• The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model

• For every ten models in the unit, one Ork Boy may replace their ranged weapon with one of
the following:
- Big shoota…
- Rokkit launcha…

Do i have to pay this extra 1 point for a shoota that's gona get replaced with a special weapon?

Yes you do. It's one point per model in the mob, not one point per model that's taking the upgrade.

Yes, agreed.

The thing is i can replace a sluga with a rokkit first. And than the boy won't have a slugga to pay this 1 ppm for a replace to shoota as i see it. There's not a word that the upgrade to shoota must be taken first.

If you have 10 Boyz and 1 of them replaces Slugga for Big Shoota, you now have 9 Sluggas left.

NOW, the entire mob may replace Sluggas for Shootas at 1 pt/model.

Ok, the entire mob chooses to do so. 9 models turn in Sluggas for Shootas as that is the entire mob's worth of Sluggas and you pay 9 points.

I'm reading it as you aren't able to pick and choose. When you choose that upgrade, everyone who currently has a Slugga pays a point and gets a Shoota.

Again, it is one point per model in the mob. If you have ten models in the mob, then it is ten points regardless of whether or not they're exchanging a weapon or not. You're trying to place a qualification on the rules (that the model must be eligible to make the exchange) that does not exist.

I think the confusion comes with
"• The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model "

1 pt per model that has a slugga or just 1 pt per model.

pros: a model can't replace a slugga if it doesn't have it
cons: it's not specified that only models without sluggas shouldn't pay the tax even if they don't have them

Your 10 slugga boys are chilling.

You pay 5 points for a rokkit launcha, nice.

You then pay 1pt per model to give them all shootas, the guy with the rokkit launcha would then lose the launcher to take a shoota instead, paying back those 5 points, great savings.

You then buy him a rokkit launcha to replace the shoota he must buy along with the rest of his squad, 5 points. Bargain.

"The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas ...1pt/model"

I am reading that as being given the option to replace all of the sluggas in the mob with shootas at the cost of 1pt/model. If the entire mob decides to replace (I have satisfied 'the entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas'), I would then pay 1 pt/model who actually made the swap.

If I have a model who does not have a slugga, please explain how I can replace his slugga with a shoota.

I think you're reading 1pt/model as 1pt/model in the squad whereas I'm reading it as 1pt/model who makes the swap.

RaW MIGHT be ambiguous here, but in my mind RaI seems very clear. If my model doesn't have a gun and isn't swapping slugga for shoota, he shouldn't have to pay the point. No replacement is happening. Your argument that he should have to pay the point makes no logical sense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MagicMan wrote:
Your 10 slugga boys are chilling.

You pay 5 points for a rokkit launcha, nice.

You then pay 1pt per model to give them all shootas, the guy with the rokkit launcha would then lose the launcher to take a shoota instead, paying back those 5 points, great savings.

You then buy him a rokkit launcha to replace the shoota he must buy along with the rest of his squad, 5 points. Bargain.

This is completely wrong. The upgrade says to replace slugga with shoota. Not whatever gun you happen to have with shoota. Also, you can't pick rokkit launcha twice!

Except it doesn't say one point per slugga, it's one point per model and if the mob has ten models, it's ten points.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

It says 1pt/model.

This is ambiguous.

You think it means 1pt/model for each model in the squad.

I think it means 1pt/model for each model making the swap.

We are both inferring meaning from an ambiguous statement.

I believe my understanding makes more sense from a RaI standpoint because 9 gun swaps would cost 9 points. Your understanding results in paying for an upgrade that you do not get.

One point per model, not one point per slugga. It's not ambiguous.

Exactly. One point per model. The entire unit can swap at the cost of one point per model.

So.

"The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas ...1pt/model"

Step 1. I choose to have my entire mob replace their sluggas with shootas.

Step 2. I need to pay for this.

Step 3. I pay on a per model basis.

Step 4. How many models in the mob replaced their sluggas with shootas?

Step 5. 9 models in the mob replaced their sluggas with shootas.

Step 6. Looks like I need to pay 9 points... 1 point per model.

I never once said I was paying 1 point per gun. I'm paying 1 point per model. Only 9 models are participating in the upgrade, so I only pay 9 points... 1 point per model.

The codex says this:

"For every 10 models in the unit, one Ork Boy may replace their ranged weapons with one of the following:....."

The force requisition is also consistent with this wording.

So its 1 pts for each of the 10 models when turned into shootas and then you pay for the big shoota or the Rokkit Launcha. In whatever order I do this in the force requisition section of the Codex, I end up paying the same price.

The person who did the Battlescribe data file interpreted it like Kriswall says.

My paper codex doesn't have a force requisition app. I'm relying on the wording in the actual unit entry, but a supplemental army collection tracking tool.

 Kriswall wrote:
My paper codex doesn't have a force requisition app. I'm relying on the wording in the actual unit entry, but a supplemental army collection tracking tool.

In that case, the codex wording is this:

"For every 10 models in the unit, one Ork Boy may replace their ranged weapons with one of the following:....."

Unless it is not the same in the paper codex?

It is the same, but I'm not challenging that part. For every 10 models, I can take a Big Shoota or Rokkit Launcha or whatever.

That's fine.

And then the entire mob can swap sluggas for shootas at the cost of 1 point per model.

That's fine also.

When the entire mob swaps sluggas for shootas, only 9 swaps occur. so 9x 1 point per model = 9 points.

If I did the swap BEFORE picking a Big Shoota, I'd have 10 sluggas to swap and it would be 10 points. That would be stupid because I'd be wasting a point.

 Kriswall wrote:
It is the same, but I'm not challenging that part. For every 10 models, I can take a Big Shoota or Rokkit Launcha or whatever.

That's fine.

And then the entire mob can swap sluggas for shootas at the cost of 1 point per model.

That's fine also.

When the entire mob swaps sluggas for shootas, only 9 swaps occur. so 9x 1 point per model = 9 points.

If I did the swap BEFORE picking a Big Shoota, I'd have 10 sluggas to swap and it would be 10 points. That would be stupid because I'd be wasting a point.

:-)

Good point!

It sounds like the Force Req thing always assumes you are doing the slugga swap first.

Keep in mind that this app is written by the Black Library Digital Editions people and not the Rules people, so it's as open to error and interpretation as anything else that happens within GW but outside the rules studio. It's effectively like asking Customer Service what's going on. They didn't write the rules, so it's an educated guess at best.

 Kriswall wrote:
I think it means 1pt/model for each model making the swap.

You don't have permission for only some models to make the swap. The entire mob swaps their sluggas for shootas.

If anything, buying a rokkit first would simply stop the rest of the mob from being able to get shootas at all, since the entire mob no longer has sluggas to swap.

 insaniak wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
I think it means 1pt/model for each model making the swap.

You don't have permission for only some models to make the swap. The entire mob swaps their sluggas for shootas.

If anything, buying a rokkit first would simply stop the rest of the mob from being able to get shootas at all, since the entire mob no longer has sluggas to swap.

I'm with Insaniak on this.

It says the entire mob.
If you take the Rokkit/Big Shoota first, that's great.
Now we're going to swap the entire mob's Sluggas for Shootas, but you can't swap the entire mob's Sluggas if one or more members of said squad lack a Slugga to swap. You are not fulfilling the requirement for taking Shootas, you are changing it from "the entire mob" to "Some of the mob/the entire mob except these guys", or something similar that is not valid.

If the entire mob has 9 sluggas and all 9 sluggas are swapped for shootas, I've fulfilled the requirement that the entire mob swap their sluggas for shootas.

"Their sluggas" refers to the population of sluggas owned by the mob. In the 10 man mob example, that population is 9 sluggas if I've already swapped on for a big shoota.

I'm not asking only some models to swap their sluggas for shootas. I asking every model in the mob that has a slugga to swap it for a shoota.

It doesn't say "All Models". It says "The Entire Mob". The entire mob does not assume that every model has a slugga. It just requires that all sluggas in the mob be swapped out for shootas at a cost of 1 point per model.

If it said "The entire mob may upgrade their Nobz to Painboyz ...10 pts/model", how many points would it take to upgrade a Nob in a 10 man mob to a Painboy? I would say 10 for the same reason that 9 sluggas costs 9 points. Your argument would have the Painboy upgrade cost 100 points. Same wording.

 Kriswall wrote:
If the entire mob has 9 sluggas and all 9 sluggas are swapped for shootas, I've fulfilled the requirement that the entire mob swap their sluggas for shootas.

"Their sluggas" refers to the population of sluggas owned by the mob. In the 10 man mob example, that population is 9 sluggas if I've already swapped on for a big shoota.

I'm not asking only some models to swap their sluggas for shootas. I asking every model in the mob that has a slugga to swap it for a shoota.

It doesn't say "All Models". It says "The Entire Mob". The entire mob does not assume that every model has a slugga. It just requires that all sluggas in the mob be swapped out for shootas at a cost of 1 point per model.

If it said "The entire mob may upgrade their Nobz to Painboyz ...10 pts/model", how many points would it take to upgrade a Nob in a 10 man mob to a Painboy? I would say 10 for the same reason that 9 sluggas costs 9 points. Your argument would have the Painboy upgrade cost 100 points. Same wording.

This is how I see it also. The painboy example is spot on as I would read it.

 Kriswall wrote:
If the entire mob has 9 sluggas and all 9 sluggas are swapped for shootas, I've fulfilled the requirement that the entire mob swap their sluggas for shootas.

"Their sluggas" refers to the population of sluggas owned by the mob. In the 10 man mob example, that population is 9 sluggas if I've already swapped on for a big shoota.

I'm not asking only some models to swap their sluggas for shootas. I asking every model in the mob that has a slugga to swap it for a shoota.

It doesn't say "All Models". It says "The Entire Mob". The entire mob does not assume that every model has a slugga. It just requires that all sluggas in the mob be swapped out for shootas at a cost of 1 point per model.

If it said "The entire mob may upgrade their Nobz to Painboyz ...10 pts/model", how many points would it take to upgrade a Nob in a 10 man mob to a Painboy? I would say 10 for the same reason that 9 sluggas costs 9 points. Your argument would have the Painboy upgrade cost 100 points. Same wording.

Huh, reading what you said and rethinking this, I'm on the fence about it...
I'm seeing it both ways and now I'm not sure.
:/

 Kriswall wrote:
IIt doesn't say "All Models". It says "The Entire Mob". The entire mob does not assume that every model has a slugga. It just requires that all sluggas in the mob be swapped out for shootas at a cost of 1 point per model.

Yet you're making the assumption that when you're told the price is one point per model, that it means it's one point per model with a slugga. You're trying to base the price off of only the part of the mob that would benefit from the upgrade when the price is determined by the number of models in the mob without exception.

I'd like to point out the "special weapons" options are phrased in a way that'd be useless if you could just get around the "all shootas" upgrade.
Why wouldn't it just say exchange their sluggas?

Mr. Marley. I have no idea what you're talking about. Could you be a little more specific?

I'm assuming by special weapons that you are referring to the big shoota and rokkit launcha.

Here is the quote...

"For every ten models in the unit, one Ork Boy may replace their ranged weapon with one of the following:
- Big shoota…X pts
- Rokkit launcha…X pts"

If you choose a big shoota first, you pay the 5 points and upgrade the slugga.

If you choose the big shoota second, you pay 1 point to upgrade to a shoota and then 5 points to upgrade the shoota to a big shoota.

It would HAVE to say Ranged Weapons to allow for you to upgrade a slugga OR a shoota.

 Kriswall wrote:
It would HAVE to say Ranged Weapons to allow for you to upgrade a slugga OR a shoota.

The point is that it wouldn't need to, because nobody would ever be upgrading a shoota when they can save a point by upgrading the slugga instead.

