Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So i guess everyone else out on the internet plays it differently than we do. I would prefer the way that everyone else plays it, as i'm not a necron player.

What we do, is when a cron gets killed, and is within the parameters of WBB then it gets knocked over. Then at the start of the necron turn, if there is a model within 6" that is of the same unit type they get to make a WBB. If there is no such model, they stayed knocked over until one gets nearby. Then the following turn they are rolled for.

This obviously makes it very difficult to beat a very key strength of the necrons by not allowing WBB. The easiest way to do it by shooting is to kill a whole unit, that is not within 6" of another unit of the same type. I just keep imagining using a whole shooting phase to drop 10 warriors, and having them knocked over. Then he brings over another squad and they rez up 5, port through the lith, and pick up 2-3 more. That whole turn of shooting...wasted. How are you supposed to kill such survivable things?

Anyway, I have read the rule, my friend has read the rule, and he obviously won't believe that it works differently "just because the internet said so.", as it is a very key rule. I can't find evidence, so its not gonna fly.

Can anyone give me proof that when a unit of crons is killed with no unit of the same type within 6", then the unit is removed from the table instead of staying knocked over until another unit comes near? Page numbers and text lines are appreciated, or if its allowed some small quoting of the rule that would show us the light.

By the rule saying "On a (self repair) roll of 1-3, remove the model as normal." There is no room for interpretation here. Also, "the self repair ability only works if the wounded Necron is within 6" of another model of the same type". Therefore, if there is no model within the distance, its removed because it doesn't benefit from the WWB rule and follows standard casualty results. I can understand not understanding, but your friend is blatantly ignoring the rules or twisting them for an very unfair advantage.

the thing is, that when I read it he pointed out that the necrons "may" self repair, giving them the option to not do it if there is nothing close enough. Therefore, no roll of 1-3 was made and they aren't quite dead yet.

Although, i dont' know about that second quote. Do they mean in addition to power weapons, instant death, ect., they cannot be rezzed if within 6"? Or do they mean if you are not within 6" you are not eligible for a roll, therefore you can't have rolled a 1-3.

Perhaps as a third interpretation, you can't choose not to come back if you have no choice in the matter, and cannot roll therefore automatically failing?

As an example of the third: you may have cake, but only if you clean your room. You didn't clean your room, so you are ineligible to have cake.

Edit: After discussing it further with him, it seems necrons are never actually removed, unless they roll a 1-3 on their roll. Even with power weapons. It doesn't say that when they are destroyed by a power weapon remove them, it says they may not take a roll. He then presented the possibility of a lord with a rez orb to walk near with a squad of the same type, and they would then get WBB. It seems that the only way a necron can be removed from the table is if it actually rolls a 1-3 for his roll.

I said to him that if a necron cannot self repair, then what is keeping it from being removed from the table as a casualty? He responded with the fact that they are still under the condition of getting put on their side, and the only way to undo this condition is to roll a 1-3 for WBB.
The WBB rules do not give any other way to remove this condition. It does not say that if they are unable to take a self repair then they are removed from the table.

Edit: he's here to speak for himself.

I'm the person that is discussing this with LightningGus.

Here is a link to another discussion board that this has come up, and I just put my thoughts onto it.
http://www.librarium-online.com/forums/40k-rules-help/109475-necron-wbb-rolls-true.html#post1077568

For those too lazy to click and go to another site, these are my thoughts (sorry if anything's the same as LightningGus's post, but I'm copy pasting)

Key phrases in the WBB rule:

Any Necron model that is reduced to 0 Wounds, or would otherwise be removed as a casualty, remains on the tabletop and is laid on its side to show that it's damaged.

At the start of every Necron turn, damaged Necrons may self-repair.

Additionally, the self-repair ability only works if the wounded Necron is within 6" of another model of the same type, although not necessarily the same unit.

My interpretation of it is this:
NO necron models are removed as casualties. (First quote)

Then when WBB phase comes around, you check eligibility for WBB and roll for those that can. This much is self explanatory. It does not say anywhere that those not eligible are removed.

Refer to quote 3: this says when to ignore the second paragraph of the WBB rule. Once again nowhere does it say that those that do not take the roll are removed.

The second quote says Necron models may self-repair, meaning they do not need to if they don't want to. Again it does not say to remove any models.

According to the Necron Codex, the only way any Necron model would be removed is if it actually failed its WBB. It cannot take it therefor, cannot fail it, if it is not eligible to do so.

