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.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:

WanderingFox wrote:@komissssar I'm aware of the rest of the phrasing, but even if you were to take it as to only referencing that specific example, there is still no rules that support the orb functioning once the lord is off the table, or at the very least no one has provided any.


@avatar:
What you're arguing is the following:

I have a lord w/ 10 warriors. The lord dies and does not return to play. Next phase you kill 4 warriors. By your logic, I can take RP at a 4+ on those 4 warriors because they are "part of the lords unit" even though the lord with the wargear is not present.
This makes absolutely no sense, and has no backing in the rules.

No. Reread my post. I said at the start of the phase. If the ResOrb isn't available at the start of the phase, obviously, its not available at the end of the phase.

A model ceases to be a part of a unit the second it is 'removed as a casualty' which happens the moment you place that ever living counter.

Regardless of your logic the ResOrb rule explicitly states the Lord and the unit he is with benefits from the affects of the Orb. By your "logic" the Lord can never benefit from the affect of the ResOrb, yet the rule of the ResOrb EXPLICITLY states otherwise.

Allow me to illustrate this with a known example from another codex.

Actually, no. Rules from another codex, or FAQs for other codices, do not affect other codices unless explicitly stated as such.

1. No where in the necron codex does it state start of phase.

2. My logic works just fine. Orb is present when the lord dies, lord gets 4+ As the orb is ALWAYS present when the lord dies, he always gets a 4+ ... still trying to figure out how you can manage to read that as the exact opposite of what I was saying.

3. Sure they do, they set precedent. While they may not function to the point where they can be used as a stand alone explanation, they point at how it's functioned in other situations, and perhaps with clearer wording.

In counter, I'd like you to point out, with a quote, where it says in the codex that the orb functions the way you describe. Specifically.

I certainly can't find it. All I see is that the lord and his unit pass RP on a 4+ This then begs the question what constitutes a unit and if the lord is still part of the unit.

By your argument, the lord is part of the unit for the entire phase of shooting, even if it's been removed as a casualty. This directly contradicts not only common sense, but also the wording in several codecs as well as the BRB.

If you wanted to be absolutely adherent to the RAW. The res orb would never function at all. Since this is obviously wrong, we go to the next closest thing, and there are several codecs that make use of powers that can be 'out-ranged' or otherwise shut off mid-combat. ALL of these powers have FAQ entries that explicitly state that the power must be active at the time of use in order for it to function.

What you suggest, while it makes sense from a logical perspective (in terms of game balance at least), completely ignores this precedent. It also completely ignores the fact that the model is removed as a casualty.

What I have asked several times now, and what no one has done, is prove, with rules, that the lord is still a member of the unit when the second set of warriors dies.

Again and again I ask this question, and no one has come up with an answer. You keep saying things like "at the beginning of the phase" and "the ever living counter" but these things have absolutely no rules background.

What I have been saying is grounded solidly, not only in the history of how the power has functioned in the past, but also in the direct wording of the codex.

Allow me to elaborate a final time before I leave this discussion as a lost cause...

10 warriors, 1 lord (lords unit = 10 warriors)

2 warriors and 1 lord die due to a round of shooting from tac squad A.

You place 2 RP counters and an EL counter. These models were part of the lord's unit, and thus get a 4+ roll at the end of the phase since they 'test RP on a 4+'

8 warriors (lords unit = nothing. Lord no longer exists)

3 more warriors die to a round of shooting from tac squad B in the same shooting phase.

You place an additional 3 RP counters. These models are not part of the lord's unit (there is no lord in coherency with them at the time that they die). These counters test on a 5+

In order for your interpretation to function, the section containing 8 warriors must still be considered part of the lords unit even though the lord is no longer on the board. I will ask again, If an IC, for example, provides FNP for a unit and that IC is taken out at I6 in close combat, do the models that get attacked at I4 still have FNP? The answer here is obviously no. The model providing the bonus is no longer present.

So... My final request of you is to prove, with a rule or FAQ entry, that RP functions differently.

You're right. As long as the Lord benefits from the ResOrb the rest of the unit does. When the Lord goes down, the Orb is no longer functioning thus the remaining unit does not benefit.

I must say I disagree. Res-orb's says that lord and unit pass RP on a 4+. Why would you check if a model is eligible for the 4+ before the time of RP? It has no bubble of influence any more, so no need to check when models are in its radius. It's just a unit with an orb.When it's time for RP you check if a model has an orb, and proceed with the roll. That's how I see it.

