If a necron model with reanimation protocols/ever-living with a maximun toughness of 5suffers a wound caused by a say demolisher cannon (S10 AP2) does it instantly die or does the bastard still get a chance to get up? I´ve been checking the codex and there doesn´t seem to be an answer. There also doesn´t seem to be any invulnerable saves on any model. Am I reading something wrong? There doesn´t seem to be much need for any inv. saves though...

RP and Everliving don't give two darns for instant death, power weapons, AP2, or any of that.

Wraiths are a prominent unit which has invulnerable saves. Lychguard with Shields do too. And an Overlord can take one with wargear.

On page 26 of the brb it says "it is killed outright and removed as a casualty." In the Necron faqs it says "Q: If a model carrying a resurrection orb is removed as
a casualty, can you still benefit from it when rolling for his, and his unit’s, Reanimation Protocol rolls that phase? (p82) A: Yes."

But, anything that removes it from play without taking a wound, it cant come back from.

So the answer to your question is yes, it can come back from an instant death.

Some people play it that RP/EL works against abilities that remove from play. Some people don't. This is a gray area and it has been debated too many times in this forum. Let's not repeat all the arguments one more time. Bottom line is there is no GAP. Check with your gaming club how it handles this situation.

Damn. Necrons got really hard to kill and without the phase out...how ae you supposed to kill them???

Remember that if you kill lets say all the immortals in a unit, even if a cryptek survives/rolls EL, those immortals are dead and gone. So focus fire...

copper.talos wrote:Remember that if you kill lets say all the immortals in a unit, even if a cryptek survives/rolls EL, those immortals are dead and gone. So focus fire...

This is mostly right....The only times that a Necron unit cannot make their RP role is if the unit fell back or if it was wiped to a man. As for EL, there is not a single way in the game to prevent this. What is wrong about this statement is that a Cryptek that joins a squad is part of that squad - even an IC that joins is part of the squad. There is no way to leave only one man standing to prevent RP/EL. The remaining model that remains does not matter.

Honestly, the best way to get rid of them are either the unreliable method of just unloading a ton of shots and just pray for failed RP/EL
OR
Take AP3 or better weapons and that is what you focus on the trouble unit. There is only 2 models (not counting named - of which there is 3) that can even have a 2+ (Overlords and Lords). It is tougher than it sounds most time, but you also have to look that you are fighting against not only failing saves but also failing reanimation.

Amaraxis wrote:

copper.talos wrote:Remember that if you kill lets say all the immortals in a unit, even if a cryptek survives/rolls EL, those immortals are dead and gone. So focus fire...

This is mostly right....The only times that a Necron unit cannot make their RP role is if the unit fell back or if it was wiped to a man. As for EL, there is not a single way in the game to prevent this. What is wrong about this statement is that a Cryptek that joins a squad is part of that squad - even an IC that joins is part of the squad. There is no way to leave only one man standing to prevent RP/EL. The remaining model that remains does not matter.

Honestly, the best way to get rid of them are either the unreliable method of just unloading a ton of shots and just pray for failed RP/EL
OR
Take AP3 or better weapons and that is what you focus on the trouble unit. There is only 2 models (not counting named - of which there is 3) that can even have a 2+ (Overlords and Lords). It is tougher than it sounds most time, but you also have to look that you are fighting against not only failing saves but also failing reanimation.

Nope. The Cryptek does not count as part of the squad for the purposes of RP. Kill all of the immortals and leave the cryptek standing, then the cryptek will be forever alone.


"Note that characters do not count as part of the unit for the purposes of reanimation protocols" 5ed cron dex, pg29

Overlords, Crypteks, Destroyer Lords and Lords are all characters, and as such can only stand up by themselves if the unit they were attached to is destroyed.

True, but because the Crypteks and Lords count as being part of the unit for all purposes during that game (like Wolf Guard), they will preserve the Kill Point (or half VPs for the unit) if they do stand up. Lost two KPs to this yesterday, in a tight game.

arent lords IC? if the unit they are attached to dies, dont they revert to being an IC, and you gain a KP by wiping the squad? (the attached character if killed would generate a second kP)

Lords are not ICs. Overlords are ICs.

Scratched my first question, the codex specifically states that characters do not count as part of the unit for the purposes of RP. So only my second question remains...

It's a question about the Royal Court in general that just sprang up in my mind through this thread. Let's say I am fielding a Court of 2 Lords and 2 Crypteks (numbers of Lords and Crypteks irrelevant, just an example). I place the Lords in 2 different units. I know I can split the Crypteks and put them into units as well. I can also leave them together as the Royal Court unit.
Logically, I can also put one of them in a unit and leave the last of them alone as the Court unit. Right?
And lastly, can I separate them and leave them operating independently from each other AND keep BOTH out of units?

Input much appreciated!

angelshade00 wrote:Wait a second though... I just checked my codex and the Lord's and Cryptek's types are Infantry (Character). So rules taken into account, once the squad of Immortals gets killed off, they should revert to being independent characters and the Immortals would not get their Protocols. I am very interested on hearing your opinions on this.

They can't revert to being independant characters, they where never indepentant characters in the first place. They can't just gain the rule.

They're upgrade characters, so even if the rest of the squad is whiped out, they're still part of that squad (just the last member). They can't then join others.

Characters are unique, special, upgrade AND independent. Just because you are a character doesnt mean you are an IC

You can also kill EL models by standing over their corpse - they have to get back up within 3" of the token, nd more than 1" away from an enemy model.

Sweeping advance kills EVERYTHING in a unit, including an EL token, and does not allow E: / RP rolls to be made

grendel083 wrote:

angelshade00 wrote:Wait a second though... I just checked my codex and the Lord's and Cryptek's types are Infantry (Character). So rules taken into account, once the squad of Immortals gets killed off, they should revert to being independent characters and the Immortals would not get their Protocols. I am very interested on hearing your opinions on this.

They can't revert to being independant characters, they where never indepentant characters in the first place. They can't just gain the rule.

They're upgrade characters, so even if the rest of the squad is whiped out, they're still part of that squad (just the last member). They can't then join others.

You're right I double-checked and confirmed it. Thanks.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Characters are unique, special, upgrade AND independent. Just because you are a character doesnt mean you are an IC

The latter part is right, but I think the phrasing you want for the first part is more like "AND/OR", rather than AND. The latter implies that all characters have all of those characteristics, when what you mean is that they may have any or all.

nosferatu1001 wrote:You can also kill EL models by standing over their corpse - they have to get back up within 3" of the token, nd more than 1" away from an enemy model.

Yup, though as it's 3" from the edge of the counter, and the counter most people use is a 25mm base, you usually need several models (at least 5 25mm ones, IIRC) to do it. I tried doing it with a Dreadnought yesterday and my opponent pointed out that the 60mm base isn't big enough.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Sweeping advance kills EVERYTHING in a unit, including an EL token, and does not allow E: / RP rolls to be made

Darn it; I forgot about that.

5 40mm termi bases are good enough (3 times today...)

The remark about sweeping advances to wipe out the counters seems incorrect. Can you please provide a quote in the rules where it says that?
Also page 29 of the necron codex says after all morale checks have been taken and fall back moves made. Can you shoot at EL counters if you wipe the command squad? For example, you have an overlord, and two lords. In the shooting phase, you shoot down all three. There are now three counters. Can you continue to shoot at them and "kill" the counters? I dont think so, I may be wrong. Also, because that unit lost more than 25% of the squad (actually, 100%), does it have to make a morale check? I dont think so, they are all gone. Consolidation moves are made after fall back moves right? If thats the case, you cant just walk over the counters. If you surround the unit, sure, it may not be able to come back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, how large does a counter have to be? If it were me, and i were playing a serious game, I would probably use a base as a counter, and measure three inches from that.

P40 Sweeping Advance wrote:The destroyed unit is removed immediately. Unless otherwise specified, no save or other special rule can rescue the unit at this stage; for them the battle is over.

I think that's the quote they meant.

Oh yeah. Unless otherwise specified. Cool, so, EL specifies.

If the EL model was killed prior to the SA, you would have an argument. However, Sweeping Advance does not remove the model as a casualty, so you would not be able to place an EL counter.

So the quick answer to my question is that all necrons are bastards and it´s pretty much impossible to kill them with anything but a massive wall of firepower...

Bastards? That's uncharacteristic for necrons. "Technological constructs of unknown origin" is more like them

Basimpo wrote:Oh yeah. Unless otherwise specified. Cool, so, EL specifies.

No, it doesnt. Where does it specify it works against Sweepign Advance? I'll give you a hint - it needs to say it works against Sweeping Advance otherwise it doesnt. See ATSKNF for an example of what specify actually means.

A general statement, which is all EL / RP is, is not specific by definition.

To continue this topic because I do not own the codex, if I shoot a unit and several die, and the unit falls back due to loss of 25%, are the markers lost or do they get a chance to reanimate?

You would have to ask this directly to someone with a codex.
Not being rude, but that is a rule in the codex and giving an answer like this is against forum rules.

As long as it is clearly stated in the codex. I played Necrons for the first time this weekend, and the guy I played was not really forth coming with letting me see his codex.

Then dont play him, until he does.

jbunny wrote:As long as it is clearly stated in the codex. I played Necrons for the first time this weekend, and the guy I played was not really forth coming with letting me see his codex.

It's a shame he won't let you at least look at a rule you don't have or need clarified.

Just ask him to show you page 29. The answer is the last sentence of the first paragraph.

The shame is that GW didnt even update the reference sheets they have on their site. The Necron sheet is still the one from the old codex.

And I agree, don't play him. If he won't help with a codex, I can only imagine how helpful he would be with a rule question.

Happyjew wrote:If the EL model was killed prior to the SA, you would have an argument. However, Sweeping Advance does not remove the model as a casualty, so you would not be able to place an EL counter.

If the unit is destroyed by Sweeping Advance, you may place EL counters. Here's the relevant FAQ.

Q: If an entire unit, including an attached character
from a Royal Court, is wiped out, do you get to make
any Reanimation Protocol rolls? (p29)
A: You would only get to make one roll for the
attached character as he has the Ever-living special rule.
Note that in this case, he must be placed within 3" of
the counter as his unit has been wiped out.

ND, in order to place an EL token, the model MUST be removed from play AS A CASUALTY. Sweeping Advance does NOT remove the model from play AS A CASUALTY. Therefore, no EL token may be placed.

If the EL model was killed PRIOR to the Sweeping Advance, you would have an argument on being able to roll for the EL token. But, you cannot come back (except possibly St. Celestine) from SA.

Happyjew wrote:ND, in order to place an EL token, the model MUST be removed from play AS A CASUALTY. Sweeping Advance does NOT remove the model from play AS A CASUALTY. Therefore, no EL token may be placed.

If the EL model was killed PRIOR to the Sweeping Advance, you would have an argument on being able to roll for the EL token. But, you cannot come back (except possibly St. Celestine) from SA.

There are many parts to this all which can blur the issue.
A IC dies and then the unit is swept.
A IC is alive and the unit is swept.
Is RFPaaC the same as RFP.
Is SA a permanent effect or is it a action that the unit does.

1) Sweeping Advance is an action that is done by the assault winning unit. The SA rule limits the effect to "at this stage" meaning while the unit is doing the SA action. The model may not be saved at that time, but at the end of phase is not "at this stage". You roll for EL after SA is done, after consolidation, and after all other combats are done. The game is no longer "at this stage".
2) A token is placed when the IC dies, no matter how it dies. See the EL FAQ. The FAQ just says "wiped out" not "wiped out as a casualty. It doesn't make any mention of RFP. So there is no difference from RFPaaC. The unit of 2 may have just been wiped out by JotWW. It doesn't matter. You place a token.
3) At the end of phase the model with EL may roll to come back. It's not longer the same "stage" the model died in so SA does not stop it from "being saved" or coming back. That combat is over already. That combat winning unit must be more than 1" away in any case.

There are people who will argue against this, but I don't understand how other than pure stubbornness, it isn't clear. EL can work after SA.

Nemesor Dave wrote:1) Sweeping Advance is an action that is done by the assault winning unit. The SA rule limits the effect to "at this stage" meaning while the unit is doing the SA action. The model may not be saved at that time, but at the end of phase is not "at this stage". You roll for EL after SA is done, after consolidation, and after all other combats are done. The game is no longer "at this stage".

"at this stage" does not mean what you think it does. It means from here on out. Just like in normal English.

2) A token is placed when the IC dies, no matter how it dies. See the EL FAQ. The FAQ just says "wiped out" not "wiped out as a casualty. It doesn't make any mention of RFP. So there is no difference from RFPaaC. The unit of 2 may have just been wiped out by JotWW. It doesn't matter. You place a token.

100% false - you should probably check the EL rules - to place a token you must have been RFPaaC.

There are people who will argue against this, but I don't understand how other than pure stubbornness, it isn't clear. EL can work against SA.

You've stated facts without backing them up with real rules. That's why people disagree with you.

You know that special rule "Ever Living", the one that is trying to Save the Unit? You dont get to use it.

Your argument that SA is "point in time" and that EL gets past this is bunk, as was proven previously - EL occurs at the end of the phase; WBB occured at the start of the next turn yet you still didnt get to roll for WBB - it was in fact the canonical example of a special rule that didnt work, as evidenced by the 4th ed rule book.

Please dnot start up your entirely illogical, unsupported by anything other than your imagination argument that somehow you get around Sweeping Advance with EL / RP because you were proven wrong every time previously, and you have nothing new to add here. Its a waste of everyones time.

EL/RP do not, ever, save a unit from Sweeping Advance, because the EL / RP rules do not specify that they can save the unit. This is as RAW as it gets, and is unarguable from a logic perspective (which isnt to say you wont try to argue it, just that your argument has no basis in rules)

If you accept that RFaaC and RFP (Removed From Play) are two separate and distinct 'things' (i.e., clearly defined game mechanics), then I don't see how EL can save a model from a Sweeping Advance.

What Sweeping Advance cannot do is remove an EL token that has already been placed prior to the Sweeping Advance happening.

These are not contradictory statements.

1.) EL model is 'killed' in Assault (Removed from play as a Casualty).

2.) EL token is placed.

3.) Necron unit loses Assault and fails the Morale check.

4.) RP (NOT EL) tokens are removed.

5.) Necron unit fails the Init test and is swept. The unit is wiped out. 'Live' models are Removed from Play.

The only thing you are left with is an EL token. At the end of the Assault phase the Necron player now has a chance to roll for EL.

What folks here seem to miss is that this roll is not, in any way shape or form, a response to the Sweeping Advance. It is not a save. The EL token/marker was legitimately generated and is not affected by a Sweeping Advance. Heck the other RP tokens (if there were any) are not affected by a Sweeping Advance. It's the failed Morale check that removes them. The only thing in the game that directly affects RP/EL tokens are failed Morale checks (RP), blocked placement (RP & EL), and completely destroying the unit (RP).

A Necron player has to take a gamble during the assault. If they think they'll get Swept (which being Necrons is usually a good bet) and try to kill off the Lord thereby getting the EL roll, or do they try to get his Warscythe attacks off before being Swept and lost for good.



-Yad

This argument (sweeping advance versus RP or EL or used to be WBB or miraculous intervention or whatever else) continues to come up from time to time.

It still comes down to a simple item.

SA says "Unless otherwise specified, no save or other special rule can save the unit..." so the special rule must specify that it works or that something happens instead of being destroyed.

Prime example, space marines ATSKNF:

"If Space Marines are caught by a sweeping advance, they are not destroyed..."

See how the special rule specifies what it does against sweeping advance?

Do either RP or EL even mention sweeping advance? No, they don't. So that special rule does not specifically save them from sweeping advance.

Maybe a future errata or FAQ will say "If the Necrons are caught by a sweeping advance, roll for the EL counter as normal."

