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.

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, because the VERY first sentence tells you that models can take tests. So models CAN take tests.

Nothing tells you how a) units take tests (do you roll once? once for each model?) and b) what happens when you have mixed stat units. Technically units *cannot* take tests as only models are given permission in the characteristic test rules.

So yes, the game does break, as has been pointed out. So you were wrong in your assertion that the game doesnt break. Again.

No, again, you are wrong!!!!. The first paragraph, all it is doing is setting up a situation. It does not say this is how the model takes the test, all it says is a model might have to take a test. It does not say only models can take the test. It is fluff really. There is no rule in that paragraph, or an introduction to the next paragraph, or an example of how one might work. So saying that, that is RAW on how a model takes a test is wrong. Also, it is wrong to say that any part of that paragraph is a rule.

So again NOS you are WRONG!

Whut?

Why not try reading all of the rule?

Page 8, "Characteristic Tests", Paragraph 2, Sentence 1 and 2:

In order to take the test, roll a D6. To succeed, you must score equal to or lower than the value of the characteristic involved.

Now, nowhere does it allow for a unit to take the test. It allows a model to take a test because of the 3rd paragraph, which states:

Of course, if a model has to take a test for one of its characteristics with a value of 0, it automatically fails.

Seriously Kapitalist-Pig, if you are going to troll (badly) and also be wrong while doing it, try and do it a bit better!

Gwar! wrote:

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, because the VERY first sentence tells you that models can take tests. So models CAN take tests.

Nothing tells you how a) units take tests (do you roll once? once for each model?) and b) what happens when you have mixed stat units. Technically units *cannot* take tests as only models are given permission in the characteristic test rules.

So yes, the game does break, as has been pointed out. So you were wrong in your assertion that the game doesnt break. Again.

No, again, you are wrong!!!!. The first paragraph, all it is doing is setting up a situation. It does not say this is how the model takes the test, all it says is a model might have to take a test. It does not say only models can take the test. It is fluff really. There is no rule in that paragraph, or an introduction to the next paragraph, or an example of how one might work. So saying that, that is RAW on how a model takes a test is wrong. Also, it is wrong to say that any part of that paragraph is a rule.

So again NOS you are WRONG!

Whut?

Why not try reading all of the rule?

Page 8, "Characteristic Tests", Paragraph 2, Sentence 1 and 2:

In order to take the test, roll a D6. To succeed, you must score equal to or lower than the value of the characteristic involved.

Okay read the 1st and second sentence of the second paragraph, please quote for me where it says, "only a model can take this test", or where it references a model at all in those two sentences.

It does not need to say only a model can, it needs to say a unit can take the test. The point is the rules only ever refer to models.

It also doesn't say my Sabbat pattern SoB bolters don't come equipped with underslung Heavy Flamers, but I am pretty sure they don't

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:Okay read the 1st and second sentence of the second paragraph, please quote for me where it says, "only a model can take this test", or where it references a model at all in those two sentences.

Why should I need to?

That isn't the full rule.

You have two references to models:

Paragraph 1, Sentence 1:

During a battle, a model might have to take a test on one of its characteristics...

and Paragraph 3, Sentence 1

Of course, if a model has to take a test for one of its characteristics with a value of 0, it automatically fails.

Understand yet, or do I need to highlight the "a model" in pink for you?

And again the first paragraph has no RULE IN IT!
It is fluff. So please tell me where in any part that is a part of the RULE (Second Paragraph just so you know) that it says only models can take a test! Also, since in the past you have been able to brow beat someone with a yes or no anwser, anwser my request.

Also yes it does since it is a permissive rule set. Otherwise A) nothing can take a test. Or B) everything can take a test. But again it come to a problem with the units characteristic and how to find it.

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:And again the first paragraph has no RULE IN IT!
It is fluff. So please tell me where in any part that is a part of the RULE (Second Paragraph just so you know) that it says only models can take a test! Also, since in the past you have been able to brow beat someone with a yes or no anwser, anwser my request.

Also yes it does since it is a permissive rule set. Otherwise A) nothing can take a test. Or B) everything can take a test. But again it come to a problem with the units characteristic and how to find it.

Ok, fine.

What about the 3rd paragraph?
Why do you ignore things that kill your argument?

Woops, answered myself there.

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:But again it come to a problem with the units characteristic and how to find it.

Is that not what everyone else was posting?

No everyone else was saying that the game breaks. I was arguing that it doesnt, or that nothing can test based on permissive rule set.

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:No everyone else was saying that the game breaks. I was arguing that it doesnt, or that nothing can test based on permissive rule set.

Except, ya know, I have shown you that it does allow models to take a test?

Gwar! wrote:

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:No everyone else was saying that the game breaks. I was arguing that it doesnt, or that nothing can test based on permissive rule set.

Except, ya know, I have shown you that it does allow models to take a test?

