PDA

View Full Version : Characteristic Tests and Combined Units; (Or Can Dwarfs REALLY be Initiative 4?)



Shas'O Vash
05-10-2010, 01:11
Before I get flamed at the stake, hear me out on this. I’m not sure if I like this interpretation, but it has come up in several large tournaments in the past month or so that I’ve been to; most of which have ruled rules as written.

The issue is concerning the last paragraph under Characteristics Tests on page 10 of the BRB, and I quote: “Where a model (or a unit) has more than one value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example, a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values.”

People have taken this to mean that when a character is in a unit (and under the Combined Units rules, characters and units count as a single combined unit, page 99) the entire unit gets to use the highest value, most likely the characters, for characteristic tests. For example, Purple Sun is cast at a unit of Dwarf Warriors (initiative 2) with a Dwarf Lord in it (initiative 4); the entire unit gets to make their initiative tests at initiative 4.

I understand that this might have some bearing on some of the more unusual units in the game (monsters and handlers etc. etc.) but I’m mostly concerned with the interaction of a Character inside of an unit that is required to take a characteristic test whether it is to perform an action, or avoid damage.

Synnister
05-10-2010, 01:40
To me that's how it works.

Ethos
05-10-2010, 03:37
RBRB FAQ

"Q: When a unit has multiple toughness values or armour saves do you use the value of the majority or in the case of a tie, the best (p42, 43)?

A: Yes, unless specified otherwise."


I think it's safe to assume that one can also add in initiative (among other stats). Does the quote you put up have "(or a unit)" or was that you? A model can be a part of a unit, but if it were a part of one, then it can not be a single unit by itself, unless of course it were to be by itself - at which point it would cease to be a part of another unit.

Purple Sun (and other spells that require characteristic tests) says that "the models" take the test (per the FAQ), not the unit. So for that case, the Dwarves are initiative 2 regardless of what else is in the unit.

decker_cky
05-10-2010, 06:24
You're reading it wrong.

For a test on a model, you use the model's best stat. For a test on a unit, you use the unit's best stat. The difference parses through the sentence.

ChrisIronBrow
05-10-2010, 07:21
You're reading it wrong.

For a test on a model, you use the model's best stat. For a test on a unit, you use the unit's best stat. The difference parses through the sentence.

Unfortunately, a model is a part of a unit, therefore it gets to use the highest value.

Shas'O Vash
05-10-2010, 12:08
RBRB FAQ

"Q: When a unit has multiple toughness values or armour saves do you use the value of the majority or in the case of a tie, the best (p42, 43)?

A: Yes, unless specified otherwise."


I think it's safe to assume that one can also add in initiative (among other stats). Does the quote you put up have "(or a unit)" or was that you? A model can be a part of a unit, but if it were a part of one, then it can not be a single unit by itself, unless of course it were to be by itself - at which point it would cease to be a part of another unit.

Purple Sun (and other spells that require characteristic tests) says that "the models" take the test (per the FAQ), not the unit. So for that case, the Dwarves are initiative 2 regardless of what else is in the unit.

Since this is talking about toughness and armor saves, I think this is referencing their use through normal hitting-wounding-saving play, not characteristic tests which is another issue entirely. The rule that I quoted at the top of the post is for characteristic tests only.

My other issue with this argument is that you're adding to or inferring things from a FAQ. If the WHFB 7th edition FAQs (horrible and contradictory as they were) teach us anything, read what the FAQ says, and only what the FAQ says.

ewar
05-10-2010, 12:45
The issue is concerning the last paragraph under Characteristics Tests on page 10 of the BRB, and I quote: “Where a model (or a unit) has more than one value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example, a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values.”



A characteristic test is taken by a model, in a unit. The model itself does not have multiple initiative values, as models within a unit are still separate models. Therefore this rule does not come into play when hitting infantry.

The template for purple sun hits many individual models which are part of a unit. Each has a single initiative value, so there is no confusion.

Where a single model has multiple initiative values (e.g. dwarf lord on shield bearers) you may use the highest characteristic.

Walgis
05-10-2010, 12:57
what ewar said :)

Shas'O Vash
05-10-2010, 13:28
A characteristic test is taken by a model, in a unit. The model itself does not have multiple initiative values, as models within a unit are still separate models. Therefore this rule does not come into play when hitting infantry.

The template for purple sun hits many individual models which are part of a unit. Each has a single initiative value, so there is no confusion.

Where a single model has multiple initiative values (e.g. dwarf lord on shield bearers) you may use the highest characteristic.

And this is how it would have been played in 7th edition. This is also what I think they meant. But what I (or we) think they meant and what they actually said are two different things. We could have a debate all day with what we think they meant or how they should have worded it. Personally, I think this rule is ripe for getting reworded in a future FAQ update.

The fact remains that the rule does not distinguish between models and units. In fact it explicitly says "or a unit"! I didn’t add that in myself or paraphrase it; I made it red and bold to emphasize that those three words make a pretty cut and dry rules-as-written argument for rank-and-file models in a unit using a character’s stat line for their characteristics tests.

ewar
05-10-2010, 13:58
But your confusing the target of the spell.

The spell doesn't affect "the unit" as a single entity. It only affects any actual models under the template. Therefore the victim of the spell is a model not a unit. Therefore only a single model with multiple initiative values would trigger the use of the wording that you've quoted.

If you were taking a single characteristic test for the whole unit, I would agree with you. But you're not. The individual models in the unit take a test just for themselves, not for the rest of the unit.

There really isn't any grey area.

Shas'O Vash
05-10-2010, 14:29
Props to ewar for the excellent argument! I like this interpretation better. I don’t have the BRB with me at work so I can’t look up the actual wording but I am inclined to agree with that.

Let’s just assume the wording in the BRB supports this for a second and consider these situations with our Dwarf Warrior unit with Dwarf Lord:

1. In that event that a spell like Purple Sun runs through the unit, it causes each model to take an initiative test. The model is the target, not the unit, and takes the test using their initiative 2 (or 4 for the Lord).

2. I can’t remember the spell but I know there is one that a unit has to take a strength test to do anything. In this situation, the unit is the target and can use the Lord’s strength 4 for the test.

Does this sound like a better interpretation?

decker_cky
05-10-2010, 18:06
That's the correct interpretation. Several terrain types force characteristic tests on a unit too.

ChrisIronBrow
05-10-2010, 19:23
But your confusing the target of the spell.

The spell doesn't affect "the unit" as a single entity. It only affects any actual models under the template. Therefore the victim of the spell is a model not a unit. Therefore only a single model with multiple initiative values would trigger the use of the wording that you've quoted.


That's really just an assumption on your part. A model within a unit, is a part of that unit. Therefore it is a unit. Your argument would be like claiming a bolt thrower is only allowed to hit one member of a unit since he is a "model" and not part of that unit.

At the very least the spell will affect the "unit" due to the possibility of panic tests.

Othewise, you could argue that a unit is not required to take a panic test for 25% because, "they were just models".

a18no
05-10-2010, 19:28
That's really just an assumption on your part. A model within a unit, is a part of that unit. Therefore it is a unit. Your argument would be like claiming a bolt thrower is only allowed to hit one member of a unit since he is a "model" and not part of that unit.

At the very least the spell will affect the "unit" due to the possibility of panic tests.

Othewise, you could argue that a unit is not required to take a panic test for 25% because, "they were just models".

The spell says: all model in the unit must pass an initiative test or die, they all test on the best characteristic they can. Having a lord faster on your side won't make you faster. Each model are testing.
If the spells would have says: the unit must pass an initiative test or me remove from play. Now you'd be able to use the characteristic of the lord on your side.

Don't try to find exception, the rule is VERY clear.

Shas'O Vash
05-10-2010, 20:11
I would say this rule is far from clear and should be addressed by the FAQ. Both points of view are perfectly acceptable interpretations of the rule. In other words, depending on how you read it, it can be successfully argued to either way. That being said, one interpretation makes perfect sense when you think about it while the other just “feels” like an attempt to exploit GW’s bad choice of words.

decker_cky
05-10-2010, 21:13
No. One properly parses it. The other doesn't, and is obviously against intent by the words included in the rule (irrelevant to parsing properly, but worth noting).

Grimskarr
06-10-2010, 03:05
I would say this rule is far from clear and should be addressed by the FAQ. Both points of view are perfectly acceptable interpretations of the rule. In other words, depending on how you read it, it can be successfully argued to either way. That being said, one interpretation makes perfect sense when you think about it while the other just “feels” like an attempt to exploit GW’s bad choice of words.I spent some time reading and re-reading the relevant sections in the rule book today ('cause, man, do I want my Dwarfs testing on their Lord's initiative when nasty King Xerxes comes a'knocking!).

Shas'O Vash is correct - the wording is such that both views can be successfully argued. This is a situation where GW really went and laid an egg (no doubt unwittingly, but it got laid none the less).

So here is a situation where all the rules lawyers need to revert to using common sense (AHH, NO, NOT THE LIGHT!!). And with that, I have to say that until a FAQ clears this up definitively, we should all play it as ewar has laid it out in his posts. Anyone not playing it this way is clearly a poor sport attempting to wiggle through a loop-hole and is not playing in the spirit of the game.

DaemonReign
06-10-2010, 05:36
I spent some time reading and re-reading the relevant sections in the rule book today ('cause, man, do I want my Dwarfs testing on their Lord's initiative when nasty King Xerxes comes a'knocking!).

Shas'O Vash is correct - the wording is such that both views can be successfully argued. This is a situation where GW really went and laid an egg (no doubt unwittingly, but it got laid none the less).

So here is a situation where all the rules lawyers need to revert to using common sense (AHH, NO, NOT THE LIGHT!!). And with that, I have to say that until a FAQ clears this up definitively, we should all play it as ewar has laid it out in his posts. Anyone not playing it this way is clearly a poor sport attempting to wiggle through a loop-hole and is not playing in the spirit of the game.

QFT!

This issue is the same kind of intentional misunderstanding that founded that heated debate on whether or not you can dispel certain spells at lower values than they are cast.

I saw this thread a few hours ago and didn't bother posting because I don't want to waste my energy arguing obvious crap like this. It seems, however, that sanity and common sense is "winning" in this thread (thanks to Ewar and others) and I'd just like to toll the bell an extra time in that spirit.

