A scoring unit is a unit taken from the troop section of an armies codex or unless it specifies that the unit is scoring.

Though I have read on various forums that x10 wraithguard and a warlock is a scoring unit and that a Daemon Prince of Chaos taken from the Chaos Daemons codex is a scoring unit? I have also read that the Nurglings are a scoring unit despite having the swarm rule.

Why is this? Am i completely missing some caveat to the scoring unit rule.

The simpler explanation is that the accounts which you read in other forums were misinformed or were the result of misunderstanding the rules.

In particular, Nurglings units are not scoring because the effect of the Swarms special rule prevents that particular troop choice from scoring.

In other cases, such as the Dark Angel Ravenwing, various special rules can make otherwise non-Troop units, such as land speeders, count as scoring. Those various cases vary from codex to codex and are dependent on special rules in the particular codex which explicitly state that such and such units in that codex count as scoring.

Another alternative is that the accounts which you mention were either referencing custom, scenario specific rules determining which units were scoring, or were using the 4th edition scoring rules. For example, I believe that under 4th edition, the current daemon prince would be scoring as a non-IC monstrous creature, in contrast to the normal 5th edition scoring rules by which the daemon prince is not a scoring unit.

Depending on the codex, some units count as troops if you take them in certain numbers.

For example, if your SM Captain is on a bike, you can take bike squads as Troops OR Fast Attack.

If you take wraithguard in squads of ten, with a spiritseer, they can be taken as Troops OR Elites.

When these units are taken as Troops, then count as scoring units, and come from your six Troops slots on the FOC.

ArbitorIan wrote:If you take wraithguard in squads of ten, with a spiritseer, they can be taken as Troops OR Elites.

Yes right there Where are you getting this information from? I can't find this in the codex.

It's in the codex, look at the unit entries for Wraithguard.

An expensive 400pt troops choice, but add a fortunelock with conceal and watch as that unit marches across soaking up punishment.

Daemon Princes are definitely NOT scoring, they are Heavy Support in DoC.

Ealiom wrote:Yes right there Where are you getting this information from? I can't find this in the codex.

Page 62

Great thanks... Don't know why but i was looking under wraithgaurd entries, wraighsight, spiritseer, warlock everywhere but the points cost.

And I can't think of a reason ever where a Demon Prince is a scoring unit.

whitedragon wrote:And I can't think of a reason ever where a Demon Prince is a scoring unit.

4th Edition

I think the only non-troop unit that's currently scoring are Sternguard with Pedro Cantor.

Also note that vehicles, even if troops, are never scoring units. So no Deff Dreads, Ravenwing Speeders, etc.

But the Dark Angels codex specifically lists Ravenwing Speeders as scoring, and doesn't the codex override the BGB?

I believe that the BA dex lists Death Company as scoring in the FAQ, which should also make them scoring.

Codices don't automatically override the BGB anymore. The codex says they count as independent scoring units, but the missions specifically says that nothing that is a vehicle can score. I think in this instance mission specific rules (even for the base mission) over ride codex rules.

Polonius wrote:Codices don't automatically override the BGB anymore. The codex says they count as independent scoring units, but the missions specifically says that nothing that is a vehicle can score. I think in this instance mission specific rules (even for the base mission) over ride codex rules.

You're saying that the rule 'Vehicles which are part of a troop choice are not scoring' is more specific than 'A Ravenwing land speeder is always scoring.' That is a very surprising conclusion.

I agree with solkan on this point. The mission is not more specific (note also that scoring units are not listed under a mission type, but general rules) in this case, because it addresses all vehicles, and the RLS addresses one.

Gwar! wrote:

whitedragon wrote:And I can't think of a reason ever where a Demon Prince is a scoring unit.

4th Edition

That or some ones getting planet strike mixed up ...

Polonius wrote:I think the only non-troop unit that's currently scoring are Sternguard with Pedro Cantor.

Also note that vehicles, even if troops, are never scoring units. So no Deff Dreads, Ravenwing Speeders, etc.

Except in Planetstrike, when they are.

Planetstrike doesn't have scoring units. It just has units.

ajfirecracker wrote:Planetstrike doesn't have scoring units. It just has units.

No, it has Scoring units. More precisely, it has a Special Rule that allows ALL units to score. What is not clarified is if units that can NEVER score (Like Rippers) can score in Planetstrike and require pre-game clarification.

Gwar! wrote:

ajfirecracker wrote:Planetstrike doesn't have scoring units. It just has units.

