gmaleron wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
That's a load of unsupported leaps, and yet again confusing command benefits - which detachments have - and what formations lack. Note what unbound says about command benefits vs the special rules of formations, if you want to understand the difference.

IC is a normal member of the unit for all rules purposes.

undermines the whole of your argument

Confer != benefit. I do not need to HAVE the rule in order to BENEFIT from the rule

This is proven. Your concession that you cannot provide a rules quote for anything you claim is noted, as you have been asked and found wanting at every turn.

You are WRONG the IC unless taken in the FORMATION is from a DIFFERNT DETACHMENT, it clearly states on page 118 that a unit from a DIFFERNT DETACHMENT cannot benefit or gain the Special Rules from another Detachment, and a Formation is listed as another Detachment. You have NOTHING to stand on.

Charistoph wrote:

Now that IS bull crap. Command Benefit rules state no such thing:"COMMAND BENEFITS
This section of the Detachment lists any special rules or benefits that apply to some or all of the models in that Detachment. For example, the units in a Combined Arms Detachment benefit from the Ideal Mission Commander and Objective Secured special rules.
If a Detachment or Force Organisation Chart does not list any Command Benefits then the units that make it up receive no additional benefits." I see no place where a joined IC from another detachment are specifically exempted any more than any other interaction between ICs and units. The only limitations between detachments involves the Ally relationship, and Battle Brother rules do not provide any such exemption, either. The other levels of alliance do, but that is because they prevent the joining in the first place.

 Happyjew wrote:
gmaleron, where in the rules for Formations, does it say that the rules granted, are Command Benefits?
Take the BA codex, for example.
Blood Angels Battle Company (Formation)
Units you must take
Restrictions.
Special Rules
Baal Strike Force (Detachment)
FOC (aka units you must take and can take)
Restrictions
Command Benefits
Detachments have Command Benefits. Formations (while a type of Detachment) do not have Command Benefits, they have special rules.

 gmaleron wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
That's a load of unsupported leaps, and yet again confusing command benefits - which detachments have - and what formations lack. Note what unbound says about command benefits vs the special rules of formations, if you want to understand the difference.

You are WRONG the IC unless taken in the FORMATION is from a DIFFERNT DETACHMENT, it clearly states on page 118 that a unit from a DIFFERNT DETACHMENT cannot benefit or gain the Special Rules from another Detachment, and a Formation is listed as another Detachment. You have NOTHING to stand on.

 gmaleron wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Well you've changed at least one word in that quote because that makes no sense in English. So you might want to have another go at that. However no one is claiming a unit can belong to more than 1 detachment other than you.

That is Word for Word from the Rulebook, so I haven't changed anything.

Charistoph wrote:

No, you changed words from the rulebook, or at least, mistranslating them.

Im going to read everything word for word from the Rule Book:

Detachments Page 118:

"However, all of the units in your army must belong to a Detachment and no unit can belong to more then one detachment

Command Benefits Page 121:

This section of the Detachments lists any Special Rules or benefits that apply to some or all models in that Detachment. For Example, the units in a Combined Arms Detachment benefit from the Ideal Mission Commander and Objective Secured Special Rules.

Formations Page 121:

Formations are a Special Type of Detachment, each specific grouping of units renowned for their effectiveness on the battlefields of the 41st millennium. Whilst some Formations provide you with all the gaming information you will need to use them in your games, it is not uncommon for them to simply describe a number of special rules that apply when you include several specific units together. Instead of including a Force Organization chart, the Army List Entries that comprise a Formation are listed on it, along with any special rules that those units gain.

 gmaleron wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
gmaleron, where in the rules for Formations, does it say that the rules granted, are Command Benefits?
Take the BA codex, for example.
Blood Angels Battle Company (Formation)
Units you must take
Restrictions.
Special Rules
Baal Strike Force (Detachment)
FOC (aka units you must take and can take)
Restrictions
Command Benefits
Detachments have Command Benefits. Formations (while a type of Detachment) do not have Command Benefits, they have special rules.

It States that Special Rules are listed under Command Benefits which means they are a type of Command Benefit when taken as a part of a Detachment, a Formation is a type of Detachment. I am not ignoring it at all and it is perfectly clear, IC's from a different Detachment cannot benefit from the Special Rules of another no matter how hard you try to find a loophole there is none.

 gmaleron wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

Now that IS bull crap. Command Benefit rules state no such thing:
"COMMAND BENEFITS
This section of the Detachment lists any special rules or benefits that apply to some or all of the models in that Detachment. For example, the units in a Combined Arms Detachment benefit from the Ideal Mission Commander and Objective Secured special rules.

