Fenrisian Wolves as wargear

[S0ULDU5T]

The Tau might be precedent. The thing is, the Tau commander entry specifically says "If accompanied by drones, he may still join other units as an independent character." The Space Wolf entry doesn't have a similar explicit rule.

"if it smells like a duck and walks like a duck..." If wording is omitted that would make a rule more clear, wouldn't it make sense to differ to the model most similiar (within reason) instead of inferring that wording yourself?

Not saying your wrong, just thowing that out there - not even sure if there is a precedent with Tau or how similiar it is to be honest.

[PhoenixFlame]

Then there's the Lone Wolf to consider, and while he doesn't have the IC issues there are questions like majority armor saves, Weapon Skill, and Feel no Pain.
The Wolves take off if the fig they're attacked too ever drops so if you can choose where to put the wounds no one would ever put them on the wolves, but if you can't does it make it easier to hurt the Lone Wolf should he have two wolf 'upgrades' (or does it make it easier to hit the Wolf Lord if he does?)
There's also the issue of MotW, if these wolves count as wargear then a model with MotW wouldn't be able to benefit from them in close combat.... so apparently if you're a werewolf and you have pet wolves they won't fight in close combat anymore

My point being the whole thing is unclear and causes issues almost any way you turn it **does an errata dance** we need some clarity.

...here's another one, you can't join a unit that isn't mounted on a thunderwolf if you take a thunderwolf mount as an upgrade... so does that mean you can't have wolves with a mount? And if not (since it's not actually prohibited in the rules) why can't you join a unit of wolves if you're on a thunderwolf mount? Is it really that Canis Wolfborn can lead and inspire wolves ... but only from a distance

you get the idea

[Jwolf]

Let's try to avoid lookingfor complicated ways to do something simple, shall we? A character that takes Fenrisian Wolves is still an IC, and the Wolves are normal models for all purposes unless the IC is killed. They act as wargear if he dies, going away with him, otherwise they're part of any unit he joins (or a unit with him, if he is acting independently).

[DarkLink]

The Tau might be precedent. The thing is, the Tau commander entry specifically says "If accompanied by drones, he may still join other units as an independent character." The Space Wolf entry doesn't have a similar explicit rule.

GW sometimes forgets to include clarifying clauses in their rule, so they probably just forgot to include a similar rule.

I have to agree with Jwolf. Just use common sense. This doesn't have to be complicated.

[PhoenixFlame]

Let's try to avoid lookingfor complicated ways to do something simple, shall we? A character that takes Fenrisian Wolves is still an IC, and the Wolves are normal models for all purposes unless the IC is killed. They act as wargear if he dies, going away with him, otherwise they're part of any unit he joins (or a unit with him, if he is acting independently).

Which would then make them incompatible with the use of a Thunderwolf mount and/or joining a unit of Thunderwolf Cavalry?

Feel free to ignore the below as it is semi-off topic

Here's my percentage in all this, I like to know my army lists (and the codex they come from) backwards and forwards. I'm a pretty savvy guy for the most part but I don't assume that I'm always right or that just because I've read something a given way that means it's the best/only way to read it. So I really like the POV of others on the same subject to check my thoughts against. If the answer to a given question is "be chill there may be a touch of gray in the wording but everyone knows what it means" that's fine... so long as everyone (or even just more than half of players) actually do know what it means and take it the same way.
My least favorite thing is to be mid game and have someone tell me "no you can't do/use XYZ like that" because they think I'm trying to pull some rules exploit and cheat them. (corrections when I've simply overlooked or miss read things are of course welcome but the assumption of intended abuse really isn't)
Having that response compounded by the loss of an option which was part of my build is very likely to take the fun out of a given round (there are many other ways to spend points which could have worked too if I'd known in advance that XYZ thing was going to be contentious). And since I'm not assuming that my POV is the end all it's important to cast a wide net and see what catches. In this case pointing out ways that the RAW are ambiguous and/or mildly conflicting.

And in the face of a lack of clear consensus on a given issue it would be nice to get a direct "yes/no" from GW about how something is employed.