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.

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
look the main point im trying to get at is the fact that formations have specific requirements, those units and only those units get to benefit from their command rule, characters by themselves are a unit they are considered a unit for all intents and purposes thats why if you kill an IC you get first blood do you not? based on that, the IC NOT being a UNIT in the deathwing formation should not benefit from the command rule.

You've already been presented with the rule that disagrees with your conclusion. Once again, from 'Independent Character' (emphasis added):

While an Independent Character is a part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters.

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
look the main point im trying to get at is the fact that formations have specific requirements, those units and only those units get to benefit from their command rule, characters by themselves are a unit they are considered a unit for all intents and purposes thats why if you kill an IC you get first blood do you not? based on that, the IC NOT being a UNIT in the deathwing formation should not benefit from the command rule.

the formation rules sate ONLY the units can benefit, the universal rule states that ICs can join any units they want (although i believe while some special rules can be shared via circumstance formation rules cannot IMO)

the only question that needs to be answered is whether the core rules supercedes the army books, that is my arguement. because they are saying opposite things.

also theres no need to be condescending about models being wiped through gameplay, the question at hand is based on legal deployment and whether or not a loophole has been found amongst formation special rules and independent characters.

Right but the IC rules from the BRB isn't superseding the codex rules for Deathwing. The IC rule is taking place after and in addition to the Deathwing. It would literally read like this.

Only units from this formation benefit from X. But since an IC joining that unit during deployment adopts That units rules that IC now benefits from X as well.

That's how I would read it in a step by step kind of explanation.

Or at least. That's how I WANT to read it. I ackowledge that I am biased.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What we really need is someone totally impartial to read this topic and pick a side I think. Maybe someone from a different table top game who doesn't care whose right but picks the side with the best argument. That's just an idea tho.

rocksteadygreeny wrote:look the main point im trying to get at is the fact that formations have specific requirements, those units and only those units get to benefit from their command rule, characters by themselves are a unit they are considered a unit for all intents and purposes thats why if you kill an IC you get first blood do you not? based on that, the IC NOT being a UNIT in the deathwing formation should not benefit from the command rule.

Not completely correct, and this has been mentioned several times at this point and you completely ignore them.

Yes, while alone and not joined to any unit, an IC is their own unit with everything that goes with that.

However, when an IC joins a unit, it counts as being part of THAT unit for all rules purposes.

Now, think about what this statement of yours, that the IC stays as their own unit for all intents and purposes. If that was true, Look Out Sir! could not work with ICs. I could shoot any IC joined to a unit and none of the Wounds could be allocated to the unit it joined. The IC could not tank Wounds placed on the unit, because he is a separate unit.

And yes, the IC does count for First Blood, because when the model dies, it is separated from the unit it is joined to, and that IC's unit is now dead.

rocksteadygreeny wrote:the formation rules sate ONLY the units can benefit, the universal rule states that ICs can join any units they want (although i believe while some special rules can be shared via circumstance formation rules cannot IMO)

Correct. Only the units can benefit from most of the Deathwing detachments, and the IC is counting as part of the unit...

rocksteadygreeny wrote:the only question that needs to be answered is whether the core rules supercedes the army books, that is my arguement. because they are saying opposite things.

Why would it need to? They are not saying the opposite things. Your understanding of how IC's interact with units they join is what is off.

rocksteadygreeny wrote:also theres no need to be condescending about models being wiped through gameplay, the question at hand is based on legal deployment and whether or not a loophole has been found amongst formation special rules and independent characters.

We were addressing the question asked in the post quoted while trying put that concept in to an easily understood perspective. It wasn't addressed to you at all.

But there is no loophole whatsoever. It is simply how the system works.

If a Battle Brother IC with Deep Strike joins a Deathwing unit to get a more reliable Deep Strike, how is that any different is that from if a Blood Angel Character joins a Dark Angel Tactical Squad to take advantage of their Stubborn, or a Space Marine Chapter Master joined to Centurions to take advantage of their Slow and Purposeful?

ok im not ignoring it, it simply doesn't make sense to have characters benefiting directly from 2 formations, that's all.

So I'm looking at the missions format in the BRB
Here are the steps broken down
-the armies
-the battlefield
-deployment
-first turn
-game length
-victory conditions
-mission special rules

So based on this I see it ass this. The Demi company and Deathwing redemption force that make up the lions strike force are detailed during "the armies" step.
You then set up the "battlefield" step.
Then the IC and who he is deploying with and whatever rules are incurred by that take place during the "deployment" step.

