Fall of Cadia and You

A review of past Tactics by commanders during the First, Second, Third & Fourth Phase Expansion.
User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#19 » Jan 20 2017 04:17

AnonAmbientLight wrote:So then how does the Tau commander get it? He doesn't have relics. "But Signature Systems are like relics" is not an argument. It's the literal definition of apples and oranges.

My post is funny because it's an absurd premise.

I never said he does. In fact if you read my earlier posts I think he can't get it as long as no FAQ says that Signature Systems are to be treated the same as Relics.

SinisterSamurai wrote:
AnonAmbientLight wrote:So then how does the Tau commander get it? He doesn't have relics. "But Signature Systems are like relics" is not an argument. It's the literal definition of apples and oranges.

My post is funny because it's an absurd premise.

Hey, what is the talisman of Arthas Moloch?

Doesn't matter what the Talisman is in the fluff. In the crunch it's a Signature System and nowhere is said Signature Systems and Relics are the same or to be treated the same.

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 892

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#20 » Jan 20 2017 05:26

I must be misunderstanding what you put then.

RAW it truly means that any faction with Celestine in the army has access to those relics as long as their characters can take relics at all.


Signature Systems are not relics, therefore you can't pick Imperial Relics for your Tau HQs. Unless an FAQ comes in that lets us use those relics specifically.

It's not a case of "It doesn't say we can't, so it means we can." That's never been an acceptable rules argument.

SinisterSamurai wrote:
AnonAmbientLight wrote:So then how does the Tau commander get it? He doesn't have relics. "But Signature Systems are like relics" is not an argument. It's the literal definition of apples and oranges.

My post is funny because it's an absurd premise.

Hey, what is the talisman of Arthas Moloch?



This is why I steer clear of these kinds of discussions as best as I can. Look up The Talisman of Arthas Moloch. What is it under? Signature Systems. Signature Systems are not relics in both name AND function (you can have multiple signature systems, you can only ever have one relic). So to argue that Signature Systems are kinda of sort of like Relics, and therefore we can take Imperium Relics is bogus.

The only way to actual field it like OP thinks it should be fielded would be if GW FAQs to specifically allow ANY faction to use those relics. Otherwise, no, you are not able to use them. Especially considering that one of the requirements IS TO HAVE THE ITEM BE CALLED A RELIC.
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

User avatar
SinisterSamurai
Kor'La
Kor'La
Posts: 429

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#21 » Jan 20 2017 07:45

Panzer wrote:Doesn't matter what the Talisman is in the fluff. In the crunch it's a Signature System and nowhere is said Signature Systems and Relics are the same or to be treated the same.

By this reasoning, Artefacts, Remnants, or Heirlooms are not Relics. Neither, then, are the Devices, the Playthings, or the Arcana. In which case, only Relics are Relics, and nothing else are relics.

Not only does this make the RAW phrasing "Relics (or equivalent)" completely unnecessary wording, it doesn't even work as you all seem to think it's intended to. Astra Militarum, with their Heirlooms of Conquest, can't gain benefit from taking Celestine as an HQ, but now that's no problem with Genestealers, who can take Relics of the Ecclesiarchy because they have access to Sacred Relics of the Cult. Likewise, Iron Hands characters have access to Gifts of the Gorgon, while Imperial Knights have Heirlooms of the Knightly Houses, and Cult Mechanicus Armies have Arcana Mechanicum. This means that they can't buy "relics", and therefore these AdMech aligned forces have no access to the unique Arcana Mechanicum of Belisarius Cawl, Archmagos. Fortunately, their opponents in the Crimson Slaughter have no issue!

"Signature System" is just the Tau "equivalent," of what other codices call Relics, or Artefacts or whatever. Any one-per-army unique piece of wargear is a essentially a gameplay variation of Relics. The FAQ calls out relics because that's the common term, as Space Marines are the army with the highest install base in the hobby. I considered Signature Systems to be "Tau relics" before I played Tau, and most of the non-Tau players at my FLGSs still do.

Yes, the word "relic" doesn't appear, but in every other way for crunch they match the crunch of Relics, or Artefacts, or Heirlooms. No mater what each codex calls them, they are powerful, rare items that can only be taken once per army. The Signature Systems table looks just like the Relics tables of other codices. The full-page dedication, the limit of seven per codex, it's all the same.

You lot think it's "cheesy" and "powergamey" for me to consider Signature Systems, "Relic equivalents," and I think it's incredibly conceited not to do so. Tau are not so special or unique as to be exempt from the broader game conventions. Golden Rule indeed.

