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.

The wording on a DA ravenwing command squad is (emphasis mine): "For each HQ choice in your army that is mounted on a bike you may include a Ravenwing Command Squad". Does this mean that if I run, say, 4 librarian bikers as part of a Conclave formation, does each fill the role of "HQ choice in your army", because while each isn't part of the detachment he is in your army?

I was looking at running 3 ravenwing command squads for laughs and was debating if I could do it legally or not.

I'd say that's pretty clear. Looks like you can have one command squad per.

IIRC, though, there is a section in the BRB that clarifies the definition of "army" in the new context of 7th edition. That might be a good place to start.

If the 4 libraians are the models of a formation then they are not hq choices, the are hq battlefield roles.

An hq choice is an hq bfr that is selected as an hq slot under a detatchment(cad, allied, inquisitorial, etc)

However, if you were to take several nonformation detachments then technically by raw you can have a rw command squad for each(although this is pretty clearly not RAI, it does not make sense that a white scars captain unlocks an extra rwb command squad)

The Raven-wing command squad needs to be in the same detachment as the HQ on the bike that is letting you take them sans FOC. In the BRB, under choosing your army there is a bit about datasheets that don't take up slots in a FOC. It reads as "If the Army List Entry states that the Army List Entry can be included in an army that includes another specified unit, and that the Army List Entry does not take up a Force Organisation slot, the Army List Entry must join the same Detachment as that specified unit." Since the conclave has no option for bikers a raven wing command squad what you are describing is illegal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
If the 4 libraians are the models of a formation then they are not hq choices, the are hq battlefield roles.

That's a wishy washy slippery slope. A compulsory choice is still a choice in my book so an HQ choice and a unit with the HQ battlefield role have got yo be the same thing.

 DJGietzen wrote:
The Raven-wing command squad needs to be in the same detachment as the HQ on the bike that is letting you take them sans FOC. In the BRB, under choosing your army there is a bit about datasheets that don't take up slots in a FOC. It reads as "If the Army List Entry states that the Army List Entry can be included in an army that includes another specified unit, and that the Army List Entry does not take up a Force Organisation slot, the Army List Entry must join the same Detachment as that specified unit." Since the conclave has no option for bikers what you are describing is illegal.

Yes, ty, that's actually what I was thinking of. So there you have it, looks like it's gotta be same-detachment.

 DJGietzen wrote:
The Raven-wing command squad needs to be in the same detachment as the HQ on the bike that is letting you take them sans FOC. In the BRB, under choosing your army there is a bit about datasheets that don't take up slots in a FOC. It reads as "If the Army List Entry states that the Army List Entry can be included in an army that includes another specified unit, and that the Army List Entry does not take up a Force Organisation slot, the Army List Entry must join the same Detachment as that specified unit." Since the conclave has no option for bikers what you are describing is illegal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
If the 4 libraians are the models of a formation then they are not hq choices, the are hq battlefield roles.

That's a wishy washy slippery slope. A compulsory choice is still a choice in my book so an HQ choice and a unit with the HQ battlefield role have got yo be the same thing.

It is fairly well defined in the brb under formations and battlefield roles.

But also ty for adding the othet brb quote, i am not at home with my brb so couldn't look that bit up.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
It is fairly well defined in the brb under formations and battlefield roles.

Its not as well defined as you might think. For starters there is nothing to distinguish, within the framework of the rules, a battlefield role and a choice. You might argue that detachments use a FOC, while formations just list the units required, however those lists constituent a FOC. In a formation a unit retains its battlefield role.

You'll have to explain to me how the BRB says a compulsory unit with the HQ battlefield role is not an "HQ choice"

I have a prepared argument, but it will gave to wait until i get home and can check a few bits from the brb.

If one of those bits has the specific verbiage i think it might, I will be changing my position.

I should be home and finished in about an hour.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ok I am late but I got my answers.

I will begin with battlefield roles, as they are the first part of the brb that discusses them. In this section each is referred to as a x-unit(example hq unit).

Next is "changing battlefield roles" which again maintains unit(from a fast attack unit to a troops unit). But then it discusses multiple roles via certain rule(example becomes a heavy support choice or an elites choice), but then it is discussing what role you have chosen for the unit... So, yeah.

The we get to "selecting detachments" and it is in the rules for non-formation detachments that the foc comes into play and it discusses your foc options as choices.

Now we get to the formations rule which simply states the units maintain their battlefield role.

Finally the bit that would have changed my mind: Eternal War missions The Scouring and Big Guns Never Tire. These 2 missions grant victory points for the destruction of Fast attack units and heavy support units respectively. Note bfr units, not choices(had it said choices i would have changed my position).

So as we can see any unit of a given bfr is a bfr unit, but only units selected via foc are bfr choices.

But you're not addressing where or how it tells us a unit in a formation us not a choice. You mention the FOC rules but those rules never mention making a choice they only mention filling slots. A slot might be a simple as any unit, more commonly it is any unit of a particular battlefield role but it can also be a specific unit. This means the requirements of a formation can be called its FOC.