Chris_
06-10-2010, 05:49
This issue is the same kind of intentional misunderstanding that founded that heated debate on whether or not you can dispel certain spells at lower values than they are cast.No, there has been no such debate that I can recall. The one I think you are referring to is debating something completely different. However I can stretch this to having similarities to the Mindrazor and Inspiring Presence debate.

Ethos
06-10-2010, 12:23
As for my first post, I thought the FAQ was referring exactly to characteristic tests, or spells. In close combat, you always attack specific models - thus never take "the best" blah blah blah. If the model has a combined stat line, that's one thing. But the unit always takes the majority, or in case of a tie, the best.

ewar
06-10-2010, 12:39
That's really just an assumption on your part. A model within a unit, is a part of that unit. Therefore it is a unit. Your argument would be like claiming a bolt thrower is only allowed to hit one member of a unit since he is a "model" and not part of that unit.

At the very least the spell will affect the "unit" due to the possibility of panic tests.

Othewise, you could argue that a unit is not required to take a panic test for 25% because, "they were just models".

They're not the same at all - a bolt thrower has to nominate a target unit and the shooting rules have clear guidance on how those hits are allocated amongst a unit.

PSoX doesn't have a target - you place the template and move it as per the vortex spell rules, and individual models underneath are affected, most definitely not a unit as an entity in and of itself.


Cheers for the positive response from others, it's always nice to see some sanity in the rules forum occassionally (unless of course you're disagreeing with me, in which case you're a mindless fool :))

Kevlar
06-10-2010, 12:53
If something hits a unit, like something that says "distributed as per shooting" you use the highest unit value.

If something hits a specific model (like a template) you use that model's value. A character on a mount is still a single model so yes, you can use the monster's characteristic.

theorox
06-10-2010, 13:08
Leadership tests are different matters than other characteristic tests...

Theo

Shas'O Vash
06-10-2010, 13:53
For my part, I’ve always agreed with ewar; I started this thread to see what the community thought and to basically get some ammunition to use against beardly little gits who tried to use the poor wording of this rule as a loophole. What I do not agree with ewar is his stance that his interpretation is the only possible interpretation and that if you don’t agree with him you are a “mindless fool”.

This question has been brought up at the last three tournaments that I’ve been to and at each one the tournament organizers have ruled with rules as written (i.e. the “bad” interpretation). And even in this thread the first few posters have agreed with the “bad” interpretation. I think everyone can agree what they “meant” to say but what they actually said is a bit more ambiguous.

The only reason this rule is even slightly open to debate is the addition of the phrase “(or a unit)”. If they had inserted the phrase “(or a unit if it has to take a single characteristic test)” there would be no debate.

ewar
06-10-2010, 15:54
What I do not agree with ewar is his stance that his interpretation is the only possible interpretation and that if you don’t agree with him you are a “mindless fool”.


:wtf:I thought it was pretty clear that I was joking?? You know, a little lighthearted banter? I obviously don't think anyone who disagrees with me is a fool. Perhaps it's a language mixup??

As for there being a grey area in the rules, I honestly think it's a case of people easter egg hunting. If you read the rules carefully there isn't actually any room for debate - unless somebody has a different view, a unit is not the target of the PSoX (it has no target). Therefore any model underneath (whether it has multiple stat lines or not) tests on it's own merits (or lackof). If a unit had to take a single characteristic test then this comes into play, otherwise it has no bearing.

If 3 tournaments you've been to have played it the other way by claiming RAW, you can now point them to the rule book and show that they're reading it wrong.

Shas'O Vash
06-10-2010, 15:57
:wtf:I thought it was pretty clear that I was joking?? You know, a little lighthearted banter? I obviously don't think anyone who disagrees with me is a fool. Perhaps it's a language mixup??

Perhapse the use of a smiley face? ;)

ChrisIronBrow
06-10-2010, 19:17
As for there being a grey area in the rules, I honestly think it's a case of people easter egg hunting. If you read the rules carefully there isn't actually any room for debate - unless somebody has a different view, a unit is not the target of the PSoX (it has no target). Therefore any model underneath (whether it has multiple stat lines or not) tests on it's own merits (or lackof). If a unit had to take a single characteristic test then this comes into play, otherwise it has no bearing.

Look, I'm not trying to be pedantic here. That's not what the rules say. There is no distinction between "a model in a unit" and a "unit". This isn't a case of looking for easter eggs. It's what the rule appears to tell you on it's first reading. the phrase "a model (or a unit)" make it clear that both models and units get to "share" stats.

Shas'O Vash
06-10-2010, 19:40
Look, I'm not trying to be pedantic here. That's not what the rules say. There is no distinction between "a model in a unit" and a "unit". This isn't a case of looking for easter eggs. It's what the rule appears to tell you on it's first reading. the phrase "a model (or a unit)" make it clear that both models and units get to "share" stats.

Which is the source of the rules confusion. RaW at first glace I would agree that ChrisIronBrow's argument is the case. On second glace the passage referes to "a characteristic test" which to me suggests only when a single test is taken, but this is possibly adding silent words to the rule.

By pure RaW, all models in a unit get to share stats for the purposes of characteristc tests. I don't for an instant think that this is RAI, but that can be argued all day long.

Taking an ounce of common sence into account and reading it again I would argue that stat sharing is only used when a single test is taken. So if a single test is at the model level, only a model gets to share stats. If a single test is taken at the unit level, the whole unit gets to share stats.

Like I said, RaI is largly open for debate as everyone has oppinions/perceptions. RaW, however, can be interpreted in two different ways depending on how you read it.

For myself, I'll be asking tournament organizers how they will rule on this one before the games start just so I know which way this will go before it even comes up. For friendly games, we usually go with RaI.

Kevlar
06-10-2010, 22:54
By pure RaW, all models in a unit get to share stats for the purposes of characteristc tests. I don't for an instant think that this is RAI, but that can be argued all day long.


Other than for leadership when is that ever the case? If something affects separate models even if in the same unit I can't think of any example where you share str, init, or toughness. Only on a rider/mount do you take the highest value.

Shas'O Vash
06-10-2010, 23:51
Other than for leadership when is that ever the case? If something affects separate models even if in the same unit I can't think of any example where you share str, init, or toughness. Only on a rider/mount do you take the highest value.

Read the quoted rule in the first post of this thread. Some can make the argument that it makes no distinction between models and units sharing stats for characteristic tests.

On a separate note, I think we've beat this horse into the ground well enough. Does anyone have anything pertinent to add to the conversation, or shall we let this thread die a quite death?

Ethos
07-10-2010, 14:08
If there are combined toughness values or armour saves in a unit, you use the MAJORITY, or in the case of a tie, the best. It's from page 42 and 43. I don't have my book with me so please someone read and check the context. If it's for spell resolutions, then there you have it.

A Dwarf Lord would not transfer his armour save NOR his toughness on the unit if the unit had to take a test for either. Why? Because the FAQ says explicitly that you use the MAJORITY, not the best (except for a tie). So now we are saying that Strength, Movement, Initiative, and Weapon Skill __are__ transferable from the Lord to the unit? Does the Lord make the unit walk faster? Or become more nimble? Or suddenly gain strength? Or handle an axe with 20 year's more experience?



Well... at least he can't make them any more tougher, or somehow add metal to their (mostly) metal-covered bodies.

Ethos
07-10-2010, 14:14
Oh.

What about the notion that entries later on in the book take precedence over ones stated earlier? Page 10 gives a standing ground for how to take Characteristics tests for cavalry, a war shrine, etc. But when a character enters a unit... I'd check that section to see what happens. Page 10 says "hey, let's make George Washington our President", but the Character sections says "After 2 terms, Mr. Washington decided not to run for a third term so as to set a precedent for all Presidents after."


I think there's even a rule in there somewhere that says to follow the later rules if they clash with the earlier ones.

Shas'O Vash
07-10-2010, 15:36
>>RBRB FAQ

>>"Q: When a unit has multiple toughness values or armour saves do you use the value of the majority or in the case of a tie, the best (p42, 43)?

>>A: Yes, unless specified otherwise."

To get back to this argument that you had made way earlier in this thread, I don’t know what is on page 42 or 43 but it feels like close combat resolution for rolling to wound and taking armor saves, which is not what we are talking about here.


Oh.
What about the notion that entries later on in the book take precedence over ones stated earlier? Page 10 gives a standing ground for how to take Characteristics tests for cavalry, a war shrine, etc. But when a character enters a unit... I'd check that section to see what happens. Page 10 says "hey, let's make George Washington our President", but the Character sections says "After 2 terms, Mr. Washington decided not to run for a third term so as to set a precedent for all Presidents after."
I think there's even a rule in there somewhere that says to follow the later rules if they clash with the earlier ones.

I’m not sure anywhere else in the book talks about characteristic tests. Do you have a source for any additional rules? Do you have a source for later entries in the BRB override earlier entries?

As for Washington, we did try to make him king but he declined…

Ethos
07-10-2010, 16:39
Close combat? When would you ever have multiple toughnesses or armour saves come into question when fighting a unit? You always allocate against a model - and even then, if the model were to have different parts/stats/etc, the FAQ stated there does not address models, but units.

It is referring to spells and other affects. Not once do you deal with a unit in such a manner when in close combat.


I'm just saying that if this question was about a unit taking a toughness or armour save test, and whether or not the Lord would give his toughness or armour save to the unit (being better most of the time), then the FAQ would have answered that blatantly.


Otherwise just put your Lord in a unit of weaklings to make an entire unit with the stats of your Lord for any characteristics tests.

(if that is indeed what you're saying).

Shas'O Vash
07-10-2010, 17:08
It is referring to spells and other affects. Not once do you deal with a unit in such a manner when in close combat.

True enough. I didn't know what the page was refering to; I just knew it was refereing to something other than what we are talking about.


(if that is indeed what you're saying).

Back the the issue at hand: Have you even read this entire thread? The arguments for and against this happening, the relevant rules quotes, and my personal stance on it are pretty well spelled out.

Oh, and I'm fairly certain armor saves don't count as characteristics test...

Ethos
07-10-2010, 23:02
Hah, sorry.