User avatar
SinisterSamurai
Kor'La
Kor'La
Posts: 429

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#22 » Jan 21 2017 12:09

An interesting bit is found in the Shield of Baal: Exterminatus FAQ.
Q: Can a model be given a relic from the Mephrit Dynasty and
an Artefact of the Aeons?
A: No. A model may only be equipped with a single relic
(or equivalent) of any kind.

Oddly, it seems as though the GW definition of "relic" is not limited to items called "Relics."
Perhaps we can now dispense with the ruleslawyering discussion (Or at least contain it to the rules forum) and instead discuss the Tau's tactical options for the Relics of the Ecclesiarcy (Celestine) and Arcana Mechanicum (Belisarius Cowl)?

Are any of the artefacts interesting?

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#23 » Jan 21 2017 05:31

SinisterSamurai wrote:
Panzer wrote:Doesn't matter what the Talisman is in the fluff. In the crunch it's a Signature System and nowhere is said Signature Systems and Relics are the same or to be treated the same.

By this reasoning, Artefacts, Remnants, or Heirlooms are not Relics. Neither, then, are the Devices, the Playthings, or the Arcana. In which case, only Relics are Relics, and nothing else are relics.

Not only does this make the RAW phrasing "Relics (or equivalent)" completely unnecessary wording, it doesn't even work as you all seem to think it's intended to. Astra Militarum, with their Heirlooms of Conquest, can't gain benefit from taking Celestine as an HQ, but now that's no problem with Genestealers, who can take Relics of the Ecclesiarchy because they have access to Sacred Relics of the Cult. Likewise, Iron Hands characters have access to Gifts of the Gorgon, while Imperial Knights have Heirlooms of the Knightly Houses, and Cult Mechanicus Armies have Arcana Mechanicum. This means that they can't buy "relics", and therefore these AdMech aligned forces have no access to the unique Arcana Mechanicum of Belisarius Cawl, Archmagos. Fortunately, their opponents in the Crimson Slaughter have no issue!

"Signature System" is just the Tau "equivalent," of what other codices call Relics, or Artefacts or whatever. Any one-per-army unique piece of wargear is a essentially a gameplay variation of Relics. The FAQ calls out relics because that's the common term, as Space Marines are the army with the highest install base in the hobby. I considered Signature Systems to be "Tau relics" before I played Tau, and most of the non-Tau players at my FLGSs still do.

Yes, the word "relic" doesn't appear, but in every other way for crunch they match the crunch of Relics, or Artefacts, or Heirlooms. No mater what each codex calls them, they are powerful, rare items that can only be taken once per army. The Signature Systems table looks just like the Relics tables of other codices. The full-page dedication, the limit of seven per codex, it's all the same.

You lot think it's "cheesy" and "powergamey" for me to consider Signature Systems, "Relic equivalents," and I think it's incredibly conceited not to do so. Tau are not so special or unique as to be exempt from the broader game conventions. Golden Rule indeed.

You see, that's the whole problem. GW didn't define to what kind of 'group' such things count and even that wouldn't be a problem if they'd work the same for every faction (because then in fact you could argue they are equivalents). But they don't. Alone the fact that Tau can take multiple Signature Systems on the same model indicates they are not the same as relics and aren't to be threated as such. It would be easily fixed with a simple short sentence in the FAQ but we didn't get it.
So since ours obviously work differently than other factions relics or whatever we have to stay with that interpretation...everything else would be cherry picking.
Means either you get access to Celestine and Cawls relics by including them into your army because Signature Systems are relics as well....OR still being able to take more than one Signature System on a single model because our Codex says so and indicates that they are not to be treated as relics after all. Can't have both.

Also I don't think it's cheesy or powergamey. I just think it's wrong and doesn't fit in with the logic that we can take more than one Signature Systems on a single model.

User avatar
Unusualsuspect
Kroot'Ui
Kroot'Ui
Posts: 600

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#24 » Jan 22 2017 11:22

SinisterSamurai wrote:
Panzer wrote:Doesn't matter what the Talisman is in the fluff. In the crunch it's a Signature System and nowhere is said Signature Systems and Relics are the same or to be treated the same.

By this reasoning, Artefacts, Remnants, or Heirlooms are not Relics. Neither, then, are the Devices, the Playthings, or the Arcana. In which case, only Relics are Relics, and nothing else are relics.

