Deathwing Company Standard

[CoyoteGospel]

To add some fuel to the fire, the Ravenwing Company Standard reads:

"In addition, all models in the squadron add +1 to their attacks characteristic"

 

This states that the Squadron adds +1 to their A. The Squadron can be two 3 man combat sqauded bikers and an attack bike - 3 separate units in 3 different places on the battlefield.

 

RAW, 2 of them might not even be able to see the banner but would still have the +1 A. This begs the question, why? Does this not imply that the purchase of the banner upgrades the whole squadron? And if an Attack Bike that could be 60+" away from the standard has the +1 A, why would he lose that because the standard bearer that he can't even see dies?

[Frater Uriah]

To add some fuel to the fire, the Ravenwing Company Standard reads:

"In addition, all models in the squadron add +1 to their attacks characteristic"

 

This states that the Squadron adds +1 to their A. The Squadron can be two 3 man combat sqauded bikers and an attack bike - 3 separate units in 3 different places on the battlefield.

 

RAW, 2 of them might not even be able to see the banner but would still have the +1 A. This begs the question, why? Does this not imply that the purchase of the banner upgrades the whole squadron? And if an Attack Bike that could be 60+" away from the standard has the +1 A, why would he lose that because the standard bearer that he can't even see dies?

Uhm... each Standard Bearer is equipped to broadcast an exceptionally loud, unmistakable death rattle over the vox...?:P

 

I am not certain that they would get the +1 A across the board: for all intents and purposes, the Attack Bike and a separated Combat Squad are independent units of the one with the SB.

[IanSturrock]

Interesting. They may be independent units -- but they are still part of the squadron. So, RAW, they get +1 to their Attacks characteristic, in the same way that if a special rule or character gave +1A to your entire army (!) that would still work for models in other units.

[Frater Uriah]

I'm afraid I'll go with consensus on the Ravenwing Standard: It looks good RAW, but I've always interpreted in the past as the other units not getting the +1 A because they were separate from the Combat Squad with the Standard. By this interpretation of the RAW, then, in the same circumstance and according to the rules for the Ravenwing Apothecary with his Narthecium and Reductor in the new FAQ: “As long as the Apothecary is alive, all models in his squad have the Feel No Pain special rule.” The Apothecary would have to have arms like Reed Richards to pull this off.

 

I'm interested to see others' interpretation of this. It's off the Deathwing Standard topic a bit, but covers similar ground.

[Chaplain Lucifer]

When you combat squad you separate into 2 different squads, so the standard only affects the squad it's with, IMHO:

[Dave Rogers]

To add some fuel to the fire, the Ravenwing Company Standard reads:

"In addition, all models in the squadron add +1 to their attacks characteristic"

 

This states that the Squadron adds +1 to their A. The Squadron can be two 3 man combat sqauded bikers and an attack bike - 3 separate units in 3 different places on the battlefield.

 

To add some rather more explosive fuel to the fire, that squadron can also include a land speeder...

 

Dave

[CoyoteGospel]

I'm afraid I'll go with consensus on the Ravenwing Standard: It looks good RAW, but I've always interpreted in the past as the other units not getting the +1 A because they were separate from the Combat Squad with the Standard. By this interpretation of the RAW, then, in the same circumstance and according to the rules for the Ravenwing Apothecary with his Narthecium and Reductor in the new FAQ: “As long as the Apothecary is alive, all models in his squad have the Feel No Pain special rule.” The Apothecary would have to have arms like Reed Richards to pull this off.

 

But the wording on the Apothecary is that it effects the squad, ie- the Combat Squad he is in. The wording on the banner is the Squadron, ie-everything that single Fast Attack (or Troops) choice encompasses.

 

RAW, this clearly shows that the Apothecary's Narthecium is an upgraded piece of wargear while the standard upgrades the whole unit.

RAI, I remain unconvinced that this is what they intended.

 

GW clearly needs to address this in the next FAQ so that there's no reason to debate it.

 

To add some rather more explosive fuel to the fire, that squadron can also include a land speeder...

 

Dave

 

Haha, yeah... I thought I'd leave that part alone ;)

[IanSturrock]

*is now tempted to model a DCCW on his land speeders*

[shabbadoo]

RAW, this clearly shows that the Apothecary's Narthecium is an upgraded piece of wargear while the standard upgrades the whole unit.