Yes, I have read the thread. It just seemed like an reductio-ad-absudum argument. When following the argument to where it leads simply... to me... seems absurd.


I just wanted to make sure I was hearing the argument clearly and not misunderstanding it.

Casshole
07-10-2010, 23:14
I with Ewar, there is a necessary distinction between units and models early in the brb where a unit is made of individual models.

If a spell targets model or models, they are targetted as models.

IF a spell or effect targets a unit, then the clause of what statistic to use will come into play.

It is absolutely necessary in Warhammer to make a preliminary distinction between models and units. Rules such as d3 wounds clearly need a distinction between models and units, and thats just the first one i can think of.

Purple sun would allow your general to use his good I, but the rest of the MODELS hit inside the UNIT would use their own I.

Lord Inquisitor
07-10-2010, 23:25
Let me reiterate what has been said before. There is a distinction between MODEL with multiple profiles and a UNIT with multiple profiles. I shall give two examples.

NET OF AMYNTOK
"The target unit must pass a Strength test every time it moves."

The UNIT must make a Strength test. Therefore p10 applies, with some editing to show the relevant parsing: "Where a ... unit has more than one value for the same characteristic... a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values." You can use the highest S value in the unit.

THE DWELLERS BELOW
"Every model in the target unit must pass a Strength test or be slain"

The MODEL must make a Strength test. Therefore they must test on their own Strength. If the model has more than one Strength characteristic, then they may choose the highest. Again, p10 applies: "Where a model... has more than one value for the same characteristic... a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values."

There are some cases where the distinction between model and unit can get blurred - Monsters and Handlers for example, are they multiprofile or not? - but that's been hashed out in other threads.

soots
08-10-2010, 01:38
Lord Inquisitor made a point. Id tell him to change the color of his bold text as its important but he already has colored text.

This is a good point brought up though, and its interesting to see how Lore of Metal just got a lot better. We know we love to buff our chracters in units with armor, well this makes the WHOLE unit a lot more vulnerable to metal magic now. Be careful when your character dons the armor of silvered steel (2+ armor save) in a unit of naked people.

Munin
08-10-2010, 08:28
This is a good point brought up though, and its interesting to see how Lore of Metal just got a lot better. We know we love to buff our chracters in units with armor, well this makes the WHOLE unit a lot more vulnerable to metal magic now. Be careful when your character dons the armor of silvered steel (2+ armor save) in a unit of naked people.

Im not sure I follow you here? Did you mean that the spell will be better because of the one characters high armor save? Previously mentioned in this thread is:
1) Armor save is not a characteristic test.
2) As the FAQ says you use the value of the majority of the models.

AMWOOD co
08-10-2010, 10:22
That's really just an assumption on your part. A model within a unit, is a part of that unit. Therefore it is a unit. Your argument would be like claiming a bolt thrower is only allowed to hit one member of a unit since he is a "model" and not part of that unit.

Sorry, ChrisIronBrow, but your claim is faulty. Yours appears to be saying that 1 is part of 11. Therefore, 1 is 11. That just isn't true.

While a single model can be a unit if alone, if it is joined by several models it is no longer a unit unto itself.

I have to go with the general arguement that one would not use the highest I in the unit for Purple Sun. Each model has its own initiative to test on.

If Purple Sun is cast on a unit of Chaos Knights (initiatives of 3 and 5) led by a Lord on a steed (initiaves of 3 and 8), then the knights would use the best of their initiatives for the test (ie 5) and the Lord would use his (ie 8) but the knights would not use his initiative. Now, Chaos knights are not the best example as they all will only fail on a 6, but the same applies to all cavalry units.

In units that contain models with no split profiles, each model only has 1 stat to choose from and thus uses it.

For spells that make a unit test (or for the myriad of Ld tests in the game) rather than the individual models within a unit, you will use the single highest stat in the whole unit.

The rule is simply stating that when multiple stats exist for what has been affected then you may choose the most favourable of those that exist. This makes sense in the cinematic style most like to picture their games as because a spell that slaughters whole forces will bypass the hero due to his strong will or nimble feet, while a spell that would try to hinder his formation will be overcome by the hero's might.

mishari26
08-10-2010, 11:16
Let me reiterate what has been said before. There is a distinction between MODEL with multiple profiles and a UNIT with multiple profiles. I shall give two examples.

NET OF AMYNTOK
"The target unit must pass a Strength test every time it moves."

The UNIT must make a Strength test. Therefore p10 applies, with some editing to show the relevant parsing: "Where a ... unit has more than one value for the same characteristic... a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values." You can use the highest S value in the unit.

THE DWELLERS BELOW
"Every model in the target unit must pass a Strength test or be slain"

The MODEL must make a Strength test. Therefore they must test on their own Strength. If the model has more than one Strength characteristic, then they may choose the highest. Again, p10 applies: "Where a model... has more than one value for the same characteristic... a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values."

There are some cases where the distinction between model and unit can get blurred - Monsters and Handlers for example, are they multiprofile or not? - but that's been hashed out in other threads.

This.

very much This.

a character inside a unit is NOT a unit, only a model inside a combined unit. when he LEAVES and stands by himself, THEN he becomes a unit.

ChrisIronBrow
08-10-2010, 11:50
As I said previously, the rules are written in a way that make no distinction between multi stat models and multi stat units (for the purposes of charicteristic tests).

If you doubt that I suggest you reread the rule book and then tell me what the phrase " a model (or a unit)" means.

mishari26
08-10-2010, 12:17
If you doubt that I suggest you reread the rule book and then tell me what the phrase " a model (or a unit)" means.

the line you quote does not mean that a model or a unit are the same thing.

it only means that:
if either a model, or a unit are required to make a characteristic test.. etc etc.

in some cases, a unit is required to make a test. and in others, it's the models inside the unit that have to make the test. each spell specifies who's the target. The models or the unit.

Shas'O Vash
08-10-2010, 13:21
Let me reiterate what has been said before. There is a distinction between MODEL with multiple profiles and a UNIT with multiple profiles. I shall give two examples.

NET OF AMYNTOK
"The target unit must pass a Strength test every time it moves."

The UNIT must make a Strength test. Therefore p10 applies, with some editing to show the relevant parsing: "Where a ... unit has more than one value for the same characteristic... a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values." You can use the highest S value in the unit.

THE DWELLERS BELOW
"Every model in the target unit must pass a Strength test or be slain"

The MODEL must make a Strength test. Therefore they must test on their own Strength. If the model has more than one Strength characteristic, then they may choose the highest. Again, p10 applies: "Where a model... has more than one value for the same characteristic... a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values."

There are some cases where the distinction between model and unit can get blurred - Monsters and Handlers for example, are they multiprofile or not? - but that's been hashed out in other threads.

Lord Inquisitor sums up my opinion, as well as the majority of this thread’s posters’ opinions, with this one quite nicely. I think that this is the best way of interpreting this rule and is in keeping with the majority of the posters’ ideas of what the RAI probably is. It also makes the most “sense”; if you can use sense to settle rules disputes in a game with magic and dragons...

That being said, I can see how someone could read this rule and come up with the opposite interpretation. I don’t agree with it, and by the sound of it most people don’t either, but I can see their point of view.

I’m not sure if there’s anything more to add to this argument; we’re basically going round in circles at this point.

Ethos
08-10-2010, 14:00
Im not sure I follow you here? Did you mean that the spell will be better because of the one characters high armor save? Previously mentioned in this thread is:
1) Armor save is not a characteristic test.
2) As the FAQ says you use the value of the majority of the models.


Precisely. If people say that a unit shares stats - and uses the best - then the FAQ explicitly contradicts that theory (at least for toughness and armour saves).

I simply think that a unit's armour stats are shared, but are taken with the majority. But as for Cavalry, where the models that make up the unit have different stats (albeit, the same stats between each of the models), then yes... the best stat is used. Not because it's a unit, but because the models that make up the unit have different stats (of which the highest is used).

Shas'O Vash
08-10-2010, 15:35
Precisely. If people say that a unit shares stats - and uses the best - then the FAQ explicitly contradicts that theory (at least for toughness and armour saves).

I simply think that a unit's armour stats are shared, but are taken with the majority. But as for Cavalry, where the models that make up the unit have different stats (albeit, the same stats between each of the models), then yes... the best stat is used. Not because it's a unit, but because the models that make up the unit have different stats (of which the highest is used).

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa… First of all, armor saves are NOT characteristics; in other words, there is no armor value on the stat line. That has never been an issue here. This only started coming up when Ethos was trying to bring in an FAQ quote that has nothing to do with what this thread is arguing. The “use majority toughness and armor saves” is clarifying something in spell casting; I still haven’t looked to see what is on the referenced pages yet (page 42-ish I think). This is a completely different issue than characteristic tests (page 10).

Let’s stay on target and not get confused on tangents here. Forget about majority armor saves and toughness. If you would like to discuss something regarding these start a new thread.

Lex
08-10-2010, 17:00
The issue is concerning the last paragraph under Characteristics Tests on page 10 of the BRB, and I quote: “Where a model (or a unit) has more than one value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example, a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values.”



I find it interesting that people always focus on the (or a unit) language and see it as an "if X then Y" statement and say that it is RAW that their tough 2 skinks test on the Old Blood's tough 5. They see X as "model or unit" and Y as "takes character test against highest". The actual structure of the sentence as written is actually "Where X and Y, then Z". X is model or unit, Y is "a characterstic test"(singular) and Z is "use highest". A characteristic test(singular) is a condition as well, not a result. So RAW says PSoX, Dwellers, etc. uses the models individual stat as "the test" is taken by the model and not the unit.

Shas'O Vash
08-10-2010, 17:09
I find it interesting that people always focus on the (or a unit) language and see it as an "if X then Y" statement and say that it is RAW that their tough 2 skinks test on the Old Blood's tough 5. They see X as "model or unit" and Y as "takes character test against highest". The actual structure of the sentence as written is actually "Where X and Y, then Z". X is model or unit, Y is "a characterstic test"(singular) and Z is "use highest". A characteristic test(singular) is a condition as well, not a result. So RAW says PSoX, Dwellers, etc. uses the models individual stat as "the test" is taken by the model and not the unit.

While your post is a little confusing to me, yes. This is the basis for the confusion.