Not only does this make the RAW phrasing "Relics (or equivalent)" completely unnecessary wording, it doesn't even work as you all seem to think it's intended to. Astra Militarum, with their Heirlooms of Conquest, can't gain benefit from taking Celestine as an HQ, but now that's no problem with Genestealers, who can take Relics of the Ecclesiarchy because they have access to Sacred Relics of the Cult. Likewise, Iron Hands characters have access to Gifts of the Gorgon, while Imperial Knights have Heirlooms of the Knightly Houses, and Cult Mechanicus Armies have Arcana Mechanicum. This means that they can't buy "relics", and therefore these AdMech aligned forces have no access to the unique Arcana Mechanicum of Belisarius Cawl, Archmagos. Fortunately, their opponents in the Crimson Slaughter have no issue!

"Signature System" is just the Tau "equivalent," of what other codices call Relics, or Artefacts or whatever. Any one-per-army unique piece of wargear is a essentially a gameplay variation of Relics. The FAQ calls out relics because that's the common term, as Space Marines are the army with the highest install base in the hobby. I considered Signature Systems to be "Tau relics" before I played Tau, and most of the non-Tau players at my FLGSs still do.

Yes, the word "relic" doesn't appear, but in every other way for crunch they match the crunch of Relics, or Artefacts, or Heirlooms. No mater what each codex calls them, they are powerful, rare items that can only be taken once per army. The Signature Systems table looks just like the Relics tables of other codices. The full-page dedication, the limit of seven per codex, it's all the same.

You lot think it's "cheesy" and "powergamey" for me to consider Signature Systems, "Relic equivalents," and I think it's incredibly conceited not to do so. Tau are not so special or unique as to be exempt from the broader game conventions. Golden Rule indeed.


Eloquently stated. I think, in light of this and several other recent clues (including the FAQ entry you also posted) suggests it would be worthwhile to re-examine what a lot of ATT posters, myself included, took for granted regarding other supposedly unique aspects of Signature Systems, including the ability to take multiple on a single unit and the ability to Mix and Match on Farsight Enclaves models.

But that is not a question for the Tau Tactics section of this site, and so I will leave it to the Rules section to deal with that issue (and may even post a new topic, in an attempt to consolidate, though I'm hesitant given existing threads on the topic - resurrecting an old thread is generally preferrable, but I'd also want posters to start with a fresh perspective and consider the question holistically... hmm).




On to discussing ACTUAL TACTICS! My analysis presumes that a Tau character can choose only a single Relic OR a single Signature System, as that is my local group's preferred interpretation. I might make a separate comment on the consequences/benefits If allowed to mix and match (with the caveat that even then, you'd still be limited to 1 Relic per character), since that seems to be relevant to the way a lot of ATT posters play.

ARCANA MECHANICUM:

Numinasta's Casket of Electromancy: Fairly pricey in points for a short-ranged (equivalent to rolling charge distance) burst of 3/- Haywire shots, let alone a One Use Only version thereof. Nevertheless, this seems like it would have a lot of use for a Shas'vre XV-8 in a deep-striking suicide squad, particularly if you can get boost the deep-strike's accuracy through Homing Beacons or the like, given the model isn't expected to survive more than a turn or two anyway, and could be a viable way to do some widespread damage to a backfield Parking Lot of vehicles - enough, at least, to allow for more consistent success in wrecking targets when splitting that squad's firepower with Target Locks.

Quantum Annihilator: As it replaces a weapon, its point costs are actually 5 higher than stated. On average, it is effectively Plasma Rifle with +1 S, and 18" Assault 2 instead of 24" Rapid Fire. Its variability means that in practice it can be very ineffective or exceptionally potent... For its point cost, I'm having trouble justifying it.

Sacrifactum Autorepulsor: This relic seems like it has a LOT of potential, especially in conjunction with other Tau Signature Systems (as well as the Momento-Mortispex, discussed below) like the Repulsor Impact Field, Seismic Fibrillator Node, and Warscaper Drone, as well as Darkstrider's Fighting Retreat special rule and Shadowsun (or a lucky Commander's) Warlord trait. This seems like it would be nearly an auto-include on any Crisis Suit Deathstar, given dangerous getting slaughtered or tied up on melee can be for a shooting deathstar.

