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.

From the Warhammer 40k RULEBOOK v1.4 APRIL13.pdf

Q: If a model is ‘removed from play’ due to such effects as failing
their Initiative test against ‘Jaws of the World Wolf’, does this count
as being removed as a casualty? (p15)
A: Yes.

Pretty sweet, I say. Rejoice fellow necrons.

Although this gets me thinking. Who else benefits from this? Justicar Thawn is the only other character I can think of that can die and come back.

Are you sure? I told this to another Necron player and he still seemed iffy about it.

In other words, it's still poor wording.

And there was much rejoicing

Yeah, I'm pretty happy about it.

Imotekhs lightning also Hits flyers, as well!

Would this also affect Eternal Warrior or Feel No Pain?

No, its just they've clarified that it counts being removed as a casualty.

Eternal Warrior has gak all to do with that, it only protects against Instant Death.

The same with FnP, you have to take a wound. No wound is being caused, its just as if you have lost your last wound and are being removed as a casualty. Which FnP cannot help against.

Wasn't this FAQ'd in the Necron codex months ago?

No, otherwise there wouldnt have been this thread.

 -Loki- wrote:
Would this also affect Eternal Warrior or Feel No Pain?

No, because that is one of the biggest draws to the ork's Shokk Attack Gun - rolling double 6s "removes from play" anything under the template, which ignores any saves or any ID-related rules because no wound is caused.
Nothing urked me more than rolling double 6s and scattering 10" (after my BS) and tapping Ghazzy with the edge.....ugh....

 TheCrazyCryptek wrote:


Although this gets me thinking. Who else benefits from this? Justicar Thawn is the only other character I can think of that can die and come back.

St. Celestine can also come back, however they FAQ'd the Sisters codex months ago to allow her to always make her revival roll against 'remove from play' abilities.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Wasn't this FAQ'd in the Necron codex months ago?

The Space Wolf January FAQ only mentioned Last Laugh and all of the Wolf players bitched that they weren't the same and RP couldn't be taken.

I think I was getting confused with the Sisters FAQ that lets Celestine come back from JoTWW.

Am I the only one skeptical about this? The wording is still vague as hell.

Might just be in reference to first blood.

I've come to the conclusion that the primary rules writter at GW plays necrons and must be terrible. He is constantly buffing them with rules interpretations when they don't need it. DA on the other hand always gets screwed with the rules interpretations.

 Wilytank wrote:
Am I the only one skeptical about this? The wording is still vague as hell.

What's vague about it? Reanimation Protocols says whenever a model is "removed as a casualty" you can attempt repair. JotWW and many others require some kind of test, and upon failure say "that model is removed from play". The FAQ makes it pretty clear what you can do when something says "remove from play".

Getting RP against LLaugh and JotWW is just dumb.

 Lobukia wrote:
Getting RP against LLaugh and JotWW is just dumb.

Why is it dumb? The necron was destroyed -- a new one teleports back in its place.

 Lobukia wrote:
Getting RP against LLaugh and JotWW is just dumb.

Yeah, but on the other hand, the argument that they couldn't come back hinged on claiming they weren't casualties, which was itself dumb.

"Removed from play" should mean exactly that... removed from play (never in play that game again... period). Otherwise the mechanic itself is pointless.

The point of the mechanic is that you do not benefit from wounds, saves, FNP, and the like. Nothing about being removed from play implies that you cannot return to play.

 Lobukia wrote:
"Removed from play" should mean exactly that... removed from play (never in play that game again... period). Otherwise the mechanic itself is pointless.

Old terminology and I suspect it will get corrected in a new codex. Mechanic isn't pointless, you're making them fail two saves stacked against them AND can snipe specific models. That's pretty cool in my books. And it's not like Tau are going to be standing back up from it!

I was fine how it worked before and I play necrons. Now it's just straight

 TheKbob wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
"Removed from play" should mean exactly that... removed from play (never in play that game again... period). Otherwise the mechanic itself is pointless.

Old terminology and I suspect it will get corrected in a new codex. Mechanic isn't pointless, you're making them fail two saves stacked against them AND can snipe specific models. That's pretty cool in my books. And it's not like Tau are going to be standing back up from it!

I was fine how it worked before and I play necrons. Now it's just straight

After all the Necron need all the help they can get...

So how about taking reanimation saves vs GK powers like warp rift or BC Sterns special S test power?

Removed from play shouldn't allow RP. You aren't in play anymore there is no action to take.

RP doesn't depend on the model being in play, just the token which was created when the model was removed from play.

Removed from play isn't a mechanic in the game anymore. I checked it before and there is no mention of it in the brb.

There is only rfpaac or destroyed which we are told elsewhere is the same as rfpaac.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Removed from play isn't a mechanic in the game anymore. I checked it before and there is no mention of it in the brb.

There is only rfpaac or destroyed which we are told elsewhere is the same as rfpaac.

So you are saying replace all RFP with essentially a casualty but not a wound?

I'm saying that RFP is an artefact of 5th ed.
What the writers think each of the different RFP effects should be now is up to them but I'd go with the line of RFP is now RFPaac since this shows clear precedent.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
I'm saying that RFP is an artefact of 5th ed.

It wasn't in the 5th edition rulebook either.

What the writers think each of the different RFP effects should be now is up to them but I'd go with the line of RFP is now RFPaac since this shows clear precedent.

It's not just clear precedent. It's rock solid. RFP == RFPAAC. In every case and in all situations.
It's not vague at all.