A Warband of 12 psykers is 12 psykers (see Culexus)

[Inquisitor Apropos]

"Psyker", capital P, used in Psychic Barrage. "Psyker", capital P, used in Animus Speculum. Look like a duck. Quack like a duck. Must be a duck.

 

Who's on first? The Psyker is not a Psyker, don't count as Psyker, because it doesn't have Psyker in the special rule. But its name is Pysker. Call it Psyker. No, not that Psyker. Just this Psyker. What's on second?

And the Chaos Daemon Prince isn't a Daemon either; does not have Daemon in the unit entry, only the unit name. Welcome to the 40k RAW vs RAI debate! lol

 

The "Daemon Prince isn't a Daemon" thing doesn't really apply. You'd have to be claiming that "a Daemon Prince wasn't a Daemon Prince", before you could apply that to a "Psyker isn't a Psyker".

 

Does the Animus Speculum rules say "for each model with the Psyker special rule" or "for each Psyker"? They aren't the same thing, even if it is just the result of sloppy writing. The term 'Psyker' is no longer exclusive to models with the Psyker special rule, since they created a type of model named 'Psyker'. (Unless, of course, the model type isn't named simply 'Psyker' after all. I won't get my copy until later this week.)

 

Corollary: Servitors suffer mindlock if not accompanied by an Inquistor, iirc. Nobody claims they always suffer mindlock because there is no Inquisitor special rule. Specific unit types can be called out by their unit entry, not just by their special rules.

 

EDIT: Punctuation mishap.

[number6]

You've really lost me on this one, Gentlemanloser. :) The rule says they are "treated as a single psyker". There you have it: the psyker special rule gets applied to the unit.

 

I can't say any more than that, so I'll just leave it there. But I truly do fail to comprehend how this is confusing. GW may write crap rules, but this one strikes me as very clear indeed.

[Gentlemanloser]

LoL! I can't debate for that side of the discussion any longer. :)

 

I'd class the whole unit as a single Psyker, becuase of thier rule.

 

But I was getting at the old Terminators not having TDA issue (Sorry BTs! You're the only guys to suffer this still I think!), due to unit entry oversights.

 

I still think they should have called these particular henchmem something different. Rogue Psyker or Sanction Psyker spring to mind. :)

[Inquisitor Apropos]

I'd agree on the naming issue, Gentlemanloser. It would have been so very easy to avoid.

 

Though there is something apropriate about GW's slapdash writing style creating grey areas in the Grey Knights codex. Maybe they'll address it in a FAQ sometime next year. :)

[number6]

One should never confuse the name of something for what it is, rules-wise. Frankly, this should be old news to us DH players. Everybody should remember how in the old DH codex Justicars were the only members of a unit that counted as psykers even though the fluff had it that every GK was a psyker, NFWs where fluffed to be a result of GK psyker abilities, etc.

[Gentlemanloser]

Or the above mentioned Daemon Prince. :)

[chewielight]

After reading the new C:GK I would say based on what is written the only ones who count toward the # of psykers would be the ones with the Brotherhood of psykers,psyker rule sets. Since the henchmen dont have either of those descriptions then no they would not count. However if they FAQ either Psyker or BOP into their listing they yes I would count them

[Aidoneus]

The squad lacks the special rule Psyker, or any other similar rule that would give them the status of being psykers. Therefore, for any effect that requires them to be a psyker, they are not.

 

The rules specific to shooting their "psychic" ability say they are treated as one psyker. That gives them the ability to use their own shooting attack, and explains how to go about using it. However, you need to keep in mind that the line people keep quoting is not in the general unit description, but only in the description for that one shooting power. Thus, the problematic "etc." should be understood to mean "in all ways relating directly to the rule of which this sentence is a part, i.e. the Psychic Barrage power." Put another way, the expansive term "etc." is placed within the limited context of a specific shooting attack, and so its meaning can only expand so far as the boundaries of that attack.