This to me reads that the BRB rule for IC and them adopting the unit they are attached to's rules takes place after establishing and satisfiing your prerequisites for your force organization. We all know that your codex supersedes the BRB if there is ever a conflict. However, there is no conflict as the BRB IC rule is taking place during a different step after you've already satisfied the first steps rules.

Does that sound logical to you all?

i cant bring myself to agree he gets the rule. hes not part of the formation he doesn't get to deploy the way they do. that's just me i am a dark angel player have been for over 10 years. im dropping it. i simply say discuss it with your opponent, i will agree with everyone here that IC rules support it but the formation does not, hes not part of the formation hes part of battle demi company.


so out of curiosity then to everyone argueing, IC absprb all specail rules doe that mean if i have a GK brother captain rocking a mastercrafted psycannon join mu dark angels lion blade detach tactical squad, does he start overwatching at his full bs? honest question


Automatically Appended Next Post:
also just so everyone is aware. IC do not obtain special rules unless the special rule itself states it. it right under special rules in the independent character section.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"unless specified in the rule itself (such as Stubborn special rule) the unit's special rules are not conferred upon the independent character"

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
i cant bring myself to agree he gets the rule. hes not part of the formation he doesn't get to deploy the way they do. that's just me i am a dark angel player have been for over 10 years. im dropping it. i simply say discuss it with your opponent, i will agree with everyone here that IC rules support it but the formation does not, hes not part of the formation hes part of battle demi company.

Then you are choosing to ignore what the rules have to say based on an appeal to your sense of fairness or sensibility. Unfortunately the rules often fit and interact poorly together, with results that often aren't fair or sensible.

so out of curiosity then to everyone argueing, IC absprb all specail rules doe that mean if i have a GK brother captain rocking a mastercrafted psycannon join mu dark angels lion blade detach tactical squad, does he start overwatching at his full bs? honest question

No, because Supreme Fire Discipline requires models to have the Grim Resolve special rule.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
also just so everyone is aware. IC do not obtain special rules unless the special rule itself states it. it right under special rules in the independent character section.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"unless specified in the rule itself (such as Stubborn special rule) the unit's special rules are not conferred upon the independent character"

Can you point to where in the Stubborn special rule it actually says the rule itself confers on a joined Independent Character?

Unfortunately for you it doesn't actually mention that at all. It simply says the unit gains the benefit.

go to special rules, find independent characters, in the subsection italics special rules

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
i cant bring myself to agree he gets the rule. hes not part of the formation he doesn't get to deploy the way they do. that's just me i am a dark angel player have been for over 10 years. im dropping it. i simply say discuss it with your opponent, i will agree with everyone here that IC rules support it but the formation does not, hes not part of the formation hes part of battle demi company.

I've been deepstriking a librrarius conclave with the deathwing formation since it's been a thing. no-one has ever complained

so out of curiosity then to everyone argueing, IC absprb all specail rules doe that mean if i have a GK brother captain rocking a mastercrafted psycannon join mu dark angels lion blade detach tactical squad, does he start overwatching at his full bs? honest question

No, because the fire discipline rules specify models, not units

also just so everyone is aware. IC do not obtain special rules unless the special rule itself states it. it right under special rules in the independent character section.

"unless specified in the rule itself (such as Stubborn special rule) the unit's special rules are not conferred upon the independent character"

agreed, the special rule is not given to the IC, just like it's not given to the unit. the formation has the rule that specifies that it effects units. there's a difference

k ive literally cited the rulebook indicating IC dont absorb formation rules at this point its ridiculous to argue

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
go to special rules, find independent characters, in the subsection italics special rules

That's not what I asked. The Independent Character rules tell us that Stubborn is an example of a rule which says it is conferred to joined Independent Characters. Go and look at Stubborn, and tell me where Stubborn says this.

Hint: it doesn't. It talks about units with at least one model with the rule gaining a benefit, but it doesn't say Independent Characters gain the special rule.

Also, as jokerkd says above, there is a difference between a model being conferred a special rule (i.e. receiving it) and a model benefiting from a special rule without actually having that rule themselves.

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
k ive literally cited the rulebook indicating IC dont absorb formation rules at this point its ridiculous to argue

No you haven't. I'll do it for you, because you refuse to:

"Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn special rule), the unit’s special rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character, and the Independent Character’s special rules are not conferred upon the unit."