Lex
08-10-2010, 17:38
While your post is a little confusing to me, yes. This is the basis for the confusion.

Okay more simply: The the rule is "Where you have a single characteristic test (the rule as written is singular) AND that test is taken by a model or unit with multiple values, then you use the highest available stat." When looking at PSoX, etc., the unit takes multiple tests and so would not be able to use the highest as both conditions of the rule are not met.

Ethos
08-10-2010, 18:09
A unit takes a toughness test.

The unit has toughness 3, and a Character within with toughness 4.

==> Which toughness does the unit use to roll against?


-- or ---

Pick any spell from the Lore of Metal.

That same unit has an armour save of 5+ (light armour and shield) and the Character within has an armour save of 2+ (some kind of magical armour).

==> What strength is used for the spell?


(the FAQ addresses these two questions, and rules in favor of the majority, not the best)

-------


What is the difference between these cases and cases where a unit has to take an Initiative test, or halves its Movement, or takes a Strength test?

I'm really open for the differences. I just can't find any.

Shas'O Vash
08-10-2010, 18:25
A unit takes a toughness test.

The unit has toughness 3, and a Character within with toughness 4.

==> Which toughness does the unit use to roll against?


-- or ---

Pick any spell from the Lore of Metal.

That same unit has an armour save of 5+ (light armour and shield) and the Character within has an armour save of 2+ (some kind of magical armour).

==> What strength is used for the spell?


(the FAQ addresses these two questions, and rules in favor of the majority, not the best)

-------


What is the difference between these cases and cases where a unit has to take an Initiative test, or halves its Movement, or takes a Strength test?

I'm really open for the differences. I just can't find any.

Oh for the love of… Ethos,

An armor save is not a characteristic. You are about the only one who is confusing it with one. Stop bringing it up!

The FAQ quote that you keep trying to push into this conversation has nothing to do with what is being discussed. Units taking characteristics tests using the majority value is not what the rules say. You are the only one combining two completely separate rules into one that makes no sense. Unless you can come up with some rules or FAQ that would link the rules for characteristics test on page 10 with your beloved FAQ regarding page ~42 together, stop bringing it up!

You are single handedly doing a great job of derailing and side tracking this thread. Please stop!

Ethos
08-10-2010, 18:48
How is that FAQ question not related to this thread?


If a unit takes a Characteristic test... let's say, a toughness test... but has multiple toughness values in the unit, which value do we use?

The FAQ clearly states to use the majority. In fact, that FAQ question covers more than just Characteristic tests. It covers any situation where the unit as a whole is involved - like being shot at, for example - and someone needs to know what to their 'to wound' roll is going to be. Or when a spell is cast and requires a unit to take a toughness test, what value is used for the unit's toughness test?

Now, if pages 42 and 43 were about shooting, then it would be aimed towards that, and not Characteristic tests. Which is fine. I'm just not able to get to a book right now. My fault entirely.

Lord Inquisitor
08-10-2010, 18:52
Yeah, it's the shooting rules, which have no mention of what you do for units that have multiple toughness values. So the FAQ is presumably directed towards "to wound" rolls.

Lex
08-10-2010, 19:19
How is that FAQ question not related to this thread?


If a unit takes a Characteristic test... let's say, a toughness test... but has multiple toughness values in the unit, which value do we use?

The FAQ clearly states to use the majority. In fact, that FAQ question covers more than just Characteristic tests. It covers any situation where the unit as a whole is involved - like being shot at, for example - and someone needs to know what to their 'to wound' roll is going to be. Or when a spell is cast and requires a unit to take a toughness test, what value is used for the unit's toughness test?

Now, if pages 42 and 43 were about shooting, then it would be aimed towards that, and not Characteristic tests. Which is fine. I'm just not able to get to a book right now. My fault entirely.

Pages 42 and 43 are about resolving hits from "attacks" whether they be from shooting, cc or magic. However, they do not cover characteristic tests at all.

Ethos
08-10-2010, 19:58
Thank goodness! I was really not liking me not having my book. Thank you for looking that up.


-------


Would there be a difference between resolving magical hits against a unit with a Toughness value of 3 (which comes from the unit) and a spell requiring that unit to take a Toughness test on a value of 4 (the Character's toughness)?


If someone says that a unit of Dwarf Warriors with a Lord in it tests on a value of 4 for Initiative tests (taken from the Lord, not the Warriors), then they are also saying that the same unit will take a Toughness test with a value of 5 (from the Lord, not the Warriors). But at the same time, they're also making the claim that they should wound the very same unit by using a Toughness value of 4 (from the Warriors, not the Lord).

This sounds absurd.

How can a unit have a Toughness of 4 when being shot at or "magic'd" at, yet when taking Characteristic tests it becomes Toughness 5?



Am I really missing something here?

Shas'O Vash
08-10-2010, 20:08
Thank goodness! I was really not liking me not having my book. Thank you for looking that up.


-------


Would there be a difference between resolving magical hits against a unit with a Toughness value of 3 (which comes from the unit) and a spell requiring that unit to take a Toughness test on a value of 4 (the Character's toughness)?


If someone says that a unit of Dwarf Warriors with a Lord in it tests on a value of 4 for Initiative tests (taken from the Lord, not the Warriors), then they are also saying that the same unit will take a Toughness test with a value of 5 (from the Lord, not the Warriors). But at the same time, they're also making the claim that they should wound the very same unit by using a Toughness value of 4 (from the Warriors, not the Lord).

This sounds absurd.

How can a unit have a Toughness of 4 when being shot at or "magic'd" at, yet when taking Characteristic tests it becomes Toughness 5?



Am I really missing something here?

Nope. You're not missing anything. That's basically the argument. However, I'll leave you with the quote from LI that sums up the general consensus I think:


Let me reiterate what has been said before. There is a distinction between MODEL with multiple profiles and a UNIT with multiple profiles. I shall give two examples.

NET OF AMYNTOK
"The target unit must pass a Strength test every time it moves."

The UNIT must make a Strength test. Therefore p10 applies, with some editing to show the relevant parsing: "Where a ... unit has more than one value for the same characteristic... a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values." You can use the highest S value in the unit.

THE DWELLERS BELOW
"Every model in the target unit must pass a Strength test or be slain"

The MODEL must make a Strength test. Therefore they must test on their own Strength. If the model has more than one Strength characteristic, then they may choose the highest. Again, p10 applies: "Where a model... has more than one value for the same characteristic... a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values."

There are some cases where the distinction between model and unit can get blurred - Monsters and Handlers for example, are they multiprofile or not? - but that's been hashed out in other threads.

Lord Inquisitor
08-10-2010, 20:08
No, that appears to be exactly the case. The FAQ for inflicting wounds clearly states that you use the majority toughness. The rules for characterisitic tests clearly states that you use the highest characteristic (i.e. toughness in this case). I can't think of many spells that force a whole unit to take a Toughness test. The Nurgle spells Pit of Slime and Rancid Visitation do, but they also explicitly specify that the lowest Toughness value in a unit should be used.

The rules are simply different for characteristic tests and for rolling to wound. Not very consistent, but there you go.

ChrisIronBrow
08-10-2010, 21:04
the line you quote does not mean that a model or a unit are the same thing.

it only means that:
if either a model, or a unit are required to make a characteristic test.. etc etc.

in some cases, a unit is required to make a test. and in others, it's the models inside the unit that have to make the test. each spell specifies who's the target. The models or the unit.

No. That's not what the rules say. You may want it to say that, but it doesn't. The book says if a model or a unit has multiple values use the highest. It's simple plain english. if you remove one of the two subjects being discussed in the rule, it should mean the same thing. so try it.

"where a model has more than one value for the characteristic use the highest"

"where a unit has more than one value for the characteristic use the highest"

A model by definition is infact a unit, or a part of a unit. there's no exception where a model is not a unit or a part of a unit. Otherwise you could only shoot the models that you see, and not the unit. That would require a unit of 20 models to actually be a unit of 20 units. If you want to target specifically one member of a unit he is either still part of that unit, or becomes his own unit. If he's still a member of the unit then he gets to use the highest value.

Shas'O Vash
08-10-2010, 21:16
No. That's not what the rules say. You may want it to say that, but it doesn't. The book says if a model or a unit has multiple values use the highest. It's simple plain english. if you remove one of the two subjects being discussed in the rule, it should mean the same thing. so try it.

"where a model has more than one value for the characteristic use the highest"

"where a unit has more than one value for the characteristic use the highest"

A model by definition is infact a unit, or a part of a unit. there's no exception where a model is not a unit or a part of a unit. Otherwise you could only shoot the models that you see, and not the unit. That would require a unit of 20 models to actually be a unit of 20 units. If you want to target specifically one member of a unit he is either still part of that unit, or becomes his own unit. If he's still a member of the unit then he gets to use the highest value.

...and this would be the opposing argument in a nutshell. This rule can be read in a way that does not distinguish between models and the unit they are in. (For the purposes of characteristic test ONLY.)

I would say the only real counter argument to this would be the bolded phrase in the rule as follows, "Where a model (or a unit) has more than one value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example, a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values.” “A characteristic test”. I take this to mean that the entity that takes the single characteristic test is what uses its highest value.

If an entire unit takes a single test…

If individual models take a single test each…

But I understand how it can be read either way.

Lex
09-10-2010, 00:37
No. That's not what the rules say. You may want it to say that, but it doesn't. The book says if a model or a unit has multiple values use the highest. It's simple plain english. if you remove one of the two subjects being discussed in the rule, it should mean the same thing. so try it.

"where a model has more than one value for the characteristic use the highest"

"where a unit has more than one value for the characteristic use the highest"



:sigh: You want to try being technical with "simple plain english" but you are incorrect and you alter the sentence to suit your interpretation. I'll start by restating the sentence so that it is grammatically the exact same, but easier to point out where you are incorrect:

"A characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values where a model (or a unit) has more than one value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example."

The subject of the sentence is actually the singular "test" with of course the article and adjective. The portion of the sentence beginning with "a model (or unit)..." it is actually an adjective clause introduced by the adverb "where" that modifies the object of the preposition "against". So, that being said, it is not really "simple" english. I don't know how many people this helps. In any case, RAW or RAI, if the unit takes a single test, i.e. the net, use highest since the subject of the sentence is singular. In the case of PSoX, Dwellers, etc. you must use the model's value since the unit takes not one, but multiple tests thereby not complying with the rule. I apologize for my wordiness, hazard of my job.