 

Quite simply, GW is obviously capable of giving the unit a special rule saying it counts as a single psyker. They didn't. Therefore, the only meaning we can take from that is that the unit is not a pskyer. And of course, if the unit is not a psyker, it will add no shots to the Culexus' Animus Speculum.

[Prathios]

It seems to me that this is one of those situations where GW backed itself into a corner by putting out rules that physically can't follow the fluff without creating a glaring imbalance issue. The idea that a group of 12 psykers are literally standing next to a Culexus and he gets no bonus is, honestly, appalling.

 

All I know is that my next game of GK I'm gonna load up my NDK's in a Stormraven, fire it's psibolt hurricane bolters on the move, get no bonuses against a daemon prince, and then have my culexus beat to death in CC by a group of angry "dudes who have psychic powers but are not psykers though they are actually named 'psykers.'"

 

And when I'm done with that, I'm gonna hit myself in the head with a str6 nemesis doomfist.

[CheezeFezt]

I feel like many of the rules arguments that simply aren't going away are because people are purposefully trying to be obtuse and abusive of the rules even when the intent is crystal clear. ;)

 

Not trying to be obtuse/abusive.

 

Codex: IG, Psyker Battle Squad, each Sanctioned Psyker got the "Psyker" Special Rule. It got an other rule Psychic Choir "The Pysker Battle Squad is treated as a single psyker for the purpose of using a psychic power. The controlling player may measure range and line of sight from any Sanctioned Psyker model when resolving psychic powers."

 

Ain't abusive to ask if Warband with Psyker plays like Psyker Battle Squad. They fluff similar. With the Psyker BS, each Sanctioned Psyker count as a Psyker, so 10 of them will add 10 to culexus weapon. Then why would it be abusive to ask if they play similar.

 

Then one read Psychic Barrage "All psykers in the same unit are treated as a single psyker for the purposes of Psychic tests, etc, and use their own Leadership value, not that of any attached characters. The controlling player can measure range and line of sight from any psyker model when resolving Psychic Barrage."

 

Put these 2 rules next to each other. The only significant difference between the two is "purpose of using a psychic power" vs "purposes of Psychic tests, etc, and use their own Leadership value, not that of any attached characters". Well, how does one use a psychic power--one take a Psychic test, etc, and use his own Leadershap value, not that of any attached characters (paraphrasing the BRB Psyker power rule).

 

And yes, if one want to strict RAW, Henchmen Psyker are not psyker (don't have Special Rule: Psyker), so can't even use Psychic Barrage, and the rest of the argument about how many Henchmen Psykers are needed to screw a light bulb is moot. They're not pysker, so 0.

 

 

And when I'm done with that, I'm gonna hit myself in the head with a str6 nemesis doomfist.

 

Nah. Don't hit oneself in the head. Hit Matt Ward head instead. Much more satisfying.

[Gentlemanloser]

All I know is that my next game of GK I'm gonna load up my NDK's in a Stormraven, fire it's psibolt hurricane bolters on the move, get no bonuses against a daemon prince, and then have my culexus beat to death in CC by a group of angry "dudes who have psychic powers but are not psykers though they are actually named 'psykers.'"

 

And when I'm done with that, I'm gonna hit myself in the head with a str6 nemesis doomfist.

 

:)

 

<3

[FerociousBeast]

@FerociousBeast: I described how I am willing to continue debating the rule, and how you can crack it open. But there's no debate unless you're willing to participate, too.

Well, my original point was ancillary to the topic of the thread, and you've since retreated from your "obtuse and abusive" language, so I consider honor satisfied! :D

 

But to bring it back to the actual OP, first let me say that I fully expect GW to FAQ the Henchman Psykers into one Psyker for Culexus purposes. To do otherwise would just be absurd from a balance standpoint. (But even then, what if there are Mystics in the unit? Mystics are said to be "minor psykers" in the description, but they don't have a psychic power, so what to do about them? I guess they aren't Psykers, even if they are psykers.)

