Necron Royal Courts

[dannyat2460]

Hello fellow BOLSers

I would like to get your opinion on a rule thats causing a little discusion at my local atm.

The rule is...

Before the battle, each member of the royal court has the option of being split off from his unit and assigned to lead a different unit from the following list......................... Only one member of the royal court can join each unit in this manner.

Now my question is what if you have two (2) royal courts does this mean that i can take a necron lord from a royal court and a crypteck form a different royal court and put them into the same unit?

Also if they join the squad do they for all game perposes become part of that squad so for the enemy to get a kill point they have to kill the member of the royal court that has attached to the squad and does he if attached to a troop choice now count as scoring even if the rest of the squad is dead?

[Archon Charybdis]

Now my question is what if you have two (2) royal courts does this mean that i can take a necron lord from a royal court and a crypteck form a different royal court and put them into the same unit?

That's a bit tricky and could easily be FAQ'd, but based on the usage of the article "the" it seems like it only restrictions Court members from the same Court. So theoretically you could have two models from two different Courts attached to one unit.


Also if they join the squad do they for all game perposes become part of that squad so for the enemy to get a kill point they have to kill the member of the royal court that has attached to the squad and does he if attached to a troop choice now count as scoring even if the rest of the squad is dead?

Being as they're not IC's and using Wolf Guard as a precedent, the model does not count for a separate KP and counts as scoring even if the rest of the unit is wiped out. For all intents and purposes it is part of the unit it was attached to at the start of the game.

[dannyat2460]

Yes along the lines i was thinking too but will see if theres any good arguments against

[Wildeybeast]

That's a bit tricky and could easily be FAQ'd, but based on the usage of the article "the" it seems like it only restrictions Court members from the same Court. So theoretically you could have two models from two different Courts attached to one unit.



Being as they're not IC's and using Wolf Guard as a precedent, the model does not count for a separate KP and counts as scoring even if the rest of the unit is wiped out. For all intents and purposes it is part of the unit it was attached to at the start of the game.

I'd have to agree with this entirely. If they wanted it to cover all Royal Courts it would be 'a' royal court rather than 'the'.

[Necron_Lord]

I agree with the responses so far but believe the 'the' could be changed to 'a' in the upcoming FAQ. In other words, for now I think you CAN attach up to two Royal Court members to a Warriors, Immortals, Deathmarks or Lychguard unit provided that they are from different courts but think that it could go either way when the FAQ comes out.

Regarding the Court Member as being a part of the unit etc., it is a member of the unit in every way EXCEPT for Reanimation protocols. It can claim objectives if attached to a Troops choice and doesn't give up KPs when killed if there are still other members of his group alive. But as it states in the Reanimation Protocols rule, one other member of that unit with the same model description must be alive to make the RP rolls.

[Luke Licens]

I agree with the responses so far but believe the 'the' could be changed to 'a' in the upcoming FAQ. In other words, for now I think you CAN attach up to two Royal Court members to a Warriors, Immortals, Deathmarks or Lychguard unit provided that they are from different courts but think that it could go either way when the FAQ comes out.

Regarding the Court Member as being a part of the unit etc., it is a member of the unit in every way EXCEPT for Reanimation protocols. It can claim objectives if attached to a Troops choice and doesn't give up KPs when killed if there are still other members of his group alive. But as it states in the Reanimation Protocols rule, one other member of that unit with the same model description must be alive to make the RP rolls.

Clarification:

A Lord or Cryptek survivor will not allow a RP roll for a unit he was attached to if the unit he was attached to is wiped out, however he will always be able to make his own RP roll, due to the Ever-Living rule.

This does bring up a new question, though. If a unit with a Lord/Cryptek gets wiped out, and he stands back up close enough, does Ever-Living allow him to join a different unit?


If the model is placed in coherency with one or more friendly units that it is eligible to join, it automatically joins one of those units (your choice).

What defines 'eligible to join'? Is it 'eligible to join at this point in time', as for ICs or 'eligible to join ever' as Lords and Crypteks can before turn one?
Damn that GW ambiguousness...

[Tynskel]

1) It only applies to ICs
2) ICs can only join a unit during the movement phase on your turn.

It really isn't that complicated.

[SotonShades]

1) It only applies to ICs
2) ICs can only join a unit during the movement phase on your turn.

It really isn't that complicated.

Except I don't believe either Lord or Crypteks are ICs...

[dannyat2460]

I have to agree in part with tynskel you do have to be an IC to be able to join the unit however as the everliving rules only says it must be in coherency not in the movement phase, and as reanimation can happen in any phase friendly or enemy i think they can join as and when it happens.

but yes Luke Licens it is yet another ambiguousness mess made by GW

[Angelofblades]

I don't think it's ambiguous, it seems very clear cut to me. If a model with the EL rule joined a unit, and the entire unit is wiped out, including that model, there's no EL or RP to be done at all, you loose all the models.

So say a cryptek joined a warrior squad, and the entire unit dies in shooting or assault phase, well you cannot even attempt to RP or EL at all.

If a Overlord joined a unit the same thing happens. The whole last paragraph of the EL rule is very explicit, a model that joined a unit "must," be placed back into coherecny with another model of that unit that did not return that phase, and if it can't be placed for any reason whatsoever, it's lost. What's so ambiguous about it?

[AbusePuppy]

What defines 'eligible to join'? Is it 'eligible to join at this point in time', as for ICs or 'eligible to join ever' as Lords and Crypteks can before turn one?
Damn that GW ambiguousness...

I can only imagine "eligible to join" means any unit that an independent character could join (i.e. not a vehicle or C'tan, in the case of the Necron army). It's a little iffier for non-IC models like Crypteks and Lords, but "eligible to join" does seem to apply, os if they stood up within 2" of a Deathmark/Lychguard/etc unit, presumably they would automatically attach to it.


I don't think it's ambiguous, it seems very clear cut to me. If a model with the EL rule joined a unit, and the entire unit is wiped out, including that model, there's no EL or RP to be done at all, you loose all the models.

That is true for RP, but not EL; the ability to stand up when the rest of the unit is eliminated is the main difference between them.

[Angelofblades]

That is true for RP, but not EL; the ability to stand up when the rest of the unit is eliminated is the main difference between them.

Where does it say that for EL? Unless were looking at 2 different printing of the codex. Here's what I've got for EL



If a model with this special rule is removed as a casualty, do not add a Reanimation protocols counter to its unit. Instead place an Ever-living counter where the model was removed from play. At the end of the phase, roll for this counter, just as you would for a Reanimation Protocols counter.

At the end of the phase, after any Morale checks have been taken and fall back moves have been made, roll a D6 for each Ever-Living counter in play. On a 1, 2, 3 or 4 the damage is too severe and no self-repair occurs– nothing happens. On a 5 or 6, a Necron reassembles itself and continues to fight.