Maybe. But for now, they do not.

Yad - so, when you Save the unit, by Saving a member of the unit, how are you doing so?

If you say "with a special rule" then you have broken the rules of Sweeping Advance, because neither EL nor RP specify they work against Sweeping Advance specifically

Your entire argument fails at this point, and has been (and will continue to be) demonstrated false.

I was REALLY hoping to avoid this debate. Hence the reason why I said, that if the EL model is killed prior to SA there is an argument (and there is regardless).
I'm unsure why I'm being told that you can place an EL counter when the model is removed via SA, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Happyjew wrote:I was REALLY hoping to avoid this debate. Hence the reason why I said, that if the EL model is killed prior to SA there is an argument (and there is regardless).

Happyjew wrote:I'm unsure why I'm being told that you can place an EL counter when the model is removed via SA, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Yeah, don't quite get that one myself.

-Yad

@time wizard: EL doesn't stop the Sweeping Advance from happening. The unit swept was wiped out. Additionally, EL is not a save that is rolled in response to a Sweeping Attack. Meaning, you don't roll for EL in order to prevent SA. Each rule can be fully executed without contradiction. Because you haven't gotten rid of the EL token that was placed prior to the Sweep Attack you now have to resolve it at the end of the Assault phase after the SA has been resolved..

Yad wrote:Because you haven't gotten rid of the EL token that was placed prior to the Sweep Attack you now have to resolve it at the end of the Assault phase after the SA has been resolved..

But you're still trying to use a special ability to rescue a unit destroyed by SA.

Correct?

People saying EL(/WBB) can recover from SA again?




But it still doesn't work.

Yad wrote: @time wizard: EL doesn't stop the Sweeping Advance from happening.

Correct.

Yad wrote: The unit swept was wiped out.

Also correct.

And nothing in the EL rule gives you permission to still roll for the counter after the unit was swept. And that's what you need.

There is no getting around the "Unless otherwise specified..." unless in the rule (EL, RP, etc) it is...um...er...otherwise specified!

kirsanth wrote:awesum pictar

I missed that one in my perusal of the internet. Thanks!

I try to keep links to interesting ones that look like that could be useful here.

I think 6th edition will simplify all deaths, removed from play, removed as casualty etc. as the same thing, until then just roll of if things get complicated.

And a tip for beating necrons, remember, none of us are fearless(except preatorians but they suck) and we strike last, so a multi-assault, focus fire and/or everything and the kitchen sink will make us run away (and we dont have ATSKNF so we dont rally well) or stay dead for good.

Exalted Pariah wrote:And a tip for beating necrons, remember, none of us are fearless(except preatorians but they suck)

...and C'tan...and scarabs...and wraiths...and spyders...


...but yes, aside from that nothing is fearless

Maelstrom808 wrote:

Exalted Pariah wrote:And a tip for beating necrons, remember, none of us are fearless(except preatorians but they suck)

...and C'tan...and scarabs...and wraiths...and spyders...


...but yes, aside from that nothing is fearless

But C'Tan, Scarabs, Wraiths and Spyders are NOT Necrons and do not get a RP roll. Which (RP/EL) are what this thread is all about...

Bah, details...






(good point though )

The only thing removing an Ever Living Token is a failed roll against it or covering the 3" bubble around the token at the time of reanimation. If a full unit is swept and contains a Character with the Ever Living rule, that model would be unable to take advantage of the EL token. The Unit is removed not the model and nothing can save a unit from sweeping advance unless specifically addressed. However, if the EL token was placed prior to a sweep there is nothing in the rules that would cause it to be removed by a sweeping advance.

NecronLord3 wrote: However, if the EL token was placed prior to a sweep there is nothing in the rules that would cause it to be removed by a sweeping advance.

Except maybe the fact that the EL rules do not specificaly say that the EL counter can remain on the table after the unit has been caught in a sweeping advance.

That's the point. The sweeping advance rule doesn't have to address any special rule in any codex. Quite the opposite.

The special rule in the codex must specifically address what happens to the unit, model or army caught by a sweeping advance, just like the marines ATSKNF rule.

RP and EL do not address sweeping advance at all. You therefore have no permission to leave the counter on the table after the unit has been caught in a sweeping advance.

That doesnt specifically say for sweeping advance, which is what it would need to say to be allowed to do it. The rules for sweeping advance are very clear about this.

Once the EL model goes down it is out of play. Sweeping advance removes units. An EL model is only part of the unit if the unit exists when the EL model is returned to play. If the unit does no longer exist the EL model gets up within 3" of the EL token. Sweeping advance removes units per the BRB. The only thing that removes EL tokens is a failed RP roll or being unable to return to play within 3" of the EL token per RAW of the Necron codex. Sweeping prevents you from placing the EL token but has no effect if the token existed before the sweeping advance was made.

But the BRB, which trumps the necron codex, says very clearly 'no save or special rule can save them" from being removed immediately, "for them the battle is OVER"

The only way around this is if something specifically say it specifically counters this rule....like ATSKNF

The model has already been removed as a casualty. It's dead, sweeping advance can't make it more dead or remove it again. It is gone, off the board and out of the game. The EL token is placed to remind you to make a roll at the end of the phase, and the position of the fallen EL warrior. Two permissions are given to remove EL tokens, sweeping advance isn't one of them.

Q: If an entire unit, including an attached character from a Royal Court, is wiped out, do you get to make any Reanimation Protocol rolls? (p29) A: You would only get to make one roll for the attached character as he has the Ever-living special rule. Note that in this case, he must be placed within 3" of the counter as his unit has been wiped out.

I see what you are saying but sweeping advance destroys the unit. The "dead" model is still linked to that unit, and the noone in the unit can be saved by special rule unless stated explictly.

I do see where the grey area is though.

The dead model is not linked to the unit at all. It's dead already. The EL counter is placed on the table (and not on the unit like an RP counter) so sweeping advance doesn't affect it. At the end of the phase, after sweeping advance has been resolved you roll for reanimation protocols and follow the rules from there.

kirsanth wrote:People saying EL(/WBB) can recover from SA again?
But it still doesn't work.

WBB instead of removing the model from play, the model was turned on its side to show where the model could come back and rolled for at the beginning of the next necron turn. This is why when SA "removed from play" and JotWW "removed from play" it prevented the WBB roll. The model that served as the counter was removed. Some people believed this was because the "as a casualty" line, but I believe it was just that the model was removed. Strictly played by RAW, WBB should never have worked because in the case of any dead model they should have been removed.

EL works differently. The EL model is RFP and a counter is placed. The necron codex referes to the model as RFP. The FAQ says when the unit is wiped out - place an EL counter. So now, it doesn't matter that JotWW removes the model from play. Its the counter that allows the model to roll to come back. There is no rule that removes EL counters or prevents them from allowing a roll to return to play.

Ah ND, selectively ignoring rules again.

it says you place a counter when the model is removed as a casualty.

Oddly enough despite being reminded of this you keep forgetting it, over and over and over....

nosferatu1001 wrote:Ah ND, selectively ignoring rules again.

it says you place a counter when the model is removed as a casualty.

Oddly enough despite being reminded of this you keep forgetting it, over and over and over....

Where does "as a casualty" come into it? "As a casualty" is fluff.

From the latest Necron FAQ:
Q: If an entire unit, including an attached character
from a Royal Court, is wiped out, do you get to make
any Reanimation Protocol rolls? (p29)
A: You would only get to make one roll for the
attached character as he has the Ever-living special rule.
Note that in this case, he must be placed within 3" of
the counter as his unit has been wiped out.

If there were two ways the unit could be wiped out, it would be mentioned here.

As a casualty is fluff now? I forget, you get to redefine / ignore words in the middle of a rule when they destroy your argument.

Lol, you just get worse

Oh, and still doesnt affect Sweeping Advance, which ignores EL and RP.

nosferatu1001 wrote:As a casualty is fluff now? I forget, you get to redefine / ignore words in the middle of a rule when they destroy your argument.

Lol, you just get worse

Oh, and still doesnt affect Sweeping Advance, which ignores EL and RP.

Is this supposed to be a response to my quoting the FAQ and all other reason and evidence I've shown?

Instead of responding to the individual point, you instead accuse me of not being consistent and then move on to make some unsupported statement about some other part of the rule.

If there is anything someone can see from my history on this board is that I do my best to support my statements consistently and from RAW.

1) You like to ignore words / part phrases that destroy your a rgument - "distance" and "as a casualty" are just a couple of your most recent efforts. Your history on this board is a complete failure to argue actual rules, instead preferring your own made up version which has no basis in the written word and betrays a dishonest approach to arguing

2) The rule requires you to have been removed as a casualty in order to place a token. Jaws removes you from Play, not as a casualty. So you dont get to place a token. Your "response" to this is to declare that "as a casualty" is fluff - right in the middle of the rule You have no actual rules basis for sayingt his, of course, but then this isnt a shock.

3) Sweeping advance entirely ignores EL and RP, because neither EL and RP specify they work aginst SA. So yes, there is more than one way for a unit to be wiped out, and this is the more specific situation than the FAQ.

nosferatu1001 wrote:1) You like to ignore words / part phrases that destroy your a rgument - "distance" and "as a casualty" are just a couple of your most recent efforts. Your history on this board is a complete failure to argue actual rules, instead preferring your own made up version which has no basis in the written word and betrays a dishonest approach to arguing

Your entire argument on "distance" is based on a method of measuring (in a circle to show coherency) that is not described anywhere in the rules. It's completely fabricated. Yet you claim I am not referencing actual rules?

I have shown many times clearly that "as a casualty" is fluff. BRB p. 24 defines what the rule mean by "casualty". It means "not necessarily dead". That can only be fluff as models are not actually alive. The sad fact is that the entire RFP vs RFPaaC is pushed by Space Wolves players trying to make JotWW remove models in some special way NEVER defined by the BRB. In EVERY instance in the BRB removal of a model also uses the fluff term "as a casualty" with the true in game effect - removal.

At this point I don't expect an objective response from you in any case.

Nemesor Dave wrote:The sad fact is that the entire RFP vs RFPaaC is pushed by Space Wolves players trying to make JotWW remove models in some special way NEVER defined by the BRB.

False. Please apologize. a) I'm not a Space Wolves player, and likely never will be. b) I've been one of the bigger proponents of RFP != RFPaaC. c) I do my best to not inject bias into any rules argument.
Accusing me otherwise without proof isn't very polite.

The definition of casualty in the rules (last paragraph on page 24) is fluff. The phrase "removed from play as a casualty" is not fluff.

Whether or not any model in a unit is removed as a casualty or removed from play has no bearing on sweeping advance.

When a unit is swept, it is destroyed. The entire unit. And it is destroyed at that point. So any rule that might take effect at the end of the phase can't help the unit either.

And again, sweeping advance requires that an army's special rule must specify that it ignores sweeping advance.

I see the points people are arguing about, but feel like I may have missed something.

If a unit is swept it's destroyed. No tokens placed, no way of saving them.

In order to be swept the necrons have failed their moral test so any RP tokens already placed are removed.

If an EL model is killed in close combat (a powerfist to the face for example), a EL token is placed.

What I'm missing is how the sweep removes the already placed token. Is the token specifically part of the unit, and so must be removed?

It doesn't. That token stays on the table. SA only affects the unit .

grendel083 wrote:What I'm missing is how the sweep removes the already placed token. Is the token specifically part of the unit, and so must be removed?

SA destroys the unit, and nothing can bring the unit back unless it explicitly specifies it works vs SA.

Bringing an EL model from the unit back is bringing the unit back.

So the token stays - you can even roll for it if you want - but actually bringing the model back is prevented.

time wizard wrote:Whether or not any model in a unit is removed as a casualty or removed from play has no bearing on sweeping advance.

When a unit is swept, it is destroyed. The entire unit. And it is destroyed at that point. So any rule that might take effect at the end of the phase can't help the unit either.

And again, sweeping advance requires that an army's special rule must specify that it ignores sweeping advance.

I agree, for a unit to stay in combat and not be killed or removed and combat to continue, a special rule must specify it ignores SA.

Whether a EL model may place a token when swept is not always important. If a model with EL is killed before the end of combat certainly there can be a token already placed. SA does not remove these tokens.

Isn't sweeping advance an action taken by the unit and why would SA say "at this stage" if it was meant to be "forever"?

If consolidation occurs after sweeping advance, what prevents the model from coming back at the end of the combat phase?

Regardless of anything else, "at this stage" does not mean "unless you can do something after this."

Nemesor Dave wrote:Isn't sweeping advance an action taken by the unit and why would SA say "at this stage" if it was meant to be "forever"?

Because that's what "at this stage" means in this context.
Until there's something that changes the state (and the SA rules say that whatever does change the state has to specify SA) "at this stage" is the same as "from here on out" or "forever".
It's not a single point in time.

rigeld2 wrote:

grendel083 wrote:What I'm missing is how the sweep removes the already placed token. Is the token specifically part of the unit, and so must be removed?

SA destroys the unit, and nothing can bring the unit back unless it explicitly specifies it works vs SA.

Bringing an EL model from the unit back is bringing the unit back.

So the token stays - you can even roll for it if you want - but actually bringing the model back is prevented.

This makes sense, my confusion was assuming EL was a rule for Independant Characters.

Would the same apply in this case? The IC was not destroyed by the sweep (but by close combat). Returning the IC model would not bring the unit back (if the unit an IC joins is destroyed, he reverts back to being an IC, free to join other units).

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:The sad fact is that the entire RFP vs RFPaaC is pushed by Space Wolves players trying to make JotWW remove models in some special way NEVER defined by the BRB.

False. Please apologize. a) I'm not a Space Wolves player, and likely never will be. b) I've been one of the bigger proponents of RFP != RFPaaC. c) I do my best to not inject bias into any rules argument.
Accusing me otherwise without proof isn't very polite.

The definition of casualty in the rules (last paragraph on page 24) is fluff. The phrase "removed from play as a casualty" is not fluff.

Sorry, I should not say SW players, but certainly the wording of the SW codex can be blamed. The action you make - the thing you do, is remove a model. Do you remove a model differently as a dead, missing in action, or as burned to a crisp?

Certainly I only "remove models" from the table.

An IC is only treated as a separate unit when close combat attacks are resolved. After that, the IC is again treated as a normal member of the unit.

And SA destroys the unit.

Nemesor Dave wrote:Sorry, I should not say SW players, but certainly the wording of the SW codex can be blamed.

If that was the case, then the wording would only exist in the SW codex. I'm pretty sure that's not the case.

The action you make - the thing you do, is remove a model. Do you remove a model differently as a dead, missing in action, or as burned to a crisp?

Yes - that is the action you take. That is not the rules effect of you taking that action. The rules treat RFP differently from RFPaaC.

If the IC dies before the SA, it is removed from play. All ties to the unit are severed at that point. The unit swept may not come back but an IC rolling succesfully EL forms its own unit (and this unit never got swept in the 1st palce).

copper.talos wrote:If the IC dies before the SA, it is removed from play. All ties to the unit are severed at that point. The unit swept may not come back but an IC rolling succesfully EL forms its own unit (and this unit never got swept in the 1st palce).

So if the IC has an orb, it does not effect the unit? (ignoring SA for a moment, let's say he died from shooting)

kirsanth wrote:Regardless of anything else, "at this stage" does not mean "unless you can do something after this."

I understand "at this stage" to mean at a specific time in the game and SA is an action that is done and finished before the unit does anything else.

In fluff terms, the winner of combat scours the battlefield crushing the life out of anything left.
Consolidation means they gather together and move off the area.
At the end of phase occurs after all this action is over bits and pieces of the EL guy reanimate.

Certainly if Celestine can come back it works no differently for necrons.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

kirsanth wrote:Regardless of anything else, "at this stage" does not mean "unless you can do something after this."

