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.

Hmm, interesting. I'm surprised to see so much disagreement on something so straightforward. Oh well, to each their own.

I'm going to happily allow players to use Rites of Teleportation with their GK armies and allied ICs. If you don't want to, fair enough, but I think you're incorrect.

DoW

So I'm going to wade on in with how I see this with the following example:

Inquistor w/terminator armor joins a GK terminator squad and goes into DS reserve. According to Rites of Teleortation, the GK termies are entitled to start rolling on turn one to arrive from DS reserve. Since the Inq is now a part of that unit and must arrive from reserves at the same time, as per the IC rule, he gains the benefit of Rites and Deep Strikes along with termies.

Please keep in mind that Rites of Teleportation is not a special rule. It is a command benefit and therefore not subject to the IC rules concerning special rules. Rites is a benefit that is conferred on to the unit as a bonus for organizing into a particular detachment, and according to the IC special rule, the Inquisitor is now a part of that unit for all rules purposes, which would seem to indicate command benefits unless otherwise noted. Since Rites doesn't specifically state that units must be comprised wholly of models from that detachment in order to benefit, there's nothing that directly disallows the use of Rites for a unit that also includes an IC.

I will say, just again, how much I dispose that whole 'for all Rule purposes' wording....

Zimko wrote:
There seems to be a lack of understanding in how units and IC joining units work. The rules are very specific that an IC becomes part of the unit he/she joins for all rules purposes. Therefore, if the unit that an IC join has a rule granted by it's detachment then it still has that rule and can still do it.

At no point is the IC being granted that rule. It may be benefiting from the rule because the unit it is part of is benefiting but the IC does not have the rule. The only time an IC doesn't benefit from rules granted to a unit it joins is when the rule specifically says so (Infiltrate, deep strike and such).

There absolutely is. You can't just read the first part of a rule entry and ignore the rest. Rigel keeps quoting that an IC becomes part of a unit for all rules purposes as though that validates his stance., but in same entry under IC on the same page in the BRB it further clarifies exactly how ICs interact with special rules which completely invalidates his stance.

At no point is the IC being granted that rule. It does not benefit from the special rule because it does not have it and it is not conferred, and if the usage of that special rule requires all models in the unit to have it, then having a model in the unit without that rule makes the unit unable to make use of it.
You have the last part backwards; the only time an IC does benefit from rules granted to a unit it joins is when the rule specifically says so.
This game is a permissive rules set. That does not mean you are permitted to do anything and everything. Quite the opposite, you are allowed to do nothing at all, until given permission to do so by specific rules.

As for the objective secured command benefit, no an attached IC would not have it. However the troops he's attached to would and could still make use of it.

"At no point is the IC being granted that rule."


This is correct. The IC is not being granted that rule. He doesnt need it.

The unit he is attatched to has it. The unit does not loose the command benefit just because a non grey knights IC joins them. You wont find a single rule in the book saying they do.


They are granted the rule from their formation, and never loose it due to attached characters. So I fail to see how they cant use it.

Are you saying somehow that because an attached IC cannot deep strike on turn 1 when he is a unit in and of himself, that he cant do it while attatched to a unit that can?

I see no rules saying that this is the case.

Deepstrike is a very bad choice to use as an argument there. Deepstrike very specifically states that all models in the unit must have the ability to deepstrike or the unit cannot deepstrike.

So yea, I would say that is the case and if you read the 'deepstrike' entry in the brb you will see a rule that is exactly the case.

OK I have a question here.

Let's say I take the Tyranid Formation "Living Tide". The Living Tide grants the Fear special rule. One of the units in the Living Tide is a Tyranid Prime (an IC for you non-Tyranid players). I join him to a unit of Warriors from a CAD.

Does the Prime still have the Fear special rule?

Yes

 Amiricle wrote:
There absolutely is. You can't just read the first part of a rule entry and ignore the rest. Rigel keeps quoting that an IC becomes part of a unit for all rules purposes as though that validates his stance., but in same entry under IC on the same page in the BRB it further clarifies exactly how ICs interact with special rules which completely invalidates his stance.

Except it doesn't. As I've pointed out multiple times now. Perhaps you've read my posts?
The unit does not have a special rule. The detachment does. I know that because it's a command benefit and units don't get those - detachments do.

Have you read your posts? Blaktoof has explained many many times why even talking about special rules as a detachment doesn't work either since the IC in question is not part of the detachment.

