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.

Playing as Chaos Daemons, I always assumed that when a unit was destroyed that it still remained as a part of your army. As of such you couldn't summon a named character that was previously destroyed as you would be breaking the "Only one of this model may be included in your army" limitation on the datasheet.

With that said, GW have teased the secondaries for Guard, including "Inflexible Command". Specifically I wanted to look at the aspect of Inflexible Command where it grants VP if "every Astra Militarum Infantry unit from your army is within 6" of a friendly Officer unit".

So keeping that all in mind, are destroyed units still a part of your army? If they are still a part of your army, then you could deny a Guard play VP on the Inflexible Command secondary by simply killing a single infantry unit. The infantry would still be a part of the army, but certainly wouldn't be within 6" of a friendly Officer unit. On the flip side, if a destroyed unit is no longer a part of your army, then it opens up the option to re-summon name characters. I'm sure that there are other implications that I haven't considered.

"When a model is destroyed, it is removed from play."

Assume that removing them from play prevents any and all rules interactions. Therefore, no they can't be resummoned or deny rules like Inflexible Command.

Why couldn't they be summoned if the destroyed unit is prevented from interacting with the datasheet limitation of "Only one of this model may be included in your army" for the newly added unit?

Maybe you should have read the core rules. Lets see what an army is.

Army: Collection of models under your command.

When a unit is removed from play, is it still under your command ? No, its not. You can still summon named characters after they are killed, because they are no longer under your command, and therefore no longer included of your army.

 p5freak wrote:
Maybe you should have read the core rules. Lets see what an army is.

Army: Collection of models under your command.

When a unit is removed from play, is it still under your command ? No, its not. You can still summon named characters after they are killed, because they are no longer under your command, and therefore no longer included of your army.

Funny, I just checked the Rules Terms Glossary. It says:

BRB Pg 364 wrote:Army: A player's army consists of every model in their army roster and any models added to it over the course of the battle.

Where did you source your quote from?
*Edit* I see that you are referencing pg 196 of BRB.

Regardless if what constitutes an army.. did you miss my post?

If a model is destroyed it is removed from play. You can safely assume that it isn't "in another area" like reserves or reinforcements.

You initial assumption that the model can be redeployed via summoning is incorrect.

Normally I'd say yes, destroyed units are still on your roster so count as in your army per BRB 364, but no longer in play; so named characters can't be resummoned because it's a 1 per army limit.

So assuming RAI, Inflexible Command needs "in your army and currently deployed on the table" or some such adding - or units in reserve or dead would break it as is RAW, IMO.

hardcore1six wrote:
Regardless if what constitutes an army.. did you miss my post?

If a model is destroyed it is removed from play. You can safely assume that it isn't "in another area" like reserves or reinforcements.

You initial assumption that the model can be redeployed via summoning is incorrect.

Your post wasn't clear. Do you understand that using Daemon Ritual to summon is adding a brand new unit to your army and not returning an existing one?

When I add a named character via Daemon Ritual, I need to meet a number of requirements. For name characters their datasheet has an additional requirement of "Only one of this model may be included in your army". If a named character unit has been destroyed, are they still a part of my army? If they are not, then I can summon them (pending points and a high enough Power Level roll) because I'm not breaking the requirement of "Only one of this model may be included in your army" with my new unit. If destroyed units are still considered as a part of them army, then a named character can not be summoned after being destroyed because it would break the requirement of "Only one of this model may be included in your army"

Hence the importance of what constitutes an army.

*Edit* - Added quote of post I was replying to for clarity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 arkhanist wrote:
Normally I'd say yes, destroyed units are still on your roster so count as in your army per BRB 364, but no longer in play; so named characters can't be resummoned because it's a 1 per army limit.

So assuming RAI, Inflexible Command needs "in your army and currently deployed on the table" or some such adding - or units in reserve or dead would break it as is RAW, IMO.

Having spent some time thinking about this, I agree with your assessment that destroyed units remain as a part of your army. There are a number of things with Inflexible Command that should result in a FAQ for it.

Again this would be the rare case where RAW doesn't work and we go to RAI and see that it was clearly not intended for AM to stop gaining vp as soon as one unit and dies and so only count living units for the purpose of the rule

U02dah4 wrote:
Again this would be the rare case where RAW doesn't work and we go to RAI and see that it was clearly not intended for AM to stop gaining vp as soon as one unit and dies and so only count living units for the purpose of the rule

What's the RAI if you table the AM player? What's the RAI if they never bring infanty in their list? The whole secondary needs a FAQ.

