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

DAR - the real problem you have is you confuse MODEL and UNIT

Shrouding talks about targetting UNITS. WHen an IC is *part of* another unit he is simply a model in that unit.

When you target the combined UNIT, while you are targetting the set of models that includes the GK, the GK is not actually a unit at this point in his own right - he is PART OF another unit. You have provided absolutely no evidence that this unit, which is required to be part of another unit, is considered a seperate unit. This is because the rules dont actually allow this, but carry on..

Therefore the IC is not a legal target, as you may only target units.

Does this make any sense to you now?

Lets say your playing space wolves and you have the following unit.

Grey Knight Hero joined to Wolf Lord, Joined to Wolf priest.

what do you call that unit? is it a Grey Knight unit, Wolf Lord Unit, Wolf Priest Unit.

None of the above or all of the Above.

Honestly. if you were really playing a game and the issue of shroud came up you would have to refer to the Rolloff rule and 4+ it.

mrdabba wrote:what do you call that unit? is it a Grey Knight unit, Wolf Lord Unit, Wolf Priest Unit.

A powerful multi-character unit.

It's even in the rules - A unit. Not 2, 3 or more. Just A unit.

so I guess shrouding doesn't work if I'm playing Deamonhunters and I join a GreyKnight hero to a Grey Knight hero.

I'm no longer a grey knight unit. I'm a "Multi-Character" Unit?

is that correct?

mrdabba wrote:so I guess shrouding doesn't work if I'm playing Deamonhunters and I join a GreyKnight hero to a Grey Knight hero.

I'm no longer a grey knight unit. I'm a "Multi-Character" Unit?

is that correct?

Is it "a unit of Grey Knights?"








(yes)

Mahtamori wrote:
Is it a "Grey Knights unit" (that's not possessive form). No, it's a unit with a Grey Knight in it. End of.

Unfortunately, the definition of a "Grey Knights Unit" on page 20 of C: DH disagrees with you. Going by your standards, an ork warboss combined with a squad of Ork boys is not a unit of Orks, but a unit with orks in it (No Waaaugh bonus) a Blood Angels Assault Marine squad with Astorath is a unit with Blood angels in it (and not a unit of Blood angels, so no "Decent of Angels" or "Red Thirst") and any unit of Eldar with a farseer (or any other IC) attached to it is no longer a unit of Eldar (but a unit with Eldar in it) and thus, cannot be targeted by Eldar Psychic Spells (or certain abilities like Eldrad's redeployment)... which is where my major concern is with this ruling, and why the discussion has gone on for so long.

kirsanth wrote:
If you were asking something else, I think I missed it.

Can you join 2 Ics (example, a Wolf Lord and a Rune Priest) to a single unit (Example, Grey Hunters) during deployment?

According to the Bullet I referenced, No you cannot, according to how I've seen it played (for instance, in 'ard Boyz Semi-finals lists) yes you can. See the conflict?

SaintHazard wrote:

mrdabba wrote:so I guess shrouding doesn't work if I'm playing Deamonhunters and I join a GreyKnight hero to a Grey Knight hero.

I'm no longer a grey knight unit. I'm a "Multi-Character" Unit?

is that correct?

Is it "a unit of Grey Knights?"








(yes)

According to the post above. Your are wrong sir

it is A Multi Character Unit. per the rulebook.


of course I dont agree with that. It is a Unit of Grey Knights. and it is also a Unit of grey Knights.

Just like my previous post about the space wolf multi character unit can be labled as A Unit of Grey Knights. I can also be labled as a Unit of Wolf Lord or a Unit of Wolf Priest. its All of the above.

SaintHazard wrote:

mrdabba wrote:so I guess shrouding doesn't work if I'm playing Deamonhunters and I join a GreyKnight hero to a Grey Knight hero.

I'm no longer a grey knight unit. I'm a "Multi-Character" Unit?

is that correct?

Is it "a unit of Grey Knights?"

No, its a Unit of Grey knights and a unit of grey knights. As you have already discussed, Shrouding does not accommodate combined units.