In response to DaBoss:

DaBoss wrote:Therefore, if there is no model within the distance, its removed because it doesn't benefit from the WWB rule and follows standard casualty results.

It does not say that the model does not benefit from the WBB rule, it says the self-repair ability may not be used if there are no Necron model of the same type within 6". It does not say anywhere it doesn't benefit from WBB, so it still qualifies to be knocked over instead of being removed, hence, it will stay laying on its side until it gets back up or fails its self repair roll and gets removed.

DaBoss wrote:I can understand not understanding, but your friend is blatantly ignoring the rules or twisting them for an very unfair advantage.

Before you start insulting people you don't know, maybe you should read a little closer and see what it actually says. I'm not blatantly ignoring rules or twisting them, that's how it's printed. It's not an unfair advantage if that's how it's printed, and there hasn't been an errata.

LightningGus wrote:As an example of the third: you may have cake, but only if you clean your room. You didn't clean your room, so you are ineligible to have cake.

But the cake is still there for when you do clean your room.

aufde wrote:
Key phrases in the WBB rule:

Any Necron model that is reduced to 0 Wounds, or would otherwise be removed as a casualty, remains on the tabletop and is laid on its side to show that it's damaged.

At the start of every Necron turn, damaged Necrons may self-repair.

Additionally, the self-repair ability only works if the wounded Necron is within 6" of another model of the same type, although not necessarily the same unit.

There is one problem with your logic. The phrase "may repair" does not indicate an action that is taken by the player but rather the effect of the WBB roll. This might be confusing but when looked in the context of the entire rule it means that there is a chance that they will repair rather than you get to chose when they do.

If it doesn't work then it is the same as rolling a 1-3 on the WBB roll.

The 3rd paragraph talks about when Necrons are denied the ability to self-repair. In this they list 3 conditions when a Necron may not self-repair. The First 2 involve damage that causes instance death or CCWs that ignore armor saves, these 2 can be over ridden by the res orb. The third is if there is no Necron unit within 6" that is of the same model type. Because it is very explicit on the fact their Repair ability does not work. If the ability does not work is this not the same as failing the Roll? I do not see the diffrence. The rules do not give you permission to not make the roll or to defer the roll to a later time. Because of the wording for models not within 6" of a Necron of the same type you will find it difficult to find some who agrees with your unique interpretation.

DaBoss's statement "I can understand not understanding, but your friend is blatantly ignoring the rules or twisting them for an very unfair advantage." While harsh is not far from the truth. You are intrepreting the rules to your advantage and ignoring the common (and for the most part correct) interpretation of this rule. If the ability does not work then it is the same as if it fails. This is similar to the argument that if you are not allowed an armor save you technically don't fail the roll, however this is not the case if you don't get an armor save then you have also failed your save.

How about because the studio says so....?? I believe it was somone from this forum that asked Phil Kelly at the Vegas GT, he said they are gone.

don_mondo wrote:How about because the studio says so....?? I believe it was somone from this forum that asked Phil Kelly at the Vegas GT, he said they are gone.

Just because it was said doesn't make it official. It is not in writing anywhere. If it really was intended that way, it would be in FAQ or an errata.

Negativemoney wrote:There is one problem with your logic. The phrase "may repair" does not indicate an action that is taken by the player but rather the effect of the WBB roll. This might be confusing but when looked in the context of the entire rule it means that there is a chance that they will repair rather than you get to chose when they do.

I understand this now, somebody explained it to me, but that shouldn't change anything. I only stated it to reinforce my argument.

Negativemoney wrote:
If it doesn't work then it is the same as rolling a 1-3 on the WBB roll.

Where does it say that?

Negativemoney wrote:Because it is very explicit on the fact their Repair ability does not work. If the ability does not work is this not the same as failing the Roll? I do not see the diffrence.

It is different, because the Necron cannot self-repair, which is different than being removed. Not being removed from the table is part of the WBB rule. It does not say anywhere to discount the WBB rule, but it does say that the Necron cannot self repair. There is a difference between the WBB rule and self repairing in that self repair is part of WBB.

In the 3 paragraph, it does talk about when Necrons are denied the ability to self-repair. Self-repairing is explained in the second paragraph, which is discounted when the Necron is not eligible to self-repair. The only place in the book that ever says to remove Necron models is when the self repair roll is actually failed.

Negativemoney wrote:This is similar to the argument that if you are not allowed an armor save you technically don't fail the roll, however this is not the case if you don't get an armor save then you have also failed your save.

