N18 Exotic Beasts Questions

[TopsyKretts]

You remind of of the time back in 2018-2019 when many of us ferociously examined rules details like this. Many great minds have given up since then. Good to see discussion from newer players.

 

[Aulenback]

Both of the models will be present on the table before their Activation,

The "pets get removed when their owners are off the table" doesn't mention anything about "during their activation." That's the conflict. It isn't like being off the leash, which specifically checks at the end of Activation. You would place the pets during regular deployment. The handler would be off table until infiltrating deployment, which happens after all regular deployment is done. The pet would be removed. It isn't during the pet’s activation. It is at any time.

That's in addition to the difficulty in From The Shadows.

** Since it never activates, it'll never have take a Nerve test for being off it's leash. So there won't be a need to Run for Cover as a result of failing a Nerve test

Off The Leash is not the only thing that causes nerve tests to fighters on the table. Nothing exempts pets from other Nerve Tests. Being off the leash simply adds yet another, and states that for ANY "Run For Cover," the pet must run toward its owner. With the owner off the table, "must run x inches towards" gets ... complicated. It doesn't require Activation to have to take a Nerve Test. Gang fighters going down in close range to the deployed pet would cause a Nerve Test for the pet, for example.

The only pet available to the Nacht-Ghul is the Spektor.

There are a variety of Exotic Beasts that are available to any and all Champions and Leaders.
0-2 Grapplehawk. 0-1 Gyrinx Cat. 0-1 Hacked Cyber-Mastiff. 0-3 Necromundan Giant Rat. All of these are also available. Rarity ranges from Common to 14. It being a problem "only" for Delaque gang champions doesn't make it not a problem, even if most of us don't play Delaque.

Imagine being the player who pays for a handler/pet to both have Infiltrate watch another Infiltrator get to use infiltrate his pet without having the rule.

I am the player with the Milliasaur Beastmaster. Easy to imagine, really. It's me. I still argue that other pets deploy with their owners. And I play most often against Delaque, who have both a lot of Infiltrate and From The Shadows.

You remind of of the time back in 2018-2019 when many of us ferociously examined rules details like this. Many great minds have given up since then. Good to see discussion from newer players.

Agreed. The stuff does want sussing out.

 

[TopsyKretts]

Obviously the pets deploy with their owner. Anything else is madness. But the rules unfortunately doesn't cover this. The rules also doesn't cover Overseer on a pet or pet owner. I don't agree Overseer isn't an activation, I would treat it exactly like an out-of-sync activation. Similar wording for Webbed which makes a lot of people confused. You are reading far too much between the lines for Overseer when it says "as though it were their turn to activate". Because it is just a side note for explaining the unusual situation of activating when it was actually someone else who activated. Can't see how GW put much thought into this meaning not an activation for the purposes of pet owner's group activation. That combo was simply overlooked.

 

[MusingWarboss]

You remind of of the time back in 2018-2019 when many of us ferociously examined rules details like this. Many great minds have given up since then. Good to see discussion from newer players.

Where’s @Thorgor when you need him? Not active in many years I think.

 

[Sarkazym]

The "pets get removed when their owners are off the table" doesn't mention anything about "during their activation." That's the conflict. It isn't like being off the leash, which specifically checks at the end of Activation. You would place the pets. The handler would be off table. The pet would be removed. It isn't during activation.

The only possible conflict I see is with Nacht-Ghuls (that I'm aware of.) It's the only situation where an 'owner being off the table' would apply because the pet would be on the table. I don't see that exemption going that far. A handler needs to be removed from play, which it can't do because it was never in play at any point in time until it arrives. While I agree that it's best to rule that having a Pet would prevent the Nacht-Ghul from using 'From the Shadows', there is no conflict because the player would use 'Tools of the Trade' to leave it out. I see no link allowing a pet to benefit from a rule (opposed to a skill) at this time.

There isn't a conflict with Infiltration, since they both happen in the same step before the game begins. Both handler and pet are on the board before the game begins. So there is no reason to allow the pet to Infiltrate with the handler in the first place. The pet isn't prevented from being placed on the board if the handler isn't present. Even if it was, there would be no reason to check before the End of the Deployment step to see if that condition did exist. Based on the RaW, the handler hasn't been removed from play, so doesn't satisfy the required condition.