(Or, depending on your perspective, what Mrdabba said.)

heh you posted to fast Daemon. i didnt think people would get my sarcasm so I had to edit.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
When you target the combined UNIT, while you are targetting the set of models that includes the GK, the GK is not actually a unit at this point in his own right - he is PART OF another unit. You have provided absolutely no evidence that this unit, which is required to be part of another unit, is considered a seperate unit. This is because the rules dont actually allow this, but carry on..

Care to explain why the opposite is the truth with special rules such as "Blight Grenades" which specifically states "A Unit of Plague Marines" (Or does Typhus not actually receive the benefit of his special rule "The Destroyer Hive" as he is not technically a "Unit of Plague Marines"

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Does this make any sense to you now?

Does this make any sense to you now?

~~~~ EDIT ~~~~

BEFORE YOU START CLAIMING THAT BLIGHT GRENADES DO NOT WORK THE SAME WAY(As they may be conceived as "Wargear" or "Equipment" instead of special rules), I WOULD SUGGEST YOU READ CODEX: CHAOS SPACE MARINES PAGE 38 BEFORE MAKING SUCH A BLATANTLY FALSE STATEMENT!

Does every character have the "Grey Knights" special rule?

That would seem to qualify as "a unit of Grey Knights" if so.

If some of them do, that would seem to be a unit containing Grey Knights.

If none of them do, then there is no reason to care.

Multi-character is a descriptor, not an ending. The reason it is important, however, is that it does state that the unit is a unit.

As for the bullet you referenced, I am going to read it now--but as I recall, it is allowed as you join a character to a unit. Then do it again--since the IC + unit is a unit. I will check, though.

Editing to add:
It's the bullet on the right-erp.
It still reads as I recalled though--deployment is per unit, and until joined each IC is one.

^ What he said.

Both models in the unit have the "Grey Knights" special rule, therefore it is "a unit of Grey Knights."

Shrouding applies.

kirsanth wrote:Does every character have the "Grey Knights" special rule?

That would seem to qualify as "a unit of Grey Knights" if so.

If some of them do, that would seem to be a unit containing Grey Knights.

If none of them do, then there is no reason to care.

Unfortunately it is not up to you or me to arbitrarily decide what a unit of Grey knights is, that definition is listed on page 20 of C: DH, and holds no accomodations for "Combined Units" or "Multi-Character" units.

If "Multi-Character" units or "Combined units" do not hold their original nomenclature of "X unit" but instead take on the new title of "Combined" or "Multi-character" unit as you are implying, (and as such, are using as justification to deny the unit of grey knights their shrouding rules) then what difference would it make if the 'Original' units were "Grey Knight" units individually, the fact is, by your logic, they are NO LONGER A UNIT OF GREY KNIGHTS, so they don't get shrouding.

kirsanth wrote:
Multi-character is a descriptor, not an ending. The reason it is important, however, is that it does state that the unit is a unit.

You are also failing to acknowledge the other bullets that state that while it is "a" unit, it does not function in the same way (in fact, in some ways SIGNIFICANTLY different) as other "Units" but more so like a "Unit which contains units"

kirsanth wrote:
As for the bullet you referenced, I am going to read it now--but as I recall, it is allowed as you join a character to a unit. Then do it again--since the IC + unit is a unit. I will check, though.

Nothing says you can do it again, permissive rules remember

kirsanth wrote:
Editing to add:
It's the bullet on the right-erp.
It still reads as I recalled though--deployment is per unit, and until joined each IC is one.

I do not recall using English as a defense in this thread--maybe I misremember though.

As for the reserves (not sure why, but) stating "any of his independent characters left in reserve are joining a unit" does nothing but re-assert that they cannot join 2 units and must be declared to be joining one to use a single reserve roll.

As for permissive, can you tell me why a unit containing models without the rule "Grey Knights" would be a "unit of Grey Knights?" Once you really nail that one, it should be easy to justify it applying without even having Daemonhunters.

I think the counter-point to that is over-done.

kirsanth wrote:
As for permissive, can you tell me why a unit containing models without the rule "Grey Knights" would be a "unit of Grey Knights?" Once you really nail that one, it should be easy to justify it applying without even having Daemonhunters.