Options in codices should be taken top to bottom last I knew.

The entire mob (meaning the whole amount of number of models present in the mob in its entirety...) needs to pay to upgrade from sluggas to shootas.

 Awfeel wrote:
Options in codices should be taken top to bottom last I knew..

Nope, that's not a thing, nor has it ever been.

 Awfeel wrote:
The entire mob (meaning the whole amount of number of models present in the mob in its entirety...) needs to pay to upgrade from sluggas to shootas.

I agree with this. You can't upgrade half the sluggas to shootas. The entire mob needs to participate in the upgrades. And then you pay 1 point per model who participates.

If not every model in the mob has a slugga (which they won't if you pick a big shoota before upgrading to shootas for everyone), then not every model in the mob is upgrading to a shoota. But... the entire mob is still upgrading to a shoota.

Two Scenarios...

#1 - 10 Man Mob with no other upgrades upgrades to shootas
My reading - 1 point per slugga upgraded.
Other reading - 1 point per slugga upgraded.

#2 10 Man Mob with Big Shoota chosen first and then upgrades to shootas
My reading - 1 point per slugga upgrades.
Other reading - 1.11 points per slugga upgraded.

I just can't believe that GW intends variable upgrade pricing depending on how other models in the mob are equipped. We know the rules are written poorly, but the clear intent is that it costs 1 point for a Slugga Boy to become a Shoota Boy. If one Slugga Boy becomes a Big Shoota Boy and then the Boss comes round and says "Oy! You lot! Talk to da mek and he's gonna let you trade in dose sluggas for shootas. But you all gotta make da same call. Noone keeps a slugga. One toof per slugga.", how many teef does the entire mob pay? 9 teef, since there are only 9 sluggas. The ENTIRE mob has swapped sluggas for shootas at a cost of 1 point per model.

I genuinely don't understand how this isn't making sense.

 Kriswall wrote:
[... But... the entire mob is still upgrading to a shoota.

...at a cost of 1 point per model.

Not one point per slugga.

I just can't believe that GW intends variable upgrade pricing depending on how other models in the mob are equipped.

And yet that's what you are arguing for...

Honestly, for one or two points I couldn't give less of a ****.


Seems pretty obvious to me that you pay per model, 1pt to upgrade the mob to shootas. Regardless of other upgrades you take. But whatever, not worth arguing about.

The wording is potentially ambiguous as it doesn't clarify 1 point per model in the mob or 1 point per model who is upgrading. It just says 1 point per model. It doesn't make logical sense to me to force a model to pay 1 point (we're paying per model) as a result of swapping slugga for shoota if the swap never occurs.

I've yet to see an explanation for how I'm paying 1 point for a model to swap a slugga for shoota if the swap doesn't occur. And we're not paying per mob, we're paying per model.

To be very specific... if the payment is per model, and our only requirement is that the entire mob make the same decision (we agree on this), why isn't the criteria of whether or not a model has to pay (we're paying per model) also per model?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
[... But... the entire mob is still upgrading to a shoota.

...at a cost of 1 point per model.

Not one point per slugga.

I just can't believe that GW intends variable upgrade pricing depending on how other models in the mob are equipped.

And yet that's what you are arguing for...

I'm actually arguing for constant pricing per piece of wargear regardless of unit size. You're arguing for variable pricing per piece of wargear, but constant pricing per unit size. Wargear is typically a fixed upgrade price, so I'm trying to avoid price variability.

It's not ambiguous.

1 point per model means....1 point per model.

1 point per model with a slugga would mean 1 point per model with a slugga.
I think you are trying to superimpose language at the end of the requirement.

the reason they changing price/unit is for simplicity and mathematical smoothness. 15 guys in the squad? want it to be a shoota buys squad? add another 15 points. Ok now go add in the special weapons.

I appreciate that you feel the rules should have been worded a certain way, and I understand the frustrations of wishing the book clarified more. But the fact is, it says 1 pt per model.

And they have used this pricing before. Most grenades use this pricing format, although in that instance each and every model gets the grenade.

But the idea is that a big shoota in a unit of shootas is more effective than a big shoota in a unit of choppas.

Also, did I mention it's easier to calculate the totals by doing it this way?

 Icculus wrote:
It's not ambiguous.

1 point per model means....1 point per model.

1 point per model with a slugga would mean 1 point per model with a slugga.
I think you are trying to superimpose language at the end of the requirement.

the reason they changing price/unit is for simplicity and mathematical smoothness. 15 guys in the squad? want it to be a shoota buys squad? add another 15 points. Ok now go add in the special weapons.

I agree that in the order you've stated, you'd pay 15 points. However, you are adding an order of operations that isn't in the rules. I could just as easily say 15 guys in the squad? Ok now add in the special weapons. Want it to be a shoota boys squad? add another 14 points (the entire mob is swapping sluggas for shootas at the cost of 1 point per model. 14 models are swapping sluggas for shootas. 14 points. The entire mob is STILL swapping sluggas for shootas, but only 14 models are swapping, not 15 models. And we're paying per model, not per mob.

I appreciate that you feel the rules should have been worded a certain way, and I understand the frustrations of wishing the book clarified more. But the fact is, it says 1 pt per model.

And they have used this pricing before. Most grenades use this pricing format, although in that instance each and every model gets the grenade.

But the idea is that a big shoota in a unit of shootas is more effective than a big shoota in a unit of choppas.

Whether or not the gun is more effective is irrelevant to how much it costs.

Also, did I mention it's easier to calculate the totals by doing it this way?

Counting to ten models in a mob is somehow easier than counting to 9 slugga equipped models in a mob? I may not have a Doctorate in Mathematics, but they both seem pretty easy. We're also not debating a player's counting ability. We're debating interpretation of the rules.

I'm going to go back to this statement...

"The entire mob can upgrade their Nobz to Painboyz ...10pts/model"

I have a 10 man squad with 9 Boyz and 1 Nob. I choose to use the above upgrade. How much am I paying?

I believe what Kriswall is trying to point to is this:

1 slugga boy = 6 points always
1 shoota boy = 7 points always
1 big shoota or rokkit boy = 11 points always

It shouldn't matter what order/what that boy had before. The special gun upgrade costs 11 points to bring to the table.

 Spydermonkey1351 wrote:
I believe what Kriswall is trying to point to is this:

1 slugga boy = 6 points always
1 shoota boy = 7 points always
1 big shoota or rokkit boy = 11 points always

It shouldn't matter what order/what that boy had before. The special gun upgrade costs 11 points to bring to the table.

I'd go a little farther...

1 slugga boy = 6 points
1 shoota boy = 7 points
1 slugga boy who trades his slugga in for a big shoota, thus becoming a big shoota boy = 11 points
1 shoota boy who trades his shoota in for a big shoota, thus becoming a big shoota boy = 12 points

So, it is to your advantage, albeit only by 1 point, to have a slugga boy trade in his gun for a big shoota before the rest of his mob become shoota boyz. Order of operations is critically important to this discussion.

The core of the issue seems to be that I don't think a MODEL can pay the PER MODEL upgrade cost without performing the upgrade. The opposing side does.

I do agree that the entire mob has to take the upgrade, i.e. that you can't choose to upgrade SOME of the sluggas, but not all. My stance is that upgrading a 10 man mob with only 9 sluggas results in 9 MODELS swapping slugga for shoota and we're paying PER MODEL. 9 MODELS at 1 point PER MODEL is 9 points. If you can explain to me how that 10th MODEL can swap his slugga (he doesn't have one) for a shoota to activate the PER MODEL cost, I will happily concede.

I acknowledge that PER MODEL can mean "per model in the mob" or "per model who swaps". HIWPI is "per model who swaps" for the reasons above.

Ed: completely changed my views looking at the Space Marine Codex.

"The entire squad may remove their jump packs, changing their unit type to infantry. (...)"

Are you allowed to remove only 9 jump packs in the squad of 10 to get the Drop Pod? No

" The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas"

Can one choose not to replace? No

I think I would pay the 1point not to have to have this discussion around the table. It does seem stupid to pay for somthing that isn't used but until it's totaly 100% clear (FAQ) then I would say better to pay the points and buy immunity to complaints from opponents.

For every 60 boys you are loosing one if you take the maximum amount of special weapons. It could be worse. We play orks, we are used to loosing boyz.

Congrats you have just gotten 3pts extra per squad of. 30 boyz with 3 big shootas.

*slow clap*

Edited. Confused slugga/choppa

Havoc0013 wrote:
If you must upgrade a RANGED weapon to a big shoot a or rock it kauncha, where do you get the ability to upgrade from a slugga? That isn't a RANGED weapon.

The slugga is a pistol. It most definitely is a ranged weapon.

 BlackTalos wrote:
Ed: completely changed my views looking at the Space Marine Codex.

"The entire squad may remove their jump packs, changing their unit type to infantry. (...)"

Are you allowed to remove only 9 jump packs in the squad of 10 to get the Drop Pod? No

" The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas"

Can one choose not to replace? No

If the squad only had 9 jump packs, then yes, you would only remove 9 jump packs. This isn't a useful comparison because you're talking about a unit where EVERY model has the piece of wargear being modified. I'm not. Only SOME of my models have the wargear.

I'm not choosing NOT to replace wargear. I'm replacing all 9 sluggas. The entire mob's worth of sluggas. If the entire mob had 10 sluggas, I would replace all 10. I'm doing what the unit entry is instructing me to do. I'm replacing the entire mob's worth of sluggas at the rate of 1 point per model. 9 sluggas, 9 models, 9 points. I can't replace the slugga on the 10th model, because he doesn't have one. Hence, I'm not paying 1 point to do so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DontEatRawHagis wrote:
Congrats you have just gotten 3pts extra per squad of. 30 boyz with 3 big shootas.

*slow clap*

Thanks for the sarcasm! It adds a lot to an academic rules debate. (Sarcasm, in case you couldn't tell )

HIWPI? I could care less. We're talking about a nominal points amount. I play Farsight Enclaves. Killing Orks is what we do. I don't care how many points they cost.

The reality of the situation is that the wording CAN be interpreted (insomuch as it IS being interpreted) either way and would require an FAQ to clear up. I'd also bet money GW will never FAQ this.

Another point i'd like to make here is the order of choosing.

I have noticed (and therefore precedence) that in Codex: Adepta Sororitas, that the option read from top to bottom.

So:
• The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model
• For every ten models in the unit, one Ork Boy may replace their ranged weapon with one of the following: - Big shoota…

Is a very different situation to:
• For every ten models in the unit, one Ork Boy may replace their ranged weapon with one of the following: - Big shoota…
• The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model

In the codex.

Example in Codex: AS:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Another point i'd like to make here is the order of choosing.

I have noticed (and therefore precedence) that in Codex: Adepta Sororitas, that the option read from top to bottom.

So:
• The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model
• For every ten models in the unit, one Ork Boy may replace their ranged weapon with one of the following: - Big shoota…

Is a very different situation to:
• For every ten models in the unit, one Ork Boy may replace their ranged weapon with one of the following: - Big shoota…
• The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model

In the codex.

Example in Codex: AS:

Spoiler:

Options:
-May include up to five additional Dominions - xx pts/model
-One dominion may take a Simulacrum Imperialis - xx pts
- Four other Dominions may take items from the Special Weapons list.

In the English language, everything typically is read from top to bottom. Left to right, also! I'm not sure how that's relevant here.

Order of upgrade entries doesn't matter. This has never mattered. The two examples above (Ork Codex) are identical. Applying one before the other creates a different situation, but there is nothing to prevent you from taking the big shoota before upgrading from sluggas to shootas.