Off The Leash is not the only thing that causes nerve tests to fighters on the table. Nothing exempts pets from other Nerve Tests. Being off the leash simply adds yet another, and states that for ANY "Run For Cover," the pet must run toward its owner. With the owner off the table, "must run x inches towards" gets ... complicated. It doesn't require Activation to have to take a Nerve Test. Gang fighters going down in close range to the deployed pet would cause a Nerve Test for the pet, for example.

It's confusing because you're blending two of my responses here.

If the Exotic Beast is more than X" away at the end of it's activation, it must pass a Nerve test or become Broken.

Activation is required to take a Nerve test for being off it's leash. So the Run for Cover(D) never comes into play as a result of that specific instance.

Yes, it gets complicated if the Pet were to fail a Nerve test for any of the other reasons if it were to happen, but we'd need to look at the condition where it would be an issue.

- First you'd have to have an Exotic Pet on the board and it's handler missing. Right now, the Nacht-Ghul is the ONLY one we're aware of that could pull this off.
- The most common Nerve Test would be within 3" of a friendly fighter (or 6" of a vehicle) that goes Prone/Injured, OOA. As this is very real possibility, one that the Nacht Ghul player would be aware of when deploying the Pet, there is no reason to deploy the pet within 3"/6" (or more as necessary to account for pushback).
- The next common Nerve tests would be from Tactics/Wyrd powers (if any). The pet can't activate until the Nacht-Ghul is on the board, so the opponent would have to have a vendetta against the pet to pick something that's not going to do anything on round 1 over something that might actually affect him round 1. *There is a good chance the player might be aware of this before deciding to use 'From the Shadows', at least that's what I've seen.
- If the Pet does happen to be near enough to witness it, the Nacht-Ghul player could also park other models next to the pet to get the +1 modifier to pass that test.
- With a Pet on the board, it's extremely unlikely that the Nacht-Ghul would wait to use 'From the Shadows' on a turn later than 2, where none of the above statements will even matter.

The ONLY reason I mentioned it in the first place is because until this INCREDIBLY rare situation even happens, there is no need to make a house rule on what to do when a pet belonging to a Nacht-Ghul fails a Nerve test when the Nacht-Ghul isn't present. Granting the pet the ability to piggyback on 'From the Shadows' is not the easiest, or the simplest house rule. Now that I know that a fighter activates when they become Broken from a failed Nerve test, the EASIEST House rule would be to say that it is simply removed at this stage. If the Nacht-Ghul player was willing to risk having a pet sit around for Round 1, and makes any of the above situations possible, then he deserves to lose the investment. The next best House Rule would be to Ignore the 'toward it's handler' part and treat the pet like a Normal fighter, since it was a Normal Nerve test that was broken. Both of these options would be fairer, and more in-line with the game mechanics, than allowing a pet to use 'From the Shadows' rule.

It'll have no impact on the game. Exotic Pets only trigger Nerve Tests on other Exotic Pets. They don't count toward bottle tests. It's the Players fault for allowing it to be in a position to take the Nerve test, and is literally the WORST option tactically for an opponent to do anything to try to get it to take a Nerve check.

There are a variety of Exotic Beasts that are available to any and all Champions and Leaders.
0-2 Grapplehawk. 0-1 Gyrinx Cat. 0-1 Hacked Cyber-Mastiff. 0-3 Necromundan Giant Rat. All of these are also available. Rarity ranges from Common to 14.

I'm going to be HONEST here, I'm not this far into the game yet. I'm going straight off pure HoS lists while I try to figure the game out. I have no idea what these pets even do, or how they affect/enhance their handlers. Having a House rule allowing a pet to piggyback on 'From the Shadows' for free would be a bigger concern.

I stand by what I said, I highly doubt that any of these pets would be better served on a Nacht-Ghul over the other options, or necessary in 1-off Skirmish games. I already have a Wyrm to learn the Exotic Pet rules. I currently have one Infiltrating Champion, but I'm strapped for Credits on the list I plan to start out with that I don't see it worth dropping even the Juves to try to squeeze a pet in on him. I also have 'Mass Infiltration' to grant the Pet Infiltrate if needed.

I am the player with the Milliasaur Beastmaster. Easy to imagine, really. It's me. I still argue that other pets deploy with their owners. And I play most often against Delaque, who have both a lot of Infiltrate and From The Shadows.

That's fine, and it's great that you and your group allow it that way. I don't see the reason to present it as a rule though. I want to know all the Pros and Cons of what the rules are so the Arbiters can make a decision on how they're going to house rule it for their Campaign. In their last campaign, none of them really ran pets. In addition to that, they also allowed players to play as many different gangs as they wanted to. So dividing Game time between different Gangs means that they're less likely to develop to the point where they would include pets.