The "models" with the Grey Knight special rule (even though this does not guarantee that it is a "Unit of Grey Knights" the DH Codex defines Possessed Marines as Daemons even though they lack the "Daemon" Special rule***...) which are units of Grey knights, are still units of Grey knights, as they are being targeted ('mixed' or not) their "Shrouding" special rule would activate. I do not believe in the permissive ruleset, but it is the prime counterargument against my claims, if it is not being held, then all "The Shrouding" looks for is the unit of grey knights, which would still be present in the combined unit (as long as one part of it is defined as a "Grey Knight" unit on page 20, remember, Codex trumps BRB) and since the condition is fulfilled, the ability is activated. And as the shrouding states that if the Grey Knights(not the unit of grey knights) are not within the range of the distance rolled, the firing cannot occur, and it is because of this that the other, non-grey knight, members of the unit are protected. Not because THEY(the Non-Gks) have the shrouding, but because the GREY KNIGHTS have the shrouding, and the wording on the shrouding does not insinuate that the distance rolled is the distance they are allowed to target the grey knights (so the issue of "Picking out targets" on either side is not present) it is the distance they are allowed to FIRE NORMALLY, as they CANNOT FIRE at the Grey Knights due to the wording on the shrouding (Remember, Codex Trumps BRB) the cannot fire at the non-greyknights Joined to the unit.

Is this making any more sense?


*** Edit

Wanted to add, that while a Daemon Prince has the "Daemon" special rule, he is not defined as a "Daemon" in C: DH and as such, is safe from many of the DH anti-Daemon abilities ((RAW))

DAR - all caps is, well, not good. Typhus blight grenades, RAW, have NEVER worked - he is not a plague marine. We'll forget the argument by strawman fallacy as well.

Any chance you can get back to the original point, which is:

You are claiming the ability to target multiple units. Please provide evidence for this extraordinary claim, or quit with your incessant claims that there are multiple units being targetted.

Once you have accepted that targetting multiple units is not allowed without a special rule saying so, you will hopefully come to the conclusion that, when targetting the combined unit, you cannot in ANY WAY shape or form be considered to be targetting a GK Unit.

Once you are not targetting a GK unit shrouding does not apply. Any clearer now?

Additionally: It states you can select An IC to join a unit. Once that IC has joined that unit, they are again one unit and you can join An IC to that unit. ANd so on, ad infinitum. Try harder with your spurious arguments.

Is it becoming any clearer why your confusion over "model", "unit", 'targetting", "shooting" etc arent helping your argument in anyway shape or form?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and just to add: quit with the "warboss + Ork Boyz /= Ork Unit" - given that all units are described as orks, barring gretchin, you are yet again simply wrong in this.

Sigh.

I think some meaning is getting lost in a sea of words here.

DAR, please tell me if this interpretation of your argument is correct.

You're saying that when a foe targets the unit that happens to contain both Grey Knights and, say, for our purposes, ISTs, it is targeting "a unit of Grey Knights" and "a unit of ISTs" simultaneously, since the combined unit is a combination of those two units, thus fulfilling the requirement that the foe must be targeting "a unit of Grey Knights." Right?

Assuming this interpretation is correct, what WE are trying to say is that the foe is not in fact targeting (in fact, cannot legally target) "a unit of Grey Knights" and "a unit of ISTs" simultaneously - they are, instead, targeting "a unit of Grey Knights and ISTs," since the unit is combined, and you cannot target multiple units with a single shooting attack.

Because the unit of Grey Knights and ISTs is not exclusively a unit of Grey Knights, it becomes something else entirely - that being best described as "a unit of Grey Knights and ISTs," which is comprised of what were previously two seperate units - one of Grey Knights, and one of ISTs.

The bottom line of our argument is that at the time they unit is being targeted, it is not in fact "a unit of Grey Knights." It is "a unit of Grey Knights and ISTs."

Unless all of the models in the combined unit can be defined as Grey Knights (and the DH codex defines Grey Knights as models with the "Grey Knight" special rule) then it is not "a unit of Grey Knights," and shrouding does not apply.

...does that make more sense?

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:Is this making any more sense?

To me, yes.

I get where you are coming from, and to a large degree agree with how you get where you are going.

Part of the issue is the assertion that codex trumps BRB. If so, SA and Ork LD is whacked, amoung other things.

Part is "The Shrouding" looks for is the unit of grey knights, which would still be present in the combined unit" because there are models in a unit with the Grey Knights rule--they are no longer a unit in their own right.