If a Detachment or Force Organisation Chart does not list any Command Benefits then the units that make it up receive no additional benefits."

I see no place where a joined IC from another detachment are specifically exempted any more than any other interaction between ICs and units. The only limitations between detachments involves the Ally relationship, and Battle Brother rules do not provide any such exemption, either. The other levels of alliance do, but that is because they prevent the joining in the first place.

Page 118 clearly states:

Detachments Page 118:

"However, all of the units in your army must belong to a Detachment and no unit can belong to more then one detachment

Meaning if an IC was taken from a different Detachment he does not belong to the Formation Detachment. Which leads me to this:

Command Benefits Page 121:

This section of the Detachments lists any Special Rules or benefits that apply to some or all models in that Detachment. For Example, the units in a Combined Arms Detachment benefit from the Ideal Mission Commander and Objective Secured Special Rules

Command Benefits list the Special Rules or Benefits for all or some of the models in that specific detachment (aka Special Rules are a type of Command Benefit) and since a unit cannot belong to more then one Detachment he cannot benefit from another Detachments Special Rules.

 Happyjew wrote:
Correct, Special Rules are listed under Command Benefits. No one has said otherwise. Which means Command Benefits are special rules, but not all special rules are Command Benefits. Formations don't have Command Benefits they have special rules. Just like Army List Entries don't have Command Benefits, they have special rules.

Charistoph wrote:
You seem to be ignoring one critical point often forgotten "While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters." The IC's unit identity is sublimated while joined to another detachment. It is not a Captain unit inside a Vanguard unit, it is a Captain model inside a Vanguard unit who reverts back to being a Captain model in a Captain unit when they separate from each other.

 gmaleron wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

No, you changed words from the rulebook, or at least, mistranslating them.

Lol you are so full of it, so now I have to be mistranslating because I am writing something that you don't agree with? Wow I guess that's one way to try and win an argument, claiming im misleading, figures.

Page 118 clearly states: 

Detachments Page 118: 

"However, all of the units in your army must belong to a Detachment and no unit can belong to more then one detachment 

Meaning if an IC was taken from a different Detachment he does not belong to the Formation Detachment. Which leads me to this: 

Command Benefits Page 121: 

This section of the Detachments lists any Special Rules or benefits that apply to some or all models in that Detachment. For Example, the units in a Combined Arms Detachment benefit from the Ideal Mission Commander and Objective Secured Special Rules 

Command Benefits list the Special Rules or Benefits for all or some of the models in that specific detachment (aka Special Rules are a type of Command Benefit) and since a unit cannot belong to more then one Detachment he cannot benefit from another Detachments Special Rules. 

 gmaleron wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Correct, Special Rules are listed under Command Benefits. No one has said otherwise. Which means Command Benefits are special rules, but not all special rules are Command Benefits. Formations don't have Command Benefits they have special rules. Just like Army List Entries don't have Command Benefits, they have special rules.

They have Command Benefits because Special Rules are a TYPE of Command Benefit. And it still doesn't change the fact that they are part of a different Detachment than the IC attempting to join the unit in the Formation, he cannot belong to both and in that case cannot benefit from both.

"Command Benefits: page 121

This Section of the Detachment lists any Special Rules or Benefits that apply to some or all of the models in that detachment"

 gmaleron wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

No, you changed words from the rulebook, or at least, mistranslating them.

Lol you are so full of it, so now I have to be mistranslating because I am writing something that you don't agree with? Wow I guess that's one way to try and win an argument, claiming im misleading, figures.

Im going to read everything word for word from the Rule Book:

Detachments Page 118:

"However, all of the units in your army must belong to a Detachment and no unit can belong to more then one detachment

Command Benefits Page 121:

This section of the Detachments lists any Special Rules or benefits that apply to some or all models in that Detachment. For Example, the units in a Combined Arms Detachment benefit from the Ideal Mission Commander and Objective Secured Special Rules.

Formations Page 121:

Formations are a Special Type of Detachment, each specific grouping of units renowned for their effectiveness on the battlefields of the 41st millennium. Whilst some Formations provide you with all the gaming information you will need to use them in your games, it is not uncommon for them to simply describe a number of special rules that apply when you include several specific units together. Instead of including a Force Organization chart, the Army List Entries that comprise a Formation are listed on it, along with any special rules that those units gain.

