Ynnari Tactics - Initial impressions

It seems identical to the Court scenario in which case I'd say it's legit RAW.

Nothing in the main book or BRB FAQ says you can't modify the contents of a formation above and beyond what it calls for. Merely that you can't trade a basic HQ for the named version (The example is Pask), and that a meta-detachment can't substitute similar formations for it's core requirements (White Scars Kauyon core formation in a regular gladius)

Edit: @Jimsolo Since Formations straight up don't use FOC slots (but do maintain them for other rules purposes) would you mind citing somewhere where it actually states that lack of free FOC slot is a restriction to take a unit? I'd imagine that request to be impossible.

The 3 new characters have permission to mix factions - that's it.

There is nothing about them not taking up slots

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying formations don't use slots. What slot they take up is irrelevant. They can be included in any detachment.

Massaen wrote:

The 3 new characters have permission to mix factions - that's it.

There is nothing about them not taking up slots

This. If I see someone trying to stuff a Yncarne in a Grotesquerie I'm going to start bringing my rock with me to game nights again.

any detachment. Bring your rocks. If you want to field them that's fine if you want to throw them you best have great reflexes.

A formation is not a detachment.

Yes it is. Page 121.

It's a special type of detachment with specific limitations. No TO would let this fly, and if I saw someone try it at my table I'd either demand to run Unbound myself or not play.

And I would let you play unbound or allow you to forfeit if we were playing in an environment were you could not do so.

A formation is still a detachment.

Any detachment.

Specific trumps General.

Formation restrictions in and of themselves are not enough to preclude an any case permission as GW has not anyway said that they are.

False. You don't have an "any case" permission to do so. I do. I'm willing to say that is a lie since you should absolutely know that statement isn't true.

The formation has set units. You can't add to something that has set units. The Ynnari HQs still occupy slots.

Yes I can because I have specific permission to do so to it's overarching category. You aren't arguing raw. You are arguing what you want to be. For the last time: Slots don't matter.

Believe what you want, play what you want. Try explaining this to a TO and have fun revising your list on a cocktail napkin 15 minutes before the round starts.

Oh I won't. I'll present 2 lists. This one and a hard min-max 5 days in advance and we'll see what they let me play. Day of I'll hand the judge a transcription of my communication with the TO if anyone complains.

You're like those people who said Grav Amps forced you to reroll the entire result.

I mean the 'Arvard 'ard boys are the reason international competitive play died in the mid aughts. I'm literally a satellite for the most toxic community there ever was.

But can pink horror summon?

Not anymore because GW explicitly issued an errata that says so. If your TO doesn't condone that particular errata due to improper format then the answer is absolutely.

I agree with this presumption. I'm not going to call it an interpretation because it's absolutely factual.

Do we have a list of everything that cares about ones "army"? This is a new mechanic that simply hasn't been implemented well. So far I count the Imperial Triumvirate and the USF (No chaos) any thing else?

Secondarily: Are there any artifacts that opens up that make an archon cost efficient or good at somehting specific?

The permission to take the Triumvirate in any detachment does not contain any language that would allow you to bypass other restrictions, namely FOC restrictions. You can take them in any detachment in which they would legally fit. (Such as a Craftworld Eldar CAD, a Dark Eldar allied detachment, or a Covenite Coterie detachment.)

You cannot take them in a formation that they aren't listed for, or in a detachment where there are no FOC slots for them to fit into.

FOC restrictions are inconsequential to formations. Were we discussing an USF then I'd totally agree with you. We aren't so I don't

Simple question @jimsolo do you feel the same way about the Court of the Archon? And if not, aside from lacking an FOC slot, which formations don't care about, what's different?

Instead of a force organization chart, the force organization is determined by the narrow list of restrictions.

The extra line in the Court of the Archon about not using up an FOC slot is the key difference.  That's what allows formations which include an Archon to take a Court.  It's more than wording, it's an indication of intent: it tells us that the Archon is always supposed to have access to his bodyguards, even when the construction of a detachment might not otherwise allow this.  

The Ynnari Triumvirate, on the other hand, contains a different proviso: it tells us that their inclusion is allowed regardless of Faction.  

Trying to interpret the rules to allow a Corpsethief Claw to take Yvraine seems unreasonable.


Edited to remove several extraneous and off-topic posts.  By all means please continue the 'Extreme RAW' thread, though.

See you are using provisions to the rule to argue for intent. I'm taking a RAW steamroller and arguing that the preliminary clause is what gives permission for the choice in either case with the followup provisions merely modifying the meta-data for the unit. In the courts case this meta modification is the loss of HQ status for scenario play, In the Ynnari scenario it's the additional permission necessary to ignore improper faction designation.

Neither provision interacts with the macro-level structure of a detachment merely the meta data that guides it.

Yes I agree that the CTC example is certainly not RAI, but I'm not convinced that it isn't currently RAW.

And will do! Where would you like it? It's sort of tactics focused but has the potential to get expansive and spammy. Nevermind found yours.

I already started one in 40k general discussion, and included the removed examples. I'll happily join you there shortly.

However, on topic, we HAVE to consider intent when playing. Otherwise the whole game breaks down. As that thread will show, playing solely based on RAW ends in disaster.

Hence the rock.