FAQ about reserve rolls and allies

[DevianID]

Howdy all, a friend pointed me to the FAQ about allies and reserves and it has me confused. Namely,

Q: Do modifiers that apply to such things as Reserve rolls, apply to units from an allied detachment? (p124)

A: No

 

Ok, so I have ig as an ally to any of their battle brothers. In my ig hq choice I take an astropath upgrade. I know that the astropath works on all units normally, even non ig ones. However this FAQ mucks everything up. First, it only talks about modifiers, so rerolls granted by the astropath to outflank for example seem exempt. Second, what are things such as reserve rolls besides reserve rolls that would actually apply here? Third, only allied detachments are mentioned, so my allied astropath can modify my primary army reserve rolls but not my allied army reserve rolls despite the allies being the one to grant the modifier?

 

So for example, I have ig as an ally to space wolves. I outflank wolf scouts, outflank ratlings and have a vendetta which must start in reserve. By my reading it appears that the wolf scouts arrive on a 2+ thanks to the astropath and can reroll their outflank with the astropath (ignore their acute senses for a moment), the vendetta and ratings both arrive on a 3+ because reserve modifiers do nothing for allies, but the outflanking ratings can still reroll their outflank side thanks to the astropath as that is not a modifier based ability. Is that right or is there some other way to resolve this with the FAQ ruling?

 

Thanks in advance

[Gentlemanloser]

That's right.  This FAQ entry is *very* badly worded.

[Dam13n]

It's worded as badly as the "allied Techmarine" FAQ answer that implied that an allied TM isn't allowed to repair allied units, despite the fact that they're from the same detachment/codex.

[jeffersonian000]

It's worded as badly as the "allied Techmarine" FAQ answer that implied that an allied TM isn't allowed to repair allied units, despite the fact that they're from the same detachment/codex.

.... You can't allie units from your own codex. Allies must come from a different codex than the core army.

 

SJ

[BassWave]

 

It's worded as badly as the "allied Techmarine" FAQ answer that implied that an allied TM isn't allowed to repair allied units, despite the fact that they're from the same detachment/codex.

.... You can't allie units from your own codex. Allies must come from a different codex than the core army.

 

SJ

What Dam13en means is that if you have Blood Angel allies, a BA techmarine cannot fix BA units, despite coming from the same codex. Its THAT badly worded.

[Dam13n]

Spot on Basswave. I reckon a pre-schooler could write better FAQ answers that the anonymous person GW employs to write them. It's embarrassing really. Especially when most of their answers are just unnecessary, as common sense/house rules could easily resolve most of the "issues" that they fail to properly fix.

[jeffersonian000]

Q: Can models from an Allied Detachment that have the ability to

 

repair Hull Points or Immobilised/Weapon Destroyed results from

the Vehicle Damage Table use this ability on Allied vehicles? (p112)

A: No.

 

... "Allied Detachment" is not the same as "Allied" units. While the Q and A above can be parsed to mean that an allied Techmarine cannot repair his own vehiles, it can also be parsed that a Techmarine from an allied codex cannot repair vehicles from a primary codex. I read it as the second parse the first time, and still read it as such because "Alied Detachment" is a reference specifically to the allied codex units, while "Allied" is referencing the primarr codex units. GW is known for their small (insufficient) vocabulary, as well as their poorly worded FAQ.

 

SJ

[Morollan]

Q: Can models from an Allied Detachment that have the ability to

 

repair Hull Points or Immobilised/Weapon Destroyed results from

the Vehicle Damage Table use this ability on Allied vehicles? (p112)

A: No.

 

... "Allied Detachment" is not the same as "Allied" units. While the Q and A above can be parsed to mean that an allied Techmarine cannot repair his own vehiles, it can also be parsed that a Techmarine from an allied codex cannot repair vehicles from a primary codex. I read it as the second parse the first time, and still read it as such because "Alied Detachment" is a reference specifically to the allied codex units, while "Allied" is referencing the primarr codex units. GW is known for their small (insufficient) vocabulary, as well as their poorly worded FAQ.

 

SJ

 

You can also infer from that FAQ that a Techmarine in a Primary Detachment can still repair vehicles in an Allied Detachment (but not the other way round)

[BassWave]

Haha! You are right Morollan, well done FAQ writers

[Dam13n]

Why couldn't they have just said:

 

"A model with the ability to repair hull points or immobilised/weapon destroyed damage results may only use this ability on models puchased from the same codex as that model."

 

or

 

"A model with the ability to repair hull points or immobilised/weapon destroyed damage results may only use this ability on models puchased as part of the same detachment as that model."

 

That way is much more straight forward and there is no ambiguity. The same could be applied to reserve roll modifiers:

 

"A model with the ability to modify (or allow re-rolls of) reserve rolls may only use this ability on models from the same codex that are arriving from reserve, models purchased from a different codex (as part of an allied detachment, for example) to the model in question are unaffected and arrive according to seperate reserve rolls, which may in turn be modified by models with similar rules from their own codex, if such models are present in the army."