Edit: If you are actually trying to follow the rule linguistically, it really can't be interpreted two ways. I think the only real controversy on this rule is in the case of monster and handlers where the model/unit definition is somewhat blurred.

Lazarian
09-10-2010, 00:52
This seems awfully simple to mess up. Two differing effects are seen in the rule book. Net states the whole unit makes one test. The unit killers like Dwellers and Psun state each model makes their own test.

Every one of these nit picking arguments that have cropped up with 8th have been fairly tiring. Every time its been FAQ'ed the common sense answer has panned out. I know people want to debate for the fun of it. I know people want some form of edge. I know some people want to look add complexity in the vacuum of normalcy but do we need to? Really, Really need to?

Arguments like this plus the always strike first argument for elves and a host of others hurt the credibility of this forum. It already gets bad press and belittlement from other sites. Do we need to argue that black is black or wet is indeed wet?

Grimskarr
09-10-2010, 03:22
Great analysis of the grammar, Lex. The nail is in the coffin and the final hammer blow goes to GW themselves. The rule even gives us an example for how to interpret it - a single model with combined stats. Really, what is so hard about this? Do people really need to win that badly that they'll abandon all common reason?
"A characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values where a model (or a unit) has more than one value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example."

ChrisIronBrow
09-10-2010, 03:47
:sigh: You want to try being technical with "simple plain english" but you are incorrect and you alter the sentence to suit your interpretation.

Funny, I'm thinking the same thing about you right now. Despite all the "wordiness" your conclusion neither addressed my point, nor was it accurate.


In any case, RAW or RAI, if the unit takes a single test, i.e. the net, use highest since the subject of the sentence is singular. In the case of PSoX, Dwellers, etc. you must use the model's value since the unit takes not one, but multiple tests thereby not complying with the rule.

While your correct that in this case the subject is singular, you make a huge assumption that this rule is only allowed to apply once. The rule references "a" characteristic test, by definition more than one characteristic test is also "a" characteristic test, or rather, a collection of characteristic tests. if something asks you to take 3 tests, it's the same as asking you to take 1 test 3 times.

So, in addition to being wrong, you have not addressed my point. the phrase "a model (or a unit)" can be altered to either of those two statements with the same meaning.

If I was selling "a red car (or a blue car)". Both statements apply to the car I am selling.

Synnister
09-10-2010, 03:54
Great analysis of the grammar, Lex. The nail is in the coffin and the final hammer blow goes to GW themselves. The rule even gives us an example for how to interpret it - a single model with combined stats. Really, what is so hard about this? Do people really need to win that badly that they'll abandon all common reason?

Cavalry is a model with several stats, why would they include the units reference if they only meant multi-stat models? The inclusion of the units phrase causes this issue to not be a clear as you'd like to think that it is. Also, the rambling above about singular tense of the word test is silly really. If they only wanted test that units took to be this why would they include it in the general rules? The occurrences of this testing is so infrequent that they could really just be in the rule of the spell or whatever is causing the test. Do I think it is intended to work this way; absolutely not. However, as I didn't write the book it's hard for me to say what is intended and what is not. I can say what is written and that is that if you have a unit with multiple value for the various stats you use the highest. That's what the rule says. Whether you want to play it that way is up to you. But you can't deny what the rule says.

decker_cky
09-10-2010, 04:37
Why would they include models if units would cover that fully?

Synnister
09-10-2010, 04:47
you see that's why this isn't as clear as people want it to be. In order to get it to only apply to singular tests that units have to take, then you have to assume that. Personally, the rules as written state a very simple rule to understand. If you have to take a characteristic test and you are in a unit you use the highest. If you play it that way then the high end spells in the new lores become less overpowered.

Lord Inquisitor
09-10-2010, 06:29
Cavalry is a model with several stats, why would they include the units reference if they only meant multi-stat models?

Because in some cases the model is taking the test and other times the unit as a whole is taking the test?

AMWOOD co
09-10-2010, 06:35
Perhaps a different example is required. I've already given my opinion, so I'm going to put this forward as a question to see who's arguments are sound.

Galrauch's Breath of Change is a Breath Weapon that causes those hit to take Toughness tests or die. Breath Weapons have very specific rules as to who is hit using the template.

Case: A unit of Goblins (T3) with a Black Orc Big Boss (T5) is hit. The Big Boss is not hit. What will the goblins who are hit (let's say there are 16 hits) test with and why?

Hopefully we can clear this up now and put it to rest.

geldedgoat
09-10-2010, 06:44
Wow, I really can't believe this is still going. The RAW and RAI should be very, very clear.

If a spell forces the unit as whole to take one or more tests, then the unit uses the highest characteristic value in that unit. "If a [unit] has more than one value for the same characteristic [...]"

If a spell forces a model to take one or more tests, then the model uses the highest characteristic value of that model. This will only occur when a model has multiple characteristic values, as in the case of riders and mounts. "If a [model] has more than one value for the same characteristic [...]"

Now, a few spell descriptions for comparison:

Purple Sun of Xereus: "Any model touched by the template must pass an Initiative test [...]" The spell specifically demands tests from individual models. Here you would use the highest I value of the model's profile. For unmounted Dwarf Warriors, this would be 2. For mounted Chaos Knights, you would use the higher 5 from the Knight's profile and not the lower 3 of the Steed's profile.

Net of Amyntok: "The target unit must pass a Strength test [...]" Here you would use the highest S value of the entire unit. The spell specifically demands tests from the entire unit. For Dwarf Warriors accompanied by a Lord, you would use the higher 4 from the Lord's profile and not the lower 3 from the Warriors' profile. For Chaos Knights accompanied by a Lord, you would use the higher 5 from the Lord's profile and not the lower 4 from either the Knights' or Steeds' profiles.

This is not the slightest bit ambiguous. RAW, the above is the only correct interpretation.

What about RAI? Well, in the case of Purple Sun, each man (or dwarf, goblin, elf, etc) is attempting to dodge the giant ball of death, so each model's speed should obviously be examined. However, for the Net, I would imagine that only one person would have to hack or rip his way through it for the magic to be broken, therefore only the highest S value is necessary.

Shas'O Vash
09-10-2010, 07:30
Wow, I really can't believe this is still going. The RAW and RAI should be very, very clear.

I'm the one who started this thread and no one is more surprised than me that this argument is still going stronger than ever; although I'm not sure what else can be said on this subject.

If GW would get off their collective asses and update their FAQs with a few things, this might be a mute point. I just hope their FAQs won't get as ridiculous as they did in 7th edition.

theorox
09-10-2010, 07:59
As for there being a grey area in the rules, I honestly think it's a case of people easter egg hunting. If you read the rules carefully there isn't actually any room for debate - unless somebody has a different view, a unit is not the target of the PSoX (it has no target). Therefore any model underneath (whether it has multiple stat lines or not) tests on it's own merits (or lackof). If a unit had to take a single characteristic test then this comes into play, otherwise it has no bearing.

If 3 tournaments you've been to have played it the other way by claiming RAW, you can now point them to the rule book and show that they're reading it wrong.

This is completely right, completely accurate and i agree completely! I really, really can't see any other way of reading it that is not the worst ruleslawyering i've ever seen. Actually, it's not even rulelawyering since the rules of Purple sun is crystal clear. (No pun intended!) Take your common sense to another thread, because my magical 8-ball tells me that this pity debate is about to be ruled by the ruleslawyers. :D

Theo

ChrisIronBrow
09-10-2010, 08:49
This is completely right, completely accurate and i agree completely! I really, really can't see any other way of reading it that is not the worst ruleslawyering i've ever seen. Actually, it's not even rulelawyering since the rules of Purple sun is crystal clear. (No pun intended!) Take your common sense to another thread, because my magical 8-ball tells me that this pity debate is about to be ruled by the ruleslawyers. :D

Theo
Thanks for the input, with that revelation we should be able to resolve this issue now.


Care to actually address the question at hand?

ChrisIronBrow
09-10-2010, 08:52
Wow, I really can't believe this is still going. The RAW and RAI should be very, very clear.


Sadly, I agree with you. which is why I'm surprised that no one seems to actually be reading the rules. The rules clearly without room for interpretation state that both models and units use the highest value for characteristic tests. I'm still waiting for someone to point out why that's wrong. (without adding words and making rules up)

geldedgoat
09-10-2010, 10:04
Sadly, I agree with you. which is why I'm surprised that no one seems to actually be reading the rules. The rules clearly without room for interpretation state that both models and units use the highest value for characteristic tests. I'm still waiting for someone to point out why that's wrong. (without adding words and making rules up)

Well, it's been pointed out plainly enough multiple times.

When a unit is forced to take a test, the highest characteristic value from the unit is used. When individual models are forced to take a test, the highest characteristic value from each individual model is used.

Lex
09-10-2010, 14:31
So, in addition to being wrong, you have not addressed my point. the phrase "a model (or a unit)" can be altered to either of those two statements with the same meaning.

If I was selling "a red car (or a blue car)". Both statements apply to the car I am selling.

My restatement of the sentence did not alter it's meaning. If you were to diagram the sentence, both my sentence and the one in the rules would be duplicates. Your example is also incorrect. "Or" is a disjunctive. Whether you are selling a red car or a blue car, you are still selling one car by your statement. The car can't be both a red car and a blue car, quantum physics and multi-verse theories aside. In Warhammer, those two statements can only be altered to have the same meaning in the case of a lone model. In the case of a dwarf unit of warriors with a character, model and unit have two very different meanings. I guess this has dragged on far too long to have any more probative value.

ChrisIronBrow
09-10-2010, 22:54
My restatement of the sentence did not alter it's meaning. If you were to diagram the sentence, both my sentence and the one in the rules would be duplicates. Your example is also incorrect. "Or" is a disjunctive. Whether you are selling a red car or a blue car, you are still selling one car by your statement. The car can't be both a red car and a blue car, quantum physics and multi-verse theories aside. In Warhammer, those two statements can only be altered to have the same meaning in the case of a lone model. In the case of a dwarf unit of warriors with a character, model and unit have two very different meanings. I guess this has dragged on far too long to have any more probative value.