 Amiricle wrote:
Have you read your posts? Blaktoof has explained many many times why even talking about special rules as a detachment doesn't work either since the IC in question is not part of the detachment.

He doesn't need to be.

The GK unit is part of the detachment. Agreed?
The detachment has a special rule (command benefit) that allows units in the detachment to do magic. Agreed?
An IC joins the GK unit. This is legal. Agreed? (Contrary to what blaktoof said)
The GK unit is still part of the GK detachment, agreed?

What rule is forbidding the GK unit from benefiting from the detachment special rule?

rigeld2 wrote:

 Amiricle wrote:
Have you read your posts? Blaktoof has explained many many times why even talking about special rules as a detachment doesn't work either since the IC in question is not part of the detachment.

He doesn't need to be.

The GK unit is part of the detachment. Agreed?

Agreed

The detachment has a special rule (command benefit) that allows units in the detachment to do magic. Agreed?

Agreed

An IC joins the GK unit. This is legal. Agreed? (Contrary to what blaktoof said)

Agreed

The GK unit is still part of the GK detachment, agreed?

Agreed

What rule is forbidding the GK unit from benefiting from the detachment special rule?

Page 166 BRB Independent Character Column 2, paragraph 3, Special Rules

 Amiricle wrote:

What rule is forbidding the GK unit from benefiting from the detachment special rule?

Page 166 BRB Independent Character Column 2, paragraph 3, Special Rules

Command Benefits are not the same as Special Rules, they are benefits conferred as a reward for using that detachment. The rule you are quoting does not address benefits (which is terminology used to distinguish it from special rules several times in the appropriate rules section), only special rules.

confoo22 wrote:

 Amiricle wrote:

What rule is forbidding the GK unit from benefiting from the detachment special rule?

Page 166 BRB Independent Character Column 2, paragraph 3, Special Rules

Command Benefits are not the same as Special Rules, they are benefits conferred as a reward for using that detachment. The rule you are quoting does not address benefits (which is terminology used to distinguish it from special rules several times in the appropriate rules section), only special rules.

Except for the fact that they are.
Page 121 BRB 1st column, 4th section Command Benefits very first line.
And even more telling, also page 121 BRB, second columnFormations 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence after the comma, and again in the following sentence, and yet again in the 2nd sentence of the 2nd paragraph

 Amiricle wrote:
Except for the fact that they are.
Page 121 BRB 1st column, 4th section Command Benefits very first line.

Here is the line: This section of the Detachment lists any special rules or benefits that apply to some or all of the models in that Detachment.

This clearly references benefits, not just special rules. Also, if you look at the CAD, you'll see that Objective Secured specifically calls it out as a special rule that is conferred on to troops. Rites does not use language even close to calling it a special rule.

 Amiricle wrote:
Except for the fact that they are.
Page 121 BRB 1st column, 4th section Command Benefits very first line.
And even more telling, also page 121 BRB, second columnFormations 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence after the comma, and again in the following sentence, and yet again in the 2nd sentence of the 2nd paragraph

The problem with this line of thinking is that any formation that has units containing ICs from other Factions will not benefit from their Command Benefits.

Would units from the Sentinels of Terra Supplement still be able to use Comrades-In-Arms if they had an allied Inquisitor? Would only the part of the unit from the Supplement be able to shoot? Can the unit not shoot at all now?

How do you roll for reserves with an Airborne Assault Formation from Tempestus? Units from that formation gain Strategic Intervention so a single roll is made for the Formation. Do allied ICs have to roll separately? Do they not come in at all? Does the unit come in piecemeal?

Or what about the classic Drop Pod Assault special rule? The rule applies to the unit contained within them, but that special rule isn't conferred to an IC. Therefore they cannot ride in Drop Pods at all (since they cannot be held in reserve and arrive on turn 1).

I appreciate your dedication to defending your position, but we assume your view of the Formation and/or unit-wide special rules that are not determined on a model-by-model basis, we break the game in several very important ways. I agree that they can avoid all of these issues by specifying (if at least one model in the unit) but perhaps it's been overlooked (or assumed to be not necessary) and maybe we'll see it in a FAQ/Errata. I even agree with you from a fluff perspective (why should random ICs gain the ability to teleport specially with GKs?), but I don't agree with you from a rules perspective. I listed 3 examples and there will be many more formations that will come out over the next few months/years. Will all of them preclude the inclusion of ICs? I seriously doubt it.

