Battle Psyker Squad Question

[jhobin]

This is per the INAT FAQ, which is used at most of the big 40k events as the standard GW doesn't have an answer FAQ;

IG.47D.02 – Q: Does 'Weaken Resolve' affect units with the 'Stubborn' special rule when they are taking a morale test?
A: No it does not, as „Weaken Resolve‟ modifies the unit‟s Ld value (which „Stubborn‟ ignores during Morale tests) [clarification].
Ref: DH.27.02, NEC.17A.01, TYR.59B.01, WH.30B.02

[Benjamin]

Yeah, my gut reaction is to agree. Stubborn should negate Weaken Resolve, not vice versa.

[keithb]

Completely disagree.

Stubborn ignores MODIFIERS to their morale checks.  I.E.  A stubborn unit of Marines loses combat by 2, this imposes a -2 MODIFIER to their morale check.   STUBBORN allows them to ignore this.


Battle Pysker Squad REDUCES the leadership of the unit for the turn.  This is not a Modifier to a morale check.  It is changing the stat in the book, not imposing penalties.   For example. the same unit of marines is hit by weaken resolve from a 5 man battle pysker squad. This reduces the leadership of the squad from 8 to 3.   They are now stubborn on a 3, as that IS their leadership until end of turn.  If they lost by 1 they would ignore the -1 MODIFIER because they are stubborn.

If GW wanted stubborn to be protected from the weaken resolve ability, the ability would read.   Any unit hit by weaken resolve suffers a -X MODIFIER to all leadership tests until the end of turn.  Rather than REDUCING the stat for a turn.

People use INAT and Direwolf FAQ to absolve themselves of responsibility for unpopular rule calls.  The Language to me is quite clear, and INAT doesn't mean anything in official GW events.

Saying "A bunch of guys who have been playing by their own rules for years play it this way" isn't really worth anything.

Using Gut reactions and other people's consensus is not a way to read rules.  Use English.  By sticking to the words in print, you can force GW to actually update errata and FAQs.  Its been working in Fantasy.  We've had 6 FAQ updates in less than a year.

 

[Benjamin]

This is what we call a teaching moment.

I learned about Weaken Resolve. Keith can learn that other people don't need the sass or the soapbox rant when just an explanation would suffice.

[jhobin]

I don't always agree with the rulings of the INAT, and I personally don't consider it to be lazy way of rule interpretation myself.  Myself I’m a competitive player, and I don’t get a chance to play a lot of friendly games much anymore do to having a kid. The events that I go are the GW sanctioned named events throughout the country. All of the events that I have gone to use the INAT as there rule set. So when I get a chance to get a friendly game in (when I can coerce a family member to watch the grot!) it’s usually with friends that are of a similar mindset, and we play our game as if we’re playing in one of these events (usually using one of the their mission as well.)

This is just the way that I play and others are welcome to play as they want. It’s the great part of the game. I was just offering a second alternative to the answer that was given and didn’t mean to insult anyone.

[the_trooper]

Too late, Mr. jhobin, I have been insulted.

[Ian Mulligan]

Yeah, my gut reaction is to agree. Stubborn should negate Weaken Resolve, not vice versa.

this is correct. I totally spaced out on the wording of Stubborn.

[keithb]

This is what we call a teaching moment.

I learned about Weaken Resolve. Keith can learn that other people don't need the sass or the soapbox rant when just an explanation would suffice.

That wasn't me ranting, thankfully that isn't needed.  I only cap things for emphasis, please do not read them as shouting.  I try to make my posts rather complete to avoid confusion.

I very much dislike when people try to make rule calls on "what they think GW meant"  versus just reading the rules as they are.  I know RAW can be unpopular, but it is the fairest way for everyone involved.  Hopefully, we can eventually get GW to write tighter, more consistent rules.  This approach seems to be working in Fantasy.

And Jeff, I didn't saying anything about GW sanctioned events.  But I know INAT won't be used for 'Ard Boyz or Throne of skulls.  If Adepticon wants to use it, that is their thing.   I am fairly certain NOVA won't be.

