What counts as a <Regiment> keyword?

[Plasmablasts]

So, the question of whether "Militarum Auxilia" can be used as a <Regiment> keyword has been brought up in a few threads now (which might then allow orders to be given to abhuman units).

 

It looks like this has only come up because the Index specifically excludes "Militarum Tempestus" as a <Regiment>. It does raise the question then whether any other faction keywords for Astra Militarum units could be considered as <Regiments>, such as Militarum Auxilia, Scholastica Psykana or Aeronautica Imperialis. These could create some interesting projects: the abhuman regiment that others have suggested; a detachment "guarding" (in all senses) a division of Psykers; an Imperial Navy landing party. I've not had chance to work through the rules implications for these (ordering Bullgryns potentially could be nasty, but not sure if there'd be much to gain from ordering Wyrdvanes, for example). There would be some balance from the loss of access to the buffs from the Cadian and Catachan characters, and that loss will probably be more pronounced when we get a Codex. So, is this interpretation of the keyword system valid?

[gilt_imp]

So, the question of whether "Militarum Auxilia" can be used as a <Regiment> keyword has been brought up in a few threads now (which might then allow orders to be given to abhuman units).

 

It looks like this has only come up because the Index specifically excludes "Militarum Tempestus" as a <Regiment>. It does raise the question then whether any other faction keywords for Astra Militarum units could be considered as <Regiments>, such as Militarum Auxilia, Scholastica Psykana or Aeronautica Imperialis. These could create some interesting projects: the abhuman regiment that others have suggested; a detachment "guarding" (in all senses) a division of Psykers; an Imperial Navy landing party. I've not had chance to work through the rules implications for these (ordering Bullgryns potentially could be nasty, but not sure if there'd be much to gain from ordering Wyrdvanes, for example). There would be some balance from the loss of access to the buffs from the Cadian and Catachan characters, and that loss will probably be more pronounced when we get a Codex. So, is this interpretation of the keyword system valid?

 

Simple quick answer: We don’t know.

GW should release a statement soon though, or a FAQ, and quickly.

 

Today in a GW store several people asked the same. The staff admitted they didn’t know for sure – first it was stated that NO “Militarum Auxilia” could not be chosen as a regiment, citing the very same argument already presented about the use of “Militarum Tempestus”, but due to many other ideas put forward they kind of got a bit iffy about it in the end.

 

There were several arguments and more milder thoughts put forward. Ranging from examples of other Regiments GW has given and how their rules interact, like Stracken & Harker being “Catachan” and their orders/buffs only affecting “Catachan” units.

 

Also, if we look at all keywords of <regiments>, and in reverse too…

Why don’t characters already have <Militarum Auxilia> as a keyword somewhere?

 

My own gut feeling is a no, but I would gladly accept it if approved. I feel like people want it be a yes, so they can capitalise on giving order/buffs to units like Ogryns, Bullgryns and Ratling snipers. I would like it to be a yes for the modelling opportunities, a specific ab-human regiment, or ogryn regiment would be interesting and cool. If ab-human regiments were their own thing, would they have their own officers too?

[joschlumpf]

I would say no. This makes no sense at all. If things like Scholastica Psykana and Aeronautica Imperialis are valid regiment (which is total  if you "use" the 40k lore) things like Adeptus Arbites and Adeptus Custodes would also be valid.

 

They specifically exclude Militarum Tempestus because there is a force in the Index books with this name and models for it but not for the rest of the organizations you have mentioned.

 

The keyword says REGIMENT not ORGANIZATION. It´s like chapter for Marines or legion for chaos.

[Nicodemus Doloroso]

I think that joschlumpf has the right of it.

 

While the rule section describing the use of <regiment> does describe the Militarum Tempestus as a "regiment", I think it is pretty clear that you cannot give "Militarum Tempestus" as a regimental designation to regular Imperial Guard infantry or conscript squads. Likewise, you can't give Militarum Tempestus to regular command squads and it seems logical to me that this would be the same for the other organizations listed (I believe that Scholastica Psykana and Aeronautica Imperialis are not even part of the Astra Militarum so those examples are right out since it says members of the AM belong to regiments).

 

What they're talking about with regiments is Cadian, Catachan, Vostroyan, Mordian, Death Korps of Krieg, home-brew regiment, etc.