I understand "at this stage" to mean at a specific time in the game and SA is an action that is done and finished before the unit does anything else.

And that's not how the phrase is normally used.

Certainly if Celestine can come back it works no differently for necrons.

Celestine has an FAQ allowing it. Do Necrons?

rigeld2 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:If the IC dies before the SA, it is removed from play. All ties to the unit are severed at that point. The unit swept may not come back but an IC rolling succesfully EL forms its own unit (and this unit never got swept in the 1st palce).

So if the IC has an orb, it does not effect the unit? (ignoring SA for a moment, let's say he died from shooting)

An IC cannot leave a unit in the shooting or assault phase (think this answers my earlier question, he is tied to the unit).

Unless being killed counts as leaving a unit? (a stupid question for anyone other than necrons)

Orb has the wording and a faq to make it work for an IC and his unit. And that is because it affects how the RP and EL rules resolve.

@grendel083 if something is removed from play how can it be affected by something in play?

grendel083 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:If the IC dies before the SA, it is removed from play. All ties to the unit are severed at that point. The unit swept may not come back but an IC rolling succesfully EL forms its own unit (and this unit never got swept in the 1st palce).

So if the IC has an orb, it does not effect the unit? (ignoring SA for a moment, let's say he died from shooting)

Unless being killed counts as leaving a unit? (a stupid question for anyone other than necrons)

That's how I read copper's assertion, and why I'm asking for clarification.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

copper.talos wrote:Orb has the wording and a faq to make it work for an IC and his unit. And that is because it affects how the RP and EL rules resolve.

@grendel083 if something is removed from play how can it be affected by something in play?

It isn't. The unit is.

Nemesor Dave wrote:
Your entire argument on "distance" is based on a method of measuring (in a circle to show coherency) that is not described anywhere in the rules. It's completely fabricated. Yet you claim I am not referencing actual rules?

Lol. Your entire argument ignored that word "distance" and tried to claim that every single time you measure ANYTHING in 40k it is base to base. When confronted with how totally and utterly wrong this was - measuring distance for a units move - you ignored it and continued on pretending that the word "distance" did not exist. You not only made up rules, you entirely ignored words AND rules when given to you.

You have one consistent thing - you lie about rules. All the time.

Nemesor Dave wrote:I have shown many times clearly that "as a casualty" is fluff. BRB p. 24 defines what the rule mean by "casualty". It means "not necessarily dead". That can only be fluff as models are not actually alive.

Wrong. As has been shown to you - but yet again you like to make up rules, so arguing you with is pointless. Correcting your posts and pointing out that you have zero credibility when arguing rules, so others arent taken in by your made up gak, is the only reason I respond to your posts.

Nemesor Dave wrote: The sad fact is that the entire RFP vs RFPaaC is pushed by Space Wolves players trying to make JotWW remove models in some special way NEVER defined by the BRB.

Bzzzzzzzt. I guess you havent read the DE codex either - or is this now a conspiracy by DE players as well? Anyone else you would like to insult while you're here? Apologies all round I would suggest.

Nemesor Dave wrote:At this point I don't expect an objective response from you in any case.

I've already given objective answers, multiple times. You make up rules, lie about existing rules, and ignore inconvenient words and phrases as you see fit in the vain hope people will be taken in by your arguments. We're not.


Fact: Sweeping Advance removes any and all EL or RP models that are members of the unit. Downed models awaiting EL rolls are still members of the unit - ICs or not. Copper of course has no rules to back up his idea that unit ties are severed when the EL model is downed (and is in fact contradicted by the Necron codex, pointing out that the EL toek model is still joined to the unit, but thats yet another inconvenient fact) so this can be safely ignored as unsupported opinion.

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

kirsanth wrote:Regardless of anything else, "at this stage" does not mean "unless you can do something after this."

I understand "at this stage" to mean at a specific time in the game and SA is an action that is done and finished before the unit does anything else.

And that's not how the phrase is normally used.

Of course a FAQ like Celestines one way or another would solve this.

Do you know of any other place that "at this stage" is used?

Nos - you've gone way overboard on this. The lack of civility and accusations not to mention demanding proof from others while providing none of your own are beyond reasonable.

Nemesor Dave wrote:Of course a FAQ like Celestines one way or another would solve this.

Do you know of any other place that "at this stage" is used?

In 40k's rules, no - I don't think so.
In common English - http://idioms.yourdictionary.com/at-this-stage

copper.talos wrote:Orb has the wording and a faq to make it work for an IC and his unit. And that is because it affects how the RP and EL rules resolve.

Right here you found the key to the lock.

Orb works for an IC and his unit. So even though the IC is nothing more than a counter on the board, it is still part of the unit.

If it is part of the unit for the res orb, then it is part of the unit for SA.

And SA.....destroys.....the.....unit.

Be careful Time, your relentless application of actual rules and logic may actually get through this time...

rigeld2 wrote:

grendel083 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

copper.talos wrote:If the IC dies before the SA, it is removed from play. All ties to the unit are severed at that point. The unit swept may not come back but an IC rolling succesfully EL forms its own unit (and this unit never got swept in the 1st palce).

So if the IC has an orb, it does not effect the unit? (ignoring SA for a moment, let's say he died from shooting)

Unless being killed counts as leaving a unit? (a stupid question for anyone other than necrons)

That's how I read copper's assertion, and why I'm asking for clarification.

From what I can tell the only time an IC can leave a unit is in the movement phase. No mention of being dead counted, so even if being brought back by EL on his own he would still count as being part of the (now destroyed) unto until his next movement phase (which is disallowed by the sweep).

And seriously, can you lot flinging insults at each other take it somewhere else. Any resolution of the original question is just being buried under a mountain of bitching.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Be careful Time, your relentless application of actual rules and logic may actually get through this time...

One can always hope so!

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:Of course a FAQ like Celestines one way or another would solve this.

Do you know of any other place that "at this stage" is used?

In 40k's rules, no - I don't think so.
In common English - http://idioms.yourdictionary.com/at-this-stage

There are a couple different ways "at this stage" is defined in your link. It could mean the SA step, or the Assault Phase. I see what you're saying and it could be read either way.

ND - but your entire argument is betrayed by the fact WBB never worked - and it saved the unit even later, the next Necron turn.

You are trying to save the unit. You have to break a rule, SA, to do so.

You are *still* wrong. Shock.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:Of course a FAQ like Celestines one way or another would solve this.
Do you know of any other place that "at this stage" is used?

In 40k's rules, no - I don't think so.
In common English - http://idioms.yourdictionary.com/at-this-stage

There are a couple different ways "at this stage" is defined in your link. It could mean the SA step, or the Assault Phase. I see what you're saying and it could be read either way.

I disagree - the context of SA makes it read similar to "I'm not sure if you can help at this stage, but perhaps you can pitch in later."
Perhaps you can save the unit later - but you need explicit permission to do so. EL does not provide explicit permission.

time wizard wrote:

copper.talos wrote:Orb has the wording and a faq to make it work for an IC and his unit. And that is because it affects how the RP and EL rules resolve.

Right here you found the key to the lock.

Orb works for an IC and his unit. So even though the IC is nothing more than a counter on the board, it is still part of the unit.

If it is part of the unit for the res orb, then it is part of the unit for SA.

And SA.....destroys.....the.....unit.

EL specifically states that if the unit is destroyed, the model with EL may come back within 3" of the token. The FAQ supports this. At the end of the phase, the EL model has left the unit which invalidates your assertion.

The reason is because res orb is wargear that works while the model is dead and has it's own exceptions so unfortunately can't be used to clear this up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:Of course a FAQ like Celestines one way or another would solve this.
Do you know of any other place that "at this stage" is used?

In 40k's rules, no - I don't think so.
In common English - http://idioms.yourdictionary.com/at-this-stage

There are a couple different ways "at this stage" is defined in your link. It could mean the SA step, or the Assault Phase. I see what you're saying and it could be read either way.

I disagree - the context of SA makes it read similar to "I'm not sure if you can help at this stage, but perhaps you can pitch in later."
Perhaps you can save the unit later - but you need explicit permission to do so. EL does not provide explicit permission.

For a unit to survive SA and stay in combat "at this stage" it must be like this:
1) SA - you may not help now.
2) ATSKNF - you may help now.

EL - if you take stage to mean at this step:

1) SA - you may not help now.
2) EL - you may help later.

There is no contradiction so explicit permission is not required.
This of course relies on you understanding "at this stage" to mean for the duration of SA and not for the whole phase.

Nemesor Dave wrote:
EL specifically states that if the unit is destroyed, the model with EL may come back within 3" of the token. The FAQ supports this. At the end of the phase, the EL model has left the unit which invalidates your assertion.

The reason is because res orb is wargear that works while the model is dead and has it's own exceptions so unfortunately can't be used to clear this up.

IC cannot leave a unit during the assault phase. Being dead is no excuse.

Edit: this also explains why the Orb works, he's still part of the unit.

ND making rules up wrote:
At the end of the phase, the EL model has left the unit which invalidates your assertion.

The IC or otherwise has no permission to leave the unit until the movement phase, not assault. Your assertion is still invalid, as you are back to making up rules again.

Try again.

grendel083 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:
EL specifically states that if the unit is destroyed, the model with EL may come back within 3" of the token. The FAQ supports this. At the end of the phase, the EL model has left the unit which invalidates your assertion.

The reason is because res orb is wargear that works while the model is dead and has it's own exceptions so unfortunately can't be used to clear this up.

IC cannot leave a unit during the assault phase. Being dead is no excuse.

Edit: this also explains why the Orb works, he's still part of the unit.

The necron codex disagrees completely. EL states if the model with EL comes back within coherency with two units you may choose which one to join. In other words, it can leave the unit it was part of and join another unit. Unless of course you take the third option and claim it can be part of two units at the same time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
From necron codex p29 under EL "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)."

The idea that a IC may never leave a unit unless in its movement phase is proven false by this. Note, this can also happen in the shooting phase.

Nemesor Dave wrote:
The necron codex disagrees completely. EL states if the model with EL comes back within coherency with two units you may choose which one to join. In other words, it can leave the unit it was part of and join another unit. Unless of course you take the third option and claim it can be part of two units at the same time.

A good point, but that implies that at the point of returning it can leave/join units. Until it returns you don't get the option.

If it can't return, it can't choose to join/leave units.

Edit for clarity

I always took '...at this stage' in the SA rules to mean anytime after a SA was performed. Not a specific instance in time. I think that is a correct reading of the SA rules.

Given that the unit is destroyed by SA, nothing can reconstitute that unit.

Given that the IC is still attached to the unit via the EL token, returning the EL token returns the unit (violating the SA prohibition).

There are really only 2 ways to break down this line of reasoning. The first is the EL token is not a part of the unit, the second is that 'stage' in the SA rules refers only to the exact moment you pickup your unit and make a sad face.

I do not think either of these points can be shown explicitly in the rules.

Arguing the first point (EL token is not part of the unit) would necessitate giving up a KP when the unit is destroyed and every single time an EL character is swept.

Arguing the second point has more potential, but is a specific reading of the SA rule that attributes timing parameters to the game that are not generally applied in the rules. It is, overall, a much weaker argument than the one suggesting (even through the fluff narrative) that a Swept unit cannot function as a cohesive fighting body for the remainder of the game.

Nemesor Dave wrote: For a unit to survive SA and stay in combat "at this stage" it must be like this:
1) SA - you may not help now.
2) ATSKNF - you may help now.

SA - You are destroyed now, but might come back later if you're allowed to.
ATSKNF - loljk - we aren't running, we want to keep stabbing.

ATSKNF completely overrides the SA rule. There is no "at this stage" because if they lose the initiative roll off, ATSKNF skips the entire thing and just applies No Retreat saves.

EL - if you take stage to mean at this step:

Yes - but based on how the sentence is phrased, that's not the way to take it.

This of course relies on you understanding "at this stage" to mean for the duration of SA and not for the whole phase.

If by "phase" you mean "ever" that's exactly what it does mean.

rigeld2 wrote:ATSKNF completely overrides the SA rule.

Yes, it does. Which is another good point.

It overrides SA because it specificaly says that if the marines are caught in a sweeping advance they are not destroyed.

Nowhere in RP or EL do you find the words "sweeping advance" so there is no specific override, so the unit is destroyed.

The entire unit including attached characters. They are still part of the unit, as evedenced the the res orb FAQ.

When GW has anything to say about time or phases they usually say so - immediately, at the start of, in this X phase and so on. IMO the "at this stage" in the SA rule refers to the fact that you've been swept, not when it happened.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

ND making rules up wrote:
At the end of the phase, the EL model has left the unit which invalidates your assertion.

The IC or otherwise has no permission to leave the unit until the movement phase, not assault. Your assertion is still invalid, as you are back to making up rules again.

Try again.

Sorry. the EverLiving rules and FAQ seem to totally disagree with you.

Try again.

NecronLord3 wrote:Sorry. the EverLiving rules and FAQ seem to totally disagree with you.

Um, no - they don't.
Nothing in the Ever Living rules or FAQ says that the model leaves the unit.

rigeld2 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:Sorry. the EverLiving rules and FAQ seem to totally disagree with you.

Um, no - they don't.
Nothing in the Ever Living rules or FAQ says that the model leaves the unit.

Don't agree.


If the EL roll is passed and the model is placed within coherency of one or more friendly units you get to choose which unit the model joins. Because you can roll for EL at the end of every phase it is possible that an EL model can join a different unit at the end of any phase (given the right conditions). So if there are two units within range (Units A and B) and the EL model originally was part of unit A, when you return the model you could choose to have it join unit B. By necessity you would have to leave unit A. You can't be a member of both units.

-Yad

My reading of that part of the rule is for IC's who are not part of a unit. So in your example, the IC is not eligible to join Unit B as it is a part of Unit A. If the IC was not a member of Unit A or B, then he could join either one.

NecronLord3 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

ND making rules up wrote:
At the end of the phase, the EL model has left the unit which invalidates your assertion.

The IC or otherwise has no permission to leave the unit until the movement phase, not assault. Your assertion is still invalid, as you are back to making up rules again.

Try again.

Sorry. the EverLiving rules and FAQ seem to totally disagree with you.

Try again.

Ever Living allows an IC to join a different squad (in effect leave the old one) when returning to play. But this is when it returns to play. If it can't be returned it can't leave the squad.

If it's part of a squad that's been swept it can't return.

rigeld2 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:Sorry. the EverLiving rules and FAQ seem to totally disagree with you.

Um, no - they don't.
Nothing in the Ever Living rules or FAQ says that the model leaves the unit.

Except the fact that the EverLiving rules do not work EVER if it is a part of the unit for Royal Court Members. And the FAQ.

Q: If an entire unit, including an attached character
from a Royal Court, is wiped out, do you get to make
any Reanimation Protocol rolls? (p29)
A: You would only get to make one roll for the
attached character as he has the Ever-living special rule.
Note that in this case, he must be placed within 3" of
the counter as his unit has been wiped out.

Ever Living:

If the model had joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, the and roll was passed, it must be returned to play, with a single wound, in coherency...
...If the model is placed in coherency with one or more friendly units that it is eligible to join...

Hmm whats this? Placed in coherency. eligible to join. How is an EL unit eligible to join a unit, if already attached to one.

That's right. It's not attached to a unit when it is removed as a casualty.

NecronLord3 wrote:
Sorry. the EverLiving rules and FAQ seem to totally disagree with you.

Try again.

Like this FAQ?

Q: If a model carrying a resurrection orb is removed as
a casualty, can you still benefit from it when rolling for
his, and his unit’s, Reanimation Protocol rolls that
phase? (p82)
A: Yes.

...his, and his unit's, ...

Now a necron overlord, an independent character, can have a res orb, and has EL, so even though he may be removed as a casualty (and replaced by an EL counter) he is still a member of the unit as he and his unit can benefit from the res orb.