If the model had joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, and the roll was passed, it must be returned to play, with a single Wound, in coherency with that unit as explained in Reanimation Protocols, e.g. return the slain model to play, placed in coherency with a model from its unit that has not itself returned through Reanimation Protocols this phase. If the model had not joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, it must be returned to play, with a single Wound, within 3″ of the counter. In either case, the model must be placed at least 1″ away from enemy models. If the model is placed in cohrency with one or more friendly units that it is eligible to join, it automatically joins one of those units (your choice). If the model was locked in close combat when it ‘died’, and the combat is ongoing, then it must immediately pile in. If the returning model cannot be placed, for whatever reason, it is lost and does not return. If the roll was failed, remove the counter from play

Here are the important parts for me:

"If the model had joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, and the roll was passed, it must be returned to play, with a single Wound, in coherency with that unit as explained in Reanimation Protocols, e.g. return the slain model to play, placed in coherency with a model from its unit that has not itself returned through Reanimation Protocols this phase."

"If the returning model cannot be placed, for whatever reason, it is lost and does not return."

The only time a model can stand up on it's own is if it never joined a unit, which is impossible for the Royal court since none are IC's and all have to join a unit. The only time an IC is solo is determined at the end of the movement phase OR in a command barge.

[Luke Licens]

I think Angelofblades hit it right on the money. I was misreading "If the model had not joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty" as "If the model was not joined to a unit when it was removed as a casualty". My bad.

[Demonus]

Im going to have to disagree. I originally thought like AoB, however reading the rule several times now, I no longer think the unit need be there for the model to get its EL roll.

Reading the first part of the rule, it obviously states that if the roll is passed you must place the model within 1" of the unit it joined. If you did not get to roll because the unit were wiped out, it would be pretty stupid to preface the whole paragraph with "if the roll is passed."

It would be pointless to have EL in the game if this were the case, and all models would just have RP.

However it is GW so you never know the limit of their stupidity :)

Im sure it will be FAQ'd soon enough so no big worry.

[Tynskel]

joining another unit can only be done by ICs. In the case of the Crypteks/Lords, they are the only member of their unit left, so they just appear 3" away.

[Angelofblades]

joining another unit can only be done by ICs. In the case of the Crypteks/Lords, they are the only member of their unit left, so they just appear 3" away.

That's totally not supported by the EL rule. It's really quite clear, if the whole unit dies, cryptek/lords are gone too. There's a total failure of proof to support that crypteks/lords can get back if their entire unit dies. However, you are entitled to your opinion, even it is wrong.

Also additionally, it doesn't take much to cover those 3" around the marker to ensure that the model can't be placed at all.

[Tynskel]

Kinda gets redonkulous if it dies, by itself. ie it is the only model. then it dies. it doesn't come back?

No. The Unit still exists because the EL model is still around. here's something to think about. If it dies in CC, and consolidation moves are made that it cannot get up without a) being within 3" of where the marker is left, or b) must be within 1", then yeah, it is 'If the returning model cannot be placed, for whatever reason, it is lost and does not return.'

[Gir]

If there are no other models in the squad and it stands back up with EL, it is technically in coherency with it's squad still (For example, if a unit is wiped to the last man, the last model it is technically in coherency with the squad still)

[Xenith]

If there are no other models in the squad and it stands back up with EL, it is technically in coherency with it's squad still (For example, if a unit is wiped to the last man, the last model it is technically in coherency with the squad still)

But the point is, that the EL model must be placed in coherency with a model that has not itself stood up due to RP this turn. If it cannot be placed in coherency with such a model, then it cannot be placed, as per RP.


"If the model had joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, and the roll was passed, it must be returned to play, with a single Wound, in coherency with that unit as explained in Reanimation Protocols, e.g. return the slain model to play, placed in coherency with a model from its unit that has not itself returned through Reanimation Protocols this phase" Emphasis mine.

If the squad is wiped, the EL, non independant character dies too.

[MaxKool]

I dont see anything in everliving about not being able to roll if your unit is wiped out. It says EL works as the RP does in that u need a 5+ to get back up. But other than that it dosnt share the rule. It giives us the SAME basic rules of RP without the "if the unit is wiped out" disqualifiers. This seems the same as the old codex. Some of the wording is clearly for Overlords and SC who can be walking around alone.

Realy, Its pretty clear. You follow the rules for RP in that you are usuing the same rolling mechanism. But other than that u read everliving and it dosnt say anything about the unit it had joined being wiped out. It even hints that if this happens and the lord stands up with the option of joining his choice of units should it be able to. And it covers what to do if his unit ISNOT wiped out. But is dosnt say he cant roll if solo.



Im realy hoping there is some eratta for this , Its very poorly written (big suprise)
EL means the character can make a RP roll even if alone... But a court model normaly isnt going to be alone as it HAS to either join a unit or stay in the court and march around with the Overlord.

Tell me when then is a court model EVER going to use EL?

I think the intent of EL is the same as how in the old book a lord could always attempt to stand back up regardless of if his unit was wiped out ect...

[dannyat2460]

Tell me when then is a court model EVER going to use EL?

I think the intent of EL is the same as how in the old book a lord could always attempt to stand back up regardless of if his unit was wiped out ect...

Ok 1st if it is deployed alone eg single model court, or if the other members are taken out and placed in squads leaving a single model

2nd this is how i thought it worked too but after rereading the EL rule about 40 times im inclined to belive that if all the unit and the EL are wiped out then no RP can be taken and even tho EL can be taken they automatical fail the criteria to be placed back and as such are destroyed :(

[MaxKool]

What in everliving would fail the criteria. It looks to me like they try and cover all the potential happenings should a model with EL come back to life alone or mixed in with units. But leave it to you to know what happns should it just be by itself. Im almost positive this is meant to keep lords from auto dieing with a unit, Just cause its not an IC dosnt mean he becomes the same as the unit. Once the unit is gone he becomes a character again but not an IC so unable to join a new unit unless one is close by and is forced to by the EL rule.
I assumed the second the unit is gone he regains his character status, has everliving and off it goes...

I dont get it. Ive read it over and over and over too and it just seems like either it works like I think it does or its a completely useless rule.

Not saying its written well, but I just dont see having such a useless rule.... for one rare thing such as a single court model walking around by itself(who would ever do that) or an IC not on a barge all by him self(again who would do that)

[dannyat2460]

i agree with you it makes no sence for it to work like that but atm thats what the rules say.

if it was in a unit when it died it must be placed back within coherancy with that unit.

if it was on its own it stands up 3" from where it died (outside 1" of enemy ext).

if any of the criteria isnt met it stays dead.

like i said at the start it makes no sence and actualy makes you want to have your characters running around alone or killing them to keep the squad alive.

now if it said at the time of rolling for EL rather when it died it would work how we expect it. if theres no squad left he goes off on his own if there is he joins it again

[Tynskel]

The characters never lose their character status. They just have retinues.

[Angelofblades]

The characters never lose their character status. They just have retinues.

Umm, retinues no longer exist in 40k. Calling it a retinue would vastly change the properties of a unit. A more accurate way to look at it, is that every lord/cryptek that joins a unit is now it's veteran sgt.

Thus a lord/cryptek that joins a TROOPS unit, is now scoring until the point he dies, if that lord/cryptek joins an elites unit, it doesn't count as scoring, etc.

[Tynskel]

Umm, retinues no longer exist in 40k. Calling it a retinue would vastly change the properties of a unit. A more accurate way to look at it, is that every lord/cryptek that joins a unit is now it's veteran sgt.