 

Abhumans are never actually the part of a Cadian regiment, for example, they are merely attached to it. 

 

To me this seems the common-sense reading RAI, although it's true RAW is not explicit enough to say 100% for the rules lawyer that you can't make Auxilia your regiment. Militarum Tempestus clearly can't be chosen as your regiment.

[Brother Captain Ed]

None of this will matter when we get a codex. It will be *exactly* like chapter tactics in 7th: You will take some keyword with a specific effect and that will be that. It's only weird now because we see the rule as all restriction and no bonus.

[Plasmablasts]

I think I've been guilty of conflating two ideas in this thread:

 

1) Using the <Regiment> keyword to access benefits for units which would not normally (or be intended to) have them. I agree that is probably against the rules as intended and smacks of "rules lawyer" behaviour, though, when more <Regiment>-specific buffs are available through a Codex, the loss of those may balance things out.

 

2) More interestingly to me, choosing <Regiment> titles which are not actually Astra Militarum regiments allows you to explore factions which could represented by Guard, even if they're not Guard themselves. Examples:

 

<Scholastica Psykana> or <Astra Telepathical>: think of the "minders" for the battle Psykers in " Only in Death ";

 

< Frateris Militia>: Conscript squad accompanying a SoB army;

 

<Ordo Reductor>: a battery of artillery accompanying an Ad Mech force;

 

<Ultramar PDF>: not strictly Astra Militarum but hardly abusing the fluff.

[Brother Captain Ed]

I think I've been guilty of conflating two ideas in this thread:

 

1) Using the <Regiment> keyword to access benefits for units which would not normally (or be intended to) have them. I agree that is probably against the rules as intended and smacks of "rules lawyer" behaviour, though, when more <Regiment>-specific buffs are available through a Codex, the loss of those may balance things out.

 

2) More interestingly to me, choosing <Regiment> titles which are not actually Astra Militarum regiments allows you to explore factions which could represented by Guard, even if they're not Guard themselves. Examples:

 

<Scholastica Psykana> or <Astra Telepathical>: think of the "minders" for the battle Psykers in " Only in Death ";

 

< Frateris Militia>: Conscript squad accompanying a SoB army;

 

<Ordo Reductor>: a battery of artillery accompanying an Ad Mech force;

 

<Ultramar PDF>: not strictly Astra Militarum but hardly abusing the fluff.

This is the point I was trying to make: there is no such thing as < Ultramar PDF>. You're right: it's totally fluffy and totally in bounds. Its even arguably a regiment. It just doesn't matter. Because there is no functional < Ultramar PDF> rule. You are totally free to explore them as a concept and a modeling scheme. More so than ever, really, thanks to the <Imperium> keyword. But saying "Oh all my <regiments> are < Ultramar PDF>" just means you can't use any characters.

 

It will be like the old chapter tactics system. When you lovingly paint a company of, say, Howling Griffons, no one says "Too bad you couldn't really explore the concept." they say "Rad Howling Griffons, man. Which chapter tactics are they using?" That's what the <Regiment> key word is. That's all.

Edited June 17, 2017 by Brother Captain Ed

[duz_]

I have the books in hand already.

Having gone through the various sections I dont think this the case at all and is certainly trying to bend the rules for advantage.

Without getting into any further rules debates the book does clearly seem to distinguish between regiments as we know them and the newly created auxilia detachments.

 

Even if people win the counter argument I highly suspect that the codex will list a set of regiments that can be selected.

 

I also suspect any further discussion on this particular topic should head to the rules sub forum once the books officially drop on the 17th.

[gilt_imp]

The following is taken straight from the 1st FAQ for 8th, page 3, thought it might be appropriate instead of starting a new thread in the rules...

 

Q: If I can choose a keyword for a unit, such as for Astra Militarum, could I choose that keyword to be, for example ‘Blood Angels’ or ‘Death Guard’?

 

A: No. In the example above, ‘Blood Angels’ is a Chapter of the Adeptus Astartes and ‘Death Guard’ is a Legion of the Heretic Astartes – neither of which are Regiments of the Astra Militarum.