Similar, yes, but not the same. The AP rule explicitly says that if the AP of the weapon is lower than the armor save, no save is taken, and the save is considered failed. If not being eligible meant failure in the WBB case they would point that out.

In British English, the dialect in which GW rules are written, the word "may" really means "must." It leads to a lot of confusion with American readers.

DaBoss wrote:
I can understand not understanding, but your friend is blatantly ignoring the rules or twisting them for an very unfair advantage.
aufde wrote:
Before you start insulting people you don't know, maybe you should read a little closer and see what it actually says. I'm not blatantly ignoring rules or twisting them, that's how it's printed. It's not an unfair advantage if that's how it's printed, and there hasn't been an errata.

Easy Tiger. There was no insult there that I could see, and I am a specialist 'insulter'.

Negativemoney wroteaBoss's statement "I can understand not understanding, but your friend is blatantly ignoring the rules or twisting them for an very unfair advantage." While harsh is not far from the truth. You are intrepreting the rules to your advantage and ignoring the common (and for the most part correct) interpretation of this rule. If the ability does not work then it is the same as if it fails. This is similar to the argument that if you are not allowed an armor save you technically don't fail the roll, however this is not the case if you don't get an armor save then you have also failed your save.

Which is why Apothacaries can 'ignore' 1 wound in the Unit they are in, even if the model was killed with a PW, but NOT insta-killed. Every other gamer I have ever played with plays the WBB rule that is written in the book. If, by your logic, you didn't roll a 1-3 (because a buddy was not close enough for the 6" rule), and decided to wait a turn or two, it sounds like a powergamer bully tactic, FTW.

That was not an insult towards you at all, just my interpretation of said scenario.

Every other gamer I have ever played with plays the WBB rule that is written in the book

and which way is that? It seems by raw it could go either way.

I give up. Have some fun games, I will not be back.

Seeing as aufde is THE ONLY necron player I've encountered to play it that way, and I've played against Necrons since they first debuted, I'd say a reference to the second line of my signature is in order.

Never noticed your signatures before Lord_Sutekh, but pretty good standards to play by.

To this question, you came onto this forum obviously seeking the advice of people who can be refered to as "veteran" players. We understand the intent of the WBB rule as we have all encountered it more times than I would like. If you want to ignore what EVERY is saying, go ahead. As to my comment about you trying to gain an unfair advantage, I stand by it. It wasn't meant as an insult, merely an observation. You seem unwilling to even consider that you cannot do as you want because of the obvious disadvantage you might suffer during play. GW is not flawless in the clearity of thier rules and it is up to the players to not pick at every word which is unclear and skew it towards some totally senseless end. The BGB is the basis of the gameplay, and the Codex is meant to add interesting elements when it utilizes nonstandard rules. To simply ignore the foundation of troop removal is one of those senseless ends. Basically, please don't use the rules as a just another weapon to win.

i do understand your logic, i mean i at least understand how you could be confused but do you really think that EVERYONE else is playing necrons wrong? dont you think this would have been caught and used as the main stay for the rules in the 6+ years that the necron codex has been out?

I'm not telling you to change how you play, but i wouldnt play agianst someone using the WBB rule like that. you are picking apart something that has been picked apart since the codex came out.

it would be like saying that just because a rule says "remove them from play" that means they dont count as casualties. it doesnt say that are counted as casualties so therefore they are not! it just doesnt work that way.

also do you really need this interpretation of the rules to help you out so much? the fact that they have more chances to stay alive than any other army in the game is pretty sweet. this would push necrons to the nigh-unkillable zone where phase out doesnt even matter anymore...


ah well just my 2 lincolns....

First of all, something I pointed out to LightningGus in person today, EVERYONE thought the world was flat. EVERYONE was wrong. Just because I am outnumbered doesn't mean I am wrong.

lord_sutekh wrote:As a rule of thumb, the designers do not hide "easter eggs" in the rules. If clever reading is required to unlock some sort of hidden option, then it is most likely the result of wishful thinking.

I don't see how this is an "easter egg" in any way. I'm not using clever reading, nor is it wishful thinking. The problem came up in a game, and I looked. That is how it is written.

Everyone is basing their logic on assumptions. Nobody is pointing out specific rules, it's just "well...since they can't take it they're removed." It doesn't say that anywhere.

Anyway, this whole topic is pissing me off and I'm done discussing it, because nobody can see where I'm coming from and think it's valid. There doesn't seem to be anything I can do about it because I am outnumbered.

akira5665 wrote:Easy Tiger. There was no insult there that I could see, and I am a specialist 'insulter'.