Thus a lord/cryptek that joins a TROOPS unit, is now scoring until the point he dies, if that lord/cryptek joins an elites unit, it doesn't count as scoring, etc.

You still never lose your 'character' status.

Hahah! Retinues no longer exist so calling it retinue would vastly change the properties of the unit, eh? How does that work--- if there are no rules for retinues, how does calling it a retinue change the properties? Please explain this!

A retinue is:
A group of advisers, assistants, or others accompanying an important person.


That's all I am saying. Or am I not allowed to use vocabulary developed for important persons, like the Lord or Cryptek.
This does not remove the fact that a Lord or Cryptek is STILL a character. That's under their properties of the model.

[The Twilight Fade]

You still never lose your 'character' status.

Hahah! Retinues no longer exist so calling it retinue would vastly change the properties of the unit, eh? How does that work--- if there are no rules for retinues, how does calling it a retinue change the properties? Please explain this!

A retinue is:
A group of advisers, assistants, or others accompanying an important person.


That's all I am saying. Or am I not allowed to use vocabulary developed for important persons, like the Lord or Cryptek.
This does not remove the fact that a Lord or Cryptek is STILL a character. That's under their properties of the model.

I think what he means is the old retinues rule exists for codices that support it. It states in the rulebook that IC's attached to a retinue can't be targetted and cannot leave unless they are the last man standing.

If the royal court was actually a retinue it would be bound by this rule but I think it exists predominantly for older armies

[MaxKool]

Wow, never thought IDE agree with Ty...

The lord/cryptic never looses his character status. He just isn't an independent character. When the last man in the unit dies the lord becomes a character again. This is how everliving works, he becomes a character again the second the last man in the unit is dead. He would then be able to make his el roll just like and IC. But would be unable tO join a unit again because characters are unable to onnce the game has started. hency u get some rules to join an el character should he stand up in range. So in effect u could prepare for the loss of the unit with cleaver maneuvering so the displaced character could join a new unit due to the everliving rules.

Looking at your guys interpretation of the rules, if an overlord joins the unit and it's a sipped out is he also now not allowed an el roll?

At my lgs we are playing it as we believe it was intended as the way it can be read it's a useless rule and we highly doubt they would dedicate so much text to something that will never be used In 99% of games.

[Angelofblades]

You still never lose your 'character' status.

Hahah! Retinues no longer exist so calling it retinue would vastly change the properties of the unit, eh? How does that work--- if there are no rules for retinues, how does calling it a retinue change the properties? Please explain this!

A retinue is:
A group of advisers, assistants, or others accompanying an important person.


That's all I am saying. Or am I not allowed to use vocabulary developed for important persons, like the Lord or Cryptek.
This does not remove the fact that a Lord or Cryptek is STILL a character. That's under their properties of the model.

In the context of the rules argument you are wrong. As Twilight Fade mentioned, a Retinue in 40k rules context is a unit that an IC can join, in which he can never be targeted in CC. The IC is also not allowed to leave the unit, and doesn't revert back to an IC until the entire unit is killed. Thus you are wrong, since this is initially a rules argument. You can reference Page 48 of the rulebook, under "Retinues,"


Wow, never thought IDE agree with Ty...

The lord/cryptic never looses his character status. He just isn't an independent character. When the last man in the unit dies the lord becomes a character again. This is how everliving works, he becomes a character again the second the last man in the unit is dead. He would then be able to make his el roll just like and IC. But would be unable tO join a unit again because characters are unable to onnce the game has started. hency u get some rules to join an el character should he stand up in range. So in effect u could prepare for the loss of the unit with cleaver maneuvering so the displaced character could join a new unit due to the everliving rules.

Looking at your guys interpretation of the rules, if an overlord joins the unit and it's a sipped out is he also now not allowed an el roll?

At my lgs we are playing it as we believe it was intended as the way it can be read it's a useless rule and we highly doubt they would dedicate so much text to something that will never be used In 99% of games.

The lord never stopped being a character. Open up your rulebook to page 47, you will see a whole section on "Characters," of which there are only 2 types. Everliving has no impact on changing the type of the model, you have incorrectly referenced that. Only Reanimation Prot has a particular statement that disallows characters as counting for RP purposes. You are also wrong in stating that a lord/cryptek becomes a character again if the unit they were joined to dies. They started as a character, and end as a character, they are, in effect a veteran sgt of the unit.

Per your question, if an Overlord joins a unit and they all die, the overlord is gone.

Your logic is flawed, in regards to how much text was used, it's clearly written as to how EL works. How can you know what the intent of the rule is, when the book isn't even a month old? Or are you basing your logic on a biased interpretation? From what is written, in EL, the intent is clear. In this case RAW=RAI.

What you need to do is stop looking at it as a wholly advantageous rule, and start looking at it for what it is, a restrictive rule. One that can help, but one that can hurt.

I really don't understand how this rule can be misinterpreted so easily when the wording is readily clear. There are criteria that must be met for EL to work, if a model with EL has joined a unit, it must be placed back into coherency with that unit, if you cannot place the model back for any reason, it is destroyed. That wording is straight from the rule! One cannot simply ignore part of the rule for their own advantage, if that were so, then people would play bolters as Assault 15, S10 Range infinite, AP1.

[MaxKool]

No, i just dont see where it says an character with everliving is dead if the unit is wiped. I dont see that anywhere.
THAT stuff isnt disqualifiers... its not saying that if the unit isnt there u cant place it.. u also are taking a leap of logic. It just says IF the unit IS there u must place it. But if because of anyreason u cant do THAT such as a consolodation move or similar.... then its dead. it dosnt say anything about if the unit is gone u cant place it... u are reading somthing that isnt there as well man.
And the overlord is totaly differant, He is always an IC and acts as one. He isnt part of the unit he is only attached to it. Big differance.

This rule becomes a total peice of garbage if you play it that way, with NO advantages. only disadvantages. Why even have everliving then?


And im not looking it as an advantages point, more of a WHATS the point.


Everliving is only an advantage if you do somthing STUPID like have a lord runing around solo. Any solo overlord should be on a barge.. there is virtualy NO good reason to run a character around solo. If you do u allready need to learn to play. So they put a rule in so if people do somthing strategicly stupid they have somthing to fall back on?

I see no point to everliving at all the way you interpret it.

Whatever... who cares... play it how u want.

[Archon Charybdis]

A question as someone without the codex, who's just been watching the thread. If the requirement on being placed in coherency would prevent attached Court members from coming back after their unit had been wiped out, why would they have the rule in the first place? At that point isn't it functionally identical to Reanimation Protocols, as a non-independent character can never leave the unit it was bought for (or in this case attached to at deployment)? Operating under the assumption that an Everliving model has to be removed if the unit it was attached to is no longer on the board, it would only ever matter for unattached IC Overlords, and would be irrelevant on the Court (beyond the basic functionality that Reanimation Protocols already provide).

[Angelofblades]

No, i just dont see where it says an character with everliving is dead if the unit is wiped. I dont see that anywhere.
THAT stuff isnt disqualifiers... its not saying that if the unit isnt there u cant place it.. u also are taking a leap of logic. It just says IF the unit IS there u must place it. But if because of anyreason u cant do THAT such as a consolodation move or similar.... then its dead. it dosnt say anything about if the unit is gone u cant place it... u are reading somthing that isnt there as well man.
And the overlord is totaly differant, He is always an IC and acts as one. He isnt part of the unit he is only attached to it. Big differance.