The daemon thing reads to me as a lark, though. See: Smoke, Storm Shields, etc.

Part is the opposite statement to what you said here, "as they CANNOT FIRE at the Grey Knights due to the wording on the shrouding the cannot fire at the non-greyknights Joined to the unit. "as they CANNOT FIRE at the Grey Knights due to the wording on the shrouding they can fire at the non-greyknights joined to the unit"

Both get silly fast.

nosferatu1001 wrote:DAR - all caps is, well, not good. Typhus blight grenades, RAW, have NEVER worked - he is not a plague marine. We'll forget the argument by strawman fallacy as well.

Now what about the Plague Marines joined by the Sorcerer of Tzeentch?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Any chance you can get back to the original point, which is:

You are claiming the ability to target multiple units. Please provide evidence for this extraordinary claim, or quit with your incessant claims that there are multiple units being targetted.

See my post on page 3 (I think it was) where I highlighted this evidence, and you chose to ignore it. You have yet to prove that Shooting at a "Multi-Character" unit is not shooting at "Multiple units" I am interested in seeing how you defend this one tho, I've been waiting for the answer now for three days (at least)

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Once you have accepted that targetting multiple units is not allowed without a special rule saying so, you will hopefully come to the conclusion that, when targetting the combined unit, you cannot in ANY WAY shape or form be considered to be targetting a GK Unit.

See above...

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Once you are not targetting a GK unit shrouding does not apply. Any clearer now?

You've yet to prove that by targeting a unit which contains grey knights, you are not targeting grey knights? Any clearer now?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Additionally: It states you can select An IC to join a unit. Once that IC has joined that unit, they are again one unit and you can join An IC to that unit. ANd so on, ad infinitum. Try harder with your spurious arguments.

Not in the "Preparing Reserves" rules, it states that you get to make "A" decision to link ANY ICs to "A"(singular) unit when you are preparing reserves, you must do this FIRST, BEFORE any other reserves are declared, and if you do not link the ICs to the SINGULAR unit (according to raw) then the ICs will roll separately (and count as a SEPARATE unit) when rolling for reserves. Not to complicated given the school of thought you have presented...

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Oh, and just to add: quit with the "warboss + Ork Boyz /= Ork Unit" - given that all units are described as orks, barring gretchin, you are yet again simply wrong in this.

Why am I wrong? You state that when a Unit of X and a Unit of X are joined, they are no longer a Unit of X. They are a combined unit of X and X. Waaaugh does not state that "All Units of Orks, and any combined units consisting of units of Orks" and therefor, by your definition, if they are a combined unit, they are denied their Waaaugh bonuses. Also while we are at it, where are the definitions of a "Unit of Orks" or a "unit of space wolves" or "a Friendly Unit" in any of the rulebooks for that matter?

Its really not all that difficult, at this point, you are arguing with yourself, as I am merely using your own justifications placed into other contexts, in which if they were applied, drastic changes would occur to how the game is currently played (which is why I have been fighting your ruling so adamantly)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kirsanth wrote: "as they CANNOT FIRE at the Grey Knights due to the wording on the shrouding they can fire at the non-greyknights joined to the unit"

Both get silly fast.

Actually this last one is an easy fix, if you reread the shrouding a little bit closer, it says that in order to fire normally, they must be in range of the Grey knights, and then continues to specifically make note that they cannot make any other firing that phase "A unit which fails to detect the Grey knights (not the Grey knight unit) misses its change to fire at an alternative target in the confusion." So, as the shrouding states that an alternative target cannot be fire at, and that firing cannot occur normally, the unit cannot fire AT ALL if they fail to see the Grey Knights. This would ALSO apply to things that CAN specifically target two separate units (for instance Long Fangs with Fire Control) if one of their targets would be the Grey Knights, and they fail to detect the Grey Knights, their firing is halted due to the Shrouding Special Rule, and as all firing with a unit happens at once, when the shrouding is failed (and the Long Fangs are denied the ability to shoot, as per shrouding rule) the other target (as per "Fire Control") Would also be indirectly protected!

Again, its the wording of the Shrouding that (in my opinion) has been ignore the most!