 

 

Q: If I create an Astra Militarum Regiment of my own and name them, for example, the ‘Emperor’s Finest’, and I then also create an Adeptus Astartes Chapter of my own choosing, and also call them the ‘Emperor’s Finest’, do the abilities that work on the and/or keywords now work on both the Astra Militarum and Adeptus Astartes units?

 

A: No. The intent of naming Regiments, Chapters, etc. of your own creation is to personalise your collections and not to enable players to circumvent the restrictions on what abilities affect what units. It is also not intended to circumvent the restrictions on which units are able to be included in the same Detachment.

[Plasmablasts]

Thanks all. I think that looks pretty unarguable. Opportunities for fluff but not for rule abuse.

[duz_]

Thanks for the update! Hopefully it puts this discussion to rest for the remaining of 8th :)

[Bronze Katana]

I just posted the below in the 'Using Veterans Now?' thread.

Not arguing for argument's sake, I just don't believe it's settled.

 

-------------

 

Pity they don't cover it explicitly, because this doesn't resolve the issue at all. Not even with intent.

All it states is that you have to choose a regiment of the Astra Militarum.

 

'Cadian' isn't actually a regiment much like 'German' isn't a regiment, but the first page for Astra Militarum states that it is, and allows for 'Cadian' officers to issue orders to all Cadian regiments, like the Cadian 8th Armoured etc. 

 

Likewise, 'Militarum Auxilla' isn't a regiment, but by the same logic as for Cadia, a 'Militarum Auxilla' officer could issue orders to all Militarum Auxilla regiments, like the Gothic Sector 12th Penal Legion or whatever.

 

Militarum Tempestus is explicitly not allowed, but then the same page states "you can use any of the other regiments that you have read about, or make up your own". I've certainly read about Militarum Auxilla.

 

I won't be using it, but the rules don't block it.

[joschlumpf]

The officers and the soldiers will normally be of the same regiment. How often do you see a regiment deploying with officers of another regiment?

 

If you compare "Cadian" to "German" you have to do the same with other regiments. The German army will never take orders from a officer of another country (except from Austrians during World Wars it seems :P). "Militarum Auxilia" soldiers get orders from "Militarum Auxilia" officers. But at the moment we don´t have Auxilia-officers. Just because the models don´t exists (only at the moment I hope), doesn´t mean they don´t exists in "reallife".

 

The rules don´t block it, because they are made for "normal" players and not "power" players who use every bad wording of the rules to get an advantage. No Astra Militarum player with knowledge of the lore will play them like that, except for story missions.

 

The only thing I don´t understand is, why commissars are not allowed to give orders or buffs to auxilias. (Like the "It´s dark in dere" rule of the Ogryns)

[Gen.Steiner]

You can be super specific:

<Regiment: Rigellian LIX Mechanised> - only this Regiment can benefit, and it can only be applied to units from the Rigellian LIX Mechanised, not the Rigellian XX Infantry or the Rigellian V Armoured or the Rigellian MCX Artillery.

or generic:

<Regiment: Rigellian> - any Rigellian unit can benefit.

or vague:

 

<Regiment: Battlegroup Z> - any unit in this Battlegroup can benefit - like these Tallarns and this Catachan and this Vostroyan...

[NatBrannigan]

I love that someone actually has to ask that if you name your regiment "Blood Angels" you can benefit from Blood Angel Character Auras and give orders to Blood Angels infantry...

 

Talk about desperately trying to abuse the rules! If not a joke then it's kind of sad really...

 

As for this Auxilia thing, no way it's allowed. It's just not specifically mentioned like Tempestus as a keyword is. However, I don't think it's a bad idea to let that be a thing, there just has to be a drawback as well. You gain the ability to order Ogryns and the like, but can't order other infantry perhaps. Exactly the kind of thing that might pop up in a codex proper if people ask Games Workshop nicely :)

 

In the Codex keyword Cadian means you hate Chaos, keyword Mordian mean you get an extra lasgun shot and keyword Auxilia means you can order Ogryns and Ratlings. Something like that. I hope so anyway...

[Corsovitt]

Looking at the rules in the index the commissars can give buffs to both ogryns and ratlings. 

 

Aura of Discipline: All friendly ASTRA MILITARUM units within 6" of a COMMISSAR can use the leadership of the commissar instead of their own.

 

Ogryn Faction Keywords: IMPERIUM, ASTRA MILITARUM, MILITARUM AUXILIA