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.

If you took an overlord with a royal court and placed a normal lord from the rc to take charge of a warrior squad. Can i assign my normal lord as the warlord instead of the overlord.

Im planning on being defensive wiith my warriors and normal lord and being quite the oppisite with my royal court+ overlord and obviously having the overlord with the rc helps as there are more wounds in the group. But as they are going into danger facing potential death , it wouldnt give my opponant the point for killing my overlord.

Both leaderships are 10.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Im quite new to the game so i apologise if this is obvious. Maybe it isnt, who knows lol

Tentatively, I would say yes.

It only requires that your Warlord be a character, not necessarily an independent character.

Are they still characters if you don't split them from the court? If so, then you could leave him in the court and he'd be fine being the Warlord.

Either way, I know they are a character when attached to a squad, so you should indeed be able to nominate him your Warlord.

First I thought that he was only a character when split, which would mean this wouldn't work, since Warlord is determined when making your army list, not when game begins. However, the Necron Lord is listed as having the (ch) subtype in the Roster Lists in the BRB, so I don't see a problem with this. Full disclosure though: I'm not 100% sure on the correctness of my answer.

An interesting idea.

Won't work. Warlord must be an HQ choice. RC does not count as an HQ choice. I would advise against it anyway. 1 wound character with only a 4+ Look Out, Sir isn't really any safer.

So it is not. "this unit does not take up an HQ choice."

That's very weird wording.

That being said, I think it's pretty clear that they are still HQ units, they just don't take up a slot. Just like Servitors. Or Command Squads.

Angelic wrote:
Won't work. Warlord must be an HQ choice. RC does not count as an HQ choice. I would advise against it anyway. 1 wound character with only a 4+ Look Out, Sir isn't really any safer.

Incorrect. The royal court is listed as an HQ choice, and therefore any of the characters within it are valid Warlords. (since they are all also leadership 10)

Models which do not use up an HQ choice slot have been FAQed to be invalid choices before true, but the royal court has no such entry.

Feel free to name your necron lord as a warlord if you wish.

Rule book pg. 111:" This is always the HQ choice character with the highest Leadership. "

Necron Codex: "This unit does not take up an HQ choice."

Doesn't matter what entry it is under in the book, since it must be a "choice". Just as an Elite option can be a Troops choice, something listed under HQ may not be an HQ choice.

To be sure. Your quotes indicates it all however: While they may not 'take up' a HQ choice, (meaning you are free to select up to 1 other HQ choice per primary detachment, and 'have' to take at least one Overlord) they 'are' HQ choices by virtue of being in the HQ FOC slot.

 Neorealist wrote:
To be sure. Your quotes indicates it all however: While they may not 'take up' a HQ choice, (meaning you are free to select up to 1 other HQ choice per primary detachment, and 'have' to take at least one Overlord) they 'are' HQ choices by virtue of being in the HQ FOC slot.

Being an option, does not make them a choice. By not taking up an "HQ choice" they are not in the HQ FOC. The FOC defines choices, not options. In addition to that, I will point out that a Lord from a RC that gets attached to a Warrior Squad becomes Troops, not HQ. It's the Royal Court that is an HQ option, though not a choice.

They cannot, the same reason that things taken from certain slots but count as another slot....cannot satisfy both.

Angelic wrote:
Being an option, does not make them a choice. By not taking up an "HQ choice" they are not in the HQ FOC. The FOC defines choices, not options. In addition to that, I will point out that a Lord from a RC that gets attached to a Warrior Squad becomes Troops, not HQ. It's the Royal Court that is an HQ option, though not a choice.

This is simply incorrect. A unit counts as 'choice' of some type as part of it's position within the FOC regardless of wether or not it takes up a selection or not.

from the FOC rules: "...Dark boxes are compulsory selections. As you can see, you have to take at least one HQ selection and two troops selections. These compulsory choices ensure that whatever else you select... ...Sometimes a single choice on the Force Organisation chart will allow you to select more than one unit. This will always be explained in the appropriate codex, so be sure to read it carefully..."