Also, I'm not sure how your AS example is relevant. It makes no difference in what order I take the upgrades. If I start with a 5 model squad with 4 Dominions and one of whatever the Dominion Sarge is called, I have 4. I can then give one a Simulacrum Imperialis, give three special weapons, take 5 more and then give a fourth a special weapon. That I didn't have enough models in the squad when I equipped the first 3 "other Dominions" doesn't somehow mean that the fourth "other Dominion" can't have a special weapon when she joins the squad.

No, if you randomised the use of the bullet points, you could take "four other" from the sarge, then pick one of those 4 and give it a Simulacrum. What says you can't do that?

But we know full well it is wrong and the other way around: you may take the Simulacrum, and 4 Other models can take Special weapons. Which "other"? The "other" from the 1 who has the Simulacrum.

So which way is it in the Ork codex?
Sluggas replaced first, or Big shoota first?

And yes it does matter. From the OP's post, it seems you must make the choice of Sluggas/ Shootas first.

And if that is the first choice you make, there is absolutely no issue whatsoever and this discussion can end.

To understand what is meant by "other Dominions" you revert to basic reading skills and use context to determine what is meant.

"Other" clearly refers to Dominions who do not have a Simulacrum Imperialis.

So, I pick a squad and equip the 4 Dominions with special weapons, effectively designating them as others. I now want to take a Simulacrum Imperialis. But I can't, because I don't have any Dominions that haven't already been designating as "others". This example is more about basic reading comprehension and understanding what "other" means in this context.

I will agree that everything would be far easier if GW had said "You have to select from the upgrades in the order in which they are presented.", but they did not say this. Choosing in order only seems natural because we read (and typically process information) from top to bottom in English.

shouldnt even be a debate on this....

models with NO SLUGGA TO REPLACE because they have a special wepaon

cannot pay 1 pt to replace that non existant slugga with a shoota,

 easysauce wrote:
shouldnt even be a debate on this....

models with NO SLUGGA TO REPLACE because they have a special wepaon

cannot pay 1 pt to replace that non existant slugga with a shoota,

So the unit can not take shootas, in that case.

or the whole mob can replace their sluggas,

hence the whole mob replaces their sluggas,

if everyone in the mob with a slugga replaces it, then the whole mobs has in fact replaced their sluggas,

that a few had none to replace, doesnt change that.

regardless,

the answer is no, you dont pay an extra pt tax either way,


taking ONE strict interpretaion of RAW means that shoota boys cant take special weapons AT ALL (not the probably, sensical, or fair interpretation, but one you can make)

the other interpretation, is that those who replace, pay the pt those who dont dont.

In response to Insaniak:

Sure they can. What about the entire mob being allowed to upgrade their sluggas to shootas requires that every model in the mob have a slugga to upgrade?

Mob of 10 Boyz. 9 have sluggas. You upgrade all 9 to shootas. Did the entire mob upgrade their sluggas to shootas? Yes.

 easysauce wrote:
or the whole mob can replace their sluggas,

hence the whole mob replaces their sluggas,

if everyone in the mob with a slugga replaces it, then the whole mobs has in fact replaced their sluggas,

that a few had none to replace, doesnt change that.

regardless,

the answer is no, you dont pay an extra pt tax either way,


taking ONE strict interpretaion of RAW means that shoota boys cant take special weapons AT ALL (not the probably, sensical, or fair interpretation, but one you can make)

the other interpretation, is that those who replace, pay the pt those who dont dont.

Except you do pay the 'extra point tax' because you adding "... with a slugga" to the cost. You pay one point per model in the mob, not one point per model in the mob with a slugga.

 Kriswall wrote:
To understand what is meant by "other Dominions" you revert to basic reading skills and use context to determine what is meant.

"Other" clearly refers to Dominions who do not have a Simulacrum Imperialis.

So, I pick a squad and equip the 4 Dominions with special weapons, effectively designating them as others. I now want to take a Simulacrum Imperialis. But I can't, because I don't have any Dominions that haven't already been designating as "others". This example is more about basic reading comprehension and understanding what "other" means in this context.

I will agree that everything would be far easier if GW had said "You have to select from the upgrades in the order in which they are presented.", but they did not say this. Choosing in order only seems natural because we read (and typically process information) from top to bottom in English.

I disagree. There is no clear "other" unless you refer to the point above it. The 4th point is "The dominion Superior may take melta bombs." What is there to say "other than the superior" for the special weapons? Nothing apart from bullet point order.

GW writes the entire BrB in "order". They never put the rules for Assault phase before the rules for Movement phase.

There is a reason for the order of options in Codexes, or prove to me one won't work with a concrete example. I have a few others for you if you disagree:

Kroot Carnivore Squad
1- May include up to ten additional Kroot
2- May include up to three Krootox Riders
3- May uprgade one Kroot to a Shaper
4- A shaper may exchange his Kroot rifle for either a pulse rifle or a pulse carbine
5- May upgrade all models with Kroot rifles to take sniper rounds -1pt/model.

How can you do 4 without doing 3 first?
5 is quite clear that in a squad of 10, if you've done 3 & 4 then you only pay 9 points.

Ork codex will be the same:
You must pay 10pts to swap Slugga first.
-Then you pick heavy weapons for additional cost.

Lo and Behold ! It works and there is no issue !


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Otherwise you could pay for your Big Shoota, then pay 9pts for the swap and THEN buy another 10 boys with Sluggas?

What is stopping you from picking your own order?

 Ghaz wrote:

Except you do pay the 'extra point tax' because you adding "... with a slugga" to the cost. You pay one point per model in the mob, not one point per model in the mob with a slugga.

strictly speaking: yes you do. its the exact wording:

The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model

how can a model replace its slugga with a shoota if it doesnt have a slugga?
would you allow a model in the mob to get an bigshoota if it didnt have a ranged weapon?
thats the reason why you cant have

the entire mob means everybody that qualifies need to pay for the upgrade. you cannot get shootas for just 10 models while 20 retain their sluggaz.

its the same reason SAG/KFF big meks cant have a megaarmnour. the SAG/KFF replaces the slugga. MA replaces slugga and choppa, since the Bmek doesnt have a slugga anymore you cant upgrade it with a MA - and vice versa.

so if you dont have a slugga you cant replace it with a shoota - hence no "tax"


that beeing said... we are talking about a 3 point save in a 265 point unit... also i like round numbers... makes math much easier


EDIT:

 BlackTalos wrote:

How can you do 4 without doing 3 first?

you cant, thats the point. thats why order doesnt matter.
to do 4 you have to do 3 first. its implied by the rules not order.

The models that qualify for the upgrade and the points you pay are not based on the same criteria, yet you're under the false assumption that it is. You still pay one point per every model in the mob to upgrade, whether that model can make use of the upgrade or not.

 Ghaz wrote:
The models that qualify for the upgrade and the points you pay are not based on the same criteria [...]

how did you come up with this?

it clearly says: "the entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model"
replace their sluggas with shootas
how am i qualified to do that, if i dont have a slugga?

furthermore it says their sluggas, so only models qualify which have a slugga.

for me its the same with the big mek:
A Big Mek may replace his slugga and choppa with mega armour, kustom mega-blasta and power klaw…40 pts

if i dont have a slugga and a choppa i cant replace it with other stuff.

also... if i take a bmek with megaarmour, following your logic, i could take on of these:
A Big Mek may replace his slugga with one of the following:
- Kustom force field…50 pts
- Shokk attack gun…50 pts

since the qualification to take one of those is being a bigmek (the entire mob) and totally ignoring the "replace" part (may replace their sluggas with shootas)


again im not trying to take an advantage of any kind, since i mosty play friendly games where 3points dont matter... but striclty following the rules you dont have to pay any "taxes"

And again, it's one point per model, period. Not one point per model upgrading his slugga to a shoota.

So the mob upgrades any and all sluggas at the cost of one point per model in the mob.

RedNoak wrote:
the entire mob means everybody that qualifies need to pay for the upgrade.

Then why did they not word it like the Tau Codex?
"May upgrade all models with Kroot rifles to take sniper rounds -1pt/model."

Clearly that states "all the ones with those weapons", not "the entire mob may". Very different.

"the entire mob may" is the same as "The entire unit may take the Bonding Knife Ritual". Same unit, Clear separation of rules, precedence, and point disproved.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RedNoak wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

How can you do 4 without doing 3 first?

you cant, thats the point. thats why order doesnt matter.
to do 4 you have to do 3 first. its implied by the rules not order.

 Kriswall wrote:
It makes no difference in what order I take the upgrades.

The order does matter. You cannot pick option 4 then option 3. You cannot exchange the weapon on a Nob if you haven't bought the Nob upgrade first.

 BlackTalos wrote:

RedNoak wrote:
the entire mob means everybody that qualifies need to pay for the upgrade.

Then why did they not word it like the Tau Codex?
"May upgrade all models with Kroot rifles to take sniper rounds -1pt/model."

Clearly that states "all the ones with those weapons", not "the entire mob may". Very different.

"the entire mob may" is the same as "The entire unit may take the Bonding Knife Ritual". Same unit, Clear separation of rules, precedence, and point disproved.

The reason the Kroot entry is written that way is that some of the models added to the unit (the hounds and the Krootox) never had a rifle to begin with. The kind of precedent tha would actually clear this up would be another case where a model must pay for an upgrade that it no longer possesses before it hits the table. My position is that you can't charge for something you don't have in the final list. This excludes cases where a single model can upgrade, because this is a case where the upgrade is (arguably) necessary for the model's neighbor to receive the upgrade.

On a side note, in this debate the thing that I find irritating, bordering on infuriating, is people who act like it's obviously clear one way or the other. There is legitimate room for disagreement here.

 BlackTalos wrote:
"the entire mob may" is the same as "The entire unit may take the Bonding Knife Ritual". Same unit, Clear separation of rules, precedence, and point disproved.

excuse me but its not. you cannot simply take wording from another codex on an entire different matter, and ignore half of a sentence because it says "the entire mob"

but ok, then whats the difference between "all models with [type of weapon]" and "the entire mob replace their [type of weapon]"?

there is none.
the first part of the rules addresses all models in the unit(all models/entire mob), the second part specifically mentions a type of weapon that is affected (with rifles/their sluggas)

The order does matter. You cannot pick option 4 then option 3. You cannot exchange the weapon on a Nob if you haven't bought the Nob upgrade first.

no THE ORDER doesnt matter. you said it yourself. you cant choose option X without getting option Y first. so the order in which it is printed doesnt effect the availability at all.
the RULE MECHANICS dictate which update you can take and when.
I.E. if i dont have a nob, i cant take upgrade for him regardless of the printed order.

@ghaz

And again, it's one point per model, period. Not one point per model upgrading his slugga to a shoota.

So the mob upgrades any and all sluggas at the cost of one point per model in the mob.

And again, the earth is flat. period.

so pigs can fly and i'm dancing in my underwear.

saying random stuff without arguments to back it up, doesnt mean jack and isnt really helpful in a discussion.

And you can't accept the fact that the way that the Ork Boyz entry is written doesn't care what weapons the model has now, just the number of models in the mob. It is clear. GW wants you to pay one point per model in the mob, regardless of how many of those models have sluggas to exchange.

The way I do my boyz mobs is as follows;

-10 boyz, 60 points
-upgrade one with big shoota or rokkit launcher, 5 points
-upgrade one to nob, 10 points
-give nob a power klaw, 25 points
-give nob a twin linked shoota, 3 points
-upgrade remaining 8 boyz with shootas, 8 points

 edbradders wrote:
The way I do my boyz mobs is as follows;

-10 boyz, 60 points
-upgrade one with big shoota or rokkit launcher, 5 points
-upgrade one to nob, 10 points
-give nob a power klaw, 25 points
-give nob a twin linked shoota, 3 points
-upgrade remaining 8 boyz with shootas, 8 points

Except as has been stated, that is not what the rules say.