Here it is again WORD FOR WORD from the Rulebook, not my fault it doesn't say what you want it to.

 FlingitNow wrote:
However that doesn't change anything does it? What Detachment(s) does the combined IC and Squad unit belong to? 4th time now.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Right, so their claim now is that ANY special rule is a Command Benefit?
Logical fallacy or what!
A-> B does not imply that B-> A.

nekooni wrote:
The rules simply do not say what you claim they say, and that's enough reason for me to leave this thread since this is clearly not going anywhere. Page 118 does simply not say that a unit cannot benefit from a Special Rule when it is not part of the detachment granting the Special Rule as their Command Benefit - which is what you claim, from what I understand from your post (you might want to calm down a tad again, though - getting hard to read there). It simply doesn't. You keep making these claims based on you literally replacing words with other words in your mind - see "to confer vs to benefit" previously - in order to fit your own narrative. Enjoy it while the thread remains open, I'm out.

 gmaleron wrote:
You people are the ones mistranslating, I am literally reading word for word out of the book and not misquoting anything, if you are the ones attempting to translate rather then speak your native language its probably on your end (no offense intended).

 gmaleron wrote:

"Command Benefits: page 121

This Section of the Detachment lists any Special Rules or Benefits that apply to some or all of the models in that detachment"

No Special Rules area type of Command Benefit not the other way around.

Charistoph wrote:

gmaleron wrote:The rule I'm referring to comes from the IC page in regard to Special Rules:

When an Independent Character joins a unit, it might have different Special Rules from those of the unit. Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn Special Rule), the units Special Rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character and the Independent Characters Special Rules are not conferred upon the unit."

Taking that into account when you look at a formation you will see that they have to take specific units listed in the army list entry in order to run the formation. Those units then get additional special rules. At that point you have to look at independent characters and how they deal with special rules which the above paragraph details. According to what is listed under independent characters unless the special rule says it confers to the independent character they do not get the special rule, to me there's no room for interpretation at that point.

Now some points have been brought up in regards to it not stating that the IC cannot benefit from the special rule. At that point you would have to read the specific special rule to see what it entails as it is the only place to answer that question. If the special rule says that independent characters from outside the formation can get the special rule or something along the lines of all models in a unit or the unit is affected by the said special rule then he would be able to get the special rule.

To me you keep ignoring one key portion of that rule you keep quoting. When you bold it to highlight it, you keep skipping the important part where it provides and example. Here let me show you:

When an Independent Character joins a unit, it might have different Special Rules from those of the unit. Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn Special Rule), the units Special Rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character and the Independent Characters Special Rules are not conferred upon the unit."

So, we have a rule that says ICs do not have the special rules conferred on them, or in other words, do not have the special rules "granted or bestowed" upon them (using the Oxford online dictionary, how much more British can you get?). Yet, it does provide an exception if it specifies as in the Stubborn Special Rule.

Well, let's review the Stubborn Special Rule for how it confers on the IC:
"When a unit that contains at least one model with this special rule takes Morale checks or Pinning tests, they ignore any negative Leadership modifiers. If a unit is both Fearless and Stubborn, it uses the rules for Fearless instead."

Hmm, no mention of conferring (or any of its synonyms) or Independent Character exists in this rule. So how then does an IC not have its Leadership negatively affected while in a Stubborn unit? He doesn't get it. It is not bestowed or conferred upon him, yet the IC rule specifically points this rule out as the IC as the example of how an IC does get the rule from a unit (or vice versa).

The only possible solution is to review another portion of a rule and the target of the Stubborn Special Rule. From Joining and Leaving a Unit in the IC rules:"While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters." What is the target of the Stubborn rule? A unit that is somehow carrying the rule.

Then we continue on to Independent Characters and Ongoing Effects which states:
"Sometimes, a unit that an Independent Character has joined will be the target of a beneficial or harmful effect, such as those bestowed by the Blind special rule, for example. If the character leaves the unit, both he and the unit continue to be affected by the effect, so you’ll need to mark the character accordingly.

Conversely, if an Independent Character joins a unit after that unit has been the target of an ongoing effect (or joins a unit after himself having been the target of an ongoing effect) benefits and penalties from that effect are not shared."

