This came up in a game last night. If a commander with strict orders is defeated, does the card still function? My first instinct was no. But in reviewing the rules, we could find nothing that says the unit must be in play for the card to function. Since the commander with strict orders does not need to be the commander issuing the orders to function, it seems like the commander with the upgrade does not need to be in play for it to function.

When a miniature is defeated, it is removed from the battlefield and cannot be used for the remainder of the game. RR, p. 31.

If you cannot use the miniature anymore I would say that this includes all of the upgrades attached to it, too.

Even though the commander doesn't need to issue orders by himself for strict orders to work, you still need to use the upgrade card. But if you can't use the unit anymore, you also can't use his upgrade cards, because the card enhances that unit, not your army:

Upgrade cards represent elements like gear, weapons, and additional troopers that enhance units. RR, p. 70.

Tl,dr: Unit gone =》Upgrade gone

That's the problem though. Nowhere does it say that unit gone => upgrade gone. Thematically, for example' the entire squad is under strict orders. That is why it doesn't matter who is issuing orders, or how far away they are each round for Strict Orders to apply. And in the classic "Do as the rules say, not as the rules don;t say" Nowhere we could find does it say that a unit removed from the battle removes it's upgrades. It says if a commander is removed, then you can't use their command cards. But not that their upgrades go away. And by virtue of that, there is a very strong argument that SO is still in play. It just so happens SO is the only upgrade I can think of that *could* be useful without the unit in play.

I was just hoping someone could pinpoint a rule either way that we missed that would definitively show one way or the other.

By that logic, improvised orders will also work, if the commander is defeated. That card has been released for over a year now and strangely noone plays it that way.

(sarcasm) I guess thousands of Legion players never looked at the rules and played the game wrong (/sarcasm). Or maybe they just had the same logical conclusion that I had (see post above) and they didn't need a written rule.

There is no pinpoint rule for it, since there was no need for one.

We can argue if they should add that rule, but I think it is clear how this situation should be handled.

If we continue this thread like this, it will all come down to a "rules as intended" vs. "rules as written" discussion. 😉

"Upgrade Cards represent elements [...] that enhance UNITS"

If a unit is gone, of course any special rules of that unit are gone as well.

Nowhere does it state that you can't use cards you didn't pack into your list. So why bothering to even bring strict orders to the field in the first place?

This is what I like to call an Air Bud rule, ie. there's no rule that says a dog can't play basketball. Because the intent is so painfully clear that it was assumed that it was unnecessary to spell it out with a rule.

Upgrades are attached to units, not armies. If the unit is removed, the upgrade goes with it.

9 hours ago, Lochlan said:

This is what I like to call an Air Bud rule, ie. there's no rule that says a dog can't play basketball. Because the intent is so painfully clear that it was assumed that it was unnecessary to spell it out with a rule.

Upgrades are attached to units, not armies. If the unit is removed, the upgrade goes with it.

By the same argument having a comms specialist get killed out of a unit should lose you that units comm slot, which isn't the case, the comms slot remains after the specialist is killed. This isn't the same situation that is being asked but it is close.I

At tournaments it is often the judges call to side on a rule as it is written and not always how it is supposed to work,or intended to work or even assumed to work. To solve disputes (in law as well as in a rules call at a tournament) they will look at what is written, given the info that I see in the book, as written the card stays active after the death of who it was given to. So either my search fu is wrong and I've missed a rule that states what happens to upgradea, or FFG need to errata the rules to say that when a unit is removed it's upgrades are also.

4 hours ago, syrath said:

By the same argument having a comms specialist get killed out of a unit should lose you that units comm slot, which isn't the case, the comms slot remains after the specialist is killed.

Let me paraphrase what I said before: upgrades are attached to units, not models. The Comms specialist adds a comms slot upgrade to the unit.

3 minutes ago, Lochlan said:

Let me paraphrase what I said before: upgrades are attached to units, not models. The Comms specialist adds a comms slot upgrade to the unit.

