Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

THE_GODLYNESS wrote:I think i was skipped over.

what does Resolve mean?

it means its been completed.

if in a combat and a unit has been SA'ed

then consolidation.

then you move on to the next combat and Resolve it.

to say SA has a lasting effect for the rest of turn or game is un true for it has been

Resolved for that combat.

Yes, the combat has been resolved.
Actions that have been resolved can have a lasting effect - you resolve shooting, and remove models. The lasting effect is that (barring EL/RP/whatever) the models don't come back.
SA has a lasting effect - the unit is destroyed and cannot be rescued without specific allowance.

Also, the enter key is not punctuation - please try and make your posts more legible. It's like reading Shatner.

is there a

Problem with me.

Talking like

Shatner?

Captian James T kirk

at your

service.

Sadly I think the INAT FAQ is going to end this SA v. EL debate.

"Q: If a Necron model with ‘Ever-
Living’ is part of a unit that is wiped out by a
sweeping advance or is killed failing to stop a vehicle
with a ‘Death or Glory! attack’, can it still return to
play via its ‘Reanimation Protocols’?
A: No in both cases [clarification]."

kilgan04 wrote:Sadly I think the INAT FAQ is going to end this SA v. EL debate.

"Q: If a Necron model with ‘Ever-
Living’ is part of a unit that is wiped out by a
sweeping advance or is killed failing to stop a vehicle
with a ‘Death or Glory! attack’, can it still return to
play via its ‘Reanimation Protocols’?
A: No in both cases [clarification]."

I think if you had read the thread no one is arguing against that.
Also the INAT FAQ is not relevant here in YMDC.

@Kilgan:

And another poster mentioned that the ETC has ruled that the EL model would get it's roll.

So, we have two different large tournaments that have conflicting interpretations of an area of the rules that some people find contentious.

Unfortunately, the rulings made by tournament co-ordinators or rules teams really have no bearing in this sort of argument. They are merely how those tournaments have chosen to handle the issue. Either tournament could just as well have stated that EL models must be replaced by a miniature butterfinger candy-bar and then eaten after a sweeping advance, if they wanted to.

Well that and everyone seems to agree that if the model is standing when SA occurs it doesn't get EL which is all the the INAT is addressing. The issue this time and each of the other three times has been what happens if the model dies before SA.

Personally I wish these threads got locked every time they popped up as this issue isn't going away and both sides are firmly rooted in there beliefs with equal support for both side.

Now out b4 Nos decides to flame me and everything I believe in.

Personally, I belive ND's time argument.

Quite frankly, no-one has ever complained that I place an EL counter upon a SA, so I won't change anything

I'll certainly be throwing all my attacks at the unit in an attempt to break them from now on. Effective AND avoids this ever popping up

IHateNids wrote:Personally, I belive ND's time argument.

Quite frankly, no-one has ever complained that I place an EL counter upon a SA, so I won't change anything

A time argument that fails in comparison to a rule that worked even later than EL / RP, yet was still denied by SA?

NDs time argument is bunk, as has been shown repeatedly throughout this thread.

Either tournament could just as well have stated that EL models must be replaced by a miniature butterfinger candy-bar and then eaten after a sweeping advance, if they wanted to.

That'd be awesome.

Feth off, and let me play how I want

<Play how you want, your opponents allowing, but further rude posts on Dakka will jeopardize your ability to post here. --Janthkin>

IHateNids wrote:Feth off, and let me play how I want

Same to you?
I mean I prefer to play by the rules, but if you do not, feel free. Just not in a game with me.

kirsanth wrote:

IHateNids wrote:Feth off, and let me play how I want

Same to you?
I mean I prefer to play by the rules, but if you do not, feel free. Just not in a game with me.

As above....

nosferatu1001 wrote:Basimpo - since you apparently didnt check, there is no mixing of 4th and 5th - the two rules are identical. You'd have known this if you had bothered to check of course. Good to know you cna be ignored as irrelevant to rules discussions, good start.

nosferatu1001 read the tenets again. You are missing an important one. Probably the most important one.