Right now I appreciate all the help, and you have been VERY helpful on this discussion, that I can get since they're learning all about pets at the same time as me, which means I have to make a case for what is/isn't allowed since I'm the only one who will be affected so far.

Obviously the pets deploy with their owner. Anything else is madness. But the rules unfortunately doesn't cover this.

The rules do cover this. There is no rule in N23/House books that state they deploy with their owner which seems to be the sole point of contention. Convincing new players who haven't been exposed to those rules is going to drive us to madness. Until we get to Nacht-Ghuls, there isn't any NEED to create a house rule, but as always, Arbiters should feel free to amend the rules as they see fit.

The rules also doesn't cover Overseer on a pet or pet owner. I don't agree Overseer isn't an activation, I would treat it exactly like an out-of-sync activation.

Read the above, there are now other players who disagree. It went MUCH smoother having played it that way my last game.

After watching a few more batreps, I strongly believe that applying the Ready token mechanic to the pet also helped come to this conclusion as well. If Overseer did trigger Group Activation(Exotic Pets), then it would still fail because the Pets would still have to burn their Ready tokens if done before the handler activates. Overseer only grants lets the model that was selected keep it's ready token. If it's done after the handler activates, then the pets wouldn't be able to do anything because they don't have a ready token, and Overseer only lets the model selected benefit. In addition to that, Pets aren't exempt from being targeted and benefitting from Overseer.

This also made sense when one of the Batreps used 'Existential Barrage'. The target fighter takes an INT test or becomes Broken. If that fails, then all other fighters within 5" take Nerve tests. With this discussion fresh in my mind, I reviewed how this might work with Pets. Exotic Pets are not Immune to Nerve tests while in range of their handler. Yes, they'll break and run to their handler and auto-rally, but it also causes them to LOSE their Ready token. So if that happens before the handler activates then the pet doesn't get to do anything when he does.

How does it make sense that a pet should circumvent the Ready token mechanic simply because it gets to activate whenever it's handler does? Had I not seen it in that light, I might have played it incorrectly if it happened in my game. Now I know better, and I haven't established a bad habit needing to be broken. As a new player, treating Overseer as 2 Actions, and not an Activation is simple to implement, avoids confusion, and just makes sense. I feel better knowing that other players see it that way too.

Based on how the Psyker powers work now, I don't think I'll be running it anymore anyways.

 

[HugeSamples]

I am the player with the Milliasaur Beastmaster. Easy to imagine, really. It's me. I still argue that other pets deploy with their owners. And I play most often against Delaque, who have both a lot of Infiltrate and From The Shadows.

I don't have the book of the outlands, but I vaguely recall the beast master gets the skill their pet has. In that case the beast master also has infiltrate and can deploy with their infiltrating millisaurs.

 

[Aulenback]

Yes, the Beastmaster Brute is the only one so far whose equipment is given the same skill he is, so as to be able to be deployed with him. No other Exotic Pets are given either infiltrate or From The Shadows. Thus the original poster's questions, really, in that regard. As the player with a Beastmaster, I also would/do allow my opponents (Delaque mentioned specifically because of the prevalence of Infiltrate and From the shadows) to continue to deploy the Exotic Beast equipment "alongside their owner" rather than separately. Some disagree, some agree.

 

[Sarkazym]

I don't have the book of the outlands, but I vaguely recall the beast master gets the skill their pet has. In that case the beast master also has infiltrate and can deploy with their infiltrating millisaurs.

That's my Argument. The existence of both handlers/pets both having 'Infiltrate' sets the precedent that it IS required on both in order to benefit from it. I don't have any experience with any pre-N23 rules, but can easily see how having them drop with their handler might have made sense. I simply don't see any reason/conflict to allow it under N23. Nacht-Ghuls are a special case because they can be on the starting Crew and not on the board before turn 1. There are two decent solutions which will be up to the arbiters running it.

I think it's awesome that @Aulenback is totally cool with allowing it for everyone, and not opposed to it. The difference is that I'm the first player to really use pets and have them look at the rules in depth. A few of them have admitted that I'm probably going to need to be the expert on them at this stage. So I need to be able to make my argument to them, not for how I want it played, but for how it should be played. They could very easily rule the way he plays it and I'm okay with that since it'll apply to everyone.