Momento-Mortispex: As above, the Overwatch boost is a fairly potent thing in combination with Tau strengths (Overwatch is our bag, baby) and helps cover Tau weaknesses (things successfully meleeing us is bad, so killing things before they can do that is always useful), but it also can function as a slightly-more-expensive PEN for Monster Hunter/Tank Hunter, and can even grant an entire unit Skyfire... which does not prevent you from taking a PEN on a different Character. I can see this on a barebones Commander hanging with a full unit of Broadsides with Target Locks and/or EWOs and a full complement of Missile Drones, saving 20 pts a piece on Skyfire for the Broadsides while granting Monster/Tank Hunter if the enemy doesn't have flyers (thus not wasting points), while allowing a separate PEN commander/character that can run with your Crisis Suits. Expensive option, but it has some serious versatility.

Omnissiah's Grace: Under my analysis limitations, this is useful to boost a Commander to 3++, but without 2+ armor/5T and/or Eternal Warrior, that just means your adversary will be relying more on mass fire. Nifty, and fairly cheap for what it does, so it still might be a useful addition...

Sait Curia's Autopurger: Effectively a beefed up Repulsor Impact Field equivalent, while also providing the benefits of Photon Grenades for attached units... As for the Sacrifactum Autorepulsor and Momento-Mortispex, this helps to cover for Tau weaknesses, and I could see use for this in a Crisis Suit deathstar to thin out hordes. Of particular note is that this appears to work in EVERY combat phase in which the bearer is locked in combat, rather than merely working only on the charge.

Multiple SS analysis: With Iridium Armor, Omnissiah's Grace and Saint Curia's Autopurgers both become a lot more potent, in that the 3++ is far better on a 2+/T5 chassis (as stated above). Combine them with Fusion Blades, and you have one helluva Tau Melee Specialist - Fusion Blades will slice up most hard/elite targets, and you can either make him exceptionally sturdy with the Omnissiah's Grace or become much more deadly against Hordes through the Autopurger.


ECCLESIARCHY RELICS:

Skull of Petronella the Pious: Eh... I guess it would be statistically useful for a Crisis Deathstar, but 6++ just doesn't excite me. If that was really important, we can always just take a Guardian Drone for less cost.

Blade of the Worthy: More melee for your Tau, which has been Hit and Miss for me personally. If you're running a Fusion Blade Commander already, this would allow you to field another melee-oriented commander with fairly easy potential for S7/AP2 attacks at initiative (only 1 in 12 rounds will force the weaker profile, which is still not bad for MEQ-work). Definitely a Your Mileage May Vary sort of situation.

Castigator: Under my analysis framework, less useful (as you can't pair it with Fusion Blades to get an extra attack AND an extra weapon to go along with your TL Fusion Blaster) but still well-worth sticking into a Plasma-Rifle toting Crisis squad, given some of the best AP2 targets like to bring along tanking models with excellent ++ saves and your Plasma Rifles will want to be within 12" in any case to get that sweet, sweet Rapid Fire.

The Font of Fury: Ehhhhh, it seems way too focused, and too short-ranged. In almost every case, I'd rather have an Airbursting Frag Projector (which doesn't cost that much more), and I can take unlimited numbers of those. Are we seeing a lot of T5+ large groups where an AP- weapon could still be effective? Doesn't seem like it in my experience.

Shroud of the Anti--Martyr: Eternal Warrior is always nice. Pricey, but could definitely be worth it, especially when combined with auto-succeed Look Out, Sir using Bodyguards... particularly since you could build a bodyguard with 2+/T5/4++/5++ for the small stuff and have your 4w Commander tank all the S10/Instant Death wounds... If you can take multiple SS as well, this would combine well with Fusion Blades and/or Iridium Armor.

Desvalle's Holy Circle: Take out the cost for the Shield Generator equivalent (which would not even take up a hardpoint, so more worth the points), and you have 15 points to create a 24" diameter circle of potent Anti-Deepstrike. Yes. God Yes. EVERY TIME. EVERY. TIME.


A lot of interesting options, but as always with Relics and their ilk, it becomes a question of opportunity costs - whether the cost of the relic, on top of the model-vehicle for the relic (not uncommonly less efficient than other, more generic choices available), is worth it becomes a question of how much bloat your list can withstand.

Fluff-wise, while having your Commander carry around some gue'la skull would be odd (to say the least), most of these relics could fairly easily be converted in description to a more Tau-like Signature System - A Suit-carried Guardian Drone Shield Generator would be a better descriptive fit for the Skull, for example, while an Advanced Early Warning Override might justify the anti-Deep-Strike relic in Tau terms.

Overall, intriguing possibilities.

User avatar
SinisterSamurai
Kor'La
Kor'La
Posts: 429

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#25 » Jan 27 2017 08:00

Thanks, Unusual! That is exactly the sort of analysis I was looking for.