Also, you failed to answer whether or not EL and RP is the same as WBB. I do not have access to 4th edition rules. Please cite the relevant 4th edition rules that are still in effect, have not been, and were not modified/transfered/kept that are still cited out of necessity for play of 5th edition. For example, the Tau Empire codex is 4th edition. Aside from the faqs and errata, the codex is necessary to the play of 5th edition Tau because there is no 5th edition Tau Empire Codex.

Next time you make a personal attack on someone, your whole conversation will be invalid. Please read the tenets and lets bring this back to a discussion, rather than personal snips at people please.

I failed to answer an irrelevant question. Shock.

The current SA rule is, word for word, identical to the 4th edition SA rule.

The "timing" issue is trying to claim that EL occurs "after" SA, and so is exempt from the SA rules. Of course, this fails utterly, as WBB occured even later, and never worked against SA - it was evcen the canonical example of a special rule that didnt work, as it was the example given in the 4th ed rulebook.

So it fails on history, it fails on actual rules, and it fails to hold any water as regards any non-easter egg hunt reading of the rules.

By your admission, WBB, and 4th edition rules are irrelevant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I found a site that lists WBB key points. By just reading the key points, i can tell WBB is not the same word for word, at all. Also, nothing like EL is listed. Furthermore, the 4th ed codex lists something called phase-out. Does this mean that ive been playing my 5th edition necrons with their 5th edition codex and their 5th edition BRB wrong the whole time, because history suggests that i should phase-out after i reach 25% of my total necro force. No! Because the 4th edition is irrelevant.

People, People, space monsters, this is going nowhere:

Sweeping Advances

"When a unit falls back from combat, the victors make a Sweeping Advance, attempting to cut down the retreating enemies.

Both the unit falling back and the winning unit roll a D6 and add their Initiative value to the result. Always count the Initiative value from the models profile without any modifiers. In a unit with a mixed Initiative characteristics, count the majority value, or the highest if there is no majority.

They then compare their totals.

If the winner's total is equal or greater they catch the fleeing enemy with a sweeping advance. The falling back unit is destroyed. 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. The destroyed unit is removed immediately. Unless otherwise otherwise specified, no save or other special rule can rescue the unit at this stage; for them the battle is over.

This is the Sweeping advance rule copied WORD FOR WORD. The important text is in red, Bold and underlined. Also note that in this context, At this stage means "from now on" not "at this time"

Ever-Living

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

If the model had joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, and the roll was passed, it must be returned to play with a single Wound, in coherency with that unit as explained in Re-animation protocols. If the model had not joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, it must be replaced with a single wound, within 3" of the counter. In either case, the model must be placed at least 1" away from an enemy models. If the model is placed within coherency with one or more friendly units that it is eligible to join, it automatically joins one of those units (your choice). If the model was locked in close combat when it "died", and the combat is ongoing, then it must immediately pile in. If the returning model cannot be placed, for whatever reason, it is lost and does not return. If the roll was failed, remove the counter from play.

Again, this is the Ever-Living Rule WORD FOR WORD.

Note that the SA rule does not "Remove as a Casualty" it is simply "Removed". Also note that when the ever living Rule is rolled, the Model has already been removed. Now according to RAW, the model would NOT be eligible for the Ever-Living rule in the first place if he survived to be swept. If it was KIA before SA, he is STILL attached to said unit which is being swept; The ENTIRE unit is removed, including those whom were KIA beforehand.

I sincerely hope I have played a pivotal role in deciding this argument.

You've just restated what's already been said, so hardly pivotal - but that's not to say its not appreciated.

Except the EL counter is not attached to the unit it is placed on the table top. When the model with EL successfully resurrects he is free to join any eligible unit or be placed alone within 3" of the marker. An EL model is not attached to the squad. The Res orb allows the use of the orb if the unit exists and is eligible for RP rolls. If the RP tokens are removed by a sweep the attachment of the orb is irrelevant and does not make the EL strictly linked to that unit, as the EL rules clearly demonstrate and the GW FAQ makes even more clear.