I thought that I had all of the darned questions already!!! This is absurd!

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/409141.page

copper.talos wrote:I must say I disagree. Res-orb's says that lord and unit pass RP on a 4+. Why would you check if a model is eligible for the 4+ before the time of RP? It has no bubble of influence any more, so no need to check when models are in its radius. It's just a unit with an orb.When it's time for RP you check if a model has an orb, and proceed with the roll. That's how I see it.

Then its checked at the end of the phase, and the lord may never benifit from its own orb (as its already off the board at the time of reanimation protocols). This clearly contradicts the wording of the res orb.

copper.talos wrote:I must say I disagree. Res-orb's says that lord and unit pass RP on a 4+. Why would you check if a model is eligible for the 4+ before the time of RP? It has no bubble of influence any more, so no need to check when models are in its radius. It's just a unit with an orb.When it's time for RP you check if a model has an orb, and proceed with the roll. That's how I see it.

The Orb's affect is checked at the time the model is damaged. In the course of a battle it matters when the bearer of the Orb is damaged. Once the bearer goes down, the Orb is no longer available, in fact it's not even on the table per RAW. Thus, remaining models in the unit do not benefit from the, now, nonexistent Orb.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:
The Orb's affect is checked at the time the model is damaged. In the course of a battle it matters when the bearer of the Orb is damaged. Once the bearer goes down, the Orb is no longer available, in fact it's not even on the table per RAW. Thus, remaining models in the unit do not benefit from the, now, nonexistent Orb.

100% made up check.

There is nothing in the Rez Orb's rules that tell you to check if the model has, or had the res orb any time before rolling for RP.
The model with the res orb does not have to be on the table in order for it to function; by necessity it almost cannot be(in the case of the dead bearer).

This is not an Item/rule that has a ranged effect.

This is not an item/rule that affects Reserves rolls

This is an Item that allows the bearer and his unit to have an easier time of returning from being tokens.

The Only checks ever needed are as follows:
Are you making an RP roll? Did you purchase a Res Orb for a model still alive in the unit, or one of the Tokens making an RP roll?

If both are yes; 4+ RP rolls this phase.

Kommissar Kel wrote:

TheGreatAvatar wrote:
The Orb's affect is checked at the time the model is damaged. In the course of a battle it matters when the bearer of the Orb is damaged. Once the bearer goes down, the Orb is no longer available, in fact it's not even on the table per RAW. Thus, remaining models in the unit do not benefit from the, now, nonexistent Orb.

100% made up check.

There is nothing in the Rez Orb's rules that tell you to check if the model has, or had the res orb any time before rolling for RP.
The model with the res orb does not have to be on the table in order for it to function; by necessity it almost cannot be(in the case of the dead bearer).

This is not an Item/rule that has a ranged effect.

This is not an item/rule that affects Reserves rolls

This is an Item that allows the bearer and his unit to have an easier time of returning from being tokens.

Not made up, applied RAW.....

When the Lord is removed due to damage, where is the ResOrb on the table? Right, it's off the table.

The rule is for the bearer and the unit he is in. If the bearer is removed from the table, he's no longer part of the unit. The Orb is no longer on the table thus cannot affect the remaining models of the unit.

The Only checks ever needed are as follows:
Are you making an RP roll? Did you purchase a Res Orb for a model still alive in the unit, or one of the Tokens making an RP roll?

If both are yes; 4+ RP rolls this phase.

Absolutely not! Show me where in the rules a piece of wargear is usable when the model has been removed from the table? The ResOrb rule makes no such claim. The rule states the bearer (and the unit he is in) gains a 4+ RP roll instead of a 5+. Since the affect of the Orb is not stated to continue beyond the grave of the bearer, the Orb must be on the table to be effective.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:The rule states the bearer (and the unit he is in) gains a 4+ RP roll instead of a 5+. Since the affect of the Orb is not stated to continue beyond the grave of the bearer, the Orb must be on the table to be effective.

The rule explicitly states that the bearer gains a 4+ RP roll, and you're arguing that the bearer can never benefit from the Orb?

