Thing that will need FAQ

[Xenith]

YAY! Quoting the dictionary!

 

Wings works on a unit of jump infantry.

 

If you use the logic that wings will not work on a unit of "Infantry (jump)" because they are not simply "infantry", then how do you propose the rule interacts with a model that is "infantry (character)".

 

If you answer anything but identically, your argument is null.

 

If jump infantry cannot be the target of wings, then character infantry may not be the target of wings.

[Spinsanity]

If jump infantry cannot be the target of wings, then character infantry may not be the target of wings.

Ah, you're right! Which would also mean that any unit that still includes a sergeant cannot be the target of Wings...

[Bryan Blaire]

If only GW had made it easy and hadn't said that Jump could not be subdivided out of a classification and then proceeded to talk about Jump units as a different categorization. Or they could have made it "Infantry (Jump)" instead of "Jump Infantry". Instead they had to write it that Jump was not a classification in and of itself... Meaning it can only be a modifier to a unit type. :(

 

GW themselves made it unnecessarily convoluted.

[Quixus]

If only GW had made it easy and hadn't said that Jump could not be subdivided out of a classification and then proceeded to talk about Jump units as a different categorization. Or they could have made it "Infantry (Jump)" instead of "Jump Infantry". Instead they had to write it that Jump was not a classification in and of itself... Meaning it can only be a modifier to a unit type.

GW themselves made it unnecessarily convoluted.

Not quite. Character is definitely not a unit type. Jump is listed in the unit type section, and the rules say that it is not a type in and of itself. They do not say that it is a set of rules to attach to a unit type. Unfortunately they do not explicitly say that jump units create a number of additional types (Jump Infantry, Jump Montrous Creaturee etc.) either.

This section describes the different types of units that can wage war in the 41st Millennium and the rules you will need to use them.

So the default is that the following items are unit types.

Unlike most other unit type categories, ‘Jump’ is not a classification in and of itself.

This does not say that Jump combined with one of the other unit types remains the same unit type as without it. Quite the contrary, IMHO it heavily implies that these combinations do make new types.

Compare this to characters:

In addition to their unit type, some models might also be noted as being characters.

To further emphasize the different treatment of jump infantry and characters, in the lists characters are designated Bk (Ch), In (Ch) or W (CH) whereas jump units are referred to as In, J. Jump units that are also characters are referred to as for instance In, J (Ch). If Jump unit rules were to be treated as the rules for characters, why aren't such units referred to as In (J) and In (Ch, J) respectively?

[Bryan Blaire]

They do not say that it is a set of rules to attach to a unit type.

Actually, that's what it pretty heavily implies, if not says, as you allude to in the quote below:

Instead you'll find it occurs before another category - commonly Infantry, sometimes Monstrous Creatures and perhaps, rarely, other things. Jump units therefore share two sets of rules, the Jump unit rules, and those of their base type. Jump Infantry would, for example, follow the rules for Jump units and Infantry.

I.E. The rules for Jump get added to the Infantry type for the unit being described, and the unit gets to use both. There's even the description of not using the Jump movement in favor of standard movement of the "normal type" for the model they are instead. It heavily implies that the two sets of rules are applying at the same time, as if joined for the unit.

 

Quite the contrary, IMHO it heavily implies that these combinations do make new types.

That's what I have been saying the whole time (and hence it being described as 'Jump Infantry' instead of 'Infantry (Jump)'), however, GW had to decide to be clever and try and word it in a strangely complicated manner that actually makes it less clear than simply saying "adding Jump to something makes a new unit type that no longer is affected by events and effects that only affect the base type it was derived from". Sadly they didn't make 'Jump' quite as cut and dried as they could/should have.

 

Wings itself doesn't need to be FAQ'd, the method that Jump needs to use needs to be FAQ'd for the rules itself.

[Quixus]

It does not matter much which, but either the Jump Infantry/MC/etc. type needs to be FAQed or the Wings power needs to be errataed. The best way would be to errata the Jump rules, explicitly saying that jump does not change the unit type.

[Bryan Blaire]

Not sure how something explicitly written as being a modifier couldn't change the unit type... That's what modifiers do, they change something. Even a simple "addition to" is still a change to the unit type.

 

They could make Jump an additional subtype things could have, and say "all things that affect the base type also affect all subtypes in the same way", which would fix it lickity-split, but they really don't have the ability to say "doesn't change the type" when they have already said "Jump isn't a classification - it has to go with something else".

[Quixus]

No. "in addition to" does not change the unit type, unless the addition is a unit type. Or would the addition of say FNP change the unit type?

 

I just found something out:

Models with jump packs gain the Jump unit type as described in Warhammer 40,000: The Rules.

So according to the codex (which trumps the rulebook) Jump is a type and it is added to the type the unit initially had. So Jump Infantry from C:BA at least has two types and not one new type called Jump Infantry. I assume other units are supposed to be treated the same way.

 

It is still unclear what Wings of Sanguinius does if a unit has two types. Does the power check whether the unit type is exactly infantry or does it check whether the unit has the infantry type? The latter would allow Jump Infantry to benefit from the power the former would not.

[Bryan Blaire]

Then once again GW contradicts their own rules as something can't be a unit type to gain while at the same time being "not a classification in and of itself". Further muddied water.

 

FNP would obviously not change a unit type, as it isn't anything found in the "Unit Type" section and does not alter the unit type. As written, Jump does in some form or fashion, whether it be an additional type, per the C:BA or something added to the type directly, per The Rules.

[Shaezus]

Sigh...was hoping to find something new being discussed, as the 'wings on jump infantry' argument has long been settled.

 

It's pretty simple really. 'Jump infantry' are a sub-class of infantry. Wings is used on infantry. So it can be used on jump infantry. Unless there is something in the rules which states otherwise.

 

No point in trying to complicate or twist things people, when it's right there in plain English.

[Bryan Blaire]

I fail to see how unclear wording can be "settled" universally by anyone other than the author. Until then, you either settle it within your gaming group or for yourself, in which case, there's no reason to take part in further discussion about it.

 

Personally, I'd probably allow Wings on any Infantry unit regardless of modifiers to the unit type, but it remains questionable overall, and nothing presented in any way clearly states that "Jump" units are a subset of anything. If you can quote actual text for that, please do.

[tsijben]

Not really BA-related, but the Necron-Relic has the ability Executioner.

In the book it says 'Executioner' while the eBook says Executioner (2+).

 

Perhaps there are more errors like this where the normal book and eBook are different?

I based my BS-file on the eBook, so I hope they are both the same.

[Bearman71]

YAY! Quoting the dictionary!

 

Wings works on a unit of jump infantry.

 

If you use the logic that wings will not work on a unit of "Infantry (jump)" because they are not simply "infantry", then how do you propose the rule interacts with a model that is "infantry (character)".

 

If you answer anything but identically, your argument is null.

 

If jump infantry cannot be the target of wings, then character infantry may not be the target of wings.

That being said, the GW BL:Data card says infantry can move a MAX of 12 inches. So who gives a :cuss what jump infantry are classed as. 

[Morticon]

Shutting this down. Take it up in the OR gents.

Its past its sell-by date.