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.

Hello couldn't seem to find the answer in previous threads.

are 1 per army war gear considered for both detachments or 1 per?

as in with double force org will you be able to take two say iridium armors?

The rulebook is a little inconsistent on that. It refers to your army as being the total of all of the detachments, but also refers to each detachment as an army.

I would personally go with it appying to the entire army, not per detachment.

Yeah, it is one of the things that is really irritating me. There is several sections where they use terminology in a different method then every other time they used it previously. One of the largest examples is the fact they have used army to mean detachment and army to mean, well, the whole thing. They have done this not just in different sections of the book, but sometimes in the very same paragraph!

Needless to say, it is very frustrating and thanks to this I have no clue myself and can only offer personal opinion. It is my opinion that one per army limitations should mean that option can only be taken once. It shouldn't matter if you have multiple primary detachments, the limitation still is one and taking a second would mean you took more then one. All simply because game workshop editors are not even worth the banana's they are paid in, which I don't feel is strong enough grounds to base any rules as written argument on. While I can understand the allure, the technically is there thanks to the duel terminology, rule based arguments really should be stronger then an editor not a good enough job to catch these things before print.

If we don't treat it as a one per whole thing limitation it would be legal to have two named unique characters simply by having different detachments... though that would explain a few little fluff based oddities.

One per Army is one in the army, the sum of the detachments. New codexes make the distinction between one per army and one per detachment, for example in the new Eldar codex the Remnants of Vaul compared to a Warlock Council or the Avatar of Khaine.

Yeah i remember something about the terminology but just to be safe il stick to 1 per the whole.

thank you