Just FYI, I don't believe Crisis Bodyguards would be able to take any of these. The ally-relics very specifically mention only being available to characters, and bodyguards don't have that subdescriptor. Crisis Shas'vres do, though.

Taking these characters is pretty easy, too. If you don't feel like going unbound, Celestine can be slotted in as an HQ in any Sororitas detachment of any kind, and Belisarius likewise any Cult Mechanicus detachment. But, Celestine and Cawl can fit as HQs in any Imperium CAD or AD, it's a pretty simple matter to take a small cheap troop and throw one of the HQs in. You can fluff them as gue'vesa, or anything else.

Unusualsuspect wrote:Multiple SS analysis: With Iridium Armor, Omnissiah's Grace and Saint Curia's Autopurgers both become a lot more potent, in that the 3++ is far better on a 2+/T5 chassis (as stated above). Combine them with Fusion Blades, and you have one helluva Tau Melee Specialist - Fusion Blades will slice up most hard/elite targets, and you can either make him exceptionally sturdy with the Omnissiah's Grace or become much more deadly against Hordes through the Autopurger.
Definitely something to keep in mind for Blade Commander. Melee Tau is pretty fun, even if it's suboptimal.

Blade of the Worthy: More melee for your Tau, which has been Hit and Miss for me personally. If you're running a Fusion Blade Commander already, this would allow you to field another melee-oriented commander with fairly easy potential for S7/AP2 attacks at initiative (only 1 in 12 rounds will force the weaker profile, which is still not bad for MEQ-work). Definitely a Your Mileage May Vary sort of situation.
I'm personally not even sure this one can be taken. It requires replacing a melee weapon, of which Crisis Commanders and Crisis Shas'vres have none. You'd essentially have to buy fusion blades and then replace them.

User avatar
Unicornsilovethem
Shas'Saal
Posts: 278

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#26 » Jan 28 2017 02:39

SinisterSamurai wrote:
Panzer wrote:Doesn't matter what the Talisman is in the fluff. In the crunch it's a Signature System and nowhere is said Signature Systems and Relics are the same or to be treated the same.

By this reasoning, Artefacts, Remnants, or Heirlooms are not Relics. Neither, then, are the Devices, the Playthings, or the Arcana. In which case, only Relics are Relics, and nothing else are relics.

Not only does this make the RAW phrasing "Relics (or equivalent)"

...

"Signature System" is just the Tau "equivalent," of what other codices call Relics, or Artefacts or whatever. Any one-per-army unique piece of wargear is a essentially a gameplay variation of Relics.

But signature systems are not equivalent to relics, because a single model can carry more than one. Google's definition for equivalent: "equal in value, amount, function, meaning, etc." or in other words, for two things to be equivalent, they have to work exactly the same. And since the sigsystems and relics differ in function, they are not equivalent.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#27 » Jan 28 2017 04:47

SinisterSamurai wrote:
Blade of the Worthy: More melee for your Tau, which has been Hit and Miss for me personally. If you're running a Fusion Blade Commander already, this would allow you to field another melee-oriented commander with fairly easy potential for S7/AP2 attacks at initiative (only 1 in 12 rounds will force the weaker profile, which is still not bad for MEQ-work). Definitely a Your Mileage May Vary sort of situation.
I'm personally not even sure this one can be taken. It requires replacing a melee weapon, of which Crisis Commanders and Crisis Shas'vres have none. You'd essentially have to buy fusion blades and then replace them.

This always confused me anyway since the BRB says the following:
Image

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 892

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#28 » Jan 29 2017 01:58

SinisterSamurai wrote:An interesting bit is found in the Shield of Baal: Exterminatus FAQ.
Q: Can a model be given a relic from the Mephrit Dynasty and
an Artefact of the Aeons?
A: No. A model may only be equipped with a single relic
(or equivalent) of any kind.

Oddly, it seems as though the GW definition of "relic" is not limited to items called "Relics."
Perhaps we can now dispense with the ruleslawyering discussion (Or at least contain it to the rules forum) and instead discuss the Tau's tactical options for the Relics of the Ecclesiarcy (Celestine) and Arcana Mechanicum (Belisarius Cowl)?

Are any of the artefacts interesting?


You're suggesting that this is proof that Signature Systems are Relics because of this vague wording. You're using this as proof to continue with your discussion since "equivalent" is the straw you are grasping. So let's follow this logic.

In order for you to use this, then it means that Signature Systems are also considered Relics and you may only have one per unit, correct? They either ARE Relics, or they are NOT Relics. You can't have it both ways.

