Banner of Nagarythe
Moderator: The Dread Knights
Banner of Nagarythe
Hello, I have a quick question
Does the Banner of Nagarythe grants +1 CR to the unit containg it apart from making them Unbreakable?
Is it possible to have a unit with base 8 CR? (Ranks, BSB, WB, BoN, Standard and Unit Strenght)
Does the Banner of Nagarythe grants +1 CR to the unit containg it apart from making them Unbreakable?
Is it possible to have a unit with base 8 CR? (Ranks, BSB, WB, BoN, Standard and Unit Strenght)
"One must do violence to the object of one's desire; when it surrenders, the pleasure is greater."
Marquis De Sade
Marquis De Sade
Thanks for a quick anwser.
I'am toying with an idea of a unit of around 25 Corsairs with War Banner and a BSB on a Cold One with the banner of nagarythe. Next to it should be a unit of around 20-25 black guard with a highborn on cold one. Two invincible units, backed up by some dark riders and chariots - could be fun
I'am toying with an idea of a unit of around 25 Corsairs with War Banner and a BSB on a Cold One with the banner of nagarythe. Next to it should be a unit of around 20-25 black guard with a highborn on cold one. Two invincible units, backed up by some dark riders and chariots - could be fun
"One must do violence to the object of one's desire; when it surrenders, the pleasure is greater."
Marquis De Sade
Marquis De Sade
- Rugi
- Noble
- Posts: 459
- Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:33 pm
- Location: probably still burried under snow after a failed backflip attempt
I'am toying with an idea of a unit of around 25 Corsairs with War Banner and a BSB on a Cold One with the banner of nagarythe. Next to it should be a unit of around 20-25 black guard with a highborn on cold one. Two invincible units, backed up by some dark riders and chariots - could be fun
I do believe that unbreakable characters can`t join non-unbreakable units. So your BsB can`t join any unit unless I misread something.
-
- Trainee Warrior
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 1:08 am
- Location: Here
- Linda lobsta defenda
- Witch Elf
- Posts: 8090
- Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2002 11:31 pm
- Location: Toms River, NJ, USA
rugi is right: page 79. If you are unbreakable you CANNOT join non unbreakable units and vice versa.
General FAQ:
http://www.druchii.net/viewtopic.php?t=2504
FAQ about rules:
http://www.druchii.net/viewtopic.php?p=547809
http://www.druchii.net/viewtopic.php?t=2504
FAQ about rules:
http://www.druchii.net/viewtopic.php?p=547809
- Patrizzo
- Malekith's Personal Guard
- Posts: 981
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 7:27 pm
- Location: Malmö/Sweden
Funny, this means a BSB with that banner never can join any unit. The BSB is unbreakable and the units are not, until after he has joined (which he can't as they are not unbreakable). Catch 22 if there ever was one. And as characters are deployed after all other units, the BSB can't join during deployment weither. Good banner in the new rules.
Pulchritudo in oculis spectatore est ...
- Prince of arnheim
- Renegade Reaver
- Posts: 1612
- Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:21 pm
- Location: Regina,Saskatchewan,Canada
Isn't the whole point of the Banner of Nag to make a unit unbreakable. The rules of the armybook(which overrule the rulebook) say that any unit joined becomes unbreakable. Since we have no unbreakable units this must be legal for a BSB to join say a unit of Warriors. What would be the points of the 150 point banner if this was not allowable?? I sincerely think that this is a case where the DE armybook overwrites the new 7th Ed Rulebook.
- Patrizzo
- Malekith's Personal Guard
- Posts: 981
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 7:27 pm
- Location: Malmö/Sweden
The banner says the unit carrying the banner becomes unbreakable, ie the BSB. If he could join a unit that one would be unbreakable too, but the rule on p.69 forbids him from joining any unit that is not allready unbreakable. That's the catch 22. I'm not saying I like it.
Pulchritudo in oculis spectatore est ...
Maybe a typo on your part, or maybe pages are shifted if you're looking at a non-english edition, but I see the Unbreakable Character rule on page 79 of my book.Patrizzo wrote:...but the rule on p.69 forbids him from joining any unit that is not allready unbreakable...
