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.

Hi how do you see if what you can take in a formation is limited to a faction or not.


The Adeptus Mechanicus War Convocation clearly isn't restricted


I know that there is a faction symbol at the top of the formation page, and before the war convocation I was certain that you could only take units that matched that symbol faction.
But here comes the confusing part. The symbols don't match in the War Convocation at all. Knights, skitarri and adeptus mech all have a different symbol and none of those symbols is the symbol in the War Convocation.

Am I missing something ?
Or could you as well use all blood angel models in a space marine codex formation if the names match ?

All models in the same Detachment or Formation must be drawn from the same Chapter.
- Chapter Tactics

That covers the Formations available to Space Marines, for the most part, as at least one model within the Formation will have a Chapter Tactic.
Other Formations will spell out exactly which Units to take, which will make it harder to mix Factions as they don't often share Units.

Technically, without a restriction saying 'one faction only' or 'These formations are available to this supplement,' there are some grounds for mixing Units from other factions but it is not easy to do.

Generally formation datasheets have a symbol at the top which identify the formation's faction. Hence why the formations in Codex: Space Marines with the Codex: Space Marines symbol cannot be taken using units from another codex.

The War Convocation appears to be an exception, though it's common sense that a formation which explicitly states it is made up of units from several different factions has an allowance to do so.

The rules for Chapter Tactics state that all units in a detachment must have the same Chapter Tactics.

To not confuse while you read my post - faction symbol determines what Faction can use it. As we see in above example there can be exceptions.

@JinxDragon
I want to know what does Chapter Tactics special rule have to do with it?
First. Chapter Tactics is specail rule. You only look at that rule when model has it, or formation (like Gladius Strike Force) forces you to do so.
Second. Let's take Space Marines Suppression Force Formation. None of the units in that formation have CT special rule, so I don't even look at that page.
Third. If I decide to use any SM formation as Blood Angels. None of the BA models have CT special rule, so why would I look at it?

There are a couple of examples of formations which have units from multiple factions (blood oath has a few) But it's always pretty clear what faction is what.

Most formations are only one faction , which will match the faction symbol. Don't see the rules problem.

 danyboy wrote:
To not confuse while you read my post - faction symbol determines what Faction can use it. As we see in above example there can be exceptions.

@JinxDragon
I want to know what does Chapter Tactics special rule have to do with it?
First. Chapter Tactics is specail rule. You only look at that rule when model has it, or formation (like Gladius Strike Force) forces you to do so.
Second. Let's take Space Marines Suppression Force Formation. None of the units in that formation have CT special rule, so I don't even look at that page.
Third. If I decide to use any SM formation as Blood Angels. None of the BA models have CT special rule, so why would I look at it?

OP edited their post - they were initially asking something along the lines of whether they could mix Chapter Tactics within formations.

The War Convocation is an extra special formation that can be drawn from multiple factions.

In general, formations are drawn from a single faction as defined by their faction symbol.

Indeed, the original post had asked about taking different Chapter Tactics within a single Formation.

Do want to point out something though: It is very easy to over-look the faction symbol!
The majority of Formations have the formation symbol spread across the top of the page as if it was some sort of decorative divider, in a book filled with near identical dividers separating sections.
I have to admit that I overlooked that it was even there....

As an aside, what resource is that formation from?

 DarknessEternal wrote:
As an aside, what resource is that formation from?

White Dwarf #69 I believe.

Interesting question, and it's likely entirely theoretical because I'm not aware of any specific rules interactions that would affect it, but (assuming the formation uses the Cult Mechanicus symbol) does the entire formation count as the Cult Mechanicus faction despite being drawn from other factions' books?

No, The units in the formation still have their faction identified by their datasheets.

A formation does not have to all come from a single faction, never has. Its just a list of units. Its a failure of the game that multiple units have different rules but the same name. Its an unwritten rule that, to avoid confusion, when two different units have the same name the unit needs to be the same faction as the symbol listed on the formation.

The problem I have with that is the rules in every 7th edition codex's 'Datasheets' section explaining the various parts that make up a unit datasheet. It's not explicitly stated but I believe it's suggested that formation datasheets should be read in the same way.

In these sections it states the faction symbol at the top identifies which faction the unit belongs to. Again, not explicitly stated this is equivalent when reading formation datasheets, however without this assumption we do indeed have nothing preventing us from using Codex: Space Marines formations using units from Codex: Blood Angels.

For example when the question has arisen, the reasoning stating the Skyhammer Annihilation Force can only be taken by Codex: Space Marines is that the faction symbol identifies the units within as being Codex: Space Marines faction formation. Does the Cult Mechanicus symbol not identify the units within as being the Cult Mechanicus faction in this case?

But the problem I have with THAT is you end up with units with multiple factions. One based on the rules as written, and another based on an assumption. Don't get me wrong, we have to make assumptions no matter what, I just prefer to make assumptions that don't result in contradictions.

 DJGietzen wrote:
But the problem I have with THAT is you end up with units with multiple factions. One based on the rules as written, and another based on an assumption. Don't get me wrong, we have to make assumptions no matter what, I just prefer to make assumptions that don't result in contradictions.

Hence why I pointed out the comparison with the Skyhammer Annihilation Force, which has no stated faction requirement beyond the Space Marines faction symbol at the top of the formation. You're making the assumption this has no effect whatsoever on the units within the formation which, if this were the case, would allow a Skyhammer Annihilation Force to be taken using Assault and Devastator Squads from Codex: Blood Angels, for example.

Why is the formation's faction symbol irrelevant or at least not indicative or binding, and why could a unit not have multiple factions (or perhaps we can assume the faction is overriden by the formation - we're making assumptions either way) in an isolated case such as this?

It seems to me the faction symbol on a formation datasheet should follow the unit datasheet rules and thus state which faction the units within are and must be drawn from, and in a case where they are drawn from another faction entirely we must assume the unit belongs either to both factions or possibly counts only as the formation's stated faction.

I will point out with the War Convocation - all models gain the canticles rules from the Cult Mechanicus book - which to me is why the faction symbol for them is at the top of the sheet.

Ok I think I understand the issue, and can come up with a meaningful rules question on the topic.

Let's say I have a hellforged hunting pack primary detachment, and want to take an allied detachment.
The HFHP has a khorne symbol above it, which I assume means daemonkin faction .
I choose a bloodslaughterer as warlord. This doesn't have the KDK faction but can be chaos marine daemons or renegade factions.
What faction can the allied detachment be?

The Allied Detachment rules cover this pretty clearly:

"All units chosen must have a different Faction to any of the units in your Primary Detachment (or no Faction)."

Ok so, if I want allied chaos marines, Ican declare the blood slaughterer and brass scorpion are renegade faction?

You'd have to, I suppose.

 Mr. Shine wrote:
Hence why I pointed out the comparison with the Skyhammer Annihilation Force, which has no stated faction requirement beyond the Space Marines faction symbol at the top of the formation. You're making the assumption this has no effect whatsoever on the units within the formation which, if this were the case, would allow a Skyhammer Annihilation Force to be taken using Assault and Devastator Squads from Codex: Blood Angels, for example.

You must have missed it when I said " Its an unwritten rule that, to avoid confusion, when two different units have the same name the unit needs to be the same faction as the symbol listed on the formation. " If we assume this unwritten rule to be true then only spacemarine units will be part of a skyhammer formation. We only only get the situation you are describign here if me make no assumptions what so ever. I did not say that was the riught way to play.

There is a problem with the rules, they don't do enough but what your suggesting is that we not only make a new rule to 'fix' the problem but also ignore previously established rules in order to make the fix work while I'm suggesting a much more elegant solution that won't require us to ignore a single rule.

DJGietzen,
If you have the Waaagh! Ghazghkull supplement flick to page 51, or to the page before Council of Waaagh! if it is a digital copy.
Mystery to me why a page that explains how to read a Formation Datasheet is missing from other books....

JinxDragon wrote:
If you have the Waaagh! Ghazghkull supplement flick to page 51, or to the page before Council of Waaagh! if it is a digital copy.
Mystery to me why a page that explains how to read a Formation Datasheet is missing from other books....

That explanation is also present in the Haemoculus Covens book.

It seems like the war cohort formation units do have 2 factions; there is the faction of their own datasheets, and then the faction symbol of the war convocation.

The convocation has its own symbol at the top there and then rules explaining that the units within count towards each other's faction rules(skitarii units count as cult mech units for canticles); so there is some strangeness there.

Another strange bit is the lack of permission for the units to be parts of 2 formations(a special permission normally given in these cases; for example the skitarii war cohort has a designer's note addressing the 3 battle maniples as being allowed to be from both formations: maniple and cohort, and thus having both formations' rules). Clearly this allowance is intended and they should have both rules but we can only assume they do(and it can be justly argued they don't get both rules, but that is kind of a jerk move of an argument).

HIWPI as far as faction goes: since they are all IOM and battle brothers the factions within the formation doesn't really matter/make a difference(unless you make one of the models your warlord and wanted to add an allied detatchment of one of the factions); so I would either let them count as both their normal factions and the convocation faction, or just the convocation faction. Either allowance, if you had a warlord trait or other special rule to gain PE on a faction, I would allow cohort as the named faction.

 DJGietzen wrote:

 Mr. Shine wrote:
Hence why I pointed out the comparison with the Skyhammer Annihilation Force, which has no stated faction requirement beyond the Space Marines faction symbol at the top of the formation. You're making the assumption this has no effect whatsoever on the units within the formation which, if this were the case, would allow a Skyhammer Annihilation Force to be taken using Assault and Devastator Squads from Codex: Blood Angels, for example.

You must have missed it when I said " Its an unwritten rule that, to avoid confusion, when two different units have the same name the unit needs to be the same faction as the symbol listed on the formation. " If we assume this unwritten rule to be true then only spacemarine units will be part of a skyhammer formation. We only only get the situation you are describign here if me make no assumptions what so ever. I did not say that was the riught way to play.

There is a problem with the rules, they don't do enough but what your suggesting is that we not only make a new rule to 'fix' the problem but also ignore previously established rules in order to make the fix work while I'm suggesting a much more elegant solution that won't require us to ignore a single rule.

What I was getting at was that you seem to be giving the faction symbol some weight in terms of binding which faction you may take a named unit from (where [unit name] can be taken from various factions) but stop short of actually applying that faction to all units within the formation. This I believe is both inconsistent and incorrect.

What I'm suggesting is that the units count from either one or both factions, the latter of which seems to make the most sense to me. Assumptions must be made either way, but I prefer consistency personally.