If you're argument is that Signature Systems are Relics, then you can only ever have one per model, correct? So far there has been no FAQ to tell us otherwise, so you're already losing ground with this argument. The Tau Codex itself even mentions that certain Signature Systems can be mixed with others for example, the Command & Control Node - "The Node can be used at the same time as Multi-spectrum Sensor Suite."

Hell, even the Farisght Enclaves book has HQs in it with more than one Signature System. This points to the fact that Signature Systems are NOT considered Relics or even equivalent to them because they do not even behave as Relics. So there's no way that Celestine can give you a Relic to replace if you do not have a Relic to start with.

You are grasping at straws trying to get this to work. Your logic is extremely shaky and your only argument is "it doesn't say I can't" which isn't an argument. It's also against primers #2, #3, and to a small degree #7. #2 because you have nothing to go on and you're ignoring the problems with your assumptions. #3 because you have no proof other than "it sorta kind of doesn't say I can't." which is bogus.

I argue for #7 because you could be potentially misleading new players into buying a model they cannot use in the way you are describing and for putting forth extremely unsound logic to make this work while ignoring everything else. I mean, you said for me to consider the Talisman of Arthas Molac as some kind of argument which you thought gives you some kind of credence which is laughable. The Talisman is considered a Signature System in the book itself. You have no proof or argument that can tie your assumption into making this work, yet we are three pages in.
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

User avatar
Unusualsuspect
Kroot'Ui
Kroot'Ui
Posts: 600

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#29 » Jan 29 2017 07:48

In order for you to use this, then it means that Signature Systems are also considered Relics and you may only have one per unit, correct? They either ARE Relics, or they are NOT Relics. You can't have it both ways.


One per model, you mean. And the FAQ entry limiting Relics (and their equivalents) to one per model does include the exception that a wording explicitly allowing that limitation to be ignored would allow that limitation to be ignored. If you're told explicitly you can have it both way, you really CAN have it both ways.

If you're argument is that Signature Systems are Relics, then you can only ever have one per model, correct? So far there has been no FAQ to tell us otherwise, so you're already losing ground with this argument. The Tau Codex itself even mentions that certain Signature Systems can be mixed with others for example, the Command & Control Node - "The Node can be used at the same time as Multi-spectrum Sensor Suite."


The general FAQ and the Blood Angels FAQ gives us a general rule (and a specific application of a general rule, with a reiteration of that general rule) that unless something EXPLICITLY states otherwise, a model can not take more than one Relic (or its equivalent).

The C&CN and MSSS interaction is arguably not explicit - being able to "be used at the same time" does not imply the addition of "by the same model", and it is imminently possible to get two Relic-wielding models in the same unit - by attaching a Commander with C&CN to a Shas'vre with MSSS, for instance.

The question then becomes: Is this sufficiently explicit to override the general interpretive rule applied by the FAQ?

Hell, even the Farisght Enclaves book has HQs in it with more than one Signature System. This points to the fact that Signature Systems are NOT considered Relics or even equivalent to them because they do not even behave as Relics. So there's no way that Celestine can give you a Relic to replace if you do not have a Relic to start with.


It doesn't have HQs in it with more than one Signature System, it has SPECIAL CHARACTERS with more than one Signature System. That they are EXPLICITLY allowed to take because they aren't given a choice at all, they're assigned their gear.

Farsight's Eight doesn't break the FAQ general rule any more than Chief Librarian Tigurius does by having two Chapter Relics as wargear, and Tigurius having two Chapter Relics as wargear doesn't entail that a generic Space Marine Captain can take more than one Chapter Relic.

You are grasping at straws trying to get this to work. Your logic is extremely shaky and your only argument is "it doesn't say I can't" which isn't an argument. It's also against primers #2, #3, and to a small degree #7. #2 because you have nothing to go on and you're ignoring the problems with your assumptions. #3 because you have no proof other than "it sorta kind of doesn't say I can't." which is bogus.


Presumably you're referencing "How to Succeed on ATT"?

The argument is not merely "it doesn't say I can't" insofar as the rule being quoted gives a very broad grant to ANY army that includes the appropriate Triumvirate member - this is a case where a formalistic interpretation of a statement gives you permission to do something, and nothing in the Tau Codex explicitly denies us this capability (especially given the extremely broad potential meaning of "Relic (or equivalent)" as that term is and has been used).

#2 is "Post with substance or not at all (includes proper spelling and grammar)."

