Necrons - Kill by Sweeping Advance?

[greatcrusade08]

OK. As an aside to the main question of the OP and the whole purpose of a RAW forum...I see your point.

- So the WBB rule allows these downed Necrons to not count towards the Unit Coherency rules, because the WBB rule says they don't count.

- Do those downed Necrons count towards unit strength for the purposes of being over half strength for Regrouping? The WBB rule doesn't say they don't count.

- Do the downed Necrons count for Phase out? The WBB rule doesn't say they don't count.

- Can the parent unit move at all? The WBB rule doesn't allow some of the models to move at more than the speed of the slowest models (the downed Necrons with a move of 0")?

 

i also understand your points but i can actually answer these (except the regrouping as i dont have rule book with me)

the phase out rule is covered in its own section and i beleive (although i havent read it in a while) it mentions what counts and doesnt, so the fact it isnt mentioned under WBB is irrelevant.

also where does it say the downed necrons have a move of '0'.. it doesnt, having no control of the model and having a move of '0' are two seperate things.. hence the added rule about ignoring unit coherancy.. in order to counter balance this.

since thier move characterisitcs is still technically the same as the rest of them then there is no slowest model.. they are not reduced in any way just 'downed'

[Mezkh]

- So the WBB rule allows these downed Necrons to not count towards the Unit Coherency rules, because the WBB rule says they don't count.

- Do those downed Necrons count towards unit strength for the purposes of being over half strength for Regrouping? The WBB rule doesn't say they don't count.

- Do the downed Necrons count for Phase out? The WBB rule doesn't say they don't count.

- Can the parent unit move at all? The WBB rule doesn't allow some of the models to move at more than the speed of the slowest models (the downed Necrons with a move of 0")?

 

I'm at work so can't reference, but I think a lot of these are covered in the FAQ, at least the first two. And I'd say the last comes under the 'ignored for all normal game purposes, including measuring ranges..... and so on. Or you accept the above explanation.

[dswanick]

i also understand your points but i can actually answer these (except the regrouping as i dont have rule book with me)

the phase out rule is covered in its own section and i beleive (although i havent read it in a while) it mentions what counts and doesnt, so the fact it isnt mentioned under WBB is irrelevant.

also where does it say the downed necrons have a move of '0'.. it doesnt, having no control of the model and having a move of '0' are two seperate things.. hence the added rule about ignoring unit coherancy.. in order to counter balance this.

since thier move characterisitcs is still technically the same as the rest of them then there is no slowest model.. they are not reduced in any way just 'downed'

I'm at work so can't reference, but I think a lot of these are covered in the FAQ, at least the first two. And I'd say the last comes under the 'ignored for all normal game purposes, including measuring ranges..... and so on. Or you accept the above explanation.

OK. May I suggest you guys go back and re-read both the Rulebook, Codex, and FAQ?

WE'LL BE BACK - Necrons have a remarkable ability to self-repair even the most horrendous damage. Any Necron model that is reduced to 0 Wounds, or would otherwise be removed as a casualty, remains on the table top and is laid on its side to show that it's damaged. Damaged Necrons ignore the normal coherency rules and cannot be attacked in any way - they are seen as just more battlefield debris.

At the start of the Necron turn, damaged Necrons may self-repair{were the rule carries on to describe the mechanics of how We'll Be Back brings damaged Necrons back into the game}

Notice this rule doesn't say anything about them not counting for Phase Out, Regrouping, not being able to move with the unit, etc. Notice that it doesn't say that the owning player has "no control" over the models? Ir doesn't limit their movement, shooting, or assault choices in one bit - that's an assumption on your parts. The BRB doesn't limit a casualty models ability to move, shoot, or assault as it simply tells you to remove it from the table. The WBB rule overrides the casualty removal step but doesn't then add any prohibitions to movement, shooting, or assault. It is assumed by players that the model can't do anything, but it's not RAW. The RAW only tells you to lay the model on its side and that it needn't maintain coherency.

PHASE OUT - If a Necron army is reduced to 25% or less of its origional number of models (in other words, 75% of it's models, rounding fractions up, are destroyed), it will disappear in an eerie fashion, leaving behind nothing of its presence. This gives an automatic victory to the enemy, regardless of victory conditions of the scenario being played. Remeber that you only count models with the Necron special ability, so C'Tan, Pariahs, Scarab Swarms, Monoliths and Tomb Spiders do not contribute to the total number of Necronsin the army or the current number of casualties. However when Phase Out occurs, the whole Necron army, including models without the Necron ability, phases out.