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Any chance you can get back to the original point, which is:

You are claiming the ability to target multiple units. Please provide evidence for this extraordinary claim, or quit with your incessant claims that there are multiple units being targetted.

See my post on page 3 (I think it was) where I highlighted this evidence, and you chose to ignore it. You have yet to prove that Shooting at a "Multi-Character" unit is not shooting at "Multiple units" I am interested in seeing how you defend this one tho, I've been waiting for the answer now for three days (at least)

Wait... so you're claiming that a "multi-character unit" is... multiple units?
...

Gorkamorka wrote:
Wait... so you're claiming that a "multi-character unit" is... multiple units?
...

yes, in military terms, a squad is a unit, a platoon is also a unit, a platoon consist of two or more squads (two or more units, inside of a SINGLE unit).

I mean, we are playing a wargame... right?

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:yes, in military terms, a squad is a unit, a platoon is also a unit, a platoon consist of two or more squads (two or more units, inside of a SINGLE unit).

In game terms, however, this is not the case.

Just so people do not think I play favorites though. . . .

In the section for "Shooting at independent characters" it states that the IC is "considered part of that unit".

More reading.

My MAJOR concern out of this entire debate is the sleeping devil that the outcome of this ruling may cause to have a VERY rude awakening.

If we rule here that "When a Unit joins another unit, it is no longer its original unit, but a "Combined unit" that does not contain its original nomenclature"

The repercussions of setting such a precedent will be MONUMENTAL and that is why I am fighting it so strongly...

While this would mean that GKs would have a SLIGHT advantage that many believed they did not deserve in the past (and as such, might POSSIBLY convince more SM players to take allies, however it is still very point-heavy and eats one of your precious HQ slots). I, as a Chaos Space Marine player, would HAPPILY make that trade then go down the dangerous road of "Player defined unit nomenclature"... Which is why I'm shrugging off the insults of some, accepting the ideas of the dissenting opinions, and trying in my very best for the outcome that I see of such a ruling passing is clear to EVERYONE on BOTH sides of the debate, before we foolishly go and counter-act so MANY rules in which this notion is addressed!

I However (if this helps anyone see more so where I am coming from) would be IN EXTREME SUPPORT of a RULES CHANGE that would NOT allow the shrouding to apply to joined units, but ONLY IF it is called what it actually is, a RULES CHANGE, and not misnomered as "how the rules currently work" as such as statement would over complicate a good 60%+ of the current rules.

So to those whom are dissenting, I implore you to reread the rules in which you are contesting and defending, understand the situation from EVERY ASPECT POSSIBLE and understand that if you are merely fighting the ruling because you simply believe that it would be game-changing balance wise for GKs to protect other units with this ability, to take the discussion to "Proposed Rules" where I will stand beside you in that fight, and not let pride, or worry of the 'power' this ruling will give Daemonhunters, and understand the severe negative, and complicated, repercussions that this ruling will introduce to a game, where already it's biggest flaw is in the stark debate over the rules (I've seen more people get upset over controversial rulings then rolling un-godly horribly, and in almost every game I have played/seen played, at least 35% of the game ((in MANY instances WAY MORE)) is spent debating rules as opposed to ENJOYING THE GAME.) So please, think long and hard before introducing a concept that will dramatically over complicate the rules of this game...

~DAR

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Any chance you can get back to the original point, which is:

You are claiming the ability to target multiple units. Please provide evidence for this extraordinary claim, or quit with your incessant claims that there are multiple units being targetted.

See my post on page 3 (I think it was) where I highlighted this evidence, and you chose to ignore it. You have yet to prove that Shooting at a "Multi-Character" unit is not shooting at "Multiple units" I am interested in seeing how you defend this one tho, I've been waiting for the answer now for three days (at least)

Wait - so you are claiming that shooting at A multi character UNIT is shooting at multiple units?

Is your comphrension of English so poor? Seriously?

You are firing at a unit consisting of multiple characters. In a similar way that you shoot at any unit consisting of multiple models.

You've been waitign 3 days to be told to look for the "A" in the sentence!