DoW

Wow, you really insist on being this obstinate? Fine, continue reading the Independent Character entry page 166 Column 2, section 5 Independent Characters and Ongoing Effects paragraph 3 (2nd last one), it uses that specific word, benefits, and states that they are not shared.

But seriously guys, if you have to fight this hard to make something work and quibble about such minutiae, you are obviously trying to gain an unfair advantage. Even if this was viable, and not really all that powerful if it were, allowing it would set a precedence for things that would be seriously OP.

 Amiricle wrote:
Independent Character entry page 166 Column 2, section 5 Independent Characters and Ongoing Effects paragraph 3 (2nd last one), it uses that specific word, benefits, and states that they are not shared.

That passage references what happens if an IC joins a unit after it has become the target of an effect. If you go two paragraphs up, it states that if an IC has joined a unit before it becomes the target of an effect, then the IC is also effected, even if it leaves the unit.

 DogOfWar wrote:

 Amiricle wrote:
Except for the fact that they are.
Page 121 BRB 1st column, 4th section Command Benefits very first line.
And even more telling, also page 121 BRB, second columnFormations 1st paragraph, 2nd sentence after the comma, and again in the following sentence, and yet again in the 2nd sentence of the 2nd paragraph

The problem with this line of thinking is that any formation that has units containing ICs from other Factions will not benefit from their Command Benefits.

That is correct. They would not unless that specific command benefit stated that it would do so.

Would units from the Sentinels of Terra Supplement still be able to use Comrades-In-Arms if they had an allied Inquisitor? Would only the part of the unit from the Supplement be able to shoot? Can the unit not shoot at all now?

No idea, I have no knowledge of that supplement.

How do you roll for reserves with an Airborne Assault Formation from Tempestus? Units from that formation gain Strategic Intervention so a single roll is made for the Formation. Do allied ICs have to roll separately? Do they not come in at all? Does the unit come in piecemeal?

Allied IC would have to roll separately or they'd come in piecemeal as the allied IC does not have these abilities. The Red Skull Kommandos is a similar formation.

Or what about the classic Drop Pod Assault special rule? The rule applies to the unit contained within them, but that special rule isn't conferred to an IC. Therefore they cannot ride in Drop Pods at all (since they cannot be held in reserve and arrive on turn 1).

I appreciate your dedication to defending your position, but we assume your view of the Formation and/or unit-wide special rules that are not determined on a model-by-model basis, we break the game in several very important ways. I agree that they can avoid all of these issues by specifying (if at least one model in the unit) but perhaps it's been overlooked (or assumed to be not necessary) and maybe we'll see it in a FAQ/Errata. I even agree with you from a fluff perspective (why should random ICs gain the ability to teleport specially with GKs?), but I don't agree with you from a rules perspective. I listed 3 examples and there will be many more formations that will come out over the next few months/years. Will all of them preclude the inclusion of ICs? I seriously doubt it.

DoW

We break the game in many more ways by ignoring the fact that if a specific command benefit was intended to affect other models and/or units outside the formation, it would specifically say so. From a rules perspective, it is RAI and RAW, so I don't see why you would be arguing it anyway. You are creating an issue they tried to avoid with the Independent Character entry on how special rules never confer unless they state that they do.

Read again the Formation description in the BRB. Formations are a special type of detachment, each a specific grouping of units renowned for their effectiveness on the battlefield. Note the word 'specific' They are by their very design exclusive to the inclusion of random IC's. If particular IC was meant to be in a particular formation, he would be listed under the formations units listing. Denying these shenanigans is both consistent with fluff and rules.
We keep looking at can'ts, so here's some can's:

Wolf Guard Void Claws
Co-ordinated Assault: As long as at least one model from this formation is still alive and on the table, the controlling player may re-roll any reserves.(a command benefit this formation has that anything else in your army can use.)

Blitz-Brigade
Scout Any unit you put in one of these battlewagons gets to scout ahead as per transport and scout rules)

Ragnar's Claws
Eager to Impress Any unit from this formation within 12" of Ragnar Blackmane have the zealot special rule. (Zealot confers, so any IC attached to any of the 4 units would gain zealot as well)

Mogrok's Bossboyz
Very Kunnin' Before deployment, the controlling player may nominate up to D3 friendly ork units. These units gain the Acute Senses and Outflank special rules. (Note how it says friendly ork units and not units in the formation as most command benefits do)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

confoo22 wrote:

 Amiricle wrote:
Independent Character entry page 166 Column 2, section 5 Independent Characters and Ongoing Effects paragraph 3 (2nd last one), it uses that specific word, benefits, and states that they are not shared.