Okay. Let's see what Stubborn has to say:

"When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule takes Morale checks or Pinning tests, they ignore any negative Leadership modifiers. If a unit is both Fearless and Stubborn, it uses the rules for Fearless instead."

Stubborn doesn't mention 'Independent Character' or 'confer' at all. All Stubborn does is give its effect to a unit.

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
look the main point im trying to get at is the fact that formations have specific requirements, those units and only those units get to benefit from their command rule, characters by themselves are a unit they are considered a unit for all intents and purposes thats why if you kill an IC you get first blood do you not? based on that, the IC NOT being a UNIT in the deathwing formation should not benefit from the command rule.

the formation rules sate ONLY the units can benefit, the universal rule states that ICs can join any units they want (although i believe while some special rules can be shared via circumstance formation rules cannot IMO)

the only question that needs to be answered is whether the core rules supercedes the army books, that is my arguement. because they are saying opposite things.

also theres no need to be condescending about models being wiped through gameplay, the question at hand is based on legal deployment and whether or not a loophole has been found amongst formation special rules and independent characters.

I get your point but while there is some people who agree with you there are others who don't, mostly related for the "when an Ic joins a units counts as part of it for all rules and purpouses" it's been argued dozen of times and both sides stick to their interpretation and refuse to concede

P.s: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/678568.page this is the discussion if you want to re-read both sides arguments.

yeap, plain as day though right in the rules IC do not have special rules conferred to them so why would the units in the formation confer their rules, so how would the IC take advantage of a special rule he does not have nor can he receive because hes not in the formation and the unit he joins cannot give it to him either

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
yeap, plain as day though right in the rules IC do not have special rules conferred to them so why would the units in the formation confer their rules, so how would the IC take advantage of a special rule he does not have nor can he receive because hes not in the formation and the unit he joins cannot give it to him either

Because you keep missing the key points.

ICs do not have special rules conferred to them unless specified otherwise (as does Stubborn).

Stubborn does not confer itself to anything.

Stubborn applies a benefit to the unit that meets its requirements (at least one model with the rule, taking Morale Checks or Pinning Tests).

Summoned To War applies a benefit to the unit that meets its requirements (units must be in this detachment, Ravenwing detachment in the army).

And again, the IC counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, this includes when rules, special or otherwise, are affecting the unit.

So, either Stubborn doesn't affect a joined IC and Summoned To War doesn't affect a joined IC, or they both do. The very rule that tells us they normally do not tells us that Stubborn DOES affect a joined IC, so therefore Summoned To War does.

This doesn't necessarily go the other way, though. The IC doesn't imprint his unit or detachment identity on the unit, so what detachment special rules affect the unit will not confer from the IC to the unit.

ok several things wrong with what you've posted.

First: summoned to war is not deathwing assault and not what we are talking about.

Second: it does not say as does stubborn, it says "such as" like giving an example of a rule that does confer to ic (disregarding the IC rule for that singular instance)

Third: stubborn states in the very first sentence "a unit containing at least one model with"

Fourth: going back to the IC rules of "No rules conferred upon the IC unless stated" which means an IC DOES NOT get to benefit from a rule that his unit has UNLESS it states in that rule that he can. nowhere does it say in deathwing assault that anyone BESIDES THE MODELS IN THIS FORMATION get to use deathwing assault.

Stop quoting stubborn and using its explanation to justify other rules.... stop reading stubborn the only reason it even came up is because it was givin as an example of a rule that applies to a whole unit, just like zealot or preffered enemy YES those SPECIFIC rules they state that it effects the unit.

the deathwing assault effects by the unit true but it only effects those units in the formation, the HQ from the battle demi company is not a member of the formation

I think you have deathwing assault and summoned to war mixed up there buddy.

We are talking about summoned to war, which is similar to the old deathwing assault.

Now deathwing assault just makes all ranged weapons twin linked on the turn they deep strike, iirc

just like a GK player trying to take a NSF and a CAD but throws all his cad heroes into reserve with his NSF units they shouldn't be able to drop.in turn one with NSF they aren't in the formation or using any kind of deepstriking battle brother ally IC to drop in turn one with GK, it doesn't make any sense and IC rules clarify that by stating it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
no you're mixed, im talking about deathwing assault which is the formation special rule from the deathwing redemption force formation.

summon the deathwing is the rule from the ravenwing detachment that give ravenwing a 12" teleport homer for deathwing units deepstriking in

vengeful strike is the rule that twinlinks deathwing models weapons after they arrive via deepatrike

True?

