RoW limitation question: What exactly count as an 'army?'

[Karsus]

Hi, I found some RoWs have restriction regarding an army. For example:

 

Orbital Assault - limitation

"Units that cannot be deployed via Deep Strike, either by having access to the special rule themselves or because they cannot be carried in a transport vehicle that has it (infantry in Drop Pods, for example) may not be chosen as part of the ARMY."

 

Armoured Spearhead - limitation

"All units with the Infantry type in the ARMY must either be purchased Dedicated Transports and start the game deployed inside them, or begin play transported inside another vehicle in the ARMY."

 

Sky Hunter Phalanx - limitation

"The only vehicles allowed in the ARMY are those that have the Skimmer or Flyer type."

 

But what exactly count as an 'army' in those paragraphs? As far as I know, AoD FoC chart consist of the Primary Detachment, Fortification Detachment, Lords of War Detachment and Allied Detachment.

 

Is the army on above sense only refer to the Primary (or Allied Legion using RoW) Detachment?

 

Or the whole force including the Primary, Fortification, LoW, and Allied?

 

(Like, if I use Orbital Strike RoW for Legion 1 both Legion 1 and Legion 2 (allied) must use Drop Pods / Deep Strike kind of sort)

 

Can someone clarify this for me? Thank you in advance.

[Marshal Loss]

Army/Force = everything, regardless of which detachment it is, if we're consistent about the wording.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Remember when your army was your army you brought to have a game with? The good times before Detachments and Formations blighted the game

[TheWolfLord]

Remember when your army was your army you brought to have a game with? The good times before Detachments and Formations blighted the game

It still is. An army is everything to bring and can be broken down into detachments and formations

[Elzender]

According to Betrayal (might be quite outdated now, don't have any of the updated red books), the Rites of War only affect the force's primary detachment, and allied forces may use different rites, but effects do not carry over. Reading that, my guess is that limitations don't do it either.

[Withershadow]

^as stated above. Basically army == detachment.

[rendingon1+]

So, recon co. allied detachment doesn't give me rerolls?

[Withershadow]

I would assume stuff that takes place before the game begins (like rolling to see who goes first) still takes effect, but your main detachment wouldn't be getting extra cover saves.

[NoLifeKing]

Army is your army, everything in your list, the stuff you have spent your points on, this as ever been the case and i don't see anything that has changed that concept to mean something different.

Rites of war have many limitations, and accordingly have an effect on stuff inside and outside of the detachement that takes it.

One of the best examples is that many RoWs deny you the chance to take an allied detachment, and this in itself should stand as an obvious example that you can't just ignore any limitations posed by a rite, based on the idea of it "only affecting the detachment" 

Another example being the ultramarines RoW, Vigil Opertii Mission, which clearly demands that you MUST take an allied detachment, and then gives buffs to the units in the mandatory allied detachment. 

So to close this off, most rites of war affect just the detachment it is taken for, but there are exceptions and in those exceptions, it is clearly stated what pieces of your army it affects and how. Besides most of the time limitations or bonuses provided by a rite of war are more often than not, very specific on what sort of models, units or factions its additional rules affect. 

So if the limitation tells you that you can't take something as part of your ARMY, then you can't take said units as part of your ARMY. Such limitations are the price of an rite of war, thats why they are optional, additional rules that lets you build an army around a certain theme or tactic. Also, Betrayal should be among the last books you look around for rules clearance atm.

[Withershadow]

Rites of war have many limitations, and accordingly have an effect on stuff inside and outside of the detachement that takes it.

 

"Effects of a Rite of War do not carry over to Allied Detachments from the Primary Detachment and vice versa."

 

This isn't from Betrayal, this is from the FAQ. This rule is unequivocal. Unless the Rite bonus or drawback specifically states it includes allied detachments (like in Sacrifical Offering), none of the bonuses or restrictions from one detachment's Rite carries over to the other.  The primary detachment is "an army". The allied detachment is also "an army".

[NoLifeKing]

"The ARMY cannot include any immobile units"
"The ARMY may not include a Fortification DETACHMENT or and Allied DETACHMENT"

These are exact lines from the newest Age of Darkness Armylist book, on the word bearers rite of war, and there the term Army is used to encompass your whole force, and not just your primary detachment, by directly stating that above mentioned optional DETACHMENTS belong to your ARMY.

Therefore it should be obvious to understand that the FAQ answer is meant to clear it up to everyone that, for example, salamanders can't share their move through cover to their auxilia allies across from the primary detachment to the allied detachment. Not to cut all links and effects of the RoW on the rest of your force, otherwise it should be deemed acceptable to ignore the rest of the limitations posed by the many RoWs available to us that affect your ARMY outside your primary detachment, such as preventing you from taking an allied detachment. 

In 7th Edition 40k, we were introduced 2 new ways of building your ARMY. The first being Battleforged method, in witch you build your ARMY with one or more DETACHMENTS, be they basic FOC type detachments like the Combined Arms Detachment, or formations that were introduced to us in the many supplements that followed. The Second being Unbound method, which allows you to build your ARMY out of any blend of units without the limitations and benefits of the rigid organization within the Battleforged method of building your ARMY. 

Detachments aren't considered an ARMY in themselves, but a battleforged ARMY is made out of DETACHMENTS. Disregarding this plain, simple and important core rule of the current edition of the game we are playing, should be considered uncommon ignorance of the contents of the rulebook, or just shameless hunger for powergaming. 