This rule becomes a total peice of garbage if you play it that way, with NO advantages. only disadvantages. Why even have everliving then?


And im not looking it as an advantages point, more of a WHATS the point.


Everliving is only an advantage if you do somthing STUPID like have a lord runing around solo. Any solo overlord should be on a barge.. there is virtualy NO good reason to run a character around solo. If you do u allready need to learn to play. So they put a rule in so if people do somthing strategicly stupid they have somthing to fall back on?

I see no point to everliving at all the way you interpret it.

Whatever... who cares... play it how u want.

You're not wholly serious about not seeing it in the rules are you?



If the model had joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, and the roll was passed, it must be returned to play, with a single Wound, in coherency with that unit as explained in Reanimation Protocols, e.g. return the slain model to play, placed in coherency with a model from its unit that has not itself returned through Reanimation Protocols this phase. If the model had not joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, it must be returned to play, with a single Wound, within 3″ of the counter. In either case, the model must be placed at least 1″ away from enemy models. If the model is placed in cohrency with one or more friendly units that it is eligible to join, it automatically joins one of those units (your choice). If the model was locked in close combat when it ‘died’, and the combat is ongoing, then it must immediately pile in. If the returning model cannot be placed, for whatever reason, it is lost and does not return. If the roll was failed, remove the counter from play

Here are the important parts for me:

"If the model had joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, and the roll was passed, it must be returned to play, with a single Wound, in coherency with that unit as explained in Reanimation Protocols, e.g. return the slain model to play, placed in coherency with a model from its unit that has not itself returned through Reanimation Protocols this phase."

"If the returning model cannot be placed, for whatever reason, it is lost and does not return."

The only time a model can stand up on it's own is if it never joined a unit, which is impossible for the Royal court since none are IC's and all have to join a unit. The only time an IC is solo is determined at the end of the movement phase OR in a command barge.

If you will notice, you are not given a choice, but to have the character re-join the unit it was with. It doesn't say MAY join, it says MUST join. The second to last sentence is what says, your model dies.

"If the returning model cannot be placed, for whatever reason, it is lost and does not return."

There it is, right there.

Also there is a reason EL exists. It's such that you roll separately for the model. If you notice, RP gives no distinction between different models. Meaning if that you could have a 10 man warrior unit with 5 tesla and 5 gauss, and you sustained 5 casualties, you're not required to distinguish between one or another. However EL forces you to distinguish this particular model.


A question as someone without the codex, who's just been watching the thread. If the requirement on being placed in coherency would prevent attached Court members from coming back after their unit had been wiped out, why would they have the rule in the first place? At that point isn't it functionally identical to Reanimation Protocols, as a non-independent character can never leave the unit it was bought for (or in this case attached to at deployment)? Operating under the assumption that an Everliving model has to be removed if the unit it was attached to is no longer on the board, it would only ever matter for unattached IC Overlords, and would be irrelevant on the Court (beyond the basic functionality that Reanimation Protocols already provide).

The wording of the rule covers aspects for "Characters," in general. As such there is wording in there that doesn't apply to a subset of "Characters," as it does another. The 2 subsets of "Characters," being IC's (Independent Characters) and UC's (Upgrade Characters).

[addamsfamily36]

Im pretty stumped on this one, but Heres a question for everyone:

If you take a court of say 5 necron lords, you don't share them out into other units but keep them together as a court, and all 5 go down, what happens?

not a single model "joined" the unit as they are a unit.

but they all have everliving.

[dannyat2460]

Im pretty stumped on this one, but Heres a question for everyone:

If you take a court of say 5 necron lords, you don't share them out into other units but keep them together as a court, and all 5 go down, what happens?

not a single model "joined" the unit as they are a unit.

but they all have everliving.

ah now that is a good point they havnt joined the unit if they start in it RAW EL should still work even if the entire squad is wiped out but once they have been nocked down do they count as joining the squad then?

[Archon Charybdis]

The wording of the rule covers aspects for "Characters," in general. As such there is wording in there that doesn't apply to a subset of "Characters," as it does another. The 2 subsets of "Characters," being IC's (Independent Characters) and UC's (Upgrade Characters).

My point being an upgrade Character can never be "unattached" from a unit. If the purpose of Everliving is only to work (or at least work differently from RP) for unattached IC's, why would Lords/Crypteks have it in the first place? For them it provides no additional benefit beyond the standard RP rule. It seems much more likely to me that EL, though perhaps poorly worded, is intended to let models make a roll regardless of the status of whether the rest of their unit is standing.

[dannyat2460]

My point being an upgrade Character can never be "unattached" from a unit. If the purpose of Everliving is only to work (or at least work differently from RP) for unattached IC's, why would Lords/Crypteks have it in the first place? For them it provides no additional benefit beyond the standard RP rule. It seems much more likely to me that EL, though perhaps poorly worded, is intended to let models make a roll regardless of the status of whether the rest of their unit is standing.

well as addamsfamily36 pointed out they havnt joined a unit if they stay part of the royal court so EL will work there

[Tynskel]

well as addamsfamily36 pointed out they havnt joined a unit if they stay part of the royal court so EL will work there

That's incorrect. They are part of a unit.

[Angelofblades]

My point being an upgrade Character can never be "unattached" from a unit. If the purpose of Everliving is only to work (or at least work differently from RP) for unattached IC's, why would Lords/Crypteks have it in the first place? For them it provides no additional benefit beyond the standard RP rule. It seems much more likely to me that EL, though perhaps poorly worded, is intended to let models make a roll regardless of the status of whether the rest of their unit is standing.

I disagree, I see the wording totally displaying the purpose of the rule for 5th ed. The rule is equivalrnt for IC's with units just as it is for upgrade characters. If you have an overlord or special character in a unit and the entire unit wipes, you loose all the models. Look at it this way. there is a price you pay for being better thqn a hidden fist. Although, I believe that there will be a change in the characters rule in 6th ed.

[addamsfamily36]

That's incorrect. They are part of a unit.

They are part of a unit yes, but the argument for everliving not working only occurs if you joined a unit and that unit was then wiped out. . As you could never "join" the unit in the first place, what happens?

[Angelofblades]

They are part of a unit yes, but the argument for everliving not working only occurs if you joined a unit and that unit was then wiped out. . As you could never "join" the unit in the first place, what happens?

It is arguable that they joined thei rown unit. That the court "joined" each other upon deployment, instead of joining other squads

[Luke Licens]

They are part of a unit yes, but the argument for everliving not working only occurs if you joined a unit and that unit was then wiped out. . As you could never "join" the unit in the first place, what happens?

If you want to argue the semantics of "Join" then clearly you pay the points for the model, and it joins the unit you bought it for. Some models, such as ICs and things like Lords/Crypteks/Wolfguard/Tyrantguard have special rules that allow them to join other units (Codex trumps rulebook, specific trumps general).