 

But until the issue is faq'ed, there is a very compelling argument to be made that each psyker is a Psyker. The comparison is frequently made between "Psychic Barrage" and "Brotherhood of Psykers", but there are two very important differences which mean that the two are clearly separate and should not be assumed to apply the same way. The first is an issue of categorization. BoP is a Unit Special Rule. It applies to the Grey Knights unit at all times. PB is clearly listed as a Psychic Power, and therefore, by RAW, applies only when the Psychic Power is being used. In no other case that I can think of does a Psychic Power have effects that apply when the Psychic Power is not active or being used. PB is a Psychic Shooting Attack, and so will have no effect after the damage has been resolved.

 

The second difference is that Perils of the Warp affect only the Justicar (or caster) in BoP, but it affects each psyker in the PB Psychic Power. In game terms, therefore, it appears that a Grey Knight squad really only has one Psyker in it, since only one model can suffer Perils of the Warp. But a Henchman band can have multiple Psykers in it, since "all psykers in the squad suffer the effects."

 

When all of this is combined with the ambiguity in the Culexus Assassin's Animus Speculum rule ("For every Psyker within 12" of the Culexus Assassin, add +1 to the animus speculum's Assault value."), it is definitely possible to successfully argue that each psyker in the Henchman band is a psyker/Psyker. Because the Animus Speculum's rules do not say "For every model with the Psyker rule within 12"..." It just says "Psyker", and there's no statement anywhere or consistent interpretation in the rules about capitalized words referring only to certain rules.

 

I rest my case.

[Gentlemanloser]

Not only that, but the 'Psyker' of the animus speculum might, in fact, *only* apply to the Henchman unit, and to the amount of them near the Culuxes. As they have the name 'Psyker'. :D

[number6]

Here's what I see.

 

Everybody is getting hung up on the fact that the word "psyker" is missing in the special rules section. I consider this a total red herring because the verbiage of Psychic Barrage is all but exactly the same as Brotherhood of Psykers.

 

That is, the rule tells us what things are. You don't need anything other than the rule to tell us what things are. But those of you who disagree are looking for that something extra when nothing extra is required.

 

For example, a Brotherhood Champion doesn't have a Nemesis Force weapon. He has an Annointed Blade. But the AB gets to count as a NFW anyway because its rules say it does.

 

Same thing with the Psyker henchman. They don't have any special rule called "psyker", but nevertheless get to count as one because its rules say they do.

 

The other thing I'm seeing is that it requires lengthy paragraphs of tortured logic to deny Psyker henchman units the "psyker" rules quality. Seriously, look over Aidoneus's post, Gentlemanloser's posts, and your own post, FerociousBeast. Each of you have found no less than three different ways -- long, tortured ways that I admit I can't even follow! ^_^ -- to try and deny the simple reality expressed in the one simple sentence in the rule that I keep quoting.

 

This fails the smell test, Occam's Razor, pretty much any rational attempt at logic. People complain that GW is dumbing down its rules and games, making them too simple, so simple that 8-year-olds are dominating game stores. Yet you also want to claim that their rules in this case are so complicated that it takes three different essays following three different logical paths to reach the same conclusion, when a much simpler and more obvious solution is sitting right there in front of you, ripe for the taking? ^_^

 

I just don't buy it. Psyker henchman units are psykers (after a sort, the kind of "sort" that Brotherhood of Psykers units are) because they pass the duck-typing test. It's just that simple. Why work so hard to deny it? To what purpose? To what end? I seriously don't get it.

[FerociousBeast]

The other thing I'm seeing is that it requires lengthy paragraphs of tortured logic to deny Psyker henchman units the "psyker" rules quality. ... long, tortured ways that I admit I can't even follow!

If you admit to not understanding the points we're trying to make, why do you persist in "debating" us? You look at my lengthy post and assume tortured logic, I can only assume because you didn't read it closely. If you had, you'd realize that it's lengthy not because I'm laboring to make a point, but because I'm making three separate points, each of which is compelling on its own and, taken together, are nearly insurmountable. In my opinion.