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Once you have accepted that targetting multiple units is not allowed without a special rule saying so, you will hopefully come to the conclusion that, when targetting the combined unit, you cannot in ANY WAY shape or form be considered to be targetting a GK Unit.

See above...

Yep, see above. Where a single unit, aka "a" unit, is the one being targetted.

Sheesh, you're a law minor?

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Once you are not targetting a GK unit shrouding does not apply. Any clearer now?

You've yet to prove that by targeting a unit which contains grey knights, you are not targeting grey knights? Any clearer now?

Any clearer by you dropping CRITICAL wording in an attempt to make your argument any less flawed?

The ACTUAL rule requires you to be targetting a Grey Knight Unit. Note the really, reaaly REALLY key word there: UNIT.

Targetting a subset of a unit, aka "models", is not targetting a unit. The rules only allow you to target UNITS.

Find the GK unit in {GK+non-GK} as far as the *shooting* rules is concerned. I would like to again remind you that:
1) An IC is PART OF a unit for shooting.
2) You cannot target a component of a unit specifically, you may only target the UNIT - barring a special rule, that is.
3) You may only target a single unit.

I declare I am targetting the SINGLE unit {GK+non-GK} - therefore NOT targetting a GK Unit, and therefore no shrouding.

Really, really, really simple.

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Additionally: It states you can select An IC to join a unit. Once that IC has joined that unit, they are again one unit and you can join An IC to that unit. ANd so on, ad infinitum. Try harder with your spurious arguments.

Not in the "Preparing Reserves" rules, it states that you get to make "A" decision to link ANY ICs to "A"(singular) unit when you are preparing reserves, you must do this FIRST, BEFORE any other reserves are declared, and if you do not link the ICs to the SINGULAR unit (according to raw) then the ICs will roll separately (and count as a SEPARATE unit) when rolling for reserves. Not to complicated given the school of thought you have presented...

As opposed to your "train of thought" which is more like a car wreck?

Resolve your issues above first, then your attempts to derail the thread into nonsense can be dealt with.

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Oh, and just to add: quit with the "warboss + Ork Boyz /= Ork Unit" - given that all units are described as orks, barring gretchin, you are yet again simply wrong in this.

Why am I wrong? You state that when a Unit of X and a Unit of X are joined, they are no longer a Unit of X. They are a combined unit of X and X. Waaaugh does not state that "All Units of Orks, and any combined units consisting of units of Orks" and therefor, by your definition, if they are a combined unit, they are denied their Waaaugh bonuses. Also while we are at it, where are the definitions of a "Unit of Orks" or a "unit of space wolves" or "a Friendly Unit" in any of the rulebooks for that matter?

No, we are stating that a unit of X and a unit of Y are a unit of {X+Y}

A unit of orks joined to a unit of orks is, weirdly enough, a unit of Orks.
A unit of Orks joined to a unit that isnt orks is, weirdly enough, not a unit of Orks.

Daemon-Archon Ren wrote:Its really not all that difficult, at this point, you are arguing with yourself, as I am merely using your own justifications placed into other contexts, in which if they were applied, drastic changes would occur to how the game is currently played (which is why I have been fighting your ruling so adamantly)

Except your spurious argument actually fails at the first hurdle: it requires you to be able to target multiple units, OR it requires you to be able to target components of a unit.

Neither argument holds any water at all. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

RAW: Targetting a unit of {GK+non-GK} requires targetting a non-GK unit. No Shrouding. End of argument now, please? You really dont have any leg to stand on, and you are just embarrasing yourself by not even seeing the word "A" in the phrase "A multi-charact unit", nor even the singular form of unit...its kinda hilarious, really.

You also seem to think that a platoon is a single unit. not in 40k it isnt, which is the only place where the definition of unit matters...

First off, please, calm down. The moment you start taking this debate personally, the moment this debate is no longer a debate...

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Wait - so you are claiming that shooting at A multi character UNIT is shooting at multiple units?

Is your comphrension of English so poor? Seriously?

No, a unit can be composed of many different units, you should probably look up the word "unit" again before making comments on my "comphrension" of English...