Phase Out is calculated at the beginning of the Necron turn after all We'll Be Back! rolls have been taken.

Notice this rule says that the check is made after the WBB rolls have been made so there should be no downed Necrons on the table at this point. That's not the same RAW as downed Necron models "don't count". That is an interpretation, which could just as easily go the other way - "They'd count IF they were still on the table." Which could be argued in the case of those Necrons not removed because "you intend to use a Monolith portal to teleport the unit during the current move." (In the case of We'll Be Back roll, Phase Out check, Monolith Teleportation useage.)

“We’ll be Back” (p. 13)

Q. Do Necrons that are down and awaiting an opportunity to make their We’ll Be Back (henceforth WBB) roll count as Necrons of the same type for determining whether a WBB roll can be made?

A. No they do not count.

This FAQ only addresses if one downed model of a Necron type can be used to allow another model of the same Necron type to WBB. It does not answer any of the other possible situations were downed Necrons may or may not "count" for anything.

 

Unless you guys can quote something I've missed, you're both operating from the faulty assumption that the downed Necrons and WBB rules have more restrictions in place than they actually do. For example: please notice that nowhere does it say that a downed Necron can't move or shoot, it only says they needn't maintain coherency and may not be attacked. You guys are making the same mistake Algesan was earlier - taking your understanding of the RAW and equating your interpretation as equal to the RAW. So unless you guys can quote a section of the rules where it says the downed necrons have these traits which you are ascribing to them, you have to realize that.

 

Disclaimer - These quotes are base on the Codex: Necron, property of Games Workshop, ©opyright 2002. I do not support or condone Necron players playing in this way. Doing so is douchebaggery of the highest order. But there is ink on the page, which is what we have to work with in a RAW Rules forum - and RAW is a lot messier than RAI in this case.

[greatcrusade08]

OK. May I suggest you guys go back and re-read both the Rulebook, Codex, and FAQ?

you too mate, you still havent answered my challenge to quote the movement '0' fact you brought up.. nor where it states the necron models arent part of thier parent unit.

you cant becuase they dont exist.. all your quotes support my argument

 

WE'LL BE BACK - Necrons have a remarkable ability to self-repair even the most horrendous damage. Any Necron model that is reduced to 0 Wounds, or would otherwise be removed as a casualty, remains on the table top and is laid on its side to show that it's damaged. Damaged Necrons ignore the normal coherency rules and cannot be attacked in any way - they are seen as just more battlefield debris.

At the start of the Necron turn, damaged Necrons may self-repair

Notice this rule doesn't say anything about them not counting for Phase Out, Regrouping, not being able to move with the unit, etc. Notice that it doesn't say that the owning player has "no control" over the models? Ir doesn't limit their movement, shooting, or assault choices in one bit - that's an assumption on your parts. The BRB doesn't limit a casualty models ability to move, shoot, or assault as it simply tells you to remove it from the table. The WBB rule overrides the casualty removal step but doesn't then add any prohibitions to movement, shooting, or assault. It is assumed by players that the model can't do anything, but it's not RAW. The RAW only tells you to lay the model on its side and that it needn't maintain coherency.

exactly my point, the only thing it tells you to do is leave them on thier sides and they can ignore coherancy.. i could make a comparison with pinning models also on thier sides, but i wont..

this is about RAW.. this rule specifically doesnt allow for them to leave thier parent unit... and thats whats at argument here.

 

 

Phase Out is calculated at the beginning of the Necron turn after all We'll Be Back! rolls have been taken.

Notice this rule says that the check is made after the WBB rolls have been made so there should be no downed Necrons on the table at this point. That's not the same RAW as downed Necron models "don't count". That is an interpretation, which could just as easily go the other way - "They'd count IF they were still on the table." Which could be argued in the case of those Necrons not removed because "you intend to use a Monolith portal to teleport the unit during the current move." (In the case of We'll Be Back roll, Phase Out check, Monolith Teleportation useage.)

your aguing my point here, WBB has no bearing on phase out, becuase the downed models would clearly be alive or dead before its calculated, any assumptions made after ths are just that.. assumptions.

i never said they didnt count towards phase out, simply that the argument was covered in the phase out section and wasnt necessary in the WBB section..