The Company Standard and the Narthecium/Reductor are listed in the "Other Equipment" section, and just reference the units which have them. That is the usual way of doing things for equipment that only certain units can have, so it doesn't change what they are- "Other Equipment". Yes, I am afraid that a Standard of any kind and a Narthecium/Reductor are both model-specific "Other Equipment", referred in general to as "wargear", and so if the models with these items are removed from play then the items' effects are no longer in play either. There is no unit upgrade effect at all, meaning don't get yer dudez with this stuff killed.

[Tanhausen]

I'd love to see someone pull that one away at a tournament...

 

Now seriously: you have characters that modify the list you build (as in Kantor, Belial or Sammael) and that remains even if they are not in table, as we all know.

 

On the other hand, you have wargear that grants X and if the model that carries the gear is removed from game, the granted X is also removed unless specifically stated.

 

GW does not work on a "I'm allowed to do X unless I'm denied"... but on "I'm allowed to do ONLY what the rules say explicitly I can do". When someone says "I can do X" and you don't have it clear, its as simple as "where does it say you can"... and not "where does it say I can't".

 

As for picking up the gear... would anybody think of "picking up" a meltagun? Why? It doesn't say anywhere I cant pick it up...

 

Beyond this point, I'd say its only an attempt to read beyond the writting or simply for the hell of it.

 

Ian, got a spare or two for my typhoons? ;)

[Isiah]

To add some rather more explosive fuel to the fire, that squadron can also include a land speeder...

 

Dave

 

Haha, yeah... I thought I'd leave that part alone :P

 

Actually, as RAS speeders and ABs are considered as entirely separate units to the bike element when on the table this is a non-issue <_< The same if 6 RAS bikes becomes two combat-squads I'm afraid - each combat squad is an entirely independent unit.

 

The banner and FNP does not extend to the ex-members of the once bigger RAS unit.

 

Cheers

I

[IanSturrock]

Isiah, I don't agree -- they're independent *units*, for sure. But they are still part of the Ravenwing Attack Squadron force organisation choice, which is what gets the benefit from the standard (but not from the apothecary).

[Dave Rogers]

To add some rather more explosive fuel to the fire, that squadron can also include a land speeder...

 

Dave

 

Haha, yeah... I thought I'd leave that part alone :P

 

Actually, as RAS speeders and ABs are considered as entirely separate units to the bike element when on the table this is a non-issue <_< The same if 6 RAS bikes becomes two combat-squads I'm afraid - each combat squad is an entirely independent unit.

 

The banner and FNP does not extend to the ex-members of the once bigger RAS unit.

 

Except that the codex says "squadron" not "unit", and defines the squadron as containing three or six bikes, 0-1 attack bike and 0-1 land speeders if there are six bikes.

 

Dave

[EPK]

I'm not sold.

 

Yes, it says "squadron" but that is completely interchangeable with "squad". The word "squadron" is simply applied to air, cavalry, armor or sea units as opposed to infantry units which are simply "squads". In this case they are referring to air and cavalry.

 

Now, if the rule said "In addition, all models in the Ravenwing Attack Squadron add +1 to their attacks characteristic," I think you would have something. This is just a case of GW picking the appropriate word for a group of cavalry and air units. You can call a combat squad a separate squad. When you split a RAS each one is now a separate squadron.

 

That's my take on it.

[Frater Uriah]

For what it's worth, until GW clarifies the language on the RW Standard, I'm going to play it as I always did, and keep the bonus in the Attack Squadron, or Combat Squad from that Attack Squadron, who actually has the Standard. Otherwise, it would play like this:

 

Ravenwing Standard Bearer (over vox): VRRRRRRRRRRRRRRMMM! I'm still on the field! VRRRRRRRRRRRRRMMM! Still on the field, everybody stay motivated! VRRRRRRRRRRM!

 

Ravenwing Attack Bike from same Squadron, some 60" away (over internal vox): Sure am glad Brother Barbatus brought the Standard today!

Gunner: Yep! I feel like I could fight harder, just knowing he's out there!

 

Ravenwing Standard Bearer (over vox): VRRRRRRRRRRRRRRMMM! Blast! Ork battlewagon closing on our position! VRRRRRRRRRRRRRRMMM!

