Black Templar Command Squad (as Retinue)

[Grey Mage]

A Wolf Lord with WBGBs doesnt lose the IC rule, he just cant leave the unit thus "Counts as" an upgrade character. Thats not the same thing. You are in fact both at the same time when you are in a retinue, you just use the rules for only one of these.

[Kurasuke]

I think you guys are using different definitions for "both at the same time." I think Trekari is saying that you are whichever set of rules you're using wheras Grey Mage is saying that you never lose either rule but only use one for certain situations. It doesn't really matter because it doesn't change the fact that the character is an IC for the purposes of close combat.

[Cent404]

Yeah, you made me go get my 4th edition rule book:

 

4th edition BRB Retinue rules:

 

Some characters are able to lead a special retinue, bodyguard or other HQ unit in battle. Where this is the case it is specified in their Codex book entry. If a character is fielded with such a unit, he may not leave them and join another unit while they remain alive. Should the unit be destroyed, the character may once again move between units.

 

4th edition BRB IC assault phase rules:

 

If a unit including a character charges into close combat, the character must charge in too - they cannot hold back like cowards! A character on his own can charge into close combat if within range of the enemy in the Assault Phase.

 

Characters are treated as a separate unit when resolving close combats, following the normal rules for multiple combats (see page 45).

 

This is directly reflected in the way the Black Templar Character rules are written (again in 4th edition). A unit which they are fielded with and attached to, that they cannot leave. However in 4th edition the Retinue rule provided no such protection in close combat to ANY IC WITH A RETINUE.

 

Now please look below at the key differences in 5th edition pertaining to these two areas:

 

5th edition BRB Retinue rules:

 

Some Codex books allow you to field characters together with a special unit that they cannot leave during the game (which is normally called a 'retinue', 'bodyguard' or similar). Where this is the case, the character counts as an upgrade character until all of the other members of this unit are killed, at which point it starts counting as an independent character and it will do so for the rest of the game.

 

5th edition BRB IC assault phase rules:

 

In the Assault phase, an independent character on his own can assault into close comabt if withinrange of the enemy as normal.

 

If a unit that has been joined by an independent character assaults into close combat, they character assaults too, as it is part of the unit. When the attacks are resolved, however, independent characters are always treated as a separate single-model unit (as described under Multiple Combats on page 41), even though they have joined the unit.

 

Currently in 5th edition, Black Templars Characters with Retinues quailify entirely for the new improved Retinue rules. Also currently in the 5th edition rules, GW has chosen to make a clear distiction to use the word "joined" (which only happens after the game starts) INSTEAD of the word "including" which encompasses "joined", "attached" and "leading" for the case of an Independent Character in the Assault Phase.

 

It's in black and white, plain as day. If a BT Character has a Retinue, USE THE RETINUE RULES. The changes between BRB editions happened for a reason, the wording changed for a reason. Clearly they didn't like the 4th edition retinue rules that's why we have the new ones.

 

Again, and this is the last time I am going to say this:

 

Page 22 of the C:BT

"A character who is leading or attached to a squad does not stop being an independent character for the purposes of close combat"

 

A Black Templar Character, who is leading or attached to a Retinue NEVER STOPS BEING AN IC EVER, however the new Retinue rules give him additional perks now by counting as an 'upgrade' character under this circumstance.

 

It's a redundant statement NOT a contradictory one.

 

{Removed a section here, because I didn't see the "*" on page 75}

 

Trekari, they current rule book and the english language just don't support your position I am sorry my friend. I've appreciated your input the whole time and yet you just get angry with me for disagreeing. I don't know why you are hostile to me, I've been civil the entire thread... What gives?

 

Edited: For a more direct point and a removal of a special rule which I didn't see the "*" on.

[SeattleDV8]

Yes you use the retinue rule except when in CC.

The codex over rules the BRB, as you have shown, only during CC.

The BT character is treated as an ungrade character that may not leave the squad during movement and shooting.

Once you have entered an assault the character reverts to a IC, which means he attacks and can be attacked seperately.

[gil galed]

Come on? Please please please please please accept that you are wrong.

