"and the unit he is with..."

Okay, VERY technical question with very possibly no obvious answer.

Things like the Brahmir statue cause -x on some test (psych in this case) if the test is caused by the bearer "OR THE UNIT HE IS WITH".

So if a tyrant had demon-killer scars in a unit with a butcher that had the statue...would the -3 apply to terror tests caused by the tyrant?  The UNIT the butcher is with does not cause terror, a model in the unit causes terror.  So would the -3 apply?

Let the games begin.

No. The Butcher is not joining the Tyrant unit. He is joining (for example) an Irongut unit. Daemon Killer Scars does not extend to the Ironguts, and so the -3 does not apply.

It does, however, mean that Fear tests will be taken at -3 even if the Butcher is not going to be in BtB.

No. The Butcher is not joining the Tyrant unit. He is joining (for example) an Irongut unit. Daemon Killer Scars does not extend to the Ironguts, and so the -3 does not apply.

It does, however, mean that Fear tests will be taken at -3 even if the Butcher is not going to be in BtB.

I tend to agree with this thinking, myself.  But I am guessing there will be some that argue.

I'd argue that characters that join other units become part of that unit for all purposes.  Spells and items that effect the unit also effect the characters that are a part of that unit.    Along that line of thought, since the tyrant is part of the unit, and the butcher is part of the unit, the items should work together.

@Misterheavy
I see what you are getting at, but it is inapplicable in this instance because the character joins the unit, not the other way around. If there were some fantastic banner that gave a fighting bonus to the unit, the character would benefit. However the reverse is not true.

If the Daemon Killer Scars said '...and the unit he is with' then it would be a different story.

I agree with Groghog, they don't work together.

@Misterheavy
I see what you are getting at, but it is inapplicable in this instance because the character joins the unit, not the other way around. If there were some fantastic banner that gave a fighting bonus to the unit, the character would benefit. However the reverse is not true.

If the Daemon Killer Scars said '...and the unit he is with' then it would be a different story.

I guess I just see it differently.  The BRB says that a character joining a unit "becomes part of that unit."

By that language, the character is included in the thing we're calling a "unit"

So if a butcher and tyrant both join the same unit, the object we call a "unit" contains and includes both characters.  If, for whatever reason that unit (which is comprised of its parts, and so includes the tyrant) causes a panic test, and there is a Bhramir Statue in the unit as well, both should apply.

Actually, you could be right. I just went through my reasoning again, and it's actually self-defeating.

Because the Brahmir Statue extends to the unit the Butcher is with, it should then extend to the Tyrant. It is still only the Tyrant that causes Terror, however.

I'd also most likely continue playing the 'soft' interpretation of the rules, as this makes the combo ridiculously powerful.

I'm in complete agreement with MisterHeavy on this.

If Brahmir Statue's effects only worked on the unit regulars and not on any characters that have joined and form part of the unit, you'd have to apply the same logic to other instances e.g. you'd also be saying characters in units would no longer receive the benefits from their unit having a BSB Bruiser with the Dragonhide Banner or the Bull Standard.

How about this: a Butcher joins a unit of Bulls with a Bruiser and casts Trollguts on the unit he has joined.  The effects apply to everyone in the unit - the Butcher, the Bruiser and the Bulls.  The Bruiser isn't exempt from the spell effects as he is part of the unit.

The Butcher is not joining the Tyrant unit. He is joining (for example) an Irongut unit.

The Tyrant unit is the Irongut unit - they are considered as one unit.  Once the character joins the Ironguts, they form part of the same unit - they are no longer two units.  They flee as one, pursue as one, take break tests as one, and take panic tests as one. They remain as one unit until the Tyrant should decide to officially leave the unit.

Would it be possible to say the Butcher is joining the Tyrant rather than the Ironguts?

What would happen if the Brahmir Statue Butcher joined a unit made up of a Tyrant (with the DK Scars) and a Bruiser?  Characters can form units together too.  Do you have to elect which character the Butcher is joining? No, because he simply elects to join the unit.

slightly off topic, but, not much, after all...
I remember playng with my skavens, with a unit of 23 plague monks, with chieftain and plague priest, in it.
Such unit was detroyed by an organ gun, leaving alive only the chieftain and priest. The two heroes had the organ gun on their flank, so I asked the opponent if the two heroes were a unit, and therefor had LOS of 90°, or they were singled out, and had a LOS of 360°, hence, could have charged the organgun crewmen.
After a lot of thinking, we settled for the first option: they were a unit, and had 90° LOS.
Bottom line: characters in unit are part of the unit (and are effected by its laws), until they get out of it on purpose and vulenterally (sp!).
cheers

Yes, I agree completely, in fact I came across the exact same example as first raised, and it was agreed at my club, andd by my apponent who suffered heavily because of his agreement, the terror test is at -3.

The arguments have all been put forward already, so won't go into any lengthy tyrade, but MisterHeavy, and Hragged are deffinately right.

I disagree to some extent.  In the BRB they go to lengths to distinguish between when a character has some attribute, and a unit does.  If a character is in a unit and causes terror, but the unit does not, an opponent does NOT have to test for terror if his charge does not put him into BTB with the terror causing model.

