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.

Does this give +1 WS to the Squad or the single model carrying it? It says mob in the book I guess I'm not sure in 40k if that's the whole group or not.

Fenrx wrote:Does this give +1 WS to the Squad or the single model carrying it? It says mob in the book I guess I'm not sure in 40k if that's the whole group or not.

Yes, it means the whole Unit. Just remember that Multiples do not stack (i.e. 2 Waaagh! Banners is still only +1 WS).

RaW Mob means nothing, it should say Unit, so RaW it doesn't do ANYTHING.

While there is no specific listed definition of the word 'mob' the fact that the codex uses it consistently to refer to the groups of Orks selected from the army list gives it a pretty solid context. You would be hard pressed to find anyone that would try to make that argument across the table with a straight face.

insaniak wrote:While there is no specific listed definition of the word 'mob' the fact that the codex uses it consistently to refer to the groups of Orks selected from the army list gives it a pretty solid context. You would be hard pressed to find anyone that would try to make that argument across the table with a straight face.

Which is why I had it spoilered. Even I would not play it as such, but I am pointing out what the RaW actually is. Yes, I know this is a Bad Thing nowadays, but I did give fair warning.

So In Summary:
RaW: It doesn't Work
RaI: We Don't Know
RaP: Mob = Unit

Can we at least agree on that?

Gwar! wrote:

insaniak wrote:While there is no specific listed definition of the word 'mob' the fact that the codex uses it consistently to refer to the groups of Orks selected from the army list gives it a pretty solid context. You would be hard pressed to find anyone that would try to make that argument across the table with a straight face.

Which is why I had it spoilered. Even I would not play it as such, but I am pointing out what the RaW actually is. Yes, I know this is a Bad Thing nowadays, but I did give fair warning.

So In Summary:
RaW: It doesn't Work
RaI: We Don't Know
RaP: Mob = Unit

Can we at least agree on that?

Sounds like a plan to me.

Gwar! wrote:Which is why I had it spoilered. Even I would not play it as such, but I am pointing out what the RaW actually is.

Hence my disagreement. Your point is only 'RAW' if you consider a specific definition to be required.

RAW is as much about context and understanding the full text as about picking out meanings of individual words. Reading the codex as a whole, it becomes pretty apparent what they are referring to when they use the word 'mob'...

So no, I would disagree that 'mob' is meaningless by RAW. It's only meaningless if you ignore the context in which it is used. By RAW (IMO), a mob is a unit of Orks.

insaniak wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Which is why I had it spoilered. Even I would not play it as such, but I am pointing out what the RaW actually is.

Hence my disagreement. Your point is only 'RAW' if you consider a specific definition to be required.

RAW is as much about context and understanding the full text as about picking out meanings of individual words. Reading the codex as a whole, it becomes pretty apparent what they are referring to when they use the word 'mob'...

So no, I would disagree that 'mob' is meaningless by RAW. It's only meaningless if you ignore the context in which it is used. By RAW (IMO), a mob is a unit of Orks.

But at no point does it state that Mob is Explicitly the same as Unit.

Specifically, a mob is a unit of Orks with the Mob Rule special rule. Page 30 says Ork units have these rules where noted. It's thin but not unreasonable.

Homer

Gwar! wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Which is why I had it spoilered. Even I would not play it as such, but I am pointing out what the RaW actually is.

Hence my disagreement. Your point is only 'RAW' if you consider a specific definition to be required.

RAW is as much about context and understanding the full text as about picking out meanings of individual words. Reading the codex as a whole, it becomes pretty apparent what they are referring to when they use the word 'mob'...

So no, I would disagree that 'mob' is meaningless by RAW. It's only meaningless if you ignore the context in which it is used. By RAW (IMO), a mob is a unit of Orks.

But at no point does it state that Mob is Explicitly the same as Unit.

His whole post is explaining why it doesn't have to say that explicitly, and you counter with repeating the exact same thing again?

Ok...

Krall wrote:His whole post is explaining why it doesn't have to say that explicitly, and you counter with repeating the exact same thing again?

Ok...

At no point does his post suggest it does not have to say it Explicitly. All his post claims is that it Implies (Implicitly) that Mob is the same as Unit, not that it doesn't have to Explicitly state it.

In His Opinion, RaW says Mob = Unit, while In My Opinion, RaW Says Mob != Unit.

What's difference is that he is taking Implied rules, whereas I am taking the fact that at no point does it actually say "Mob is Equivalent to Unit".