Jump to content

Welcome to The Bolter and Chainsword
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Treason of Tzeentch - MUST Fight?

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1
SallyForth

SallyForth

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 52 posts
We’re having a disagreement in my group over Treason of Tzeentch. For this let’s say he’s 1000 Sons and I’m Salamanders.

The 1000 Sons player takes over my Salamanders chaplain in the middle of my main blob. Chaplain is base to base with several of my Salamanders units. 1000 Sons player is saying that those Salamanders units MUST fight the chaplain.

The core rules, under fighting, state as the very first sentence of Step 1: “1. Choose Unit To Fight With: Any unit that’s charged or has models within 1” of an enemy unit can be chosen to fight in the fight phase.”

It says, first sentence of first step of combat, CAN be chosen, not MUST. Fighting is optional, per that rule.

1000 Sons player is saying treason of Tzeentch, despite not saying so on the spell text, makes the Salamanders units HAVE to fight the Chaplain. He has an FAQ screenshot, that neither he nor I can dig up, that says: “Q: if a character is being treated as part of the opponents army due to Treason of Tzeentch psychic power, must units from that characters actual army fight it in the fight phase if they are within 1” of that character? A: Yes.”

So he is saying that FAQ means my Salamanders MUST fight the Chaplain. This goes against the core rules and the spell as written, and makes no sense in game: why would other units besides the target of the Treason, suddenly disregard the rules, and be obligated to fight, rather than still being optional? To me the FAQ is poorly worded and should not be interpreted to be disregarding the “can be chosen” rule.

What are your thoughts?

Edited by SallyForth, 25 January 2020 - 08:50 PM.


#2
JamesI

JamesI

    ++ OBITUS CAELESTIE ++

  • ++ MODERATI CEDO ++
  • 14,135 posts
  • Location:Albany NY
  • Faction: Angels Vermillion+TSons

The FAQ says must.  Baring a change to the FAQ, must overrides can.


gallery_26_4045_8286.gif

 


#3
MasterDeath

MasterDeath

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 241 posts

Its the Daemon or TS FAQ you are looking for, last entry in the FAQs section. My thoughts are: This spell so so unreliable und so hard to actually effect anything (You had to roll a 10+ on Morale there) that it should force an enemy unit to fight. 



#4
Kite Senet

Kite Senet

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 254 posts
  • Faction: Thousand Sons
The Thousand Sons FAQ clearly states that they must fight. Rules-as-written I'd agree with you, and I think the text of Treason of Tzeentch ought to be fixed in an errata to bring it into line with what the FAQ states, but because of this FAQ your friend's interpretation is in fact correct in this matter.

I do not see how it is unfluffy. Sometimes in the grim darkness, "killed or be killed" reigns. If your ally suddenly goes Istvaan V on your squad, are you going to just sit there and allow yourselves to all be slaughtered? Remember, your Salamanders don't even necessarily know any sorcery is involved! They might figure it out once their Chaplain snaps out of it, but in the thick of things it'd be easy to assume he'd fallen to Chaos.

#5
Raven1

Raven1

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,886 posts
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV
I'm mean not to beat a dead horse, but it is clearly stated in both the TS and Chaos Demons FAQ that units must fight.

gallery_33260_13323_10404.pnggallery_33260_13323_11012.pngETL_VI_Banner_03_Custos_Fidei_02_.jpgETL_VI_Badge_Forum_Champion_Chaos_DemonsETL_Medal_01.gif





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users