slotless units - allowable in formations?

[skeletoro]

So... Lone Wolves can be taken without using a FOC slot. But can they be taken in detachments that lack FOCs? For instance, could a Lone Wolf be taken as part of a formation and benefit from its special rules? For example - a Lone Wolf in Arjac's Shield brothers might be quite nasty (although because it would have to remain adjacent to another model, it might be awkward).

A Lone Wolf alongside a Void Claws formation would be quite awesome. Not sure if it's allowed, though?

[Leif Bearclaw]

I'd say you can take them, as the rules say 'one per Troops/WG units in the army', so the Shieldbrothers would allow you to take a LW as well. However, that LW wouldn't be part of the formation, because it has specific contents, which don't include the LW, so he wouldn't benefit from formation-specific special rules.

[Frater Cornelius]

Hm, I would disagree. A formation tells you exactly what units it must contain to be valid. Even if the LW does no take a slot, it is still another unit that is not listed in the formation.

[skeletoro]

Well he'd have to be taken as part of a detachment in order for the army to be battleforged.

 

The rules do touch on this but as far as I can tell they don't quite address the issue.

 

"occasionally a units army list entry will state that the unit it describes does not take up a FOC slot. These units can be taken in any detachment, even if all the slots are taken for its battlefield role or if the detachment had no slot for its battlefield role, but they must also abide by any restrictions detailed on the detachment and its own army list entry. If the army list entry states that it can be included in an army that includes another specified unit, and that it does not take up a FOC slot, it must join the same Detachment as that specified unit. In either case, these units are part of the detachment for all rules purposes and will gain any appropriate command benefits".

 

There's another bit too. Sore hands from typing,

[Frater Cornelius]

Hm, interesting. Though a Formation isn't just a detachment. It is a special type of detachment with its own rules. So I would look at the wording of the formation rules.

[Quixus]

That's it, a formation tells you exactly what units it contains. If a unit (whether it takes a FOC slot or not) is not in that list it is not part of the formation.

 

Arjac's Shieldbrothers is Arjac and a unit of WGTDA armed with Thunder Hammers and Storm Shields. There is no mention of a Lone Wolf.

[skeletoro]

Yeah, that was where I was going to look next. But are the rules for formations worded strongly enough to actually disallow these tack ones? If the rules for formations say "you get x" and the rules for slot-less add ons say "if you have x, you can take y" then the latter stands regardless of the former.

 

I've gotta go check the section...

 

Edit: the section on formations doesn't really address this as far as I can tell. Yes, it says formations are made up of a specific grouping of units but it does not specifically override the 'these units can be taken in any detachment....' clause of the slot-less units paragraph.

 

Out of interest, where do people stand regarding dedicated transports in formations? It's not quite analogous but there are similarities. The formations section doesn't mention dedicated transports. A formation is a 'specific grouping of units' - whether or not this precludes dedicated transport options is up for debate. Only the dedicated transports subsection earlier in the chapter (just one page earlier than the slot-less units section) and the army list entry for the unit (in this case for the passengers, not for the transport itself) actually allow this.

[Vash113]

Yeah, that was where I was going to look next. But are the rules for formations worded strongly enough to actually disallow these tack ones? If the rules for formations say "you get x" and the rules for slot-less add ons say "if you have x, you can take y" then the latter stands regardless of the former.

 

I've gotta go check the section...

 

I wouldn't say that the formation counts as "taking" those units. As I understand it you are choosing the formation, which contains specific units, but those units themselves aren't a listed part of your army, the formation is.

[skeletoro]

Hmm Vash, that seems kinda counterintuitive to me. Is there a rulebook reference supporting that? The section entitled "the force roster" doesn't say anything like that, for instance.

[Quixus]

A unit can only be part of one detachment. Lone Wolves are enabled by having troops choices or wolfguard or Wolfguard TDA in your army. So Arjac's Shieldbrothers would allow you to take another Lone Wolf but he would not be part of the detachment (formations have a fixed list of units not a fixed number of FOC slots) and thus would not benefit from the formation's special rules. Since the number of Lone Wolves is limited by the number of eligible units in the army you are allowed to have up to four in an army consisting of two CADs with 1 HQ and two troops each, but you could freely distribute them amongst the two detachments.

[Frater Cornelius]

My personal take would be that a formation contains what it says on th box. It is supposed to be a set group of famous dudes.

In the end it would come down to the TO or agreement of the opponent.

[skeletoro]

Again, it says a formation contains a 'specific' grouping of units but it does not say it is 'fixed' and I don't think 'specific' necessarily negates the rules for slot less choices. The section says that slot-less units can be taken 'even if the detachment... had no slot for their battlefield role' and 'must join the same detachment as [the void claws].'