That passage references what happens if an IC joins a unit after it has become the target of an effect. If you go two paragraphs up, it states that if an IC has joined a unit before it becomes the target of an effect, then the IC is also effected, even if it leaves the unit.

That doesn't help either since a detachments benefits are applied during list creation before a game even begins. As such they are in place and in effect when the game starts before the IC has the opportunity to join the unit.

 Amiricle wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

confoo22 wrote:

 Amiricle wrote:
Independent Character entry page 166 Column 2, section 5 Independent Characters and Ongoing Effects paragraph 3 (2nd last one), it uses that specific word, benefits, and states that they are not shared.

That passage references what happens if an IC joins a unit after it has become the target of an effect. If you go two paragraphs up, it states that if an IC has joined a unit before it becomes the target of an effect, then the IC is also effected, even if it leaves the unit.

That doesn't help either since a detachments benefits are applied during list creation before a game even begins. As such they are in place and in effect when the game starts before the IC has the opportunity to join the unit.

Actually, I would argue that the unit isn't the target of the effect until turn one, when you begin to roll for it to come in or, at the very least, the unit would be the target of the effect when it's put into deep strike reserves, both of which would come after you've joined the IC to the unit.

Regardless, I don't even really feel that the rule you're referencing fits this situation either. This particular command benefit isn't an ongoing effect since it occurs once at a specified time and is immediately resolved when the unit deep strikes, and that passage is obviously meant more to cover what happens if an IC leaves or joins a unit on the tabletop in the course of a game after it has been the target of a special rule or psychic power, not before the game has even begun.

It appears that several players either lack reading comprehension skills or are deliberately ignoring key sentences within both the BRB and the GK codex.

When an IC joins a unit (perhaps a unit which is part of a detachment which differs from the allied detachment the IC is from), it quite clearly states that it is then considered part of that unit for all rules purposes.

The rites of teleportation rule confers a specific command benefit (which is a separate and distinct entity from a special rule) to units that are part of the NSF detachment. Regardless of the presence of ICs, the unit remains part of the NSF detachment and gains the command benefits. The ICs are part of said unit, ergo they also gain these same benefits. Note that the IC in question MUST already have the Deep Strike USR because it is NOT conferred by the unit.

By the same token, an IC from the NSF detachment may wind up joining an allied, non-NSF detachment unit. It will become part of that unit and therefore lose any command benefits from the NSF detachment, but gain any applicable benefits from the allied detachment (if any).

In short, these detachment benefits are applied at a unit level, not on a per model basis, so arguing about the particular detachment identity of an IC within a unit belonging to another detachment is totally irrelevant to the rule in question. This is why rigeld (who I by no means always agree with) insists that certain other parties are making straw man arguments. In this matter, I am in complete agreement with him.

The unit retains the command benefit. Period.

Of course you would. Ignore any rule that contradicts your waac powergaming, right?

You're grasping at straws here. The IC Special Rules entry should have ended this discussion, but you keep trying to 'game' the system for an unintended advantage.
Regardless, lets play one more time since you refuse to see that a command benefit is a special rule. Is it an effect? Yes, it does something to alter the unit. Is it ongoing? Again, yes, its ongoing from before the game starts, till after the game ends (It doesn't lose the ability, it just can't use it anymore)(And as a pre-emptive, even if we agree the ability is lost after use, it is still ongoing - in will be 'going' from the time the list is created until the time it deepstrikes). (Even if an effect lasted for a single action, it is ongoing while that action is being resolved) Is it therefore an ongoing effect? Inarguably, yes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fachxphyre wrote:
It appears that several players either lack reading comprehension skills or are deliberately ignoring key sentences within both the BRB and the GK codex.

When an IC joins a unit (perhaps a unit which is part of a detachment which differs from the allied detachment the IC is from), it quite clearly states that it is then considered part of that unit for all rules purposes.

How incredibly ironic to call someone out for doing something you do in the following statement. You can't just read that sentence and then skip and ignore the rest of the rules entry, specifically the section on IC and Special Rules.