There, logic done. :cool:

Now, quick recap:

Lords and Crypteks have the Ever Living special rule, instead of Reanimation Protocols. This means that when they are killed, they get a special Ever Living token dropped down that specifically represents them. That token is rolled for seperately than regular Reanimation Protocols rolls, because it is for that charater specifically.

If Cryptek Jimmy gets killed, a single specific die roll lets just him stand back up, whether he's leading a unit of Immortals, or playing second fiddle in the Court of the Multi-Colored Staffs. This counter is for Jimmy, Harbinger of Destruction and Taxes, this counter is for Lord Bob the Warscythe-keteer, this counter is for Wilhelm von Harp'o'Dissonance, this one for Orb Caddy Percival, and this one is for Angval the Jiggly, Tremorstaver Extrordinaire.

Now, they all get slaughtered in the same phase. Even if they ALL pass their Ever Living rolls, there's no one from their unit for them to stand back up in coherency with that wouldn't also have stood back up this phase by passing their roll (as required in EL/RP), so they all get beamed back up to the mothership and put in timeout. End of story. :D

[Nachodragon]

So, was re-reading the WD with the Necrons and this exact scenario with Imotekh in a group of Lychguard were slaughtered. What is said in the WD:
"Like all Necron characters, Imotekh has the Ever-Living special rule, allowing him to self-repair even when the rest of the unit has been utterly destroyed."

Case closed, Ever-living characters (overlord, ICs, lord, and Crypteks) get to roll Reanimation Protocols even when the unit they were attached to has been decimated into a molten slag.

[Angelofblades]

So, was re-reading the WD with the Necrons and this exact scenario with Imotekh in a group of Lychguard were slaughtered. What is said in the WD:
"Like all Necron characters, Imotekh has the Ever-Living special rule, allowing him to self-repair even when the rest of the unit has been utterly destroyed."

Case closed, Ever-living characters (overlord, ICs, lord, and Crypteks) get to roll Reanimation Protocols even when the unit they were attached to has been decimated into a molten slag.

LAWL. Seriously?

You do realize how many times they make mistakes on rules?

They had a WD BR where it was IG vs Tyranids iirc. The IG player Scouted with a Vendetta but moved in such a manner that he came to within 12" of an enemy unit.

Also I called GW up and spoke to Matt Ward, he apologizes for the mistake in the WD battle report

BWAHAHAHAHAH!

WD battle report...

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Nachodragon]

I don't realize how many times there have been mistakes as I am a new to the hobby and game.

Though, I would say this is a specific rule and in this instance is pretty cut and dry. This is not a mistake of 'oh, I forgot this unit doesn't have that rule/ability' and more of a 'this is what I am doing because the rule is new and I made the rule' type of scenario.

They can sure change this is in the FAQ but I am going to go by the WD because I feel that is what they actually meant with this rule and so does the group I play with. So, interpret and play how you will with your group and when the FAQ comes out we will see what they meant by their horribly complicated written rules.

I can only hope someday GW will realize a simple rule is better than a complicated rule. But given how long this company has been around and this is what they are putting out, that hope is very small.

[Necropolis]

Sorry to shift gears here, but I have a question along the lines of the initial posting. Was hoping someone could help me out.

Can a group of Lords and Crypteks from one Royal Court exist by themselves as an individual unit? I'm assuming no. Does this change if they are in joined with the HQ? I.e. Can I put 5 Crypteks and 5 Lords into a unit with the HQ?

Thanks! Sorry if this is a dumb question. I'm not well versed with the rules.

[Nachodragon]

The royal court is essentially forming a unit with the Overlord IC. So, yes, you can take an Overlord and have 5 lords and 5 crypteks in a unit. I am not sure if the Overlord could leave the unit though. I believe other 'courts' in other codices (Tau and Tyranid) are not able to leave the unit but I could be wrong on that.

[dannyat2460]

The overlord can leave at any time (in his movement phase) as he is an IC, hive tyrants are not IC and as such are a unit with the tyrant guard

[Necropolis]

Thanks! Would be interesting to take a unit of Crypteks with lances, put them on a Ghost Ark and give them Tank Hunters with Nemesor. Risky though since they are a huge target.

[gamblerselite]

What you fail to read is the last paragraph of reanimation protocol which would leave the court member alone as his own unit

[Necron2.0]

Now, they all get slaughtered in the same phase. Even if they ALL pass their Ever Living rolls, there's no one from their unit for them to stand back up in coherency with that wouldn't also have stood back up this phase by passing their roll (as required in EL/RP), so they all get beamed back up to the mothership and put in timeout. End of story. :D

Actually, they all get back up, and go immediately back into coherency with one another. If you want to sequence it out, it would go "Lord A gets up. His unit is dead. He consolidates where he is. Lord B gets up, and goes into coherency with his unit (Lord A). Lord C gets up and goes into coherency with his unit (Lords A & B). Lord D gets up ..., etc, etc, etc."

Any character with "Ever Living" always gets to role for reanimation, whether they are alone, in a royal court or leading a bunch of girl scouts. That was the point of making "Ever Living" distinct from Reanimation protocols. Those who want to make it situational depending on where they are, what units they're with and what color underwear they're wearing on a Friday of the full moon are rules lawyers who should be slathered with KY and thrown to same-sex Slaanesh cultists. There is much from the Necron Codex that was ill conceived and lacking ... this is not one of those things. I don't know why this argument has gone on as long as it has. It is chillingly, mind-numbingly simple to understand.

[Necron2.0]

The royal court is essentially forming a unit with the Overlord IC. So, yes, you can take an Overlord and have 5 lords and 5 crypteks in a unit. I am not sure if the Overlord could leave the unit though. I believe other 'courts' in other codices (Tau and Tyranid) are not able to leave the unit but I could be wrong on that.

Actually, the Overlord cannot leave the court. That's spelled out on page 48 of the core rulebook, as the court falls under the "retinue" rules. Since the rules for a royal court do not specifically state the Overlord can leave, he cannot.

As for the original poster's question on whether or not you can put more than one Cryptek/Lord in a given unit, that's probably something you'll end up having to dice for with your opponent. It falls under the "questionable rule" rule. Sure, there's nothing specific that says you cannot do it, but since the rule for courts say the Cryptek/Lord is leading the given unit, it is arguable that a unit cannot have more than one leader, just as there's only ever one space marine sergeant in a squad.

[Nachodragon]

I'll have to check my Necron book when I get home but I don't believe this is a retinue. If I am remembering correctly it is just a unit that can only be taken if you have an overlord type character. The individual crypteks/lords can be broken off to lead another unit and if they don't they stay with the royal court. I don't remember reading the overlord needing to stay with said Royal Court.

[Angelofblades]

The royal court isn't a retinue, and doesn't follow the rules for retinues at all. There are only a few "true" retinue units in the game, and none of them are found in the Necron codex. An Overlord can choose to leave or join a royal court at will.

[Necron2.0]

:rolleyes:

I'm not sure why I bother, because the problem is obvious, but ....

From the core rules:


Retinues
Some Codex books allow you to field characters together with a special unit that they cannot leave during the game (which is normally called a 'retinue', 'bodyguard' or similar).