Which indicates that Special Rules that affect a unit that the IC has joined WILL be affected as well, even if the IC leaves the group afterward. 92% of the unique rules provided by Formations are rules that have a Trigger and an effect, such as "When a unit with this special rule arrives from Deep Strike Reserves, it may Charge in the next Assault Phase." If the IC is with the unit when this Trigger occurs, it receives the beneficial effect from the rule just as much as it would be disabled if the unit was hit with a Blind Attack. Conversely, if the IC joins after the trigger, it is not affected.

So say you have a Vanguard unit with this Formation rule to charge and you have Marneus Calgar both waiting in Deep Strike Reserves as separate units and they both roll to come in on the same turn. You Deep Strike in the Vanguard unit, and seeing an opportunity for this unit to have even more punch, you Deep Strike Marneus Calgar in to Coherency with the unit (you gutsy player you) with no Mishaps. The Vanguard unit has fulfilled the conditions of its rule and the Trigger is activated and the unit receives the benefit. Calgar is not part of this unit when it happens as he arrives later and isn't considered a member of the unit till the end of the Movement Phase. This unit will not be able to charge because Calgar does not have any permission or Special Rule effect to override the Deep Strike and Reserves conditions.

BUT, if Calgar is in the Vanguard unit from deployment and Deep Strikes with the unit, he receives the benefit of the rule since he was a member of the unit when it received the effect of the Special Rule.

Do you see the difference?

 gmaleron wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
However that doesn't change anything does it? What Detachment(s) does the combined IC and Squad unit belong to? 4th time now.

It does and I answered you earlier, the situation in question deals with as follows:
-An IC from an CAD
-A Unit from a Formation

BRB page 118 wrote:
However, all of the units in your army must belong to a Detachment and no unit can belong to more than one detachment.

So the IC joins the unit in the Formation, however because he is from a Different Detachment he cannot benefit from another Detachments Command Benefits which Special Rules are listed under.

Also as mentioned repeatedly and repeatedly ignored by everyone is this on page 166:
When an Independent Character joins a unit, it might have different Special Rules from those of the unit. Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn Special Rule), the units Special Rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character and the Independent Characters Special Rules are not conferred upon the unit."

 FlingitNow wrote:

 gmaleron wrote:

Charistoph wrote:

No, you changed words from the rulebook, or at least, mistranslating them.

Lol you are so full of it, so now I have to be mistranslating because I am writing something that you don't agree with? Wow I guess that's one way to try and win an argument, claiming im misleading, figures.

Im going to read everything word for word from the Rule Book:

Detachments Page 118:

"However, all of the units in your army must belong to a Detachment and no unit can belong to more then one detachment

Command Benefits Page 121:

This section of the Detachments lists any Special Rules or benefits that apply to some or all models in that Detachment. For Example, the units in a Combined Arms Detachment benefit from the Ideal Mission Commander and Objective Secured Special Rules.

Formations Page 121:

Formations are a Special Type of Detachment, each specific grouping of units renowned for their effectiveness on the battlefields of the 41st millennium. Whilst some Formations provide you with all the gaming information you will need to use them in your games, it is not uncommon for them to simply describe a number of special rules that apply when you include several specific units together. Instead of including a Force Organization chart, the Army List Entries that comprise a Formation are listed on it, along with any special rules that those units gain.

Here it is again WORD FOR WORD from the Rulebook, not my fault it doesn't say what you want it to.

Well that page 118 quote isn't word for word is it? Actually look at what the rulebook has written in it.

However that doesn't change anything does it? What Detachment(s) does the combined IC and Squad unit belong to? 4th time now.

 FlingitNow wrote:
Cool so how many Detachments do you have listed there? Is that number more than 1? Because according to the actual quote from page 118 it can't be:

Why can it not? Again what rules support to do have for this. Remember a rule saying X gets Y is not the same as a rule saying if not X then you can not get Y

Who has ignored that rule? How does that rule in any way damage our argument?

gungo wrote:
You do realize no where in the rules does it state a model can transfer from one detachment to another just by joining another unit. The IC always belongs to its original detachment and thus does not gain another detachments command benefits. The IC is always an HQ choice (or whatever type you originally purchased it from) these do not change if you join a unit. If the game gave you a victory point for every HQ unit killed the IC (if purchased originally from HQ) would still give you a victory point. No where in the rules does it state two detachments can't share models in one unit. However it does state no model can ever be part of two detachments.

You do realize no where in the rules does it state a model can transfer from one detachment to another just by joining another unit.