The only exception being the upgrades that are part of specific models, such as the droids and heavy weapons. Which are specifically called out in the rules.

But building on what Lochlan has been saying, the upgrades are part of the unit and, per the rules, "When a miniature is defeated, it is removed from the battlefield
and cannot be used for the remainder of the game." Unit upgrades (excepting the ones enumerated above) add abilities to all the miniatures in the unit. So if all the minis in the unit are removed, the abilities added by any upgrades, such as Improvised Orders and Strict Orders can't be used either.

If you're still questioning this, use the rules question fiction on the website and get an answer direct from Alex Davy.

51 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

The only exception being the upgrades that are part of specific models, such as the droids and heavy weapons. Which are specifically called out in the rules.

But building on what Lochlan has been saying, the upgrades are part of the unit and, per the rules, "When a miniature is defeated, it is removed from the battlefield
and cannot be used for the remainder of the game." Unit upgrades (excepting the ones enumerated above) add abilities to all the miniatures in the unit. So if all the minis in the unit are removed, the abilities added by any upgrades, such as Improvised Orders and Strict Orders can't be used either.

If you're still questioning this, use the rules question fiction on the website and get an answer direct from Alex Davy.

I'm actually with the fact that the upgrades are part of the unit and when the unit goes so does the upgrade I.just can't find it in the rules, and often it's what's in the rules that judges have to call from.

7 hours ago, syrath said:

I'm actually with the fact that the upgrades are part of the unit and when the unit goes so does the upgrade I.just can't find it in the rules, and often it's what's in the rules that judges have to call from.

It's a combination of rules. "Upgrades enhance units" and "units can't be used once out of play."

Looking at the forum, this was well understood for Improvised Orders, and Strict Orders has the same application. The upgrade is associated with a particular unit, when that unit is removed from play, their special rules (which includes upgrades!) cannot be used.

Judges also have to use common sense, and I am struggling to think of miniature games wherein upgrades bought for a particular unit continue to operate once that unit is removed from the board.

If you're that concerned about it not being in the rules, it's still worth contacting FFG through the rules question tool. If they don't get asked questions directly, they won't know something is wrong (like when armament upgrades by the rules did nothing).

On 1/29/2020 at 12:38 PM, Caimheul1313 said:

It's a combination of rules. "Upgrades enhance units" and "units can't be used once out of play."

Looking at the forum, this was well understood for Improvised Orders, and Strict Orders has the same application. The upgrade is associated with a particular unit, when that unit is removed from play, their special rules (which includes upgrades!) cannot be used.

Judges also have to use common sense, and I am struggling to think of miniature games wherein upgrades bought for a particular unit continue to operate once that unit is removed from the board.

If you're that concerned about it not being in the rules, it's still worth contacting FFG through the rules question tool. If they don't get asked questions directly, they won't know something is wrong (like when armament upgrades by the rules did nothing).

I do know they also keep an eye on the forums, however some rulings do not follow common sense like the situation where you have commanding presence on Krennik and he issues an entourage order to his death trooper you can issue an order of the unit is at range 1 2 or 4 but not 3 since commanding presence let's you issue orders you give out at range 4 and entourage gives them out at range 1-2. If this has been errata'd since one the main judges at a major tournament ruled on that , it may not be possible any more (but I don't believe it has).

Edit I just checked the 1.51 RRG and it actually clarified the ruling

Game effects that alter the range at which a unit issues orders or can be issued orders, such as from upgrade cards, can effect the range of the entourage keyword.

On 1/28/2020 at 9:01 PM, syrath said:

I.just can't find it in the rules, and often it's what's in the rules that judges have to call from.

I can't speak for all judges. But as one of the judges from LVO (and Invader League, and YBTL) I'd say the RRG is already clear enough to rule that upgrade cards equipped to a defeated unit are no longer in play. Upgrade cards are equipped to and enhance units, and defeated units cannot be used anymore.