I'll have to re-read it when i get home

im lookin outa the book

rocksteadygreeny wrote:First: summoned to war is not deathwing assault and not what we are talking about.

For the purposes of this discussion, there is no difference between Deathwing Assault and Summoned To War. Both Summoned To War and Deathwing Assault apply their benefits to units from their detachment. The only differences are timing and one is a Command Benefit which is lost with Unbound armies.

rocksteadygreeny wrote:Second: it does not say as does stubborn, it says "such as" like giving an example of a rule that does confer to ic (disregarding the IC rule for that singular instance)

To be precise, "Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn special rule)..." meaning that Stubborn is the guiding standard for this concept, not merely an example.

rocksteadygreeny wrote:Third: stubborn states in the very first sentence "a unit containing at least one model with"

Show me where this translates to "a model without it can have it". It doesn't with basic English. Counter Attack also has this phrase, but does not include the IC with its benefits.

All this phrase does is allow a unit without this rule to be able to included in the requirements from a joined IC, as it would already have this rule otherwise.

rocksteadygreeny wrote:Fourth: going back to the IC rules of "No rules conferred upon the IC unless stated" which means an IC DOES NOT get to benefit from a rule that his unit has UNLESS it states in that rule that he can. nowhere does it say in deathwing assault that anyone BESIDES THE MODELS IN THIS FORMATION get to use deathwing assault.

Doubly incorrect.

First, the IC rule regarding Special Rules in full is, "Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn special rule), the unit’s special rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character, and the Independent Character’s special rules are not conferred upon the unit."

Secondly, Deathwing Assault mentions nothing about the models:

Deathwing Assault: All units in this Formation must be placed in Deep Strike Reserve. Immediately after determining Warlord Traits, make a secret note of which of your turns you would like each Deathwing Redemption Force in your army to arrive: your turn 2, 3 or 4. All units in this Formation automatically arrive by Deep Strike at the start of the chosen turn.

If this Formation includes a Venerable Dreadnought embarked in a Drop Pod, the Drop Pod automatically arrives at the start of the chosen turn, and ignores the normal rules that determine when a Drop Pod arrives.

It's all about the units. The Venerable Dreadnought and Drop Pods are the closest things listed, but they are also Unit Names as much as models.

rocksteadygreeny wrote:Stop quoting stubborn and using its explanation to justify other rules.... stop reading stubborn the only reason it even came up is because it was givin as an example of a rule that applies to a whole unit, just like zealot or preffered enemy YES those SPECIFIC rules they state that it effects the unit.

I cannot stop quoting Stubborn. It is the example and standard by which we are to interpret Special Rules as applying between IC and unit. That would be like ignoring Rapid Fire while shooting a Boltgun. It is an intrinsic portion of this rule.

So, too, Deathwing Assault and Summoned To War also specifically apply themselves to whole units, not partial ones. They are not set up like Fleet, which requires all units to have models to have the rule. They are not set up like Counter Attack which relies on a unit action, but only gives its benefits to the models. They are like Stubborn, Zealot, and Preferred Enemy which give their benefits to the units.

In addition, when a rule affects the unit, the IC is included. For an example of this, review Blind.

rocksteadygreeny wrote:the deathwing assault effects by the unit true but it only effects those units in the formation, the HQ from the battle demi company is not a member of the formation

And the joined IC counts as part of the unit for ALL rules purposes. We do not get to ignore that, and the IC and Special Rules section does not separate them out for these purposes. We do not get to treat the IC MODEL as being the IC UNIT while joined to another unit, and Deathwing Assault only concerns itself with UNITS.

rocksteadygreeny wrote:just like a GK player trying to take a NSF and a CAD but throws all his cad heroes into reserve with his NSF units they shouldn't be able to drop.in turn one with NSF they aren't in the formation or using any kind of deepstriking battle brother ally IC to drop in turn one with GK, it doesn't make any sense and IC rules clarify that by stating it.

And we're back to "shouldn't". Why does it not make sense? Just because you say so?

To me it doesn't make sense to include the IC as part of the unit for Stubborn and getting Shot, but exclude it from the unit for a Detachment Special Rule without something else explicitly stating as such. And after the dozens of times I've had this discussion, not one person has been able to satisfactorily provide that portion of the rulebook to support that. All they can do is go back to "shouldn't" or "because".