And a necron lord, from a royal court and not an independent character, can have a res orb, and has EL, so even though he may be removed as a casualty (and replaced by an EL counter) he is still a member of the unit as he and his unit can benefit from the res orb.

And if the unit is caught in a sweeping advance, the unit is destroyed.

Unless you want to argue that if the overlord or lord are removed and replaced by an EL counter that they are suddenly no longer a part of the unit. In which case, the unit could not benefit from the res orb. But the FAQ says they can.

So they are still one unit supported by the FAQ, and that's a fact.

time wizard wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:
Sorry. the EverLiving rules and FAQ seem to totally disagree with you.

Try again.

Like this FAQ?

Q: If a model carrying a resurrection orb is removed as
a casualty, can you still benefit from it when rolling for
his, and his unit’s, Reanimation Protocol rolls that
phase? (p82)
A: Yes.

...his, and his unit's, ...

Now a necron overlord, an independent character, can have a res orb, and has EL, so even though he may be removed as a casualty (and replaced by an EL counter) he is still a member of the unit as he and his unit can benefit from the res orb.

And a necron lord, from a royal court and not an independent character, can have a res orb, and has EL, so even though he may be removed as a casualty (and replaced by an EL counter) he is still a member of the unit as he and his unit can benefit from the res orb.

And if the unit is caught in a sweeping advance, the unit is destroyed.

Unless you want to argue that if the overlord or lord are removed and replaced by an EL counter that they are suddenly no longer a part of the unit. In which case, the unit could not benefit from the res orb. But the FAQ says they can.

So they are still one unit supported by the FAQ, and that's a fact.

Except the FAQ specifically permits the EL model to return to play when the UNIT no longer exists.

Q: If an entire unit, including an attached character
from a Royal Court, is wiped out, do you get to make
any Reanimation Protocol rolls? (p29)
A: You would only get to make one roll for the
attached character as he has the Ever-living special rule.
Note that in this case, he must be placed within 3" of
the counter as his unit has been wiped out.

If i'm reading the rules posted right, only when you pass your EL roll and return the model are you allowed to join another unit (leaving the now destroyed one).

But with the EL model being attached to a unit that's been swept would prevent it making the roll in the first place.

Or am I reading it wrong?

NecronLord3 wrote:Except the fact that the EverLiving rules do not work EVER if it is a part of the unit for Royal Court Members.

What? Maybe my migraine is messing with my brain too much, but I can't parse that sentence.

Hmm whats this? Placed in coherency. eligible to join. How is an EL unit eligible to join a unit, if already attached to one.

That's right. It's not attached to a unit when it is removed as a casualty.

You're making an assumptive leap that's not supported by rules.

An EL IC is eligible to join a unit if it dropped unattached and stands up in range of units.
You're making the assumption that because it mentions the words eligible, all EL IC's *must* be eligible - with no rules basis for that assumption.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NecronLord3 wrote:Except the FAQ specifically permits the EL model to return to play when the UNIT no longer exists.

Now you're back to EL coming back from SA.

NecronLord3 wrote: Except the FAQ specifically permits the EL model to return to play when the UNIT no longer exists.

Q: If an entire unit, including an attached character
from a Royal Court, is wiped out, do you get to make
any Reanimation Protocol rolls? (p29)
A: You would only get to make one roll for the
attached character as he has the Ever-living special rule.
Note that in this case, he must be placed within 3" of
the counter as his unit has been wiped out.

I must be missing the line in there that says the character can make that roll if the entire unit is wiped out due to a sweeping advance.

Therefore, there is no specific exception to the sweeping advance rule.

A few points here: is a regular Lord an IC? On page 30 of the codex he is listed as one. A cryptek on the next flipped page is listed as a character, not an IC. Odd.

The RP states explicitly that Characters don't save units. So the only argument left is if a EL character can get back up through sweeping advance.

At current Sweeping Advance specifically overrides any special rule though so unless a FAQ shows up saying IC's can still get up I think they are destroyed.

Mind, I am primarily a necron player so am not voting in my own favor here, this just makes the most sense to me.

Spectral Dragon wrote:A few points here: is a regular Lord an IC? On page 30 of the codex he is listed as one.

Page 30 under special rules says, "...Independent Character (Necron Overlord only), ..."

The regular lord is: Infantry (Character)

The Overlord is an independent character.

time wizard wrote:

Spectral Dragon wrote:A few points here: is a regular Lord an IC? On page 30 of the codex he is listed as one.

Page 30 under special rules says, "...Independent Character (Necron Overlord only), ..."

The regular lord is: Infantry (Character)

The Overlord is an independent character.

Somehow missed that, thanks.

NecronLord3 wrote:

Sorry. the EverLiving rules and FAQ seem to totally disagree with you.

Try again.

No they dont - well, not unless you totally make gak up that has no basis in rules.

Oh wait, I see what you did there. You DID make gak up that has no basis in rules!


Try again - some actual rules owuld be useful, anytime you feel like it

I think what we have here is a clear indication of rules from the past contradicting rules form the present and possible future

The Necrons suffered for a long time with 3rd Ed rules in a 5 Ed game ,now they are suffering from 5th ed rules with (and i am sure most will agree) 6th ed rules based codex

The EL rules has been written with 6th Ed in mind making the 5th Ed SA rule superfluous.

Until the 6th Ed is released we have to use 5th Ed rules ,which will (as has been seen with other crossed Ed codex's) cause rules issues.

The argument we have here should be( I hope) resolved with SA rules being re written for 6th Ed , until then this Argument will rage on with no satisfactory outcome for any side of the argument

Although i do not like the SA trumps EL argument, unfortunately until the 6th ed is released ,it is what it is ,and EL fails under those rules

Happyjew wrote:My reading of that part of the rule is for IC's who are not part of a unit. So in your example, the IC is not eligible to join Unit B as it is a part of Unit A. If the IC was not a member of Unit A or B, then he could join either one.

Hmm, I don't see that same linkage as you. I read that particular section of the EL rules as describing how to return:

An EL model that returns to a unit which is still present (and was attached to that unit).
An EL model that is not part of a unit and returned to play.

There there's a statement which applies to either case. This is in regards to making sure that the returning EL model is not placed within 1'' of an enemy model.

Finally, there is a statement that describes a situation in which the returning EL model can be placed in coherency to one or more friendly units. The bit about eligible is in reference to staying within 3'' of the marker and at least 1'' away from an enemy model.

And EL doesn't care about being an IC. It only cares about models that have the EL property. Meaning as long as a model has EL it can potentially leave and join another unit (per the EL rules) at the end of any phase.

-Yad

Yad wrote:And EL doesn't care about being an IC. It only cares about models that have the EL property. Meaning as long as a model has EL it can potentially leave and join another unit (per the EL rules) at the end of any phase.

-Yad

Yes! Indeed! It can leave the unit and/or join another at the end of the phase.

Perfect!

And when does one roll for RP and EL? At the end of the phase.

And when does a sweeping advance occur? From page 40, if the unit is caught in a sweeping advance, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately."

Let's repeat that so everyone gets it. "The destroyed unit is removed immediately."

Not at the end of the phase, not when they make their EL roll, but immediately!

So, the character with the EL rule is part of the unit, again as per the res orb FAQ, and if the unit is swept, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately.".

So at the end of the phase, there are no RP or El counters to roll for, they have already been removed when the unit was destroyed.

Luusormi wrote:Damn. Necrons got really hard to kill and without the phase out...how ae you supposed to kill them???

Same as before, focus fire, take out one unit at a time. It gets really fun if you play Guard like I do.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:

Sorry. the EverLiving rules and FAQ seem to totally disagree with you.

Try again.

No they dont - well, not unless you totally make gak up that has no basis in rules.

Oh wait, I see what you did there. You DID make gak up that has no basis in rules!


Try again - some actual rules owuld be useful, anytime you feel like it

Already posted them try reading it some time.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

time wizard wrote:

Yad wrote:And EL doesn't care about being an IC. It only cares about models that have the EL property. Meaning as long as a model has EL it can potentially leave and join another unit (per the EL rules) at the end of any phase.

-Yad

Yes! Indeed! It can leave the unit and/or join another at the end of the phase.

Perfect!

And when does one roll for RP and EL? At the end of the phase.

And when does a sweeping advance occur? From page 40, if the unit is caught in a sweeping advance, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately."

Let's repeat that so everyone gets it. "The destroyed unit is removed immediately."

Not at the end of the phase, not when they make their EL roll, but immediately!

So, the character with the EL rule is part of the unit, again as per the res orb FAQ, and if the unit is swept, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately.".

So at the end of the phase, there are no RP or El counters to roll for, they have already been removed when the unit was destroyed.

Except when the EL token was placed prior to the Sweep. In which case nothing removes the EL token.

Squidmanlolz wrote:

Luusormi wrote:Damn. Necrons got really hard to kill and without the phase out...how ae you supposed to kill them???

Same as before, focus fire, take out one unit at a time. It gets really fun if you play Guard like I do.

Correct. That's the best way to do it.
In one game (old Necron codex) I managed to take out 7 warriors from 1 squad and all 10 from another squad. I just couldn't take out those last 3 warriors!
In my opponent's turn, all 17 models were within range to make a WBB roll, and he brought back 14 of the 17!
He now had a 17 strong unit of warriors that I had to try to take out all over again.
So he brought back 14 warriors. At 18 points each, he had just got an additional 252 points of models in his force!

Yad wrote:And EL doesn't care about being an IC. It only cares about models that have the EL property. Meaning as long as a model has EL it can potentially leave and join another unit (per the EL rules) at the end of any phase.

-Yad

You're going to have to cite something for that. The only way for a model to be eligible to join another unit is if it is an IC.
And ICs can only leave their unit at the end of their movement.

You could, however, come back from a counter with your 3" allowance putting you inside join range of a unit or two, which EL allows you to join.
There's no provision saying EL models leave units. In fact, there's other rulings that say they don't (res orb "his unit" - if you leave the unit when dead, there is no "his unit" and it doesn't say "his old unit")


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NecronLord3 wrote:Except when the EL token was placed prior to the Sweep. In which case nothing removes the EL token.

So you're saving the unit after SA has happened, when SA forbids saving the unit unless you have a specific exception?

time wizard wrote:

Yad wrote:And EL doesn't care about being an IC. It only cares about models that have the EL property. Meaning as long as a model has EL it can potentially leave and join another unit (per the EL rules) at the end of any phase.

-Yad

Yes! Indeed! It can leave the unit and/or join another at the end of the phase.

Perfect!

And when does one roll for RP and EL? At the end of the phase.

And when does a sweeping advance occur? From page 40, if the unit is caught in a sweeping advance, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately."

Let's repeat that so everyone gets it. "The destroyed unit is removed immediately."

Not at the end of the phase, not when they make their EL roll, but immediately!

So, the character with the EL rule is part of the unit, again as per the res orb FAQ, and if the unit is swept, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately.".

So at the end of the phase, there are no RP or El counters to roll for, they have already been removed when the unit was destroyed.

Ok, now we need to know if EL lets you save from effects that aren't wound-based, which should answer the question entirely I think.

Do you get EL from JOTWW for example? How about void grenades in apocolypse? If you do then you theoretically should get it from sweeping advance as well as thats a remove model not tack on wound basis. If not then you the opposite, I would think.

As (I'm sure someone has) mentioned before, EL token are only placed when a model is removed from play as a casualty. JOTWW says you are "Removed From Play".

Apocalypse Vortex Grenade also says that you can not take any saves, and any special rule doesn't work. The model is removed from the game.

rigeld2 wrote:
So you're saving the unit after SA has happened, when SA forbids saving the unit unless you have a specific exception?

No I'm saying that SA advance has no effect on a model that has already been removed as a casualty by other means.

Which (as I originally stated) based on the FAQ and wording of EL is ambiguous. Personally I don't think that EL can be used if the unit was wiped by SA, regardless of when the model was "killed". If I play a Necron player and he feels differently, we will roll off. Of course, I think this whole thing got horribly off topic from the original post, which I was hoping to avoid.

If the unit is destroyed by Sweeping Advance, you may place EL counters. Here's the relevant FAQ.

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

Q: If an entire unit, including an attached character
from a Royal Court, is wiped out, do you get to make
any Reanimation Protocol rolls? (p29)

A: You would only get to make one roll for the
attached character as he has the Ever-living special rule.
Note that in this case, he must be placed within 3" of
the counter as his unit has been wiped out.

JasoX wrote:If the unit is destroyed by Sweeping Advance, you may place EL counters. Here's the relevant FAQ.

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

Q: If an entire unit, including an attached character
from a Royal Court, is wiped out, do you get to make
any Reanimation Protocol rolls? (p29)

A: You would only get to make one roll for the
attached character as he has the Ever-living special rule.
Note that in this case, he must be placed within 3" of
the counter as his unit has been wiped out.

And here's the relevant rule, main rules page 40, sweeping advances, "Unless otherwise specified, on save or other special rule can rescue the unit..."

Are RP and EL "special rules"? Page 29 Necron Codex heads with "Necron Special Rules".

Do either or these "special rules" say that the unit is not destroyed by a sweeping advance? No, they don't.

So after all these pages, we are right back where we started. Sheesh!

NecronLord3 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
So you're saving the unit after SA has happened, when SA forbids saving the unit unless you have a specific exception?

No I'm saying that SA advance has no effect on a model that has already been removed as a casualty by other means.

SA destroys the unit. Bringing a model from the unit back brings back the unit - we know this because you can't farm EL units for kill points.
So you're attempting to restore the unit from being destroyed. SA prevents that without specific exemption.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JasoX wrote:If the unit is destroyed by Sweeping Advance, you may place EL counters. Here's the relevant FAQ.

It'd be great if you'd read the thread. Thanks.

rigeld2 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
So you're saving the unit after SA has happened, when SA forbids saving the unit unless you have a specific exception?

No I'm saying that SA advance has no effect on a model that has already been removed as a casualty by other means.

SA destroys the unit. Bringing a model from the unit back brings back the unit - we know this because you can't farm EL units for kill points.
So you're attempting to restore the unit from being destroyed. SA prevents that without specific exemption.

And that applies not at all to IC. If you want to proceed with an argument along the lines that a Royal Court member can not resurrect because he is part of the unit and when the unit is removed it cannot resurrect, you might have a viable argument. However, since this issue is with Ever Living, and that rule is specifically designed to super cede the rules for RP, the argument is moot. You don't get your kill point from shooting until the EL model fails it's RP roll, the same goes for Sweeping and assault. Nothing inconsistent.

rigeld2 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

JasoX wrote:If the unit is destroyed by Sweeping Advance, you may place EL counters. Here's the relevant FAQ.

It'd be great if you'd read the thread. Thanks.

Back the feth up dude. Do you have any idea how many times I could say the same thing to you. Don't jump down someone else's throat who is trying to participate in this forum just because they aren't part of your little NOS clik.

rigeld2 wrote:

Yad wrote:And EL doesn't care about being an IC. It only cares about models that have the EL property. Meaning as long as a model has EL it can potentially leave and join another unit (per the EL rules) at the end of any phase.

-Yad

You're going to have to cite something for that. The only way for a model to be eligible to join another unit is if it is an IC.

Easy enough, the entire EL rules section. There is absolutely nothing in the EL rules to suggest that they only pertain to IC's. I would look at the paragraph that describes how to place EL models that succeed on their roll. You should see that it follows how I broke it out in my previous post. Any model that has the EL property (regardless of the type of model (IC vs. non-IC) must follow all the rules for EL. This means, given the right conditions, that such a model could leave and join a different unit at the end of the Movement/Shooting/Assault phase. Whichever one the player is making the roll for.

rigeld2 wrote:And ICs can only leave their unit at the end of their movement.