No, it has Scoring units. More precisely, it has a Special Rule that allows ALL units to score. What is not clarified is if units that can NEVER score (Like Rippers) can score in Planetstrike and require pre-game clarification.

I think Gwar that specific rules over rule general. All units are scoring unless they specifically state they don't.

It's like the two warbosses thing. The codex doesnt say you can't have two nob squads as troops, but it doesn't exactly tell you it's ok

ajfirecracker wrote:I believe that the BA dex lists Death Company as scoring in the FAQ, which should also make them scoring.

As a BA player please allow me to say no, just no. The question is in reference to a rule that no longer exists, and even if taken literally has to be stretched in such a way I dare anyone to back that up with a straight face.

Nightwatch wrote:It's like the two warbosses thing. The codex doesnt say you can't have two nob squads as troops, but it doesn't exactly tell you it's ok

Except that...it tells you that if you take a warboss, you can take a squad of nobz as troops. So, a second warboss would therefore be able to take a second Nobz squad as troops per his entry. So, the codex does tell you that you can.

I guess I'm still curious as to whether Ravenwing Speeders can score. The codex says they do, which should be the more specific rule overriding the BGB saying that Vehicles can never score.

Neconilis, VP are still in 5e. They're described as optional, but there's rules for them and everything. So the question about Death Company's VP total is still relevent/extant.

Also, since Death Company are hardly typical elites (free, don't take up FOC, possibly 0 VP) it's not that strange an idea that they might be able to score (particularly since their rage requirements will keep them off most objectives w/o a chaplain), and the FAQ is pretty clear on this point, at least for now.

whitedragon wrote:

Nightwatch wrote:It's like the two warbosses thing. The codex doesnt say you can't have two nob squads as troops, but it doesn't exactly tell you it's ok

Except that...it tells you that if you take a warboss, you can take a squad of nobz as troops. So, a second warboss would therefore be able to take a second Nobz squad as troops per his entry. So, the codex does tell you that you can.

I guess I'm still curious as to whether Ravenwing Speeders can score. The codex says they do, which should be the more specific rule overriding the BGB saying that Vehicles can never score.

Of course they can.

The argument of; "But they are still Vehicles and therefore cannot score" is simply stupid.
It would be like saying; "But they are still Elites and therefore cannot score" to the Sternguards in an army with Pedro Cantor.

Let's see, several points to address.......

Blood Angel Death Company has no such statement about being scoring (leastwise, I didn't find it on page 18 (unit entry) or on page 10 (unit description)) in the most current download. If yours still has a bunch of FAQ stuff on the last page, go get the new one.

Codices do indeed override main rules. GW has said so over and over, in both the main rules and their FAQ/Erratta. Hence we have Elite Infantry (Sternguard, an Elite choice) that can be scoring in spite of the main rules saying Troops only. So why does everyone have so much heartburn over the fact that DA can do the same thing with RW Bike Squadron Landspeeders, overriding the no vehicles clause? It's the same rules premise, that a special rule in the codex overrides the restrictions on what is and is not scoring and allows a normally non-scoring unit to become scoring. Bottom line, by RAW, those DA RW Landspeeders are scoring.

So, I take a Big Mek and a Troopified Deff Dred. My Deff Dred, though a troop choice, is not scoring?

KaloranSLC wrote:So, I take a Big Mek and a Troopified Deff Dred. My Deff Dred, though a troop choice, is not scoring?

Correct, because it is a Vehicle.

Gwar! wrote:

KaloranSLC wrote:So, I take a Big Mek and a Troopified Deff Dred. My Deff Dred, though a troop choice, is not scoring?

Correct, because it is a Vehicle.

Huh. Why even bother, then?

Fit more into the Force Org Chart, allowing you to have 9 kans and 2 dreads in the same list, potentially.

Well, I'm glad this came up before I spent a bunch of time scratch-building Dreds.

Malecus wrote:Fit more into the Force Org Chart, allowing you to have 9 kans and 2 dreads in the same list, potentially.

Or 5 Dreads


Automatically Appended Next Post:

KaloranSLC wrote:Well, I'm glad this came up before I spent a bunch of time scratch-building Dreds.

It lets you take 2 Dreads AND 3 Battlewaggons. How awesome is that?!

don_mondo, the current BA FAQ still has one question, which clearly specifies that Death Company are a "normal scoring unit". I got that off the GW website about 3 minutes ago.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1180159_Blood_Angels_Codex_and_FAQ_2007-08_5th_Edition.pdf

You sir are a liar and a charlatan.