 

They could've swapped in the part about different detachments in place of different codices if that's what they wanted from the answer. Note that this took me all of 5 minutes to write and (I hope) make a lot more sense than the GW answer.

 

It's just lazy writing with no proof-reading before release. Something that really shouldn't happen given GWs size and position within the industry. I'm sure many of us that post here would happily do this for GW (for a modest fee of course :P ) and would do it with much more care and attention to what we write than whomever it is that currently writes the crap their FAQs are filled with.

[Upstartes]

RAW answer to OP: Unclear on pretty much all counts.

 

RAI answer: It seems likely that the intent is "units on one side of the ally divide can't use their ability to alter rolls related to coming on from Reserves - including Outflank rolls - to affect units on the other side of the ally divide." Having it go one from allied to primary but not primary to allied makes little sense. Also, the FAQs and erratas all seem to be strongly pointing towards curtailing the ability of allies' powers to help the other half of the alliance. Like all "Rules and Intended" answers, however, this is a potential source of endless arguments. It's just how I read it. Plus, making the conservative assumption is almost always the safest thing to do.

[Gentlemanloser]

How can the RAW be unclear? 

[Kastor Krieg]

How can the RAW be unclear?

I'm sorry, are you serious?

[Gentlemanloser]

In this specific case, not in general.

 

In direct response to;

 

 

RAW answer to OP: Unclear on pretty much all counts.

 

The FAQ is quite clear.  It's a bad rule, and it's badly written, but the FAQ, and the RAW it supplies, is quite clear.

[Lysere]

Why couldn't they have just said:

"A model with the ability to repair hull points or immobilised/weapon destroyed damage results may only use this ability on models puchased from the same codex as that model."

or

"A model with the ability to repair hull points or immobilised/weapon destroyed damage results may only use this ability on models puchased as part of the same detachment as that model."

That way is much more straight forward and there is no ambiguity. The same could be applied to reserve roll modifiers:

"A model with the ability to modify (or allow re-rolls of) reserve rolls may only use this ability on models from the same codex that are arriving from reserve, models purchased from a different codex (as part of an allied detachment, for example) to the model in question are unaffected and arrive according to seperate reserve rolls, which may in turn be modified by models with similar rules from their own codex, if such models are present in the army."

They could've swapped in the part about different detachments in place of different codices if that's what they wanted from the answer. Note that this took me all of 5 minutes to write and (I hope) make a lot more sense than the GW answer.

It's just lazy writing with no proof-reading before release. Something that really shouldn't happen given GWs size and position within the industry. I'm sure many of us that post here would happily do this for GW (for a modest fee of course ) and would do it with much more care and attention to what we write than whomever it is that currently writes the crap their FAQs are filled with.

You should just e-mail that response to GW and tell them to use it as their FAQ entry.

[Grey Mage]

In this specific case, not in general.

 

In direct response to;

 

 

RAW answer to OP: Unclear on pretty much all counts.

 

The FAQ is quite clear.  It's a bad rule, and it's badly written, but the FAQ, and the RAW it supplies, is quite clear.

When there are multiple ways to read something, it is 'unclear'.

[Gentlemanloser]

GM, there's no possible way to read 'No' in multiple ways.

 

 

Q: Do modifiers that apply to such things as Reserve rolls, apply to units from an allied detachment? (p124)

 

 

A: No

 

Pretty clear cut...

 

Do modifiers to reserve rolls apply to units in your allied detahcment?

 

No.

 

How else could you possibly view that?

[Dam13n]

The problem is this:

 

- I take a Space Marine Force with Guard Allies.

 

- As part of the Guard Allies I take a Astropath as an upgrade to my Command Squad

 

- As per the ruling, the allied detachment (Guard) do not gain any benefit from the Astropath, however I could argue that the Marines (as a primary detachment) would, because they aren't an allied detachment as per the army selection rules.

 

It's just poor wording from a RAI perpective.  The RAW is fairly clear, I agree, but the interpretation above should be clearly wrong.

 

Like I said above (in a slightly more long-winded way), they should've said that:

 

 

"such modifiers only apply to models purchased from the same codex/detachment as the model with these special rules"

 

This is still clear from a RAW perspective, and fits the RAI much better than their answer.

[Upstartes]

Here are things I find unclear:

 

Is a re-roll considered a modifier? Some may say "this is obvious." Maybe so, but it could still be argued.

 

If the modifier is coming FROM the allied detachment, does it apply to the main force? Answer: there is no explicit answer. There is no rule-as-written. Thus, unclear.

 

That's what I meant.

[Gentlemanloser]

If the modifier is coming FROM the allied detachment, does it apply to the main force? Answer: there is no explicit answer.

 

Why wouldn't it?

 

Still, that's a seperate issue, and nothing really to do with the OP.

 

Edit: As long as the modifier followed the ally rules.  No Psychic Powers / Wargear for non Battle Brothers, etc.