It still causes conflicts, though rare, when they rule it that way. I've been looking at various Tactics, and found 2 so far that cause problems with Pet interaction.

- 'Shape Shifting' - Though I can't think of a situation where the Nacht-Ghul is not participating in the fight, this would be a good way to get him in on Round 1. This applies to any model with a Pet though. Going the 'Pet's always drop' way, the pet would come with the Nacht-Ghul, conflicting with the 'Exotic Pets' rule that allows them to come in with their handler during deployment. No, I don't think it's game-breaking to allow it and would maintain the narrative. The way I see it is that the Pet simply doesn't come in.

- 'Informant' - We have an Enforcer player. This is an interesting one. If he selects my Gheist, then it looks like the Pet simply gets removed because of the Exotic Pets rule stating 'for any reason'. Strict rules, the pet doesn't come back when the Gheist gets re-deployed. I believe that the INTENT of this rule should not affect the pet when 'Informant' is used because it's during deployment. This is because 'Informant' can be used to redeploy the Pet, and placed as far from my Gheist as possible, creating another situation where the Pet could be off leash before it even activates. (Though I think that a Pet being the Informant is like the 40k version of 'Lassie', and somewhat hilarious)

Not sure if the Nacht-Ghul is even a target for this one. He's not ineligible because he's being held off, but he's not on board to remove. I can easily see the Enforcer using this one to force the Nacht-Ghul to not only deploy normally, but also in a place where he's not going to come in and murder anything easily. By the strictest sense of the wording though, he is being removed, then deployed per the opponents choice. Assuming the Nacht-Ghul has a pet, we create another scenario where the pet would be removed from the entire GAME.

 

[TopsyKretts]

That's my Argument. The existence of both handlers/pets both having 'Infiltrate' sets the precedent that it IS required on both in order to benefit from it. I don't have any experience with any pre-N23 rules, but can easily see how having them drop with their handler might have made sense. I simply don't see any reason/conflict to allow it under N23. Nacht-Ghuls are a special case because they can be on the starting Crew and not on the board before turn 1. There are two decent solutions which will be up to the arbiters running it.

That is one argument, but I am not inclined to agree. This may be the first time they thought about the case with infiltrate with the owner and pets combo. And the way they solved it is if to have parity. The intention is clear - if one can infiltrate then other can too. Otherwise it's useless and considered an error. Note that pets can only start with it, not gain it from advancement as it's not on their reduced list of skills.

I think pets should deploy with their infiltrating owner, because otherwise it's a non-functional mechanic (unfun). The main goal is to make things work in this rules mess. Of course this is further complicated with special rules that are similar to Infiltrate, like the Delaque specialist champ "From the Shadows".

For Informant card, I would lean towards redeploying the owner and all pets together in unit cohesion. That would make most sense. Otherwise, RAW and of course more punishing, you could split them making the pet useless until united with owner (most effectively redeploying the owner to a more uselesss/vulnerable position). Fighters with infiltrate or similar mechanics should not be affected by Informant IMO. Only those physically on the battlefield before round 1. And a Lassie informant sounds exactly like the crazy fun interactions this game allows for

 

[Sarkazym]

Game tonight. Gave 'infiltrate' to the Gheist and left they Wyrm on normal deployment. There was never an opportunity for any rules to break.
-----

We did have an interesting situation come up that created the exact scenario I described.

The Gheist peril'd and went insane. Next turn, I activated the Ghiest. The Insanity check is first and my opponent gains control of the Gheist.

As part of the Group Activation, he chooses the Wyrm to activate (which is still under my control). I choose to stay where I need him, but he fails the Nerve Test and breaks. I break, roll 2D6, and head straight toward the handler.

- Did we play it right or does he get control of the Wyrm because it's wargear?
- Does it still Auto-rally while the handler is an enemy model?
- If no, then can I still test to rally as normal, and potentially get XP from it?
- Can he still use they Wyrm as a node when it's an enemy model? I only ran 'psychosis', but is the Wyrm eligible to be a Target of the Gheist power. (This could've been REALLY bad if I had a different power)
- If I have a CE power up, it's likely my opponent will let it drop, but if he doesn't, would the power switch to affecting my own gang?
- How does it work if that CE is bouncing off the node? Would that power affect the Gheist as an enemy model or would he still be immune if the pet goes with him?

