Chaplain Question

[Paralyz3dxD]

Okay, so I've searched the internet and although I have found much argument about it, I can't seem to find the answer to my question. So here it is.

 

Liturgies of Battle states: One a player turn in which he assaults, a Chaplain and all members of any squad he has joined can re-roll failed rolls to hit.

 

I personally believe that this means ALL units he has joined in the course of the gain can re-roll failed rolls to hit if the Chaplain (and any attached unit) assaults. Some things to back up my opinion..

 

1) Fluff. "By his example and his piety, the Chaplain exhorts his Brother-Marines to the pinnacle of dedication, so that they might conquer with valour that which would resist all else." He inspires those around him, if you were in a unit and he had just been fighting along side you.. even if he wasn't anymore.. you would be pretty damn motivated!

 

2) Now for my actual back up. When an independent character gives its unit a special ability, it usually specifically states any models in his squad.

 

Example 1: Shrike's See, But Remain Unseen "Shrike (and models in his squad) benefit from..."

Example 2: Kor'sarro Khan's Master of the Hunt "Kor'sarro Khan, and models in his unit"

 

Although the wording is slightly different, it remains pretty clear that ONLY the models in either characters units gain their abilities.

 

Well.. thoughts? Sorry if this issue has been resolved elsewhere, I am pretty new to Warhammer 40k and I just want to make sure I'm getting my points worth out of what I buy!

 

Now for the side note.. I just want to clarify the rules on Rapid Fire weapons. If a model with say, a boltgun, moves.. he CANNOT fire 24" correct?

[Isiah]

Liturgies of Battle states: One a player turn in which he assaults, a Chaplain and all members of any squad he has joined can re-roll failed rolls to hit.

 

I personally believe that this means ALL units he has joined in the course of the gain can re-roll failed rolls to hit if the Chaplain (and any attached unit) assaults.

 

No this means the unit he with in the current cc phase. Liturgies is not conferred to any unit(s) he might have been with at any other time during the game but that he is no longer currently with. The Chaplain must be present with the unit for the unit to gain the bonus.

 

On the boltgun issue. Correct he cannot move and fire 24" only 12". See diagram on p28 of the rulebook.

 

Cheers

I

[SeattleDV8]

If you read pg.48 It is clear that the wording 'squad he has joined' means the squad the IC is currently a part of or 'has joined'.

Not all of the squads he was part of during the game would retain the ability ,only the one the IC is part of.

 

Side note : Correct (exception Relentless models pg. 76)

[Paralyz3dxD]

I figured this is what the rule meant, but I know it has been a topic of debate elsewhere.

 

I actually own the Dark Angels codex as well, and under the similar ability their Chaplain's get it states:

 

"On a player turn in which he charges, a Chaplian or Interrogator-Chaplain, and all members of any Dark Angels squad he has joined, leads or is attached to may re-roll failed hits to roll."

 

I think why its not really clear is they say WAY to much in abilities effects then is needed, which causes the speculation.

[Mordekiem]

Wow, never heard that one before!

 

Someone is reading waaaaaaaaaaay too much into things.

[Arnil]

Well i am playing that any squad i have ever joined gets it from now on! I play a dedicated chaos player and what he doesnt know wont hurt him...or maybe it will! :)

[Grey Mage]

Wow, never heard that one before!

 

Someone is reading waaaaaaaaaaay too much into things.

Its a potential reading for the Wolf Priests abilities that I bring out to get the worst of the rules lawyers to come back to normalcy.

[Iron Father Rik]

Liturgies of Battle states: On a player's turn in which he assaults, a Chaplain and all members of any squad he has joined can re-roll failed rolls to hit.

 

I draw your attention to the section: "On a player's turn in which he assaults..." - to me that would mean that the effects of Litanies of Battle only are in effect for the turn in question. Therefore only the squad that the Chaplain has joined in the [same] turn in which he assaults are affected.

[gdeathlegion]

If you dissect the rule word for word, and butcher it in the most literal way you possibly could, it would grant any units he has joined previously the ability to reroll hits, and not the unit he is attached to because.....has is past tense, it really should say any unit he IS joined to.

Unless of course you take into account the fact that he has already joined the unit he is attached to....so that would mean he gives it only to that unit....or maybe it means that he confers it to ANY unit he HAS joined to....

I love ridiculous rules debates.

[Iron Father Rik]

If you dissect the rule word for word, and butcher it in the most literal way you possibly could, it would grant any units he has joined previously the ability to reroll hits, and not the unit he is attached to because.....has is past tense, it really should say any unit he IS joined to.

 

Yeah, and therein lies where the problem occurs - dissecting the rules and picking out sections. When you dissect the rule in question and pick out sections, such as "this word here means i can do whatever I want", as you describe gdeathlegion it doesn't work. You need to take the whole rule in question, and look at it in the context of what it is describing, and also look at the section that is causing problems in the context of the whole rule and not just a part of it.