the fact is WBB has no bearing on phase out as at this point the necrons are either dead or alive

 

Unless you guys can quote something I've missed, you're both operating from the faulty assumption that the downed Necrons and WBB rules have more restrictions in place than they actually do. For example: please notice that nowhere does it say that a downed Necron can't move or shoot, it only says they needn't maintain coherency and may not be attacked. You guys are making the same mistake Algesan was earlier - taking your understanding of the RAW and equating your interpretation as equal to the RAW. So unless you guys can quote a section of the rules where it says the downed necrons have these traits which you are ascribing to them, you have to realize that.

the thing is your doing the same though, your making the assumption they arent of the same unit and that they have movement zero.

the fact is phase out has no correlation with WBB as it is calculated after.. so that is not an argument

pure RAW is simple, downed modles arent removed as casualties thereforestill 'exist' in the game.. if they fail thier WBB they are removed if they pass they get back up.. you dont need a quote to determine they are still part of the game, becuase the WBB overrides the codex and allows them to remain in the game.

 

my point has always been that unless you can state with a quote that being on thier side means they arent still part of thier parent unit then they must still be, they arent removed from the game or switched to another unit until they make a WBB save.. SA happens before this.

there are no assumptions here, this is fact.. you cant assume they leave the unit unless it says to do so

 

you argued this:

Can the parent unit move at all? The WBB rule doesn't allow some of the models to move at more than the speed of the slowest models (the downed Necrons with a move of 0")?

yet you argue that there are no limitations on a necron unit that is downed.

just seems to me like you havent got the argument straight in your own head yet?

occums razor, simplest argument is normally right

 

downed necron models dont leave thier parent unit (because thier are no rules stating they do and no precedents for suggesting its possible without an IC rule).. SA removes whole units, therefore downed necrons are removed also.. if you want to challenge this RAW statement please do so with actual quotes and not assumptions

[Mezkh]

Unless you guys can quote something I've missed.

 

Yup can do, looks like you've got the 'First Printing' of the Necron Codex. Games Workshop put out a 'Second Printing' update with inserted extra rules text. If you don't have this you're missing out on some pertinent rules updates.

You can check the version by looking at the inside cover, the reissue will have 'Second Printing' above the various worldwide head offices.

 

Anyways the second printing updates the WBB rule as follows in bold.

 

WE'LL BE BACK - Necrons have a remarkable ability to self-repair even the most horrendous damage. Any Necron model that is reduced to 0 Wounds, or would otherwise be removed as a casualty, remains on the table top and is laid on its side to show that it's damaged. Damaged Necrons are ignored completely for all normal game purposes such as unit coherency, measuring ranges, calculating whether other units can self repair, and so on - they are debris only.

At the start of the Necron turn, damaged Necrons may self-repair{were the rule carries on to describe the mechanics of how We'll Be Back brings damaged Necrons back into the game}

 

So we aren't assuming anything :) Yes GW is stupid and it's their fault you weren't aware there was further WBB clarification, because they don't exactly advertise widely the fact they redid aspects of the codex.

 

'Damaged Necrons are ignored completely for all normal game purposes' is a wonderfully broad phrase that is all-encompassing, or in this case all-ignoring; they never count for anything, or affect anything.

 

However to bring the thread back to the original topic, there are two points about damaged Necrons

 

1) We know a priori they still a part of their respective units. The rules treat them as such.

a ) To keep things simple, when the casualties are suffered, assess whether they are in range of the resurrection orb. If they are, lay them down and move them with the unit.

b ) Any models in the unit that, although eligible to self-repair, failed their 'We'll be back' roll....

 

2) Being a part of a unit they're hence removed from the game when that unit is caught in a sweeping advance. This is because the more specific sweeping advance clause "No special rules may save the unit at this stage" overrides the special rule "Damaged Necrons are ignored completely for all normal game purposes".

 

As stated before, you can't use your special rule to save your unit from a rule with the specific clause 'no special rule may save the unit'.