Also, if you are making the claim "this would be the rare case where RAW doesn't work", you need to substantiate it. The RAW works, but ultimately it is difficult to maximise.

Again rai would be that you need at least one infantry unit on the board to score it.

It is clearly not intended for an all vehicle list to max it out or a tabled army to score it

The raw doesn't work because intention is pretty obvious but raw as you have pointed out creates silliness

But you know that as does anyone being reasonable

Regarding the Astra Militarum Objective in the OP, it is patently obvious that a dead unit is not considered for purposes of scoring / preventing scoring this. Dead/destroyed units play no further part in the game.

Regarding all the side guff about summoning, well, I’ve no idea at all how that relates to the main Q tbh. Summoning is a whole separate thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JakeSiren wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:
Again this would be the rare case where RAW doesn't work and we go to RAI and see that it was clearly not intended for AM to stop gaining vp as soon as one unit and dies and so only count living units for the purpose of the rule

What's the RAI if you table the AM player? What's the RAI if they never bring infanty in their list? The whole secondary needs a FAQ.

Also, if you are making the claim "this would be the rare case where RAW doesn't work", you need to substantiate it. The RAW works, but ultimately it is difficult to maximise.

The RAI if you table the Militarum player is that they cannot score this.
The RAI if they bring no Infantry is that this cannot be scored.

No FAQ needed, not even hard questions as the RAW is clear and the RAI perfectly aligned.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Regarding the Astra Militarum Objective in the OP, it is patently obvious that a dead unit is not considered for purposes of scoring / preventing scoring this. Dead/destroyed units play no further part in the game.

Regarding all the side guff about summoning, well, I’ve no idea at all how that relates to the main Q tbh. Summoning is a whole separate thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JakeSiren wrote:

U02dah4 wrote:
Again this would be the rare case where RAW doesn't work and we go to RAI and see that it was clearly not intended for AM to stop gaining vp as soon as one unit and dies and so only count living units for the purpose of the rule

What's the RAI if you table the AM player? What's the RAI if they never bring infanty in their list? The whole secondary needs a FAQ.

Also, if you are making the claim "this would be the rare case where RAW doesn't work", you need to substantiate it. The RAW works, but ultimately it is difficult to maximise.

The RAI if you table the Militarum player is that they cannot score this.
The RAI if they bring no Infantry is that this cannot be scored.

No FAQ needed, not even hard questions as the RAW is clear and the RAI perfectly aligned.

The side gruff is both Summoning and Inflexible Command. The question, "are destroyed units still a part of your army?" affects how the RAW operate in each of these cases.

Since the answer to the question appears to be yes, it means that for summoning, when you try to summon a named character that was previously destroyed, you run afoul of the requirement of "Only one of this model may be included in your army" as there is already the destroyed unit instance still in your army. This would not be the case if the destroyed unit was no longer considered a part of your army.

For Inflexible Command, it means that if an Infantry unit is destroyed, it is still considered for "every Astra Militarum Infantry unit from your army is within 6" of a friendly Officer unit" as that unit is still a part of your army.

In addition, if your army has zero infantry then you will always meet the requirement of "every Astra Militarum Infantry unit from your army is within 6" of a friendly Officer unit".

I would say that while RAW is clear for Inflexible Command, that it is not perfectly aligned to the RAI expressed in this thread so far.

U02dah4 wrote:
Again rai would be that you need at least one infantry unit on the board to score it.

It is clearly not intended for an all vehicle list to max it out or a tabled army to score it

The raw doesn't work because intention is pretty obvious but raw as you have pointed out creates silliness

But you know that as does anyone being reasonable

So given that your RAI is to consider living units, I imagine your RAI would have units in reserve be considered for the 6" check? If the only unit in reserves is an Officer, would your RAI allow or disallow the scoring of the secondary?

If anyone is gonna spend time arguing that destroyed units are still part of an army for purposes of this secondary and try and staple together some word salad to “prove” that, I mean… they won’t ever get a second game. It’s farcical.

Reserves is a fair if nitpicky catch. But, yet again… The Book Is Not Out And There Will Be An FAQ.

This is all premature pissing and moaning.

I mean, the "word salad" as you put it is

BRB Pg 364 wrote:Army: A player's army consists of every model in their army roster and any models added to it over the course of the battle.