They are not using stubborn as the standard to interpret rules wtf? its given as an example refering to stubborn because it is a rule that states one model gives it to everyone. so in that instance the IC can receive this rule if hes in the unit contrary to the IC special rules description

since were being so overly anal about the exsact description of IC, in your " all rules and purposes" we can assume that is not geared towards SPECIAL rules but rather the rules of coherency, removing casualties, etc. and then the special rules section would be for explaining the event of anything happening in the small rulebook/army book sections about special rules like stubborn, infiltrate, etc

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
They are not using stubborn as the standard to interpret rules wtf? its given as an example refering to stubborn because it is a rule that states one model gives it to everyone. so in that instance the IC can receive this rule if hes in the unit contrary to the IC special rules description

Stubborn does not say the rule is given to the rest of the unit. Stubborn says an effect is granted to the unit if one model in the unit has the special rule. Stubborn says nothing about conferring the rule, only that the unit can do something if at least one model in the unit has the rule.

One model in the unit having the rule is the condition for the benefit being applied to the unit. We're not interested in the condition, we're interested in who is eligible for the benefit.

since were being so overly anal about the exsact description of IC, in your " all rules and purposes" we can assume that is not geared towards SPECIAL rules but rather the rules of coherency, removing casualties, etc. and then the special rules section would be for explaining the event of anything happening in the small rulebook/army book sections about special rules like stubborn, infiltrate, etc

So "for all rules purposes" means "for all rules purposes except special rules"? You're making things up.

If the rules say "for all rules purposes" we should accept it means for all rules purposes, including special rules.

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
They are not using stubborn as the standard to interpret rules wtf? its given as an example refering to stubborn because it is a rule that states one model gives it to everyone. so in that instance the IC can receive this rule if hes in the unit contrary to the IC special rules description

since were being so overly anal about the exsact description of IC, in your " all rules and purposes" we can assume that is not geared towards SPECIAL rules but rather the rules of coherency, removing casualties, etc. and then the special rules section would be for explaining the event of anything happening in the small rulebook/army book sections about special rules like stubborn, infiltrate, etc

Or we can make no assumptions and take it as meaning "all" with only the exceptions that follow

whatever feth it ignore the rules then read them the way you want to read them i really cant stop you, at this point your literally ignoring the rules as theyre written infront of you

I'm not sure why you're so upset. This is a disagreement over the rules of a game of toy soldiers. I suggest calming down.

I'm all ears if you'd like to address the points I've raised, but if you're just going to disregard the thought-out and reasoned posts I and others have made, and swear and rant instead, there's no point discussing.

Do you want to have a discussion on the rules, or do you just want to put your fingers in your ears and pretend you're right "just because"?

well that is just it, i have raised valid point after valid point in regards to this topic, ive cited the rules from both the rulebook and the army book, however any time i make a point which directly reflects the rules as they are written someone goes on a rant and says nope everything you said is wrong i read it this way which in fact is reading it wrong.

secondly i am.not ranting is it frustrating at times absolutely. its not.like ive freaked out and started name calling or calling anybody power gamers or anything, no why would i that is silly in the end everyone else is gonna go home and game the way they want to see the rules.

so again as someone who is in fact argueing against strengthening his own army on this topic, with the rules as they are written show zero evidence that a model or IC for that matter can claim the bonus of a formation he does bot belong to.

i do not think that in the description of how IC interact with special rules refers to stubborn as the set example of how all rules work. its clearly an example stating that rules written in this manner supercede the IC inability to claim his units rules.

so yea an ic that joins a unit can claim rules that state only one model needs it to benefit the whole unit.

in the formation in question it states all units apart of te formation can do X. how is it so.hard to see that "x is not apart of y" he is not apart of the formation he cannot use the rule. and the deathwing assault rule doesnt say anywhere that it confers it to anyone except those in the formation, therefore the IC cannot use the rule since it hasnt specifically stated otherwise, just like how infiltrate doesnt care about who or what is joing the unit if you dont have infiltrate too bad you can't deploy that way. if you don't have deathwing assault you cannot deploy using that way

Infiltrate used to have some very specific RAW timing that made it confusing for people to figure out, but was actually quite straightforward. The recent FAQ finally cleared that up.