@syrath Trusting that someone happen to notice it on the forum is significantly less reliable than sending a direct message to the company. Given how long some flame wars and trolls are allowed to post on these forums, it seems lightly regulated, relying more on the "report" feature.

And to me, the ruling on Krennik was always 'common sense' per the rules as they were written previously. I don't know why you don't think that IS 'common sense' since it also followed the wording of the rules, as I outlined in the linked forum posting. Common sense here is (to me and many others) if a unit is removed from the game, then all of it's upgrades are also removed from the game.

35 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@syrath Trusting that someone happen to notice it on the forum is significantly less reliable than sending a direct message to the company. Given how long some flame wars and trolls are allowed to post on these forums, it seems lightly regulated, relying more on the "report" feature.

And to me, the ruling on Krennik was always 'common sense' per the rules as they were written previously. I don't know why you don't think that IS 'common sense' since it also followed the wording of the rules, as I outlined in the linked forum posting. Common sense here is (to me and many others) if a unit is removed from the game, then all of it's upgrades are also removed from the game.

It wasn't at the time and Krennik having a donut where he cannot have an order given out isn't common sense. The rules at the time did not include the wording I give you this was only added in November, the ruling was prior to that and the majority of people didn't think that commanding presence should apply because out gives an additional range band to an entourage order outside a range nd where they could not, IE it doesn't make sense that you couldn't give out the order at range 3 ,but you could at 4.

Edit and just for.clarification I'm on the side that would say the upgrade goes off the table when the unit does. It's just that I've seen the rulings previously that were Rules as Written that don't make sense and I've also studied as an MtG judge where it's important that you follow RAW, however on this until I'm told otherwise I'm personally going with the"obvious" ruling rather than putting in a rules question myself since I only get about 20% of my questions ever answered.

@syrath The link I posted was from the original wording, before it was changed to specify that Commanding Presence does work. (posts are from May 14, 2019).

The fact that it leaves a donut is a product of the working specifying "At range 4" as opposed to "up to range 4," not whether or not Commanding Presence was "triggered" by issuing an order using Entourage. The original wording of Battlefield Meditation also allowed it to trigger off of Entourage, effectively meaning Palpatine + Guards meant you could give one order to any unit on the board every turn, in addition to the command card orders.

You cannot use it

2 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@syrath The link I posted was from the original wording, before it was changed to specify that Commanding Presence does work. (posts are from May 14, 2019).

The fact that it leaves a donut is a product of the working specifying "At range 4" as opposed to "up to range 4," not whether or not Commanding Presence was "triggered" by issuing an order using Entourage. The original wording of Battlefield Meditation also allowed it to trigger off of Entourage, effectively meaning Palpatine + Guards meant you could give one order to any unit on the board every turn, in addition to the command card orders.

I know but in a real world situation this doesn't make sense. Being able to not use a units upgrades after its destroyed also makes sense but point me to some wording in the rules that say you can't use strict orders after the commander is killed. I couldn't find any, so rules as written strict orders could still be used. Strict orders is different from other cards in that orders given by other commanders also benefit from it, since the card remains on the table so to speak, does this mean that , as per the rules , it is still active after the commanders death. A case could definitely be made IMO

14 minutes ago, syrath said:

I know but in a real world situation this doesn't make sense. Being able to not use a units upgrades after its destroyed also makes sense but point me to some wording in the rules that say you can't use strict orders after the commander is killed. I couldn't find any, so rules as written strict orders could still be used. Strict orders is different from other cards in that orders given by other commanders also benefit from it, since the card remains on the table so to speak, does this mean that , as per the rules , it is still active after the commanders death. A case could definitely be made IMO

Quote

P70
UPGRADE CARDS
Upgrade cards represent elements like gear, weapons, and additional troopers that enhance units.

P31
DEFEATED
When a miniature is defeated, it is removed from the battlefield and cannot be used for the remainder of the game.