[dswanick]

Nope, your missing my point. The rule doesn't say they have a 0" move. It also doesn't say they can't move. It doesn't say they can't shoot or assault, either. If you're going by RAW models killed and placed on thier side during your assault phase can still be consolidated into base contact and fight during your opponents close combat phase. I don't know of any quote that says they are or aren't part of their parent unit, I am pointing out that if you conclude that they are still part of the unit then they also must still be able to move, shoot, and assault by RAW. Also, it does have a bearing on phase out as I showed : At the start of your turn your roll WBB for all the downed models (except those you intend to move with the Monoloth - RAW/FAQ), removing the models that fail their roll, then you test for Phase out - guess what all those models that you intend to move with a Monolith are still on thier side/downed and still on the table. Do they count against the Phase Out? Again RAW fails us. Now as for your "their still in the game", since the rule doesn't say they can't move, shoot, assault - how do you reconcile this?

[Mezkh]

Also I'd love to link an copy of the Second printing errata complete changes but it's pretty much impossible for me to find easily on the net :) the only really important ones are that WBB line and some Monolith clarifications about teleportation and unaugumented strength that the FAQs clear up later.

[greatcrusade08]

Now as for your "their still in the game", since the rule doesn't say they can't move, shoot, assault - how do you reconcile this?

 

they are either in play or not, whether they are removed as casualties is a decision put off until thier WBB roll.. until that point they havent been removed and can be removed by SA.

tell me where it says this isnt the case.

they are ignored for all normal games purposes,. but as ive said time and again, it doesnt state they leave thier unit.. so they dont.. its really that simple. no assumptions just RAW

[thade]

If they are "ignored for all game purposes", doesn't that mean that events that remove the unit would ignore them also?

[Mezkh]

If they are "ignored for all game purposes", doesn't that mean that events that remove the unit would ignore them also?

 

Tell me thade, are you trying to save a theoretical unit with a special rule from a page in the Necron Codex titled 'NECRON SPECIAL RULES' when the event that triggers it's removal says 'no special rules may save the unit'?

 

Because it looks a tiny-insy-little bit like you are ;)?

[greatcrusade08]

If they are "ignored for all game purposes", doesn't that mean that events that remove the unit would ignore them also?

 

Tell me thade, are you trying to save a unit with a special rule from a page in the Necron Codex titled 'NECRON SPECIAL RULES' when the event that triggers it's removal says 'no special rules may save the unit'?

 

Because it looks a tiny-insy-little bit like you are?

 

ding ding we have a winner...

it used to specifically state ~WBB couldnt be used against SA, this was changed to any special save.. which btw still covers WBB

[dswanick]

Unless you guys can quote something I've missed.

 

Yup can do, looks like you've got the 'First Printing' of the Necron Codex. Games Workshop put out a 'Second Printing' update with inserted extra rules text. If you don't have this you're missing out on some pertinent rules updates.

You can check the version by looking at the inside cover, the reissue will have 'Second Printing' above the various worldwide head offices.

 

Anyways the second printing updates the WBB rule as follows in bold.

 

WE'LL BE BACK - Necrons have a remarkable ability to self-repair even the most horrendous damage. Any Necron model that is reduced to 0 Wounds, or would otherwise be removed as a casualty, remains on the table top and is laid on its side to show that it's damaged. Damaged Necrons are ignored completely for all normal game purposes such as unit coherency, measuring ranges, calculating whether other units can self repair, and so on - they are debris only.

At the start of the Necron turn, damaged Necrons may self-repair{were the rule carries on to describe the mechanics of how We'll Be Back brings damaged Necrons back into the game}

 

So we aren't assuming anything ;) Yes GW is stupid and it's their fault you weren't aware there was further WBB clarification, because they don't exactly advertise widely the fact they redid aspects of the codex.

 

'Damaged Necrons are ignored completely for all normal game purposes' is a wonderfully broad phrase that is all-encompassing, or in this case all-ignoring; they never count for anything, or affect anything.

 

However to bring the thread back to the original topic, there are two points about damaged Necrons

 

1) We know a priori they still a part of their respective units. The rules treat them as such.

a ) To keep things simple, when the casualties are suffered, assess whether they are in range of the resurrection orb. If they are, lay them down and move them with the unit.

b ) Any models in the unit that, although eligible to self-repair, failed their 'We'll be back' roll....

 

2) Being a part of a unit they're hence removed from the game when that unit is caught in a sweeping advance. This is because the more specific sweeping advance clause "No special rules may save the unit at this stage" overrides the special rule "Damaged Necrons are ignored completely for all normal game purposes".

 

As stated before, you can't use your special rule to save your unit from a rule with the specific clause 'no special rule may save the unit'.