The FAQ is about Victory points, not if they are "Scoring" or not:

Q. How do you work out the victory points for a Death Company squad?
A. The victory points of a Death Company squad is equal to the total points value of any additional Death Company models and extra wargear purchased for the squad. For example: a Blood Angels army contains six units that allow one Death Company model to be added to the initial unit composition of the Death Company squad. This six-strong initial squad is a normal scoring unit worth 0 victory points. If the player decides to add two models to the squad (+60 pts) and to equip the entire squad with Jump Packs (8 x 5 pts, for a total of +40 pts), the squad is now worth 100 victory points.

From your post:

"this six-strong initial squad is a normal scoring unit"

ajfirecracker wrote:From your post:

"this six-strong initial squad is a normal scoring unit"

Yes, for the purposes of Victory Points. In any case, a "Normal Scoring Unit" doesn't let them score, it means they follow the Normal rules for determining if they are a Scoring unit, which they are not because they fulfil none of the criteria for counting as scoring.

KaloranSLC:

I think the idea isn't to give you scoring Dreadnoughts, but to give you five Heavy Support choices. You could take two Dreadnoughts and nine Killer Kans, for example.

Units are not scoring for the purposes of victory points, but for capturing objectives, unless I've seriously misread the rules.

And nowhere does it say that they follow the normal rules for determining if a unit is scoring, it says they are a normal scoring unit. (i.e. a unit that is both normal and scoring)

ajfirecracker wrote:Units are not scoring for the purposes of victory points, but for capturing objectives, unless I've seriously misread the rules.

Yes, try Reading the FAQ Question. it is about victory points.

I agree. It is about victory points. Got it.

However, it says they're a normal scoring unit. If we accept FAQs as rules, they're a normal scoring unit. Note that this phrase is never defined, so we're required to parse out its meaning, substituting english definitions for game definitions when we find words without game definitions.

Normal, loosely, means without irregularities.
Scoring is well-defined (by GW), and means that it can both capture and contest objectives.
Unit is also well-defined, and refers to a group of models that fights together.

In other words, the FAQ states that Death Company is just like any other group of models that fights together and can both capture and control objectives.

(Unless you're claiming they can score in VP-counted games, but in games where you don't count VP, they can't score, on the basis of the question used to generate the response)

The term "normal" or "normally" is used in the rules to refer to more basic or general rules covering a situation.

The normal rules for vehicles are covered on pp.56-64, followed by the normal rules for the various types of vehicles, which are themselves special cases of the normal rules.

Right, nurglitch, but if the rule said a particular vehicle was a "normal skimmer vehicle" that would mean that it followed the normal rules for skimmer vehicles, not that it is a vehicle which we should separately assess the skimmer properties of.

Similarly, Death Company follow the normal rules for scoring units. (i.e. They are a scoring unit which follows the normal rules given to describe such units, namely, that they may capture objectives)

ajfirecracker wrote:Similarly, Death Company follow the normal rules for scoring units. (i.e. They are a scoring unit which follows the normal rules given to describe such units, namely, that they may capture objectives)

No, because:
a) FAQ != Rules
b) Scoring is referring to Victory Points
c) They are Elites, not Troops and have no special rule like Pedro+Sternguard

ajfirecracker:

Yeah, that's my point, that if a rule referenced Falcons as "skimmer vehicles", they follow all the rules for vehicles and for skimmers. Given that the rules for skimmers are a special case of the normal vehicle rules, then of course you follow the normal rules for vehicles until you encounter cases covered by the skimmer rules.

The only point that matters of those three is FAQ!=Rules. If true, it does indeed make them not scoring. However, I've been under the impression that competitive play as well as YMDC treats the FAQ as rules. Is this not the case?

ajfirecracker wrote:The only point that matters of those three is FAQ!=Rules. If true, it does indeed make them not scoring. However, I've been under the impression that competitive play as well as YMDC treats the FAQ as rules. Is this not the case?

Yes, most people do. However, the FAQ is referring to VICTORY POINTS, not objectives.

Nurglitch, the rules for scoring units are a subset of the rules for units. So you would follow the rules for units, unless the rules for scoring units were different, in which case you would follow the rules for scoring units.