 

So you would have to put the lone wolf in the void claws detachment ("must join the same detachment"). The fact that formations lack FO slots is specifically stated to be irrelevant ("even if the detachment ... had no slot for their battlefield role")  and as far as I can tell nothing else about the way formations are laid out in the rules prevents you from doing this. (except perhaps the word 'specific' but I'm not sure that really overrides tack ons where another rule allows them)

[Lucien Eilam]

Nope.

 

"Instead of including a Force Organisation chart, the Army List Entries that comprise a Formation are listed on it, along with any special rules that those units gain."

 

If the unit isn't listed, it doesn't comprise part of the Formation.

[Quixus]

Again, it says a formation contains a 'specific' grouping of units but it does not say it is 'fixed' and I don't think 'specific' necessarily negates the rules for slot less choices. The section says that slot-less units can be taken 'even if the detachment... had no slot for their battlefield role' and 'must join the same detachment as [the void claws].'

 

So you would have to put the lone wolf in the void claws detachment ("must join the same detachment"). The fact that formations lack FO slots is specifically stated to be irrelevant ("even if the detachment ... had no slot for their battlefield role")  and as far as I can tell nothing else about the way formations are laid out in the rules prevents you from doing this. (except perhaps the word 'specific' but I'm not sure that really overrides tack ons where another rule allows them)

You forget the other part of the rules about slotless units: "These units can be included in any Detachment, even if all the slots of the appropriate Battlefield Role are filled with other units or if the Detachment had no slot for their Battlefield Role, but they must still adhere to any restrictions detailed on the Detachment and its own Army List Entry." Emphhasis mine.

 

A formation sheet contains a list of specific units that form the formation. If the slotless unit is not one of those specific units (i.e. a lone wolf is neither Arjac nor WGTDA with TH/SS) it cannot be added to the formation. Warhammer 40K is a permissive rule sets so "You may do this" means "You may do this and nothing else."

[Donkalleone]

Throwing my 2 Cents in. I highly doubt what you want to do is possible and i think GW made sure that it doesnt work! While im 100% sure it is in no way Possible to gain a Formation bonus (HOW/Shieldwall for Arjac SB) , I think it could benefit from the general Rulez of the COF (Sagaborn , Kingsguard , Firstamong equals).

But the SW Codex makes sure to never mention Wolfguard in the Lone Wolf Section Entry (Even Fluff) so the great WS+1/Pref. Enemy isnt even open to argue.

And yes i think u can take 1 LW for the WGT in the formation, its the general rule of SW, but not as a part of the formation.

[skeletoro]

Lucien, that begs the questions given that slot-less units are explicitly stated to be allowed in any detachment that meets the conditions (formations are detachments too) even if that detachment lacks an appropriate slot.

To paraphrase the logic of it:

A) Formation is comprised of unit x.

One y can be taken for each x in your army. It is placed in the same detachment as that x, and this is explicitly allowed even if the detachment doesn't have a slot for a y.

To respond 'but A says the formation is comprised of x!' just begs the question with regards to B. B allows extra units in a detachment beyond what a detachment could usually contain.

@quixus: firstly, 'restrictions' refers to the detachment restrictions, which are a specific section in their datasheet. The units that comprise the formation are NOT part of this section.

Whether or not 40k is permissive, the rules for slot less units specifically give permission. You say 'you may do this and nothing else' but that is not what it would mean for the rules to be permissive. In fact, that interpretation makes an incoherent jumble of any set of rules that provide multiple permissions to players in separate sections. A permissive set of rules allow a player to do whatever the rules taken as a whole permit. Nothing about 'permissive rulesets' foreclose the possibility of a rule layering additional permissions over the top of others. Again: 'you can do x' and 'if you do x you can do y' imply permission to do y (if you do x).

@D, I'm pretty sure you got some of that wrong but if you want to provide reasons for your stance then there might be grounds for us to discuss it. You may be 100% certain of your position but I don't have anywhere near that level of certainty (either way) and so I must recourse to posting this thread to try and clarify things for myself. But perhaps you should read the posts above again before posting - getting kingsguard was never suggested by anyone and the rules for slot less units specifically state they must be placed in the same detachment as the qualifying unit.

[Lucien Eilam]

Lucien, that begs the questions given that slot-less units are explicitly stated to be allowed in any detachment that meets the conditions (formations are detachments too) even if that detachment lacks an appropriate slot.

Nope.