I took it as an insult because he didn't have anything to base what he said on. I am not intentionally trying to get an advantage out of this (there isn't much to be gained). I'm not twisting what is there, I am simply reading what it says and playing by it.

If you told a religious person that what they think is blasphemy and is ridiculous, they will be insulted. That is what they believe, they aren't trying to get anything. I am not trying to get anything out of this, I am simply playing by how I believe it is stated. Whether I am wrong or not, I wasn't doing anything intentionally.

aufde wrote:First of all, something I pointed out to LightningGus in person today, EVERYONE thought the world was flat. EVERYONE was wrong. Just because I am outnumbered doesn't mean I am wrong.

I'm not sure where this piece of misinformation came from, but it's completely untrue. Almost nobody thought that the world was flat, at least, not in seafaring societies that had basic navigation. There's a statue of Charlemagne holding a globe that dates back to the eighth century. The Greeks calculated the diameter of the Earth based on the lengths of shadows in different location. I've never been able to find any historical source that suggests that anywhere near a majority of literate people thought that the world was flat.

Audfe-

I would refer you to the Necron FAQ, We'll Be Back!, Bullet point 2.

From GW:

A Necron unit falls back, having been beaten in close combat by a unit with power weapons. However, there is a Resurrection Orb nearby. To keep things simple, when the casualties are suffered asess whether they are in range of the Resurrection Orb. If they are, lay them down and move them with the unit. If they are not in range of the Resurrection Orb, REMOVE THEM ENTIRELY (my emphasis). You will then know how many WBB rolls to make at the start of your next turn. The same logic applies if the Necrons fall back after taking shooting casualties.

http://us.games-workshop.com/errata/assets/necrons_faq_v4-0.pdf

This part of the FAQ clarifies that:

a) A Necron model that takes a wound from a weapon negating WBB that is not within range of a Resurrection Orb when the wound is taken is removed from the game entirely as a casualty

b) Per the sentence following this (You will then know . . .), we learn that the number of casualties taken in that turn dictate how many WBB you will be making at the start of the turn-hence there is no "delay" effect.

Good call Alpharius.

I wonder if he will be back..... to read it.

Reading these Internet things is pretty addictive-I have faith that Audfe or LightningGus will read it at some point

Yes I did come back.

I've read the FAQ, I know what your talking about. I could continue discussing(don't feel like it) but that's not happening.

But then my OCD kicked in and I had an impulse to explain myself:
It says for SIMPLICITY (my emphasis) remove them. This doesn't mean you have to. Also, you don't check Res. Orb when the models die, but when you roll for WBB. Which means, that bullet only explains and doesn't mean much to the game.

Buoyancy wrote:I'm not sure where this piece of misinformation came from, but it's completely untrue. Almost nobody thought that the world was flat, at least, not in seafaring societies that had basic navigation. There's a statue of Charlemagne holding a globe that dates back to the eighth century. The Greeks calculated the diameter of the Earth based on the lengths of shadows in different location. I've never been able to find any historical source that suggests that anywhere near a majority of literate people thought that the world was flat.

Sorry, I was never good at social studies, I just knew that was a misconception.

How about this: Everyone thought the Sun revolved around the Earth, and everyone was wrong.

My point is the same...I'm not wrong just because everyone thinks I am.

aufde wrote:Yes I did come back.

I've read the FAQ, I know what your talking about. I could continue discussing(don't feel like it) but that's not happening.

But then my OCD kicked in and I had an impulse to explain myself:
It says for SIMPLICITY (my emphasis) remove them. This doesn't mean you have to. Also, you don't check Res. Orb when the models die, but when you roll for WBB. Which means, that bullet only explains and doesn't mean much to the game.

I could see where you were coming from at first and could easily see how you could argue "may" - wouldn't play it that way myself, but in truth I could see the logic and depending on how you use the word "may" your interpretation could be right.

However, now I have seen the FAQ for you to say "It says for SIMPLICITY (my emphasis) remove them. This doesn't mean you have to." is just dumb. It really makes you sound as if you are just trying to get an advantaged and win at all costs. If in a game you tried to pull this (and I was aware of the FAQ) my next move would be to say you win the game and pick my models up. What you are saying is so far beyond stretching the rules I cannot even think of a slightly amusing comparison to explain it.

Hmmm

The FAQ says.....

'If they are not in range of the Orb, remove them entirely'

Seems simple and obvious.

aufde wrote:Yes I did come back.