** I'm really starting to think my Gheist wants to be painted. 3 out of his 5 games, he's peril'd.

 

[HugeSamples]

- Did we play it right or does he get control of the Wyrm because it's wargear?

I'm not entirely sure actually.

I can see arguments for both ways to play it.

Someone with more pet experience might know. The situation hasn't come up for me.

For simplicity's sake it might be best to let him control it? i.e. the insane guy is ordering their pet(s) around.

- If I have a CE power up, it's likely my opponent will let it drop, but if he doesn't, would the power switch to affecting my own gang?

Your gheist would become "friendly" again at the end of it's activation, so no you wouldn't be effected by your aura powers.

- Does it still Auto-rally while the handler is an enemy model?

I believe so, like I mentioned before he's back to being friendly at the end of its activation.

 

[Sarkazym]

I'm not entirely sure actually.
I can see arguments for both ways to play it.

We went with 'treated exactly like a fighter' approach. There was no harm, since they Wyrm doesn't really do much more than being a node. Different story when there is a pet that actually does something. I think we're going to stick with this going forward though.

For simplicity's sake it might be best to let him control it? i.e. the insane guy is ordering their pet(s) around.

That's why we let him pick the order for Group Activation, cause it just made sense and kept it simple.

I believe so, like I mentioned before he's back to being friendly at the end of its activation.

Now that I've gone back and read it, I believe we did play it right and let him auto-rally. Exotic Pets rule says 'within X" of it's owner'. That appears to be enough reason.

It's odd because I'm trying to learn the timing of it all, especially with the Wyrm. They Wyrm needs to be in node position before the Gheist activates when not using a CE. I'm finding that getting the Wyrm to where he is needed will often take him just out of leash range, which will trigger the Nerve test. 'Psychosis' is fairly easy to manage because it has a decent range to start with and not requiring LoS makes it very manageable. **Sidenote: Overseer makes this very manageable by allowing the Gheist to move before the Wyrm does.

I liked the 'Cinematic Emotional moment' of it either way. The Wyrm, sensing something wrong, returned to it's owner in the middle of the fight.

 

[Beebopalulla]

One case doesn't make a rule. It's an exception.If it's happen more than one time there is room for questioning.

Even so it may just be more exceptions. Like for the range of the leash. The leash rule still exist even with numerous exception.

So for me I disagree with this statement.


"That's my Argument. The existence of both handlers/pets both having 'Infiltrate' sets the precedent"

Edit: the understanding of what is a precedent depends on the country culture where you live.

 

[Sarkazym]

You completely lost me and I don't follow what you're trying to say. What prompted this whole discussion is that I started reading the rules, then started watching Batreps to make sense of it all. I started seeing things that conflicted with what I had read. Some of them were so common across different Batreps, that I honestly believed that I had missed a rule since so many different games, in different parts of the world, were playing it similar. I'm still new to the current (N23) version of Necromunda, so haven't had to deal with earlier variations. That's still a factor when I see references where wording is different, and it's not clear if N23/House books replace them, since a few of the rules, especially Tactics, are still legal under the current rules.

One case doesn't make a rule. It's an exception.If it's happen more than one time there is room for questioning.

This is coming across as confusing. An exception is when there is a rule in place, and special conditions would allow them to modify or ignore the rule. Exotic Beasts have a long list of exceptions that apply to them. Following what I believe your intent is, they tell us what ruleset applies to Exotic Beasts. The exceptions make no sense without any rules for them to be exempt from.

Exotic Beasts follow ALL the normal rules for Fighters.

When it comes to 'Infiltrate', the first place I went to was the Exotic Beasts rule. There isn't a single exception, or even mention of 'Infiltrate' in there at all. The next place I looked was how 'Infiltrate' worked, and it's covered there. Since there is no mention in there about Exotic Beasts, and why would there be, we fall back on to how it affects Fighters. "If this Fighter should be setup...". Since the Exotic Besats follow ALL the normal rules for Fighters, they would have to have 'Infiltrate' themselves, and there doesn't appear to be an exemption to that.

So for me I disagree with this statement.

The existence of both handlers/pets both having 'Infiltrate' sets the precedent

This is where you flip. You are presented with evidence in game that the Rule applies and requires all fighters, Exotic Beasts included, to have 'Infiltrate' to be able to use it, and its somehow an exception? Since there is existence of one Exotic Beast not breaking the rule, it should act as a guide on how to address others in a Similar situation. That's the very definition of what a precedent is.

