"the majority" question, and a IC q.

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.

**KIANEM**

Alright, so 1

If you have a squad where there is no "majority", say a 10 man squad where 5 are in cover and 5 aren't, how should this be resolved?

and 2,

With an IC falling back with a squad, and their numbers are 2 out of the origional 10 (as in, they cannot regroup), does the IC have to retreat out of the game with them?

Thanks

**Gorkamorka**

KIANEM wrote:Alright, so 1

If you have a squad where there is no "majority", say a 10 man squad where 5 are in cover and 5 aren't, how should this be resolved?

P22
"If half or more of the models in the target unit are in
cover, then the entire unit is deemed to be in cover and
all of its models may take cover saves"
In your case, half the models are in cover, so the unit gets cover.
Note that if it is hard to tell, you can agree on a lesser save to speed things up.

For weapon skill, the other confusing majority rule I can think of... if there is no majority, as in your case of 5v5, you use the highest for the whole unit.
I believe the example INAT gives is something like:
3 models with WS 2
2 models with WS 3
1 model with WS 4
= WS 4, as there is no majority
I believe toughness works the same way, requiring an actual majority.

**Ridcully**

In question 2, the IC will continue retreating until they go off the table or the rest of the squad dies. If everyone but him dies, he can attempt to regroup (providing he meets the requirements) at the start of his movement phase.

Gorkamorka wrote:
KIANEM wrote:Alright, so 1

If you have a squad where there is no "majority", say a 10 man squad where 5 are in cover and 5 aren't, how should this be resolved?

P22
"If half or more of the models in the target unit are in
cover, then the entire unit is deemed to be in cover and
all of its models may take cover saves"
In your case, half the models are in cover, so the unit gets cover.
Note that if it is hard to tell, you can agree on a lesser save to speed things up.

For weapon skill, the other confusing majority rule I can think of... if there is no majority, as in your case of 5v5, you use the highest for the whole unit.
I believe the example INAT gives is something like:
3 models with WS 2
2 models with WS 3
1 model with WS 4
= WS 4, as there is no majority
I believe toughness works the same way, requiring an actual majority.

Sorta varies. No one i know around here plays that 'majority' refers to the absolute majority whereby the majority Toughness would need to make up more than 50% of the models. Most people here would play that majority toughness refers to the mode toughness.

**Gorkamorka**

Ridcully wrote:
Sorta varies. No one i know around here plays that 'majority' refers to the absolute majority whereby the majority Toughness would need to make up more than 50% of the models. Most people here would play that majority toughness refers to the mode toughness.

I suppose, as 'majority' is never really defined outside of the specific equal-sided cover clause, that the mode could be an acceptable interpretation as well.
The examples in the book are not really helpful, as they only include lopsided comparisons... people around here play by INAT's 'raw' version of an absolute majority, but ymmv.

Here's the relevant INAT quote:
RB.37C.01 – Q: If a unit being attacked in close
combat has one engaged model with WS5, two
engaged models with WS4 and three engaged models
with WS3 what Weapon Skill value is used for attacks
against them?
A: As there is no majority WS (more than half of the
engaged models in the unit), the unit uses the WS of 5 when
attacked [RAW].

**Ridcully**

I'd be curious to see how the English players play majority.

**ChrisCP**

I'll give you a hand

One Can not have an 'even' majority. Or a majority surpasses the remainder. So more than half not the 'mostest' that would be the mode

**colonel584**

As Ridcully said it just means the 'mode' toughness/weapon skill ie the most common. Regardless, if theres:
4 WS/T 3
3 WS/T 4
2 WS/T 5
1 WS/T 6
the WS/T3 still has the largest number :. i'd count that.

**Lord_Mortis**

Ridcully wrote:In question 2, the IC will continue retreating until they go off the table or the rest of the squad dies. If everyone but him dies, he can attempt to regroup (providing he meets the requirements) at the start of his movement phase.

Now here's a question: I know the RAW state you cannot fire into a combat involving your own models, but do the rules state you cannot shoot at or assault your own models that aren't in combat? Some parts of the rules simply say pick a target unit and then mentions "enemy" but does the rulebook ever define "enemy" as only your opponents models?

**Ridcully**

Lord_Mortis wrote:Now here's a question: I know the RAW state you cannot fire into a combat involving your own models, but do the rules state you cannot shoot at or assault your own models that aren't in combat? Some parts of the rules simply say pick a target unit and then mentions "enemy" but does the rulebook ever define "enemy" as only your opponents models?

'Enemy' and 'opponent' are synonymous. It doesn't need to define enemy models as being those that belong to your opponent. The rules state that you choose an enemy target. No rules allow you to choose a friendly target.

**kartofelkopf**

Nitpick: Vindicare assassins can target friendly models (and even fire into CC).

**ChrisCP**

colonel584 wrote:As Ridcully said it just means the 'mode' toughness/weapon skill ie the most common. Regardless, if theres:
4 WS/T 3
3 WS/T 4
2 WS/T 5
1 WS/T 6
the WS/T3 still has the largest number :. i'd count that.

And you would be playing the rule wrongly, as the example from the rulebook and our clarification point out there is no majority of WS in that unit so the highest is used, this time being 6. Make it clear to travelling players that you play with house rules or there will be tears!! =D

**Ridcully**

ChrisCP wrote:
colonel584 wrote:As Ridcully said it just means the 'mode' toughness/weapon skill ie the most common. Regardless, if theres:
4 WS/T 3
3 WS/T 4
2 WS/T 5
1 WS/T 6
the WS/T3 still has the largest number :. i'd count that.