Basimpo wrote:By your admission, WBB, and 4th edition rules are irrelevant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I found a site that lists WBB key points. By just reading the key points, i can tell WBB is not the same word for word, at all. Also, nothing like EL is listed. Furthermore, the 4th ed codex lists something called phase-out. Does this mean that ive been playing my 5th edition necrons with their 5th edition codex and their 5th edition BRB wrong the whole time, because history suggests that i should phase-out after i reach 25% of my total necro force. No! Because the 4th edition is irrelevant.

If anything I would say RP is more like WBB and EL has been added for this very reason. RP is more like WBB than EL, but all in all the rules are just different.

A unit destroyed by sweeping advance is "wiped out". This really should be the only rule you need for this to be clear:

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.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Crusader - did you deliberately type this wrong or is your codex different from mine?

Your quote:
"Instead place an Ever-Living counter where the model was removed. At the end of the phase roll for this counter, just as you would a reanimation protocols counter. "

My codex:
"Instead place an Ever-Living counter where the model was removed from play. At the end of the phase roll for this counter, just as you would a reanimation protocols counter. "

Did you omit the part the says "removed from play" on purpose?

Well that Is the EXACT wording in my dex. So whether or not one of our codicies is wrong I don't know but thats what it says.

I would upload a picture of the entry but I can't figure it out for the life of me....

The Crusader wrote:Well that Is the EXACT wording in my dex. So whether or not one of our codicies is wrong I don't know but thats what it says.

I would upload a picture of the entry but I can't figure it out for the life of me....

ND is actually correct here, though not necessarily in a way that empowers his argument. In your own post, the first sentence after the line which you emphasized in read, it reads as he states.

So it says BOTH removed as a casualty, and removed from play.

Basimpo wrote:By your admission, WBB, and 4th edition rules are irrelevant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I found a site that lists WBB key points. By just reading the key points, i can tell WBB is not the same word for word, at all. Also, nothing like EL is listed. Furthermore, the 4th ed codex lists something called phase-out. Does this mean that ive been playing my 5th edition necrons with their 5th edition codex and their 5th edition BRB wrong the whole time, because history suggests that i should phase-out after i reach 25% of my total necro force. No! Because the 4th edition is irrelevant.

Don't be rude.-Mannahnin. Try again.

I did not say that WBB and EL / RP are the same rules, word for word. Go back and actually read the post and you will see this. In case you cannot work it out, "SA" means Sweeping Advance

I stated, correctly, that the 4th edition Sweeping Advance rule is, word for word, identical to the 5th ed [b}Sweeping Advance[/b] (bold added so you cannot possibly miss it, this time) rule. The only difference is that they rmeoved the example of WBB. The rules are, however, still exactly the same. So, how does this matter? It matters to those claiming that suddenly Sweeping Advance allows units to return to play after Sweeping Advance is "over", by claiming that timing comes into play. This entirely destroys the argument, because WBB resolved even later than EL does. ND however clings to this timing argument as if it actually had any basis in rules.

Its called an analogy - WBB and EL/RP are directly comparable, and so claiming a timing allowance for one when the other never worked is laughable. Oh, and 3rd ed. Necron codex is 3rd ed.

I would advise you actually read AND understand others points - so far you havent managed that in any post.

The Crusader wrote:Well that Is the EXACT wording in my dex. So whether or not one of our codicies is wrong I don't know but thats what it says.

I would upload a picture of the entry but I can't figure it out for the life of me....

Mine says Removed form play also ,so it would seem your codex is differing from others .It would be nice to know if this is just your codex or if others have the same wording .

This argument is fun to read but in the end its how ,YOU and your flag read it .I could add my opinion to this that EL gets to roll but what would that prove , or add to this argument

Nothing, as you cannot fulfill the tenets of this forum by providing any rules to back it up.