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You are firing at a unit consisting of multiple characters. In a similar way that you shoot at any unit consisting of multiple models.

Characters are units in their own right (this has been discussed before)

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You've been waitign 3 days to be told to look for the "A" in the sentence!

What does the "a" actually signify.

If you are holding five "one-dollar" bills in your hand, you are still holding A unit of 5$ that is both worth 5$ and still 5 individual dollars...

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yep, see above. Where a single unit, aka "a" unit, is the one being targetted.

Targeting a single unit which contains multiple units is what you seem to be missing here... it is possible for A unit (platoon) to consist of MULTIPLE units (Two or more squads, by definition)

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Sheesh, you're a law minor?

Yes I am

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Any clearer by you dropping CRITICAL wording in an attempt to make your argument any less flawed?

As you are dropping pages of evidence, and sheer definitions of the words you claim I cannot comprehend, to make your argument less flawed, but even still, what critical wording? The One Unit? Again, I have already proven that "A Unit can consist of Multiple Units". Its really not all that foreign a concept.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
The ACTUAL rule requires you to be targetting a Grey Knight Unit. Note the really, reaaly REALLY key word there: UNIT.

Note the definition of Grey Knight Unit (described in C: DH) is NOT NECESSARILY THE SAME UNIT DEFINITION BEING USED IN THE BRB! SPECIFIC > GENERAL.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Targetting a subset of a unit, aka "models", is not targetting a unit. The rules only allow you to target UNITS.

And when you are targeting the combined unit, you are still targeting what the CODEX DAEMONHUNTERS DEFINES as a unit of Grey Knights.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Find the GK unit in {GK+non-GK} as far as the *shooting* rules is concerned. I would like to again remind you that:
1) An IC is PART OF a unit for shooting.
2) You cannot target a component of a unit specifically, you may only target the UNIT - barring a special rule, that is.
3) You may only target a single unit.

Two different definitions of "Unit" bro, and before you say "THATS A LOAD OF CROC" keep in mind that the term "Unit" is applicable to HUNDREDS of definitions, it is you who is merging them all, and it is that mindset I fear could cause an unprecedented wave of conflicts in the rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
I declare I am targetting the SINGLE unit {GK+non-GK} - therefore NOT targetting a GK Unit, and therefore no shrouding.

Really, really, really simple.

Again, above.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
As opposed to your "train of thought" which is more like a car wreck?

Tenants of YMDC, care to back up that statement? Or would you rather retract it?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Resolve your issues above first, then your attempts to derail the thread into nonsense can be dealt with.

Stop calling me Black, Kettle!

nosferatu1001 wrote:
No, we are stating that a unit of X and a unit of Y are a unit of {X+Y}

A unit of orks joined to a unit of orks is, weirdly enough, a unit of Orks.
A unit of Orks joined to a unit that isnt orks is, weirdly enough, not a unit of Orks.

No, as stated above, if you have X and Y you are X + Y

If you have X and X you are X+X

X+X =/= X With the amount of criticism you give my English, you'd think you'd have a tighter grasp on Math....

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Except your spurious argument actually fails at the first hurdle: it requires you to be able to target multiple units, OR it requires you to be able to target components of a unit.

No, you want to define the word "Unit" in the way that best supports your argument, I chose to use the ones provided by the books/codex/english language. And that is, what I have noticed, the fundamental difference in our posts... I'm basing mine off of something.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
RAW: Targetting a unit of {GK+non-GK} requires targetting a non-GK unit. No Shrouding. End of argument now, please? You really dont have any leg to stand on, and you are just embarrasing yourself by not even seeing the word "A" in the phrase "A multi-charact unit", nor even the singular form of unit...its kinda hilarious, really.

You also seem to think that a platoon is a single unit. not in 40k it isnt, which is the only place where the definition of unit matters...

Weren't you using the "The book is in English so you have to use English" defense?

That aside, you have still yet to come up with any solid support for why the books definition of Unit trumps the codex!

~DAR