This thread easily meets this standard, as the substance involves a tactical discussion of wargear options that A) hasn't been addressed elsewhere and B) involves the application of both theorycrafting and personal experience upon the subject.

#3 is "Post only what you know. If you're unsure about something, look it up."

What we know for the purposes of this post is the wording for the potential inclusion of Relics in non-Imperial forces, and the potential for their interaction with Tau Empire choices. NO ONE knows whether this is true, but that doesn't prevent it from being a viable source of discussion here on ATT - lacking a FAQ that clarifies it either way, we at least minimally know what our experiences and theories can tell us about the potential of their interactions.

Lacking 100% clarity does not entail a violation of the primers that guide us as ATT posters, it merely enjoins us from failing to approach a topic with less knowledge than one can reasonably bring.

#7 is "Be ethical."

The only way I could see this thread being unethical is if it actively encouraged others to purchase things that the thread opener knew, or should have known with substantial certainty, would be utterly impossible, improper, or itself inethical.

Edit: The thread's OP could be more clear and upfront about the shakey nature of this rule interpretation, but that's about as far as you go on that. OP is not actively telling ATT posters to purchase the Triumvirate, OP is eliciting discussion on the potential tactical applications of the rule.

Would I prefer OP to edit in something making it explicit that this thread is about potential, that other players may refuse such a formalistic interpretation, and/or that this interpretation may be negated in the future by a FAQ? Sure, just to cover bases. But we, as responsible ATT posters, should be aware of those possibilities already.

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 892

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#30 » Jan 31 2017 04:38

So...the rules don't say I can't do it so it means I can. Nothing else can be shared between Imperium and Tau except this one rule that you are intentionally misinterpreting to gain an advantage.

Got it. Great thinking here at ATT. Quality threads and reasoning. Partly why I am sure it has seen a decline in recent years.

People get tired of seeing threads where the forum posters try to power game everything they can while ignoring any common sense or conflicting views.

Besides, how is St. Celestine supposed to deliver these relics to the tau commander anyway? She can't be deployed that close or stay that close.

You don't think you're misinterpreting this rule? RAW right? Lol
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

User avatar
Unusualsuspect
Kroot'Ui
Kroot'Ui
Posts: 600

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#31 » Jan 31 2017 06:23

AnonAmbientLight wrote:So...the rules don't say I can't do it so it means I can. Nothing else can be shared between Imperium and Tau except this one rule that you are intentionally misinterpreting to gain an advantage.


No, and that is an extremely disingenuous way to paraphrase what I've stated.

The overarching meta-rule is that you can't do something unless you're explicitly allowed to do so by the rules.

The contention in this thread (yes, on a RAW basis) is that ANY army's characters can take a Relic from the list if the right Special Character is in your army and that character can take a relic (or its equivalent).

The term "any army" would include any army. Tau are an army. Tay would be included in the term "any army" by deduction.

The term "relic (or equivalent)" is a broad term, but for all the reasons I and others have noted, I've interpreted Signature Systems to fall under that category. You are free to disagree on this interpretation.

Because there is a rule that says you can, the meta-rule is satisfied, because it DOES say you can.

Finally, there are no rules that explicitly deny the Tau the ability to utilize this rule by the RAW. Without that sort of denial, there is nothing preventing the broad rule allowance from working for the Tau in particular, again per RAW.

RAI is a different kettle of fish, and I've at least implied that I agree that Tau SHOULDN'T be using this (though using counts-as would be perfectly reasonable to me - in the same way I might include ersatz Space Wolves in a Tau army by using Kroot models/kitbashes).

Got it. Great thinking here at ATT. Quality threads and reasoning. Partly why I am sure it has seen a decline in recent years.


People play by RAW and RAI. Understanding the RAW is the first step in understanding where RAI is needed in the first place. The fact that this thread may not be useful for you does not negate its potential entirely.

I suspect the decline, if any, in ATT has vastly more complicated reasons behind it than people trying to game the system. Your hyperbole does not help your point, and comes across as a bit petty, frankly.

People get tired of seeing threads where the forum posters try to power game everything they can while ignoring any common sense or conflicting views.


Common Sense is rarely common, and even more rarely will it make sense. Conflicting views, as far as I can tell, haven't been ignored, they've simply not been agreed with, or are arguing a different point entirely. I AGREE with you on the RAI, but I'm not discussing RAI (because this is a thread where RAI will differ across the variety of poster experiences), I'm discussing RAW.

Those of us defending the RAW here are no more ignoring conflicting views than you are by denying that Signature Systems fall under the category of "Relic (or equivalent)" - that is to say, not at all. Disagreement is not ignoring.