A destroyed unit is still a part of your army. Hardly reaching on the RAW.

The reason I was asking was because when I initially saw the secondary I thought maybe I had misremembered and it was the opposite, which would open up options for summoning.

But I agree, a FAQ should come out that cleans up the wording on this secondary.

And it’ll come. Weeks after the book. That isn’t due for weeks. These threads, honestly…

This is one of the best questions in YMDC in a while.

Shocked GW anticipated being asked "what is an army" and provided a clear answer.

Would like to point out this Objective is a Progressive and it does not solely deal with Infantry. A player can score a total of 4 VPs each turn that they meet all the criteria, or 2 for meeting the infantry criteria.

It's possible this is RAW and RAI. Once you start losing units, Inflexible Command breaks down and you no longer have the opportunity to score points for that part of the Objective. You can still get 1 VP for destroying an enemy unit with one of yours that's subject to orders, and 1 VP for having all your tanks within 12" of a tank officer.

So, two completely silly thoughts have occurred to me regarding the silliness of the AM RAW:
1) if the AM player loses an infantry unit and an officer, but physically places them within 6" of one another on the side of the table, does that satisfy the condition for the secondary?
2) if the first unit the AM player loses is both an infantry unit and an officer unit, does that prevent them from satisfying this secondary?

Imho, RAI says the answer to these questions is 1) no, but it doesn't prevent it either and 2) no. But it gets a bit zany when you look at it RAW. If this is, in fact, in the printed version, then this is some really sloppy (or perhaps nonexistent) rules quality assurance.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
If anyone is gonna spend time arguing that destroyed units are still part of an army for purposes of this secondary and try and staple together some word salad to “prove” that, I mean… they won’t ever get a second game. It’s farcical.

Reserves is a fair if nitpicky catch. But, yet again… The Book Is Not Out And There Will Be An FAQ.

This is all premature pissing and moaning.

I don't think anyone here would actually try that, obviously - but it did raise a valid question of 'what is your army, as defined by the rules?' because that rule interaction affects more than this sloppily worded preview. We all know what they meant in the general case, but they used a - for once - fairly clearly defined term that means something other than they thought it did, without clarification. Though saying that - I'm genuinely unsure RAI if you should be able to score it or not if you have infantry units in reserve because I can see an argument for both thematically, so hopefully the FAQ is clear enough or the final print version is tighter.

I am a RAI and benefit-of-the-doubt guy generally, but even I have to fall back on RAW at times when RAI is particularly unclear.

A unit which is removed from the battlefield is no longer under your command. And when its no longer under your command its no longer part of your army.

 p5freak wrote:
A unit which is removed from the battlefield is no longer under your command. And when its no longer under your command its no longer part of your army.

Citation needed for "A unit which is removed from the battlefield is no longer under your command". Using that definition I think a number of people would be surprised that embarking a unit into a transport or putting them into reserves means that they are no longer a part of your army.

Fortunately GW have provided a clear and precise definition in the rules glossary on what an army is:

BRB Pg 364 wrote:Army: A player's army consists of every model in their army roster and any models added to it over the course of the battle.

JakeSiren wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
A unit which is removed from the battlefield is no longer under your command. And when its no longer under your command its no longer part of your army.

Citation needed for "A unit which is removed from the battlefield is no longer under your command".

Ok, when a unit is destroyed, its removed from play. When a unit is destroyed, and removed from play, no more rules apply to it, it no longer participates in the game, and you cant command it.

JakeSiren wrote:

Using that definition I think a number of people would be surprised that embarking a unit into a transport or putting them into reserves means that they are no longer a part of your army.

A unit in reserves is still under your command, because its removed from the battlefield and then it is placed in strategic reserves. A unit embarked within a transport is still under your command, because its removed from the battlefield and then its embarked within that transport. After the units have been removed from the battlefield there are still rules which apply to those units. A unit which has been destroyed is removed from play, and no more rules apply to it.

 p5freak wrote:
Ok, when a unit is destroyed, its removed from play. When a unit is destroyed, and removed from play, no more rules apply to it, it no longer participates in the game, and you cant command it.

And? I feel like you are implying that the unit is no longer a part of your army, but you haven't said that. So I won't put words in your mouth. If someone were to make that argument however, I would once again have to ask for a rules citation.

 p5freak wrote:
A unit in reserves is still under your command, because its removed from the battlefield and then it is placed in strategic reserves. A unit embarked within a transport is still under your command, because its removed from the battlefield and then its embarked within that transport. After the units have been removed from the battlefield there are still rules which apply to those units. A unit which has been destroyed is removed from play, and no more rules apply to it.