[Isiah]

Indeed Iron Father Rik context is all.

[Arnil]

Okay, look at the context then. "on a player's turn in which he assaults" During the assault phase is when this effect takes place. "a chaplain and all members of ANY squad he HAS joined can re-roll fail rolls to hit." this is clear that any squad he has been in get the rerolling. The first section defines the phase in the present tense so we aren't using this in the shooting phase and then switches to past tense to define that this effects all squads he has ever been in. The more I'm reading this the more obvious it is looking!!

 

I have a jumpy chaplain but originally I wasn't planning to...long story...so I never read the rules carefully, I saw rerolling failed assault hits and left to go play!

[Arnil]

Double post

[Iron Father Rik]

Okay, look at the context then. "on a player's turn in which he assaults" During the assault phase is when this effect takes place. "a chaplain and all members of ANY squad he HAS joined can re-roll fail rolls to hit." this is clear that any squad he has been in get the rerolling. The first section defines the phase in the present tense so we aren't using this in the shooting phase and then switches to past tense to define that this effects all squads he has ever been in. The more I'm reading this the more obvious it is looking!!

 

I disagree. I'd say that the first bit - "on a player's turn in which he assaults" - applies to the second part. In other words, any squad that he has joined on the player's turn win which he assaults can get the benefit in combat. Therefore not any squads he has joined in previous turns, that weren't the player turn in which he assaults.

 

And before anyone argues that I've switched the order round which changes the meaning, it doesn't. Not in the english language in a situation such as this.

[Arnil]

Well one could say this effect only applies in the assault phase, true, so i would play it every squad in which he has assaulted with. The power is only used in the assault phase after all...and I think the order didn't change the meaning of the sentence...but we still disagree on said meaning. "a chaplain and any squad he has joined may re-roll failed rolls to hit, on a players turn in which he assaults." this actually sounds like my chaplain gets the rerolls if I assault the other player hahaha but regardless it still says ANY he HAS joined. Even if it is a bit of a grammatical mess...

[Iron Father Rik]

I don't disagree that the Chaplain and the unit he is with at the time gets the benefit. I don't disagree that the rule is enacted during the assault phase. I just disagree with the fact that other squads that the chaplain used to be attached to get the benefit if they also charge into combat.

 

I'm not sure how I could say it any clearer than in my previous post, but as I described you need to take the whole rule into consideration. As you stated Arnil, it does state any squad he has joined, but it clarifies with on the player turn in which he assaults - therefore any squad he has joined in that turn, and only the squad he is with in that turn, gets the benefit.

The section "in any player turn in which he assaults" applies to when in the game the rule applies - i.e. only on the charge in the controlling players turn - but also clarifies the section detailing the units that get the benefit. Only squads he has joined, or is with, in the turn in which he assaults, and not other squads that he joined in previous turns.

[Arnil]

"Any squad currently attached to the chaplain gets to re-roll failed rolls to hit during the assault phase."

 

This is how simple and completely clear they could have made this rule. I dare anyone to twist my new version lol.

 

I agree it is dumb and makes no sence but they are blantantly making this rule complicated for no good reason so I am going to take advantage of their purposeful vagueness. It should be the rule as stated above but no, they wanted to be vague so people like us can waste our lives arguing how plastic army men are motivated to fight...LOL :)

 

Raw, ID say they want us to re roll all squads he has been attached to no matter how ridiculous that sounds. And yeah this will not fly in a tourney but they know what they are doing unlike GW...

[Leonaides]

But then if the Chaplain gets killed by something which strikes before the rest of the squad, they wouldnt get to use Litanies... So your new wording still doesnt actually work... Added to teh fact that an IC becomes a separate unit in assault, so there is no way ANY unit coudl be attached to him. Or would you like me to stop now?

[Paralyz3dxD]

I'm rather enjoying this debate :tu: At least I wasn't the only one who read it the way I did, but I will of course play it as only the squad he is attached to. Shame on GW for making the rule sound more then it actually is.

[Arnil]

I actually met with my gaming group earlier today and told them about this and the rule's odd writing. And I quote from my chaos player, "That is some :cuss :cuss :cuss right there! But I'll let it happen if that is how the rules are written..." My chaplain just got a whole lot cooler hahahahaha! ;) :huh: :lol: :lol: I had forgotten completely about what Leonidas said with the IC being separate for combat. Maybe GW DID mean it to be this way?

[Grey Mage]

But then if the Chaplain gets killed by something which strikes before the rest of the squad, they wouldnt get to use Litanies... So your new wording still doesnt actually work... Added to teh fact that an IC becomes a separate unit in assault, so there is no way ANY unit coudl be attached to him. Or would you like me to stop now?

Actually, they do assault together, its once they start rolling attacks that they are seperate, so that wouldnt be an issue.