I really don't see the problem hear the codex says that the bearer and his unit get a 4+. Seem pretty simple. A remember reading somewhere that the codex takes precedent when it conflicts with the rules. And as far as logic goes it's GW and Mat Ward were talking about here. They don't exactly right air tight and rock solid rules dude. This isn't wizards of the coast.

wowsmash wrote:A remember reading somewhere that the codex takes precedent when it conflicts with the rules.

I don't understand why people continually get this wrong. It's not codex trumps BGB. It's specific trumps general.

What I'm trying to say is that codex necrons is a new codex righten with 6th edition in mind. Your arguing for rules verification that isn't possible because they haven't been published yet. WBB doesn't exist anymore. It's reanimation protocol now and it functions differently than the old one. And since WBB is scraped I'll be going with what the codex says until they either FAQ it or sixth is realeased.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:
Not made up, applied RAW.....

When the Lord is removed due to damage, where is the ResOrb on the table? Right, it's off the table.

The rule is for the bearer and the unit he is in. If the bearer is removed from the table, he's no longer part of the unit. The Orb is no longer on the table thus cannot affect the remaining models of the unit.

The applied RAW; is the Plain text, which is what I posted.

Right; off the table, which does not matter; when is the res orb used? Right, often when the bearer is off the table.

The rule is not for the unit he is in; it is for "his unit", since he was attached to the unit, and EL already deals with a unit the bearerwas attached to; his unit is pretty well defined with him just being an EL token.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:
Absolutely not! Show me where in the rules a piece of wargear is usable when the model has been removed from the table? The ResOrb rule makes no such claim. The rule states the bearer (and the unit he is in) gains a 4+ RP roll instead of a 5+. Since the affect of the Orb is not stated to continue beyond the grave of the bearer, the Orb must be on the table to be effective.

I'm with TGA on this one. The Res Orb rule is somewhat broken. It works just fine for the unit the Lord is attached to while the Lord is alive. Unless the rule or FAQ/Errata specifically allows it Wargear does not function when it is not present on the table.

GW should have appended a line to the end of the Res Orb rule that allowed the bearer to make the 4+ save when it was removed as a casualty and replaced by a token.

-Yad

Yad wrote:I'm with TGA on this one. The Res Orb rule is somewhat broken. It works just fine for the unit the Lord is attached to while the Lord is alive. Unless the rule or FAQ/Errata specifically allows it Wargear does not function when it is not present on the table.

GW should have appended a line to the end of the Res Orb rule that allowed the bearer to make the 4+ save when it was removed as a casualty and replaced by a token.

-Yad

First: Where does it say wargear/rules must be on the table to function?

Second: Where does it say that the EL token is not the Character that was removed as a casualty, or that his gear/rules cease to function while he is awaiting the RP roll(which again would make both the phylactery and the res orb useless)?

Third: IF GW had put that line in it would do as you theorize, it would have the bearer roll for RP immediately.

Fourth(to TGA, et al):How do you propose to keep track of/separate the rp rolls of those unit members that Die prior to the bearer going down and those that died after? All RP rolls are done at once, the only RP rolls that get separated(at least dice-wise) are EL Tokens.

Stop trying to add to the plain text.

Stop trying to make up timings and Checks to be inserted for when the rule applies.

Just play with the Plain text because it is the only way it works.

Kommissar Kel wrote:

Yad wrote:I'm with TGA on this one. The Res Orb rule is somewhat broken. It works just fine for the unit the Lord is attached to while the Lord is alive. Unless the rule or FAQ/Errata specifically allows it Wargear does not function when it is not present on the table.

GW should have appended a line to the end of the Res Orb rule that allowed the bearer to make the 4+ save when it was removed as a casualty and replaced by a token.

-Yad

Kommissar Kel wrote:First: Where does it say wargear/rules must be on the table to function?

Models exist in three states. In Reserve, on the 'battlefield' (i.e., in Play), and Out of Play. As far as Out of Play this can happen for a number of reasons, removed from play, removed as a casualty, etc. For certain pieces of wargear there are specific rules that allow them to function either in Play and/or in Reserve. But there are no rules that allows Wargear to function when the model is out of play. At least none that I'm currently aware of.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Second: Where does it say that the EL token is not the Character that was removed as a casualty, or that his gear/rules cease to function while he is awaiting the RP roll(which again would make both the phylactery and the res orb useless)?