 Ghaz wrote:

 edbradders wrote:
The way I do my boyz mobs is as follows;

-10 boyz, 60 points
-upgrade one with big shoota or rokkit launcher, 5 points
-upgrade one to nob, 10 points
-give nob a power klaw, 25 points
-give nob a twin linked shoota, 3 points
-upgrade remaining 8 boyz with shootas, 8 points

Except as has been stated, that is not what the rules say.

Except as had been stated BY YOU.

I've stated the other way. I would agree that only 8 points would be needed to upgrade the 8 models as, PER THE RULES, we're PAYING the points on a PER MODEL basis. We're choosing the upgrade on a per mob basis, but PAYING on a per model basis. Nothing tells me to pay for models that aren't being upgraded. The entire mob upgraded their sluggas at a cost of 1 point per model. Time to pay. How many models upgraded their sluggas to shootas? 8 models. 8 points.

 Ghaz wrote:
And you can't accept the fact that the way that the Ork Boyz entry is written doesn't care what weapons the model has now, just the number of models in the mob. It is clear. GW wants you to pay one point per model in the mob, regardless of how many of those models have sluggas to exchange.

you still havent said WHY we should ignore the "replace slugga with shoota" part...

how can i replace something i dont have?

 Ghaz wrote:
And you can't accept the fact that the way that the Ork Boyz entry is written doesn't care what weapons the model has now, just the number of models in the mob. It is clear. GW wants you to pay one point per model in the mob, regardless of how many of those models have sluggas to exchange.

If it were clear, everyone would agree with you. It's not clear. I could just as easily say "It is clear. GW wants you to pay one point to upgrade a slugga to a shoota, regardless of how many models are in the mob."... but I don't. I don't do this because I don't know what GW wants. I'm not on the rules writing team and neither are you. We have to rely on what is actually written.

At the end of the day, I (and many others) think that it costs 1 point to upgrade a slugga to a shoota. You don't. You (and many others) believe it costs a variable amount to upgrade a slugga to a shoota depending on how other models are in the mob. I am paying on a per model basis with the models determined by asking how many upgraded their sluggas to shootas (the upgrade in question). You are paying on a per model basis with the models determined by asking how many upgraded their sluggas to shootas AND how many didn't because they can't owing to not having a slugga. Your method creates a variable cost per slugga upgraded. Mine doesn't.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

RedNoak wrote:
saying random stuff without arguments to back it up, doesnt mean jack and isnt really helpful in a discussion.

RedNoak, this tend's to be Ghaz's modus operandi, at least based on the threads I've read. You have to say one thing though. S/he never gives up.

RedNoak wrote:
u still havent said WHY we should ignore the "replace slugga with shoota" part...

how can i replace something i dont have?

He's not saying you ignore that part. He's saying the upgrade affects the entire mob, because it says so. So you replace all the sluggas with shootas, and you pay a cost of one point per model in the mob to do so.

RedNoak wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
And you can't accept the fact that the way that the Ork Boyz entry is written doesn't care what weapons the model has now, just the number of models in the mob. It is clear. GW wants you to pay one point per model in the mob, regardless of how many of those models have sluggas to exchange.

you still havent said WHY we should ignore the "replace slugga with shoota" part...

how can i replace something i dont have?

Because it never says that the price is per model replacing the slugga, does it? No. The price is per model. Per model what? Per model in the entire mob. Once again, the price you pay has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the model has a slugga to replace or not. It is all dependent on how many models are in the mob, regardless of whether all of the models have sluggas or only one does. The 'replace slugga with shoota' has nothing to do with the price. Nothing.

Ok here's a question that will get me flamed I'm sure. In the previous Ork Codex I believe Shoota Boyz and Slugga Boyz were a separate entry correct? If so, was there a different upgrade cost to include the special weapons in either of those squads? If the weapons cost the same for both units, then I'd say the intention of the upgrade sluggas to shootas is that you pay for every single model in the mob whether you are upgrading them to a special weapon or not.

If the costs were different, then I'd say the intention was that you don't have to pay the cost for the shoota upgrade on special weapon upgrades, as they were compensating for the already higher point cost of the shoota boy (assuming the cost for the special weapon was lower in the shoota boy squad!).

As I haven't read either ork codex that closely, someone else would have to spot check this for accuracy. Hope this helps and doesn't cause more confusion.

Noc

Nocturus wrote:
Ok here's a question that will get me flamed I'm sure. In the previous Ork Codex I believe Shoota Boyz and Slugga Boyz were a separate entry correct? If so, was there a different upgrade cost to include the special weapons in either of those squads? If the weapons cost the same for both units, then I'd say the intention of the upgrade sluggas to shootas is that you pay for every single model in the mob whether you are upgrading them to a special weapon or not.

If the costs were different, then I'd say the intention was that you don't have to pay the cost for the shoota upgrade on special weapon upgrades, as they were compensating for the already higher point cost of the shoota boy (assuming the cost for the special weapon was lower in the shoota boy squad!).

As I haven't read either ork codex that closely, someone else would have to spot check this for accuracy. Hope this helps and doesn't cause more confusion.

Noc

Same entry, however the swap cost no points.

In 3rd edition they were separate entries, with slugga boyz costing 1 point more (upgrades cost the same between the two, except for Nobz).

 Happyjew wrote:
In 3rd edition they were separate entries, with slugga boyz costing 1 point more (upgrades cost the same between the two, except for Nobz).

Which is exactly what you get with the 7th edition codex in a single entry, with the shootas being a point more expensive instead of the sluggas.

RedNoak wrote:
but ok, then whats the difference between "all models with [type of weapon]" and "the entire mob replace their [type of weapon]"?

there is none.

You see no difference between the term "model" and the term "unit" ("entire mob") ? I'm not sure why we are still arguing rules....


ANY other Codex entry with the quoted words "entire unit" will be for every single model in the unit. Or please find an example that is not.

The Slugga to shoota where "some models don't get to pay" is wrong and has no precedent.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bludbaff wrote:
The kind of precedent tha would actually clear this up would be another case where a model must pay for an upgrade that it no longer possesses before it hits the table. My position is that you can't charge for something you don't have in the final list.

This would bring us back to "order of options". If you run for top to bottom, you will never find that precedent. Nor will this situation be a precedent, as you pay for the swap before they pick the extra weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

And another example of "order of option" if you still do not agree:

Astra Militarum Codex:
Militarum Tempestus Platoon

- Up to four Tempestus Scions that have not been upgraded with one of the options above may (...)

How can you pick this point first and then do your other options later?

Requiring options be taken from top to bottom isn't a RaW thing.

Here is the specific quote from the Army Entries section of the Ork Codex describing the options...

"11. Options: This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to do so, alongside the associated points cost for each. Where an option states that you may exchange one weapon ‘and/or’ another, you may replace either or both, provided you pay the points cost for each. The abbreviation ‘pts’ stands for ‘points’ and ‘pts/model’ stands for ‘points per model’. Where applicable, this section also refers to any Transports the unit may take. These have their own datasheets. Dedicated Transports do not use up any slots on a Force Organisation Chart, but otherwise function as separate units. The Detachments section of Warhammer 40,000: The Rules explains how Dedicated Transports work."

You'll notice a lack of any wording telling you to take options from top to bottom. We can quit discussing order of operations unless you can provide an actual rule dictating order of operations.

Ultimately, the wording is ambiguous, but the math is not.

If you have a 10 man mob and 1 model takes the big shoota upgrade before any other upgrades, you will have 9 sluggas. If you then choose the slugga to shoota option and we go with your interpretation, you pay 10 points. Now, we have a break occurring because you're paying 1.11 points per swapped slugga. The entire mob may swap their sluggas for shootas ...1pt/model. But your'e not swapping the sluggas for shootas at 1pt/model. You're swapping sluggas for shootas at the rate of 1.11 pts/model. You're overpaying. The rules dictate that the mob swaps sluggas for shootas at the rate of 1 point per model. You're arguing specifically that you swap at the rate of 1.11 points per model. The ACTUAL SWAP is occurring at 1.11 points per model and SWAP is the key verb/action that is taking place.

Your just looking at it the wrong way kriswall.

What your effectively doing with the swap is actually just paying for a Shoota unit instead of a Slugga unit.

They could have made them seperate entries but decided to instead consolidate them to save space in the book.

Shoota boys cost 1 point more than slugga boys, thus you need to pay the 1 point more per guy that is in the unit.


This is how you have to look at it for it to make sense.

Eihnlazer wrote:
Your just looking at it the wrong way kriswall.

What your effectively doing with the swap is actually just paying for a Shoota unit instead of a Slugga unit.

They could have made them seperate entries but decided to instead consolidate them to save space in the book.

Shoota boys cost 1 point more than slugga boys, thus you need to pay the 1 point more per guy that is in the unit.


This is how you have to look at it for it to make sense.

My codex only has a Boyz unit. I don't have a Shoota unit or a Slugga unit. I only have Boyz who come with sluggas and have an option to replace them for shootas.

I agree that "Shoota Boyz" cost 1 point more than "Slugga Boyz". The unit in question has 10 Slugga Boyz when one of them spends 5 points to become a Rokkit Boy. I now have 9 Slugga Boyz and a Rokkit Boy. I spend 9 more points to make the Slugga Boyz into Shoota Boyz.

What im saying is that the reason they worded it the way they did is because you are effectively paying for a shoota boyz unit when you pay the 1 point per model.


And yes, that is the RAI.

 Icculus wrote:
It's not ambiguous.

1 point per model means....1 point per model.

1 point per model with a slugga would mean 1 point per model with a slugga.
I think you are trying to superimpose language at the end of the requirement.

the reason they changing price/unit is for simplicity and mathematical smoothness. 15 guys in the squad? want it to be a shoota buys squad? add another 15 points. Ok now go add in the special weapons.

I appreciate that you feel the rules should have been worded a certain way, and I understand the frustrations of wishing the book clarified more. But the fact is, it says 1 pt per model.

And they have used this pricing before. Most grenades use this pricing format, although in that instance each and every model gets the grenade.

But the idea is that a big shoota in a unit of shootas is more effective than a big shoota in a unit of choppas.

Also, did I mention it's easier to calculate the totals by doing it this way?

QFT. There is a lot of confusion in the rules and yes, it is not clear, but this makes the most sense RAI.

 Ghaz wrote:

Because it never says that the price is per model replacing the slugga, does it?

yes it does...

The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model

every model in the unit with a slugga replaces it with a shoota for 1pt

 BlackTalos wrote:

RedNoak wrote:
but ok, then whats the difference between "all models with [type of weapon]" and "the entire mob replace their [type of weapon]"?
there is none.

You see no difference between the term "model" and the term "unit" ("entire mob") ? I'm not sure why we are still arguing rules....

yes i fail to see the difference between the terms: all models and the entire mob

please enlighten me. where exactly is this difference found? those arent the same words or letters, ill give you that. but from my understanding of the english language: all models is the same as the entire unit...

 insaniak wrote:
He's not saying you ignore that part. He's saying the upgrade affects the entire mob, because it says so. So you replace all the sluggas with shootas, and you pay a cost of one point per model in the mob to do so.

but what if the model doesnt have a slugga? the way i see it, only models with a determined qualifier (i.e. a slugga) have to pay the fee. but the entire mob is affected by this swap. so EVERYONE in the entire mob can replace their slugga with a shoota for 1pt/model

RedNoak wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

Because it never says that the price is per model replacing the slugga, does it?

yes it does...