In general, yes absolutely. Per the EL rules, not so much.

rigeld2 wrote:You could, however, come back from a counter with your 3" allowance putting you inside join range of a unit or two, which EL allows you to join.
There's no provision saying EL models leave units. In fact, there's other rulings that say they don't (res orb "his unit" - if you leave the unit when dead, there is no "his unit" and it doesn't say "his old unit")

This is where I think you're stumbling a bit on the reading of the EL placement rules. The option to choose which unit to join upon a successful EL roll is not dependent upon the EL model being a unit of 1. The coherency requirement is satisfied in either placement scenario. All EL cares about is that when you return the EL model to play is::

Can the EL model be returned to play in coherency of the unit that it was previously attached to and at least 1'' away from an enemy model?

or

Can the EL model be returned to play within 3'' of the marker and at last 1'' away from an enemy model (if the EL model was not attached to a unit when it was killed).

In either case if the model is placed within coherency of one or more friendly units, you now have a choice as to which unit you want the EL model to join. This is an exception to the normal requirement of leaving/joining units only in the Movement phase (for IC's). There's no reason that, in the second option you can't return the EL model to play in coherency with a friendly unit. There's nothing in the EL rules or the BRB that would prevent this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NecronLord3 wrote:Except when the EL token was placed prior to the Sweep. In which case nothing removes the EL token.

So you're saving the unit after SA has happened, when SA forbids saving the unit unless you have a specific exception?

NecronLord3 wrote:And that applies not at all to IC. If you want to proceed with an argument along the lines that a Royal Court member can not resurrect because he is part of the unit and when the unit is removed it cannot resurrect, you might have a viable argument. However, since this issue is with Ever Living, and that rule is specifically designed to super cede the rules for RP, the argument is moot. You don't get your kill point from shooting until the EL model fails it's RP roll, the same goes for Sweeping and assault. Nothing inconsistent.

ICs are not the only model type that have EL. The IC is part of the unit when it goes down, so it suffers along with the rest of the unit. It's a normal member of the unit, per the rules for ICs.

And KPs aren't awarded when the unit is destroyed, they're awarded at the end of a match for every destroyed unit. Note the difference.

Back the feth up dude. Do you have any idea how many times I could say the same thing to you. Don't jump down someone else's throat who is trying to participate in this forum just because they aren't part of your little NOS clik.

I didn't? If I was "jumping down his throat" I'd have been far less polite. And I'm sorry if you're feeling persecuted, but there's no "clik" (I think you mean clique). nos and I disagree on as many things as we agree on it seems like.

Yad wrote:
EL is not a save. You're conflating the concept of 'saving' with the game mechanic of Save. The SA rule expressly forbids the use of a Save.

-Yad

Partially correct, SA expressly forbids the use of a save or other special rule unless otherwise specified.

Yad wrote: This means, given the right conditions, that such a model could leave and join a different unit at the end of the Movement/Shooting/Assault phase.

The EL model has to be eligible to join another unit, per the EL rules. Guess what the only type of EL model is eligible to join different units is?

This is where I think you're stumbling a bit on the reading of the EL placement rules. The option to choose which unit to join upon a successful EL roll is not dependent upon the EL model being a unit of 1. The coherency requirement is satisfied in either placement scenario. All EL cares about is that when you return the EL model to play is::

Can the EL model be returned to play in coherency of the unit that it was previously attached to and at least 1'' away from an enemy model?

or

Can the EL model be returned to play within 3'' of the marker and at last 1'' away from an enemy model (if the EL model was not attached to a unit when it was killed).

In either case if the model is placed within coherency of one or more friendly units, you now have a choice as to which unit you want the EL model to join. This is an exception to the normal requirement of leaving/joining units only in the Movement phase (for IC's). There's no reason that, in the second option you can't return the EL model to play in coherency with a friendly unit. There's nothing in the EL rules or the BRB that would prevent this.

I feel that this is a big enough issue to warrant it's own thread. Mind starting one?

Yad wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

NecronLord3 wrote:Except when the EL token was placed prior to the Sweep. In which case nothing removes the EL token.

So you're saving the unit after SA has happened, when SA forbids saving the unit unless you have a specific exception?

EL is not a save. You're conflating the concept of 'saving' with the game mechanic of Save. The SA rule expressly forbids the use of a Save.

-Yad

No - SA denies saves and special abilities from rescuing the unit - I used the word save above meaning rescue (which I should not have done) and you read it as "save" like invulnerable save. I wasn't conflating anything, it was a miscommunication.

time wizard wrote:

JasoX wrote:If the unit is destroyed by Sweeping Advance, you may place EL counters. Here's the relevant FAQ.

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

Q: If an entire unit, including an attached character
from a Royal Court, is wiped out, do you get to make
any Reanimation Protocol rolls? (p29)

A: You would only get to make one roll for the
attached character as he has the Ever-living special rule.
Note that in this case, he must be placed within 3" of
the counter as his unit has been wiped out.

And here's the relevant rule, main rules page 40, sweeping advances, "Unless otherwise specified, on save or other special rule can rescue the unit..."

Are RP and EL "special rules"? Page 29 Necron Codex heads with "Necron Special Rules".

Do either or these "special rules" say that the unit is not destroyed by a sweeping advance? No, they don't.

So after all these pages, we are right back where we started. Sheesh!

This is why I think your understanding of timing should decide which side you agree with.

If SA is an action the winning unit does "immediately" as it the rule states, and the FAQ was intended to answer this very question then:
1) SA does not prevent placing a counter
2) SA kills the unit and its effect ends (nothing is preventing this or saving the unit). Nothing is rescuing the EL model during Sweeping Advance.
3) EL may bring the model back at the end of the phase since SA ended before consolidation or at the end of combat. (you may still prevent EL by having a unit standing near the counter)

A) the changes to WBB to RP and EL to use counters instead of the model remaining in play
B) the codex gives EL to characters with a special rule (not all models) limiting its power
C) FAQ so simply states EL rolls are allowed
D) the SA rule says "immediately" and "at this stage" showing it is a time limited action
E) SA happens before consolidation meaning it also ends
F) SA does not remove EL counters
G) there is no separate BRB sections for RFP and RPFaaC sections - only RFPaaC and Instant Death (as a casualty). There is no RFP rule in the BRB.
H) Celestine has a similar rule, and is allowed.

In my opinion, if you lift a model of the table top, it is now a 'casualty' (regardless if it is a casualty at the center of the earth [JotWW] or a casualty in several pieces in a crater [demolisher cannon]). Therein, you get to place the counters, unless the original unit (ie no characters that joined it) is destroyed, then there is no RP counters, only EL counters.

As far as Instant Death is concerned, Necrons don't give a feth any more.

As far as SA is concerned, I would say place a EL counter. I have played that way all along, and no-one at my flgs has cared

time wizard wrote:

Yad wrote:
EL is not a save. You're conflating the concept of 'saving' with the game mechanic of Save. The SA rule expressly forbids the use of a Save.

-Yad

Partially correct, SA expressly forbids the use of a save or other special rule unless otherwise specified.

Which is what NL and ND keep failing utterly on. They cannot find a single rule which says ANY EL model leaves the unit before EL rolls are made, meaning they are still a member of the unit - as per the FAQs - and are thus destroyed.

ND has an interesting timing theory, which also has no rules basis and also falls apart when you consider that WBB, which worked at a LATER stage than RP / EL, never worked against SA - so trying to bring in that SA removes models "now" and doesnt prohibit saving later is a terrible argument, as it ignores both the rules for SA AND ignores the past.

NL - just gve up, you are sounding REALLY paranoid now. Oh, and as was pointed out - "clique". Please try to at least use the correct words when you are feeling ganged up on - you arent, it's just you're wrong in soooo many threads.

Nemesor Dave wrote:H) Celestine has a similar rule, and is allowed.

As clarified by the SoB FAQ, which is not the Necron FAQ. And seeing how GW answers often go by fluff instead of RAW this might well be the only "return to life" power that will ever do that - she won't stay down until the Emperor himself calls her. Yarrick's strength of will does nothing, a Necron Overlord's repair systems don't help. Or even if they do, he probably uses them to get his personal teleporter online first so he can get the hell out while there's any getting out.

Spetulhu wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:H) Celestine has a similar rule, and is allowed.

As clarified by the SoB FAQ, which is not the Necron FAQ. And seeing how GW answers often go by fluff instead of RAW this might well be the only "return to life" power that will ever do that - she won't stay down until the Emperor himself calls her. Yarrick's strength of will does nothing, a Necron Overlord's repair systems don't help. Or even if they do, he probably uses them to get his personal teleporter online first so he can get the hell out while there's any getting out.

I agree, its not black and white, but one more link to add weight to the decision.
In the Space Wolf FAQ they are treated the same:

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2170015a_Space_Wolves_FAQ_Version_1_2_January_2012.pdf
Q. Are models with an ability to return to play (e.g.
Necrons, St. Celestine, etc) able to use their special rule
even after being removed from play by The Last
Laugh? (p52)
A. Yes they can. It sounds odd but their special rule
works just fine.

Nemesor Dave wrote:I agree, its not black and white, but one more link to add weight to the decision.
In the Space Wolf FAQ they are treated the same:

Q. Are models with an ability to return to play (e.g.
Necrons, St. Celestine, etc) able to use their special rule
even after being removed from play by The Last
Laugh? (p52)
A. Yes they can. It sounds odd but their special rule
works just fine.

That does add a bit, but then The Last Laugh lacks any "no special rule can save them at this stage" part.

And I do repeat my earlier thoughts on GW and timing - that "at this stage" isn't a point in time, it's the fact you've been swept. Once it's happened nothing can help. Until it's put in a FAQ I'll personally be happy to agree on it either way before a game (if I have a similarly "grey" special rule in my army) or just roll off when it comes up.

Spetulhu signing out, nothing more worthwhile to add I'd say.

The whole argument rest s on ingnorance of the meaning of the word "rescue".
Rescue, by definition, means avoiding harm and evading it. Thus, if suffering of harm was not prevented, no rescue occured.
Everliving rule does not allow models or units for that matter to avoid being removed as casualties - or, in case of units, destroyed. Thus Everliving never rescues anything.
Thus all that talk about sweeping advance having any relevance to everliving is gibberish.

Furthermore, the cases when Everliving and Resurrection Protocol tokens are removed from play are clearly defined. Adding any cases to them is a rule violation.

time wizard wrote:

Yad wrote:
EL is not a save. You're conflating the concept of 'saving' with the game mechanic of Save. The SA rule expressly forbids the use of a Save.

-Yad

Partially correct, SA expressly forbids the use of a save or other special rule unless otherwise specified.

I was simply pointing and correcting the use of the term save. There have been times, when this particular topic comes up, that folks focus on the 'save' bit of the SA rules as an attempt to deny EL. I am fully aware of the remainder of the SA rule. As stated previously, I do not believe that EL can be used as a response to a SA. The SA rules forbid this. It can however be used after the SA has been resolved. Because it has no association with SA there is no 'rescue'. EL is never used to stop a model from being removed from play.

-Yad

Yad wrote:

time wizard wrote:

Yad wrote:
EL is not a save. You're conflating the concept of 'saving' with the game mechanic of Save. The SA rule expressly forbids the use of a Save.

-Yad

Partially correct, SA expressly forbids the use of a save or other special rule unless otherwise specified.

I was simply pointing and correcting the use of the term save. There have been times, when this particular topic comes up, that folks focus on the 'save' bit of the SA rules as an attempt to deny EL. I am fully aware of the remainder of the SA rule. As stated previously, I do not believe that EL can be used as a response to a SA. The SA rules forbid this. It can however be used after the SA has been resolved. Because it has no association with SA there is no 'rescue'. EL is never used to stop a model from being removed from play.

-Yad

SA destroyed the unit. You're asserting that returning the unit to the board is not rescuing the unit?

It's a matter of timing.

While an IC (killed before the sweep) is attached to a unit that's been swept he can't be returned to the board.

The only time a IC can leave the unit is 1). during the movement phase OR 2). after they've made an EL roll and returned to the board. Being dead isn't enough to leave the unit.

Now he can't do 1). as being dead stops this right away.
Nor can he do 2). as the sweep prevents him from making a EL roll as he's still attached to the swept unit.

Yad - so, when you rescue the unit you are using a special rule which does not allow you to rescue the unit from Sweeping Advance

WHich is against the rules of SA.

Again - this timing theory not only has no basis in the rules, it entirely ignores that WBB, which worked even later than EL / RP does, never worked. Ever.

ALso Yad - SA removes the unit. The whole of it. That includes any EL counters, as has been proven many times.

Your belief has no basis in fact

rigeld2 wrote:
SA destroyed the unit. You're asserting that returning the unit to the board is not rescuing the unit?

The SA rule does not suggest that it continues indefinitely. SA happens "immediately" and is a step in combat before consolidation.

If you ask yourself what steps are taken in combat:
1) Determine Assault Results
2) Loser checks morale
3) If the loser is falling back, the attacker does a Sweeping Advance
4) the attacker consolidates
5) End of combat
6) All combats resolved
7) End of Phase (when EL rolls are made)

#3 here is Sweeping Advance
Do you think the SA rule means "you may never rescue or save"? Wouldn't it say that?

8) Beginning of next turn, when WBB occcured - yet WBB never worked

What makes you think EL works?


We can do without the digs thanks. Further such comments will result in an extended "easter holiday" . Reds8n

The premise of not allowing EL rolls after SA is based on the term "rescue".

Where is "rescue" defined in the rules? (It isn't, we all know that)

Now, it just becomes an argument of interpretation of the word "rescue" since we have no definition.

It is entirely feasible that the word "rescue" COULD mean, not allowing the return of the models even though the situation has already occurred. It does seem pretty logical that if the unit died but is resurrected, it got "rescued".

It is also entirely feasible that the term "rescue" can be interpreted that it must occur before the situation concludes itself.

The dictionary more agrees with this second scenario. Logically, to rescue someone from a situation, you must do so before the situation concludes. (I.e. to "rescue" you from a lion, I must do so before the lion eats you)

Logically, to "rescue" a unit from a sweeping advance, you must do so before the effects of the sweeping advance wipes them out.

So, is EL a "rescue" attempt or is it more akin to a "resurrection" attempt? I believe the dictionary clearly supports one interpretation over another.

(I.e. I couldn't rescue you from the lion, it ate you. However, later on, I did resurrect you. You still got eaten but through other means you are alive again.)

Dave's timing argument makes perfect sense. Not to mention, it is supported by the use of "at this stage" which is clearly written.

The argument about a unit having been rescued because it resurrects at a later date also makes sense.

However, I believe the timing argument, lacking any definition of the term rescue, is the stronger argument because it more closely fits the dictionary definition of the word. The reason is that trying to make the word "rescue" apply after the situation has already occurred is STRETCHING the definition of the word rescue considerably. The timing argument makes no such stretch.

ngilstrap wrote:The premise of not allowing EL rolls after SA is based on the term "rescue".

Incorrect. Rather the fact that SA does not allow for EL rolls is based on the rule which says, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately. Unless otherwise specified, no save or special rule can rescue the unit..."

Immediately, as in right then and there, you remove the unit.

Not part of the unit, not some of the unit, the entire unit.

Unless you have a special rule that start with "If the unit is caught in a sweeping advance, {then something else besides being destroyed and immediately removed happens}."

nosferatu1001 wrote:8) Beginning of next turn, when WBB occcured - yet WBB never worked

What makes you think EL works?

You won't allow the use of a simliar rule like Celestines in the current SW FAQ that says you're allowed to come back, but you're going to use an out of date FAQ on a codex that is no longer valid to support your view?

Consistency my friend.

As above.

The timing idea not only ignores the current rules, it ignores the old rules as well for something that didnt work, even though it occured even later in the sequence of events than the current rules.