 

1) That explicit statement continues: "they must still adhere to any restrictions detailed on the Detachment". The list of units is a restriction which the unit isn't meeting, because it's not on there.

 

2) Even if you could take it, "along with any special rules that those units gain". It cannot be one of "those units", because it's not listed, so none of the special rules apply to it.

[casb1965]

A Formation isn't a Detachment so you cannot add to (or subtract from) a Formation in the same way you do with Detachments, it has fixed units.

[DanPesci]

Aye, for me, the formation is a fixed entity, you can take what is written on the formation and that is it, only those units will benefit from the formations rules.

 

If the formation includes a troops choice or WG choice, then fine, that lets you include a lone wolf in your army, without it using up a FO slot, but that lone wolf does not count as being part of that specific formation (as the formation can only ever contain the units listed in its specific rules) , and so wouldn't gain its rules. 

[skeletoro]

I think I'm going to bow out a little bit because I'm getting a little tired of repeating myself (and of the smug tone taken by some). I'd like to see what some other people say because I haven't really seen anything conclusive that disallows it even though I think it probably shouldn't be allowed.

[DanPesci]

 because I haven't really seen anything conclusive that disallows it even though I think it probably shouldn't be allowed.

 

This is my thing, i dont think its meant to be allowed, and im not one for trying to find loopholes in stuff ;)

 

reread your post (the A B X Y one) and i get where you are coming from (apologies if came across as smug, at work so typing fast haha), but is a formation not different to a detachment? Ie because a formation is a special type of detachment, the rules for adding in a slotless unit such as a lone wolf don't really apply....as you say, it could be interpreted one way or the other...but for me, im gonna go with what i thought was RAI, which is that lone wolves wouldn't benefit from a formations special rule....

 

but for discussions sake...lets say they could...

for the shield wall formation - even if the lone wolf was taken as part of that formation and got the special rules, it couldnt benefit from shield wall, as it cant be part of that unit (and is the rule not that they get shield wall if models in that unit are next to each other)?

 

The void claws one would be more open i guess...so you'd be talking about getting a turn 1 DSing lone wolf? Could be useful.

 

For the one that gives you WS5 (kingsgaurd??) pretty sure that only applies to WG and TWC...so a lone wolf wouldnt get the increase to WS anyway..

 

any more im missing?

[FenrisWolf]

I agree with Skeletoro that the rules as written is at best vague, at worst conflicting.  

 

 

“If the Army List Entry states that it can be included in an army that includes another specified unit, and that it does not take up a Force Organisation slot, it must join the same Detachment as that specified unit. In either case, these units are part of the Detachment for all rules purposes and will gain any appropriate Command Benefits.”

 

Excerpt From: Games Workshop Ltd. “Warhammer 40,000.” iBooks. 

 

This definitely implies that the Lone Wolf chosen would be in the formation.  The section on formations is more vague.

 

 

“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 simply to describe a number of special rules that apply when you include several specific units together. Instead of including a Force Organisation chart, the Army List Entries that comprise a Formation are listed on it, along with any special rules that those units gain. Unless stated otherwise, each individual unit maintains its normal Battlefield Role when taken as part of a Formation.”

 

Excerpt From: Games Workshop Ltd. “Warhammer 40,000.” iBooks. 

 

The first sentence there is the issue.  The Formation does not give all the gaming information we need.  It further goes on to say that the Formation retains the same battlefield role as the units would normally have.  To me this makes the Formation a "child detachment" of the original detachment.  Thus the Lone Wolves would go in the "parent detachment".  

 

Can you have a Battleforged army that is composed only of one or more Formations?  The Champions of Fenris implies that the Champions of Fenris Formation is a new Formation and is nothing more than all the previously listed Formations taken together.  Can that be your entire army? It's certainly enough points!

[Lucien Eilam]

This definitely implies that the Lone Wolf chosen would be in the formation

Only if you ignore the rest of the paragraph: "they must still adhere to any restrictions detailed on the Detachment".

 

The first sentence there is the issue. The Formation does not give all the gaming information we need. It further goes on to say that the Formation retains the same battlefield role as the units would normally have.

And again, you've skipped over that pesky sentence in the middle: "Instead of including a Force Organisation chart, the Army List Entries that comprise a Formation are listed on it".

 

Can you have a Battleforged army that is composed only of one or more Formations?

Yes.

[FenrisWolf]

Ok, so if the Lone Wolf that the Formation allows does not go in the Formation (which the sentence you point out seems to state), where does it go?  

[Quixus]

It cannot go anywhere unless the army ceases to be a battleforged one and becomes unbound, but then the units making up the formation would cease to be a formation.