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.

Salutations and Greetings everybody,

Given my leave of absence from this forum, I am a little rusty when it comes to researching Rules and looking over some basic ones have left me wondering if this game is worse off them I remember. I am also curious what other people have to think on some very basic 'gaps' that might exist in this poorly written excuse for a rule-set. So before I get it into my head to ask for yet another leave, let us begin with something very simple and basic but very important to ponder on. Of course, should you believe there is a relevant rule being over-looked feel free to quote it as page and paragraph is a lot harder to do on e-books. As always, mark your post accordingly if your are completely unable to do so when requested, preferably before being requested.

Question:
Outside of the 'issue' with Independent Characters, what other situations would remove a Model from a Unit?

Not entirely sure what you are asking.

Are you trying to determine if there is some way for models other than ICs to leave a unit?

I like to think of myself as a fairly literate person, but the OP really has me questioning my proficiency. Not trying to offend - just hoping for some more clarity

 luke1705 wrote:
I like to think of myself as a fairly literate person, but the OP really has me questioning my proficiency. Not trying to offend - just hoping for some more clarity

So I think a way to restate the question would be, what rules, aside from IC, actually permit us to remove models from a unit.

It looks like less of an actual question about the rules and more of a discussion of the rules and their flaws.
Am I correct?

I am trying to 'play a few cards close to my chest' as they say, so I was trying not to put any details into the question that might lead the discussion...
I have edited the question to be more sensible, did I do it right?

What 'issue' with ICs are you talking about?

Whenever we discuss what happens to an Independent Character joining another, especially involving Monstrous Creature Independent Characters, a debate will always flare. Enough people will put forth interpretations of the joining process which involve the two somehow both going through said process. Others will argue that the count as doesn't delete the original Unit, which prevents it from ending the turn within the required distances to Join the second Unit if a secondary restriction applies. Regardless of how the debate ends up going, it is not something I would care to entertain in this thread because it is irrelevant to the overall Rule interactions I am trying to verify.

We know Independent characters have Rules that address Joining and Leaving a Unit, but what about other situations?

.

Here is one off the top of my head for example of what I am looking for:
If an opponent takes control of one of your models or units during play, it becomes an enemy model or unit for as long as it is under your opponent’s command.
Does the Model in question stop being part of the original Unit it belonged to for said duration?

Unless the rule says that they leave the unit, no, they would remain a part of their original unit.

Jinx, are you drinking right now?

What rule allows that? Maybe I can look something up for you or something?

I think mindshackles got changed. Are there other ways to use your opponents models against him/her?

JinxDragon wrote:
Here is one off the top of my head for example of what I am looking for:
If an opponent takes control of one of your models or units during play, it becomes an enemy model or unit for as long as it is under your opponent’s command.
Does the Model in question stop being part of the original Unit it belonged to for said duration?

1) What rule is giving your oppoanant control of one of your models. The awnser likely deponds on this.
2) Does it become an enemy model? Or is it a friendly model he/she controls with unusual permissions.
3) You can't play things this close to the vest. The Question is far to vague and assumes a broad stance. Discussing this is going to be like discussing the shapes of the clouds.

 DJGietzen wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
Here is one off the top of my head for example of what I am looking for:
If an opponent takes control of one of your models or units during play, it becomes an enemy model or unit for as long as it is under your opponent’s command.
Does the Model in question stop being part of the original Unit it belonged to for said duration?

1) What rule is giving your oppoanant control of one of your models. The awnser likely deponds on this.
2) Does it become an enemy model? Or is it a friendly model he/she controls with unusual permissions.
3) You can't play things this close to the vest. The Question is far to vague and assumes a broad stance. Discussing this is going to be like discussing the shapes of the clouds.

Given that this is a permissive rule set, I would say we'd need to be told that the model can leave the unit. My gut says no, that the model wouldn't leave the unit at all. I'd really need to know what specific situation you're considering. I can't imagine a scenario where you can use a special rule to forcibly break apart an enemy unit.

The only thing I can think of right now that might fit your thinking is Codex: Necron's Anrakyr the Traveller. He has this special rule, but at no point are we told the target vehicle leaves its unit (in the case of vehicle squadrons).

"Mind in the Machine: At the start of your Shooting phase, choose an enemy vehicle within 12" of Anrakyr the Traveller and roll a D6. On a 4+, randomly select one of that vehicle’s weapons (do not include Bombs, weapons with the One Use Only/One Shot Only special rule that have already fired, and weapons that are destroyed). You may then shoot with the selected weapon at another enemy unit. The weapon fires using the vehicle’s Ballistic Skill, unless the vehicle is Crew Stunned or Shaken, in which case the weapon can only fire Snap Shots."

Can you clue us in to your example?

Understandable that people would want a specific situation, which would then limit the debate to that lone situation and make it easier for us to argue over. However, I was hoping for a broad scope for a specific reason; to find out what people believe the default system actually is. That would be defeated by looking at one specific situations from the very beginning as it always leaves the question 'is this normally how it is done?.' So a broad net was cast, as it would either bring back many different situations that prove there is no baseline to use, or an agreement of what that baseline is.

So lets move this discussion forward a little to find a possible broken situation, as it seems a baseline has been created which requires specific instructions to remove the Model from the Unit:
If you remove a Model as a Casualty, are there Rules which states it also is removed from the Unit?

JinxDragon wrote:
Understandable that people would want a specific situation, which would then limit the debate to that lone situation and make it easier for us to argue over. However, I was hoping for a broad scope for a specific reason; to find out what people believe the default system actually is. That would be defeated by looking at one specific situations from the very beginning as it always leaves the question 'is this normally how it is done?.' So a broad net was cast, as it would either bring back many different situations that prove there is no baseline to use, or an agreement of what that baseline is.