 

GW red shirts say you're wrong

Grand Tournaments say you're wrong

The rule book says you're wrong

We say you're wrong

 

Joined as an english word infers no 'choice factor', you can willingly or unwillingly join something, i.e "i was forced to join x"

 

A BT retinue has still been 'joined' by a character, whether this was forced by the rules is of no concern, you cannot argue that because they use the word joined semantically he must have been able to choose to join. The IC and the retinue after all are separate units.

 

Dictionary:

Join ~ "To put or bring together so as to make continuous or form a unit"

 

I mean its even there, he has been put into the squad forming a unit, under DICTIONARY definition he has still 'joined' the unit regardless of when or how he was put in it or whether he can leave.

 

Yes you use the retinue rule except when in CC.

The codex over rules the BRB, as you have shown, only during CC.

The BT character is treated as an ungrade character that may not leave the squad during movement and shooting.

Once you have entered an assault the character reverts to a IC, which means he attacks and can be attacked seperately.

 

This 'IS' the correct answer, you can think you're right, hell play it like that if you're friends let you but the 'accepted' position IS this.

[Cent404]

The written rule in C:BT was redundant in 4th edition and it's still redundant in 5th edition. There is no contradiction nor is they anything to "override".

 

Black Templar Characters who have a RETINUE are not targetable in Close Combat.

 

If GW has said I am wrong.... where is the information located? Nothing on this particular scenario is in the BT FAQ or the Rulebook FAQ (Errata as well).

Show me direct proof from a GW publication and I will shut up immediately and forever about this.

 

Edited out personal remarks. I.

[GTang]

ICs who have retinues don't get targeted in close combat.

 

BT ICs with retinues do. Because BT ICs have a rule that says that they do.

 

There's no more that needs to be said than that, and I don't see any way around it. The Space Marine codex modifies the BRB Morale Test with ATSKNF, BT modifies retinues with their rule, etc. The GW confirmation is the existence of that rule without an errata that takes it away.

[Trekari]

Show me direct proof from a GW publication and I will shut up immediately and forever about this.

 

You are either an upgrade character, or an independent character.

 

Outside of CC, you are an upgrade character, but your "GW publication" says that during CC you have the IC rule.

 

Your Codex overrides the BRB because the BRB says you wouldn't be targetable since you have a Retinue. Because while you have a Retinue, you are supposed to be an UPGRADE character. Your Codex says that for CC, you are an INDEPENDENT character despite having the Retinue. I'm terribly sorry that you still do not understand that.

 

Edited out personal remark. I.

[Isiah]

Guys you need to cool down. Without a BT Codex I find myself handicapped here rules-wise, but, I shan't tolerate personal sniping in this topic so quit it or it will be closed.

 

Cheers

I

[Grey Mage]

Show me direct proof from a GW publication and I will shut up immediately and forever about this.

 

You are either an upgrade character, or an independent character.

 

Outside of CC, you are an upgrade character, but your "GW publication" says that during CC you have the IC rule.

 

Your Codex overrides the BRB because the BRB says you wouldn't be targetable since you have a Retinue. Because while you have a Retinue, you are supposed to be an UPGRADE character. Your Codex says that for CC, you are an INDEPENDENT character despite having the Retinue. I'm terribly sorry that you still do not understand that.

 

Edited out personal remark. I.

The rules on page 46-47 dont support the statement that you are either one or the other.... they are fairly explicit that a character with a retinue is both and simply uses the rules for one "state of being" at a time. Its rather like infantry that are in a transport- they "count as" embarked and they also "Count as" off the table, wich modifies the normal rules for there being infantry.

 

I have to agree with the above that says its a redundant statment, not a prohibitive one.

 

And I dont care about Grand Tournaments, as theyve directly conflicted with RAW and GW errata over the years, nor do I care about Redshirts... theyre worse than the old trolls when it comes to knowing the rules.

[SeattleDV8]

Redundant or not, we still are told how to treat the BT characters in a retinue.

Upgrade [retinue] for shooting and movement. An IC [non-retinue] in CC.