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.

I am slightly confused.

Can you take a techmarine as a sole DA HQ, or do you need to run another DA HQ as well?

The reason I am asking is because I am planning to run DA as an ally so only 1 HQ.

Thanks.

Sure you can, nowhere does it say you're required to have any of the other HQs.
So grab whoever the hell you want.

Page 94 of the DA codex outlines a limitation requirement that must be met in order for you to be able to take a techmarine. Should this limitation remain unfilled, then you are unable to use a techmarine in your army list. It is a similar limitation that exists in a lot of codex for 'slotless' units, such as Tau Bodyguards, GK inquisitor war-bands, Eldar Warlock councils and countless others.

There is also something else to consider. There is two sentences there, one telling you of the limitation and the other informing you how many slots it fills in the force organization chart. Even if you do find a way around this limitation it still will not meet the slot requirements found in the allied detachments force organization chart due to that second sentence. You would still be required to take a second HQ choice in order to make your army legal.

Oh wow i was totally off on that one.
Still if he doesn't take a slot he can still have him alongside the other HQ.

Jinx, your second point is untrue, I'm afraid. When GW have ruled on similar situations in the past (the most notable being the Emperor's Champion) they have explained that the character not using up a shoot doesn't preclude him from counting as your compulsory HQ. You haven't used a slot, but you still have a HQ unit.

If he wants to have one along side another HQ then he can do so without a problem.

That is the nice thing about these HQ limited units, they don't take up any slots. If you plan it just right you can end up with an army that has more units in the HQ choice then in the other sections, DA in particular. If you want to sink the points into it for some bizarre reason you can have 9 HQ units by the end of it, just have to stick one of the HQ's you begin with on a bike and the other in terminator Armour and watch those one per army limits. That is probably going to more more HQ units then every other section in the organization chart combined, as you have blown most of your points on just having that many HQ units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting there Insaniak, do you have a link to the FAQ or something similar so I can read up?

I have seen it pop up once or twice in the past and I would like to be better educated over this matter so I can provide a more accurate answer in the future. I was under the impression that slotless units do not take up slots, so therefore can not count towards such limitations. I know a few other people on this forum have the same misconception as well, so it will be refreshing to have a more accurate answer to give.

You would need to dig out the 5th edition BT FAQ, since it doesn't apply for primary detachments for BT now (since they decided that the Champ can't be your Warlord, so you have to take a second HQ anyway) and they haven't bothered to address it for BTs taken as allies


Not sure off the top of my head if they have ever addressed it for other armies.

 insaniak wrote:
Jinx, your second point is untrue, I'm afraid. When GW have ruled on similar situations in the past (the most notable being the Emperor's Champion) they have explained that the character not using up a shoot doesn't preclude him from counting as your compulsory HQ. You haven't used a slot, but you still have a HQ unit.

Actually I believe they've changed that, as in this question from the Imperial Guard FAQ:

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.

Or this from the Black Templars FAQ:

Q. Can the Emperor’s Champion be my warlord? (p31)

A. No. This will mean you will need to include a second HQ choice to be your warlord.

Not even sure if any other army would be in the same situation, let alone if it was ever addressed.

From what I read of the champions rules it wasn't just that he could be taken by himself, but that he was a mandatory choice so he had to be taken in virtually every game. From what I have seen of other armies, when it comes to slotless units, they have a limitation that guarantees you will need to take another HQ unit in any case. The champion might of been the lone exception, but I will keep my eyes out for any unit with similar circumstances and then look over that FAQ very carefully for an answer when it occurs.

Ghaz, yeah, I saw that, but it's down to those models bring your Warlord, not whether they can be a compulsory HQ. And it doesn't help at all for allied detachments.

 insaniak wrote:
Ghaz, yeah, I saw that, but it's down to those models bring your Warlord, not whether they can be a compulsory HQ. And it doesn't help at all for allied detachments.

Reread the question from the Imperial Guard FAQ. It is about whether or not they can be your compulsory HQ.

I'm not sure I see the confusion here. "For each HQ you may..." means you can have up to 4 HQ units, ally or not. As for Ghaz's statements, whether or not it xan be a warlord is irrelevant. Allies don't have the warlord spot.