The other option (which does not apply to Death Company, per the FAQ) is that you would follow the rules for units all the time and ignore the rules for scoring units, as the unit in question (say, for example, an empty BT Land Raider) is not a scoring unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ajfirecracker wrote:Units are not scoring for the purposes of victory points, but for capturing objectives, unless I've seriously misread the rules.

And nowhere does it say that they follow the normal rules for determining if a unit is scoring, it says they are a normal scoring unit. (i.e. a unit that is both normal and scoring)

Meaning that it does not matter what the topic of the question is. Particularly if FAQ=Rules, because then all of the rules are true all of the time, not just when you're evaluating VP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, strictly speaking, the FAQ is referring to both Victory Points and Death Company, and the answer pertains to Victory Points and Death Company (and, as a property of DC, scoring status).

ajfirecracker:

I do believe I just pointed out that where the rules for scoring units are a subset of the rules for units, they follow the rules for units until they encounter cases concerning scoring.

Why exactly do you repeat back what I've said as though I was saying something else?

This is sort of a sideways rule. It's as if I were to find a hidden gem in a FAQ from GW like "No ork player may hop on their left foot for the entirety of the opponent's turn, because if they do, then that would cause Land Raiders to be front armor 13 instead of the proper value of 15". The FAQ is talking about random XYZ (left foot hopping Orks), but in its text addresses something totally separate (namely Land Raiders being even harder to kill than before).

Regardless, the GW FAQs are a set of suggestions on how to address things if there are questions. Only the Errata is binding, unless you and your opponent or the organizer of a given tournament states otherwise.

Nurglitch, my point is this: Per the FAQ, Death Company follow scoring rules as if they are a scoring unit like any other scoring unit. I did re-iterate that to make it clear.

However, what they do not do (per the FAQ) is follow normal rules and then check to see (as if any other unit) if they follow the scoring rules when such rules come into effect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Your post made it sound as if you were advocating the second position, so I wanted to be clear.

So to find out if the unit is scoring, you need to reference a question about Victory Points?

Makes. . . sense?

No, kirsanth. It makes no sense. But it can still be the rules, and if you treat the FAQ as rules, it is.

kirsanth wrote:So to find out if the unit is scoring, you need to reference a question about Victory Points?

Makes. . . sense?

Durrrr. It's a Moot point after all </annoykirsanth>


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ajfirecracker wrote:No, kirsanth. It makes no sense. But it can still be the rules, and if you treat the FAQ as rules, it is.

But you are not looking at the whole rule and twisting a single part to match your needs.

ajfirecracker:

How on earth did my post make it sound like I was proposing that the Death Company followed the normal rules for scoring units (and thus not be scoring units) when they have special rules saying that they are scoring units?

I was just pointing out that normal is defined in the Warhammer rules.

They don't have special rules, they have a FAQ. (Although if you treat said FAQ as rules, it has the effect.)

I didn't realize that normal was defined, would you mind throwing up a page number?

ajfirecracker wrote:I didn't realize that normal was defined, would you mind throwing up a page number?

Page 90

Gwar, I don't see anything about normal units, scoring or otherwise, on that page. I do see scoring units. Perhaps you've mixed up the pages?

ajfirecracker:

I've already pointed out how the rules define "normal", so asking for a page number is beside the point.

I just want to see it, for future reference. I've had the unfortunate luck of having people play strangely against me, and I like to know where all my rules are.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gwar, I don't play BA. I'm not twisting anything to suit my needs. I'm saying that the FAQ is clearly indicating that they're a normal scoring unit. "This six-strong initial squad is a normal scoring unit worth 0 victory points." This addresses VP, as per the FAQ's topic, and it indicates that they're a normal scoring unit.

What's unclear or twisted about that?

Nurglitch wrote:The term "normal" or "normally" is used in the rules to refer to more basic or general rules covering a situation.

The normal rules for vehicles are covered on pp.56-64, followed by the normal rules for the various types of vehicles, which are themselves special cases of the normal rules.

The FAQ says they are a normal Scoring unit for the purposes of Victory Points, because the question is about sodding victory points.

Thanks, nurglitch. Which ruleset does that come from? I need to be able to point it out to opponents.

It's how the 5th edition rulebook is set up.

Gwar, the question could be about bananas, and if it said they were a scoring unit, they would be a scoring unit. I repeat, does the term scoring unit even make sense in the context of VPs?

And, no, the question does not say they're a normal scoring unit for the purposes of VP. It says they're a normal scoring unit.

ajfirecracker wrote:Gwar, the question could be about bananas, and if it said they were a scoring unit, they would be a scoring unit. I repeat, does the term scoring unit even make sense in the context of VPs?