Yes. I was making light of your imprecise wording.

 p5freak wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

Using that definition I think a number of people would be surprised that embarking a unit into a transport or putting them into reserves means that they are no longer a part of your army.

A unit in reserves is still under your command, because its removed from the battlefield and then it is placed in strategic reserves. A unit embarked within a transport is still under your command, because its removed from the battlefield and then its embarked within that transport. After the units have been removed from the battlefield there are still rules which apply to those units. A unit which has been destroyed is removed from play, and no more rules apply to it.

Models that are destroyed are removed from the battlefield and placed off the table. They are still under your command - they were following your orders right up until they were removed - you're just going to be waiting a while for them to follow new ones in most cases! However, some of them though can literally come back in the same battle, e.g. poxwalkers with the "dead walk again" strategem - "Select one POXWALKERS unit from your army and roll seven D6s: for each 3+, one of that unit’s destroyed models is added back to it with 1 wound remaining." That's a rule that applies to them*, even though they are destroyed.

Destroyed models are removed from play, and no longer take an active part in the game unless otherwise specified, but they don't just cease to exist. (Destroyed models is not just those killed, but e.g. those who are cowering in a shell crater due to failed morale and no longer fighting. They're removed from the table for simplicity. After the battle, the commissar will probably be having Words, and he's very much sure they're still under his command.)

"Under your command" is to distinguish between models that you bring, and models someone else brings for their army - applying that to destroyed models or not is interpretation. Fortunately, BRB 364 is very clear that "your army" includes every model on your roster at the start and anything added, so no intepretation is needed. You can't just pretend that definition doesn't exist.

* To pre-empt a nitpick, "Dead walk again" is used on an active unit on the battlefield like any strategem, not the destroyed models directly, but the amount that can be brought back is limited to the previously destroyed models of that unit, so those destroyed models are a vital part of the rule implementation, and thus have a rule that is applied to them.

** My grammar sucks today.

JakeSiren wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Ok, when a unit is destroyed, its removed from play. When a unit is destroyed, and removed from play, no more rules apply to it, it no longer participates in the game, and you cant command it.

And? I feel like you are implying that the unit is no longer a part of your army, but you haven't said that. So I won't put words in your mouth. If someone were to make that argument however, I would once again have to ask for a rules citation.

There is no rule citation that a six sided dice has to have numbers from 1-6 on its sides, yet everyone knows that thats what we need to play. If a model is removed from play you cant play with it anymore. Thats common sense, no rule needed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 arkhanist wrote:

Models that are destroyed are removed from the battlefield and placed off the table. They are still under your command - they were following your orders right up until they were removed - you're just going to be waiting a while for them to follow new ones in most cases! However, some of them though can literally come back in the same battle, e.g. poxwalkers with the "dead walk again" strategem - "Select one POXWALKERS unit from your army and roll seven D6s: for each 3+, one of that unit’s destroyed models is added back to it with 1 wound remaining." That's a rule that applies to them*, even though they are destroyed.

So what ? Models can return, units cant. Once a unit is removed from play, its not coming back. If there is a special rule saying that a destroyed unit can come back to the battlefield its considered to be a new unit, which has nothing to do with the old one. Check pg. 363 of the BRB.

 p5freak wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

 p5freak wrote:
Ok, when a unit is destroyed, its removed from play. When a unit is destroyed, and removed from play, no more rules apply to it, it no longer participates in the game, and you cant command it.

And? I feel like you are implying that the unit is no longer a part of your army, but you haven't said that. So I won't put words in your mouth. If someone were to make that argument however, I would once again have to ask for a rules citation.

There is no rule citation that a six sided dice has to have numbers from 1-6 on its sides, yet everyone knows that thats what we need to play. If a model is removed from play you cant play with it anymore. Thats common sense, no rule needed.

You haven't actually put an argument forwards here. You've made a number of statements, but no cohesive argument or conclusion.

Based on what you have actually written, I can only conclude you are not trying to discuss the topic "Are destroyed units still a part of your army?". If that's what you wanted to do, and you want to respond with "No", you would actually have to produce rules that contradict the definition in the rules glossary. Not some vague "you cant play with it anymore" noise.