Infiltrate is a skill not listed on the Exotic Beasts chart. That is only and exemption to the 'normal rules for all Fighters' by restricting their access to those skills WHEN they gain a new skill (typically through advancement). They are not restricted from getting 'Infiltrate' or prevented from using it when they get it. If you need more than one way to prove the precedent, there are a few other ways to grant Infiltrate to an Exotic Beast. I benefit from 'Mass Infiltrate' where I can grant D3 Fighters the use of Infiltrate. Delaque isn't the only one that has access to it. There is a Universal grant one fighter 'Infiltrate' Tactic. I believe Ogryns, Palanites, and Cults also have similar cards but not sure.

-----
Compilation of Arguments presented so far:
'Exotic Beasts must be deployed with their Handlers' - FALSE: This is probably the MOST common reference presented so far and not just here. There isn't any rule/exemption that states this. It's true that when the owner is selected as part of the Starting Crew, the Exotic Beast may also be deployed. There is no further exemption at this stage permitting/restricting deployment, so then they would fall back on 'Following all the normal rules for fighters'.

'The pet can't be on the board without it's owner' (A)- FALSE: This just looks odd when you see it. 'Infiltrators' are never '... removed from the board'. They are simply held off to the side and then deploy after both sides are finished, before rolling for the first Round. Without interference, nothing is going to happen between the Exotic Beast deploying normally, and it's owner benefitting from 'Infiltrate'

'The pet can't be on the board without it's owner' (B) - FUZZY: There are a few Tactics/Abilities, that affect fighters but don't require them to be on the board before the first round. Relevant to me is the Nacht-Ghul because of his super Infiltrate, which leaves the Pet on the board for a turn without it's owner. He hasn't been 'removed' from play to trigger the removal of the Exotic Beast either, he's simply not there, and the rules do not cover this at all. Following the 'normal rules for fighters' though, it never becomes an issue until the the Exotic Beast has to fail a nerve test while it's owner is still not there. Hardly a justification allowing a Beast to piggy back onto a special rule, especially when the 'Infiltrate' skill isn't even in play.

'Exotic Beasts will have nowhere to run when they fail the Nerve Test because their owner isn't on the board' - CIRCUMSTANTIAL: This only applies to any post Round 1 deployment, which is the Nacht Ghul as of right now. They don't automatically fail a nerve test when their owner isn't with X" or even on the board. They don't even have to test when outside of X" of their owner until the end of their Activation. Since their owner Activating IS a requirement for a Pet to activate, it'll never have the opportunity to test, despite having a Ready marker. So you'd have to get the Exotic Beast to take a Nerve Test before it's owner shows up. As I said above, if the Pet is somehow within 3" of another fighter, who is exposed on Round 1 AND manages to get Critically Injured/OOA, and the Pet then fails it's Nerve test for seeing a friendly fighter go down, he deserves to have the pet removed. The controlling player knew all of the rules to create such an incredibly rare situation. The only other situation I could see the Exotic Beast taking a Nerve test on Round 1 when the gang fails a Bottle Test, and the Beast is outside of one of the Hierarchy bubbles.

There are however plenty of Tactics available. Any kind of Redeployment, like 'Informant' actually state they remove the model, which qualifies as 'Any reason' and would remove the pet. It also leaves the precedent in place, even when beneficial Tactics are played. 'Shifting Shadows' removes the fighter and the places him anywhere within 4" of it's previous location. Any type of 'Reinforcements' wouldn't bring the pet along because they weren't selected to participate in the scenario. 'Shape Shifting' wouldn't allow me to replace they Seriously Injured model with a suitable replacement and his pet.

There is a much simpler solution. Show me the RaW allowing an Exotic Beast to benefit from 'Infiltrate' just because it's owner is using it.

Edit: the understanding of what is a precedent depends on the country culture where you live.

I don't see how this applies to the discussion. Precedents don't really change until the Rules do. What is a Rule(or Law) in one country differs from country to country, so any precedents that affect a European rule, won't affect any precedents tied to any Western Continent rule. Or are you suggesting that there are different rules for Necromunda simply because you live in a different country?

 

[Beebopalulla]

Yeah you lost me there. What I m trying to say is the way you understand what a precedent is in your culture affect the way you understand what is a precedent in necromunda.

So my understanding is one case doesn't make a change of rule. That's all.

 

[Sarkazym]

Yeah you lost me there. What I m trying to say is the way you understand what a precedent is in your culture affect the way you understand what is a precedent in necromunda.