The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model

every model in the unit with a slugga replaces it with a shoota for 1pt

Again, you've added with a slugga that's not in the actual rule. The entire mob, at the cost of one point per model replaces all sluggas in the mob for shootas. Ten orks in the mob means you pay ten points because that is the number of models in "the entire mob".

Ghaz, please answer this specific question... how many points for the below upgrade?

Assume a unit of 10 models, 9 Boyz and a Boss Nob.

Assume this option...

"The entire mob may replace their Boss Nobz with Painboyz ...10pts/model"

How many points does it take to replace the single Boss Nob with a Painboy?

RedNoak wrote:
but what if the model doesnt have a slugga?

Then he doesn't get a shoota. He is still a model in the unit, though.

Kriswall 6080531 5938b049ebccd3de45ff20192e69acfc.jpg wrote:Ghaz, please answer this specific question... how many points for the below upgrade?

Assume a unit of 10 models, 9 Boyz and a Boss Nob.

Assume this option...

"The entire mob may replace their Boss Nobz with Painboyz ...10pts/model"

How many points does it take to replace the single Boss Nob with a Painboy?

This rules debate is for replacing wargear not models. Your point is moot and confusing for anyone.

If the entire mob does not have sufficient wargear to replace for Shootas, ie the entire mob does not have sluggas, then you may not take the option.

It would be like "The entire unit may replace its x for y."

Just like a codex where you take a terminator with claws then cant have the unit power fists replace power fists with hammers. They can't replace the fists he doesnt have. Doesn't mean you skip him.

It means since the entire mob doesn't have sluggas so the entire mob is not eligible. Because the entire mob does not qualify.

Also, the book says replace x for y by paying per model in the mob.

The book does not state "replace x for y and pay per number of upgrades"

Without inserting words, our side of the arguement RAW and RAI makes clearer sense.

Edit**

If you took upgrades out of order it would be possible to take a unit of 20 boys with ten shootas

 Kriswall wrote:
Assume this option...

"The entire mob may replace their Boss Nobz with Painboyz ...10pts/model"

How many points does it take to replace the single Boss Nob with a Painboy?

Is there a particular reason that you would expect changing the specific things being replaced while keeping the wording otherwise the same to change the answer?


If the entry were written like that (which it wouldn't be, because it makes no sense that way) it would cost one point per model in the unit to upgrade the Boss to a Painboy.

 Kriswall wrote:
Ghaz, please answer this specific question... how many points for the below upgrade?

Assume a unit of 10 models, 9 Boyz and a Boss Nob.

Assume this option...

"The entire mob may replace their Boss Nobz with Painboyz ...10pts/model"

How many points does it take to replace the single Boss Nob with a Painboy?

I don't see this in the codex, or is it something you just made up trying to prove that you're right?

It's obviously not in the codex. You'll note my use of the word assume.

I can only assume from your answer avoidance that you don't feel as strongly when the nouns are changed.

I've also spoken to three friends out of a sheer sense of curiosity. Two have advanced degrees (one Master and one Doctorate) in English. The third is a technical writer and copy editor by trade. All three agree that at best the wording is ambiguous. None of the three know anything about this game and all three agreed with my interpretation. To avoid bias, I didn't voice my opinion until after they did.

I think I'm going to go with my interpretation as it not only gives a consistent one point per model for the act of the model replacing a slugga with a shoota, but has also been agreed to by three separate, specifically educated third party observers.

I think the thing you are missing is in the fluff... or rather, in the ambiguity of how Orks divide their gear. Da oyz make a made dash for the big shoota. One in ten get it, the rest go for the pile of sluggas or shoot as that are left.

The entire mob can exchange. It doesn't matter how many boyz are in the mob, they all pay for the mobs upgrade. They all want that shot at the Rokkit, but they don't have the choice to save teef on a slugga if the rest of the mob is getting shootaz.

I agree, there is some ambiguity in the wording. That can be said for most of GW's rules... right? But this rule still says "entire mob" and "1pt/model". The mob exchanges, not just the boyz with sluggas.

 Kriswall wrote:
It's obviously not in the codex. You'll note my use of the word assume.

I can only assume from your answer avoidance that you don't feel as strongly when the nouns are changed.

I've also spoken to three friends out of a sheer sense of curiosity. Two have advanced degrees (one Master and one Doctorate) in English. The third is a technical writer and copy editor by trade. All three agree that at best the wording is ambiguous. None of the three know anything about this game and all three agreed with my interpretation. To avoid bias, I didn't voice my opinion until after they did.

I think I'm going to go with my interpretation as it not only gives a consistent one point per model for the act of the model replacing a slugga with a shoota, but has also been agreed to by three separate, specifically educated third party observers.

So, you're using an example NOT IN THE CODEX to justify your interpretation? Okay. Also, I will absolutely give you that the wording is ambiguous, but saying "I think I'm going to go with my interpretation as it not only gives a consistent one point per model for the act of the model replacing a slugga with a shoota, but has also been agreed to by three separate, specifically educated third party observers." is more or less a "nanny nanny boo boo" to everyone who disagrees with you. Not sure what it adds to the discussion other than trying to demean others.

i guess i never thought about it to take the big shoota before upgrading to shoota boys. but i don't see any reason why it would negate you from being able to upgrade to shootas and save a few points, with all the crap the gets pulled by some of the guys i play with i will definitely be saving a few points from now on.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
It's obviously not in the codex. You'll note my use of the word assume.

I can only assume from your answer avoidance that you don't feel as strongly when the nouns are changed.

I've also spoken to three friends out of a sheer sense of curiosity. Two have advanced degrees (one Master and one Doctorate) in English. The third is a technical writer and copy editor by trade. All three agree that at best the wording is ambiguous. None of the three know anything about this game and all three agreed with my interpretation. To avoid bias, I didn't voice my opinion until after they did.

I think I'm going to go with my interpretation as it not only gives a consistent one point per model for the act of the model replacing a slugga with a shoota, but has also been agreed to by three separate, specifically educated third party observers.

So, you're using an example NOT IN THE CODEX to justify your interpretation? Okay. Also, I will absolutely give you that the wording is ambiguous, but saying "I think I'm going to go with my interpretation as it not only gives a consistent one point per model for the act of the model replacing a slugga with a shoota, but has also been agreed to by three separate, specifically educated third party observers." is more or less a "nanny nanny boo boo" to everyone who disagrees with you. Not sure what it adds to the discussion other than trying to demean others.

Having the situation reviewed by qualified third party specialists counts as a demeaning "nanny nanny boo boo"? My good sir, I'd recommend you stay away from academia. I'm not sure you'd react well to a full blown peer review process. Getting multiple impartial subject matter experts to opine on a situation is very commonplace in real world dispute arbitrations.

Also, I used the specific example we are talking about, but with different nouns to illustrate my point.

Lastly, thank you for agreeing that the wording is ambiguous. That the wording is ambiguous means this requires an FAQ at the very least.

The FAQ that we really need is "Can I choose options out of order, or must they be chosen from top to bottom?". An answer to that questions resolves this issue, as well as other issues such as the viability of a Power Fist wielding Space Marine Apothecary.

 Kriswall wrote:

Lastly, thank you for agreeing that the wording is ambiguous. That the wording is ambiguous means this requires an FAQ at the very least.

The FAQ that we really need is "Can I choose options out of order, or must they be chosen from top to bottom?". An answer to that questions resolves this issue, as well as other issues such as the viability of a Power Fist wielding Space Marine Apothecary.

Only been playing a year now, but coming from other (better written) games, heres how i see it:

(Note: based on other loop-hole arguments, not a solid written rule)

When i buy a unit, I list the upgrades i want to purchase with it and they get applied all at once (unless it changes the unit size or type, then the upgrade must re-"check" the unit).

I find when there is something in the game that prevents you from doing something, IF you can do it out of order to ignore that fact, GW intends for you to consider all of those choices at once

I think it was said before, but if you're right, could you not take 10 boyz, up them w/ shootas, THEN add additional models to make a mixed slugga/shoota mob?

at the end of the day, I really think there's only two solid RAW interpretations: Waste a point if you want shootas and a big shoota, OR Big Shootas lock you out of upgrading slugga boys to shootas (and given how orks love the dakka, my money is on the first option

RedNoak wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

RedNoak wrote:
but ok, then whats the difference between "all models with [type of weapon]" and "the entire mob replace their [type of weapon]"?
there is none.

You see no difference between the term "model" and the term "unit" ("entire mob") ? I'm not sure why we are still arguing rules....

yes i fail to see the difference between the terms: all models and the entire mob

please enlighten me. where exactly is this difference found? those arent the same words or letters, ill give you that. but from my understanding of the english language: all models is the same as the entire unit...

The difference between the term "model" and "unit" are a core part of the Warhammer 40k rules. pages 8 & 9 of the Rulebook, entitled "Models & Units" will explain all this to you.

In my example above, "all models with [type of weapon]" is very different to "the entire unit". The first one could say "all models with Plasmaguns", and in a Marine Squad of 10, that would be 1 marine. "the entire unit" in the same squad would be all 10, whatever they are equipped with.

 Kriswall wrote:
The FAQ that we really need is "Can I choose options out of order, or must they be chosen from top to bottom?". An answer to that questions resolves this issue, as well as other issues such as the viability of a Power Fist wielding Space Marine Apothecary.

As is said here:

sasquatchalex wrote:
I think it was said before, but if you're right, could you not take 10 boyz, up them w/ shootas, THEN add additional models to make a mixed slugga/shoota mob?

Where is your permission to choose the upgrades out of order?

The English language itself rules that you must work your way from top to bottom, so where is your permission to read the other way?
If you are telling me this is not valid, then i'll play with this rule:

"pt/model 1 - shootas with sluggas their replace may mob entire the"

Oh look, i can replace my shootas with sluggas for 1 pt.
If you think this is not valid, then i think reading from Bottom to top is exactly the same.

But i would guess that we are both quite adept at the rules of the language and that left to right and top to bottom should be obvious.

From the Marine codex:

Within these pages you will find (...), from their creation at the dawn(...). This book also contains rules(...). Finally, you will find.

Implying the standard English "top to bottom" read...

 BlackTalos wrote:

RedNoak wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

RedNoak wrote:
but ok, then whats the difference between "all models with [type of weapon]" and "the entire mob replace their [type of weapon]"?
there is none.

You see no difference between the term "model" and the term "unit" ("entire mob") ? I'm not sure why we are still arguing rules....

yes i fail to see the difference between the terms: all models and the entire mob

please enlighten me. where exactly is this difference found? those arent the same words or letters, ill give you that. but from my understanding of the english language: all models is the same as the entire unit...

The difference between the term "model" and "unit" are a core part of the Warhammer 40k rules. pages 8 & 9 of the Rulebook, entitled "Models & Units" will explain all this to you.

In my example above, "all models with [type of weapon]" is very different to "the entire unit". The first one could say "all models with Plasmaguns", and in a Marine Squad of 10, that would be 1 marine. "the entire unit" in the same squad would be all 10, whatever they are equipped with.

 Kriswall wrote:
The FAQ that we really need is "Can I choose options out of order, or must they be chosen from top to bottom?". An answer to that questions resolves this issue, as well as other issues such as the viability of a Power Fist wielding Space Marine Apothecary.

As is said here:

sasquatchalex wrote:
I think it was said before, but if you're right, could you not take 10 boyz, up them w/ shootas, THEN add additional models to make a mixed slugga/shoota mob?

Where is your permission to choose the upgrades out of order?

The English language itself rules that you must work your way from top to bottom, so where is your permission to read the other way?
If you are telling me this is not valid, then i'll play with this rule:

"pt/model 1 - shootas with sluggas their replace may mob entire the"

Oh look, i can replace my shootas with sluggas for 1 pt.
If you think this is not valid, then i think reading from Bottom to top is exactly the same.

