Daemonic Ritual - Cost?

[Quixus]

Basically what it says in the title, do you have to reserve points for the units you may summon with Daemonic Ritual in Matched Play?

[CrystalSeer]

Yes

[Quixus]

Where can I find that rule?

[Ultrabear]

Its described in the rulebook under Reinforcement points in Matched play

[Quixus]

That's just silly. Thread can be closed.

Edited February 24, 2018 by Quixus

[Claws and Effect]

That's just silly. Thread can be closed.

It's not silly at all.

 

It's to stop games from ending up being 2000 points of something versus 2000 points plus 1500 points in daemons.

 

It isn't fair to end up with twice the points worth of units without paying for them.

[Quixus]

If they give a unit such an ability they should calculate the "summoning" units cost accordingly, after all the summoning isn't guaranteed at all and poses a threat to the summoning unit.

 

Do you have to set power points aside in open and narrative play as well?

[Ultrabear]

The restriction is only for matched play i belive, so you don't need to set aside power points in narrative and open play games for summoning.

[Gentlemanloser]

Can i jump in here with a question about Tervigons?

 

Does thier ability to generate 10 gants cost points as well?

 

Does it differ if they are reinforcing an existing squad, to crafting a new unit if 10?

[BluejayJunior]

I could be wrong. But I believe the general rule is that everything that adds a new unit costs reinforcement points, unless otherwise stated in the rule. 

[Eddie Orlock]

Does it differ if they are reinforcing an existing squad, to crafting a new unit if 10?

I recall that is does matter. Only new units need to be paid for per pg 214. I wonder if this raises an implication about dynamic combat squadding and that one custodes strat and if they're viewed as new units, should they be paid for?

[Gentlemanloser]

Yeah reinforcement costs are so ill defined.

 

Especially as some abilities outright state they do or do not cost.

 

While others are silent on the matter.

 

Perhaps combat squads and the AC get around it because the number of minis stay the same. You're not putting anything more down to what you started with.

Edited February 25, 2018 by Gentlemanloser

[Gentlemanloser]

Next tervigon question.

 

If we rule that a new unit of 10 costs reinforcement points, but replacing up to 10 in an existing unit doesn't.

 

Does The replacement take original unit size into account?

 

For example. Termagants come as min 10 max 30. If;

 

1. You have a unit of 10 on your roster can a Terivgon replace another 10 to take it to 20?

 

1. You have a unit of gants that were originally size 10 but are now 8 due to casualties. Can a Tervigon only replace the 2 lost? Can it take the unit up to 18?

 

Would any of the options above cost reinforcement points?

[McElMcNinja]

I think it can replace up to 10 models lost earlier.

[Gentlemanloser]

Can that take the unit over it's initial size if it remains under the maximum size?

[Oxydo]

Can that take the unit over it's initial size if it remains under the maximum size?

The rules states:

Alternatively,

you can replace up to 10 models lost earlier in the battle

in an existing unit of Termagants from your army that

is within 6" of the Tervigon. Models placed in this way

must be within 6" of the Tervigon and more than 1" from

the enemy. You can only replace models armed with

fleshborers. If you cannot place some of the models the

excess is discarded.

 

 

I would say you can't take a unit over it's initial size due to the whole "replace" wording.

[Tyriks]

Since it specifies they must have been lost earlier in the battle, it's for sure not able to take the unit over initial size.  

[Gentlemanloser]

Following on.

 

You have a unit of 20.

 

Turn 1, they lose 7 (dropping to 13).  You replace 7 (Now 20 again).

 

Turn 2, they lose 4 (dropping to 16).  They have "lost" 11 gants so far, earlier in the battle.

 

Can the Tervigon replace 10 of the lost 11, and take the unit to 26?

[Lord_Caerolion]

I would argue they can't, as some of those "lost" models have already been "found". You can't bring an already revived model back to life again.

[Plasmablasts]

I would argue they can't, as some of those "lost" models have already been "found". You can't bring an already revived model back to life again.

I don’t think that argument would stand, as the total number of models lost is lower than the starting number, so the second wave of replacements in this example could still be “original” models. Plus, I don’t think anything in the wording implies that a model can’t be replaced more than once.

 

For what it’s worth, the rule as quoted does not state “once per turn” or anything similar, so that suggests the maximum is per game. However, I might be missing a relevant phrase from the wording that presumably preceeds “Alternatively”.

[Lord_Caerolion]

 

I would argue they can't, as some of those "lost" models have already been "found". You can't bring an already revived model back to life again.

I don’t think that argument would stand, as the total number of models lost is lower than the starting number, so the second wave of replacements in this example could still be “original” models. Plus, I don’t think anything in the wording implies that a model can’t be replaced more than once.

 

For what it’s worth, the rule as quoted does not state “once per turn” or anything similar, so that suggests the maximum is per game. However, I might be missing a relevant phrase from the wording that presumably preceeds “Alternatively”.

 

 

That's not what the question was, though. This is talking about a unit that has a starting size of 20, having taken 11 casualties over the battle, but due to replacements currently has 16 models. You can only "replace" another 4, to bring it back up to the original starting size of 20. You can only replace something once, unless GW is using a different definition. When you replace the casualty, it no longer exists, as there's now a "living" model in its place. I can't replace a broken item more than once, as when I do it the first time, the broken item is no longer there to be replaced again.

[Gentlemanloser]

How many minis has that unit lost over the course of the battle?

 

11 or 4?

[Brother Casman]

Why are we discussing whether a Tervigon can take a unit over it's starting size in a thread about reinforcement costs?

[Tyriks]

They lost 11, but only 4 are still lost. Replaced models aren't lost at the time the rule checks to see how many it can spawn.

[Eddie Orlock]

Why are we discussing whether a Tervigon can take a unit over it's starting size in a thread about reinforcement costs?

Because the thread scope has been interpreted as encompassing some more general inquiries about placing rule generated models on the table; no-one has yet argued circularly, though this condition is perilously close; and the users seem to have remained relatively polite to one another about it.