This is nothing like Infiltrate, since timing is not a factor.

 rocksteadygreeny wrote:
well that is just it, i have raised valid point after valid point in regards to this topic, ive cited the rules from both the rulebook and the army book, however any time i make a point which directly reflects the rules as they are written someone goes on a rant and says nope everything you said is wrong i read it this way which in fact is reading it wrong.

That's because when you're debating people raise counterpoints to your points. Your job is to look at those counterpoints and either accept them or disagree respond with your own counterpoints, rather than mouthing off and simply telling people they're wrong and aren't reading the rules properly.

You've posted some rules, sure, but when you've been pointed to other rules, or had it explained to you why your interpretations are incorrect, you've simply repeated yourself or stated your opinions which aren't supported by rules (for example claiming "for all rules purposes" means something other than for all rules purposes).

secondly i am.not ranting is it frustrating at times absolutely. its not.like ive freaked out and started name calling or calling anybody power gamers or anything, no why would i that is silly in the end everyone else is gonna go home and game the way they want to see the rules.

It's great you're not name calling, but it's concerning when someone starts throwing swear words around instead of giving an intelligent counter-argument.

with the rules as they are written show zero evidence that a model or IC for that matter can claim the bonus of a formation he does bot belong to.

The rules very much show evidence that an Independent Character could claim the bonus of a formation he does not belong to. You keep repeating your claim but show no evidence, whereas I have shown the rules which say Independent Characters count as part of a unit for all rules purposes, so therefore if a rule says it applies to said unit then the Independent Character would benefit. Unless the rule actually requires the models to have the rule, or only allows itself to apply to a unit composed entirely of models with that rule.

For example, are you suggesting a Tactical Squad from a Combined Arms Detachment can no longer use their Objective Secured when joined by an Independent Character from another detachment or formation?

i do not think that in the description of how IC interact with special rules refers to stubborn as the set example of how all rules work. its clearly an example stating that rules written in this manner supercede the IC inability to claim his units rules.

So we don't need to look at Stubborn then? If it's not the set example then you can't use it to support your argument.

so yea an ic that joins a unit can claim rules that state only one model needs it to benefit the whole unit.

Well yes, because the rule says it benefits the unit, and doesn't require all models to have the rule.

in the formation in question it states all units apart of te formation can do X. how is it so.hard to see that "x is not apart of y" he is not apart of the formation he cannot use the rule. and the deathwing assault rule doesnt say anywhere that it confers it to anyone except those in the formation, therefore the IC cannot use the rule since it hasnt specifically stated otherwise, just like how infiltrate doesnt care about who or what is joing the unit if you dont have infiltrate too bad you can't deploy that way. if you don't have deathwing assault you cannot deploy using that way

Because we're not looking at models in units in the formation. We're just looking at units. The Independent Character counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, so we simply point at the unit and ask, "Is this unit a part of the formation?" "Yes it is."

You're trying to claim, "But there's an Independent Character not part of the formation in there!" Except that's covered by him counting as part of the unit (which is part of the formation) for all rules purposes.

well then why did they bother with the special rules subsection in independent characters if not to clarify that IC cannot claim special rules unless the rule itself specifically states otherwords.

i have not used stubborn to support my arguement, as i said before its only come up because it is referenced in the independent characters subsection as an example of a rule that an IC can adopt (because it says in the rules models without it can take advantage as long as one model in the unit has stubborn)

The CAD reference is irrelevant since the character can legally join a unit and it does not interfere with any of the rulings, but during deployment there are rules that still need to be adhered to. like the infiltrate example I gave, yes a charcter can a unit with infiltrate whether before or during the game thats fine but he cannot infiltrate if he doesnt have the rule. a chaplin on a bike while during the game yes he could join units with the deepstrike rule, yes before th game start i can say hey hes joining my termies, that doesnt allow him to deepstrike though which leads me to the formation. deathwing assault does not confer to anyone only models apart of the formation have deathwing assault, the company master does not have it, the IC rules state he cannot claim the special rule if the rule itself doesnt state that it confers (which it doesn't-because he is not in the formation)

Also, keep in mind that the units don't actually have the rule conferred to them either. the formation special rules effect the units in it. the units dont actually have the Deathwing Assault rule.

Now that i have the book, I see the confusion from earlier. Deathwing assault is the deathwing formation rule, Summoned to war is the deathwing detachment version from the back of the book (the one that I use)