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 Tyranid Tervigon can spawn Termagants during the game:

A unit spawned by a Tervigon is identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section of
the army list, and is treated as such for all mission special rules.

In your area, do you play the spawned unit as having ObSec?

no nid players in my area but you have the rule right there, so if your gaunt unit has ObSec then your spawn unit does.

If it is a part of your CAD that has a command benefit of "Objective Secured" it will have Objective Secured, because as described with your quote it is a unit that is identical to a troop taken from your army list. Troops are OBSec when taken as a CAD.

If you spawned it from Levithan (dont know if they are ObSec) then it wouldn't be ObSec (if they aren't)

 Whacked wrote:
If it is a part of your CAD that has a command benefit of "Objective Secured" it will have Objective Secured

That is how tournaments rule it in your area?

So if you have one Hive Fleet Detachment Tervigon, one Incubator Node Formation Tervigon, and one CAD Tervigon - only the CAD Tervigon babies have ObSec?

 N.I.B. wrote:

 Whacked wrote:
If it is a part of your CAD that has a command benefit of "Objective Secured" it will have Objective Secured

That is how tournaments rule it in your area?

So if you have one Hive Fleet Detachment Tervigon, one Incubator Node Formation Tervigon, and one CAD Tervigon - only the CAD Tervigon babies have ObSec?

That's not how it's ruled in his area, that is the actual rules.
You only get ObSec if your detachment's command benefits say you get ObSec.

But, in your example, yes. Only the CAD Tervi babies would have ObSec. Unless the Incubator Node gives ObSec in its command benefits?

No, just because you can create a unit in-game that has the same battlefield role as a unit you could take in a detachment does not suddenly give them permission to claim the Command Benefits of that detachment.

 Frozocrone wrote:
No, just because you can create a unit in-game that has the same battlefield role as a unit you could take in a detachment does not suddenly give them permission to claim the Command Benefits of that detachment.

This seems to be the most common "RaW consensus".

The newly created unit was not selected as a Slot in the CAD, and therefore does not gain command benefits. (at all)
They are not part of any detachment at all (even if they are "identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules").

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
No, just because you can create a unit in-game that has the same battlefield role as a unit you could take in a detachment does not suddenly give them permission to claim the Command Benefits of that detachment.

This seems to be the most common "RaW consensus".

The newly created unit was not selected as a Slot in the CAD, and therefore does not gain command benefits. (at all)
They are not part of any detachment at all (even if they are "identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules").

I agree with this in RAW. However, the intent of them adding the language ""identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules" seems to cover this situation. They just happened to write this pre 7th Ed. RAI I would rule it that the CAD Tervigon spawns Obj. Sec. babies.

How's it played in the UK, does it differ between regions?

rollawaythestone wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
No, just because you can create a unit in-game that has the same battlefield role as a unit you could take in a detachment does not suddenly give them permission to claim the Command Benefits of that detachment.

This seems to be the most common "RaW consensus".

The newly created unit was not selected as a Slot in the CAD, and therefore does not gain command benefits. (at all)
They are not part of any detachment at all (even if they are "identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules").

I agree with this in RAW. However, the intent of them adding the language ""identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules" seems to cover this situation. They just happened to write this pre 7th Ed. RAI I would rule it that the CAD Tervigon spawns Obj. Sec. babies.

This.

 N.I.B. wrote:
How's it played in the UK, does it differ between regions?

rollawaythestone wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
No, just because you can create a unit in-game that has the same battlefield role as a unit you could take in a detachment does not suddenly give them permission to claim the Command Benefits of that detachment.

This seems to be the most common "RaW consensus".

The newly created unit was not selected as a Slot in the CAD, and therefore does not gain command benefits. (at all)
They are not part of any detachment at all (even if they are "identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules").

I agree with this in RAW. However, the intent of them adding the language ""identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules" seems to cover this situation. They just happened to write this pre 7th Ed. RAI I would rule it that the CAD Tervigon spawns Obj. Sec. babies.

This.

It depends on the tournament's houserules whether they would get ObSec or not. Most I've seen don't rule as ObSec.

 Frozocrone wrote:

 N.I.B. wrote:
How's it played in the UK, does it differ between regions?

rollawaythestone wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
No, just because you can create a unit in-game that has the same battlefield role as a unit you could take in a detachment does not suddenly give them permission to claim the Command Benefits of that detachment.

This seems to be the most common "RaW consensus".

The newly created unit was not selected as a Slot in the CAD, and therefore does not gain command benefits. (at all)
They are not part of any detachment at all (even if they are "identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules").

I agree with this in RAW. However, the intent of them adding the language ""identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules" seems to cover this situation. They just happened to write this pre 7th Ed. RAI I would rule it that the CAD Tervigon spawns Obj. Sec. babies.

This.

It depends on the tournament's houserules whether they would get ObSec or not. Most I've seen don't rule as ObSec.

Kinda splinting hairs here surprise surprise, but I don't think Obsec could be considered a "mission special rule". It's a special rule yea but it comes from your detachment not the mission.

Kaela_Mensha_Khaine wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:

 N.I.B. wrote:
How's it played in the UK, does it differ between regions?

rollawaythestone wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
No, just because you can create a unit in-game that has the same battlefield role as a unit you could take in a detachment does not suddenly give them permission to claim the Command Benefits of that detachment.

This seems to be the most common "RaW consensus".

The newly created unit was not selected as a Slot in the CAD, and therefore does not gain command benefits. (at all)
They are not part of any detachment at all (even if they are "identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules").

I agree with this in RAW. However, the intent of them adding the language ""identical in every way to a Termagant unit chosen from the Troops section (...) for all mission special rules" seems to cover this situation. They just happened to write this pre 7th Ed. RAI I would rule it that the CAD Tervigon spawns Obj. Sec. babies.

This.

It depends on the tournament's houserules whether they would get ObSec or not. Most I've seen don't rule as ObSec.

Kinda splinting hairs here surprise surprise, but I don't think Obsec could be considered a "mission special rule". It's a special rule yea but it comes from your detachment not the mission.

You're correct here - my comment was basically to say whether a tournament would FAQ (or houserule, so make a rule for their tournament) it as Objective Secured Gaunts or not (like S9/S10 Wolf Lord Cavalry or FMC's DS, but let's not open those debates, there are far too many threads, most of which have been locked )

Here's the most recent:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/633155.page

blaktoof wrote:
as above, as per the command benefits section the command benefits are given to the units in the detachment prior to deployment.

There is no ability to give/gain command benefits to units after that point- so summoned units would never be able to be assigned command benefits for being in a detachment, even if they were counted as being in the same detachment.

The conclusion i was referring to being most commonly accepted.

Most large tournaments rule it as No ObSec. I haven't actually come across any tournaments that don't rule it that way.
Bay Area Open: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByVzaY23LOX-ODFIdlhST3ZwaEI1cVJLdnFUbDdad3ZRT2Zj/view - bottom of page 5
Renegade Open: https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/bba63cd9-eac8-4dbd-b825-f283e75b1c13 - middle of page 6
Adepticon: http://www.adepticon.org/wpfiles/2015/40KAddendum2015.pdf - top of page 7
Michigan GT: http://michigangt.com/rules/warhammer-40k-tournament-rules/ - near the top.

I got what I wanted, thanks ya´ll for contributing!