The rules are very specific about defining a models type. You remove the model Necron Lord/Overlord of type Infantry (Character) and replace it with an Everliving token. One is not like the other.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Third: IF GW had put that line in it would do as you theorize, it would have the bearer roll for RP immediately.

Fourth(to TGA, et al):How do you propose to keep track of/separate the rp rolls of those unit members that Die prior to the bearer going down and those that died after? All RP rolls are done at once, the only RP rolls that get separated(at least dice-wise) are EL Tokens.

Is this really such a difficult thing to manage? With the into of the GK codex we've been introduced to resolving effects via randomization within a unit. This continues with the Necron codex. Why is this so hard for you?

-Yad

Where are the rules for the out of play removal of gear? And RP adds a fourth state of existence to the models at any rate: that of a token waiting for return to play.

No the token is a replacement of the model on-table; but it is still the same model; otherwise, as I have already said, Phylacteries and Res orbs never function.

Well considering that such a line does not exist Res orb bearers still roll for RP at the same time as all other models; there is nothing to manage.

And for the randomization of models; that is also not written into the res orb rules; so whether or not such a thing can exist matters little to the fact that it does not exist.

Nothing of the sort exists; the rules are plain and clear, why is this so hard for you?

Kommissar Kel wrote:Where are the rules for the out of play removal of gear? And RP adds a fourth state of existence to the models at any rate: that of a token waiting for return to play.

What? That doesn't make any sense. That of a token waiting for return to play? The model is removed from play and a token is put into play. Each token represents a model, but is in fact not that model. It does not have any wargear, any stats, etc.

Kommissar Kel wrote:No the token is a replacement of the model on-table; but it is still the same model; otherwise, as I have already said, Phylacteries and Res orbs never function.

See above, this makes no sense and is not represented in the rules.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Well considering that such a line does not exist Res orb bearers still roll for RP at the same time as all other models; there is nothing to manage.

No, what we have is an inherent conflict in the RAW. I do think that the RAI is that the bearer of the Orb would benefit from the 4+ save when it is removed as a casualty. I don't have any hard rules to back that up. It's just how I feel the rule should be played.

Kommissar Kel wrote:And for the randomization of models; that is also not written into the res orb rules; so whether or not such a thing can exist matters little to the fact that it does not exist.

Nothing of the sort exists; the rules are plain and clear, why is this so hard for you?

You completely missed the point I was making. This was in response to your question regarding the tracking of RP/EL tokens. My take on this is that GW has no trouble introducing sometimes complex rules mechanics into the system. As to my, "why is this so hard for you" comment. I apologize that you took this personally. That wasn't my intent. A better wording would have been, "why would this 'token tracking' mechanic be hard for you"? Not, why is this point so difficult for you to understand?

-Yad

KK, I think they are basing their answer off the following question from the BGB FAQ:
Q: Do any upgrades or special rules a vehicle has cease
to work once it is destroyed? (p61)
A: Yes. For example if a Land Raider Crusader is
destroyed by ramming an enemy vehicle, its embarked
passengers would not be able to launch an assault in
the ensuing Assault phase as they would no longer
benefit from its Assault Vehicle special rule.

The rule here is extremely simple.

"The bearer of the resurrection orb (and his unit) pass Reanimation Protocols on a 4+"

To deny the bearer (and his unit) the use of the orb is utter nonsense when it clearly states he benefits.

Another thing to add to the FAQ for the next GT I guess, but hopefully GW or INAT will take care of it by then.)

Yep, it is stunningly clear. As soon as you attach the lord to the unit, that unit has a 4+ RP.

Really not difficult

The rules say what they say; nothing more, Res orb triggers when RP rolls are made, not any time before.

The phylactery cannot do anything if it's rules do not come into play while the model is replaced by a token(since it does what it does after the first passing of RP, and before returning the model to play, since it returns with d3 wounds).

You cannot have the Phylactory effecting the model as a token, and the res orb not effecting the model and his unit while the model is a token.

You are adding to the RAW to change them because you feel the rules should function differently.

I did not miss the point you were making; the facts are the rules say to do only 1 thing, you are trying to change the rules and over-complicate what they say because you are not happy with them.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yep, it is stunningly clear. As soon as you attach the lord to the unit, that unit has a 4+ RP so long as the Lord is in play.

Really not difficult

Fixed. Poor rules writing by GW. RAI obvious. RAW broken.