If not, are optional units in a formation of a particular role not a choice of that role?

I mean, if you're going purely off of whether or not a model in a formation counts as a "choice", couldn't I make the argument that the librarians all count as choices? The only requirement is that you have Ezekiel, you can "choose" to take 2 to 4 librarians.

I just demonstrated that the only hq units the brb refer to as choices is those purchaced in an foc.

In a fomation they are simply referred to as hq units. You need to show where a formation bfr unit is a bfr choice.

Trying to apply that you got to make a "choice" of the librarians in the formation(which is also demonstrably false, there is only 1 unit in the codex called a librarian, you take 3 of those with wargear options as you see fit) is attempting to apply the common definition of choice as opposed to the game term of an hq choice(or any bfr choice).

What then would you say this line means, taken from the section on formations in the brb?

Unless stated otherwise, each individual unit maintains its normal Battlefield Role when taken as part of a Formation.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
If they fill the same battlefield role, being an HQ, why would a unit that requires an HQ unit not consider them as an HQ unit?

 kingbobbito wrote:
What then would you say this line means, taken from the section on formations in the brb?

Unless stated otherwise, each individual unit maintains its normal Battlefield Role when taken as part of a Formation.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
If they fill the same battlefield role, being an HQ, why would a unit that requires an HQ unit not consider them as an HQ unit?

Go back and read my previous 2 posts more carefully.

Then go back and read the rw command squad rule. Notice how it is not hq unit but hq choice?
Notice how i addressed that twice already?

But again, where does the rulebook define the word choice and say that choice is distinctly different to "maintains role". Why are you saying that an HQ is not always and HQ, as defined by the book? All you're saying is "formation doesn't use the word choice", and making a leap in logic that an HQ isn't an HQ because it's simply called an HQ, not an HQ choice. Where does the rulebook say that there is a difference between "an HQ choice" and "an HQ that you chose to be in your army"?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"HQ choice" is the exact same as saying HQ selection or HQ pick or HQ decision, it's a vague term used to say "the HQ you want in your army". "Choice" is not defined by the rulebook as being of any importance. And you say that it doesn't matter that you're choosing the wargear, when in a standard FOC that's exactly what matters, whether or not you "chose" to give your librarian a bike. Having a librarian as "an HQ choice" doesn't mean you get a bike command squad, "choosing to give your librarian a bike" is what matters, the two things being very distinctly different.

An HQ is always an HQ. That is not in question.

But the terms "HQ unit"(which is what an HQ always is) and "HQ choice" are clearly different.

The "unit" term is used for all battlefield roles, that is the units role. "Choice" is only used in referrence to the slors and selections from a foc.

This is consistent in the 2 missions that provides vps for destroying a particular battlefield role unit, which means heavy support units from a formation still counts(as I had said earlier, had the missions used the term choice there, I would have changed my position).

It isn't defined specifically, it is something you can logically determine via reading the rules involved(which I had provided the direction to in an earlier post).

I could ask you the same question; can you provide a definition that all hq units are hq choices?

Demanding such a definition is a worthless argument, neither exists. Instead we must read all the rules involved, and then apply the verbiage used(consistently I might add) to discover the difference.

Yes, I logically determined via reading that "HQ choice" is simply the wording they chose to say "HQ that you're using in your army". When something is your "choice" that's the same as saying "it's the model I bought and wanted to have in my army". Again, why are you defining "choice" as anything more than the vague definition I used? It's the wording they chose to use because it's easier than "the models you want to be your HQ".

If they wanted to put some level of impact upon the word choice, they'd have stressed that a formation doesn't have any choices involved. Further some formations do have choices of how many of each unit you want to include.... Why is it that you're saying that a "unit choice" is different from "the models I choose" when no proof is given for this assumption other than they happened to not use that wording in the brief definition of formations.

Keep in mind the paragraph defining formations makes no mention of how you select troops. They mention units you "include"..... which coincidentally happens to have the same meaning as choose in this context, and perhaps they just wanted to use synonyms to vary the wording in the rules?

Im done repeating myself.

If you actually read the rules you see that an hq you have in your army is called an hq unit in all cases in the brb excepting those that involve the foc, that is the only place the call it a Choice.

I'm sorry you refuse to read the rules and just continue to blindly repeat the same falsehoods.

Yes formation makes now mention of how the units are selected, because they are generally pre-selected. A unit you include from a formation is not(keeping the hq example for ease here) an hq choice, it defaults to the other term used everywhere other that detatchments chosen via foc: an hq unit.

The new decurion/warhost, while giving you choices in some of the formations would still be elites units in the aspect host(or fast unit, or hs unit, or troops unit)

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Im done repeating myself.

If you actually read the rules you see that an hq you have in your army is called an hq unit in all cases in the brb excepting those that involve the foc, that is the only place the call it a Choice.