But i would guess that we are both quite adept at the rules of the language and that left to right and top to bottom should be obvious.

From the Marine codex:

Within these pages you will find (...), from their creation at the dawn(...). This book also contains rules(...). Finally, you will find.

Implying the standard English "top to bottom" read...

I never once recommended or implied that you don't READ top to bottom. Of course you read top to bottom. Otherwise, it would be impossible to understand the context of things like making an "other" model into a Boss Nob. Congratulations. You've successfully shown that reversing the order of most (you forgot to reverse pt/model to model/pt) of the words in a string of words makes it lose its meaning. I am willing to concede that as it's glaringly obvious.

However, nothing in the English language's rules of syntax requires me to select from a list of options in top to bottom format. Sure, I have to read them from top to bottom to understand them, but if the intent is that I pick them in order, that needs to be communicated to me. Nothing about the word options implies that I have to choose top to bottom. Nothing in GW's description of the section "Options" implies that I have to choose top to bottom. Of course I read top to bottom for comprehension. I learned that when I was a little kid. That's sort of a given. From my stance, I have to read the entire list from top to bottom to understand my options, but then at that point, they are just that - options. Nothing in how they are written or described forces me to pick them top to bottom anymore than anything on a restaurant's menu would require me to order from top to bottom.

If your stance is that I'm required to choose options from top to bottom based on how I read in my native language, do I also have to select units from front to back in the codex? If I go to a tournament and am presented with a list consisting of a Warboss, Gretchin and Boyz (in that order), can I cry foul? "Hey TO, it sure looks like this guy picked his Gretchin before his Boyz and as I'm sure you know, Boyz come first in the Ork Codex. It looks like he's selecting units out of order which is a clear violation of the implied rules of unit selection built in to the English language."

And yes, as written you could apply the options differently to get a mixed wargear mob of Boyz. Any Boyz you include additionally AFTER upgrading to 'eavy armour and shootas wouldn't have them. I think this is probably not GW's intent, but it's impossible to know their intent without an FAQ. I do however think most people who frequent these forums would quickly allow that GW isn't great at communicating their intent in all instances... but we aren't here to debate Rules as Intended. We're here to debate Rules as Written.

Here's another question... if it's a matter of which order we take the upgrades, can't I upgrade a boy to a nob then upgrade that nob to have a big shoots or rokkit launcher? Or rather, upgrade a boy to have a rokkit then upgrade that boy to a nob? either way... right?

The major point here isn't the order the options are taken in. Blacktalos said it best, the major issue is the difference between "unit" (or mob) and "model". The unit gets the upgrade, not individual models. So the points that must be paid depends on how many models are in the unit, not how many models are getting the upgrade.

I don't think this one NEEDS an FAQ as it's an old old old issue... not that we have had to pay for shootas in the past, but the idea of how we can upgrade. Which is why I mentioned the nob upgrade shenanigans. There is nothing that says the Nob can't get a rokkit launcha (or did that get FAQed?), but the options a nob gets are clear, and rokkit isn't one of them. (ok, kombi-rokkit, but that's not what I'm talking about )

 Kriswall wrote:
Having the situation reviewed by qualified third party specialists counts as a demeaning "nanny nanny boo boo"? My good sir, I'd recommend you stay away from academia. I'm not sure you'd react well to a full blown peer review process. Getting multiple impartial subject matter experts to opine on a situation is very commonplace in real world dispute arbitrations.

Also, I used the specific example we are talking about, but with different nouns to illustrate my point.

Lastly, thank you for agreeing that the wording is ambiguous. That the wording is ambiguous means this requires an FAQ at the very least.

The FAQ that we really need is "Can I choose options out of order, or must they be chosen from top to bottom?". An answer to that questions resolves this issue, as well as other issues such as the viability of a Power Fist wielding Space Marine Apothecary.

No, claiming you have friends who have advanced degrees to support your argument as opposed to actual evidence is "nanny nanny boo boo". It is the intellectual equivalent of "my dad can beat up your dad". And yes, it is the example we're talking about, but switching nouns doesn't work, because its not an example in the rulebook. Use evidence from the book to justify your argument, you can't just switch nouns.

Lastly, I would be completely in favor of FAQs and better wording. I think there are tons of things in 40k that need to be FAQed.

Actually, if you read the entry, you'll see that a Nob can't be given a big shoota or rokkit launcha. One Boy in 10 models is given those upgrades and a different Boy can be upgraded to a Boss Nob, as shown by the word "other" in the entry.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Having the situation reviewed by qualified third party specialists counts as a demeaning "nanny nanny boo boo"? My good sir, I'd recommend you stay away from academia. I'm not sure you'd react well to a full blown peer review process. Getting multiple impartial subject matter experts to opine on a situation is very commonplace in real world dispute arbitrations.

Also, I used the specific example we are talking about, but with different nouns to illustrate my point.

Lastly, thank you for agreeing that the wording is ambiguous. That the wording is ambiguous means this requires an FAQ at the very least.

The FAQ that we really need is "Can I choose options out of order, or must they be chosen from top to bottom?". An answer to that questions resolves this issue, as well as other issues such as the viability of a Power Fist wielding Space Marine Apothecary.

No, claiming you have friends who have advanced degrees to support your argument as opposed to actual evidence is "nanny nanny boo boo". It is the intellectual equivalent of "my dad can beat up your dad". And yes, it is the example we're talking about, but switching nouns doesn't work, because its not an example in the rulebook. Use evidence from the book to justify your argument, you can't just switch nouns.

Lastly, I would be completely in favor of FAQs and better wording. I think there are tons of things in 40k that need to be FAQed.

It's really more the equivalent of "Neither of us are experts here, so I went and got my dad who is a trained expert and can give an informed opinion on the matter. If your dad is also a trained expert, by all means, invite him to the party." But please, reduce my arguments to grade school level garbage.

 Kriswall wrote:
Actually, if you read the entry, you'll see that a Nob can't be given a big shoota or rokkit launcha. One Boy in 10 models is given those upgrades and a different Boy can be upgraded to a Boss Nob, as shown by the word "other" in the entry.

Well, you got me there. It does say "one other"... just like it says "entire mob". Let me ask you this, can I upgrade some of my boyz with 'davy armor, or do I have to spend the opts for every model in the unit? If you say no, then the same goes for the slugga/shoota upgrade.

As an aside, does anyone else think this thread is getting a little heated? I hope it's just me thinking that. This would be a silly thing to get up-in-arms about... unless the 1pt per 10 boyz is game changing for a game you are playing right this second.

All of the models who can take 'eavy Armour (all of them) must do so just like all of the models who have sluggas (some of them) must replace them with shootas when you choose an option.

So no, you can no more upgrade some of your Armour than you can replace some of your sluggas when you choose an option.

My contention is simply that models without sluggas can't pay one point to replace a slugga with a shoota. We are activating the option on a per mob basis, but paying on a per model basis.

 Kriswall wrote:
All of the models who can take 'eavy Armour (all of them) must do so just like all of the models who have sluggas (some of them) must replace them with shootas when you choose an option.

So no, you can no more upgrade some of your Armour than you can replace some of your sluggas when you choose an option.

My contention is simply that models without sluggas can't pay one point to replace a slugga with a shoota. We are activating the option on a per mob basis, but paying on a per model basis.

You have yet to address what a few of us have said about the abuse of taking options out of order.

"If you took upgrades out of order it would be possible to take a unit of 20 boys with ten shootas. "

It doesn't say "all models with sluggas" it says the "entire mob". The rule isn't discussing single exchanges of dakka for dakka. It's discussing the mobs dakka. It doesn't matter how many sluggas you have in the mob, only how many models are in the mob, as it states clearly "entire mob".

I am on your side about the ambiguous nature or GW's writing, but this ain't one of those cases that need a lot of attention. The rule says "ENTIRE MOB".

We'll have to agree to disagree until GW FAQs this, which is to say... Most likely forever.

Cheers gentleman.

Hey, as long as the folks you game with agree with you, right? have fun Kriswall.

Kris - your error is in not linking "their" to the subject, which is the entire mob. So the entire mob replaces thei sluggas with shootas, at a cost of one point per model. This is not linked to the number making the replacement, as you have no ability to determine that value within this rule; instead the "per model" again relates to the subject, which is the entire mob. So this is the cost - one point per model in the mob.

You committed an appeal to authority fallacy. The problem with your claim,s unlike those in real peer reviews, is that your claims cannot be verified; I can as easily claim 42 PhDs have reviewed this text and they all agree with me. You cannot disprove this, as you have no means to do so.

It's why on,y codexes, brb, FAQS are accepted here. And here the codex is clear - it is the mob replacing their sluggas , not the models.

I'm linking "their" to "entire mob" and I'm linking "per/model" to "replace".

"Their" is giving me the population of upgrades occurring. "Per/model" is giving me the population of payments occurring.

The issue is that we're linking the payment part to different populations. My side is linking it to the population of models replacing their sluggas with shootas. The other side is linking it to the population of models replacing sluggas with shootas plus those not replacing sluggas with shootas. Since we're paying on a per model basis and not a per mob basis, this seemed to make the most sense to me.

And I'll give you the appeal to authority. I was just looking for an educated third party. Debating with anonymous people on the internet rarely gets you a useful answer.

Except you are changing the subject, when no second subject exists. The subject is always the entire mob, you are never told you can link the number of sluggas replaced to the cost.

Per model can only relate to the mob, as their is no other unit to relate to that you are told you can relate to.

One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

Some people have agreed. One actually reconsidered his position. To be honest, I think the vast majority of people post a single comment and move on. I normally don't stay engaged in one thread this long, but my wife was out of town for the weekend and I was super bored!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Except you are changing the subject, when no second subject exists. The subject is always the entire mob, you are never told you can link the number of sluggas replaced to the cost.

Per model can only relate to the mob, as their is no other unit to relate to that you are told you can relate to.

I would actually argue that you can only do something per model. You can't noun something per model. It doesn't make sense. The word "their" requires us to ask the questions "Whose?" with the answer being "the entire mob". What are we doing per model? We're paying 1 point. What are we paying 1 point for? The act of a model replacing a slugga with a shoota. Which models are we talking about? The entire mob's worth of models who are replacing their sluggas with shootas. How many models is that? It's 9 models (in this ongoing example). So, at 1 point per model and with 9 models in scope for the optional replacement, I should pay 9 points.

The answer to which models are we talking about is the breakdown point. I don't believe you can pay for an upgrade for a model (we're instructed to pay per model) that you aren't receiving.

You're paying to upgrade the unit from having sluggas to shootas, at the cost of one point per model in the unit

You need the rule to say 1pt/model with a sluggas. It doesn't.

You're actually not paying to upgrade the unit from having sluggas to shootas. You're upgrading per model to have models in the unit upgrade from having sluggas to shootas.

You're selecting the option on a per unit basis, but paying on a per model basis.

If it were something like the Grey Knights option to take psyammo (and I don't have the 'dex in front of me) where it says something like "The entire squad may take psyammo ..20pts", then I'd agree that the option was selected and paid for on a per unit basis. In the Ork example, it's selected on a per unit basis and paid for on a per model basis.

If I'm not allowed to say "1 pt/model replacing a slugga with a shoota", then you're not allowed to say "1 pt/model in the unit" because the actual text simply says "1 pt/model". We're both adding modifiers to the word model to argue our case.

 Kriswall wrote:
You're actually not paying to upgrade the unit from having sluggas to shootas. You're upgrading per model to have models in the unit upgrade from having sluggas to shootas.

The codex says otherwise.

You have to pay the point. It's a 1 point charge for every model in the unit.