This is true, but I don't see anywhere in the item description where it says the Character becomes Unbreakable, and then the unit he joins becomes Unbreakable after he joins them. The way the rule is written, it simply states that the unit that is carrying the banner becomes Unbreakable, so the BSB should be able to join any unit as normal.Rugi wrote:I do believe that unbreakable characters can`t join non-unbreakable units. So your BsB can`t join any unit unless I misread something.
Unless somewhere there is an official rules clarification on this stating that the banner was meant to be useless, I would say that any GW event you brought this list to would have no problem with the unit described above.
.
.
Wishing everyone the very best, to the end of your days.
.
Wishing everyone the very best, to the end of your days.
- Patrizzo
- Malekith's Personal Guard
- Posts: 981
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 7:27 pm
- Location: Malmö/Sweden
Correct, it should be p.79 according to Linda's and your posts, a typo from my part. My only point is that the BSB is the unit carrying the banner and so is unbreakable. If he joined a unit that one would be unbreakable too, but as he allready is unbreakable and the unit he wants to join is not, he actually can't join it and so make it unbreakable. I of course understand that this wasn't intended (as so much else), but it is the rule. In short it's a matter of timing. When does the unit he's trying to join get the benefit of his banner? Before or after he actually joins the unit? I'd say after, and so he can't join at all as they are not unbreakable at that moment and he is.
Pulchritudo in oculis spectatore est ...
- Silverheimdall
- Malekith's Best Friend
- Posts: 2503
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:54 pm
- Location: Québec, Canucksda.
- Silverheimdall
- Malekith's Best Friend
- Posts: 2503
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:54 pm
- Location: Québec, Canucksda.
Errr.... its not complicated, the deployment is only to present your army, however, the army sets out from somewhere to engage their enemies or are the ones being attacked, the noble has his units in which he holds the banner.
You start out in a unit with the banner but you cannot go join or leave and rejoin it, the noble BSB is bound to his unit from the start.
You start out in a unit with the banner but you cannot go join or leave and rejoin it, the noble BSB is bound to his unit from the start.
- Silverheimdall
- Malekith's Best Friend
- Posts: 2503
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:54 pm
- Location: Québec, Canucksda.
- Vorchild
- Master of the Red Legion
- Posts: 7037
- Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 1:06 pm
- Location: Land of Chill
- Contact:
This is what you'd typically call splitting hairs guys. My advice: play it the way it was OBVIOUSLY intended, and if anyone for complains about it, simply swap out immediately for the hydra banner (or if that's not acceptable, drop it entirely) and dock his his entire sportsmanship score if its a competitive event.
_
The storm is coming...
Are you ready?
The storm is coming...
Are you ready?
Thanks for re-explaining, but it wasn't that I didn't understand what you are saying, it was just that I disagreed with it.Patrizzo wrote:... My only point is that the BSB is the unit carrying the banner and so is unbreakable. If he joined a unit that one would be unbreakable too, but as he allready is unbreakable and the unit he wants to join is not, he actually can't join it and so make it unbreakable. I of course understand that this wasn't intended (as so much else), but it is the rule. In short it's a matter of timing. When does the unit he's trying to join get the benefit of his banner? Before or after he actually joins the unit? I'd say after, and so he can't join at all as they are not unbreakable at that moment and he is.
Yes, you can take this sort of Magic The Gathering approach and read the rules to mean that things have to happen one at a time, but you can also just as readily interpret them to say that based on the item description it is saying that the unit the BSB is in becomes Unbreakable, so it's an item that could be used in an actual game situation. And I think that any time there are two ways to interpret a rule, one that makes sense and one that does not, it stands to reason that the way that makes sense is the way that was intended and the one that you should play with. I guess that is my basis for disagreeing with you, not that I don't think you can choose to look at this the way you've outlined.
Vorchild! Haven't seen you in ages, hope life is going well for you.Vorchild wrote:My advice: play it the way it was OBVIOUSLY intended, and if anyone for complains about it, simply swap out immediately for the hydra banner (or if that's not acceptable, drop it entirely) and dock his his entire sportsmanship score if its a competitive event.
I actually disagree with this, too though. I can't imagine any GW event where you couldn't get a judge to agree that the BoN could be used in a unit.
.
.
Wishing everyone the very best, to the end of your days.
.
Wishing everyone the very best, to the end of your days.