Look, your making my point. If "or" means both than both models and units use the highest value. Furthermore, a model is always a unit, or a part of a unit, always. Meaning it's always a unit testing, even if it's a single character.

Ethos
10-10-2010, 02:49
A model is only a unit when it is by itself; a lone model. Otherwise, a model is not a unit.

A model inside a unit is not a unit by itself in addition to being a part of the unit at large.


Please cite the rule where this is incorrect.

ChrisIronBrow
10-10-2010, 04:49
A model is only a unit when it is by itself; a lone model. Otherwise, a model is not a unit.

A model inside a unit is not a unit by itself in addition to being a part of the unit at large.


Please cite the rule where this is incorrect.

So, what is a model inside a unit then? It's part of that unit.

jamano
10-10-2010, 06:07
being part of a unit is not the same as being a unit. The rule doesnt say "when part of a unit takes a test, use the highest value" If you're selling a red(or a blue) car, it doesn't mean theyre both the same even if they're the same price one is still red and one is still blue

ChrisIronBrow
10-10-2010, 06:13
being part of a unit is not the same as being a unit. The rule doesnt say "when part of a unit takes a test, use the highest value" If you're selling a red(or a blue) car, it doesn't mean theyre both the same even if they're the same price one is still red and one is still blue

and yet, if I sell one, it was either red or blue.

Honestly, I'm not even sure why I'm continuing to argue this. I've made the point I wanted too, mostly you haven't been convinced and we are just going in circles now.

Interesting note; I discovered this ruling while participating in an Indy GT, previously I hadn't considered it. So I'm certainly not alone in this thought.

jamano
10-10-2010, 06:19
Well it seems to be everyone vs you, have you ever changed your mind on a rule? Or are you divinely right?

Kevlar
10-10-2010, 13:13
Well it seems to be everyone vs you, have you ever changed your mind on a rule? Or are you divinely right?

Much like the motba thread.

ChrisIronBrow
10-10-2010, 22:30
Well it seems to be everyone vs you, have you ever changed your mind on a rule? Or are you divinely right?

Of course I have, and I am willing to do so. I just need evidence to base my decisions on. Not bullying and conjecture. After several pages of insulting people who disagree with you your surprised that no one is coming back to keep arguing?

Lord Inquisitor
10-10-2010, 22:34
Let's not get personal here.

CIB, if you're position were the case, wouldn't the text say "Where a unit has more than one value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry for example, a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values"?

That whole "if a model (or a unit)" clause suggests there is a difference as to whether we're talking about a model with multiple profiles taking the test or a unit with multiple profiles taking the test.

ChrisIronBrow
11-10-2010, 01:09
Yes, LI I do. However, I think that would be a more clear and accurate way of writing the rule. Which I would like from GW, but have learned not to expect.

I read the clause about a unit as meaning just that, a unit. If you wanted to target a model specifically that's fine, but I still see a rule that tells me to use the highest value since that model is a part of the unit.

I don't think there's really middle ground here between all of us. It sounds like the true argument is whether or not a model in a unit uses the rules for that unit, or is separated. I don't see any clear rule that addresses that point.

When I see multiple members of a unit required to take characteristic tests, I see a unit taking characteristic tests. Which is what the rule appears to (me) to address.

bernardo
11-10-2010, 04:30
Please go to BRB P.3 for the definition of "Model". and P.5 for the definition of "Unit".

its very clear.

ChrisIronBrow
11-10-2010, 06:51
Please go to BRB P.3 for the definition of "Model". and P.5 for the definition of "Unit".

its very clear.

I suggest you read those pages as well, Because they support what I'm saying, as much as they do your argument.

ChrisIronBrow
11-10-2010, 06:57
Please go to BRB P.3 for the definition of "Model". and P.5 for the definition of "Unit".

its very clear.

You know, I'm posting again cause there's the off chance that someone might actually believe you instead of looking it up themselves. All pg. 5 says regarding models and units is that a unit is a group of models.

Welcome to my argument. Would you like to contribute?

geldedgoat
11-10-2010, 08:50
You really should take another look at those pages, because they would dispel the notion you seem to have that the terms 'model' and 'unit' are equivalent.


Each model is an individual playing piece [...]


A unit usually consists of several models that have banded together, but a single, poweful model [...] [is] also considered to be a unit.

Your argument hinges on 'model' and 'unit' sharing the exact same meaning. Unfortunately, this is entirely unsupported by the rules. Is a model part of a unit? Yes. Is a model the same as a unit? No, except when the model is alone.


Where a model (or a unit) has more than one value for the characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example, a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values.

Look very closely at this again. The author has specifically separated "(or a unit)" from the rest of the sentence so that it may be inserted in place of "a model". This essentially gives us two different sentences:


Where a model has more than one value for the characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example, a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values.

Where a unit has more than one value for the characteristic, [...] a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values.

This is not a liberal interpretation of the original sentence; it's simply how syntax demands it be read. So if a model is forced to take a test, the highest value for that model is used. If a unit is forced to take a test, the highest value for that unit is used.

bernardo
11-10-2010, 09:18
You know, I'm posting again cause there's the off chance that someone might actually believe you instead of looking it up themselves. All pg. 5 says regarding models and units is that a unit is a group of models.

Welcome to my argument. Would you like to contribute?

Reading the rule in proper order will find the answer.

P.3, defination of Model, then P.4, in P.4 BRB tells you to go to P.80 because there is another important information about characteristics profile.

On P.80, we learn about Troop type, pay attention to decription of Cavalry.

go back to P.5, we learn about about forming a unit.

.....and then P.10

We find a clause "Where a model (or a unit) has more than one value for the characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example, a characteristic test is always taken against the highest of the values."

"as is the case with cavalry"

Ok we learn about "cavalry" from P.80, in the decription Cavalry we have a new term "Split Profile".

Do a Combine Unit has a "Split Profile" same as the decription in "Cavalry" section?

If yes, you are Right CIB.

ChrisIronBrow
11-10-2010, 20:58
This is not a liberal interpretation of the original sentence; it's simply how syntax demands it be read. So if a model is forced to take a test, the highest value for that model is used. If a unit is forced to take a test, the highest value for that unit is used.

You are making my argument still. Pg 5 defines a "unit" as "a group of models".

So the rule can actually be read like this, "if forced to take a characteristic test, the highest value for that "group of models" is used".

Does that finally explain what I'm trying to say?

ChrisIronBrow
11-10-2010, 21:00
Do a Combine Unit has a "Split Profile" same as the decription in "Cavalry" section?

If yes, you are Right CIB.

If the characteristic tests rule mentioned "split profiles" you would be correct. what it says is "model (or unit)".

With the new FAq's hopefully issues like this one can be addressed by GW. :P

decker_cky
11-10-2010, 21:23
You are making my argument still. Pg 5 defines a "unit" as "a group of models".

So the rule can actually be read like this, "if forced to take a characteristic test, the highest value for that "group of models" is used".

Does that finally explain what I'm trying to say?

A->B does not mean B->A, so that definition just means the same as everyone is saying. We know a unit is a group of models. That's irrelevant when a model is forced to take a characteristic test.

Kevlar
11-10-2010, 23:48
You are making my argument still. Pg 5 defines a "unit" as "a group of models".

So the rule can actually be read like this, "if forced to take a characteristic test, the highest value for that "group of models" is used".

Does that finally explain what I'm trying to say?

If a unit is forced to take a single test, yes use the highest value. Most every test besides leadership based tests force individual models to test, using their own individual statistics. Sorry but str, toughness, and weaponskill aren't shared between characters and rank n file in any way shape or form.

No idea why I am bothering to post this as I'm sure you already know that and don't care, you are just looking to argue.

geldedgoat
12-10-2010, 00:24
So the rule can actually be read like this, "if forced to take a characteristic test, the highest value for that "group of models" is used".

Yes, that's correct. However, what you seem to be misunderstanding is that the above statement is separate from "if forced to take a characteristic test, the highest value for that "single model" is used," and that the rule in the BRB encompasses both.

Synnister
12-10-2010, 01:25
For the people saying the rule doesn't mean a unit uses its highest value when called upon to make a characteristic test (which btw is exactly what the rule says), name an example other than net where the unit would take a test as opposed to models.

Shas'O Vash
12-10-2010, 01:42
My original intent when I started this thread was to see what the majority of people thought, their arguments to support it, and how hotly contested the idea was. I think everyone falls within 4 categories on this issue:

1. "RAI. Why is this even being discussed?!?!? You're all a bunch of @@@@@@@!!!" I place very little value on any RAI arguments as no one reading these threads has anything, most likely, to do with the writing of the rules and as such has no idea what the intent of the author was. Opinions are like butt-holes: Everyones got one and they all stink.

2. "Every model in the unit shares it's stats with every other model in the unit because that's what the RAW says. How can anybody interpret this any other way!?" I will admit, at first glance, this is exactly what the rule says. I can see why people would interpret this rule in this way. It doesn't make much sense to me in a real world situation type of way, but then again neither do sniper cannon balls.

3. "Only the entity actually taking the singular test can share stats because that's what the RAW say. How can anybody interpret this any other way!?" While I agree with this stance I don't agree that this is the only interpretation. After reading at the rule a few more times I do agree that this is indeed what the rules says, although it's not as clear as I'd like.

4. "There are two ways to interpret this rule and both positions are pretty defendable. However, one position makes sense and it's how we're used to playing it and the other just feels 'weird'." This is where I fall. I really don't need to go into defending this position as many, many, posters above me have amply argued both sides of the issue. This is definitely a FAQ worthy question; are you listening to me GW???

The end result is that I think I have more than enough ammunition to argue with any player that says his Dwarf Warriors are initiative 4! That being said, I will continue to get clarification of this question before any large tournament gets underway. I just like everyone to be on the same page, even if I don't personally like that page...

Synnister
12-10-2010, 03:05
I think the best solution for this issue is to discuss it before the game. It's definitely a 'can go either way' rule. Best to get that settled before the dice hit the table and people get their feeling hurt.

decker_cky
12-10-2010, 06:31
For the people saying the rule doesn't mean a unit uses its highest value when called upon to make a characteristic test (which btw is exactly what the rule says), name an example other than net where the unit would take a test as opposed to models.