Gwar! No you haven't based on the counter arguements I have made. So, at this point please anwser this question again! Where does it say in the second paragraph, first and second sentences where we get the rule for how to take a test, that only models are allowed to take tests, or that models are allowed to take tests. Thanks.
Also the third paragrpah does not permit the model to take a test. It says if it has to with a characteristic of 0 it fails. Where in there does it say a model is allowed? Where in there does it say that?

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:No everyone else was saying that the game breaks. I was arguing that it doesnt, or that nothing can test based on permissive rule set.

Except, ya know, I have shown you that it does allow models to take a test?

Gwar! No you haven't based on the counter arguements I have made. So, at this point please anwser this question again! Where does it say in the second paragraph, first and second sentences where we get the rule for how to take a test, that only models are allowed to take tests, or that models are allowed to take tests. Thanks.

By your logic, I can ask you "Where does it say on page 3 how Walkers move?" and because it isn't there Walkers can never move.

Protip: When arguing rules, read the whole rule. It stops you looking like a pillock.

In any case, Units taking tests is Broken, live with it and make a house rule if you must.

Gwar! wrote:

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:No everyone else was saying that the game breaks. I was arguing that it doesnt, or that nothing can test based on permissive rule set.

Except, ya know, I have shown you that it does allow models to take a test?

Gwar! No you haven't based on the counter arguements I have made. So, at this point please anwser this question again! Where does it say in the second paragraph, first and second sentences where we get the rule for how to take a test, that only models are allowed to take tests, or that models are allowed to take tests. Thanks.

By your logic, I can ask you "Where does it say on page 3 how Walkers move?" and because it isn't there Walkers can never move.

Protip: When arguing rules, read the whole rule. It stops you looking like a pillock.

In any case, Units taking tests is Broken, live with it and make a house rule if you must.

I ignored the first one because well you can be like that sometimes. Not anymore, please follow the rules of YMDC. Do not insult people. I know you feel justified to do so, but you do not run the boards. This site has very specific rules that you have no doubt known about for a while, and have been sent packing for a couple of days for. I have also said the same thing about units taking tests. Hello, do you ever think about reading the whole post, or arguement of the other side before you go off! Additionally, page 72 is where you find how walkers move so have a nice day!

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:I ignored the first one because well you can be like that sometimes. Not anymore, please follow the rules of YMDC. Do not insult people. I know you feel justified to do so, but you do not run the boards. This site has very specific rules that you have no doubt known about for a while, and have been sent packing for a couple of days for. I have also said the same thing about units taking tests. Hello, do you ever think about reading the whole post, or arguement of the other side before you go off! Additionally, page 72 is where you find how walkers move so have a nice day!

But you didn't follow my rules!!!!! If you can make silly limits on what I can use to answer questions, so can I!

And I wasn't insulting you at all.

Gwar! wrote:

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:I ignored the first one because well you can be like that sometimes. Not anymore, please follow the rules of YMDC. Do not insult people. I know you feel justified to do so, but you do not run the boards. This site has very specific rules that you have no doubt known about for a while, and have been sent packing for a couple of days for. I have also said the same thing about units taking tests. Hello, do you ever think about reading the whole post, or arguement of the other side before you go off! Additionally, page 72 is where you find how walkers move so have a nice day!

But you didn't follow my rules!!!!! If you can make silly limits on what I can use to answer questions, so can I!

And I wasn't insulting you at all.

Firstly, as I reference you did start with the whole, anwser my question within my limits. Addtionaly, when you can find another page that talks about, and gives rules for Characteristic tests then you have an arguement. Secondly, by insinuating that I look like a pillock to you. You have in essence called me a pillock, so yes you did insult me.

Modquisition on:
Both of you cease and desist. NOW.

Back on topic - If nothing is listed as being able to take a characteristic test then, nothing can take a test. The default is not 'everything can take a test'

That said - the rule explicitly states that a model takes the test.

Based on RAW, GWAR! looks like he got it right to me. Characteristic tests are specific to individual models, the Hit and Run test is explicitly stated as a unit check, therefore it cannot be a characteristic check by definition and must be something different entirely.

However, these silly semantic games are much beside the point and don't really help you solve your problem.

Since it looks like they designed the Hit and Run rule for units, they probably didn't address this issue as they never planned they'd have mixed initiative units with this capability.

So, you're going to have to house rule it. Precedent would support the idea that you would go with majority Initiative, or at a 50/50 split, the highest. That is how I would play it and expect my opponent to play it.

Paragraph 1 provides the CONTEXT for the rule. The context is A MODEL.

Then, to reinforce the context, paragraph 2 states that "the model automatically fails"

So, we're still talking about MODELS taking tests. Not a single hint of the word unit here.

Finally, JUST to add to the context, it states what happens if a MODEL has a characteristic of 0.

So, 3 mentions of models, all in context, therefore only providing permission for models to take tests.

Sorry KP, you're wrong on this. The game breaks because there is no permission for units to take the test - it gives you no suggestions on how to perform this action. So you cannot.