In general, a character inherits attributes from a unit, but not vice versa.  A unit cannot "inherit" terror, fear, stubborn, immune to psych, or anything else (besides Ld, I guess).

That is not to say GW intended the wording to work out like it did, but that is the way I read it.

No, the unit does not inherit Terror.

However, the entire unit (including Tyrant) gets the -3 Ld ability because of the '...and the unit he is with' line on the Brahmir Statue.

Grohog is exactly right, I think Yarsolav is missing the point, any terror test are still going t be coming from the Tyrant(due to distance, charge, etc.), not the Unit.

However, as the Tyrant is part of the unit, and the unit affects leadership by -3, the tyrant caused terror test is at -3.

What would people say to a butcher's braingobbler spell (forced panic test) being 'enhanced' because he was in the unit with the Brahmir-holding Tyrant?

Seems like one of those supercombos that didn't occur to writer, but if it had it would be illegal.

Does anyone else think the title of this thread resembles "...and the horse you rode in on"?  lol

I remain unconvinced.  What am I missing that has some folks so convinced?  The fact the statue gives -3 to psych checks caused by the unit does not equate to "gives -3 to psych tests caused by a character/member OF the unit".  IMO.  Characters, even when part of a unit, are not the same AS the unit.

Has anyone submitted this question to Phil Kelly, so that when the FAQ DOES show up, it might be addressed?

The unit doesn't cause terror, but a model IN the unit does.  If the power of the statue extends to the entire unit, each individual member of the unit will have that power, even in terms of mutually exclusive effects.  Same goes for the skullmantle.  They even stack!

It's not THAT powerful, IMO, because it requires 2 characters in a unit, 70 points, and it works against skaven and chaos ONLY.  And let's not forget that chaos can have mark of undivided(re-roll psychology), or play Slannesh(Immune to psychology), or play Nurgle(Fear-causing), or play Khorne(Frenzied), or play a daemon army...

It's really very limited.  If you can get it to work, congratulations.

BRB, page 100:
When a character is with a unit of troops he is considered to be part of that unit in all respects.

Hence, he gets the -3.

BRB, page 100:
When a character is with a unit of troops he is considered to be part of that unit in all respects.

Hence, he gets the -3.

I agree with that statement entirely, but that goes the opposite direction, in terms of "who is a member of what".  In other words the unit is not equated with the character, while the character IS equated with the unit.   Again I mention the fact characters inherit unit characteristics (cause Fear, stubborn, immune to psych, etc), but not the other way around.

Oh well, I am not 100% certain of any answer.  Thus the thread.  I certainly WANT to interpret it as beneficially as possible in the ogre's favor, but I feel I must convince myself it is right first.  So believe me when I say I am hoping to be convinced.  lol

Cheers

I know exactly how you feel. Note the fact that I changed my opinion halfway through the thread.

You are absolutely correct in that characters inherit unit characteristics and not the other way around.

The Brahmir Statue explicitly states "...and the unit he is with". Therefore the entire unit benefits from the -3 Ld. The Tyrant inherits this.

At no time does the unit cause Terror. Only the Tyrant causes this, but with a -3 Ld penalty.

To sum up a bit:

We have a unit of Ironguts, joined by a Butcher with the statue, and a Tyrant with the scars.

Both characters are a part of the unit.

The Ironguts does not cause terror, but the Tyrant does, and he's a member of the same unit as thr Butcher.

The rules for the statues says "...and the unit he is with".

The BRB states that once a character joins a unit, he becomes a part of it.

Looking at these factors, it leaves little doubt the way I see it.
Any enemy unit that are forced to take a terror test by means of the scarred Tyrant does so with a -3 LD penalty.

Cheers, Meatfist

Guess what we need... An official FAQ!

Who'd o' thunk it?

The Brahmir Statue explicitly states "...and the unit he is with". Therefore the entire unit benefits from the -3 Ld. The Tyrant inherits this.

But but but...he isn't synonymous with "the unit".  He is merely an "outsider" member of the unit, who has special characteristics the rest of the unit does not share.

Like I said, I am not certain either way.  Woe is me.  lol

One question that I think should be remembered though, when a tyrant with demon killer scars joins a unit, does the unit now get terror?  It does NOT say that demon killer scars benefit the unit that the tyrant joins (and yes I'm sure some will argue they get it because the tyrant has it), however, I think this can be solved by looking at other examples.  If a stubborn lord joins a unit does the unit become stubborn?  As I recall reading in an annual the unit doesn't get stubborn and the lord more or less loses this in the unit.  A lord joining a stubborn unit receives stubborn because of the unit.  Thus a lord joining a terror unit gets the benefit of terror while in the unit, but a terror causing lord doesn't give a unit terror.  The bramhir statue specifically states it applies to the unit, but the DK scars don't, and so I'd say you don't get the benefit...however, I could be wrong, maybe the lord does give a normal unit stubborn if he joins it......

The issue is not whether the unit gets Terror. It doesn't. The issue is whether the Tyrant gets the benefit from the Brahmir Statue.

The 'pro' argument is that (like Stubborn) the character benefits from it upon joining the unit, as he becomes part of that unit.