Synonyms for "retinue" are: court, posse, homies, crew, droogs, entourage, followers, sycophants, toadies, stooges, etc, etc, etc.

[Angelofblades]

*sigh*

You should bother, so that you may learn your place, fool.

Did clearly notice the LACK of the RETINUE rule from the Necron codex?

For that rule to take effect, it must be LISTED in the unit's special rules, or have wording equivalent to Tau bodygaurd and Honor Guard.

Last I checked, it's clearly missing.

[Necron2.0]

:D

It's called "reading comprehension." Learn it. Love it. Nice talking to you. I have a suspicion you won't be allowed on here for very much longer.

[SeattleDV8]

The royal court is not a retinue any more than a command squad is.
It is an HQ unit (that doesn't count towards FOC) that can be taken for each Overlord taken in the army.
The overlord never has to be joined to the court.
There may not even be a 'royal court 'unit at all, in that each member can be joined to other units.

[Tynskel]

is someone confusing the Necron Lord with Overlord? Because the Necron Lord follows the 'retinue' rules.

[Necron2.0]

Exactly right. Again, this isn't even an argument. It's in black and white on page 48 of the 5th edition Core rules. Any special unit fielded with an IC, that can only be fielded as an adjuct to the IC, IS a retinue. That means Necron Courts are a retinues, the Court of an Archon is a retinue, Marine Honour Guards, Marine Command Squads ... any special unit that can only be fielded attached to an Independent Character is a retinue. Again, mind-numbingly simple and straight forward.

Slaanesh's minions are going to be exhausted tonight it seems.

[SeattleDV8]

Necron lords are not IC's , they are more like upgrade characters, especially when farmed out to other units.
As upgrade characters the cannot be singled out in CC and can never leave the unit, but as they are not IC they don't revert to IC's, Similar to a retinue but not quite the same.
Totally wrong Necron 2.0, none of those are retinues.
Nowhere in the overlord , the SM chapter master, SM captain and the like is there a requirement for that model to be joined with the unit it keys.
They are not retinues.
Commander Shadowsun ( her drones), Commander Farsight, Aun'va, and a Crisisbattlesuit Commanders(all with bodyguards) in the Tau Codex are examples of a retinue.
The retinue rule was from older codices, none of the 5th ed ones have units that follow that rule.
It's an old rule that is being phased out.
The closest a modern codex comes is the Space Wolves and the Fenrisian Wolves, but even those have been declared wargear and not a retinue.


Q. Do Fenrisian Wolves bought as wargear by an
Independent Character act as a Retinue during an
assault? (p31)
A. No – the Independent Character may still be singled out
even though his Fenrisian Wolves are still alive. For
example, a unit of Blood Claws is joined by a Wolf Lord
with two Fenrisian Wolves as wargear. In an assault, the
enemy would be able to direct his attacks towards three
separate targets – the Blood Claws, the Wolf Lord, or the
Fenrisian Wolves.

[Necron2.0]

Totally wrong Necron 2.0, none of those are retinues.
Nowhere in the overlord , the SM chapter master, SM captain and the like is there a requirement for that model to be joined with the unit it keys.
They are not retinues.

Nope. Although, this is a source of ongoing (and apparently perpetual) nerd rage. A little research shows there are equal numbers of opinions saying they are retinues as there are those saying they're not, and nothing in the FAQs clarifies this. This is yet another ambiguous dicing situation.

[Rapture]

Space Marine Command Squads are not retinues.

No dice required.

[Necron2.0]

Space Marine Command Squads are not retinues.

No dice required.

Actually, you are correct ... in that no dice are required, I mean.

This is the description from GW's website, about the Space Marine Command Squad box set:


Command squads accompany high-ranking Space Marine officers on the field of battle. Most Captains fill their retinues with Space Marines in whom the bloody skills of combat are matched by a tactical and strategic brilliance. Service in a Command squad undoubtedly seeds promotion within the Chapter - its members fighting in the most gruelling of battles against the most terrible of foes.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1050238

I was willing to give it some latitude for individual interpretation, but apparently I don't have to.

[Tynskel]

ah, but, does the Space Marine Captain/Necron Overlord, ect, lose its IC status when attached to the command squad? No. The rules do not state this (They explicitly did, however, in the 4th edition codex for space marines!).

The command squads are not retinues for the IC they were bought for.

How about Mephiston? Mephiston explicitly states that it is a unit of one, not an IC, and yet for purchasing him, you can take an honor guard.

The command squad is a separate unit. Not a retinue. The models within the unit, itself, are 'retinue', and cannot be picked out.

[Rapture]

Actually, you are correct ... in that no dice are required, I mean.

This is the description from GW's website, about the Space Marine Command Squad box set:



http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1050238

I was willing to give it some latitude for individual interpretation, but apparently I don't have to.



Maybe I am missing that this is a joke. Are you seriously referencing the GW website's fluff description to prove your argument?

You are making an outrageous claim that no reasonable person (who has done any amount of reasonable research) could believe.

[MaxKool]

IF they are a retiune(spelling) THEN the overlord can never be singled out in CC wich is not how anyone plays it.

The Retiune rule is a left over from 4th and older and has no place in current 40k outside of fluff text OR entries that still have it.

NO where in the nectron codex is it worded like that, In fact they are refered to as a UNIT.


A court is just a unit. nothing more.

[SeattleDV8]

Indeed , fluff does not equal rules.
In order for the units in question to be treated as retinue's they would have to have in their Army list entries , under Special Rules the word (rule) 'Retinue'.
None of the Units have this rule, so regardless of fluff descriptions they are not retinues.
Hmmm , you know there may be one unit in a modern Codex that is treated as a retinue.
I'm not 100% sure of the wording but if a Hive Tyrant or a Swarmlord joins a unit of
Tyrant Guard I believe they follow the retinue rules.
Could someone check that please.

[Wildeybeast]

I'm not 100% sure of the wording but if a Hive Tyrant or a Swarmlord joins a unit of
Tyrant Guard I believe they follow the retinue rules.
Could someone check that please.

I just checked for you and they are not. I believe they were in the old codex, but no mention of it in the current one. They have the shieldwall rule, which lets a tyrant join them as if he were an IC (despite being an MC), but they do not form a retinue. You simply take a unit of them if you have a tyrant, same as SM command squads.

[SeattleDV8]

Ah, thanks, I wasn't sure about that.
I knew they had similar rules from the 'Nid FAQ

Q: If a Hive Tyrant or the Swarmlord joins a unit of
Tyrant Guard, is it treated as an Independent Character
for the purposes of resolving shooting attacks (i.e.
independent characters who are monstrous creatures
can be targeted separately from the unit) and assaults
(i.e. independent characters always count as separate
units in an assault)?
A: No.
Q: Can a Hive Tyrant or the Swarmlord choose to leave
a unit of Tyrant Guard once it has joined them?
A: No.

[Angelofblades]

I have erased this post. If you would like to try to post again, I submit that starting your post with an insult is probably not the best course. Though you do get some points for starting and ending the post with insults; I appreciate symmetry.

[Tynskel]

I have erased this post. If you would like to try to post again, I submit that starting your post with an insult is probably not the best course. Though you do get some points for starting and ending the post with insults; I appreciate symmetry.

Awww...

