Preferred Enemy (Independent Character)

[Kaoshin]

Another question for you, my beloved 40k community. With OFCC coming up this is another rules question I'd like to get resolved before dice start rolling.

 

Commander O'Ra'Lai from the Taros Campaign comes with Preferred Enemy (Independent Character), and there seems to be a great deal of conflict on how this rule should work when firing at a unit containing an IC. I've seen arguments made for it doesn't work, that it only works on precise shots allocated to the IC (thereby ignoring the re-rolling 1's to hit), that it works on the entire unit, and could even be interpreted as working on a transport containing an IC.

 

I personally lean to working on a unit containing an IC too but it's ambiguous enough I'd like to get a consensus before I risk a sportsmanship situation by debating it with an opponent. Anyone familiar with this situation or can point to a clear ruling on it?

[Guest]

BRB says preferred enemy is specific to units containing at least one model with the subtype in question for both shooting and melee, so you get it as long as the target contains at least 1 IC.

[Guest]

Only exception would be if the target model specifically loses the independent character rule due to special circumstances (like the outdated retinue rules).

[WestRider]

BRB says preferred enemy is specific to units containing at least one model with the subtype in question for both shooting and melee, so you get it as long as the target contains at least 1 IC.

The "at least one Model" bit is referring to the attacking Unit, not the target Unit.

 

As far as I can tell, it only works when firing at an IC on its own, in CC with an IC that's not Joined to a Unit, or in a Challenge. Or a Unit composed entirely of ICs Joined to each other.

[AbusePuppy]

I think it's pretty arguable either way. Personally, I've always interpreted Preferred Enemy as working whenever you shoot at a unit that contains any models of the appropriate type, as that seems to make the most sense in the context of other, similar rules. However, it's part of an ongoing disclarity in the rules that has plagued the game for a couple editions now without resolution or comment from GW, namely how to handle units with mixed factions or types when applying special rules.

[Guest]

Agree with AP's interpretation.

 

@west, yeah, I misread it.

 

I will note that for hatred, seems specific to the model, not the unit. Not really sure if we can use hatred as a reference point.

[Xavier319]

I Dont think that you get it shooting at a unit that contains one, honestly. or a vehicle with one inside. It seems like a very poorly thought-out rule to me, honestly.

[Kaoshin]

I suppose I can always ask Big Tal how he would rule on it at OFCC in particular. The joys of poorly structured rules.

[Guest]

I Dont think that you get it shooting at a unit that contains one, honestly. or a vehicle with one inside. It seems like a very poorly thought-out rule to me, honestly.

Not sure why you'd get it for a target inside a vehicle. By containing one, AP means the IC is attached, AFAIK.

[Xavier319]

I'm aware. I've heard (at other message boards) it argued that by being inside a vehicle, it would apply. Was just throwing that out there.

[Guest]

I'm aware. I've heard (at other message boards) it argued that by being inside a vehicle, it would apply. Was just throwing that out there.

Ah. Yeah, don't agree with that thing the "other message boards" were saying.

 

It is true that models inside transports are considered occupying the same space, but they are not the same unit. 40k's transport rules are always so messy...

[AbusePuppy]

When you shoot at a squad, hits/wounds can be allocated to all of the members of the squad (generally speaking), hence why I would argue for the version mentioned earlier.

 

However, a model embarked on a vehicle is NOT part of the vehicle's squad and never has been; in fact, they are wholly unrelated concepts. I can't seem any reasonable argument for why that would work.