- I don't see how Culture affects what a precedent is.
- Precedents are used as a guide when the rules are unclear.
- Culture only dictates the rules, and even Laws.
- The rules are different for American Culture, European Culture, or Japanese Culture.
- Regardless of Culture, when there are 'Grey' areas, precedents provide direction on how those rules apply in similar situations, within their rules.
- The Rules are different in each culture, which changes the precedents. Not the other way around. (I can give non-political examples if needed)

There aren't different rules for Necromunda, so a different understanding of what a precedent is doesn't apply.

So my understanding is one case doesn't make a change of rule. That's all.

What is the rule when an owner has 'Infiltrate' and the Exotic Beasts do not? Where is it located? That's all.

-----
There are 3 Reasons to allow Exotic Beasts to piggyback on 'Infiltrate' or other similar rules.

1 - The Scenario (often custom) would allow it. This would be a rules change and create an exemption on it's own. There is no need for any precedent here because it's a pocket discussion, and wouldn't affect anything outside of the Scenario.

2 - It's fun / simple. This how @TopsyKretts , and probably quite a few others, play it as well. I completely support this so there is no disagreement. I've got no problem with playing it this way either should the group decide to rule it that way either. I'm just in a position where I am learning the game with several other players, so we can test out the RaW to see if it creates any problems. I'm grateful that @TopsyKretts has been quite helpful here by showing where to look for conflicting situations where separating the Exotic Beast and it's owner because of 'Infiltrate' could show up. Playtesting while learning has debunked most of these so far, which brings us to the next point.

3 - Habit. 'That's how it's always been played!' doesn't necessarily make it a rule. I don't have any previous versions of the rules to reference, and it may have been a grey area that didn't have any precedents to guide the situation. So the consensus may have been that they do piggyback on 'Infiltrate', which is fine. When the any rules get updated, there is no need to question changes until someone actually looks to see if there were changes. Which is where I'm coming from. The question isn't HOW Exotic Beasts and 'Infiltrate'. It's more about WHY does it even need to be addressed?

I didn't create this post to find out how people are playing it, but to discuss what the rule is. Under the current wording in both N23 and 'House' books, there is less haziness with how it works. Without any exemptions listed under Exotic Pets to allow them to benefit from 'Infiltrate' simply because their owner does, then they fall back on the 'normal rules for all fighters', and should be required to have 'Infiltration' in order to benefit from it.

It's not until this step that we need to see if there is an example to support/restrict how the Interaction is intended to work. You know, to set a precedent. The ONLY example I've been able to find is the Beastmasters. It's the only place (so far) where I've found both the Owners AND Exotic Beasts having 'Infiltrate'. This shows that when you follow 'all the normal rules for fighters', that even Exotic Pets are required to have 'Infiltrate' to be able to use it RaW. This should guide how other Exotic Pets can use 'Infiltrate' when their owner has it and they don't. I haven't found any rules, or examples, to support them being able to 'Infiltrate' with their owners.

-----
There is nothing in the rules that prevents players from allowing rules to be changed, but that's not the point of this discussion. I'm learning with a bunch of other new players, so I'm simply trying to find out how the rule is played before we get to that step. We're all playing 1-off skirmish games to learn the rules, so we get to experiment before we make any house rules. As a Delaque player, I'm the one who is going to be making the most of the Exotic Pets rule because of how good the Wyrm is. All I intend to do here for now is find out what the Rule IS. The Arbiters (it's a pair of guys afaik), are looking for my feedback on it before they make a decision for the Campaign.

There are already players who want to try Pet heavy Escher, and two Goliath players want to get Krocs. I've been quite clear with them that my Wyrm is an extreme exception because of the 12" leash range, so that might not apply to their Exotic Beasts. Again, special thanks to TopsyKretts, and Hugesamples pointing out where the perceived conflicts are. They've both been very helpful in formulating a counter argument and finding the differences between the wording and the phrasing of several game mechanics, not just 'Infiltrate'

 

[TopsyKretts]

Then RAW pets can never infiltrate with owner except Millisaur which is the only one which starts with it - case closed.

 

[Sarkazym]

Then RAW pets can never infiltrate with owner except Millisaur which is the only one which starts with it - case closed.