Common misconception. It's not a black-and-white situation. Definitions of terms in the BRB go like this: if it's explicitly defined in the BRB, you must use the BRB definition. Terms like "unit," "target," "embark," "assault," and so on have very specific meanings within the context of the rules - and these meanings are often slightly or sometimes even greatly different from their dictionary definition. On the other hand, you have terms like "it," "and," "towards," "up," "down," and so on that are NOT given specific definitions within the context of the rules. That's where the English language kicks in. If the term ("unit") has a specific BRB definition, you must use that definition to decide what can or cannot affect it, or what it can or cannot do. If the term doesn't have a specific BRB definition, you have to interpolate what it means based on its definition in the English language.

"Unit" has a very specific BRB definition. Therefore real-world definitions of the word have no effect whatsoever on the rules (such as your example of a real-world military "unit").

Does that make more sense?

I've posted this again, darth bob tried to dispute the first diagrams validity with

Drath Bob wrote:What is that little purple area made of? A different unit and a Grey Knight unit. I'm not saying the blue has become a unit of Grey Knights, nor am I saying that the Purple has become a unit of Grey Knights (so don't put words in my mouth). I'm saying that one of the ingredients of that purple unit is a Grey Knight unit. Because there is a Grey Knight unit within that purple area, if you shoot the purple area, you are shooting at a Grey Knight unit, and therefore, test for Shrouding.

Which I belive Nos has just readdressed on this page

And, what about the second diagram... explain to us how one could shoot at a unit of Grey Knights whit the conditions set there?

ChrisCP wrote:


I've posted this again, darth bob tried to dispute the first diagrams validity with

Drath Bob wrote:What is that little purple area made of? A different unit and a Grey Knight unit. I'm not saying the blue has become a unit of Grey Knights, nor am I saying that the Purple has become a unit of Grey Knights (so don't put words in my mouth). I'm saying that one of the ingredients of that purple unit is a Grey Knight unit. Because there is a Grey Knight unit within that purple area, if you shoot the purple area, you are shooting at a Grey Knight unit, and therefore, test for Shrouding.

Which I belive Nos has just readdressed on this page

And, what about the second diagram... explain to us how one could shoot at a unit of Grey Knights whit the conditions set there?

I get what your saying, that it is a unit that now has two different types in it making a new one.

Just for the sake of arguement though, does shrouding say a unit of GK's? So if a unit of GK's is in the new unit, does it not also mean that your are shooting at a unit of GK's? Regardless of the fact that something else is there are your not shooting at a unit of GK's? At this point you need to think what shooting at a unit of GK's really means. Does it mean GK's and only GK's? If so where does the word only appear in the codex? If you are saying that GK models are no longer GK models after they join another squad (and this is funny to think and I know it is ludicris and I thought this) then when a IC joins another unit you lose all the IC rules, because he is no longer an IC, he is a part of the unit, and since he is a part of the unit and no longer an IC because he has a new type of unit you loss all the bells and whistles you bought when you paid for the IC. If this really makes you want to take a shot at me just pass, because I know it is not what you are saying.(And again I just thought it so I thought it was funny and brought it up).

Have a nice night everyone.

SaintHazard wrote:Common misconception. It's not a black-and-white situation. Definitions of terms in the BRB go like this: if it's explicitly defined in the BRB, you must use the BRB definition. Terms like "unit," "target," "embark," "assault," and so on have very specific meanings within the context of the rules

The problem is, you are making the above statement up, and if the above statement were true, then the BRB'd definition of "Unit" would over-ride and codex-specific definition of unit (which you are stating with the GK argument) and as such, there would be no such thing as an "ork unit", an "eldar unit", a "blood angels" unit or even a "friendly unit" as the BRB does not state definitions for these SPECIFIC conditions. Remember SPECIFIC > General...

Sooo... if you go with the BRB's unit definition, you never gain shrouding, even if you are a single unit of grey knights (as Unit of Grey knights is not covered in the overleaf of "unit types" or a unit type of anything other then "Infantry, B & C, MCs, Jump Infantry, Artillery, Bikes and jet bikes, and Vehicles" as you are saying that the BRB unit definition over-rides codex, you would lose your codex specific definitions.

I will not allow this, as it would dramatically alter the game.