Why don't I get that kind of lovely treatment...

[Necron2.0]

Indeed , fluff does not equal rules.

True enough. The actual rule is "Some Codex books allow you to field characters together with a special unit that they cannot leave during the game (which is normally called a 'retinue', 'bodyguard' or similar)." The point is, those who say a command squad isn't a retinue have been interpreting the rule incorrectly. The ruling isn't "if it is a unit the IC cannot leave, it is a retinue." Rather, it is "if it is a retinue, then the IC cannot leave it." I referenced the fluff as indicative of the games designer's intent. If the producers of the game refer to the Command Squad as a retinue, then the retinue rule must surely apply. The preponderance of evidents indicates the CS is a retinue.

Again, this isn't a new controversy. A smidge of research shows this is something of a raging debate. Of course, given that 6th ed is less than a year away, largely this is a moot point.

[Nachodragon]

That's what everyone has been saying, but none of those units are a retinue. There would be a specific rule stating the unit is a retinue. For an example look at the Tyrant guard Blind Rampage rule:
"If a Hive Tyrant is killed whilst part of a unit of Tyrant Guard, the surviving Tyrant Guard immediately gain Furious Charge..."

This rules is states the Hive Tyrant does not have to be part of the unit, cause if it is not, then the Tyrant Guard doesn't get this rule. This is not a Retinue. It has no Retinue rules. The Tyrant Guard is a unit that can only be included if you have a Hive Tyrant and does not take up an HQ choice. That is it. Same for a Royal Court and without looking at the rest of the codices, I would suspect the others are the same.

Everyone is telling you this is a holdover from a previous edition. Find one codex that has a true Retinue with a Retinue rule. Since not all books are released when a new ruleset is released they have to include rules for those older books, as evidenced by the most recent Necron release, I believe that book was from 2002 or 2003.

[Nachodragon]

More fuel to the fire to finally kill it. Look at Aun'Va from the TAU. His entry CLEARLY states the group with him is a Retinue. This is pretty much the only one that is out there and will be changed (most likely) in 6th and whenever they have a new book, or maybe not as Aun'Va sucks, but they make him better.

"Honour Guard: Aun'Va is always accompanied by a ceremonial retinue of two honour guards, the entire group counting as a unit and as a single HQ choice."

The underline portion is missing from those entries you say are actually retinues. While in the fluff they may actually be a retinue, in the game, they are not.

[Skari]

What is the general thought? I like the -D3 charge range cryptec in a unit with a phaeron overlord. If taking a second overlord for a second unchargable unit, what would your secondary cryptec be in each unit? Ir would you run lords.

[Nachodragon]

I like the Storm Crypteks myself. They have the 4 shot st5 Haywire staff which is pretty spiffy. Plus, if you find yourself actually being charged bring the lightning field or whatever it is called. D6 St8ap5 hits to the assaulting unit. Whittle em down before they get to you.

Or, a Veil Cryptek to try and place your blob of glancing death somewhere that it can be useful. Played one game with 20 and a phaeron. Took too many turns before the unit was useful. Granted I had another game that I rolled horribly and mishapped the group to death. Though, that was really bad placement on my part.

Only other one I would take would think about would be Destruction and grab the Gaze of Flame. Having those defensive grenades could prevent enough attacks to allow more or your guys to survive.

OR, take a necron lord with mindshackle and warscythe. Give the enemy pause when assaulting. They don't want 2 of their own guys hitting their own unit (cause at 15 why would you not take mindshackle on the overlord too).

There are too many options. Though, the -D3 assault move is overrated in my book. Can be nice when it works but if someone wants to assault you they will. Giving up shooting and running to you will pretty much nullify it. But again, it is situational, if it works then you have another turn to fire 40 shots in their face and hopefully melt said faces.

[Tynskel]

The -D3 to assault works if you combine it with the tremor staff, and tesla weapons.

you have 24" range (36" for the staff). Back pedal. Shoot and hit your opponent, they are now in difficult terrain (which you could combine with that dangerous terrain power...). Slowed movement there. Then with your backpedaling, and slowed movement, then now take -D3 on the assault. It works quite well. If you manage to stay at the ~12" range, your opponent will have a hard time reaching you.

[Nachodragon]

As long as the Tremorstave doesn't scatter... and they can roll 6's for movement. So, I still think it is fairly situational.Though, I tend to play aggressively, which is probably why I have lost a number of games.

Also, not sure about Tesla myself, could be the environment I play, but I find that the glancing on vehicles to be more important then a couple of extra hits on infantry. At least with immortals. I love the Annihilation barge, so cheap and effective. But that is off topic even more than half of this thread.

[SeattleDV8]

True enough. The actual rule is "Some Codex books allow you to field characters together with a special unit that they cannot leave during the game (which is normally called a 'retinue', 'bodyguard' or similar)." The point is, those who say a command squad isn't a retinue have been interpreting the rule incorrectly. The ruling isn't "if it is a unit the IC cannot leave, it is a retinue." Rather, it is "if it is a retinue, then the IC cannot leave it." I referenced the fluff as indicative of the games designer's intent. If the producers of the game refer to the Command Squad as a retinue, then the retinue rule must surely apply. The preponderance of evidents indicates the CS is a retinue.

Again, this isn't a new controversy. A smidge of research shows this is something of a raging debate. Of course, given that 6th ed is less than a year away, largely this is a moot point.



Sorry, but one fluff quote is hardly a "The preponderance of evidents(evidence)" you're claiming.
Nothing in any of the aformentioned units have any rules that would support your idea.
Yes, it's not new , it's been debunked time and time again.
Fluff does not equal rules.

[Demonus]

Im becoming more of a fan of the Storm crypteks. I had one in a unit of 7 Lychguard, with Nemessor Z, and a ms/scythe/orb regular lord.

I was charged two separate times by 10 Khorne Berserkers. First time, lightning field killed 3 marines, lychguard and lord killed another 6 and the last died to fearless wounds. I lost 1 lychguard.

Second time (2 turns later) the second group of Berserkers charged, lighting field killed 2 of them, my unit killed another 6 and I lost 2 LG.

Against Berserkers and stuff like Dark Eldar or Assassins, its huge to take out the attackers before they even strike. That saved me 4 attacks each from the marines.

[thecactusman17]

True enough. The actual rule is "Some Codex books allow you to field characters together with a special unit that they cannot leave during the game (which is normally called a 'retinue', 'bodyguard' or similar)." The point is, those who say a command squad isn't a retinue have been interpreting the rule incorrectly. The ruling isn't "if it is a unit the IC cannot leave, it is a retinue." Rather, it is "if it is a retinue, then the IC cannot leave it." I referenced the fluff as indicative of the games designer's intent. If the producers of the game refer to the Command Squad as a retinue, then the retinue rule must surely apply. The preponderance of evidents indicates the CS is a retinue.

Again, this isn't a new controversy. A smidge of research shows this is something of a raging debate. Of course, given that 6th ed is less than a year away, largely this is a moot point.