"The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas... 1 -pt/model". The key words here are ENTIRE and PER MODEL. If you want one model to have a shoota you must pay 1 point per model and you then upgrade one to be a big shoota or rokkit launcha. If you're running slugga boyz you bypass the shoota option and simply pay the 5 points for a special weapon.

If you buy your special weapons before upgrading the sluggas to shootas you create an impassable barrier as once a model is given a big shoota he no longer has a slugga to swap for a shoota - which prevents anyone from making the swap.

It's not ambiguous at all. The wording and the intention is pretty clear.

Yeah. There's the rub. The wording and intention aren't clear. The wording is vague. I think the intention is that it costs 1 point to upgrade a slugga to a shoota.

And there is nothing about 1 model not having a slugga preventing me from choosing the option "the entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas". This doesn't create an impassable barrier. If 9 out of 10 models has a slugga and those models replace slugga with shoota, they've fulfilled the requirement that the entire mob replace their sluggas with shootas.

It's one point per model, for the entire mob. Not one point per model in the mob with a slugga. The latter cannot be inferred from the rules

It can be inferred, as I'm inferring it. You might want to consider not using absolutes when talking about how things can be interpreted. It comes off as close-minded and bullying, which I'm certain is not your intent.

And again, if I'm not allowed to qualify "per model", then neither are you. You added "for the entire mob". This isn't in the codex. The codex just says 1 point per model. The codex says that the entire mob may replace, but leaves it up to us to determine the population of models paying since we pay on a per model basis and not a per unit basis.

If I am paying 1 point per model, I have to ask the question "how many models am I paying for?"

I can answer with "the entire mob", but that's not useful because it's not a number. I can also answer 9 because having 9 models replace their sluggas with shootas fulfills the requirement that the entire mob is replacing their sluggas. The last guy shouldn't have to pay because he isn't fulfilling the requirement of replacing his slugga since he doesn't have one and we're paying on a per model basis.

The population is the mob, as that is the unit of measure we have been given. At no point are you told the population is the entire mob that have sluggas.

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

Yes, there are people who agree with his interpretation. I am one of them. The reason I'm not in here arguing is 1. I think the codex is unclear enough that both interpretations are valid and 2. I don't have the patience to argue with people who just assert over and over without ever analyzing. Oh hey, speaking of,

 Ghaz wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
You're actually not paying to upgrade the unit from having sluggas to shootas. You're upgrading per model to have models in the unit upgrade from having sluggas to shootas.

The codex says otherwise.

It does? Awesome! Where is this? I assume you're not just talking about the unit entry, since it's been explained multiple times that there are valid reasons to interpret it both ways, and simply saying "Nuh-uh" again adds nothing whatsoever to the discourse. Where is this other source, which is worded so plainly that merely reading it lays to rest all arguments?

Read the post by Nos right above yours. There's your answer that the codex says otherwise.

Kris - to add, the entire mob is a variable, but most definite IS a number.

 Kriswall wrote:
Some people have agreed. One actually reconsidered his position. To be honest, I think the vast majority of people post a single comment and move on. I normally don't stay engaged in one thread this long, but my wife was out of town for the weekend and I was super bored!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Except you are changing the subject, when no second subject exists. The subject is always the entire mob, you are never told you can link the number of sluggas replaced to the cost.

Per model can only relate to the mob, as their is no other unit to relate to that you are told you can relate to.

I would actually argue that you can only do something per model. You can't noun something per model. It doesn't make sense. The word "their" requires us to ask the questions "Whose?" with the answer being "the entire mob". What are we doing per model? We're paying 1 point. What are we paying 1 point for? The act of a model replacing a slugga with a shoota. Which models are we talking about? The entire mob's worth of models who are replacing their sluggas with shootas. How many models is that? It's 9 models (in this ongoing example). So, at 1 point per model and with 9 models in scope for the optional replacement, I should pay 9 points.

The answer to which models are we talking about is the breakdown point. I don't believe you can pay for an upgrade for a model (we're instructed to pay per model) that you aren't receiving.

I think the vast majority of people in this thread would agree that this information is a twist of the RAW since the english language is able to be manipulated as such since words can vary in meaning according to syntax.

No one would disagree, even you, that the words themselves are unclear at best.

This being said, HIWPI is to have a ruling by third party members of the game or tournament before the list was written, or in most cases house rule it for the FLGS.

RAW there is a clear arguement for the payment of the one point per model, weapon or not.

I would even go as far as to argue that if you did not pay the point that I would assume you are power gaming for ONE point and I certainly wouldn't want to play against you.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kriswall wrote:
You're actually not paying to upgrade the unit from having sluggas to shootas.

Actually, you are.

And "the entire mob" is in fact a representation of the number of models in "the entire mob."

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

Devils Advocate

Both sides of this argument are super imposing words onto the end of the sentence.

One side is "points per models that have taken place in the upgrade from slugga to shoota."

The other is "points per model in the entire mob that has taken place in an upgrade from sluggas to shootas."

My personal opinion in favor of the latter of the two.

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

The rule is only slightly different from the old codex, in so far as there is no mention of Choppas in the new rule. Is there an old FAQ that answers this problem?

As an Ork player, I really don't see the big deal in this. It's 1 point. 1. Even in a 2k game, I only take maybe two squadsof 20 Boyz, but i don't typically give them the Special Weapon because...Ork shooting. I just stick with the regular shootas. But, if I DID do this, I'd only lose...4 points. 4. Thats only enough to buy a Grot, or MAYBE some other minor upgrade that wouldn't be worth the points ANYWAY.

I get using redundant points sucks. But we still have one of the cheapest armies in the entire game (point wise). It's really not that big of a deal, nor worth actually arguing about.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RedNoak wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
The models that qualify for the upgrade and the points you pay are not based on the same criteria [...]

how did you come up with this?

it clearly says: "the entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model"
replace their sluggas with shootas
how am i qualified to do that, if i dont have a slugga?

furthermore it says their sluggas, so only models qualify which have a slugga.

for me its the same with the big mek:
A Big Mek may replace his slugga and choppa with mega armour, kustom mega-blasta and power klaw…40 pts

if i dont have a slugga and a choppa i cant replace it with other stuff.

also... if i take a bmek with megaarmour, following your logic, i could take on of these:
A Big Mek may replace his slugga with one of the following:
- Kustom force field…50 pts
- Shokk attack gun…50 pts

since the qualification to take one of those is being a bigmek (the entire mob) and totally ignoring the "replace" part (may replace their sluggas with shootas)


again im not trying to take an advantage of any kind, since i mosty play friendly games where 3points dont matter... but striclty following the rules you dont have to pay any "taxes"

But a Big Mek can take a KFF with Mega Armor, just not SAG. Right in it's entry, says if it takes MA, it may replace it's Telyporta Blasta with KFF. So, that example doesn't really work.

Here's the details that get me.

"The entire mob"
"1pt/model"

It's clear what the intent here was. To make a unit of shoota boys, the whole unit costs an extra 1 pt per model. Don't be tfg and argue this RAW by trying to interpose 1pt/model(with a slugga).

The language to upgrade to a big shoota says their ranged weapon, so it's meant to be done after you decide whether or not you want slugga boyz or shoota boyz.

If someone came at me with this argument and supposition before the game started I wouldn't want to play them. It's clear they are reading rules for advantage and will take the game too far and take the fun out of the game.

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

I completely agree with Kris. And it has been faq'ed in the ork faq.

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas
with shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a
big choppa?
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big
choppa or power klaw before you choose to
upgrade the mob to have shootas, in which case
the Nob is not affected by the mob’s weapon
swap (as he no longer has a choppa to swap),
does not receive a shoota and keeps his slugga
and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

osirisx69 wrote:

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

I completely agree with Kris. And it has been faq'ed in the ork faq.

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas
with shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a
big choppa?
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big
choppa or power klaw before you choose to
upgrade the mob to have shootas, in which case
the Nob is not affected by the mob’s weapon
swap (as he no longer has a choppa to swap),
does not receive a shoota and keeps his slugga
and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

And please tell us where that changes the price from 'the entire mob' to 'the entire mob equipped with sluggas'. Simply put, it doesn't.

There was a faq regarding the lasts codex and flash gitz.

the question was something like: does the painboy pay 5pts when the unit decides to upgrade its weapons with more dakka? (5 points per model)

Answer: no, as he has no snazzgun.

Sadly I dont have that faq anymore as I relied on GWs webside, but the wording is kinda like the wording for the shoota upgrade. Therefore I think its RAI that you dont "pay" 6 points for a rokkit in a shoota mob.

 Ghaz wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

I completely agree with Kris. And it has been faq'ed in the ork faq.

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas
with shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a
big choppa?
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big
choppa or power klaw before you choose to
upgrade the mob to have shootas, in which case
the Nob is not affected by the mob’s weapon
swap (as he no longer has a choppa to swap),
does not receive a shoota and keeps his slugga
and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

And please tell us where that changes the price from 'the entire mob' to 'the entire mob equipped with sluggas'. Simply put, it doesn't.

Simple put it doesn't have to. I purchase my big shoota which changes out my choppas and slugga then I purchase my shootas for the rest that have sluggas.

osirisx69 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

I completely agree with Kris. And it has been faq'ed in the ork faq.

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas
with shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a
big choppa?
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big
choppa or power klaw before you choose to
upgrade the mob to have shootas, in which case
the Nob is not affected by the mob’s weapon
swap (as he no longer has a choppa to swap),
does not receive a shoota and keeps his slugga
and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

And please tell us where that changes the price from 'the entire mob' to 'the entire mob equipped with sluggas'. Simply put, it doesn't.

Simple put it doesn't have to. I purchase my big shoota which changes out my choppas and slugga then I purchase my shootas for the rest that have sluggas.

Yes it does, because the price is linked to the number of models in the mob, not the number of models with sluggas. You're making the same assumption which has been disproven multiple times in this thread,

 Ghaz wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

I completely agree with Kris. And it has been faq'ed in the ork faq.

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas
with shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a
big choppa?
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big
choppa or power klaw before you choose to
upgrade the mob to have shootas, in which case
the Nob is not affected by the mob’s weapon
swap (as he no longer has a choppa to swap),
does not receive a shoota and keeps his slugga
and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

And please tell us where that changes the price from 'the entire mob' to 'the entire mob equipped with sluggas'. Simply put, it doesn't.

Simple put it doesn't have to. I purchase my big shoota which changes out my choppas and slugga then I purchase my shootas for the rest that have sluggas.

Yes it does, because the price is linked to the number of models in the mob, not the number of models with sluggas. You're making the same assumption which has been disproven multiple times in this thread,

nothing has been disproven. In fact the FAQ even more proves it. You can go on and keep moving the goal post. The fact is there is no order when you do your updates and RAW CLEARLY states you must REPLACE!!!! a slugga and choppa with a shoota .

That's it.... anything else is just making rules up as you go.....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 koooaei wrote:
• [b]The entire mob may replace their sluggas with shootas…1 pt/model[/b]

• For every ten models in the unit, one Ork Boy may replace their ranged weapon with one of
the following:
- Big shoota…
- Rokkit launcha…

Do i have to pay this extra 1 point for a shoota that's gona get replaced with a special weapon?

Read the bold underlined

Yes, and the cost to do so is one point per model in the unit. You're making things up if you say ptherwise

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, and the cost to do so is one point per model in the unit. You're making things up if you say ptherwise

Cite page and para please where it states you must pay 1 point per model even if they have no slugga or choppa to trade in?

Oh wait.... that's right you can't cause it does not exist. Illogical leaps lead to illogical conclusions.

RAW State it must, must , must, replace a slugga and choppa. That is definitive and proven.