Thank you. This is what I was trying to elicit from you guys. Some people have 1st print Codexs and there is no Errata which indicates that this rule is changed in later printings. I suspect that this alone is partially to blaim for the disagreement on this issue. It's always best to ensure that all debators have the same set of base facts from which to debate.

[greatcrusade08]

Thank you. This is what I was trying to elicit from you guys. Some people have 1st print Codexs and there is no Errata which indicates that this rule is changed in later printings. I suspect that this alone is partially to blaim for the disagreement on this issue. It's always best to ensure that all debators have the same set of base facts from which to debate.

 

yeah its a bugger when that happens...

how does it affect your viewpoint now though?

[Mezkh]

Yes. I'd be tempted to say it's wholly to blame for the disagreement - I only picked up where you were coming from when you quoted your codex without the extra text. If I had the first edition codex I'd totally agree with your assessment the RAW would be wholly lacking in regards to downed Necrons and how this affects them game-wise.

 

Also this is going way back in the thread, but Algesan said

As for "coming to terms", I'll assume it wasn't meant to be personal and being from the southeast USA I'd hate to say what that sounded like when I first read it

 

definitely wasn't meant to sound personal, I'm not from Southeast USA so no idea how any other culture interprets that phrase, where I'm from it means 'accept'.

[dswanick]

Thank you. This is what I was trying to elicit from you guys. Some people have 1st print Codexs and there is no Errata which indicates that this rule is changed in later printings. I suspect that this alone is partially to blaim for the disagreement on this issue. It's always best to ensure that all debators have the same set of base facts from which to debate.

 

yeah its a bugger when that happens...

how does it affect your viewpoint now though?

My point of view has always been with you guys. I only took the devil's advocate position because no one had quoted the exact updated text, and as noted my Codex and FAQ were lacking. Also, I'm still OK with my LGGs house rule allowing the downed models to remain - as pointed out earlier the Necrons have gotten boned enough, a few warrior models here or there isn't that big a deal. ;)

[thade]

If they are "ignored for all game purposes", doesn't that mean that events that remove the unit would ignore them also?

 

Tell me thade, are you trying to save a theoretical unit with a special rule from a page in the Necron Codex titled 'NECRON SPECIAL RULES' when the event that triggers it's removal says 'no special rules may save the unit'?

 

Because it looks a tiny-insy-little bit like you are?

Don't make this a personal assault, lest I'll resort to name-calling. I'm playing devil's advocate; have been for a few pages now. If you can't cover every angle, you can't cover the rule.

[Dan VK]

If they are "ignored for all game purposes", doesn't that mean that events that remove the unit would ignore them also?

 

Mezkh is correct, if one accepts that a special rule must use the term Sweeping Advance to qualify as "otherwise specified" then We'll Be Back! does not qualify as such, making "ignored for all game purposes" irrelevant in this situation.

 

Tell me thade, are you trying to [content cut for space]

 

Because it looks a tiny-insy-little bit like you are?

 

;)

[Mezkh]

If they are "ignored for all game purposes", doesn't that mean that events that remove the unit would ignore them also?

 

Tell me thade, are you trying to save a theoretical unit with a special rule from a page in the Necron Codex titled 'NECRON SPECIAL RULES' when the event that triggers it's removal says 'no special rules may save the unit'?

 

Because it looks a tiny-insy-little bit like you are?

Don't make this a personal assault, lest I'll resort to name-calling. I'm playing devil's advocate; have been for a few pages now. If you can't cover every angle, you can't cover the rule.

 

Sorry that was supposed to come across as a funny comment, not an insult! I've added a smiley. Yes I know you're playing devil's advocate and I was aiming more for reductio ad absurdum than reductio ad ridiculum.

[thade]

Smilies and winkies are important in a world of nothing but cold text. :P

 

My necron buddy is not going to buy this; I'll just tough it out until the update.

[Gentlemanloser]

are you trying to save a theoretical unit with a special rule from a page in the Necron Codex titled 'NECRON SPECIAL RULES' when the event that triggers it's removal says 'no special rules may save the unit'?

 

Codex trumps BRB.

 

If the BRB says no special saves you and a Codex say you can ignore it, then Codex wins.

 

This is because the more specific sweeping advance clause "No special rules may save the unit at this stage" overrides the special rule "Damaged Necrons are ignored completely for all normal game purposes".

