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.

Yep.

So now it is pretty unclear whether units which have models flee, or at least have their last models flee, have been "destroyed".

And clearly a Warlord that flees is not slain.

BomBomHotdog wrote:
Well per the new FAQ update models removed by Morale do not get to reanimate

Q: Can Necrons that have fled the battlefield return using Reanimation Protocols?

A: No. This ability only allows models that were slain to return, not models that have fled.
You may find it useful to place Necron models that flee to one side as a reminder that they cannot return using their Reanimation Protocols ability

You mean, they never did and this is just reminding people of that fact?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Yep.

So now it is pretty unclear whether units which have models flee, or at least have their last models flee, have been "destroyed".

And clearly a Warlord that flees is not slain.

99% of the time a warlord is a single model and thus can't flee. If your enemy makes a single conscript their warlord you have bigger problems than not being able to "slay" them.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

99% of the time a warlord is a single model and thus can't flee. If your enemy makes a single conscript their warlord you have bigger problems than not being able to "slay" them.

Guard characters don't actually make very good Warlords, since they don't fight very well in CC and are easy to kill. Sure, +1 Ld is nice, but until they get their own traits in a codex I feel like you're often going to be better off nominating a Conscript rather than a Lord Commissar in many matchups.

actually this has been cleared up in the new FAQ:

"Q: If a model flees from an
Adeptus Astartes
unit, can an
Apothecary use its narthecium to return a model to the unit?
A: No, the narthecium can only be used to return slain
models to a unit."


RP is worded the same, returns slain models only, ergo it does not work.

 easysauce wrote:
actually this has been cleared up in the new FAQ:

"Q: If a model flees from an
Adeptus Astartes
unit, can an
Apothecary use its narthecium to return a model to the unit?
A: No, the narthecium can only be used to return slain
models to a unit."


RP is worded the same, returns slain models only, ergo it does not work.

It's actually covered in the Xenos 1 FAQ too.

Q: Can Necrons that have fled the battlefield return using
Reanimation Protocols?
A: No. This ability only allows models that were slain to
return, not models that have fled.
You may find it useful to place Necron models that flee
to one side as a reminder that they cannot return using
their Reanimation Protocols ability.

Dionysodorus wrote:
Yep.

So now it is pretty unclear whether units which have models flee, or at least have their last models flee, have been "destroyed".

And clearly a Warlord that flees is not slain.

How is a unit considered "destroyed"? I assume that this is in the DT version, because it isn't in the Primer.

In 7th, any unit which had all its models removed from play was destroyed. Is there not a similar statement in the new version?

Dionysodorus wrote:
Yep.

So now it is pretty unclear whether units which have models flee, or at least have their last models flee, have been "destroyed".

What? If a unit has no models (either slain, fled, or removed) its destroyed.

Besides, RP requires at least 1 model from the unit that has NOT returned by RP for the returned models to be placed. You can have 1 Warrior left and make 19 (or whatever) rolls but can only place like 5 or 6

BomBomHotdog wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Yep.

So now it is pretty unclear whether units which have models flee, or at least have their last models flee, have been "destroyed".

What? If a unit has no models (either slain, fled, or removed) its destroyed.

Besides, RP requires at least 1 model from the unit that has NOT returned by RP for the returned models to be placed. You can have 1 Warrior left and make 19 (or whatever) rolls but can only place like 5 or 6

They only require to be placed within unit coherency of live models, 2" allows for more than 5-6 models.

BomBomHotdog wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Yep.

So now it is pretty unclear whether units which have models flee, or at least have their last models flee, have been "destroyed".

What? If a unit has no models (either slain, fled, or removed) its destroyed.

Besides, RP requires at least 1 model from the unit that has NOT returned by RP for the returned models to be placed. You can have 1 Warrior left and make 19 (or whatever) rolls but can only place like 5 or 6

Is there actually a reference for this about units being destroyed? My intuition would have been that a unit which has its last model flee has fled.

BomBomHotdog wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Yep.

So now it is pretty unclear whether units which have models flee, or at least have their last models flee, have been "destroyed".

What? If a unit has no models (either slain, fled, or removed) its destroyed.

Please support this with a quote, either from the primer or the new rulebook.

 Charistoph wrote:

BomBomHotdog wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Yep.

So now it is pretty unclear whether units which have models flee, or at least have their last models flee, have been "destroyed".

What? If a unit has no models (either slain, fled, or removed) its destroyed.

Please support this with a quote, either from the primer or the new rulebook.

It's called the Oxford English Dictionary. The rules also don't define what the word "roll" means.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
It's called the Oxford English Dictionary. The rules also don't define what the word "roll" means.

Huh? The whole problem here is that, in ordinary English, "destroyed" does not encompass "fled". And of course we now even have a FAQ where GW is clear that "fled" is very different from "slain", and in the rules "slain" and "destroyed" are used interchangeably. It seems strange to say that "destroyed" means one thing for units and another for models, and downright bizarre to say that we know this because of a dictionary which is itself totally unaware of the distinction the 40k rules make between units and models.

This is different from "roll" because that is used by GW in its ordinary sense.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

BomBomHotdog wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Yep.

So now it is pretty unclear whether units which have models flee, or at least have their last models flee, have been "destroyed".

What? If a unit has no models (either slain, fled, or removed) its destroyed.

Please support this with a quote, either from the primer or the new rulebook.

It's called the Oxford English Dictionary. The rules also don't define what the word "roll" means.

Read Tenet #6 of the Tenets of the YMDC, please.

1) A unit must be demonstrated to have lost all of its models. Can you provide any rules which states this happens?

2) Units throughout history have not been considered destroyed even when all members have been lost. Can you provide any rules to demonstrate that this does not happen?

3) Units throughout history have been considered destroyed even when numerous members still existed and were in fighting form. Can you provide any rules to demonstrate that this does not happen?

The online Oxford living dictionary provides several different meanings associated with it including:
1) End the existence of (something) by damaging or attacking it.
1.1) Ruin (someone) emotionally or spiritually.
1.2) Defeat (someone) utterly.
1.3) Kill (a sick, savage, or unwanted animal) by humane means.

Can you provide which context in which we are supposed to use any of these definitions? GW provided a definition before, which I referenced. Does the new rulebook provide one now when associated with these new objectives?

I also thought that fled should be treated as slain as it would be inline with the rest of the rules. Fled not being slain can create problems with strict RAW view.

Now GW decided that fled is something else. This makes morale even more important which is a good thing imo. We just have to accept that a unit with its models fled and slain/destroyed counts as slain/destroyed and move on.

copper.talos wrote:
I also thought that fled should be treated as slain as it would be inline with the rest of the rules. Fled not being slain can create problems with strict RAW view.

Now GW decided that fled is something else. This makes morale even more important which is a good thing imo. We just have to accept that a unit with its models fled and slain/destroyed counts as slain/destroyed and move on.

Or use the older definition in which a unit whose models have all been removed from play is considered destroyed. "Removed from play" is inclusive to whether the model is slain or fled.

If you think that it helps you then it is OK to do so. But I like simplicity and I think the use of older definitions for an edition that is fundamentally different is just adding complexity.

copper.talos wrote:
If you think that it helps you then it is OK to do so. But I like simplicity and I think the use of older definitions for an edition that is fundamentally different is just adding complexity.

Well, it would help to know the context in which the loss of the unit is defined to know just how it should be treated,one way or another.

Technically speaking, what you said and what I said were basically the same, I only provided a reference point rather than implying I'm pulling it out from nowhere.