Does the model have a slugga and choppa to replace? No? then you do not pay the cost...RAW

osirisx69 wrote:
nothing has been disproven. In fact the FAQ even more proves it. You can go on and keep moving the goal post. The fact is there is no order when you do your updates and RAW CLEARLY states you must REPLACE!!!! a slugga and choppa with a shoota .

That's it.... anything else is just making rules up as you go.....

Sorry, but you're mistaken. The FAQ has nothing to do with the price of the upgrade. The upgrade and the price of said upgrade are two separate things. It is not based on who takes the upgrade, but the number of models in the mob. Perhaps you should read what the rule actually says before you claim someone is making up rule, because at this time it's you who's making up rules. You're making up the rule that somehow the number of models taking the upgrade somehow influences the cost. It doesn't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

osirisx69 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, and the cost to do so is one point per model in the unit. You're making things up if you say ptherwise

Cite page and para please where it states you must pay 1 point per model even if they have no slugga or choppa to trade in?

Oh wait.... that's right you can't cause it does not exist. Illogical leaps lead to illogical conclusions.

RAW State it must, must , must, replace a slugga and choppa. That is definitive and proven.

Does the model have a slugga and choppa to replace? No? then you do not pay the cost...RAW

We have. It's right there in black and white when it says "The entire mob" and not "All of the models in the mob with sluggas". We have provided the RAW. You have not.

 Ghaz wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:
nothing has been disproven. In fact the FAQ even more proves it. You can go on and keep moving the goal post. The fact is there is no order when you do your updates and RAW CLEARLY states you must REPLACE!!!! a slugga and choppa with a shoota .

That's it.... anything else is just making rules up as you go.....

Sorry, but you're mistaken. The FAQ has nothing to do with the price of the upgrade. The upgrade and the price of said upgrade are two separate things. It is not based on who takes the upgrade, but the number of models in the mob. Perhaps you should read what the rule actually says before you claim someone is making up rule, because at this time it's you who's making up rules. You're making up the rule that somehow the number of models taking the upgrade somehow influences the cost. It doesn't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

osirisx69 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes, and the cost to do so is one point per model in the unit. You're making things up if you say ptherwise

Cite page and para please where it states you must pay 1 point per model even if they have no slugga or choppa to trade in?

Oh wait.... that's right you can't cause it does not exist. Illogical leaps lead to illogical conclusions.

RAW State it must, must , must, replace a slugga and choppa. That is definitive and proven.

Does the model have a slugga and choppa to replace? No? then you do not pay the cost...RAW

We have. It's right there in black and white when it says "The entire mob" and not "All of the models in the mob with sluggas". We have provided the RAW. You have not.

Why do you insist on taking words out of context? The entire sentence is very clear. RAW you must replace slugga and choppa with shootas. if they don't have a slugga and choppas you don't replace.. You don't replace the nobs slugga and choppa and he is part of the ENTIRE SQUAD! Notice how you have to have a slugga and choppa to replace? GW faq'ed it in so this silly debate wouldn't even happen.....

Bold and underlined sentence complete and total fallacy made up by you.....I am not making a rule up I am follow the rules to the letter.

We're not taking anything out of context. It seems however that you are. The price is determined by how many models are in the mob, nothing else.

osirisx69 wrote:

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

I completely agree with Kris. And it has been faq'ed in the ork faq.

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas
with shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a
big choppa?
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big
choppa or power klaw before you choose to
upgrade the mob to have shootas, in which case
the Nob is not affected by the mob’s weapon
swap (as he no longer has a choppa to swap),
does not receive a shoota and keeps his slugga
and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

Might want to mention that this is from the old 6th ed FAQ, so may or may not apply.

Re the question. Who cares, it's 1 point.

 Ghaz wrote:
We're not taking anything out of context. It seems however that you are. The price is determined by how many models are in the mob, nothing else.

You're wrong per GW own FAQ.....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 don_mondo wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

I completely agree with Kris. And it has been faq'ed in the ork faq.

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas
with shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a
big choppa?
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big
choppa or power klaw before you choose to
upgrade the mob to have shootas, in which case
the Nob is not affected by the mob’s weapon
swap (as he no longer has a choppa to swap),
does not receive a shoota and keeps his slugga
and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

Might want to mention that this is from the old 6th ed FAQ, so may or may not apply.

Re the question. Who cares, it's 1 point.

That's the only FAQ orks have.. are you implying that we should ignore the FAQ's now? Or did you just not know there is not a 7th edition FAQ yet? Its not 1 point its 12 points. 4 mobs of 30 boyz. 12 points is a big gun almost.

osirisx69 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
We're not taking anything out of context. It seems however that you are. The price is determined by how many models are in the mob, nothing else.

You're wrong per GW own FAQ.....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 don_mondo wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

I completely agree with Kris. And it has been faq'ed in the ork faq.

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas
with shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a
big choppa?
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big
choppa or power klaw before you choose to
upgrade the mob to have shootas, in which case
the Nob is not affected by the mob’s weapon
swap (as he no longer has a choppa to swap),
does not receive a shoota and keeps his slugga
and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

Might want to mention that this is from the old 6th ed FAQ, so may or may not apply.

Re the question. Who cares, it's 1 point.

That's the only FAQ orks have.. are you implying that we should ignore the FAQ's now? Or did you just not know there is not a 7th edition FAQ yet? Its not 1 point its 12 points. 4 mobs of 30 boyz. 12 points is a big gun almost.

Wait.... are you seriously using the FAQ from the now outdated Ork Codex for the now outdated 6th edition, to justify an argument on something within the new codex and current edition that isn't even directly referenced by said FAQ? I think you just lost all credibility.

chanceafs wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
We're not taking anything out of context. It seems however that you are. The price is determined by how many models are in the mob, nothing else.

You're wrong per GW own FAQ.....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 don_mondo wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:

 The Good Green wrote:
One last question, Kris. Has anyone on Dakka agreed with you on this point? Or have we all bee saying the same few things to counter your argument? I haven't read the entire thread, just the posts I thought I needed to read.

I completely agree with Kris. And it has been faq'ed in the ork faq.

Q. If a Boyz mob exchange sluggas and choppas
with shootas, can a Nob take a power klaw or a
big choppa?
A. You may upgrade the Nob to have a big
choppa or power klaw before you choose to
upgrade the mob to have shootas, in which case
the Nob is not affected by the mob’s weapon
swap (as he no longer has a choppa to swap),
does not receive a shoota and keeps his slugga
and power klaw/big choppa instead. He is a lot
happier that way!

Might want to mention that this is from the old 6th ed FAQ, so may or may not apply.

Re the question. Who cares, it's 1 point.

That's the only FAQ orks have.. are you implying that we should ignore the FAQ's now? Or did you just not know there is not a 7th edition FAQ yet? Its not 1 point its 12 points. 4 mobs of 30 boyz. 12 points is a big gun almost.

Wait.... are you seriously using the FAQ from the now outdated Ork Codex for the now outdated 6th edition, to justify an argument on something within the new codex and current edition that isn't even directly referenced by said FAQ? I think you just lost all credibility.

out of context

osirisx69 wrote:

 don_mondo wrote:

Might want to mention that this is from the old 6th ed FAQ, so may or may not apply.

Re the question. Who cares, it's 1 point.

That's the only FAQ orks have.. are you implying that we should ignore the FAQ's now? Or did you just not know there is not a 7th edition FAQ yet? Its not 1 point its 12 points. 4 mobs of 30 boyz. 12 points is a big gun almost.

Did I say that we should ignore the old FAQs, or did I say that you should mention the source that you are using? Wouldn't want to intentionally mislead someone into thinking that a new FAQ had come out, now would we?

Actually, as chanceafs pointed out (and I missed), it's not an FAQ at all any more as it references a previous version of the codex. So it's the only FAQ you USED to have for a previous version of the codex. And you're trying to use it to support a rules argument for a codex that it was not written for?!? Doh!! Seriously? but tell you what, if I can use the FAQ from the 4th ed codex for my IG....

But to answer your questions.
No, I don't think we should ignore the FAQs, even tho GW has taken them down and seems to be unwilling or unable to put them back up. However, we should also only use them for the codex version that they were posted for. And some of the FAQ bits are obviously not going to apply any more due to rules changes in 7th.

I (obviously) know that there is not a VIABLE FAQ for 7th, altho there are what GW posted to the Black Library pages and are currently calling FAQs, even tho they barely address some of the necessary rules bits to use the older codexes in 7th and have (maybe) only two or three actually FAQ items amongst them.

Ok, whoopee, 1 point per gun, max it would cost if you took 6 mobs of 30 is what, 18 points? Oooooo, wow, I'm impressed... NOT.

Wait a new FAQ came out? I thought it was still v1.0 from mid-July.

 Happyjew wrote:
Wait a new FAQ came out? I thought it was still v1.0 from mid-July.

No, the only Ork FAQ currently posted is the old codex 24 July version. Sorry....

Aww, I got all excited for a FAQ for an army that I don't play...

Osirix - as explained, before you cited an out of date FAQ for the previous codex, the only population you gp have is the entire mob. Nothing else.

Actually, you aren't performing an action on the entire mob. You're performing an action on a portion of the models in the mob. The action taking place is replacing and the population is "their sluggas". I would argue that the population in question is the object of the phrase, namely "their sluggas" and that you pay for this replacement on a per replacement basis at the cost of one point per model.

Ok, thank you osirisx for relating the FAQ Q&A. Unfortunately it has no relation to points cost versus gear upgrades. It only states that the nob doesn't change his gear. This is probably due to the upgrade being free in the applicable codex for that FAQ. So I am still left with the feeling that the "Entire Mob" would be paying for the upgrade.

I see that the answer definitely points out the the upgrade don't need to be taken in order though, which does clear up part of the argument for some, if it hasn't already been.

Just to reiterate my point, the group that is called on to pay for the upgrade is the "entire mob" not just the boyz that make the trade. Because the rule does not say anything to the effect of "every boy" or "boyz with sluggas" or "slugga boyz", but instead says "entire mob" I have no reason to think that some part of the mob can avoid paying for the upgrade.

I also think it's funny that this is all over, at most, 3 points. ;D

 Kriswall wrote:
Actually, you aren't performing an action on the entire mob. You're performing an action on a portion of the models in the mob. The action taking place is replacing and the population is "their sluggas". I would argue that the population in question is the object of the phrase, namely "their sluggas" and that you pay for this replacement on a per replacement basis at the cost of one point per model.

No, the action is on the entire mob, the replacement is per model, but the entire mob performs the replacement. Again, there is no way, from the text, to get to "per model with slugga" , as the size is set by the only thing mentioned- the mob

 The Good Green wrote:
Ok, thank you osirisx for relating the FAQ Q&A. Unfortunately it has no relation to points cost versus gear upgrades. It only states that the nob doesn't change his gear. This is probably due to the upgrade being free in the applicable codex for that FAQ. So I am still left with the feeling that the "Entire Mob" would be paying for the upgrade.

I see that the answer definitely points out the the upgrade don't need to be taken in order though, which does clear up part of the argument for some, if it hasn't already been.

Just to reiterate my point, the group that is called on to pay for the upgrade is the "entire mob" not just the boyz that make the trade. Because the rule does not say anything to the effect of "every boy" or "boyz with sluggas" or "slugga boyz", but instead says "entire mob" I have no reason to think that some part of the mob can avoid paying for the upgrade.

I also think it's funny that this is all over, at most, 3 points. ;D

Haha. Yeah. In an actual gaming situation, I wouldn't care at all. In the real, non-gaming world I'm a process engineer and software designer. For me, being extremely specific in your rules is very important. In a gaming situation I routinely let people "go over by just a few points". I can't tell you how many games I've played where it's my 1500 versus his/her 1550-1600. Some people just don't understand "a few points"!