Pidgeon plucker pendant

[Diobarach]

I was wondering how the interpretation of this worked on characters mounted on flying mounts. Do you get the 5+ ward save against the wounds from the character?

Item states:
This item grants the bearer a 5+ ward save against wounds caused in close combat by models that have the Fly special rule.

In most cases the character doesn't have the fly special rule and according to cavalry rules, special rules that apply to the mount don't apply to the rider and vice versa.

But, not giving up on the cheese, the fly rule quotes 'Units made up entirely of models that can fly can move or charge normally on the ground, using their Movement value, or instead choose to fly' which when I also noticed that the faq adds a condition for 'fast cavalry' to transfer to the rider of :
http://www.blacklibrary.com/Downloads/Product/PDF/Warhammer/WARHAMMER-RULEBOOK-.pdf (on page 2)
lead me to believe that maybe the intention is for the rider to also gain the fly special rule?

[Lesebyst]

Would it be 5+ for wounds off the mount only? Other rules which apply to mounts (tough skin, flaming attacks etc) wouldn't be given to the rider.

Page 82

Unless otherwise noted, special rules that apply to the mount do not normally also apply to the rider, and vice versa. There are, however, a few exceptions:
• If the rider or the mount causes Fear or Terror, then the entire combined model is assumed to cause Fear / Terror.
• If either the rider or the mount is subject to Stupidity, then the whole model is affected by the result of the test.
• If either the rider or the mount are Immune to Psychology or immune to Fear, Terror or Panic, then so is the whole model.
• If either the rider or the mount have Frenzy, then the whole model is subject to the Berserk Rage, but only the element with the Frenzy rule gains an Extra Attack."

Page 105

"We assume that special rules that apply to a ridden monster do not normally also apply to character riding it and vice versa (with the same exceptions that apply to cavalry models, which are listed on page 82)"

[Diobarach]

I was curious to see what others thought about the rider. Given the fact that they FAQed fast cav made me wonder about whether the 'fly' rule might be viewed in a similar light.

[Lesebyst]

I'd guess the 1.8 update about fast cavalry is to specifically allow characters on fast cavalry mounts like dark steeds to join dark riders without causing them to lose fast cavalry status. "If a Fast Cavalry unit is joined by a character without the Fast Cavalry rule, the unit loses the rule" would be the rule it's clarifying.

[Haagrum]

My recollection was that a mounted model counted as one model with different components. If that's accurate, then the PPP works against the character's attacks, because the model has the Fly special rule.

Taken to its logical end point - if the mount has Fly but the character does not, the model couldn't use the Fly special rule and would be limited to the mount's M characteristic. This rather defeats the point, of course.

RAW, it may be slightly unclear. However, I'd rule that the PPP works against the rider's attacks as well, since the model as a whole has the Fly special rule.

[Calisson]

Haagrum has it right, and that's RAW.

In short:
Pigeon plucker tells about models.
Reading p.105, there's no doubt that character & mount constitute a single model.

More detailed explanation:
Sure, the rider has not "fly" special rule, but it doesn't matter: the condition is not attached to the attacker, but to the model.
The rider is a part of a model which has special rule "fly", therefore the condition for the pigeon plucker is met.

[Lesebyst]

Pigeon plucker tells about models.
Reading p.105, there's no doubt that character & mount constitute a single model.

The sentence on page 105 I think you're referring to is under the heading "Monstrous Cavalry Mount"

Very rarely, a character will have the option to ride a monstrous beast. In this case, the whole model is treated as having the troop type 'monstrous cavalry' and follows all the rules for both characters and monstrous cavalry models.

Further down the page is this;

If a character model is riding a monster, it does not use the rules for cavalry or monstrous cavalry".

I can accept a character on a 'monstrous cavalry' mount would be seen as one model since it's pretty much treated as a horse with more wounds. But, does this mean PPP would offer a ward vs a pegmaster's attack but not vs a dragon riding character's? Being mounted on a monster is very different to being mounted on an MC as there are different rules to consider.

There is a rule for “If the mount has the Fast Cavalry special rule, then the whole model has it.” but not for "If the mount has the Fly special rule, then the whole model has it.".

[Calisson]

RAW:
p.104: "A character and his mount are treated as a single character model for all rules purposes, except as noted below." [Note: Special rules being generally exceptions, "Fly" is an exception indeed].
p.70 about Fly: "Units made entirely of models that can fly can (...) choose to fly. (...) using 10" as Movement characteristic".

Here is the alternative:
A) The character is a distinct model from his mount.
=> The character has not the fly rule, therefore it is not subject to PPP.
=> As the unit (character + mount) is not made entirely of models that can fly, it may not chose to fly and may not use flyers' M10". It is therefore limited to the slowest move in the unit, i.e. M5, non flying.
=> The unit does not have swiftstride either, by the way, for a similar reason.

B) The character and his mount constitute together a single model.
=> This single model has the fly rule, therefore it is subject to PPP, including the character.
=> The unit is made entirely of models that can fly. As such, it may chose to fly with M10".


Conclusion:
If you really want your dreadlord to be immune to PPP despite riding a dragon, you can argue alternative A) with RAW. As an opponent, I would accept gladfully that ruling.
But be consistent and, until the dreadlord is killed, the unit cannot move faster than M5, has not swifstride, and cannot fly.

[Diobarach]

Alright well that makes some more sense, thanks for the responses.