The IC always belongs to its original detachment and thus does not gain another detachments command benefits.

gungo wrote:
You do realize no where in the rules does it state a model can transfer from one detachment to another just by joining another unit. The IC always belongs to its original detachment and thus does not gain another detachments command benefits. The IC is always an HQ choice (or whatever type you originally purchased it from) these do not change if you join a unit. If the game gave you a victory point for every HQ unit killed the IC (if purchased originally from HQ) would still give you a victory point. No where in the rules does it state two detachments can't share models in one unit. However it does state no model can ever be part of two detachments.

 FlingitNow wrote:
So what Detachment is the combined unit from? Remembering that the answer can only be 1 detachment?

Charistoph wrote:
So again, we are going back to the two units in one argument which has yet to be supported anywhere? So the IC rule about when it joins another unit it counts as part of that unit for ALL rules purposes is never stated? Which rulebook are you using?
The IC has the HQ role when he is a unit, as the UNIT has the Role, not the model. When the IC is in a Troops unit, he is not operating as an HQ unit, but a model in a Troops unit. It really is quite simple and explicit, I don't understand why you choose to ignore it.

 gmaleron wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
Cool so how many Detachments do you have listed there? Is that number more than 1? Because according to the actual quote from page 118 it can't be:

That is the POINT I am trying to make

Why can it not? Again what rules support to do have for this. Remember a rule saying X gets Y is not the same as a rule saying if not X then you can not get Y

Because it is clearly stated on pages 118 and 166 that a unit from a Different Detachment cannot gain the Command Benefits (Special Rules) of another Detachment. Page 166 describes it at the unit level.

Who has ignored that rule? How does that rule in any way damage our argument?

Everyone has, noosferatu and nekooni have stated that because it doesn't say if the IC can benefit from the Special Rule or not. The problem is that you have to read the Special Rule to see what it has to say, however it should never get to this point because he is part of a different detachment.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Per your logic, the IC's special rules no longer exist since the IC unit ceases to exist.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Gmaleron - so again, IC from cad joins unit from formation
The combined unit is a) from one detachment or b) from two detachments ? A or b. Pick one
Have you read the rule stating that the IC is a normal member of the unit yet?
IC unit from cad joins formation. IC Unit CEASES to exist. IC model is a normal member of the unit for all rules purposes.
And we're done. The unit is allowed to benefit from its special rules. (Not command benefits. Have you bothered to understand the difference yet??? A implies B does not mean B implies A. That's a logical fallacy YOU are committing, not GW. GW never said what you are claiming, so stop pretending otherwise). The IC, as a normal member, also benefits
There is no rule disallowing this, and the special rule in question permits it.
Done. Proven. Old argument, disproven every time. Confer != benefit.

 FlingitNow wrote:


You are making zero sense dude, what are you asking? You are asking the same thing over and over even though I answered your questions and you are asking questions that don't make sense?

 gmaleron wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
So what Detachment is the combined unit from? Remembering that the answer can only be 1 detachment?

I see how you are getting confused, the question started with a Space Marine Combined Arms Detachment containing an IC joined a unit from a Space Marine Formation. As long as an IC is listed as Battle Brothers with a unit from a different Detachment he can join them, however he does not benefit from their Special Rules because they are from a Different Detachment.

Charistoph wrote:
So again, we are going back to the two units in one argument which has yet to be supported anywhere? So the IC rule about when it joins another unit it counts as part of that unit for ALL rules purposes is never stated? Which rulebook are you using?
The IC has the HQ role when he is a unit, as the UNIT has the Role, not the model. When the IC is in a Troops unit, he is not operating as an HQ unit, but a model in a Troops unit. It really is quite simple and explicit, I don't understand why you choose to ignore it.

If the IC were to join a unit from HIS Detachment then he has the potential to benefit from that Units Special Rules if said Special Rule can carry over to the IC such as Stubborn. Stubborn works because how the rule is setup "a model in the unit effects the whole unit". However since the Formation is a different Detachment he cannot benefit from the Command Benefits (Special Rules) of the other Detachment. We are not ignoring it, its just a fact that it doesn't work at all because it never gets past the "from a different detachment" stage.

 FlingitNow wrote:
So being general seems to confuse you so I'll try to be more specific. We have an IC From a CAD. It joins an Assault Squad from a Skyhammer Annihilation Force. What Detachment is the combined unit from?