There is indeed a rule in your quote about retinues. It is that part about being with a "special unit they cannot leave." That is an actual rule in some 3rd and 4th edition books, written into the unit and character entries. It is not a part of any 5th edition codex. With perhaps the exceptions of Tau and maybe the two remaining 4th ed Space Marines books (templars and dark angels, whose rules I am not very familiar with) there are no codexes that contain this rule any longer. The last codex I played that still had this rule was Sisters of Battle, who could buy such a retinue for their Palatine and Canoness HQ choices, and their Inquisitors who bought acolytes as a supplemental collection of models.

Nothing prevents, say, an Eldar player from getting a Farseer and a Warlock squad, and running them separately. Nor the Necron Royal Courts, the Space Marine Honor Guard, the Dark Eldar royal courts, etc.

[Rapture]

The preponderance of evidents indicates the CS is a retinue.

Again, this isn't a new controversy. A smidge of research shows this is something of a raging debate. Of course, given that 6th ed is less than a year away, largely this is a moot point.


No.

A smidge of research also shows that there is something of a raging debate whether or not evolution occurred or prehistoric man rode dinosaurs Flintstone-style. Just because there are some people desperately clinging to a stupid idea doesn't grant said idea even the smallest amount of credibility.

You either need to go dig for (non-existent) real proof or stop spreading that idea.

[Tynskel]

There is indeed a rule in your quote about retinues. It is that part about being with a "special unit they cannot leave." That is an actual rule in some 3rd and 4th edition books, written into the unit and character entries. It is not a part of any 5th edition codex. With perhaps the exceptions of Tau and maybe the two remaining 4th ed Space Marines books (templars and dark angels, whose rules I am not very familiar with) there are no codexes that contain this rule any longer. The last codex I played that still had this rule was Sisters of Battle, who could buy such a retinue for their Palatine and Canoness HQ choices, and their Inquisitors who bought acolytes as a supplemental collection of models.

Nothing prevents, say, an Eldar player from getting a Farseer and a Warlock squad, and running them separately. Nor the Necron Royal Courts, the Space Marine Honor Guard, the Dark Eldar royal courts, etc.

There is the Tyranid Codex. That's the only one that I am aware of that is 5th edition.

[Nachodragon]

Not even them. I posted some information about this on page 8 of this thread. The only Retinue I could find was in the Tau.

[Skari]

Tau, and Black templars.

[Tynskel]

Not even them. I posted some information about this on page 8 of this thread. The only Retinue I could find was in the Tau.

no, the Hive Tyrant may not leave the brood of tyrant guard. This is the only 5th edition codex that has the retinue rules.

Black Templars and Tau are 4th edition.

[Nachodragon]

OK, had to re-read the FAQ for Tyranids. They FAQ the Tyrant Guard to be a Retinue without saying Retinue. Though, I don't think you have to put the Hive Tyrant with them, but once you do they are attached until death does them part. New FAQ stuff

Page 35 – Tyrant Guard, Shieldwall, second paragraph
Change the first sentence to “A single Hive Tyrant
(including the Swarmlord) may join a unit of Tyrant
Guard during deployment exactly as if it were an
Independent Character.”

[Necron2.0]

Heh. So ... so, the only retinues that exist in 5th edition are those found exclusively in 4th edition codices, eh? Some here are actually attempting to claim that, with a straight face, and expect everyone to take them seriously?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM-G0bkl8MQ

:D

[Nachodragon]

Facts are facts, and trolls are trolls. Thank you for showing that you can cover your ears and go lalalalalalalalalalalala so you don't hear the truth. If you have something relevant and factual to post please do. But refusing to believe something after it has been proven is just silly, immature, and just trying to argue for arguments sake.

for something relevant I am going to play a seismic crucible and Lightning field in two groups of 20 warriors with a phaeron this weekend. So, we'll see how that goes.

[thecactusman17]

Heh. So ... so, the only retinues that exist in 5th edition are those found exclusively in 4th edition codices, eh? Some here are actually attempting to claim that, with a straight face, and expect everyone to take them seriously?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM-G0bkl8MQ

:D



Actually, we noted one outlier exception that has ben created by the new tyranids codex. Note that the faq only specifues that you MAY attach the tyrant guard, not that you have to. It also is not an interaction between a unit and an independent character, one our the specific elements of a retinue. The tyrant could not become an IC after the unit dies, he would just become a regular monstrous creature. So even then, it is not a retinue by the rulebook, just the spirit. A real retinue makes an IC lose their ic rule.

[SeattleDV8]

Heh. So ... so, the only retinues that exist in 5th edition are those found exclusively in 4th edition codices, eh? Some here are actually attempting to claim that, with a straight face, and expect everyone to take them seriously?
Easier than trying to claim fluff for rules.
To prove your point show where any of the units mentioned have the special rule 'Retinue', or even rules that mirror the Retinue rules like the 'Nid Codex.
Yes , the rule exists in the BRB, but it does not in the Necron or SM Codex.
Without that you are just making things up.

[Archon Charybdis]

It's also worth pointing out that in the blue book ERRATA, they actually remove the word "retinue" from the description of Command Squads and Honor Guard on page 103, and replace it with "an extra HQ unit". S'not a retinue brah.

Also, the Eldar FAQ makes it clear that the Farseer and his "extra HQ unit" of warlocks are two separate units and not a retinue. Admittedly, an FAQ from a different codex isn't always 100% applicable, but there is no substantive difference between the rules for a Warlock squad vs a Command Squad: "For each Farseer in the army, you may include a squad of 3-10 warlocks... This unit and the Farseer are a single HQ choice." and "You may take one Command squad for every Space Marine Captain... This unit does not count against your HQ allowance."

[SeattleDV8]

Oh, good catch Archon.
Well, even the fluff is gone now, I think we can nail this shut....(as long as Tynskel doesn't join in....heh)

[Tynskel]

Oh, good catch Archon.
Well, even the fluff is gone now, I think we can nail this shut....(as long as Tynskel doesn't join in....heh)

Hey,
I still stand by my words: the Tyrant Guard act as a retinue, *IF* you join the tyrant to the guard brood.

Hugs, Kisses, and Love.

-Tynskel

[SeattleDV8]

HA!...Yeah I bought that up back in post #60 something.
Thats a good example of the kind of rules you need for it to be a real 'retinue'.

[VSzeus]

I think the Lord/Cryptek can get back up when their squad is wiped out because of this

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2170012a_Necron_FAQ_Version_2_0_January_2012.pdf.


Last paragraph of page one.

I have not seen this mentioned here so I thought I would post it link it ( hope we are allowed to do that on this site)
If this is not legit I appoligize, but EL would make no sense unless it worked that way (They should be able to get back up by them selves)

Good heated debate however.

Cheers
Zeus

[Nachodragon]

So, I played two 20 man warrior, Overlord (war, MindS, SepW, Phaeron, res orb) with transmogrification and Storm Cryptek with Seismic Crucible and Lightning Field.

The Lightning Field is awesome. Destroying guys before they can attack is great. Seismic crucible is still not awesome. Thought, I did setup bad, had I place more guys in terrain it may have helped more. Also sucked that my opponent rolled really well with mindshackle scarabs, didn't get one chance to have my opponent kill themselves.

Voltaic staves are just plain sick. Especially when you fire 40 gauss shots at a vehicle and finish off with 4 more glaces. I glanced a vehicle to death, woot!