There are no rules allowing EL to roll - none at all. It all comes back to one simple undeniable fact - neither EL nor RP specify they work against Sweeping Advance, so they dont. Thats as simple as it gets.

In Reference to my post, got my mate to show me his codex and it seems mine is a mis-print or something. I shall edit my afore-mentioned post to say the correct rule.

I apologise for any annoyance my damnable codex may have caused

Kharrak wrote:

The Crusader wrote:Well that Is the EXACT wording in my dex. So whether or not one of our codicies is wrong I don't know but thats what it says.

I would upload a picture of the entry but I can't figure it out for the life of me....

ND is actually correct here, though not necessarily in a way that empowers his argument. In your own post, the first sentence after the line which you emphasized in read, it reads as he states.

So it says BOTH removed as a casualty, and removed from play.

Its really a whole argument on its own. Now the necron codex confirms once and for all - RFP and RFPaaC are exactly the same.

If in Warhammer 40k there were two distinct ways a model could die - "removed from play" and "removed from play as a casualty".

Why would they continually use them interchangeably?

Nemesor Dave wrote:

Kharrak wrote:

The Crusader wrote:Well that Is the EXACT wording in my dex. So whether or not one of our codicies is wrong I don't know but thats what it says.

I would upload a picture of the entry but I can't figure it out for the life of me....

ND is actually correct here, though not necessarily in a way that empowers his argument. In your own post, the first sentence after the line which you emphasized in read, it reads as he states.

So it says BOTH removed as a casualty, and removed from play.

Its really a whole argument on its own. Now the necron codex confirms once and for all - RFP and RFPaaC are exactly the same.

If in Warhammer 40k there were two distinct ways a model could die - "removed from play" and "removed from play as a casualty".

Why would they continually use them interchangeably?

No, the Necron codex confirms nothing of the sort.
If you buy a pizza from dominoes, call me when you buy a pizza.
That sentence is parsed exactly as the one in the Necron book. And yet "buy a pizza" and "buy a pizza from dominoes" are absolutely not interchangeable. The latter phrase refers to the former.

Stop Easter egging. (irony because this is Easter weekend...)

NecronLord3 wrote:Except the EL counter is not attached to the unit it is placed on the table top. When the model with EL successfully resurrects he is free to join any eligible unit or be placed alone within 3" of the marker.

You are only quoting part of the rule here. The first part says, "If the model had joined a unit when it was removed as a casualty, and the roll was passed, it must be returned to play, with a single wound, in coherency with that unit as explained in Reanimation Protocols." So they had been a part of the unit when the counter was placed and must be returned to the unit if it passes its roll.

Oh, and it should be noted that the part you allude to would not be applicable at all to a lord or a cryptek. They are not independent characters. So they can never join another unit. They are attached to a unit at the start of the game and are a part of that unit for the rest of the game.

That's why if you join a lord, an HQ choice from a royal court, to a unit of warriors and the unit of warriors are all removed (by anything other than a sweeping advance ), the lord is still able to control objectives, because once it joined the unit of warriors it became a scoring unit.

If you want to continue to say that the lord or cryptek is no longer part of the unit once an EL counter is placed, that's fine. Then that would mean when the lord or cryptek passes its EL roll, it reverts to being an HQ choice, the warrior unit gives up a kill point at that time, and the lord or cryptek will give up a kill point as well when it is destroyed. But we know this isn't the way it works, don't we?

You can't have your cake and eat it too. If the lord or cryptek are a part of the unit for scoring purposes (and they are) and are part of the unit for res orb purposes (and they are) then they are part of the unit if the unit is caught in a sweeping advance. And they are.

Notwithstanding the fact that as has been posted ad naseum, "Unless otherwise specified..." neither RP nor EL do anything against sweeping advance.

And that's all folks.

Thread has gotten circular. If anyone has a new argument, feel free to start a new thread and link to this one. Locking.