Yes, they score you victory points.

Oh, well, Nurglitch. I guess if you can't give me some sort of reference I'll be stuck arguing it out based on common sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gwar, where does GW use the term scoring unit in the context of VPs? Scoring unit is a term that's used to refer to being able to capture objectives. It has a rules meaning, so making one up based on conjecture as to what "scoring" and "unit" mean together is simply ignoring the rules for scoring units, listed on p. 90.

I would read "normal scoring unit" as "they score as normal for their unit type", not "they gain the ability to score".

ajfirecracker:

The reference is the rulebook.

The rulebook doesn't contain a sentence explicitly telling you that the rules are written in English (or German, etc) either, and asking for a reference for such a sentence would be missing the point that the rulebook being written in English is what tells you it's written in English.

Likewise with the definitions of "normal" and other terms of art in the book: their definition is made through their mode of use.

Nurglitch, that may be true, but when someone disagrees with the meaning of an instance of normal, I'd still be stuck arguing it out.

That's why you deal with rules disputes prior to play.

ajfirecracker wrote:Nurglitch, that may be true, but when someone disagrees with the meaning of an instance of normal, I'd still be stuck arguing it out.

The same can be said of "is" and a ridiculous amount of other words.
If it is not a game term, it is a word.

If that's the case, then there should be no rules version thereof, and nurglitch should not be insisting that it has a special meaning in regards to the rules. Just using it as a word would be sufficient.

Misfire.

I did not read that he was.

It seemed to me that he was asserting that the rule used "normal".

As above, I originally thought his point with the normal definition and such was to deny Death Company scoring based on checking whether or not "scoring" applied using normal rules.

I read it as supporting this:

Orkeosaurus wrote:I would read "normal scoring unit" as "they score as normal for their unit type", not "they gain the ability to score".

Which I thought was rather succinct.

shrug

I agree that it looked like nurglitch supported that position. I agree that its succinct. But I also think the position is completely wrong.

A normal scoring unit is a unit that is both normal and scoring. There's simply no rules to the contrary.

The obvious implication is that they should be considered normal "scoring unit" as opposed to a special "scoring unit". If they were not normal in their scoring, they would face some additional restriction or benefit (relative to other scoring units), which they do not.

Responding more directly to Orkeosaurus' argument: there's simply no way to take X scoring unit and argue that it's something other than a scoring unit which is also X, especially since scoring unit is well-defined (by GW standards) in the rulebook.

ajfirecracker wrote:
A normal scoring unit is a unit that is both normal and scoring. There's simply no rules to the contrary.

The obvious implication is that they should be considered normal "scoring unit" as opposed to a special "scoring unit". If they were not normal in their scoring, they would face some additional restriction or benefit (relative to other scoring units), which they do not.

If the FAQ were refering to a question about holding objectives I would agree.

It remains about Victory Points. VP are scored as well. As the unit is not costed normally, without upgrades, scoring as normal means you count the points spent - as normal, for scoring.

shrug

Right, but the term "scoring unit" means something very specific. I don't think the intent of that particular phrase was to say to count the points spent, since the end of the sentence about scoring is an explanation of how much the squad is worth in VPs.

This six-strong initial squad is a normal scoring unit worth 0 VPs.

I think it's a screw-up on GW's part, I just don't see how that screw-up can be interpreted other than to give them scoring status.

ajfirecracker wrote:Right, but the term "scoring unit" means something very specific.

In the rules.

So are you saying that the six-strong initial squad is scoring? That is the only allowance for it - not the unit at large, without touching on the fact that the question itself is now . . . moot, as "kill points" are used now.

kirsanth wrote:So are you saying that the six-strong initial squad is scoring? That is the only allowance for it - not the unit at large, without touching on the fact that the question itself is now . . . moot, as "kill points" are used now.

Well, KP are used in Annihilation. VPs are farther back in the rulebook, but they are still in there, so the question isn't 'moot'.

ajfirecracker. I see what you're saying, but in context, it's pretty obvious that the question is referring to VP status only and not their ability to control an objective. I wouldn't argue it if an opponent wanted his DC to be scoring, but I do not believe that to be the intent behind the FAQ answer.

Moot:
• adjective subject to debate or uncertainty: a moot point.

• verb put forward for discussion.

Ahhh, I was reading it as:
Moot=of little or no practical value or meaning; purely academic.

don_mondo wrote:Ahhh, I was reading it as:
Moot=of little or no practical value or meaning; purely academic.

