

 

If 3 Guards and a Tyrant are standing in a forrest, three models, the guard, are in cover, one model, the Tyrant is not. As per p22, right column, second paragraph, if half or more of the unit are in cover, all members may take a cover save. Nothing in the MC rules contradicts that in any way. Clearly the MC does not count as in cover from the firer's perspective, but as a member of a unit that's over half in cover, he gets a save.

 

It's no different from the one marine standing out in the open who still gets a cover save because the other 4 are behind a wall. The criteria for a marine to count as in cover is that part of his body be obstructed from view, just as an MC has more strict criteria. He fails this criteria entirely, yet still receives a save because of the majority unit rule. The Hive Tyrant in the same way totally fails the criteria for counting as in cover for his model type, and still receives the save in the same way.

[boreas]

It's completely different from the simple fact that your marine is not a MC. The Monstrous Creature rule doesn't say "standing in area terrain does not automatically confer a cover save - the 50% rule takes precedence, unless the MC is in a unit" (underlined part added by me). It says the 50% rule takes precedence, no exception to that. It's a clearly defined rule for MCs, whether in a unit or not. The unit rule does not, in any way, suggest that it absolves MCs from the 50%. The fact is, the MC rule includes a reference to taking precedence over the area terrain rule, no the reverse. Until GW FAQs that MC can use that exception to their special cover rule, I don't think they can benefit from it...

 

Phil

[nighthawks]

it's not an exception to the rule, it's following the rules for the TG and units partially in cover - you CANNOT target the HT with TG without mindwar-type powers as THIS particular MC is not alone, it has a retinue, and follows the rules for such. if the HT is not 50% obscured, then he counts towards the portion of the unit NOT in cover, but counts equally to a TG for this purpose. the rules regarding MCs and determining cover are specific in their differences to how it works for basic infantry, as all non-infantry unit types are explained that way. as these rules say NOTHING with regard to retinues, the basic retinue rules, and the shieldwall rules in the codex, are still in force.

 

It's not completely different from the example given by Phred, there are differences, but they don't account for much in this scenario.

[boreas]

I'm not sure what your point is with the retinue rule, Nighthawks (no sarcasm here, I sincerely don't!). The vindicare and culexus assassins can clearly target the HT, even with TG. Now the question is, once in a unit, retinue or other, does the MC behave as a regular trooper or does it keep it's MC status in regard to cover saves? I read 2 rules. The general cover save section, with it's "unit partially into cover" subsection. The MC section with it's particular rule for cover save.

 

The way I read it, the general cover save section say nothing about MC in units getting regular benefits. Although it doesn't say the reverse either, WH40k is a permissive ruleset. Because it doesn't deny you something doesn't mean you can do it.

 

In the other rule, the specific MC rule, I read that the 50% rule takes precedence over automatic cover from standing into area terrain. Getting your cover save because you're in a unit that majorly into cover is getting automatic cover save for standing into area terrain, albeit indirectly. Once again, the permissive ruleset does not grant you the permission to get around this by being into a unit. If that was the case, the rule for MC would include the exception.

 

I know the HT is not an IC. But let's look at the IC section because the retinue rules are a subsection of the IC rules. Under special rules, it says that an IC can lose a special rule by joining a unit. It then refers the the USR section. That section defines which rules are lost by joining a unit. Those include some USR, nothing about other rules. As such, one cannot claim a MC loses it's rule about cover save by joining a unit.

 

Lets also look at the shooting at IC (again keeping in mind that a HT is not an IC but also that retinue rules are a subsection of IC rules). It says IC that are MCs can always be picked out as separate targets unless they've joined a unit of MCs or a unit with special rules that offer them protection. The TG are such a unit (that offers special protection, that is). But the Vindicare and Culexus assassins rules clearly deny such a protection to the HT as they can, no matter what, pick him as a target. Being a separate target from the unit (in that very specific case), they wouldn't even benefit from the unit partially into cover rule, as they are not part of the unit for purpose of targeting. I'd also like to point that the shieldwall rule only prevent the HT being picked upon as a separate target despite the fact that it's a MC, not just being picked upon as a separate target. The second phrasing would possibly prevent the assassins targeting him because the 2 general rules would conflict. As the assassins rules are general (you can target no matter what) and the shieldwall is specific (you cannot target despite being a MC), it takes precedence.

 

I do think that a FAQ will have to clear-cut this one, but strong phrasing in favor of the MC specific rules (the takes precedence reference) as well as the IC MC rules having them picked out as separate targets really inclines me to deny the HT with TG a cover save.

 

Phil

[hack n slash]

In the case of assasins etc no cover as the unit is diregarded but against a unit who cannot pick there target the tyrant gets a save, thats my take on it but it will need a clear ruling from gw as these type of theads will keep croping up. :)

[boreas]

I must say that against general shooting, when you "distribute" wounds around (eg 4 plasmagun shots on a unit of HT+3TGs), it's not as clearcut, as the unit is targeted, not the HT... I'd be incline to give it it's cover save.

 

Phil

[nighthawks]

Boreas:

 

I was not trying to argue that the assassins or other character with a special rule had to heed the retinue rules when targeting the HT. never meant to imply that, sorry if I did (though assassins are not 100% cut and dry, as you point out).

 

My point was and is only that the HT, an MC in every respect, has a retinue that additionally has the shieldwall rule. as such, in shooting from regular units, the HT could be out of cover by the MC rules, but benefit from the cover save of his UNIT if the majority of the models have cover, from area or whatever else. I believe that you were disagreeing with that notion. the permissive ruleset concept is well understood - and by using the rules for retinue, shieldwall (which really is not very relevant in most situations), MCs, and units partially in cover, the correct way, as I see it, is to determine a cover save for the unit on a model by model basis, where the MC has a different set of rules for determining that character's cover status, but still counts as in or not in cover for the unit tally. if more models are in cover, then all get a cover save. it's a bit of an amalgamation of the various rules as this is not explicitly addressed, but it takes no liberties and fiollows the letter 100% (at least by my reading).

 

thus, he can "hide" to some degree, which is the initial topic of this thread.

 

The shieldwall rule makes allusions to the 4th ed targeting rules where MCs could always be picked out, but does clearly say that a HT cannot be picked out of his unit. maybe there is an argument for that protecting him from the assassins, but GW has historically ruled to the powerful side of assassin rules, and they are rather specific in their allowance to choose a specific model as a target. So I believe that shieldwall does not apply to them, but am willing to concede the point if something at all compelling was shown to me.