-Yad


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kommissar Kel wrote:The rules say what they say; nothing more, Res orb triggers when RP rolls are made, not any time before.

The phylactery cannot do anything if it's rules do not come into play while the model is replaced by a token(since it does what it does after the first passing of RP, and before returning the model to play, since it returns with d3 wounds).

You cannot have the Phylactory effecting the model as a token, and the res orb not effecting the model and his unit while the model is a token.

You are adding to the RAW to change them because you feel the rules should function differently.

I did not miss the point you were making; the facts are the rules say to do only 1 thing, you are trying to change the rules and over-complicate what they say because you are not happy with them.

No I'm not adding to the RAW. I'm reading it through and bringing it to its logical end. I haven't inserted or changed any wording in the RAW. Because Wargear doesn't function when a model is removed from play (no matter how it happens) the Res Orb rule is screwed. There's no way I'd force a Necron player to play it this way. It's patently obvious how it should be played.

This is YMDC where we often pick apart the RAW till you're ready to break out the rusty spoons. It's a useful exercise that I have fun taking part in.

Yet nothing requires the lord to be in play.

Anything not on the board or in reserves does not exist. This is a very solid fact in the game rules. It's mentioned several times in phrases such as "every player knows the board edge is the end of the world" and "remove from play"

There is NO wargear that functions when the model is not 'in play' There are pieces that function even if the model is in reserve, but NOTHING out of play can interfere with the game.

Secondly, and something a lot of people are overlooking, is that necron models with RP that die are removed as a casualty. The second the model reaches the remove casualties step of fighting it is removed from play. It ceases to exist.

To quote RP "Return one of the slain models to play"

Any powers, abilities, or effects a slain model has do not function while slain. This is pretty obvious.

To put this into perspective, lets suppose an IC joins a unit. There are several powers that say "the IC and his unit" It is generally accepted that these powers cease to function once that model is dead or has left the unit. Otherwise you generate all sorts of questions like "if the IC joins a different unit, which one counts for 'his' unit? Both of them? The one he is currently in? or the one he left?"

Well the first one is obviously wrong. You can't be in two units at once. The second one proves the "everyone gets a 4+" theory incorrect as it means that when the model is removed from the unit, powers phrased "and his unit" cease to function. Lastly, the third one would support your claim, however how is a unit his when he is not in it? This is a logical fallacy.

An IC leaving a unit is no different than any other model dieing.

Ergo, there are only two viable readings of the rules:

1. The res orb never functions for the lord, and only functions when the lord is on the table when other members of his unit are taking their RP rolls.

2. The orb's effect is triggered when the models die, and persists until the RP rolls are made. This allows the lord the use of its own wargear, and generally makes more practical sense.

Let's look at those options.

Number one. So the 30+ point piece of wargear that explicitly infers that the lord gains the benefit of it, doesn't function according to the rules (note that the wording of the wargear is not specific enough to negate the rules in the BRB).

Number two. It does not conflict with the wording of the wargear, it functions 100% according to the BRB rules, and does not conflict with any wording.

Let's see here... which one of these makes more sense...

If you get to add whatever verbiage you like to change the res Orb to how you want it to work that is fine; I get to add the following:

For every model returned to play via the Ressurection orb, all enemy units on the table suffer 20 S10, AP1 hits with the entropic strike special rule.

Does that sound fair? Now you get to ignore the res orb's function for it's primary benefactor; and I get to wipe your entire army after 2-3 returns.

Adding Verbiage changes the rule; the verbiage does not exist, therefore no such requirements are in place.

That is because it is VAGUE. That wording alone is not sufficient enough to play the piece of wargear. You MUST imply something. This is true for both your argument and mine.

In my case I imply that the presence of a res orb is checked when the models die. This is backed up by past history of the item, as well as a logical assumption based on the phrasing of the item with respect to its point cost.

In your case, you assume that the piece of wargear does not need to be present at the time of death, and that the simple act of buying the piece of wargear confers the 4+ to each and every model that is in the unit.

One of these is a smaller leap of faith than the other.

On that note, I'd like you to explain how a unit of immortals with a lord that has a res orb functions when it interacts with an Overlord.

Specifically, the following situations.

Overlord is joined to the unit at deployment:
Overlord dies when the lord is alive. Overlord dies in the same combat phase as the lord, but dies after the lord has died.