Terrain: Mist-Wreathed Swamp.

Daemon Lore of Nurgle Spell: Rancid Visitation (though it explicitly uses the lowest value)

There's a few others. Models taking tests is certainly more common, hence "or unit" being placed in brackets.

Synnister
12-10-2010, 09:01
so we've come up with 3 examples and 1 of them goes against the rules. Why would they include that as a general/basic rule if it is used so infrequently?

Shas'O Vash
12-10-2010, 12:18
Well, where else would they have put it?

jamano
12-10-2010, 13:42
Terrain: Mist-Wreathed Swamp.

Daemon Lore of Nurgle Spell: Rancid Visitation (though it explicitly uses the lowest value)

There's a few others. Models taking tests is certainly more common, hence "or unit" being placed in brackets.

Well, don't forget leadership tests.

Shas'O Vash
12-10-2010, 13:46
Well, don't forget leadership tests.

Leadership tests are specifically not covered under the rule under discussion.

jamano
12-10-2010, 14:02
Yeah, but it does fit it exactly, except for that 2 dice part :p (a time where a unit is forced to take a stat test that uses the highest value available in the unit) It's probably what that rule was based off of.

Shas'O Vash
12-10-2010, 15:14
Yeah, but it does fit it exactly, except for that 2 dice part :p (a time where a unit is forced to take a stat test that uses the highest value available in the unit) It's probably what that rule was based off of.

Ok, you're getting yourself side tracked here. The rule in question explicitly states that it is for all stat test except leadership. Leadership is a seperate issue all together. If you would like to discuss something regarding leadership please start a new thread.

geldedgoat
12-10-2010, 17:25
so we've come up with 3 examples and 1 of them goes against the rules. Why would they include that as a general/basic rule if it is used so infrequently?

How many examples do you need? As has already been said, its rarity is the reason for the rule's sentence construction, separating 'unit' from the rest of the sentence with parentheses.

Lord_Elric
12-10-2010, 17:59
Just thought id put my 2 cents in. But personaly unless its a single test that effects the entire unit ("the targeted unit must pass a str test or suffer d6 casualtys" as an example) then yes it would take the test on the highest stat as its a unit wide effect.
If the effect is targeted at a unit but is effecting models("Models under the template must pass a str test or be removed from play") then the models characteristic is used.

The main difference between the 2 is the fact that the first example being targeted at the unit takes only a single test, whereas in the second example u take one test per model effected wich would mean (as far as common sense tells us) that the test is taken on the models own characteristic.

argueing that dwarves become intiative 4 because there lord is standing next to them is like argueing that dark elf spearmen have a 1+ armour save because there dreadlord in the unit does. would you really try making a lizardmen player take str test for his 3 kroxigor at the skinks strenth when the majority of the template is over the kroxigor i think not.

Lord Inquisitor
12-10-2010, 18:09
Note also that all of the examples that actually use the rule actually are found in the new rulebook itself. We may expect to see unit characteristic tests to be more common in future books.

decker_cky
12-10-2010, 19:26
Have you seen monsters and handlers rule? 1 unit actually uses it, and another unit uses 1/2 of it. In the 7th edition rules, there was only a single unit which existed using the rules until warriors of chaos came out.

There's only 1 fire thrower - why include the rules in the basic rules?

With special rules....there's several that don't yet exist! Sea creature and slow to fire are used by nothing. Devastating charge is used by 1 magic item and 1 piece of terrain.

Expect more in the future, but note that there is a difference in use of the different types of characteristic tests even within the 8th edition rulebook.

Shas'O Vash
12-10-2010, 19:32
Or some of this stuff may go the way of Reaping in the 4th edition 40k book. They put it in, never used it, and then took it back out.

Lord_Elric
12-10-2010, 19:58
Have you seen monsters and handlers rule? 1 unit actually uses it, and another unit uses 1/2 of it. In the 7th edition rules, there was only a single unit which existed using the rules until warriors of chaos came out.

There's only 1 fire thrower - why include the rules in the basic rules?

With special rules....there's several that don't yet exist! Sea creature and slow to fire are used by nothing. Devastating charge is used by 1 magic item and 1 piece of terrain.

Expect more in the future, but note that there is a difference in use of the different types of characteristic tests even within the 8th edition rulebook.

I can see with the new terain rules a few things "skinks for example" will have sea creature rules, slow to fire however is used by all warmachines (pg 109 brb) the firethrower rules i can see being incorperated into for example salamanders when new army books are released as well as other rules simple being premptive for new magic item or units for new army books. I mean they made the loremaster a special rule now for the sole reason of typeing fewer words in a few army list entrys.

ChrisIronBrow
13-10-2010, 00:52
I Think the reason I've been snarky up to this point is because no one wants to actually address the argument I'm making. Instead of rules rebuttal I get insults.




The main difference between the 2 is the fact that the first example being targeted at the unit takes only a single test, whereas in the second example u take one test per model effected wich would mean (as far as common sense tells us) that the test is taken on the models own characteristic.


The rules argument that I have been making this whole time is actually quite simple.

1. A "unit" is defined as "a group of models".

2. When a "unit" makes a characteristic test it uses the highest value present in the unit.

3. A model in a "unit" may be targeted separately from it's unit.(where the rules specify)

4. Targeting a model doesn't remove it from it's unit.

5. A "group of models" in a unit being affected doesn't remove those models from the "unit".

6. If a "group of models" are required to take a characteristic test they use the highest value.

7. A "unit" is defined as a "group of models".

8. It is acceptable for rules clarity to replace one instance of a word with it's definition.

Is there a rule that defines these terms differently?

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 00:56
The logic gap as I see it happens at Step 6. An individual within a "group of models" is not the group. The individual tests, or the group. If the group does, then that's a unit testing. If the individual tests, or all individuals within the groups at the same time, then the components test, not the group itself.

Synnister
13-10-2010, 01:02
No where in the rule does it state that the rule only applies to units taking a characteristic test.

jamano
13-10-2010, 01:21
No where in the rule does it state that the rule only applies to units taking a characteristic test.

It's a matter of parsing the sentence, the rule is supposed to be read as "if a model with multiple values is taking a test ie cavalry, it uses the highest" and "if a unit with multiple values is taking a test ie one with a hero in it, it uses the highest"

Lord_Elric
13-10-2010, 01:24
This has become just another thread where people are just for the most part repeating their own arguements. neither side is going to change there mind or their opinion and we wont know wich side is right until Throne of skulls for example being the official GW tournament. If your attending and this comes up simply call an official over to give a judgment. Im pritty dam sure i already know what GW staff would state (and if your playing in a gw store then they can give a ruleing) if your opponent insists on argueing then just roll off

Simples!

though seems though the arguement would of never have arose (im assuming the OP is a dwarf player) if you hadnt been annoyed at pit of shades forcing a test on one of your lowest characteristic.

"To make a characteristic test, roll a d6 and compare the scroe to the relevant characteristic on the models PROFILE"
This is the rule that pritty much lays it out.

"where a model (or a unit) has more than one value for the same characteristic, as is the case with cavalry, for example. a chacteristic test is always taken against the highest value"
This is the unfortuneate rule that makes things unclear yet is common sense to assume that the (or a unit) part of the sentence is aimed at monsters/handlers, chariots, cavalry, and monsterous cavalry. shame it doesnt state that though allowing people to get cheesy because they dont like there expensive units dieing (im sure if the spell pit of shades didnt exist we wouldnt be having this debate atall)

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 01:48
Please don't mention Monsters and Handlers as an example... only pain that way lies...

Lord_Elric
13-10-2010, 01:57
Please don't mention Monsters and Handlers as an example... only pain that way lies...

unfortuneatly they are an example of a unit that has multiple profiles though with the new rules im glad hydras/beastmasters have their own rules lol.

:P please anyfurther posters please dont start on monsters and handlers on this thread too the servers will melt.

Shas'O Vash
13-10-2010, 02:00
Please don't mention Monsters and Handlers as an example... only pain that way lies...

I didn't comment too much on that thread. But please, leave M&H's out of the discussion. They have their own rules issues that are completely separate from the issues discussed in this thread.

And as far as getting into the circular argument, you're very right. Just about everything that can be said to support and debunk both sides of this argument have already been said. As I've stated before, while I agree with the stance of Lord Inquisitor and his circle but acknowledge that ChrisIronBrow and his circle have a fair argument as well.

If you're that concerned about this particular ruling, talk to a tournament administrator before the tournament begins.

Lord_Elric
13-10-2010, 02:05
That is always the way to go thought the way things are going i think ill be having to give the tourney official a list of questions "pop quiz" as the amount of cheese theres gonna be stinking up the game hall will put me off my beer lol.

ChrisIronBrow
13-10-2010, 04:44
The logic gap as I see it happens at Step 6. An individual within a "group of models" is not the group. The individual tests, or the group. If the group does, then that's a unit testing. If the individual tests, or all individuals within the groups at the same time, then the components test, not the group itself.

Thank you for responding. I actually agree with you on this point. Kinda.

The problem lies in effects that cause multiple members of a "unit" to test at once, such as Purple sun. In this case, there is in fact a "group of models" testing.

Therefore, unless the argument is that a group of models is not a "group of models" then you can use the highest value present in the unit.

geldedgoat
13-10-2010, 06:22
The problem lies in effects that cause multiple members of a "unit" to test at once, such as Purple sun. In this case, there is in fact a "group of models" testing.

Models that may or may not be joined by other models which may or may not form a larger group are tested. A singular entity referred to as a 'group' is not tested.

jamano
13-10-2010, 11:46
Thank you for responding. I actually agree with you on this point. Kinda.

The problem lies in effects that cause multiple members of a "unit" to test at once, such as Purple sun. In this case, there is in fact a "group of models" testing.

Therefore, unless the argument is that a group of models is not a "group of models" then you can use the highest value present in the unit.
Do you think if your purple sun hit multiple units, you would use the highest stat for all tests between all models in both units? because that is also a "group of models"

Lord_Elric
13-10-2010, 11:56
Do you think if your purple sun hit multiple units, you would use the highest stat for all tests between all models in both units? because that is also a "group of models"

wow actualy that a very valid arguement IMO and one that has yet to be brought up yet.