So lets move this discussion forward a little to find a possible broken situation, as it seems a baseline has been created which requires specific instructions to remove the Model from the Unit:
If you remove a Model as a Casualty, are there Rules which states it also is removed from the Unit?

Jinx, again, it's going to depend on the context of your question. I don't believe there are any rules regarding models leaving a unit other than those found in the IC section. Even when a model is removed as a casualty, s/he is still a part of that unit for things like VP calculations.

I think this would be the point where the judge says "Get to the point, counsel. You either need to ask a direct question of move on."

I believe the baseline I was looking for has been reached:
The Model is part of the Unit at all times, unless a Rule specifically states it is removed from the Unit.

We play this game with a lot of misconceptions, many times without even realizing we have glossed over so many cracks with house-rules! This leads a lot of people to b believe they are arguing 'Rule as written' within a specific situation... when really they are not. That is why I am trying to break away from the concept of a specific situation, which is more difficult then I thought it would be in my absence. Expect a few new posts containing questions that seem broke, disjointed and.. yes a little 'drunk'... at times.

Would have been nice to put it down as a skilled attempt to throw a wrench in peoples thinking, forcing them to think about the basics more then specifics, but I am not that good a writer.

You're babbling about random stuff and no one knows what you're talking about. If you don't get specific, people will simply ignore you. You've spent more time rambling about how you want to "establish a baseline to discuss gaps in the Rules" (why are you capitalizing 'rules', anyways?) and explaining why your posts are so disjointed than you have even obliquely defining what you want to have a discussion about. Clarify your question.

I am using it as a proper name to talk about a specifically defined object, just like when I capitalize the word Unit. That defined object is: 'an instruction within the Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook detailing how to play the game: Warhammer 40,000." It might seem like a silly distinction, but one that needs to be made if we are to have some sort of debate over what is written in the book and what is not. For example: There is no Rule designed to prevent us breaking our opponents models within the book itself. Such would be covered by rules that govern society, informing us of the personal consequences that occur if we break each others property.

Therefore I capitalize Rules to define something written in the book, even though it is usually redundant given the forum.

In any case, I will keep the feedback in mind when I write next week's question and try to make them less vague, disjointed or otherwise 'drunk...' though no promises that I won't 'drink' before posting.
Till then the thread can be closed.

LMAO jinx with the word dance of perfect eloquence to the disoriented audience.

First of all, JinxDragon, Welcome back. There is still confusion in rules and problems with the basic ideology behind the ruleset, but this thread is most definitely a Curved ball

I am not sure whether you want a consensus or personal opinion on the matter, and what this would lead to, but to the Question "what other situations would remove a Model from a Unit?", i would reply that i know of none.

Even opponent control would not, i think, detach a model from its Unit. But then as most, i'd just hope you find a more concise example we can get to discussing, because Rules Philosophy tends to happen enough as it is, and just makes things blurry... Short, concise, and simple is what i now strive for in YMDC. Which is also hard to not make sound "snarky".

Combat squading id reckon qualifies

 Bishop F Gantry wrote:
Combat squading id reckon qualifies

The decision to Combat Squad a unit happens before selecting Warlord Traits. The game hasn't even started yet, so I think this is a stretch. At no point are the 5 Marines being removed from a Unit of 10. You simply have two Units of 5.

Immobilized squadron members?

Gravmyr wrote:
Immobilized squadron members?

We have a winner! (kind of)

"If a member of a squadron is Immobilised, the rest of the squadron are permitted to ‘abandon’ it. To do so, the rest of the squadron must move out of unit coherency with it; treat the Immobilised model(s) as a separate unit from then on for all rules and victory conditions."

You can't really force your opponent's unit to break in two... but you can force a situation where they have to choose between staying in coherency with an immobilized vehicle or breaking the unit in two.

A solid baseline with no opposition, and an example of a Rule conforming to that baseline... better then I was hoping for.
Thank you.

:\
This seems like maybe a big broad reach that might be better discussed elsewhere. YMDC is for discussing specific rules and situations. There are appropriate places for discussion of rules in a more oblique way, such as the rules discussion or proposed rules forum.

That being said, I believe there are only two ways for models to leave units, as stated above. Not really much of an examined topic, since it usually isn't important.

Have to disagree with your interpretation into the purposes of the "You Make Da Call" and "proposed Rules" forums, but that is neither here nor there.
Does seem like such a tiny little thing, for now...

JinxDragon wrote:
Have to disagree with your interpretation into the purposes of the "You Make Da Call" and "proposed Rules" forums, but that is neither here nor there.
Does seem like such a tiny little thing, for now...

Um. Okay. That's fine. Just working to keep things sorted and such, since there was a bit of confusion from several of the respondents, and it seemed lije you were looking more for conversation regarding the rules rather than actual clarifications, and both general discussion and proposed rules seem a bit more appropriate for that.

You are, of course, free to post wherever you feel. Best luck!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
*wasn't supposed to be snarky. Genuinely trying to point you towards a forum where your efforts will be more fruitful.

JinxDragon wrote:
There is no Rule designed to prevent us breaking our opponents models within the book itself.

I should point out that it is lack of Rule that allows us to do so actually prevents us from doing so. That said, I see what you mean.
Not exactly on topic, but whatever.

Edit: anyway, one non-specific case I can think about is immobilization of a member of squadron if that counts. You can choose to leave it behind and move on with the rest, they will be treated as separate... um... units, I guess?