 

Would be the final answer, if it wasn't that Codex rules always trump the main rulebook.

[SeattleDV8]

Sorry . but that is stuff and nonsense.

Specific trumps general.

The Sweeping advance has a specific way that a special rule can over rule it. It has to specificly mention SA.

Codex does not always trump BRB, in this case " a Codex say you can ignore it, then Codex wins."

The Codex and WWB does not mention SA.

There is no confict, the unit is destroyed.

[Algesan]

What happens with Jaws of the World Wolf?

Casualty or removed from play?

 

That sounds like a SW thing. I don't have the SW Codex, so I cannot comment on that one, but I'll be touching on the concept of using a Codex to define rules in other codices or the BRB, when I get back to it.

 

Algesan i find your attitude very disturbing, you accuse us of being rules lawyers becuase we take "removed as a casualty" and "removed from play" as meaning two different things.

yuo cant accuse us oif using RAI here becuase the words are clearly defined as being different, much the same way as a GK force weapon can beat eternal warrior.. it doesnt cause instant death, it removes them from play.

this is fully accepted and a good precedent..

 

The anti-WBB position depends on five things:

1) Use of ATSKNF as the example for how SA can be avoided.

2) Definition of the word "model"

3) Definition of the word "unit"

4) Definition of the word "casualty"

5) Interactions of the above to produce the denial of WBB vs. SA in 5th Ed just like it was in 4th Ed.

 

This will take a bit of time I don't have right now to reply, but I'll grind this one up and repost it in a day or two. Since I'm not a real active character in the current RPG we play once a week, I might have time to get the basics down this afternoon.

 

I'll check back here to see if the anti-WBB crowd can add any other relevant points they think I've missed. NOTE: This does not mean quoting rules or codices or your opinions, just any other bottom line points I might have missed. If these five cover it, then just say so. The failure of one or more of those five will collapse the anti-WBB position vs. SA.

 

Nothing wrong with being a rules lawyer, something wrong with being a rules shyster.

 

For those who I didn't reply directly too, sorry, but your points merely confirm the five points I gave above and the errors in logic and reading that make those five false. I'll be addressing then when I go through those five points.

[greatcrusade08]

The anti-WBB position depends on five things:

1) Use of ATSKNF as the example for how SA can be avoided.

2) Definition of the word "model"

3) Definition of the word "unit"

4) Definition of the word "casualty"

5) Interactions of the above to produce the denial of WBB vs. SA in 5th Ed just like it was in 4th Ed.

 

i cant beleive your still arguing this..

all of the points, model, unit and casualty are fully explained in the rulebook.. and these are rulebook definitions not dictionary definitions.. ATSKNF has nothing to do with this argument as necrons dont have it.

 

RAW is clear, the onus is on you to show how necrons DONT get wiped out, not trying to find silly areas like this to try and undermine our arguments..

if you dont know the definitions of the middle 3 then you really shouldnt be arguing rules should you?

[Gentlemanloser]

Sorry . but that is stuff and nonsense.

Specific trumps general.

The Sweeping advance has a specific way that a special rule can over rule it. It has to specificly mention SA.

Codex does not always trump BRB, in this case " a Codex say you can ignore it, then Codex wins."

The Codex and WWB does not mention SA.

There is no confict, the unit is destroyed.

 

Codex *always* trumps rulebook.

 

DH Force Weapons and Smoke Launcher, or Necron Special Rules and Sweeping Advance. Codex takes preference in *every* case.

 

Edit: The Necorn Rule is inclusive. It covers *everything*. Incuding SA. It doesn't need to mention each and every possible stiuation as the list would be immense.

 

All normal situations. Of which SA is one.

[greatcrusade08]

actually your wrong, the coldex does trump the rulebook but the two rules have nothing to do with each other..

the WBB rule covers models that are removed as casualties.. sweeping advance doesnt remove as casualties hence WBB rule cannot override it.

 

I really wish people would get this, as this thread is going round in circles..

 

edit: the rulebook has a section on removing casualties, it defines the process ie. a model is wounded, he fails his save (or doesnt get one) has his wounds value reduced to 0 and is removed as a casulaty.. SA is absent from this page.. infact if you read the description of SA it says they may be running and hiding in its fluff section.

 

further to this, what we are now arguing is whether SA affects necrons at all.. if necrons werent meant to morale things like this GW would have made them fealess, even in an older edition..