:yes: :yes: :yes:

ChrisIronBrow
13-10-2010, 11:57
Models that may or may not be joined by other models which may or may not form a larger group are tested. A singular entity referred to as a 'group' is not tested.

It doesn't matter how you chose to address them, or classify them, By definition they are a "group of models". Even if you don't want them to be.

ChrisIronBrow
13-10-2010, 12:00
Do you think if your purple sun hit multiple units, you would use the highest stat for all tests between all models in both units? because that is also a "group of models"

Perhaps. I'd have to read into the rules of a "unit" a little more closely. Either way, that's not the argument I'm making, and has no bearing on any of the rules I pointed out earlier. In the meantime do you have an answer to my question?

I'm not arguing GW wrote logical rules, I'm arguing what they actually say.

theorox
13-10-2010, 12:05
I will be playing it that every model uses it's own value, because nothing in this thread makes sense one way or the other.

Example: Spell X wich tests on Initiative hits the unit of 20 Dwarf warriors and a lord in it. All models are hit. I'm damn right not going to let my warriors use the Initiative of my lord. Nevahr.

Is this a house rule?

Also, this whole ZOOMG IT SAYS MODEL NOT UNIT stuff seems like a load of Ballistic Skill to me. It's all the same. I tried to read it how it's argued here, but it seemed like a clumsy and unintended interpretation.

Theo

the Nurge
13-10-2010, 13:41
That's really just an assumption on your part. A model within a unit, is a part of that unit. Therefore it is a unit. Your argument would be like claiming a bolt thrower is only allowed to hit one member of a unit since he is a "model" and not part of that unit.


Maybe it's just me. but I shoot my bolt throwers at units, not models in the unit.

If a spell targets a unit as a whole, then it appears you use the best characteristic value. If the spell effect states that each model in the unit tests, then they are on their own. While the whole unit may be effected, the models are effected individually. Generally with spells that target the whole unit singularly (allowing one optimal test) only one test is made and the result of that test is applied to everyone in the unit.

Trains_Get_Robbed
13-10-2010, 16:14
If I made add. If I have a BsB with Dragon Armor in a unit of Spearmen, then the entire unit gets a +2 Ward. Essentially that is an example of what is being argued with a Lord contributing his I value to the unit. No the BsB dosen't confer the ability to the unit just himself, and thus the same goes for the Dwarf Lord in a unit of Warriors that the O.P listed as an example in the opening page.

Stymie Jackson
13-10-2010, 16:30
Also, this whole ZOOMG IT SAYS MODEL NOT UNIT stuff seems like a load of Ballistic Skill to me.
Theo

2 points for a creative way to curse.

I agree with this guy. Dwarves are my main army, and as much as I'd like to, it seems totally retarded (apologies to Sarah Palin) to rulesmith it so hammerers have I4 with having a king in the unit. Each model uses it's initiative.

"Hi! I put a vampire in my unit of zombies so they are Strength 5 vs Dwellers Below! The whole unit!"

It would be times like that I'm happy the new rule book also doubles as an Ork anaesthetic device. The 'literal' interpretation leaves way too much room for cheeze in just about any army out there.

Shas'O Vash
13-10-2010, 17:03
If I made add. If I have a BsB with Dragon Armor in a unit of Spearmen, then the entire unit gets a +2 Ward. Essentially that is an example of what is being argued with a Lord contributing his I value to the unit. No the BsB dosen't confer the ability to the unit just himself, and thus the same goes for the Dwarf Lord in a unit of Warriors that the O.P listed as an example in the opening page.

This argument (or something similar enough) has been used in this thread before (a few pages ago) and it is a wrong argument on almost every level. Armor saves and ward saves are not characteristics, which is what the rule in question is concerning. The rule in question is further only concerning characteristic tests, not things like to-hit and to-wound rolls.

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 17:20
The problem lies in effects that cause multiple members of a "unit" to test at once, such as Purple sun. In this case, there is in fact a "group of models" testing.

Therefore, unless the argument is that a group of models is not a "group of models" then you can use the highest value present in the unit.

No, there is a ... set of individual models all taking a test simultaneously, if we're defining a unit as a group. The group is not testing, just a bunch of individuals within the group. Sure, the individuals make up the group, but the individuals test. Even with dwellers, where every individual in the group tests, it is not a group test, which implies a single test for the whole group.

ChrisIronBrow
13-10-2010, 18:10
it is not a group test, which implies a single test for the whole group.

I understand your point, and on many levels agree. However the problem becomes one of "common sense" definitions of groups or units or collections or members of, etc.. VS. what the Rulebook defines these terms as.

In reference to the quote. In this case you choosing to define a "group test" as a singular test for the entire group. However, a "group test" can just as easily mean "several individuals testing". The difference is whether or not there is one test, or several.

Forcing a model in a unit to make a test. Singular, one model affected.
Forcing several models in a unit to test. Plural, More than one model affected.

If more than one model in a unit is affected, than that is a "group of models" affected. Just because not every model within the "group of models" that comprises a unit were affected doesn't change the fact that a "group of models" that are a "unit" have been affected.

I believe, based on past Experience with GW, that what they intended to say was that when targeting a unit and not individual members of the unit use the highest value.

However, No matter how much I might believe it, unless I can dispute the rules argument I'm not going to be able to convince the TO around here to reverse his previous ruling.

As such, this appears to be an oversight on GW's part. Maybe it's not.

Lord Inquisitor
13-10-2010, 18:34
Fair enough then if you're playing devil's advocate and looking for a cast-iron proof.

I don't know that I can word things in another way. A group of individuals - even the whole unit - that are taking individual tests does not mean the unit is taking the test.

Ultimately if you can't pursuade the TO then just stick a hero in every unit (vampires would be good for this!) and keep going. In all honesty it might even be a good thing, given that it'll drastically reduce the effectiveness of those problematic megadeath spells and give Ogres, Dwarfs and Lizards some measure of defence against the purple sun.

jamano
13-10-2010, 19:26
Because a unit is a group of models doesn't mean that a group of models is a unit! And so if you are defining it as the unit testing because a "group of models" is testing, that logic is flawed.

Heck, tell your TO what you say that there is no ironclad rule either way(one certainly couldnt say it's undisputable that the models test on the whole units stats) and since GW didn't actually give you a rule, you need to use rules as obviously intented because since you're forced to make a ruling on the lack of rules, you might as well make the sensible one.

geldedgoat
14-10-2010, 03:59
I understand your point, and on many levels agree. However the problem becomes one of "common sense" definitions of groups or units or collections or members of, etc.. VS. what the Rulebook defines these terms as.

The BRB defines a model as a single playing piece and a unit as a group of models, yes, but it defines them separately. It then goes on to describe the rule we're discussing with "a model (or a unit)", separating them once again. And finally, in the very same BRB, it gives spells and effects that specifically test units and spells and effects that specifically test models. Nowhere is it ever stated that 'model' is equivalent to 'unit'; you're just pulling that out of thin air.

CGLover
27-10-2010, 10:03
Sorry for necroing this thing ,but maybe some-one knows if this issue was raised in the Ard Boyz tourney ,and how it was rules out? Thank you

H33D
27-10-2010, 21:16
If you take a single test for the entire unit using 1 die, it is taken vs. the highest value of that characteristic in the entire unit. If a Dwarf unit had to take an Initiative test against the unit you would roll 1 die and fail on a 3+. If a Lord was in that unit you would fail on a 5+.

If you take a test for every model in a unit, you use 1 die per model in the unit. It is taken vs. the individual characteristic of each single model in that unit. The only exceptions are for cavalry and other split-profile/mount models in which case they use the highest stat of their model, whichever part that may come from. If a character is in a unit only he can use his own characteristics, the unit uses their own in this case.

This works even applied to Monsters/Handlers. Handlers usually cannot be affected, but if the 'unit' takes an Initiative test it can use the Handlers as there's is the highest. If the Monster itself takes a model-specific test then it can't use the Handler's Initiative.

CGLover
27-10-2010, 22:47
Just to make sure , if I got this right.

Dwellers below on the dwarf unit above -> use lord Strengh
Purple sun on the dwarf unit above -> every model uses his own stat

Right?

Lord_Elric
27-10-2010, 22:54
Just to make sure , if I got this right.

Dwellers below on the dwarf unit above -> use lord Strengh
Purple sun on the dwarf unit above -> every model uses his own stat

Right?

no because you test for every model in the unit on dwellers not the unit taking a single test

AMWOOD co
28-10-2010, 13:47
Dwellers: Every model on his own.
Purple Sun: Every model on his own.
Net of Amyntok: Best in the unit (there's only 1 test for the whole unit).

CGLover
05-11-2010, 20:20
Sorry again..
But if a Stegadon gets hit by any one of the above?
Thank you.

Lord_Elric
05-11-2010, 20:33
Sorry again..
But if a Stegadon gets hit by any one of the above?
Thank you.

Hmmm that a litte more difficult as im not 100 percent on the rule but it would be similar to ridden monsters.

IF the skinks are effectively the stegadons handlers now then id say you test on the highest (it can be assumed the skinks hold onto the steg/steer it out the way of the oncoming purple ball of doom)

However as is the case with ridden monsters im unclear as to weather you test both for the character and the mount at the moment????

CGLover
05-11-2010, 20:53
Every skink and the stegadon would take the test ,but at which stat?

Lord_Elric
05-11-2010, 20:58
Every skink and the stegadon would take the test ,but at which stat?

If they all test idivdualy then theyd have to use there own but i dont htink thats how it works for monsters im under the impression every "model" takes the test therefore as you would test once for every skink and the stegadon all together (aka 1 dice)using the highest Characteristics available if you ???

decker_cky
05-11-2010, 21:10
For a stegadon:

Dwellers: Single test on highest value for the model
Purple Sun/Pit of Shades: You'd test once for each part, but always testing on the highest value for the model.
Net of Amyntok: Single test on highest value for the model (and in this case, the model is the unit).

Lord_Elric
05-11-2010, 21:21
i agree with decker thats sounds spot on to me