 

Ork Battlewagon: DAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKA!!!

 

Ravenwing Standard Bearer (over vox): VRRRRRRRRRRRRRRMMM! AAAARGHHH! SKREEEE-KRAASH!!!

 

Ravenwing Attack Bike from same Squadron, some 60" away (over internal vox): Brother Barbatus...?

Gunner: That just totally harshed my bliss, brother. I just can't fight as hard, knowing he's gone.

[EPK]

We'll always remember Brother Barbatus, he liked to go fast... but in the end, not fast enough.

 

Yea, I don't understand where this argument has even come from. They didn't change the language in the FAQ nor did they change it for the Apoth in regard to the squad he effects. The codex has been out since like 2006 and now people want to comb over it.

 

Maybe it has come up before.

[krewl]

It's the new FAQ, that renews interest so people really read the rules again. I know I didn't read my codex for a long while even while playing DA, cause I knew the rules and stats anyways (or so I thought) from head.

beeing a pretty old codex you have a kind of been there done that attitude that this new FAQ (temporarily) washes away.

 

Though I have always played the "Bannerguy dies, bonus attack is gone" way of playing it I do see the issue in the wording here.

Even though it reeks of powergaming to choose that the bonus sticks and I think it was not meant to be so, the wording raises a characteristic without a "While bannerguy is alive" statement.

So I'd say it's debatable, but in my opinion not worth the hassle over fighting everyone you want to play with first.

 

This is contrairy to the RW scoring speeder issue, because that one is just as written AND imho as intended. This one is debatable, which is a whole new ballgame.

[CoyoteGospel]

We'll always remember Brother Barbatus, he liked to go fast... but in the end, not fast enough.

 

Yea, I don't understand where this argument has even come from. They didn't change the language in the FAQ nor did they change it for the Apoth in regard to the squad he effects. The codex has been out since like 2006 and now people want to comb over it.

 

The bit about Brother Barbatus was quite amusing

 

As for where the argument has even come from...

I'm recently back in the hobby after a 10 year departure and a return to be beloved Deathwing. As I have just gotten around to modeling my standard bearer (fortunately I still had the power fist holding a dowel rod I made a decade ago!) I paid more attention to the rules written in the codex and realized that it is rather ambiguous.

 

While I've maintained since my second post that I don't think GW intended for the squad to have the +1 Attack whether or not the standard bearer was alive or dead, I was surprised to see that (as far as I could tell) this hand't really come up before. And as the discussion evolved, I realized that despite all logic dictating that 'of course they'd lose the +1A if he died', the rules as written don't explicitly say this and, in some ways, contradict that (ie: the Ravenwing Standard Bearer and the "Squadron" wording I pointed out earlier).

 

Sorry for the long winded post - just wanted to point out that I'm not trying to powergame and certainly would never try to insist in an actual game that the squad should keep the +1 A (unless GW were to for some reason insist that's what they meant), but just trying to point out the ambiguity and that someone legitimately could try to make that argument in a game (though I'd probably not want to play against them even though I'm pointing it out in this forum).

[krewl]

It's fair to choose that standpoint for someone, but as it is a slight bit controversial it would be good manners that dictate he'd say that before the game so you can discuss it before it's an all important issue deciding the fate of the game ^_^.

 

So it's not the fact someone chooses to play/defend the sticky extra attack interpretation, it's how they use that point in game.

Don't say it sticks anyway when the banner guy rolls a 1 on a normal save, discuss it beforehand. Like any good tournament gamer does with say terrain and any counts as models.

Then if you dissagree there's the judge or a d6 to decide and it won't spoil your game.

 

If you do it the other way people will feel cheated and have sour feelings even if it is the exact same issue, so I'd try to prevent that.

[ValourousHeart]

To add some rather more explosive fuel to the fire, that squadron can also include a land speeder...

 

Dave

 

Haha, yeah... I thought I'd leave that part alone :lol:

 

Actually, as RAS speeders and ABs are considered as entirely separate units to the bike element when on the table this is a non-issue ;)

 

 

Actually it is because the speeder doesn't have a WS and so is unable to attack, no matter how many attacks you claim. I see a lot of room for abuse because the squads away from the banner (3 + ab) could be confused (intentionally or not). Leave it to some WAAC jerk to ruin it for the rest of us.