I'm sorry you refuse to read the rules and just continue to blindly repeat the same falsehoods.

Yes formation makes now mention of how the units are selected, because they are generally pre-selected. A unit you include from a formation is not(keeping the hq example for ease here) an hq choice, it defaults to the other term used everywhere other that detatchments chosen via foc: an hq unit.

The new decurion/warhost, while giving you choices in some of the formations would still be elites units in the aspect host(or fast unit, or hs unit, or troops unit)

Yes, you keep repeating yourself, your only argument being they don't use the exact wording of choice. Where does the rulebook say that choice means anything? They could have used any number of synonyms for choice, such as selected HQ, they just felt like using the word choice. Where does it say that the word choice actually matters, and that the choice of librarian on a bike isn't considered an HQ choice?

The section for formation uses the wording "which you include", which means the same thing as "which you choose to include" in this case. Why does the word "choice" mean anything, where does it say that units "chosen" for a formation are not "choices", and that "choosing" to use a formation means that you didn't "choose" the units? Formations like the decurion especially are still part of a FOC. It's just that when it contains certain unit choices from the FOC does it become a formation. The units are chosen, and then when you choose those units they count as a formation. I choose to run Ezekiel and librarians.... tell me how choosing to use Ezekiel and librarians doesn't make them choices, other than that the book uses a synonym for choice so that it doesn't repeat itself?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Every single unit that I include in my army is a unit choice, because if I didn't choose to run it, it wouldn't be in my army. Where does the rulebook define formations as units that you didn't choose to run, that for some unknown reason they stop becoming a choice when they're a formation?

Kal, forgive me if i misunderstood, but are you saying that a fast attack choice (ravenwing attack squadron) that is taken as a "troops choice" (as per sammaels sr) still has the fast attack bfr and is still a fast attack unit for the eternal war mission objective?

I would argue that the brb actually refers to "the common" foc as requiring 1 HQ unit and 2 troop units
It's not an obvious clarification but it certainly lends credence to idea that unit and choice are one and the same.
If it were the way you (may) claim, then that sentence itself suggests you cannot take sammael and 2 bike squads as your basis for a cad

 jokerkd wrote:
Kal, forgive me if i misunderstood, but are you saying that a fast attack choice (ravenwing attack squadron) that is taken as a "troops choice" (as per sammaels sr) still has the fast attack bfr and is still a fast attack unit for the eternal war mission objective?

I would argue that the brb actually refers to "the common" foc as requiring 1 HQ unit and 2 troop units
It's not an obvious clarification but it certainly lends credence to idea that unit and choice are one and the same.
If it were the way you (may) claim, then that sentence itself suggests you cannot take sammael and 2 bike squads as your basis for a cad

No, that is not at all what I am saying.

What I am saying is that that particular situation you have a troops choice(because it is taken via the foc) that is also a troops unit. If you had some form of raven wing bikers in a formation with the troops bfr; then they would be a troops unit, but not a troops choice(and of course if the formation did not specify them as troops unit, then they would be a fast attack unit and not a fast attack choice)

A simple set of definitions needs to be applied.

HQ Choice: Sometimes known as an HQ Slot. An option in a Detachment's Force Organization Chart that can be filled by any unit with the HQ Role (also known as an HQ unit).

HQ Unit: A unit that has the HQ Role, either natively or changed by special rule.

A Ravenwing Assault Unit in a detachment with Sammael or Azrael and the Warlord, will always have the Troops Role, or be classed as a Troops Unit. In detachments where they are not present, or the Warlord is not in their detachment, they would retain the Fast Attack Role. This would apply whether in Formation or a CAD.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

What I am saying is that that particular situation you have a troops choice(because it is taken via the foc) that is also a troops unit. If you had some form of raven wing bikers in a formation with the troops bfr; then they would be a troops unit, but not a troops choice(and of course if the formation did not specify them as troops unit, then they would be a fast attack unit and not a fast attack choice)

A Daemonkin Helldrake is Fast Attack unit. If you include one in a bloodstorm formation is it not also a Fast Attack choice? You chose to include it, it was entirely optional.

 DJGietzen wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

What I am saying is that that particular situation you have a troops choice(because it is taken via the foc) that is also a troops unit. If you had some form of raven wing bikers in a formation with the troops bfr; then they would be a troops unit, but not a troops choice(and of course if the formation did not specify them as troops unit, then they would be a fast attack unit and not a fast attack choice)

A Daemonkin Helldrake is Fast Attack unit. If you include one in a bloodstorm formation is it not also a Fast Attack choice? You chose to include it, it was entirely optional.

Same with things like the Ravenwing Apocalypse formation. They're part of a formation, but that doesn't mean they aren't choices in a FOC (you can actually fit the formation in a standard FOC using Sammael). Why would they cease to be "choices" even though they're a perfectly acceptable CAD, and only count as a formation because you chose to include 5 squads of bikes.