[Grimwulfe]

And Jeff, I didn't saying anything about GW sanctioned events.  But I know INAT won't be used for 'Ard Boyz or Throne of skulls.  If Adepticon wants to use it, that is their thing.   I am fairly certain NOVA won't be.

Actually NOVA runs a FAQ very similar to the INAT and uses it as its basis.  Adepticon and these other events are part of the mainstream hobby for 40k.  GW events are lacking and as a fellow GT attendee I found the INAT to be very viable in all stages of 40k.  To rely on GW to FAQ something is a long and tedious process.

Overall the INAT is balanced and made to keep the game fair and on the level due to some very bad writing on the parts of GW and there editing team.  To solely rely on RAW in some cases will cause more issues then using a well known FAQ whether it be done by GW or an independent.

Since the INAT is used in numerous high profile events it has time again proven its worth to the hobby and in the tourny scene.

[keithb]

my point regarding FAQ's is that if you do it, they won't.  As they have shown.  In Fantasy people have stopped making their own and made a lot of complaints to GW directly and we have gotten a lot of clarfication/Errata/FAQs updated in the like 8 months of 8th edition.

Also, a question was asked a while ago about this, and answers were given that I think lists were built around, so to change it now would be a bit unfair to which ever player(s) originally asked.

[Moosifer]

I am confused by this discussion.  The rules for both are pretty clear cut and PSB's weaken resolve does not effect stubborn units.

Stubborn in the book says "While taking morale tests, stubborn units always ignore any negative leadership modifiers" while weaken resolve says "For the remainder of the turn, the enemy units leaderships is reduced by the number of sanctioned psykers in the unit using this power (to a minimum of 2)"

Now correct me if i am wrong but with GW saying "any neagtive leadership modifier" (i.e. effect that would drop the unit below what their base leadership) answer this question and not have the need for this long winded discussion?

[NChomsky3d]

I am confused by this discussion.  The rules for both are pretty clear cut and PSB's weaken resolve does not effect stubborn units.

Stubborn in the book says "While taking morale tests, stubborn units always ignore any negative leadership modifiers" while weaken resolve says "For the remainder of the turn, the enemy units leaderships is reduced by the number of sanctioned psykers in the unit using this power (to a minimum of 2)"

Now correct me if i am wrong but with GW saying "any neagtive leadership modifier" (i.e. effect that would drop the unit below what their base leadership) answer this question and not have the need for this long winded discussion?

It depends on how you view "negative leadership modifier".  I consider losing combat by two and having a -2 to your roll be a modifier, and therefore ignored.  I think the Psyker Battle Squads actually reduces the leadership stat of the unit, not their roll, as this counts for anything (morale, pinning, Fateweaver's thing, etc).  I think there is a pretty big distinction there, and that therefore PSBs ignore stubborn.

[Moosifer]

Does the PSB ability reduce the leadership of a stubborn unit below its base leadership?  If the answer is yes then you are applying a "negative leadership modifier" to the unit.

Chase how did this question come about anyway?

[the_trooper]

Does the PSB ability reduce the leadership of a stubborn unit below its base leadership?  If the answer is yes then you are applying a "negative leadership modifier" to the unit.

Chase how did this question come about anyway?

People crafting internet lists around it.

[keithb]

Does the PSB ability reduce the leadership of a stubborn unit below its base leadership?  If the answer is yes then you are applying a "negative leadership modifier" to the unit.

Chase how did this question come about anyway?

In all examples, effects that are modifiers state explicitly that they are.   For example, the Broodlord's psychic ability, "Aura of despair"  gives the target unit a "-1 modifier" to all leadership checks.

The Battle Psycher squads "Weaken Resolve"  is the only ability that does not use this language.  It reduces the stat for 1 game turn.   


You are reading modifier as "anything that changes"  rather than a classification.   Weaken Resolve replaces your stat with a 2 or whatever the new number is.  It does not impose a modifier.