- Prince of arnheim
- Renegade Reaver
- Posts: 1612
- Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 1:21 pm
- Location: Regina,Saskatchewan,Canada
- Pariah mk.231
- Noble
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 11:10 am
- Location: The Eastern Steppe, assaulting the Great Bastion of Cathay ... well, Australia actually.
I think that rule was introduced to stop an unbreakable character joining a unit and passing on the ability, or him sticking around when the unit flees, or of course, him fleeing along with the unit.
The interpretation that a BSB with the Banner of Nagarythe can't join a unit because he's unbreakable is an oversight, as it's the banner that provides the benefit to the entire unit, and not just the character. If it was an item or rule that made the character himself unbreakable, but not the unit, then he wouldn't be allowed to join it.
But since the ability is passed on to the unit, and clearly stated as such, he can still join the unit, and then the unit as a whole becomes unbreakable.
The interpretation that a BSB with the Banner of Nagarythe can't join a unit because he's unbreakable is an oversight, as it's the banner that provides the benefit to the entire unit, and not just the character. If it was an item or rule that made the character himself unbreakable, but not the unit, then he wouldn't be allowed to join it.
But since the ability is passed on to the unit, and clearly stated as such, he can still join the unit, and then the unit as a whole becomes unbreakable.
Formerly Marlus Chi Kai
In all ov da 'ole Orky race, der ar too kindz ov ladz an' only too. Der'z da one stayin' put in 'is propa place, an' da one wiv 'is foot in da uvver one'z face.
- Gurgit Trollpuncha
In all ov da 'ole Orky race, der ar too kindz ov ladz an' only too. Der'z da one stayin' put in 'is propa place, an' da one wiv 'is foot in da uvver one'z face.
- Gurgit Trollpuncha
- Silverheimdall
- Malekith's Best Friend
- Posts: 2503
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:54 pm
- Location: Québec, Canucksda.
The original intent is that the bsb can join any unit even in mid battle. The intent of this item is not in question. If we retain this item in this edition it should have the small caveat added that it ignores the unbreak able rules that does not allow a characther to join. Just because our Army book does not fit the new rules exactly, the rule should not be held against us. Just ask yourself, " What would GW say on an faq.?" The answer is that that they would write a small caveat for this item. I would rather they save the article space for a more ambiguous or clearly conflicting rule rather than a rule whose intent is not questionable. In this case do you have to bother to ask for a rules clarification? Or do you just say, "yes by the precise letter of the rules it is not allowed, but they clearly want it to be allowed and our army book is just not meshing exactly as it should with the new rules." A reasonable person would say this, people I wouold not play with would disagree.
I think that 7th edition is a much better written rule book than 6th but you will still find some ambiguities or conflicting rules. Especially when cross referencing between 6th and 7th.
I think that 7th edition is a much better written rule book than 6th but you will still find some ambiguities or conflicting rules. Especially when cross referencing between 6th and 7th.
Good, bad, I am the guy with the reapter bolt thrower.
- Patrizzo
- Malekith's Personal Guard
- Posts: 981
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 7:27 pm
- Location: Malmö/Sweden
The thing is, it's not at all certain that they would say that. Remember the FAQ answer on Chaos Knights of Khorne nad their steeds not gaining the extra attack from frenzy? GW is quite inflexible these days imho, more RAW than anything.Viper wrote:" What would GW say on an faq.?" The answer is that that they would write a small caveat for this item.
That said, I agree with the intent. As you might have noticed in my first post, I started with saying that this was a funny consequence of the new rules. In a friendly game I would make a joke of it and let it go asap. In a tournament I would probably make more of a fuss about it, but that's one of the reasons that I don't play tournaments anymore. They are way too competitive for my liking, and people (including me) take the game way too serious. More fun to play with the same people on our tables at home, where we can laugh about the stupid consequensies(?) of GW's inability to read and consider their own rules before they print them.
On the issue of MtG I can only say one thing. WotC is a company that really can write rules. There is very seldom any disputes of rules on the tournaments I've watched (or even played though that is not a common occurance). This is because of course because WotC take tournaments way more serious than GW does, but that doesn't make people playing MtG more competitive than WHFB players.
Pulchritudo in oculis spectatore est ...