Does EL specify it can rescue the unit from SA? No? then I guess that that EL token that is a member of the unit, as proven by the rules AND the FAQ over and over and over and over gets removed, because otherwise you would be trying to rescue a member of the unit, which is rescuing the unit.

However, given we went through many pages of this before, and one side seemed unable to comprehend it then, is it worth continuing? given we;re right back to the start for probably the 90th time, there's surely only so many times you can shoot someones arguments down before it gets pointless?

time wizard wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:The premise of not allowing EL rolls after SA is based on the term "rescue".

Incorrect. Rather the fact that SA does not allow for EL rolls is based on the rule which says, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately. Unless otherwise specified, no save or special rule can rescue the unit..."

Immediately, as in right then and there, you remove the unit.

Not part of the unit, not some of the unit, the entire unit.

Unless you have a special rule that start with "If the unit is caught in a sweeping advance, {then something else besides being destroyed and immediately removed happens}."

This is a good point but has 2 areas that require clarification:

1) Even if we were to agree that SA removes the unit and somehow doesn't allow the placement of EL tokens because of that, this doesn't account for the situation in which an EL model has already been killed prior to the sweeping advance. In this case, the EL token is already on the board prior to the sweeping advance occurring, and we are back to the timing argument. The part that then becomes an issue, even if we agree that the SA rule forbids EL rolls (which we clearly aren't because I don't believe the term rescue prevents this roll by definition), is the continued discussion that a dead model is part of a unit, which has no support one way or another. Thus, making an assumption either direction immediately false.

2) This is also a good point, but as you stated with a highlight, I will respond with a highlight.

"The destroyed unit is removed immediately. Unless otherwise specified, no save or special rule can rescue the unit..." - your point is it needs to specify

"The destroyed unit is removed immediately. Unless otherwise specified, no save or special rule can rescue the unit..." - my point is there is nothing to specify because EL isn't rescuing anything.

ngilstrap wrote:However, I believe the timing argument, lacking any definition of the term rescue, is the stronger argument because it more closely fits the dictionary definition of the word. The reason is that trying to make the word "rescue" apply after the situation has already occurred is STRETCHING the definition of the word rescue considerably. The timing argument makes no such stretch.

If SA didn't include the phrase "at this stage" I'd agree with you.
It does, which means SA is not just a one and done effect.

@rigeld2: I was definitely wrong about the Cryptek/Lord being able to join one or more units. I took another look through and I agree with you on that.

I still think you're off on SA and EL though

-Yad

ngilstrap wrote:. The part that then becomes an issue, even if we agree that the SA rule forbids EL rolls (which we clearly aren't because I don't believe the term rescue prevents this roll by definition), is the continued discussion that a dead model is part of a unit, which has no support one way or another.

Necron codex, page 82, Resurrection Orb, "The bearer of the resurrection orb (and his unit) pass Reanimation Protocols on a 4+."

Necron FAQ version 2.0.

Q: If a model carrying a resurrection orb is removed as
a casualty, can you still benefit from it when rolling for
his, and his unit’s, Reanimation Protocol rolls that
phase? (p82)
A: Yes.

The dead model, the one that was removed as a casulaty, can use the res orb on himself and his unit.

If the dead model were not part of the unit, there is no way he could use his res orb on them.

Here is the support that a dead model is still part of a unit.

rigeld2 wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:However, I believe the timing argument, lacking any definition of the term rescue, is the stronger argument because it more closely fits the dictionary definition of the word. The reason is that trying to make the word "rescue" apply after the situation has already occurred is STRETCHING the definition of the word rescue considerably. The timing argument makes no such stretch.

If SA didn't include the phrase "at this stage" I'd agree with you.
It does, which means SA is not just a one and done effect.

I'm not sure on your interpretation of "at this stage". Can you clarify for me? "At this stage" seems to imply a timing argument to me which supports the idea that the unit is not being rescued, in my interpretation. My paraphrase would look like this (because really "stage" isn't defined either in the rule book *le sigh at bad rules*)

My paraphrase:
"Nothing can rescue you from sweeping advance at this point, unless otherwise specified". To me, the reading of the "at this stage" implies nothing can save you at the time in which you are being swept, NOT any indication at what happens at a later time (read: later stage). This seems to support that not only are you not being "rescued", even if you read rescue == resurrected, it is happening at a different stage.

time wizard wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:. The part that then becomes an issue, even if we agree that the SA rule forbids EL rolls (which we clearly aren't because I don't believe the term rescue prevents this roll by definition), is the continued discussion that a dead model is part of a unit, which has no support one way or another.

Necron codex, page 82, Resurrection Orb, "The bearer of the resurrection orb (and his unit) pass Reanimation Protocols on a 4+."

Necron FAQ version 2.0.

Q: If a model carrying a resurrection orb is removed as
a casualty, can you still benefit from it when rolling for
his, and his unit’s, Reanimation Protocol rolls that
phase? (p82)
A: Yes.

The dead model, the one that was removed as a casulaty, can use the res orb on himself and his unit.

If the dead model were not part of the unit, there is no way he could use his res orb on them.

Here is the support that a dead model is still part of a unit.

That's a pretty narrow FAQ ruling though. I'd be cautious about applying that horizontally across the board. To me, this FAQ says that the Res Orb effect, and only the Res Orb effect, can still be used if the owning model is removed from play as a casualty. I wouldn't want to go down the path of now all wargear can be used when the owning model is removed from play.

-Yad

time wizard wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:. The part that then becomes an issue, even if we agree that the SA rule forbids EL rolls (which we clearly aren't because I don't believe the term rescue prevents this roll by definition), is the continued discussion that a dead model is part of a unit, which has no support one way or another.

Necron codex, page 82, Resurrection Orb, "The bearer of the resurrection orb (and his unit) pass Reanimation Protocols on a 4+."

Necron FAQ version 2.0.

Q: If a model carrying a resurrection orb is removed as
a casualty, can you still benefit from it when rolling for
his, and his unit’s, Reanimation Protocol rolls that
phase? (p82)
A: Yes.

The dead model, the one that was removed as a casulaty, can use the res orb on himself and his unit.

If the dead model were not part of the unit, there is no way he could use his res orb on them.

Here is the support that a dead model is still part of a unit.

That seems pretty reasonable to me then as evidence that he is still part of the unit. Glad that's put away.

Still two more things to resolve though before we can conclude:

1) can we remove a model due to SA when we already removed it due to him dying? (Removing him from the board twice...). It does seem that the model is still part of the unit, and SA does say to remove the entire unit from the board. What isn't clear now is how to remove a model that was already removed. this seems to create a paradox of sorts.

2) Is EL a "rescue"?

Yad wrote:That's a pretty narrow FAQ ruling though. I'd be cautious about applying that horizontally across the board. To me, this FAQ says that the Res Orb effect, and only the Res Orb effect, can still be used if the owning model is removed from play as a casualty. I wouldn't want to go down the path of now all wargear can be used when the owning model is removed from play.

That's not what he's interpreting from the FAQ.
The FAQ answer says "and his unit". Which means the orb holder is still a member of the unit he was when he went down.

1) You remove the unit - and as the token represents a member of the unit, you remove the token. No paradox whatsoever.

2) Yes, because you are bringing the unit back after it has been destroyed. A unit going from state: destroyed to state:not destroyed has certainly been rescued.

I can rescue someone whose heart has stopped (they are clinically dead) by resarting it; you rescue the unit by reintroducing (or keeping, given the token IS a member of the unit) a member of the unit after SA occurs.

time wizard wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:The premise of not allowing EL rolls after SA is based on the term "rescue".

Incorrect. Rather the fact that SA does not allow for EL rolls is based on the rule which says, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately. Unless otherwise specified, no save or special rule can rescue the unit..."

Immediately, as in right then and there, you remove the unit.

Not part of the unit, not some of the unit, the entire unit.

Unless you have a special rule that start with "If the unit is caught in a sweeping advance, {then something else besides being destroyed and immediately removed happens}."

Sorry to repost this but doing so for clarity.
1) Determine Assault Results
2) Loser checks morale
3) If the loser is falling back, the attacker does a Sweeping Advance
4) the attacker consolidates
5) End of combat
6) All combats resolved
7) End of Phase (when EL rolls are made)

To "specify it stops SA" and do what you're saying would mean the model is still alive at #3 SA and prevents #4 consolidation. In fact all the other RP models wouldn't die either. The purpose of EL is not to prevent, save, or rescue the model from death.

For the model to die by SA, it cannot have a rule specifying EL "prevents Sweeping Advance". The model with EL must die for EL to work.

ngilstrap wrote:
1) can we remove a model due to SA when we already removed it due to him dying? (Removing him from the board twice...). It does seem that the model is still part of the unit, and SA does say to remove the entire unit from the board. What isn't clear now is how to remove a model that was already removed. this seems to create a paradox of sorts.

You kind of answered your own point here. SA does not remove models, the unit is destroyed and removed. The entire unit.

ngilstrap wrote:2) Is EL a "rescue"?

It does not matter. EL is a special rule, and no special rule can negate SA unless otherwise specified.

For an example of being otherwise specified, look at the space marine ATSKNF rule.

ngilstrap wrote:I'm not sure on your interpretation of "at this stage". Can you clarify for me? "At this stage" seems to imply a timing argument to me which supports the idea that the unit is not being rescued, in my interpretation. My paraphrase would look like this (because really "stage" isn't defined either in the rule book *le sigh at bad rules*)

My paraphrase:
"Nothing can rescue you from sweeping advance at this point, unless otherwise specified". To me, the reading of the "at this stage" implies nothing can save you at the time in which you are being swept, NOT any indication at what happens at a later time (read: later stage). This seems to support that not only are you not being "rescued", even if you read rescue == resurrected, it is happening at a different stage.

I'd ask you to read the thread to see my reasoning, but apparently that's rude, so I'll make the effort to retype all my arguments.

"at this stage", by itself, can be read to mean either "right now, at this point" or "from here on out".
The context of the rule ("for them the battle is over", We assume that the already demoralised foe is comprehensively scattered, ripped apart or sent packing, its members left either dead, wounded and captured, or at best fleeing and hiding.") points to the latter reading being the correct one.

ngilstrap wrote:Still two more things to resolve though before we can conclude:

1) can we remove a model due to SA when we already removed it due to him dying? (Removing him from the board twice...). It does seem that the model is still part of the unit, and SA does say to remove the entire unit from the board. What isn't clear now is how to remove a model that was already removed. this seems to create a paradox of sorts.

No, of course we can't. That would be silly.
The counter can stay on the table. You can even roll for it if you want. But placing the model back on the table is breaking the SA rule.

2) Is EL a "rescue"?

Q1: Was the unit destroyed?
Q2: Does bringing back the EL model un-destroy the unit?
Q3: Does un-destroying the unit "rescue" the unit from destruction?

A1: Yes, per the SA rules.
A2: Yes - the EL model does not create a new unit when it stands back up.
A3: Yes - the unit was saved from destruction - no kill point is awarded if the game ends after this phase.

I don't see any way to define "rescue" that avoids those issues.

rigeld2 wrote:

2) Is EL a "rescue"?

Q1: Was the unit destroyed?
Q2: Does bringing back the EL model un-destroy the unit?
Q3: Does un-destroying the unit "rescue" the unit from destruction?

A1: Yes, per the SA rules.
A2: Yes - the EL model does not create a new unit when it stands back up.
A3: Yes - the unit was saved from destruction - no kill point is awarded if the game ends after this phase.

I don't see any way to define "rescue" that avoids those issues.

A3 is flawed - the unit was destroyed by SA. Wiped out and removed from the table, thus satisfying fully the rules for SA. Rolling for the EL token after the SA is resolved does not constitute a 'rescue' of the unit.

I think I'll bow out now and wait for the next time this topic rears its head

-Yad

Yad - how have you NOT rescued the unit?

The unit was dead. It is not not-dead. By all measures that unit has been rescued.

Rigeld2 - If by rescue you mean "prevent the death of" certainly there is no conflict. You can't rescue dead people.

nosferatu1001 wrote:1) You remove the unit - and as the token represents a member of the unit, you remove the token. No paradox whatsoever.

2) Yes, because you are bringing the unit back after it has been destroyed. A unit going from state: destroyed to state:not destroyed has certainly been rescued.

I can rescue someone whose heart has stopped (they are clinically dead) by resarting it; you rescue the unit by reintroducing (or keeping, given the token IS a member of the unit) a member of the unit after SA occurs.

1) I think the remove the token part is the point of contention here. There is no specification that SA removes tokens. I think that's a big reason why this is being debated. If it did say remove tokens, we wouldn't be having such a fun conversation.

2) As posted above, this doesn't tightly fit the term rescue. I can see the logic here, but I think this is stretching the term rescue's meaning into something that is more clearly defined by the term resurrection. (Clinical death isn't heart stop btw, but an aside, it has to do with brain waves, at which point they won't try to rescue you with CPR. ) If someone actually is clinically dead, resurrecting them would not be rescuing them. Again, I think that's a second point on why this conversation is contentious. I can see your logic, and it is clear. It doesn't invalidate, though, that the term rescue may be being over-interpreted, rather just validates it. (Thus, we will reach an impasse)

You may resurrect, reanimate, or reincarnate dead people. But rescuing - not so much.

Yad wrote: Rolling for the EL token after the SA is resolved does not constitute a 'rescue' of the unit.
-Yad

If you have a unit of 5 warrior with a joined cryptek, and all 6 are killed due to shooting, you don't put down any RP counters, but you can still put down an EL counter.

Now you roll for and pass the cryptek's EL roll, and it is returned to play.

You don't give up a kill point, the cryptek, the last member of the unit is still alive.

The cryptek can control objectives, he is still a warrior like the rest of his unit.

If the cryptek has a res orb, and not all the warriors were killed, he could use it for his and their RP and EL rolls.

But it is still insisted upon by some that the EL counter is not part of the unit and is not caught and removed by sweeping advance.

Incredible.

Nemesor Dave wrote:Rigeld2 - If by rescue you mean "prevent the death of" certainly there is no conflict. You can't rescue dead people.

That's not how the SA rule uses that word.
SA destroys the unit, which consists of a bunch of models.
Bringing back any of those models rescues the unit - pretty much by definition.

It's being rescued from destruction, not "rescuing dead people"

time wizard wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:
1) can we remove a model due to SA when we already removed it due to him dying? (Removing him from the board twice...). It does seem that the model is still part of the unit, and SA does say to remove the entire unit from the board. What isn't clear now is how to remove a model that was already removed. this seems to create a paradox of sorts.

You kind of answered your own point here. SA does not remove models, the unit is destroyed and removed. The entire unit.

ngilstrap wrote:2) Is EL a "rescue"?

It does not matter. EL is a special rule, and no special rule can negate SA unless otherwise specified.

For an example of being otherwise specified, look at the space marine ATSKNF rule.

1) That wasn't an answer but a question. SA does destroy and remove. The problem is the situation in which the model has already been destroyed and removed due to being killed in combat. There is a distinction there and a paradox in which you are trying to double remove something. (object reference no longer in existence if you will )

2) It does matter because SA expressly forbids "rescuing". If the point is that it isn't a rescue, SA's specification of rescue no longer is applicable. It's really key to the entire argument.

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:Rigeld2 - If by rescue you mean "prevent the death of" certainly there is no conflict. You can't rescue dead people.

That's not how the SA rule uses that word.
SA destroys the unit, which consists of a bunch of models.
Bringing back any of those models rescues the unit - pretty much by definition.

It's being rescued from destruction, not "rescuing dead people"

I understand. I meant it a bit tongue in cheek.

However I would still say rescuing must be defined as "preventing the death" like is intended with ATSKNF. If EL rescued the model, it would still be in combat.