How much clearer must it be?

I see there is no direct entry for what happenes to defeated units, but it's mentioned all the time throughout the document and the intent is so overwhelmingly clear. If it means so much to you, please write to the developers to clarify that. I for my part am done with this thread, have fun 😉 .

If we want to try and apply the rules to a real life example:

If Krennic is issuing Strict Orders and he dies, he is no longer issuing Strict Orders.

Understood?

You can't issue specific orders while dead IRL, so you also can't in-game.

6 hours ago, syrath said:

I know but in a real world situation this doesn't make sense.

Neither does the officer determining the range for the entire unit's weapons, the Entourage order distance being innately shorter, nor cover being determined solely from the unit leader to the target.

The donut did make sense from a rules reading standpoint, in that given the wording of the upgrade (and the rules at time of printing), that is how it is applied.

Upgrade cards stop working when the unit is defeated. This is based om Common Sense as well as years and years of ffg miniature games.

If you find a quote from the game developers I stand ready to change my mind.

10 hours ago, SailorMeni said:

How much clearer must it be?

I see there is no direct entry for what happenes to defeated units, but it's mentioned all the time throughout the document and the intent is so overwhelmingly clear. If it means so much to you, please write to the developers to clarify that. I for my part am done with this thread, have fun 😉 .

How about the fact that strict orders affects orders given by other commanders which, so it doesn't clearly affect just the unit it was attached to. I'm not an advocate of playing where upgrade cards stay on the table after the unit is destroyed , far from it in totally against it, but rules as written, which is how judges should judge things I've still not seen a rule that says it doesn't even including the quote you included. The two are not linked rules one describes upgrade cards , the other tells you what happens when a unit is defeated it doesn't actually say the attached upgrade cards are removed. It does infer it , but inferral is often personal viewpoint rather than a Crystal clear ruling, of which I can find none.

Edit - just to clarify I am on the side of believing that the upgrade goes with the unit, but I could not find a rule that confirms the same

25 minutes ago, syrath said:

How about the fact that strict orders affects orders given by other commanders which, so it doesn't clearly affect just the unit it was attached to.

It does provide the unit with the special rule written in the card, which happens to effect the other units in your army. Much like how Esteemed Leader affects the units in range 1, not the unit it is attached to. Improvised Orders doesn't affect the unit attached, and Compel affects all units in range 1-2. Upgrades effectively add text to the unit, which is what the first quoted rule indicates. The second quoted rule indicates that all special rules on a unit can't be used.

25 minutes ago, syrath said:

but rules as written, which is how judges should judge things I've still not seen a rule that says it doesn't even including the quote you included. The two are not linked rules one describes upgrade cards , the other tells you what happens when a unit is defeated it doesn't actually say the attached upgrade cards are removed. It does infer it , but inferral is often personal viewpoint rather than a Crystal clear ruling, of which I can find none.

There are 2 high-level judges (myself and TalkPolite) in this thread that have given their view, but here is a more specific breakdown of why RAW works right now:

Quote

Pg 70 - Upgrade Cards
Upgrade cards represent elements like gear, weapons, and additional troopers that enhance units.

Pg 31 - Defeated
When a miniature is defeated, it is removed from the battlefield and cannot be used for the remainder of the game.

Pg 70 - Unit

A unit is a miniature or collection of minis that functions as a
single fighting group.

Premises: upgrades enhance units. Units are composed of minis. Minis that have been defeated cannot be used anymore.

Conclusion: a unit whose component minis have all been defeated cannot be used anymore before it doesn't have any minis that can be a part of its collection. By extension, the upgrades attached to that unit are out of play. If you come across a judge that challenges this, they're going to have a hard time making their case.

If the concern is that this should be made more clear, maybe. I'd suggest writing to the devs to request that. If the concern is that the rules don't currently work this way , again I think a judge who rules the other way is just wrong.