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.

So reading through the MT codex tonight I liked a number of things in the book but one caught my eye specifically and made me do a double take.

4: Grav-chute Commandos: All friendly units chosen from Codex:Militarum Tempestus re-roll failed Reserve Rolls if arriving from deep-strike. Also, all units in the same platoon as the Warlord only scatter D6” instead of 2D6”

That warlord trait talks about a platoon however, nothing in the rules section of the book uses the word "platoon".

Anyone have any insights into this one? Would such be clarified in the new IG/AM book? Would it mean all MT units in the PRimary detachment when taken as such?

IIRC there are 2 platoons in the regular AM book, one for the Tempestus and the regular old platoon. I can't tell for the MT codex, but it might be explained in the army list section

GW poorly written rule... as usual.

There are no platoons in the MT book.

Read it as "Unit"(Like all other Warlord traits) and the rule works just fine.

All units in the same Unit ... reads wonderfully.
Just teasing you a little there Kommissar Kel, I too would say to simply treat it as the unit which the Warlord is attached too because that is how these Rules normally work!

I just have to wonder if they intended it to somehow affect multiple units but didn't want it applying to the whole Codex's Army. If this was the intention though then we need to take the good Kommissar's "GW poorly written rule... as usual" comment, give it a bold and an underline just to emphasize the point because they went about it very, very, very poorly. There is no mechanics provided that would explain how we go about tracking such a 'platoon' and none of the default rules mesh up to the concept at all. Even combining units into something that we would call a 'platoon,' if that still is an option, it doesn't mesh up well because that would still best addressed as 'the unit the warlord is in.'

That is what I get for posting while falling asleep