Would you say Sweeping Advance happens before Consolidation or do they happen at the same time?

rigeld2 wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:I'm not sure on your interpretation of "at this stage". Can you clarify for me? "At this stage" seems to imply a timing argument to me which supports the idea that the unit is not being rescued, in my interpretation. My paraphrase would look like this (because really "stage" isn't defined either in the rule book *le sigh at bad rules*)

My paraphrase:
"Nothing can rescue you from sweeping advance at this point, unless otherwise specified". To me, the reading of the "at this stage" implies nothing can save you at the time in which you are being swept, NOT any indication at what happens at a later time (read: later stage). This seems to support that not only are you not being "rescued", even if you read rescue == resurrected, it is happening at a different stage.

I'd ask you to read the thread to see my reasoning, but apparently that's rude, so I'll make the effort to retype all my arguments.

I have read the thread, and for future reference, statements like these, especially when directed for no reason are also rude. The reason for that is that assuming because someone doesn't agree with you means they didn't read the thread is what causes the statement to be viewed as rude (although sometimes probably justified).

rigeld2 wrote:
"at this stage", by itself, can be read to mean either "right now, at this point" or "from here on out".
The context of the rule ("for them the battle is over", We assume that the already demoralised foe is comprehensively scattered, ripped apart or sent packing, its members left either dead, wounded and captured, or at best fleeing and hiding.") points to the latter reading being the correct one.

"from here on out", I can see how that could be read that way. At best, though, we would be relying now in interpretation and it would come down to 'at this stage" being more strongly interpreted as "this moment" or "any moment thereafter". Probably best left mute here because neither can prove correct since the "stage" term is not defined.

The second part is more compelling, but again, the entire point is that the model has died, been rended, wounded, etc. This is more a fluff statement, granted, but in that vein, the fluff also states that RP is the robot putting itself back together. This implies that he got wrecked already and is no resurrecting himself. (The T1000 gets hit by liquid nitrogen (a sweeping advance) and is shattered. Later on, heat comes in and he resurrects himself.)

rigeld2 wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:Still two more things to resolve though before we can conclude:

1) can we remove a model due to SA when we already removed it due to him dying? (Removing him from the board twice...). It does seem that the model is still part of the unit, and SA does say to remove the entire unit from the board. What isn't clear now is how to remove a model that was already removed. this seems to create a paradox of sorts.

No, of course we can't. That would be silly.
The counter can stay on the table. You can even roll for it if you want. But placing the model back on the table is breaking the SA rule.

This is the point of the argument. It is not breaking the rule. (As above). I am contending that EL does not "rescue". For us to agree that it breaks the rules, we must agree that it is a "rescue".

rigeld2 wrote:

2) Is EL a "rescue"?

Q1: Was the unit destroyed?
Q2: Does bringing back the EL model un-destroy the unit?
Q3: Does un-destroying the unit "rescue" the unit from destruction?

A1: Yes, per the SA rules.
A2: Yes - the EL model does not create a new unit when it stands back up.
A3: Yes - the unit was saved from destruction - no kill point is awarded if the game ends after this phase.

I don't see any way to define "rescue" that avoids those issues.

A1: We agree here. The unit is indeed destroyed. No point of contention.
A2: Also agreed. No point of contention.
A3: This is the point of contention. The unit was not "rescued". It did indeed get destroyed, as per our agreement on A1 and A2. A rescue != a resurrection, as per A2.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nemesor Dave wrote:Rigeld2 - If by rescue you mean "prevent the death of" certainly there is no conflict. You can't rescue dead people.

Well said.

ngilstrap wrote:1) That wasn't an answer but a question. SA does destroy and remove. The problem is the situation in which the model has already been destroyed and removed due to being killed in combat. There is a distinction there and a paradox in which you are trying to double remove something. (object reference no longer in existence if you will )

Even if killed in CC before the sweep, the model in question (IC or not) is still part of the unit. Alive or dead it's still part of the unit, the unit is destroyed.

2) It does matter because SA expressly forbids "rescuing". If the point is that it isn't a rescue, SA's specification of rescue no longer is applicable. It's really key to the entire argument.

Making a roll for EV would return a member of the swept unit (still a member of the unit, see above) therefore 'rescuing' it. The sweep prevents the return. IC can change units after they return, but the sweep prevents this return in the first place so they are stuck as part of the swept (destroyed) unit.

Nevermind.

The unit was dead. It is not not-dead. By all measures that unit has been rescued.

On the contrary. If the unit became dead it wasn't rescued from death/sweeping advance.
Restoration is just that. Return into play of a model that 'died'. By definition of rescue it isn't it.
Now, there is clear confusion about just what resurrection protocol and everliving tokengs are.
They are not part of the unit. Unit consists of models, which they are not.
Resurrection protocol counters are additional charactersitic that unit gains at the moment the casualties are inflicted to it. The only thing they represent is how many dice are rolled at the end of the phase.
Likewise, everliving counter is not part of a unit. For it, however, a specific model (that was removed from play as a casualty) is defined and the unit the model was attached to when it 'died' (this one is optional). These two things determine how everliving counter is resolved. I must stress that unlike Resurrection protocol counter isn't even "added" to unit and thus cannot even be considered its characteristic.
P.S. And characters are not even considered part of the unit for the purposeof reanimation protocol anyway.

time wizard wrote:

Yad wrote: Rolling for the EL token after the SA is resolved does not constitute a 'rescue' of the unit.
-Yad

If you have a unit of 5 warrior with a joined cryptek, and all 6 are killed due to shooting, you don't put down any RP counters, but you can still put down an EL counter.

Now you roll for and pass the cryptek's EL roll, and it is returned to play.

You don't give up a kill point, the cryptek, the last member of the unit is still alive.

The cryptek can control objectives, he is still a warrior like the rest of his unit.

If the cryptek has a res orb, and not all the warriors were killed, he could use it for his and their RP and EL rolls.

But it is still insisted upon by some that the EL counter is not part of the unit and is not caught and removed by sweeping advance.

Incredible.

The reason it is being insisted on is because there is nothing very clear in the rules about a token being part of a unit. This is closely related to the quantum physics demonstration about a cat in a box with a vial of poison. The token represents the "chance" that something is alive, but does not go one way or another until the roll is made. The "chance" of being a unit is not the same thing as being a unit. I hope that helps you understand why this is contentious rather than creating more confusion!

Likewise, because SA doesn't say to remove tokens, it says to remove units.

I think the point you are making is logical, but i think the problem is we have two very logical points.

Saldiven wrote:Don't use quotation marks when you aren't quoting anything. The SA rules nowhere use the word "immediately."

Sweeping advance, main rules, page 40, 3rd sentence, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately."

time wizard wrote:

Saldiven wrote:Don't use quotation marks when you aren't quoting anything. The SA rules nowhere use the word "immediately."

Sweeping advance, main rules, page 40, 3rd sentence, "The destroyed unit is removed immediately."

Already edited my post; you ninja'd my self-edit.

Saldiven wrote:

Already edited my post; you ninja'd my self-edit.

Oops! Sorry about that!

Yad wrote:
That's a pretty narrow FAQ ruling though. I'd be cautious about applying that horizontally across the board. To me, this FAQ says that the Res Orb effect, and only the Res Orb effect, can still be used if the owning model is removed from play as a casualty. I wouldn't want to go down the path of now all wargear can be used when the owning model is removed from play.

-Yad

The interpretation is not that any piece of wargear can be used when the model carrying is dead, but that a model that is dead is still part of the unit to which it originally belonged.

ngilstrap wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:I'd ask you to read the thread to see my reasoning, but apparently that's rude, so I'll make the effort to retype all my arguments.

I have read the thread, and for future reference, statements like these, especially when directed for no reason are also rude. The reason for that is that assuming because someone doesn't agree with you means they didn't read the thread is what causes the statement to be viewed as rude (although sometimes probably justified).

I don't try to be rude - I said something similar earlier and was cussed at for it. If you'd read the thread you would have seen my reasoning and not have had to ask for it - which is why I assumed that you hadn't read it.

The second part is more compelling, but again, the entire point is that the model has died, been rended, wounded, etc. This is more a fluff statement, granted, but in that vein, the fluff also states that RP is the robot putting itself back together. This implies that he got wrecked already and is no resurrecting himself. (The T1000 gets hit by liquid nitrogen (a sweeping advance) and is shattered. Later on, heat comes in and he resurrects himself.)

Would you mind explaining why you are defining "at this stage" as "at this point and not after"?

rigeld2 wrote:
Q2: Does bringing back the EL model un-destroy the unit?
Q3: Does un-destroying the unit "rescue" the unit from destruction?

A2: Yes - the EL model does not create a new unit when it stands back up.
A3: Yes - the unit was saved from destruction - no kill point is awarded if the game ends after this phase.

I don't see any way to define "rescue" that avoids those issues.

A2: Also agreed. No point of contention.
A3: This is the point of contention. The unit was not "rescued". It did indeed get destroyed, as per our agreement on A1 and A2. A rescue != a resurrection, as per A2.

So bringing a unit back from destruction is not a rescue?

A token is just that. A token. A marker.
The Model associated with that token is what counts.
A token isn't part of a unit, the model associated with it definatly is.
And it's the model returning that SA forbids. It's still part of the unit. Do what you like with the token.

time wizard wrote:

Saldiven wrote:

Already edited my post; you ninja'd my self-edit.

Oops! Sorry about that!

No problem. When I catch myself being completely wrong about something, I try to fix it. Haha...I was hoping to have fixed it before suffering the embarrassment of people noticing my wrong-ness.

grendel083 wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:1) That wasn't an answer but a question. SA does destroy and remove. The problem is the situation in which the model has already been destroyed and removed due to being killed in combat. There is a distinction there and a paradox in which you are trying to double remove something. (object reference no longer in existence if you will )

Even if killed in CC before the sweep, the model in question (IC or not) is still part of the unit. Alive or dead it's still part of the unit, the unit is destroyed.

2) It does matter because SA expressly forbids "rescuing". If the point is that it isn't a rescue, SA's specification of rescue no longer is applicable. It's really key to the entire argument.

Making a roll for EV would return a member of the swept unit (still a member of the unit, see above) therefore 'rescuing' it. The sweep prevents the return. IC can change units after they return, but the sweep prevents this return in the first place so they are stuck as part of the swept (destroyed) unit.

1) I see the logic here. I have no contention that you can make an interpretation this way. The point being made by this statement is the model is already destroyed when it died the first time, which is also logical. We won't be able to reach an agreement most likely on this issue because we would a definition of destroyed. You say destroyed applies above and beyond where I say he was already destroyed. /ack

2) This is further to my original point which I implore you to revisit as my proof of the term 'rescue'. (I don't want to repeat it). The short is though that lacking a rule book definition of 'rescue', we go to the dictionary. A rescue must occur prior to some bad event. Since the sweep already killed the unit, the bad event has already occurred. EL then is not a rescue attempt but a resurrection attempt. Again, it is unlikely we will come to an agreement here as if you do not believe you are stretching the defintion of the word 'rescue' beyond its actual meaning, I don't think I can convince you otherwise.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Survivor19 wrote:

The unit was dead. It is not not-dead. By all measures that unit has been rescued.

On the contrary. If the unit became dead it wasn't rescued from death/sweeping advance.
Restoration is just that. Return into play of a model that 'died'. By definition of rescue it isn't it.
Now, there is clear confusion about just what resurrection protocol and everliving tokengs are.
They are not part of the unit. Unit consists of models, which they are not.
Resurrection protocol counters are additional charactersitic that unit gains at the moment the casualties are inflicted to it. The only thing they represent is how many dice are rolled at the end of the phase.
Likewise, everliving counter is not part of a unit. For it, however, a specific model (that was removed from play as a casualty) is defined and the unit the model was attached to when it 'died' (this one is optional). These two things determine how everliving counter is resolved. I must stress that unlike Resurrection protocol counter isn't even "added" to unit and thus cannot even be considered its characteristic.
P.S. And characters are not even considered part of the unit for the purposeof reanimation protocol anyway.

This is a good summation of my point as well.

ngilstrap wrote: A rescue must occur prior to some bad event.

Absolutely, incontrovertibly incorrect.

Ship wreck victims are not rescued before the ship wrecks. Kidnap victims are not rescued before the kidnap. Assault victims are not rescued before the assault occurs. Victims of earthquakes are often rescued from the wreckage of buildings; it's safe to say having a building collapse on you is a bad event.

For something to be rescued, there absolutely must be either an imminently impending bad event, and ongoing bad event, or an already passed bad event.

These examples here show that your premise listed above is false, so therefore cannot be used as a logical basis for your argument.

ngilstrap wrote:A rescue must occur prior to some bad event.

I'm normally loathe to quote dictionary definitions, but that's just not true.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/rescue

If you're trapped, the bad event has already happened. Rescuing means the bad event is being undone.
If you're destroyed, the bad event has already happened. Rescuing means the bad event is being undone.

I used the oxford dictionaries site because it's the closest to the OED (that I know of) and that's the "actual" English definition.

edit: I word can really. Promise I!

rigeld2 wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:I'd ask you to read the thread to see my reasoning, but apparently that's rude, so I'll make the effort to retype all my arguments.

I have read the thread, and for future reference, statements like these, especially when directed for no reason are also rude. The reason for that is that assuming because someone doesn't agree with you means they didn't read the thread is what causes the statement to be viewed as rude (although sometimes probably justified).

I don't try to be rude - I said something similar earlier and was cussed at for it. If you'd read the thread you would have seen my reasoning and not have had to ask for it - which is why I assumed that you hadn't read it.

The second part is more compelling, but again, the entire point is that the model has died, been rended, wounded, etc. This is more a fluff statement, granted, but in that vein, the fluff also states that RP is the robot putting itself back together. This implies that he got wrecked already and is no resurrecting himself. (The T1000 gets hit by liquid nitrogen (a sweeping advance) and is shattered. Later on, heat comes in and he resurrects himself.)

Would you mind explaining why you are defining "at this stage" as "at this point and not after"?

I think it's just the way we read the statement. When I asked for clarification earlier on your interpretation I didn't get how you were not reading it like I do either. Weird how the language works I suppose. (And why we have to engage in these discussion anyways!)

The way I read it (lacking a definition of "stage" mind you which is why I think we should probably just avoid this one altogether for discussion), I read as a layman's term of "at this point", stage meaning point in time. I would then view anything after that point as being 'another stage'. When you said "everything after" that made sense to me then because you are seeing the term "stage" (if I understand correctly) and saying something like, "you have met THIS stage, and no are proceeding" using stage like an accomplishment, which is also a correct reading. (Everytime I say stage I keep thinking of video game references?)

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Q2: Does bringing back the EL model un-destroy the unit?
Q3: Does un-destroying the unit "rescue" the unit from destruction?

A2: Yes - the EL model does not create a new unit when it stands back up.
A3: Yes - the unit was saved from destruction - no kill point is awarded if the game ends after this phase.

I don't see any way to define "rescue" that avoids those issues.

A2: Also agreed. No point of contention.
A3: This is the point of contention. The unit was not "rescued". It did indeed get destroyed, as per our agreement on A1 and A2. A rescue != a resurrection, as per A2.

So bringing a unit back from destruction is not a rescue?

ngilstrap wrote:To rescue you from a lion, I have to stop it from eating you. if it has already eaten you, I am not recuing you by bringing you back to life. At that point, I am resurrection (reanimating) you.

I see the logic, though, as to how that could be interpreted as a "rescue". I just think that it is stretching the definition of rescue to make it mean resurrect. Thus, although logical, I think that it is the weaker of the two interpretations. That doesn't make you wrong, me right, or a hill of beans, just a view point.

I see your point, but there are a few other things to consider.

The Lion rescue, the Lion could already be attacking you. you can rescue them from a good mauling. A rescue doesn't have to be 'from death'. Same with a Sweeping Advance. As mentioned in the rules the models can be "scattered, ripped apart or sent packing", a rescue is certainly possible from at least two of those. No resurection needed.