[Withershadow]

You're acting as if FW is at all consistent in their terminology.

 

40K army building rules are irrelevant, we play Age of Darkness.

[NoLifeKing]

You're acting as if FW is at all consistent in their terminology.

 

40K army building rules are irrelevant, we play Age of Darkness.

Your first line isn't an valid argument even on the school playgrounds, because with that logic, we could as well throw all the books into the trash and start throwing models at each other and scream nonsense since none of the rules don't apply to anything because there was few inconsistencies somewhere. 

 

Even if there are inconsistencies in terminology and rules, the term ARMY is not one that is questionable or debatable in anyway, and has never been.

 

Also, 40k ARMY building rules, as you, ironically referred to them as such, (thus only proving that the term "army" and its meaning is obvious at least to your subconsciousness if nothing else, even if you refuse to acknowledge it otherwise) are NOT irrelevant. Why? Because The Horus Heresy/Age of Darkness is based upon those same set of rules, because it is just an Expansion set with few rules tweaks here and there, and not an independent game in itself (at least not yet anyway) 

 

I am amazed that something so simple and obvious has to even be debated with anyone who is supposedly familiar with the game and its rules, and i'm starting to feel like i'm talking to an internet troll of some kind.

 

 

 

 

[Memento Of Prospero]

I have to agree with you here. The army encompasses everything.

[Ghorgul]

I agree totally, it should be clear what is the difference between army and detachment.
I guess its well veiled gamey and min-max attitude when people try to run 2 RoWs simultaneously.
I cannot make exhaustive list, but many of them set very explicit armywide restrictions. There's clear trend on the RoWs that they impose more heavier limitations than give benefits. People trying to run 2 RoWs is then natural as they want to just get the benefits but no drawbacks.

I have looked into these, for example Recon Company with Drop Assault Vanguard would be imo both fluffy and cool (and probably too effective). The rules were somehow worded in a way that it was difficult to make the combo work at all, or it would have been so heavily restricted that list building wasn't what I'd expect it to be.

[Ghorgul]

On FW site "The Horus Heresy 7th Edition Warhammer 40,000 FAQ & Errata", June 2016, states:

"Effects of a Rite of War do not carry over to Allied Detachments from the Primary Detachment and vice versa."

 

If you go read through Rite of War's as they have been listed in various books, they are always structured in following way:

Effects: *Rules text*

Limitations: *Rules text*

 

So clearly, Effects do not spread out to be armywide, but there is no mention of Limitations, so RAW if you run 2 RoWs your Whole Army will have to follow Limitations stated in both RoWs, so if the limitations are armywide, then you have to follow them armywide. And even with single allied detachment with RoW, your whole army/primary detachment must follow the Rules in Limitations set in that allied detachment's RoW.

 

As a continuation to my previous post, I went to check what the limitations were for Legion Recon Company and Drop Assault Vanguard:
Drop Assault Vanguard doesn't allow allied detachment. It has blanket limitations: "Only units that can deploy via Deep Strike or embarked upon a Transport vehicle with the Flyer type may be taken in the Army", no immobile units in the army, and curiously worded "the Army may not include a Fortification Detachment or an Allied detachment". So, RAW, the Drop Assault Vanguard can only be used alone, while LoW is allowed.

[Unknown Legionnaire]

Army = Army

Detachment = Detachment

Army =//= Detachment

 

Limitations and Effects are written in easily accessible sentences for the most part , sometimes a bit iffy because, you know (Forgeworld), but theoretically all are understandable if the reader applies some common sense. 

 

If you find yourself playing against someone trying to de-construct and re-formulate rules and RoW on a word-by-word level ... stop playing them. It won't be fun, believe me.

 

This thread makes my head explode, really.

[Ghorgul]

Army = Army

Detachment = Detachment

Army =//= Detachment

 

Limitations and Effects are written in easily accessible sentences for the most part , sometimes a bit iffy because, you know (Forgeworld), but theoretically all are understandable if the reader applies some common sense. 

 

If you find yourself playing against someone trying to de-construct and re-formulate rules and RoW on a word-by-word level ... stop playing them. It won't be fun, believe me.

 

This thread makes my head explode, really.

 

I think Thread has been quite useful so far, made at least me to go through the RoWs and rulings carefully through and I ended up learning how the Effects and Limitations actually stack and work together.

All in all the RoW system of 30k seems very well designed and written to limit all sorts of powerplaying using them, i.e. they have significant limitations and they do usually affect the whole army.

[Brother Captain Spud]

Does this mean i can have an IF primary detachment with stone gauntlet qhich prohibits deep striking and an allied detachment with u its that deep strike?

[Ghorgul]

Does this mean i can have an IF primary detachment with stone gauntlet qhich prohibits deep striking and an allied detachment with u its that deep strike?

Stone Gauntlet limit of no-deep striking is for that specific detachment only, so in my understanding the allied detachment would be free to deep strike.

[NoLifeKing]

Does this mean i can have an IF primary detachment with stone gauntlet qhich prohibits deep striking and an allied detachment with u its that deep strike? 

As said above, the limitations for the Stone Gauntlet RoW are Detachment based. Therefore don't affect any allied detachment you might take with your primary detachment

[Brother Captain Spud]

This is good. I want to run a deep striking close combat allied detachment to compliment my stone ganutlet gun line. Thinking wolves or blood angels.