8th Ed. tiktaqto question

[Lizardmatt]

No, not as the rules currently stand.
Even if they FAQ cheifs to be able to join units, his ripper won't get the bonus unless they also give it the toad rage rule.

I'm not sold on that.

Ripper Riders have Toad Rage, which lets them place the Bloat Toad marker.
Bloat Toad marker gives Ripper's Frenzy more attacks and re-rolls.
Chief's Ripper has Frenzy.
The Chiefs Ripper is meeting the requirements of the Bloat Toad Marker effect.

-Matt

 

[Wizgamer]

but if you look carefully, the ripper also loses scaly skin and cold blooded when use as a character mount........

 

[Spiney Norman]

but if you look carefully, the ripper also loses scaly skin and cold blooded when use as a character mount........

Irrelevant, the ripper never makes a save when it has a character on its back, the character makes the save, and the skink chieftain has scaly skin, also any Ld tests will be made by the character, not his mount and skink chieftains have the cold blooded rule so that is covered too.

The toad rage rule is what gives rippers their boosted frenzy, a Ripperdactyl that doesn't have toad rage (I.e one ridden by a chieftain) will not get the boosted frenzy vs a toaded unit because it doesn't have the rule, quite regardless of whether they write an errata to allow the chieftain to join the ripper unit.

 

[Lizardmatt]

but if you look carefully, the ripper also loses scaly skin and cold blooded when use as a character mount........

Irrelevant, the ripper never makes a save when it has a character on its back, the character makes the save, and the skink chieftain has scaly skin, also any Ld tests will be made by the character, not his mount and skink chieftains have the cold blooded rule so that is covered too.

The toad rage rule is what gives rippers their boosted frenzy, a Ripperdactyl that doesn't have toad rage (I.e one ridden by a chieftain) will not get the boosted frenzy vs a toaded unit because it doesn't have the rule, quite regardless of whether they write an errata to allow the chieftain to join the ripper unit.

It's being in contact with the Bloat Toad marker that gives them the attacks, not the Toad Rage.
The first paragraph is the Toad Rage rules for placing a Bloat Toad.
The 2nd paragraph is the effect of being in contact with a bloat toad.

The split of paragraphs and the use of 2 different terms (Toad Rage and Bloat Toad) leaves you wiggle room to argue for the chief.

-Matt

 

[Spiney Norman]

but if you look carefully, the ripper also loses scaly skin and cold blooded when use as a character mount........

Irrelevant, the ripper never makes a save when it has a character on its back, the character makes the save, and the skink chieftain has scaly skin, also any Ld tests will be made by the character, not his mount and skink chieftains have the cold blooded rule so that is covered too.

The toad rage rule is what gives rippers their boosted frenzy, a Ripperdactyl that doesn't have toad rage (I.e one ridden by a chieftain) will not get the boosted frenzy vs a toaded unit because it doesn't have the rule, quite regardless of whether they write an errata to allow the chieftain to join the ripper unit.

It's being in contact with the Bloat Toad marker that gives them the attacks, not the Toad Rage.
The first paragraph is the Toad Rage rules for placing a Bloat Toad.
The 2nd paragraph is the effect of being in contact with a bloat toad.

The split of paragraphs and the use of 2 different terms (Toad Rage and Bloat Toad) leaves you wiggle room to argue for the chief.

-Matt

I guess if the chief is attached to a unit with the toad rage rule then you could make a case arguing that, but since neither the ripper mount nor the toad marker itself have any rules pertaining to toad rage a ripper chief attacking a frogged unit isn't really any different to a unit of terradons attacking a frogged unit, the toad rage rule isn't in play because none of the participants of the combat have that rule.

One other point of order it is a Lustrian blot toad, not a bloat toad, however logical the latter alternative would have been.