In this case the Necron codex allows you to take a Royal court as an HQ choice (since that is it's FOC slot) that doesn't take up a HQ choice (as written in the codex)

It seems to pan out, but why would you want to? Planning to send your single overlord on a suicide mission? Otherwise, the survivability of an overlord is so much better that I would question the tactical merit of it.

Only reason I'd do so is to make my opponents targeting priority choices a bit more difficult. They are probably already going to want to shoot the overlord anyway given I tend to play them fairly aggressively, so it allows me to place one of the more strategic warlord traits somewhere in/near my deployment zone and keep it (relatively) safe.

 Neorealist wrote:

Angelic wrote:
Being an option, does not make them a choice. By not taking up an "HQ choice" they are not in the HQ FOC. The FOC defines choices, not options. In addition to that, I will point out that a Lord from a RC that gets attached to a Warrior Squad becomes Troops, not HQ. It's the Royal Court that is an HQ option, though not a choice.

This is simply incorrect. A unit counts as 'choice' of some type as part of it's position within the FOC regardless of wether or not it takes up a selection or not.

from the FOC rules: "...Dark boxes are compulsory selections. As you can see, you have to take at least one HQ selection and two troops selections. These compulsory choices ensure that whatever else you select... ...Sometimes a single choice on the Force Organisation chart will allow you to select more than one unit. This will always be explained in the appropriate codex, so be sure to read it carefully..."

In this case the Necron codex allows you to take a Royal court as an HQ choice (since that is it's FOC slot) that doesn't take up a HQ choice (as written in the codex)

The RC does not in anyway appear in a FOC chart because it does not take up a HQ choice. What I said is not incorrect. As laid out in any codex, all units are merely options. They do not become choices until you fill a particular slot within a FOC with them. The RC takes up neither of the standard 2 HQ choices (slots) and thus does not appear on a FOC. As I also noted, before the game begins the Necron Lord becomes a Troop as soon as it is attached to the unit of Warriors. But you know what, go ahead and try it. Couple of Sniper weapon or Barrage shots and you'll realize it's foolish.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/562901.page

From when this subject was brought up just over a month ago.

 Quanar wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
It was the last question in the Imperial Guard FAQ 1.1 (the newest I have on hand)

Q: Can Ministorum Priests or Techpriest Enginseers be taken as the
mandatory HQ choice? (p93)

A: No. You will need to take another model to be your
Warlord.

That implies to me that only an HQ unit that fills the HQ slot on the FOC can be your Warlord.

Thanks for that Ghaz. This would certainly suggest a precedent despite not having any direct rule to attach it to.

One of the salient points from the last thread, that hasn't been brought up here.

If it was ruled that you could count a Royal Court as your warlord (like a CCS) that would be interesting. Would you need to kill the whole unit? Potentially the toughest Warlord in 40k - 5 Crypteks and 5 Lords...

Kholzerino wrote:
If it was ruled that you could count a Royal Court as your warlord (like a CCS) that would be interesting. Would you need to kill the whole unit? Potentially the toughest Warlord in 40k - 5 Crypteks and 5 Lords...

Wont work because with an HQ unit consisting of more than one model you have to nominate which single model in the HQ unit is the warlord at the start of the game. If that model dies your opponent gets slay the warlord even if the rest of the unit is still alive.

If a RC member joins a unit of warriors, it becomes part of that unit for all intents and purposes. That RC member is scoring as a troops.

So in that specific instance, THAT RC member cannot be your warlord. However, if you kept it into a RC unit (even a RC unit of 1 model) it still wouldn't be since RCs cannot be taken w/o an Overlord (named or generic). They are not an HQ choice, they are a HQ upgrade just like the DE Archon's Court and similar units, you cannot choose them without choosing another unit.

As for "why" you'd want a 1W Warlord - it just frees up the Overlord to be on the front lines without fear of giving up 1 VP for Slay the Warlord.