Besides, how is St. Celestine supposed to deliver these relics to the tau commander anyway? She can't be deployed that close or stay that close.


Cute, but I was talking RAW game mechanics - the commander (or Shas'vre) takes the relic during list building, not during gameplay.

If you want to discuss the RAI, then you'll probably find I agree with you.

You don't think you're misinterpreting this rule? RAW right? Lol


I'm interpreting the RAW, and I'm simply unable to interpret the explicit wording used in a way that excludes Tau armies. In interpreting the RAI, I'd agree with you, but I'm not going to mix up RAW and RAI because it makes more fluff-oriented players angry.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#32 » Feb 01 2017 01:35

The term "relic (or equivalent)" is a broad term, but for all the reasons I and others have noted, I've interpreted Signature Systems to fall under that category. You are free to disagree on this interpretation.

Honestly I think this is the only thing worth fighting about here.
The whole question whether it's possible or not depends on the question whether Signature Systems count as relic-equivalent or not (which would also mean that our Codex entries would be overwritten and we can only take one Signature System on a character).
Unfortunately GW is pretty vague with that and there are good pro and contra arguments so there is no way to find a definite answer to this and everybody has to decide for themselves (according to his meta of course) how it should be interpreted at the moment.

The rest of what you two are doing there......I suggest you calm down a bit before a mod has to speak up. :D

User avatar
Unusualsuspect
Kroot'Ui
Kroot'Ui
Posts: 600

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#33 » Feb 01 2017 04:36

...Yes, you're right.

My apologies if my tone got out of hand. We're all here for the same thing: quality content.

What qualifies as quality content is going to have to be our own determination, barring mod intervention.

Cheers.

User avatar
SinisterSamurai
Kor'La
Kor'La
Posts: 429

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#34 » Feb 01 2017 10:11

Panzer wrote:The whole question whether it's possible or not depends on the question whether Signature Systems count as relic-equivalent or not (which would also mean that our Codex entries would be overwritten and we can only take one Signature System on a character).

Even in the final draft, the line about relics is a FAQ, not an Errata. It overwrites nothing. It adds zero content, only context and clarification.
Exchanging one weapon for one Relic means limit: one, not limit: number of weapons owned.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#35 » Feb 01 2017 12:15

We've already seen that GW often puts Errata into the FAQ section with the recent FAQ/Errata.
Also I didn't say it definitely overwrites stuff just that if GW defines Signatures Systems as equivalent to Relics the part of the FAQ that restricts everyone to only one per character would apply to us as well. However since it's not clear you'll have to decide with your group how it's to be played/do what your local meta does.

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 892

Re: Fall of Cadia and You

Post#36 » Feb 02 2017 06:23

Whenever you have a rule conflict, you often cannot rely on solely on RAW to guide you through it. In fact, rule conflicts often exist because the RAW is not always clear, such as this case.

As an example of why you shouldn't follow RAW religiously, the Sunshark Bomber was not able to make a bombing run since it was not equipped with one at the start of the game. That is RAW, sorry Charlie, deal with it. Obviously no one played it that way because a hard line RAW stance doesn't work for situations like that. That was, of course, FAQd so that it could make a bombing run. I use this point often because it really does show the flawed logic being used in this thread. It's a classic example of why following strict RAW isn't a viable solution.

Instead you really do have to do a mixture of intent and RAW to figure out what the purpose is and use logic to back it up. Logically, it doesn't make any sense that an army that is Allies of Convince would ever share their relics. Now if Tau was Battle Brothers with Imperium, you MIGHT have a leg to stand on. As it stands, they're one step away from outright hating each other come the apocalypse so them sharing their Relics like you're suggesting doesn't follow lore, OR more importantly rules since they do not share anything else. "Hey, you want to share my Relic? What? Psychic Powers too? I can't do that."

The only line of logic you have to go off of is a vague FAQ about Relics and "their equivalent". Then you make a leap of logic and assume that Signature Systems are kind of like Relics without telling us how you got there. Signature Systems do not behave like Relics neither in rules, in name, nor in practice. Your only way to bridge that gap is to suggest the vague FAQ and the fact that they are HQs that take special wargear unique to them, which is not sufficient reasoning.

When you consider all these unanswered questions, with principles of thought like Occam's Razor, the logical reasoning is that Relics cannot be shared with Tau.

And no, using the tired argument of "but people shoot mind bullets so logic doesn't have to make sense" is not an argument.
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

Return to “Archival Datacore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests