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.

What if my army has two detachments, each with a model that "must be my warlord".

How does that work? Do I get to pick one? Randomize it?

You can't take the second one because you can't meet the requirement of "must be the warlord" for it.

Can you quote the rules of the models? Mostly the rule will state "if HQ X is included in your primary detachment they become your warlord", if it is worded in this way then the HQ in your primary detachment becomes your warlord.

 mrhappyface wrote:
Can you quote the rules of the models? Mostly the rule will state "if HQ X is included in your primary detachment they become your warlord", if it is worded in this way then the HQ in your primary detachment becomes your warlord.

This is how Abaddon works. If you don't want him as your warlord you just put the model you want to be warlord in a separate detachment, thus ensuring Abaddon isn't in your primary.
This is a relic of the different definition of primary detachment under 6th ed.

nareik wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:
Can you quote the rules of the models? Mostly the rule will state "if HQ X is included in your primary detachment they become your warlord", if it is worded in this way then the HQ in your primary detachment becomes your warlord.

This is how Abaddon works. If you don't want him as your warlord you just put the model you want to be warlord in a separate detachment, thus ensuring Abaddon isn't in your primary.
This is a relic of the different definition of primary detachment under 6th ed.

I see, unfortunetly Abaddon is the only time I have ever come across this rule. Thanks for clarification.

AFAIK must be warlord appears in IA11 for Corsair Princes and IA13 for Renegade Demagogues.

The FAQ Draft tells us that you can't use more than 1 detachment with that rule

In the case of the Corsair Prince it specifically says you pick which detachment you want as your primary and the Prince in that detachment is your Warlord, no doubt this is because you have to take a Prince in each Corsair detachment.

Ok. Say I have a corsairs detachment AND a Renegade detachment. Possible?

Weren't the rules supposed to say that if 2 models have the "must be the warlord" rules, then only the model with the highest leadership stat was the be the warlord?

 sing your life wrote:
Weren't the rules supposed to say that if 2 models have the "must be the warlord" rules, then only the model with the highest leadership stat was the be the warlord?

Thats not a rule anymore.

Both models shall be struck once with a Warhammer (MSRP 65.00 usd)

the model with the least amount of damage is the warlord, the other model is removed as a casualty.

You can't take two models which both must be a warlord, if they must be something and they aren't then you have not made a valid army for standard play. You have not fulfilled the must requirement for one of the models.

It would be similar to a formation saying you "must take transports for all squads of x" and not taking the transports then saying your army is valid- it is not okay.

That seems like a false equivalency. We're explicitly told that formation restrictions are exclusive (meet them or you can't use them). No such explicit statement exists for Princes or Abaddon. I think it's closer to Sliscus's deployment rules back in the day, which required he be fielded with X unit. (And was later clarified in the FAQ not to restrict his presence to armies containing unit X.)

If both models MUST be warlord, and only one is warlord, you have not fulfilled the must. There is no additional permission being granted anywhere to ignore the rule which must be obeyed. Therefore not obeying it means you have selected an army combination that is not a valid combination within the rules of the game. just as if you select a formation/detachment and do not fulfill the must requirements for it.

If both models must be warlord, then both detachments they are from must be the primary detachment, because the warlords detachment is the primary detachment. You cannot have more than one primary detachment, just as you cannot have more than one warlord.

We are explicitly told we can have one warlord.

We are explicitly told we can have one primary detachment.

it is not a false in any sense, we must do the things we are told we must do within the game- unless there is specific permission to do otherwise.

Selecting two models which both require they must be the warlord is not a valid army selection. Just as selecting a formation that requires you must take transports for each unit and not taking the transports is not a valid formation selection.

Forgeworld has answered this question in their Legion red book. Can't have two characters in the same army with the "must be warlord" rule (with the exception if one is a primarch).