And you would be playing the rule wrongly, as the example from the rulebook and our clarification point out there is no majority of WS in that unit so the highest is used, this time being 6. Make it clear to travelling players that you play with house rules or there will be tears!! =D

The clarification you speak of comes from the INAT FAQs. Using either definition of 'majority' is valid. Americans would be more likely to use majority in the sense of 'more than half', but the UK players (where it was written) could take it to mean majority in the sense of the 'mode'. Neither goes against the rules or example and neither (as far as i'm aware) has been mentioned in an FAQ.

**ChrisCP**

The clarifiction I was speaking of was the definition of majority Page 37 & 38 mention this.
If you want to use majority to mean half once again you should make this clear as there is no 'definition dispute' half is half and a majority is more than half.
I've said it before 'taking it to mean' is not the same as means and people should be corrected in their views instead of the propagation of misinformation.
The only time I've heard of a majority being called something different is in american language where the term simply majority is also used to mean the same thing. If there is a situation like 30a,30b,10c it's know as a plurality.

I can break it down for you again on my next break if it's still not clear.

**Ridcully**

ChrisCP wrote:The clarifiction I was speaking of was the definition of majority Page 37 & 38 mention this.
If you want to use majority to mean half once again you should make this clear as there is no 'definition dispute' half is half and a majority is more than half.
I've said it before 'taking it to mean' is not the same as means and people should be corrected in their views instead of the propagation of misinformation.
The only time I've heard of a majority being called something different is in american language where the term simply majority is also used to mean the same thing. If there is a situation like 30a,30b,10c it's know as a plurality.

I can break it down for you again on my next break if it's still not clear.

I'm fairly sure i've understood what you're saying in both posts, but thank you. We're not referring to a specific half situation. We're referring to the highest occurrence of a T/WS being the majority. Majority used in a mode sense.

1 x WS2
1 x WS3
1 x WS4
2 x WS5
1 x WS6

Mode: WS5

That sort of thing. I understand it's likely that a vast number of people don't play it this way. Judging by this 2006 thread there are potentially many people still playing by mode toughness etc (although quite possibly considerably less if they go by the INAT FAQs religiously):
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/103336.page#103336

The rules were worded almost identically to this edition's rules, but with an obvious change that doesn't affect this discussion.

The slightly odd thing about that thread is that option B (the way i play it) was the popular vote in a Yakface's YMDC thread, which are considered for the INAT FAQs. Not in this case however, as the INAT FAQs appear to have ruled against it. I wasn't around at the time, so i can't really make other comments.

**ChrisCP**

Ah got you sorry, your quite right that I thought this was still about what to call a majority/GW meaning mode. Gorkas last post on the int faq plays as RAW.
Colonel584 got me all confused with the I'd play that comment which is saying he'd play differently than RAW when it's a fairly simply process/no room for dispute imo.
And a snap reaction as my group play fairly religiously RAW.
Cheers man.

**Ridcully**

I think the confusion comes largely from plurality and majority being synonymous in British English. As GW is from the UK, it's not surprising that mode toughness is a fairly common interpretation outside of the US.

**kirsanth**

Ridcully wrote:I think the confusion comes largely from plurality and majority being synonymous in British English. As GW is from the UK, it's not surprising that mode toughness is a fairly common interpretation outside of the US.

Thank you for this.
I had always read it in American.

**ChrisCP**

Now we are back where we were - the words are not synonymous, not to be confused with synonyms
Synonymous words for majority are most, generality, preponderance.
A majority in English language is a group greater than half of the whole.
Plural means more than one, plurality means having more than one type synonyms for plurality could be diversity heterogeneity (sp?)
A plurality can only be when there is no majority.

=_= should just get my poor mum to come in and explain, I'm the maths person in our family =P

**Ridcully**

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurality_%28voting%29

In voting, a plurality is the largest number of votes to be received by any candidate or referendum.[1] It is contrasted with a majority, which is over half of the votes.[1] For example, in a plurality election, the candidate with the most votes wins, while in a majority election, a candidate can only win if they also receive over half of the votes. When no candidate receives a majority in the first round of voting, a two-round systems or preferential voting systems can be used to choose a winner. When there are only two choices, the plurality choice is also the majority choice.

In British English, the word majority can often be used as a synonym of plurality, with the term overall or absolute majority being used to refer to the narrower North American meaning.[3]

For example, an election of three candidates where 100 votes are cast, with Alice winning 40 votes, and Bob and Carol winning 31 and 29 votes respectively. A Briton might say "Alice won with the majority of votes", whereas a Canadian wishing to express the same sentiment would say "Alice won with a plurality." The Canadian would only describe Alice as winning with a majority if Alice won with at least 51 votes.

The term relative majority is a synonym for plurality, that can also be used if necessary to distinguish that kind of 'majority' from an overall majority.

**ChrisCP**

Argh the sin of using Wiki as a reference!!!

"In voting, a plurality is the largest number of votes to be received by any candidate or referendum.[1] It is contrasted with a majority, which is over half of the votes.[1]"

That's what I've been saying isn't it?

**Ridcully**

First of all, there's nothing wrong with wikipedia. I think it's the best website on the internet and more accurate than your average encyclopaedia. Their sources are easy to follow.

You're the one disagreeing with me. You don't seem to understand that, as the article suggests and people have shown, 'plurality' and 'majority' are said to be often synonymous in British English. So interchangeably so that an overwhelming number of people voted for the non-american definition in the poll. You don't have to keep insisting majority is always more than half. It can have different meanings in different places.

The AMERICAN 'majority' refers STRICTLY to a situation where one takes beyond half. This varies outside of the US, where it can also mean the plurality.

Do you understand what i'm saying?

**Scott-S6**

As someone who grew up in the UK I can definately say that majority is often used to mean mode/plurality.