 

Since your rebuttal doesn't address any of those three points, I am tempted to write them again in a Cliff's Notes fashion, but there is only so much time in a day and I won't.

[Grey Mage]

When all of this is combined with the ambiguity in the Culexus Assassin's Animus Speculum rule ("For every Psyker within 12" of the Culexus Assassin, add +1 to the animus speculum's Assault value."), it is definitely possible to successfully argue that each psyker in the Henchman band is a psyker/Psyker. Because the Animus Speculum's rules do not say "For every model with the Psyker rule within 12"..." It just says "Psyker", and there's no statement anywhere or consistent interpretation in the rules about capitalized words referring only to certain rules.

 

I rest my case.

Of course, if were going to debating this part, Id say that since they dont have the special rule "psyker' they cant use their psychic power as theres no rules provided allowing them too. Id further argue that since they cant cast psychic powers they cant be counted for the assassin....

 

Though if you want them to, they can- but nothing else will as if its refering to the title its not refering to the special rule. Cant have your cake and eat it too.

[KnowThyEnemy]

if it walks like a duck, sounds like a duck...then its a heretic and it must be burned :)

[Prathios]

Ok so either the Culexus gets bonuses with them... or... They are immune to mindstrike missiles as well. Think about that, if they are psykers then the Culexus thing works. If they are not psykers they are immune to perils, and mindstrike missiles.

[number6]

Actually, I read your post twice, FerociousBeast. But I can't make heads or tails of your "logic". It therefore strikes me as faulty sophistry. That's the point I'm making.

 

Therefore, if that's the best and clearest explanation you can come up with, I might as well admit that I'm going to remain unconvinced. :)

[Inquisitor Apropos]

Of course, if were going to debating this part, Id say that since they dont have the special rule "psyker' they cant use their psychic power as theres no rules provided allowing them too. Id further argue that since they cant cast psychic powers they cant be counted for the assassin....

 

This is factually incorrect. Please consult the BRB section regarding Psykers:

 

Psykers are powerful warriors gifted with awesome mental powers, which enable them to channel the baleful energy of the Warp.

 

...

 

Psykers can use one psychic power per player turn. To use a psychic power the psyker must pass a Psychic test, which is a normal leadership test.

 

Nowhere in the entire section on psykers is there any mention of 'models with the Psyker special rule'. So, by the BRB, what constitutes a psyker? Any model with a Psychic power, and anything that your codex says is a psyker (the so-called Psyker special rule, we'll get back to it in a minute ;) ).

 

Now lets look at the henchman unit entry for Psykers:

 

Psychic Power: Psychic Barrage

 

So, every Psyker in a henchman unit has a Psychic Power, therefore every Psyker is a Psyker by the BRB. You do not need the Psyker rule to be a Psyker, and you do not need it to use psychic powers. You need to have a psychic power, and to pass a psychic test.

 

But what about the Special Rule, you ask? While it's not needed to be a Psyker, it can be used to say something is a psyker EVEN IF IT HAS NO PSYCHIC POWERS. Inquisition players should be familiar with this, as in the old Daemonhunters and Witch Hunters codices, all Inquisitors are psykers for rules purposes, whether they have any psychic powers or not. It is also often used to reinforce that something is a psyker, such as in the case of Space Marine Librarians, or IG Psyker Battle Squads, but the BRB doesn't require it. Eldrad Ulthran does not have the Psyker special rule. Cheif Librarian Tigurius does not have the Psyker special rule. They don't need it. They have Psychic Powers, and are therefore Psykers under the BRB.

 

Ok, so all henchman Psykers are Psykers. But they have something funny in the rules of their power that makes things wonky. Let's take a look:

 

Only one Psychic Barrage is 'fired', regardless of the number of psykers in the squad. All psykers in the squad are treated as a single psyker for purposes of Psychic tests, etc, and use their own leadership value, not that of any attached characters.