The Imperial Guard FAQ is not about Warlords. Its simply additional information that wasn't asked. It clearly says that they can not be your compulsory HQ choices and then adds that because of that they can't be your Warloed.

Ghaz wrote:Reread the question from the Imperial Guard FAQ. It is about whether or not they can be your compulsory HQ.

Yeah, I missed that. Good enough.

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:I'm not sure I see the confusion here. "For each HQ you may..." means you can have up to 4 HQ units, ally or not. As for Ghaz's statements, whether or not it xan be a warlord is irrelevant. Allies don't have the warlord spot.

The 'confusion' was simply over the lack of specification on whether HQ units that don't use a slot can still count as the compulsory HQ in this edition.

Even more confusing, if you take Sammael as a landspeeder and a Techmarine who is your warlord?
The Techmarine who doesn't take a HQ slot, or Sammael who doesn't have a leadership value?

Kisada II wrote:
Even more confusing, if you take Sammael as a landspeeder and a Techmarine who is your warlord?
The Techmarine who doesn't take a HQ slot, or Sammael who doesn't have a leadership value?

The Techmarine as he's an HQ choice (just doesn't take a slot) with the highest leadership.

Wrong. It would be Sammael. He already has a warlord trait.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
Wrong. It would be Sammael. He already has a warlord trait.

Doesn't matter if he has a Warlord Trait. In the given example, he is not a character and as such is not eligible to be your Warlord.

How would that be different from Bjorn the Fell-Handed?

Bjorn is a character. Sammael on Sableclaw is not.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
How would that be different from Bjorn the Fell-Handed?

One of the two has a rules exception. The other is Sammael.

edit: Also, having a warlord trait means nothing if he's not the warlord.

As such, I have no idea what happens if your only primary HQ is Sammael on Sableclaw. On the one hand you must have a Warlord. On the other hand Sableclaw cannot be the Warlord.

 Happyjew wrote:
As such, I have no idea what happens if your only primary HQ is Sammael on Sableclaw. On the one hand you must have a Warlord. On the other hand Sableclaw cannot be the Warlord.

It'd be an illegal army - just like having only 1 troop choice.

Lol, the Warlord Trait Samael gets even tells you how it works when he's on his Landspeeder, methinks GW didn't think this through...

rigeld2 wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
As such, I have no idea what happens if your only primary HQ is Sammael on Sableclaw. On the one hand you must have a Warlord. On the other hand Sableclaw cannot be the Warlord.

It'd be an illegal army - just like having only 1 troop choice.

It would still be legal. Sammael on Sableclaw is still a HQ, so he would fulfil the minimum HQ requirement. Also, if there is no other HQ with a higher Ld value, there is nothing that precludes him from being the Warlord.

Run a cheap DA Librarian as your second HQ. SOOO worth it.

Dra'al Nacht wrote:

It would still be legal. Sammael on Sableclaw is still a HQ, so he would fulfil the minimum HQ requirement. Also, if there is no other HQ with a higher Ld value, there is nothing that precludes him from being the Warlord.

A per the FAQ, a vehicle can only be your warlord if they are a character, as is the case with Bjorn.

Sammael in Sableclaw is not a character.

 insaniak wrote:

Dra'al Nacht wrote:

It would still be legal. Sammael on Sableclaw is still a HQ, so he would fulfil the minimum HQ requirement. Also, if there is no other HQ with a higher Ld value, there is nothing that precludes him from being the Warlord.

A per the FAQ, a vehicle can only be your warlord if they are a character, as is the case with Bjorn.

Sammael in Sableclaw is not a character.

Ah, ok. That would make a difference. Can't find it in the FAQ though. Could you direct me to the relevant section please?

I had misremembered the FAQ slightly, although the end result is the same...

The rulebook specifies in the Warlords section that your warlord is chosen from your HQ characters.

The rulebook FAQ just clarifies that vehicles aren't characters, even if they are unique, except in the case of Bjorn.

So Sammael can't be your warlord if he is in the speeder, as in that situation he is not a character.

 Quanar wrote:
Lol, the Warlord Trait Samael gets even tells you how it works when he's on his Landspeeder.

In that case I'd suspect it was intended that he could be the Warlord, just some text is missing. Maybe they'll FAQ him once they notice it.