The reason why they would ever NEED to is what I'm going to have to present to the Arbiters. Millisaur Beast Masters are designed to use 'Infiltrate' hence why they have it. With Delaque having easy access to 'Infiltrate', I haven't found any disputes that would justify granting it to them. Even giving the Gheist 'Infiltrate' on one of my games and having the Wyrm deploy normally didn't ever trigger any conflicts.

The Nacht-Ghul is the one exception because it's not a true Infiltrate. As a result of my game, I don't see any benefit of upgrading a Gheist to a Nacht-Ghul and keeping the Wyrm pet. He's going to be dedicating his Actions to murder, so even maintaining a CE would restrict that. I don't even see it as viable now. There might be a better pairing with one of the other Exotic Pets from the Market, but I'm not there yet.

 

[TopsyKretts]

But the pet breaks at round 1 if it can't catch up to the forward deployed owner? This worked out for you regardless?

 

[Sarkazym]

But the pet breaks at round 1 if it can't catch up to the forward deployed owner? This worked out for you regardless?

Yes it was fine, and potentially no. The Wyrm is the most flexible with RaW, and as a result is the worst representation of Exotic Beasts rules as a whole.

They don't TEST to break until the end of their Activation. Even with having to measure the leash range around solid objects, there was still plenty of wiggle room to have the Infiltrating Gheist in Control range 8" away from the Wyrm. When I activated both models in Round 1, I moved the Gheist forward twice to be in position for Round 2 (since I didn't run a CE this game). This put the Wyrm ~15" (bending around solid objects) away from the Gheist at the start of it's own Activation. A Double Move+Burrow I was able to get him about 2" in front of the Gheist, perfectly setup for Round 2. Since it was within 12" at the end of it's activation, there was no need to test. This is why the other new players are asking me about their own Beasts and I have to be honest that this isn't a normal Beast, and to check their own pets before asking me for help.

I kept what you said in the back of my mind and saw the potential problem with Exotic Beasts as I did this. Very few beasts have Burrowing, or Fly (which won't help much in Zone Mortalis). It's unlikely that a majority of the Pets would even have the ability to get within leash range at the end of it's activation without restricting where it's owner can 'Infiltrate' in the first place. This still doesn't break RaW though, if it fails the test, it will immediately move and additional 2D6" toward it's handler, and will auto-rally (no XP) at that step if it's in Leash range. The only risk here is that the Beast could be exposed to enemy fire. If it STILL out of leash range at the end of that move, then they can still attempt to Rally at the End Step (for XP).

If they fail that 2nd Rally test, they don't get to move an additional 2d6". They're already in 'broken' status. On the next round, if the Beast activates before it's owner, all it can do during is continue to 'flee' toward it's owner, and if it makes it in range then it will auto-rally(no XP). After all of that, one of the situations I mentioned at the start is possible. If the Owner activates before the Beast, it's possible for the Owner to get in leash range at the end of his activation. When the Beast activates, it's both Broken and within leash range. This is the point where a house rule would be needed IMO. Strict RaW, the pet moves into base with it's owner then Rallies. House rule would let the Pet auto-rally (no XP) at the start of it's activation and be allowed to act normally.

(Nacht-Ghuls aren't included at this stage of the discussion, because I don't believe it's tied to the Exotic Beasts rules anymore.)

** Note on Overseer **
Overseer is not an Activation. So it can be used on the Pet (as a normal fighter), perform it's two actions, and not have to test for being off leash. That's saved for when it Activates. If Overseer is used on a Beast with the 'Broken' status (can't think of ANY tactical reason to do so), the actions available to it are restricted by the status, not the activation., It can only 'flee' to it's owner. Eventhough it's not an activation, it should be allowed to auto-rally (no XP) anyways since the auto-rally appears to be tied to the 'Broken' status, and not the activation. The RaW could go either way at this stage, but the conditions needed for this to even be possible are almost impossible.

If there is anything I missed in here, PLEASE point it out.

What I admire about players who allow Beasts to Infiltrate, is that it doesn't restrict players from gaining the full benefit of 'Infiltrate' despite having to sneak a yapping mutant alien with him. I think it creates more potential conflict/problems than it solves, while lowering the value of Millisaur Beastmasters by granting all Pets the same ability. An interesting point was brought up that it might still be possible for Beasts to acquire 'Infiltrate' by RaW. I agree that it's a stretch and probably not worth the investment even if a Beast survives that long. Beast turns into a Specialist, and 15XP allows them to gain a skill from ANY table. Haven't looked into it too much, but even the 'Pets have no way to acquire it' is potentially not a valid reason anymore.