Jump to content

The Dagger of Tu'Sakh - Officer of the Fleet...


ambit

Recommended Posts

The Dagger of Tu'Sakh

INFANTRY OFFICER model only. During deployment, you can set up the bearer and one INFANTRY unit from your army behind enemy lines instead of placing them on the battlefield. The infantry unit must have the same <REGIMENT> keyword as the bearer if the bearer has one. At the end of any of your Movement phases these units can launch their daring attack – set them up within 3" of each other, anywhere on the battlefield that is wholly within 6" of any battlefield edge and more than 9" away from any enemy models.

 

 

So the relic states that bearer must be an INFANTRY OFFICER (officer restriction added in the FAQ), and that the accompanying unit be of the same <REGIMENT> if the bearer has one.

 

Now, look at Officer of the Fleet's keywords. He has CHARACTER, check. He's an OFFICER, check. But look at that, no <REGIMENT>. He has AERONAUTICA IMPERIALIS, but the codex quite explicitly states that to NOT be a <REGIMENT>. So since he does not have a<REGIMENT> keyword, then as per the dagger's rules, the unit brought along does not have to be of the same <REGIMENT>.

 

RAW, you can actually use it for non guard infantry, since it doesn't actually specify ASTRA MILITARUM.

 

 

6 Centurions? Valid.

10 Custodian Guard? Valid.

10 Hellblasters? Valid.

20 Electro-Priests? Valid.

 

 

Does anyone have a counter to the above, with actual rules? Because it could lead to some unexpected combinations.

Edited by ambit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The logic for the Dagger of Tu'sakh relic works like this: If the bearer has a <regiment>, the target unit must have the same <regiment>. Also, the target unit must be Infantry and have a <regiment>. Custodes do not have a <regiment> and are therefore not eligible targets."

 

This was the response from the adepticon TO when I asked. It wasnt worth arguing so I ran as ruled even though I believe it's the opposite. No regiment, no restriction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you remember if you pointed out the line 'if the bearer has one' as that is the key phrase here.

 

Without that 'exception' wording we wouldn't be having this discussion, but because it's there, the only way a TO can deny the relic being used in this way is to actually make up rules that fit their own interpretation. There isn't actually a grey area if you're applying the rules as written.

 

Re-reading the actual wording of the relic, where the TO says 'the target unit must be Infantry and have a <regiment>. Custodes do not have a <regiment> and are therefore not eligible targets' is not interpreting the rules, it's making them up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I feel I gotta agree here, that the Adepticon TO made up an extra condition. As long as the relic bearer has no regiment, the question whether or not the target unit has one simply isn't asked by the relic rules. So you're free to take whatever infantry with it.

 

That said...if a tournament official makes a ruling, you gotta abide by it for the tournament. They have every right to house rule stuff, so if they want to slap extra conditions on something they can do that.

Edited by sairence
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about it being a rule made up on the spot. That shouldn't happen at a tournament, but I can see a downside to making a stink about it. Adepticon, LVO, Nova and the London GT are the main events GW looks at when making rules changes. If mertbl had argued and got his way, GW might have noticed a mistake in the rule set. As it stands, you can't take a Bullgryn squad with the dagger unless the officer of the fleet gets it. This means that a Bullgryn deepstrike technique could be written out of the rules, if attention is brought to it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ambit your logic definitely makes sense.

As a counter argument (for the purposes of balance). RAI (slightly guessing the designers mind here) this was probably designed for with AM units in mind. To my mind bringing in Bullgryns etc (or any other AM unit with <regiment> keyword) was the design idea (again guessing). Hence the specific wording on regiment or lack there of. But I think we all know the difference between RAW vs RAI.

 

My point of view its a little "gamey" for my tastes but seem legit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ambit your logic definitely makes sense.

As a counter argument (for the purposes of balance). RAI (slightly guessing the designers mind here) this was probably designed for with AM units in mind. To my mind bringing in Bullgryns etc (or any other AM unit with <regiment> keyword) was the design idea (again guessing). Hence the specific wording on regiment or lack there of. But I think we all know the difference between RAW vs RAI.

 

My point of view its a little "gamey" for my tastes but seem legit. 

 

Yeah I totally agree that the exception wording RAI was for Bullgryn and other non-regiment AM units.

 

Definitely gamey using it on 6 Centurions, but if your approaching it from a competitive perspective it's worth knowing. People use all kind of overpowered combinations in tournaments if they can get away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RAW seems like OP pointed out. I don't see much of a problem balance wise either to be fair as you still have to be more than 9" away from any enemy unit AND have to be within 6" of a battlefield edge, which isn't just very limiting, it also makes charge shenanigans very unlikely to work since it has the same problem as regular deep strikes, so is mostly interesting for shooty units that try to get into rapid fire range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.