 

What does this mean? Well for starters, it means each Psyker can't go shooting his mindblast off on his own, even though each is a psyker, and would normally be entitled to one power for each model. This is an excellent example of the Codex trumping the BRB. Now for that second sentence.

 

There's a big can of worms in there, so lets open it: '...treated as a single psyker for purposes of Psychic tests, etc...' Etc is a dangerous word, without context. It can mean just about anything. If I was a jerk, I could try and claim that it meant that my 9 Psykers were actually one model with nine wounds spread across nine bases, because it's 'treated as a single psyker'.

 

If you assume that the ETC is wide open, it can be twisted and abused in all sorts of unpleasant ways, by both sides. But the key to ETC is context, so lets take a second look: '...Psychic tests, etc, and use their own leadership value...' That looks an awful lot like a focus on 'psykers taking leadership tests'. But psykers only take Leadership tests when they need to cast powers, you say? Well, in the BRB, yes that's perfectly true. But what about in Codices?

 

This whole thread was started because we were talking about the interaction of Culexus Assassins and henchman Psykers, but don't forget, the new GK Culexus isn't the only one in the game. The Witch Hunter Culexus is still out there, available to all those Imperial codices, including our own (2 assassins of the same type, with completely different rules, in the same army? Legally?! YES! MADNESS!). And man he's got some crazy anti-psyker rules. 2 of them have examples of 'psykers taking leadership tests', and one of those actually makes a difference in the way things play out (Life Drain causes a wound to a psyker that fails an opposed Leadership test, but is limited to one psyker per turn. Mechanically identical, whether they're a single psyker or are each individual psykers).

 

If the psyker is hit, he must pass a leadership test on 2d6. For each point the psyker fails the test by, he loses one Wound. Saving throws may be taken as normal. For example, a psyker (with leadership 7, due to the Soulless rule, below) rolls 9, and so loses 2 Wounds.

 

Ouch. On boxcars, that's as many as 5 wounds on your multi-model 'single psyker', which is really tough at a 5+ save. On the other hand, it's only one leadership test (at Ld 7) against a 'single psyker' as opposed to a Ld 7 test on every single psyker in the unit. I'm not sure which is worse statistically, but I can tell that the results are different even before MathHammering.

 

And then there's the Dark Eldar Crucible of Malediction:

 

Once per game, in the shooting phase, a model with a Crucible of Malediction may choose to open it instead of firing. Every psyker within 3d6" of the bearer must pass a leadership test or be removed from play as they go stark raving mad. No saves of any kind are allowed.

 

So, as individual psykers, just over half of them are going to make it out alive, statistically. As one psyker, though, that's near even odds that all of them live, or all of them evaporate. That's a make or break roll, and it's ONE roll. Talk about pressure.

 

And who knows what new nasty anti-psyker wargear we'll see in the future? Necrons (and their Pariahs) are coming someday soon, and Eldar, Chaos Marines and Daemons will get updated eventually, too.

 

So, in summary, my judgement is that henchman Psykers are each individually psykers for rules purposes involving psykers, and only a 'collective psyker' for purposes involving 'psykers taking Leadership tests'. This puts them on nearly even footing with their IG counterparts, the Psyker Battle Squad. Granted, IG have a bit of an edge, as they have more than one power and only d3 of them evaporate under Perils as opposed to all of them, but they have a higher base cost and can't buy ablative wounds, so it balances out.

 

I plan on playing it this way until it gets FAQed, one way or the other.

 

Edit: Grammatical Picky-ness. Addition of Eldrad and Tigurius examples. Removal of brain-fart.

 

Edit-dendum: If they're all a single psyker for the purposes of all things involving psykers, as some people propose, then when they suffer Perils of the Warp, only one of them dies. This is a rules-lawyery loopwhole around the 'all suffer the effects' caveat. Even if they all suffer the effects, 'as a single psyker' they lose a single wound. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. :)

[KnowThyEnemy]

very solid argument. one point of contention though: your double assassin statement. is the WH book different than the DH book? i could've swore the DH said you can only ever have 1 imperial assassin in an army, no matter what the reason. since they are both imperial assassins (albeit with different rules now), i think id have to call shenanegins on that :tu:. unless the WH book is different of course.