The word rescue is only an issue if SA means 'dead', which isn't necessarily the case.

rigeld2 wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:A rescue must occur prior to some bad event.

I'm normally loathe to quote dictionary definitions, but that's just not true.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/rescue

If you're trapped, the bad event has already happened. Rescuing means the bad event is being undone.
If you're destroyed, the bad event has already happened. Rescuing means the bad event is being undone.

I used the oxford dictionaries site because it's the closest to the OED (that I know of) and that's the "actual" English definition.

edit: I word can really. Promise I!

This not only serves your point but also mine which is why I think we will just inevitably end up disagreeing.

Your dictionary link provided has the main definition of "rescue" to be:

"save (someone) from a dangerous or difficult situation:"

It does not mean to undo a dangerous or difficult situation.

So here's the point in a nutshell.

1) The unit that is swept was not saved in any way from being swept. The event occurred, they were destroyed. (we agree here)
2) The unit may not be rescued at this stage (rulebook) and according to the definition of rescue above, that would mean saving them from being destroyed. The unit was destroyed (as per #1) and thus were not rescued. (this is a "duh" statement, we agree here)

3) After being destroyed, can a model attempt to EL to come back? The definition of rescue is not to "undo" but to "save". By #1 and #2 above, the model was already destroyed thus no save took place. When he comes back, this is a "resurrection" which is an "undo" not a rescue which is a "save".

Suffice it to say, again, I think your interpretation is entirely logical, and I see where you are coming from. I also think that my interpretation is well supported and logical. In a sense, we are both right. The only caveat is that we both think we are "more" right. The reason why I think I am more right in this case is because i believe that stretching the above defintion to mean "undo" is exactly that, a stretch of the definition of rescue.

Bottom line for both of us is, we really won't know till an FAQ comes out (if ever).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

grendel083 wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:To rescue you from a lion, I have to stop it from eating you. if it has already eaten you, I am not recuing you by bringing you back to life. At that point, I am resurrection (reanimating) you.

I see the logic, though, as to how that could be interpreted as a "rescue". I just think that it is stretching the definition of rescue to make it mean resurrect. Thus, although logical, I think that it is the weaker of the two interpretations. That doesn't make you wrong, me right, or a hill of beans, just a view point.

I see your point, but there are a few other things to consider.

The Lion rescue, the Lion could already be attacking you. you can rescue them from a good mauling. A rescue doesn't have to be 'from death'. Same with a Sweeping Advance. As mentioned in the rules the models can be "scattered, ripped apart or sent packing", a rescue is certainly possible from at least two of those. No resurection needed.

The word rescue is only an issue if SA means 'dead', which isn't necessarily the case.

I agree, it could be interpreted that way. The reason why I think it is "rescue from death" is because SA says it destroys the unit. So, I guess that leads that I am saying that the unit is NOT being "rescued" from destruction (death or whatever we want to refer to it as). I am saying it is being 'resurrected'.

Still a valid point though and I get how it could be read that way.

I created no strawman; I pointed out how your premise is flawed by giving examples. To prove a premise is flawed, you only have to show on instance that it is inaccurate.

I have to admit that the parsing you're doing between "rescue" and "resurrect" are absolutely amusing, from a rules debate standpoint. I haven't seen something this convoluted in a while.

Your biggest flaw is that you're focusing on the models and not the unit.

The ultimate "bad event" that can happen to a unit in a game is for it to be permanently removed from the board, with no chance to come back. My premise is that SA isn't that bad event, but merely something that triggers the bad event (being removed from the board, unable to return). Regardless of whether or not models were removed before the SA occurred, if one allows those models to come back to the table after the SA occurs, then the UNIT has not suffered the ultimate "bad event" that can happen in game terms. Using your own language, the UNIT has been rescued.

You argue that the SA is the bad event that has already happened, therefore there is no "rescue." My argument is that SA is merely the mechanism by which the real "bad event" occurs: a model/unit being permanently removed from the game board for the duration of the game. Anything that prevents a unit from being permanently removed from the game board has rescued that model/unit.

(Sorry to ramble; trying to type and do work at the same time.)

I gotta go, and am going to bow out of the conversation. I think my point has been made clearly enough to add to the discussion.

maybe if we get a clarification in INAT on the sweeping advance (already added to the request thread) and/or a GW FAQ, we'll come back make fun of whoever ends up being wrong.

ngilstrap wrote:I agree, it could be interpreted that way. The reason why I think it is "rescue from death" is because SA says it destroys the unit. So, I guess that leads that I am saying that the unit is NOT being "rescued" from destruction (death or whatever we want to refer to it as). I am saying it is being 'resurrected'.

Still a valid point though and I get how it could be read that way.

I get where you're coming from.

The way i'm reading it in game terms is
destroyed = removed (but not nessisarily dead)
rescued = returned to play (not nessisarily 'rescued from death')

It's a problem when rules and background fluff are combined in the same section. And also why I would avoid using a dictionary definition.

ngilstrap wrote:we'll come back make fun of whoever ends up being wrong.

How about no - that never ends well (no matter who "wins")

Saldiven wrote:I created no strawman; I pointed out how your premise is flawed by giving examples. To prove a premise is flawed, you only have to show on instance that it is inaccurate.

I have to admit that the parsing you're doing between "rescue" and "resurrect" are absolutely amusing, from a rules debate standpoint. I haven't seen something this convoluted in a while.

Your biggest flaw is that you're focusing on the models and not the unit.

The ultimate "bad event" that can happen to a unit in a game is for it to be permanently removed from the board, with no chance to come back. My premise is that SA isn't that bad event, but merely something that triggers the bad event (being removed from the board, unable to return). Regardless of whether or not models were removed before the SA occurred, if one allows those models to come back to the table after the SA occurs, then the UNIT has not suffered the ultimate "bad event" that can happen in game terms. Using your own language, the UNIT has been rescued.

You argue that the SA is the bad event that has already happened, therefore there is no "rescue." My argument is that SA is merely the mechanism by which the real "bad event" occurs: a model/unit being permanently removed from the game board for the duration of the game. Anything that prevents a unit from being permanently removed from the game board has rescued that model/unit.

(Sorry to ramble; trying to type and do work at the same time.)

By definition, creating examples which are ultimately not relevant is the creation of strawmen. Stating something like you can rescue sailors who have been ship wrecked, when we are clearly talking about something that has died, is that definition.

Saldiven wrote:
I have to admit that the parsing you're doing between "rescue" and "resurrect" are absolutely amusing, from a rules debate standpoint. I haven't seen something this convoluted in a while.

I'm thinking this line was just intended to be rude? You don't sound very amused, but more annoyed. Just in case, though, am I really trying to convolute the situation or is it the notion that you can rescue someone who has already died convolution?

Saldiven wrote:
The ultimate "bad event" that can happen to a unit in a game is for it to be permanently removed from the board, with no chance to come back. My premise is that SA isn't that bad event, but merely something that triggers the bad event (being removed from the board, unable to return). Regardless of whether or not models were removed before the SA occurred, if one allows those models to come back to the table after the SA occurs, then the UNIT has not suffered the ultimate "bad event" that can happen in game terms. Using your own language, the UNIT has been rescued.

You argue that the SA is the bad event that has already happened, therefore there is no "rescue." My argument is that SA is merely the mechanism by which the real "bad event" occurs: a model/unit being permanently removed from the game board for the duration of the game. Anything that prevents a unit from being permanently removed from the game board has rescued that model/unit.

(Sorry to ramble; trying to type and do work at the same time.)

We agree that removal from the board, ( i suppose but I will call this destruction) is the ultimate bad event. Regardless of if SA is the trigger or the attack that killed him prior to SA, he has been destroyed and removed.

I'm not arguing that SA is the bad event but rather destroyed is the bad event. The unit has been destroyed. EL does not try to rescue them from that. It tries to resurrect them after the fact.

Anyways! i'm at as per above. This was my last comment to respond to. Hope that helps!

The unit was destroyed

The unit is now not destroyed

Thus, the unit has been rescued.

It really doesnt get simpler than that. Not at all.

WBB never worked against SA, read your 4th ed rulebook, read the 5th ed one and note that the wording is exactly the same. WBB was the canonical example of a rule that did not work against SA. WBB, in regards this discussion, is FUNCTIONALLY IDENTICAL to EL and RP, it just occured at a later point in time.

So any argument that stands on "at this stage" being incorrectly interpreted to being a single instance (when in context it isnt - it is duration) already falls apart - it is ignorant of not only the current rules, but of rules history.

We're also right back at stage one - some people feel that rescuing the unit from status: destroyed isnt actually rescuing the unit, some others feel that the token isnt a member of the unit, despite the actual rules AND FAQ stating otherwise, and others are just making yet more rules up out of nowhere.

grendel083 wrote:It's a problem when rules and background fluff are combined in the same section. And also why I would avoid using a dictionary definition.

Absolutely. I wish GW and the other game makers would take a cue from the old Avalon Hill rules writers. GW could have lots of little fluff sections through the book, but the rules themselves should be presented in a dry and boring (but infinitely clear) outline format. Something like this:

I. Movement
A. Infantry Movement
1. Infantry models may move a total of 6" during the controlling player's Movement Phase.
a. This general rule may be modified by other game effects.
b. An infantry model may not move through friendly or enemy models.
c. An infantry model may not end it's movement partially or entirely occupying the space of another model's base.

Etc. Or something like that. I've always said that GW's liberal intermixing of fluff and rules makes a needlessly confusing set of rules and inspires unnecessary arguments.

rigeld2 wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:A rescue must occur prior to some bad event.

I'm normally loathe to quote dictionary definitions, but that's just not true.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/rescue

If you're trapped, the bad event has already happened. Rescuing means the bad event is being undone.
If you're destroyed, the bad event has already happened. Rescuing means the bad event is being undone.

I used the oxford dictionaries site because it's the closest to the OED (that I know of) and that's the "actual" English definition.

edit: I word can really. Promise I!

I agree with these definitions, but in this case we're not talking about a kidnapping or being trapped.

In this case we're talking about being killed and removed from play. You wouldn't say someone who was killed was rescued even if their body was found. EL doesn't rescue the model from the underworld - I'm trying not to stray into fluff territory with this. Certainly the normal concept of rescue in any life or death situation means to prevent death.

Likewise a model that is "reanimated" isn't rescued, but reanimated.

I would never refer to some models with RP that made their roll and consider them "rescued from dying". They died and reanimated.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

ngilstrap wrote:A rescue must occur prior to some bad event.

I'm normally loathe to quote dictionary definitions, but that's just not true.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/rescue

If you're trapped, the bad event has already happened. Rescuing means the bad event is being undone.
If you're destroyed, the bad event has already happened. Rescuing means the bad event is being undone.

I used the oxford dictionaries site because it's the closest to the OED (that I know of) and that's the "actual" English definition.

edit: I word can really. Promise I!

I agree with these definitions, but in this case we're not talking about a kidnapping or being trapped.

In this case we're talking about being killed and removed from play. You wouldn't say someone who was killed was rescued even if their body was found. EL doesn't rescue the model from the underworld - I'm trying not to stray into fluff territory with this. Certainly the normal concept of rescue in any life or death situation means to prevent death.

Likewise a model that is "reanimated" isn't rescued, but reanimated.

I would never refer to some models with RP that made their roll and consider them "rescued from dying". They died and reanimated.

You've rescued the unit from destruction.

ngilstrap wrote:

I'm not arguing that SA is the bad event but rather destroyed is the bad event. The unit has been destroyed. EL does not try to rescue them from that. It tries to resurrect them after the fact.

Anyways! i'm at as per above. This was my last comment to respond to. Hope that helps!

It absolutely, absolutely does not matter whether or not bringing back the models happens after the fact.

The ultimate "bad event' that can happen to models on the game board is an on-going effect. As I said, that ultimate bad event is being removed from the table with no possibility of returning, not merely being removed from the table. If there is any possibility for the model to return, then they have not suffered the ultimate bad event. If at any point during the game, models or units come back to the table, that bad event has been avoided.

You want to look at merely being removed from the board as the "bad event," and only in the single, isolated instance of when the models/units are removed. I think that is entirely too narrow a focus. Just being removed from the board is not really a "bad event" if the models have a chance to return.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

Likewise a model that is "reanimated" isn't rescued, but reanimated.

I would never refer to some models with RP that made their roll and consider them "rescued from dying". They died and reanimated.

Good job that SA is only concerned about the units status, and the fact the unit has been rescued. HOW the unit was rescued isnt relevant.

Rigeld2 wrote:
You've rescued the unit from destruction.

I see how it can be taken either way. A 3 wound model with EL comes back with 1 wound. Are zomebies rescued humans?

Saldiven wrote:
The ultimate "bad event' that can happen to models on the game board is an on-going effect.

This is what I've been saying all along. If you believe that SA is an on-going effect then you would believe EL does not work. If the unit perform Sweeping Advance at the end of the phase then I would agree.
This is why I ask:

Does Consolidation happen after Sweeping Advance, or at the same time? When does the Sweeping Advance action done by the winning unit end?

Nemesor Dave wrote: This is why I ask:

Does Consolidation happen after Sweeping Advance, or at the same time?

Main rulebook, page 33, 'Assault Phase Summary', '3 Resolve Combats', 5th bullet point, second sentence, "Units falling back from close combat must test to see if they successfully break off, if they fail they are destroyed. The winners may then consolidate their position."

Nemesor Dave wrote:When does the Sweeping Advance action done by the winning unit end?

"The destroyed unit is removed immediatley." After that, the sweeping advance action has certainly ended.

@ND:

I don't believe it matters when SA happens. SA isn't the ongoing effect that I mention.

The ongoing effect I mention is "being removed from the board with no possibility of returning." (Quoting myself.)

SA merely triggers that event. As such, it doesn't matter when it happens. There are tons of things that can cause a model or unit to leave the game board with no possibility of returning. For the vast majority of units in the game, suffering an unsaved wound is all it takes. Other models have rules that give those models varying abilities to return to the table after they have otherwise been removed. The rules for Sweeping Advance acknowledge that certain models/units have rules that allow them to avoid permanent removal from the board; and states that those rules must specifically exempt Sweeping Advance in order to trigger after Sweeping Advance occurs.

As such, I think timing is irrelevant as far as SA and EL/RP are concerned.

Careful time, ND may try to now claim that, since SA has "ended" any prohibition on rescuing the unit has ended.

Of course this is a terrible argument, as proven by the prior WBB rules and any non-convoluted reading of the rules, but hey, its likely.

It also got shot down the last time ND tried it.

time wizard wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:When does the Sweeping Advance action done by the winning unit end?

"The destroyed unit is removed immediatley." After that, the sweeping advance action has certainly ended.

So what? As I said before, SA is merely a trigger. The SA trigger might be "ended," but the end result of unit being removed with no chance of returning is ongoing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Careful time, ND may try to now claim that, since SA has "ended" any prohibition on rescuing the unit has ended.

Of course this is a terrible argument, as proven by the prior WBB rules and any non-convoluted reading of the rules, but hey, its likely.

It also got shot down the last time ND tried it.

I can follow his argument, but it requires too much of the Easter Egg hunting that GW stated years ago they do not put in their rules.

I'm a big fan of using the Occam's Razor argument: The least convoluted possible explanation is the most accurate.

The unit was destroyed

The unit is now not destroyed

Thus, the unit has been rescued.

Wrong. This is not how rescuing works.

The unit was about to be destroyed.
The unit was prevented from being destroyed and thus wasn't
The unit has been rescued

This is how rescuing works
Another example

The shipwreck survivors has been rescued

That means they are out of the immediate danger of drowning with the wreck/starving to death/etc and are now safe.

Oh well, i think the point has been made. I apoilogise for my tone, it may ahve been a tad obnoxiuos.