That is how most people see it. However it reeeeeeeealy annoys kirsanth when people use it "wrong". Something I use to great delight

But the codex is silent on whether BA are scoring. It's a mute point.

Hehehehehehehehehe, sounds like fun to me!!

I just got ninja'd on an explaination of my own foible.

American (and even so, colloquial) usage is self-contradictory.
Moot was a gathering of elders for discussion.
A point brought before them was a moot point.
The negative usage is based upon the notion that debate is not worth time/too hard/takes thought. The usage of which makes me sort of annoyed, in that it is claiming that "This subject is too hard for me to discuss, stop it!!"

Off-topic: The usage of moot to indicate not worthy of debate is not saying that it's too hard to discuss, it's that it's not worth time because the point does not really matter either way.

Incorrect.
Editing to add:
Let's leave this as . . . moot.
Way off topic.

/fix on

"normal scoring unit" - GW blunder

friendly games - get over it and have fun (not saying op to get over it, just someone)

tournaments - ask TO beforehand

me- only if you let my firewarrior honor guard score as well

/fix off

ajfirecracker wrote:Responding more directly to Orkeosaurus' argument: there's simply no way to take X scoring unit and argue that it's something other than a scoring unit which is also X, especially since scoring unit is well-defined (by GW standards) in the rulebook.

Untue; X could be a descriptor for the adjective "scoring".

Thus, a normal scoring unit could be a unit that has a normal scoring ability, as opposed to a unit that is both normal and scoring. I'll admit that "normally scoring unit" would probably be a better expression of this, grammatically, though.

A "normal scoring" unit is not at all equivalent to a "normally scoring" unit.

Changing a word from an adjective to an adverb changes the meaning of the word in context.

Applying the word "normal" to a unit simply cannot be interpreted to remove any other description given to it. If the unit is considered scoring, also being normal cannot remove that ability.

But THE QUESTION IS ABOUT VICTORY POINTS. Thus "Scoring" is not does not mean anything to do with Scoring for Objectives.

ajfirecracker wrote:Changing a word from an adjective to an adverb changes the meaning of the word in context.

It should change the meaning, that would be grammatically correct.

However, people neither write nor read with perfect grammar all of the time. So there is another way to read it .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gwar! wrote:But THE QUESTION IS ABOUT VICTORY POINTS. Thus "Scoring" is not does not mean anything to do with Scoring for Objectives.

Weren't units that were reduced below half strength/immobilized/etc referred to as "half-scoring" for victory point purposes in 4th edition?

I can't believe I forgot about that.

The question could be about bananas, and if it says scoring unit, the unit is scoring. In 5e that means something for objectives but nothing for VPs.

And no, orkeosaurus, adverb adjective noun only works if the adjective is a gerund. Adjective adjective noun is always correct. You could read it as normally scoring unit, but that would be changing the rules. And even if it weren't, there's no reason to say that "normally scoring" units do not score.

Also, 4e doesn't matter.

There are still rules for victory points in 5th edition.

Also, if you read it as normally scoring unit it wouldn't be changing the rules, it would be interpreting the meaning of the sentence in a manner that is somewhat defiant of grammatical convention. I'm not sure how reading a sentence in a specific manner can ever change the sentence itself.

Off-topic: (this is inane) You're changing a word. The word is part of the sentence. Therefore you're changing the sentence.

Wow, looking at the text which contained the phrase 'normal scoring unit', this argument is about a phrase in the example given to explain an answer about question about calculating victory points.

Is there a Dakka article about Easter Egg hunts?

VP have rules, but not scoring units. Objectives have both.

ajfirecracker wrote:Off-topic: (this is inane) You're changing a word. The word is part of the sentence. Therefore you're changing the sentence.

You're reading a sentence in a manner that would better be expressed with a different sentence. You're not literally changing a word; you're not adding a "-ly" with a sharpie.

(Also, yes, this is inane.)

After 3 pages about Victory Points scoring units I'm confused

Do non-vehicle, non-troop units gain the ability to "score" on objectives when you can field them as a troop choice by some means (for instance Warboss + Nobs) in their codex?

Nivoglibina wrote:Do non-vehicle, non-troop units gain the ability to "score" on objectives when you can field them as a troop choice by some means (for instance Warboss + Nobs) in their codex?

Yes, because they become Troops. They are no longer their Non-Troop Type, they are Troops.