[FerociousBeast]

Inquisitor Apropos, your post is long, therefore your logic is obviously torturous and flawed. :huh:

 

More to the point, though, I agree with your argument except for this part:

 

So, in summary, my judgement is that henchman Psykers are each individually psykers for rules purposes involving psykers, and only a 'collective psyker' for purposes involving 'psykers taking Leadership tests'.

I think it is very clear that the Psykers in the Henchman squad are only a collective psyker in one single case: when they are using Psychic Power: Psychic Barrage.

 

The only place it says anything about Psykers pooling their resources is in the rules for Psychic Barrage. As I've already argued, in every case a psychic power's effects ONLY apply when the psychic power is active, cast, or used somehow. In other words, the rules for Psychic Barrage only apply after the squad passes its Psychic Test, and once the Psychic Barrage has been resolved, the rules cease to apply.

 

In no other case that I can think of do the rules of a Psychic Power have effect on the unit when the Psychic Power is not being used.

[Gentlemanloser]

Nowhere in the entire section on psykers is there any mention of 'models with the Psyker special rule'. So, by the BRB, what constitutes a psyker? Any model with a Psychic power, and anything that your codex says is a psyker (the so-called Psyker special rule, we'll get back to it in a minute ).

 

Codex > Main rulebook.

 

Our Codex specifically references a 'Psyker Special Rule'.

 

The Henchmen don't have it, in any fashion, unlike every other Psychic unit in the Codex.

[FerociousBeast]

Our Codex specifically references a 'Psyker Special Rule'.

No, it doesn't. Page number and reference, please, to prove me wrong or clarify your argument.

[number6]

Inquisitor Apropos, your post is long, therefore your logic is obviously torturous and flawed. :angry:

So it's OK for snarky comments again? :( Awesome! Game on!

 

Apropos' logic was clear. Yours wasn't. <_<

 

I think it is very clear that the Psykers in the Henchman squad are only a collective psyker in one single case: when they are using Psychic Power: Psychic Barrage.

Is this what you were trying to explain before? There you go! One sentence. NOW I get what you're trying to argue.

 

The only place it says anything about Psykers pooling their resources is in the rules for Psychic Barrage. As I've already argued, in every case a psychic power's effects ONLY apply when the psychic power is active, cast, or used somehow. In other words, the rules for Psychic Barrage only apply after the squad passes its Psychic Test, and once the Psychic Barrage has been resolved, the rules cease to apply.

 

In no other case that I can think of do the rules of a Psychic Power have effect on the unit when the Psychic Power is not being used.

I emphasized your last sentence because you yourself are describing why what you're arguing makes no sense. You have to invent a new concept for the game in order for it work. Whereas the simpler solution is to just accept that the intention of the rule -- written, as it is, in the mirror image of Brotherhood of Psykers -- is what it patently appears to be.

 

Simpler >> complicated. Occam's Razor.

 

Besides, when was the last time GW ever wrote airtight rules? Go on, you find 'em. I'll wait here.

 

Done? Right, doesn't exist. This is a company that outright refuses to put a "Daemon" special rule on units that are clearly daemons. Jervis Johnson himself thinks our arguments on this subject are asinine and publicly stated that GW will never pander to rules stupidities like that. They expect us to take the obvious implications and run with them. I don't agree with their philosophy, but I do understand their point. Their point is: this is a ridiculous argument that is working to obscure the obvious. For a game.

 

Give it up. Eventually, this will be FAQ'd to be exactly what the rules already say they are. We all know this. Why make such a painful hullabaloo out of it now? How 'bout we just play the game? This particular rules kerfuffle is only as big as you make it out to be. There are definitely bigger rules holes in the codex than this.