Overlord joins the unit after deployment but while the Lord is still alive:
Overlord dies when the lord is alive. Overlord dies in the same combat phase as the lord, but dies after the lord has died.

Overlord joins the unit after deployment but after the lord is already dead and gone:
Overlord dies.

Because right now, your logic dictates that in EVERY one of those situations the OL gets to roll RP at a 4+ The only way for you to counter this is to use situational logic, which MUST be inferred since there is absolutely no situational logic in the rules for the wargear.


Allow me to elaborate on each of those scenarios.

Scenario 1: The overlord is joined to the unit at deployment. It is obviously part of the lords unit, and as such should gain benefit of the res orb. Using your logic, this means that the overlord still gains the benefit of the orb in both cases.

Scenario 2: The overlord joins the unit later on. It is still obviously part of the unit and as such the same logic as above applies.

Scenario 3: The overlord has joined the unit the lord was a part of. In your logic, the wargear has magically made this unit a 4+ RP unit, regardless of whether the lord is present or not.

Don't try to argue that it doesn't. You can't. Anything you say will contradict the above. If you state that the lord is not present and thus the overlord does not gain the effects of the wargear, you have conceded the point to me because that is EXACTLY how my interpretation of the rules is played.

For example, if you claim that the lord must be present to confer the bonus when the IC joins, you must also admit that the lord must be present to confer the bonus to the immortals, yet the lord is explicitly removed as a casualty before the RP rolls on the immortals/lord/overlord are ever made.

In order for you to state this works for when the immortals die in the same phase, but doesn't when the overlord joins later requires you to imply something about the rules for the res orb as there is no specific ruling stating that it functions like this.

Finally, you could state that the overlord does indeed gain the benefits of the res orb even after the lord has died, but this contradicts your statement on page 1. Specifically, "no this one is correct; the Lord, or his EL token are not Present at rolling for RP; therefore no 4+ RP. "

Your move.

How is "The bearer of the resurrection orb(and his unit) pass reanimation protocol rolls on a 4+." vague?

That is just about the single most straight forward and clear rules GW has ever written.

Does the model bear a Res orb?

Is the model or a unit he is in making an RP roll?

If the answer is yes to both of these; then the roll is on a 4+.

There really is nothing else to this rule.

If you want to add extra wording to change the rule from those 2 checks; then I get to add the wording that any passed RP rolls equal an automatic win, because at this point we are both just making up rules to change how the res Orb works.

... Did you even read any of this thread...

Last time I'm saying this...

10 warriors + lord /w orb.

2 warriors and lord die in first volley of combat.

3 more warriors die in a second volley of fire same phase.

THE LORD IS ALREADY OFF THE TABLE WHEN RP IS ROLLED.

This is quite explicitly stated in the RP rules. No where in the res orb rules does it cover this situation. you must infer the rules from the situation.

If you argue that the everliving counter has anything to do with it, you are also still inferring something about the way res orb works because no where in it does it say "the lord or his ever living counter" it says "the lord" as in that model. You know, the one that is not on the board anymore. In fact, the only situation where you do not have to infer anything is when the lord itself does not die.

It's perhaps one of the most vague things GW has ever put into a codex. It is so amazingly simply worded that it does not provide enough detail as to its function.

I would like to point out, once again, that if you follow res orb to the letter it will never work for the lord. The lord (and thus the res orb) are already off the table (removed as casualty) before RP is ever rolled for.

NONE OF THAT MATTERS.

See I can type in all caps too.

You are still making up rules.]

Res orb does not care when the lord or any of the other models died.

All it cares about is that the lord has a Res Orb(is the bearer), and that you are making RP ro9lls for that lord and/or his unit.

You keep making up and adding rules that you feel are somehow inferred based on rules that do not exist.

The Ever-living counter is the lord; if it is not, then does that mean I can bring a basic 35-point lord, let him take the first casualty; then replace him with Imotekh the Stormlord or a fully kitted Destroyer lord? how about a fully kited Harbinger of some sort?

If Everliving tokens are not their model, then none of the placement rules for everliving function either.

RP and EL tokens, and the models they return are the same models that had died, therefore the Tokens are also representative of the same models that died and are a place-holder-state between being in play and removed from play(as a casualty)

Also it does not say "the lord"; it says "the Bearer", and "the Bearer" is a model that benefits from the better RP roll, which can only happen if "the Bearer" is a token at the time.