The rites of teleportation rule confers a specific command benefit (which is a separate and distinct entity from a special rule) to units that are part of the NSF detachment. Regardless of the presence of ICs, the unit remains part of the NSF detachment and gains the command benefits. The ICs are part of said unit, ergo they also gain these same benefits. Note that the IC in question MUST already have the Deep Strike USR because it is NOT conferred by the unit.

Again doing something you accuse others of doing. Read the Command Benefits and Formations section. Command benefits are special rules. The IC in question may be in said unit, that was never in question, he may not however be in the detachment or formation if he cam from a different one. Each model may belong to only 1 detachment.

By the same token, an IC from the NSF detachment may wind up joining an allied, non-NSF detachment unit. It will become part of that unit and therefore lose any command benefits from the NSF detachment, but gain any applicable benefits from the allied detachment (if any).

In short, these detachment benefits are applied at a unit level, not on a per model basis, so arguing about the particular detachment identity of an IC within a unit belonging to another detachment is totally irrelevant to the rule in question. This is why rigeld (who I by no means always agree with) insists that certain other parties are making straw man arguments. In this matter, I am in complete agreement with him.

Models and/or units do not lose their command benefits in such a way unless a specific effect states that they do.

The unit retains the command benefit. Period.

Oh. Period. Such exclamation with your punctuation. Too bad its still wrong according to RaW and RaI (cause, c'mon anything you have to twist, bend and shoehorn though so many rules was clearly not intended, even if it were possible)

Allied IC would have to roll separately or they'd come in piecemeal as the allied IC does not have these abilities. The Red Skull Kommandos is a similar formation.

That doesn't make sense.

Are you saying the IC would then be forcibly detached from the Unit after rolling for reserves? At some arbitrary point during the Reserve Roll process? Where in the Rules does it say that this is possible and how does it give you permission to do so?

The entire Formation MUST roll a single reserve roll. If you roll separately for the IC, you have broken the rules for attaching ICs to units. If you roll separately for the Unit, you have broken the rules for the Formation.

The only recourse is to roll for the entire formation, assuming that the IC benefits from the Command Benefit by virtue of being attached to a unit that is part of the Formation. It is the least game-breaking of the options and follows in line with the logic behind Allies, ICs, and Formations that GW has been working towards since the beginning of 6th.

You might not want it to be true, but this is the way the game is going. I'm resistant to change as much as the next guy, but this way of thinking is something that won't make you any friends and will make you look foolish at tournaments. Of course it's up to you how you interpret the rules, but I don't think you're in the majority.

DoW

the least game-breaking option would be to not attach an IC to a unit in that formation. As those special rules are specific to that formation, a separate IC would not have access to them, so if the formation enters in a way that the IC could not, then he would be left behind. Some things can't be done, like say having an IC join a 10 man squad of Wolf Guard and still be able to squeeze them into their rhino. You either choose to have them walk on or don't attach the IC so they may drive on.

Fluffwise, & logically the rules for formations do make sense. Formations are very specific groupings (cite BrB) that are renowned for certain tactics and traits. Think of it this way, You have a US Navy Seal unit known to be exceptional in their ability to enter a combat zone practically invisibly. Say their general forces them to take a naval officer who's never been off a ship before. He'd give away their position every time they moved and as such they'd lose their infiltrate command benefit.
Or just in case you get hung up on infiltrate, say you have a squad known for dropping from aircraft and getting into position in seconds is forced to take an army commander who's never airdropped before. Their effectiveness is going to be compromised unless they leave him behind.

They're specific to the formation, and that benefit applies to all units from that formation. While attached the IC is not a unit, but part of one. Denying the unit the benefit is breaking a file either no allowance to do so.

Your notes that others arguing the actual rules are either clutching, rules lawyering or Waac power gaming have been noted, and reported.

 Amiricle wrote:

The detachment has a special rule (command benefit) that allows units in the detachment to do magic. Agreed?

Agreed

What rule is forbidding the GK unit from benefiting from the detachment special rule?

Page 166 BRB Independent Character Column 2, paragraph 3, Special Rules

How does a rule discussing unit special rules apply to detachment rules?
Nothing in that paragraph refers to detachment rules (command benefits) which you agreed were at play (not unit special rules).

 Amiricle wrote:
Of course you would. Ignore any rule that contradicts your waac powergaming, right?