I've read the FAQ, I know what your talking about. I could continue discussing(don't feel like it) but that's not happening.

But then my OCD kicked in and I had an impulse to explain myself:
It says for SIMPLICITY (my emphasis) remove them. This doesn't mean you have to. Also, you don't check Res. Orb when the models die, but when you roll for WBB. Which means, that bullet only explains and doesn't mean much to the game.

GW is giving you a reason for the FAQ ruling they made ("To keep things simple . . .").

There is no language in the FAQ ruling (and the FAQ does supercede the Codex . . .) to indicate that their ruling is in any way optional. The 2nd line of the "Using This Update" paragraph states that "This document explains how to use the Necrons in conjunction with these changes [a reference to 40k V4's release]." So they decided to change something to be simple and work better in conjunction with the mechanics of the new ruleset. That hardly makes it optional.

If you read the 40k rulebook FAQ there is one ruling that is optional-and it specifically states that it should be used only with the consent of both players (if you are curious, it is the section dealing with moving infantry 1" away from vehicles without a WS after conducting their attacks). There is nothing in the Necron FAQ regarding WBB that approximates this language.

So Aufde, hypothetically, how long can a necron lie around until YOU decide that they are in range to test?
1 turn?
2?
the entire game?

Could you explain the logic behind your reasoning?

The rules do not say that you can choose when to roll for WBB and that they can wait around. They do however state that once there are no Necron models with 6" of a damaged one that that damaged model cannot repair. Considering that the WBB roll is a roll to determine if the model can repair or not seems to indicate to me that the roll is automatically failed and the model is removed.

And yes the fact the may is used in that sentence to describe a game effect rather than a player option does change the entire rule. Because of that you have no choice in the matter on when you can make the roll.

aufde wrote:Yes I did come back.

I've read the FAQ, I know what your talking about. I could continue discussing(don't feel like it) but that's not happening.

But then my OCD kicked in and I had an impulse to explain myself:
It says for SIMPLICITY (my emphasis) remove them. This doesn't mean you have to. Also, you don't check Res. Orb when the models die, but when you roll for WBB. Which means, that bullet only explains and doesn't mean much to the game.

Buoyancy wrote:I'm not sure where this piece of misinformation came from, but it's completely untrue. Almost nobody thought that the world was flat, at least, not in seafaring societies that had basic navigation. There's a statue of Charlemagne holding a globe that dates back to the eighth century. The Greeks calculated the diameter of the Earth based on the lengths of shadows in different location. I've never been able to find any historical source that suggests that anywhere near a majority of literate people thought that the world was flat.

Sorry, I was never good at social studies, I just knew that was a misconception.

How about this: Everyone thought the Sun revolved around the Earth, and everyone was wrong.

My point is the same...I'm not wrong just because everyone thinks I am.

You're not wrong because everyone says you are. You're wrong because you are blatantly misreading and interpreting the rules to give your army an advantage.

Some advice: You're not smarter than everyone else on the planet that plays 40K. If you have a radically different interpretation of the rules that what is generally accepted, you are probably wrong. The analogy you make referenced above is completely unapplicable. The rules of a game and the laws of physics are not analagous.

It looks like everyone has pretty much told you that you are wrong, but you dont believe it because it isnt from an offical GW document.

Here is an answer to a question in the official Chapter Approved Necron Errata v2.0. The initial question is different, but the answer to this question lies within the posted answer.



Q. If Necrons fail their WBB roll are they removed or do they remain there
to try again next move?

A. When a Necron has either failed a WBB roll or is ineligible to take one at the
start of the Necron turn it is deemed to be destroyed and is removed, unless you
intend to use a Monolith portal to teleport the unit during the current move. If for
some reason you change your mind about using the portal, they are removed
immediately.

key text here: ...has either failed a WBB roll or is ineligible to take one at the start of the necron turn.

this is as obvious as it gets, it is from a document published by GW that is available on the GW website. Should be case closed

aufde wrote:Yes I did come back.

I've read the FAQ, I know what your talking about. I could continue discussing(don't feel like it) but that's not happening.

But then my OCD kicked in and I had an impulse to explain myself:
It says for SIMPLICITY (my emphasis) remove them. This doesn't mean you have to. Also, you don't check Res. Orb when the models die, but when you roll for WBB. Which means, that bullet only explains and doesn't mean much to the game.

Actually, you check for the ResOrb range when the model is DAMAGED not at the beginning of the turn. This is important when determining which models are affected by the Orb if the Lord is damaged.