Believing a rule works a certain way that differs from your opinion does not make someone waac, and I'm pretty sure the consensus is that someone who plays GKs these days is hardly a power gamer. Quit being unnecessarily insulting.

You're grasping at straws here. The IC Special Rules entry should have ended this discussion, but you keep trying to 'game' the system for an unintended advantage.

The special rules section does NOT apply here. Special rules are a distinct and different mechanic from command benefits. I've already demonstrated where it makes a distinction in the Command Benefits section for Detachments and pointed out that in the case of a command benefit giving a special rule, it is specifically called out as a special rule

Regardless, lets play one more time since you refuse to see that a command benefit is a special rule. Is it an effect? Yes, it does something to alter the unit. Is it ongoing? Again, yes, its ongoing from before the game starts, till after the game ends (It doesn't lose the ability, it just can't use it anymore)(And as a pre-emptive, even if we agree the ability is lost after use, it is still ongoing - in will be 'going' from the time the list is created until the time it deepstrikes). (Even if an effect lasted for a single action, it is ongoing while that action is being resolved) Is it therefore an ongoing effect? Inarguably, yes.

Rites is really not an ongoing effect since an ongoing effect is, wait for it, ongoing. It occurs once either when the unit deep strikes or when they're placed into deep strike reserves. You can't really say it's ongoing because that benefit isn't activated for a unit put into regular reserves, so at a certain point it needs to be switched on. One could also say that since it benefits all units placed into deep strike reserves there's no real "target" of the effect. You could even argue that that particular rule does not apply here since it's meant to cover what happens when an IC leaves or joins a unit during play, not an IC that is part of a unit still in reserves.

Too bad its still wrong according to RaW and RaI (cause, c'mon anything you have to twist, bend and shoehorn though so many rules was clearly not intended, even if it were possible)

The funny thing is that YOU'RE the one twisting and turning here. You're coming up with rules that have a tenuous link to your argument at best, presenting them as the end of the discussion, and then insulting anyone who doesn't immediately agree that you're right. I'm sorry man, but you're really just not laying down a convincing argument here.

 Amiricle wrote:

Fluffwise, & logically the rules for formations do make sense. Formations are very specific groupings (cite BrB) that are renowned for certain tactics and traits. Think of it this way, You have a US Navy Seal unit known to be exceptional in their ability to enter a combat zone practically invisibly. Say their general forces them to take a naval officer who's never been off a ship before. He'd give away their position every time they moved and as such they'd lose their infiltrate command benefit.
Or just in case you get hung up on infiltrate, say you have a squad known for dropping from aircraft and getting into position in seconds is forced to take an army commander who's never airdropped before. Their effectiveness is going to be compromised unless they leave him behind.

If you wanna give a fluff reason, the Grey Knight NSF commander has asked his good friend... a Librarian that used to be part of his force... to join one of his unit for the assault. That Librarian knows the ropes or can at least follow along and teleports into battle with the unit he's attached to.

FORGE DAT NARRATIVE!!!

Well it just boils down to the fact that you refuse to see that command benefits are special rules then even though they are called exactly that. Saying that the word benefits is used in the in that paragraph and that you can't call them effects therefore giving you free reign to apply them however you feel best is twisting the raw and rai.
Some food for thought, I noticed that on a lot of those formations I looked at to give some positive examples, specifically the Tempestus ones and the newest Sanctus Reach ones, the benefits listed for the formations aren't even titled "Command Benefits". They are titled "Special Rules". If GW can use the terms interchangeably then so should you.

 Amiricle wrote:
Well it just boils down to the fact that you refuse to see that command benefits are special rules then even though they are called exactly that. Saying that the word benefits is used in the in that paragraph and that you can't call them effects therefore giving you free reign to apply them however you feel best is twisting the raw and rai.

They may be special rules.
The rules you're relying on calls out unit special rules. You've agreed that this is a detachment special rule, not a unit special rule. Why are you attempting to apply a rule that only cares about unit special rules to something that isn't a unit special rule?

Some food for thought, I noticed that on a lot of those formations I looked at to give some positive examples, specifically the Tempestus ones and the newest Sanctus Reach ones, the benefits listed for the formations aren't even titled "Command Benefits". They are titled "Special Rules". If GW can use the terms interchangeably then so should you.

I am. They're detachment special rules, not unit ones. Read the rule you're citing.