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.

nosferatu1001 wrote:So, do you think Destroyed == Removed from Play as a Casualty? You never answered that, nor did you explain your train of thought. You cant just assume we'll never meet on this, especially when you make leaps that you dont explain.

Yes, you DO take a morale check. See first line page 44:

page 44 wrote:A unit losing 25% or more of its models....

Nothing about "remove from play as a casualty"

Ok on page 44, under the heading "casualties" it says "a unit losing 25% or more of its models during a single phase...etc" To me this shows that losing models=casualties. Honestly I truly dont see how you could not agree with this.

The thing about the kill points is this. Your argument rests on that remove from play is wholly different from it being destroyed and removed as a casualty. That the things that trigger when a model is destroyed as a casualty do not trigger when it is removed from play. I think if you follow this logic that "remove from play" is a wholly different effect then it would not yield a KP.

I think the argument that it does not yield a KP is the same as you dont get to roll RP, and i think neither are true.

No, it doesnt say that. You are inferring it, without any written rule telling you that. Thats why I disagree - you have no rules telling you this, in fact they tell you the opposite.

You are simply told that losing models triggers the test. You have lost models with JotWW. Thats why you take the test.

No, my argument is NOT that RfP and Destroyed are different. Not at all. My contention is that "destroyed" CONTAINS RfP, RfPaaC, Wrecked, Explodes, etc. BEcause it does. It is a PURPOSELY broad phrase because it has to include Vehicles.

YOUR contention is that destroyed == RfPaaC. Which is entirely wrong, as I pointed out.

You are conflating terms when you not only have no basis in rules, but also doing so to such an extent that vehicles no longer give up kill points. This shows your argument to be absurd - revisit and rethink it.

Nos has this one. Destroyed encompasses many of the 'remove from play', 'removed as casualties', 'explodes', 'wrecks' and numerous other iterations of 'destroyed'.

He also has it on the morale check argument as well.

Unless your contention is you never roll for a morale check.

It says "Casualties" in bold then it descrbies losing models. Honestly this cant be any more clear.

If you think JOTWW counts as casualties as described on page 44 for the purposes of checking moral, but do not think it counts as casualties for the purposes of checking RP then no further argument can continue. I would say you had a valid argument if you thought it didnt count for either reason. However if you believe this contradiction to be logical there is no purpose in further argument. Thats all I will say on the matter.

I have always read it as nosferatu1001 states.

haroon wrote:It says "Casualties" in bold then it descrbies losing models. Honestly this cant be any more clear.

If you think JOTWW counts as casualties as described on page 44 for the purposes of checking moral, but do not think it counts as casualties for the purposes of checking RP then no further argument can continue. I would say you had a valid argument if you thought it didnt count for either reason. However if you believe this contradiction to be logical there is no purpose in further argument. Thats all I will say on the matter.

The moral rule specifically states, 'loses'.

haroon wrote:It says "Casualties" in bold then it descrbies losing models. Honestly this cant be any more clear.

What, that you dont understand logical fallacies?

A implies B does not mena that B implies A. Just because losing models can be casualties does not mean that casualties are always losing models.

Jaws makes you lose models, therefore you test. It does not remove models as casualties, meaning you dont get RP. Sorry, it really ISNT any more clear than this.

haroon wrote:If you think JOTWW counts as casualties as described on page 44

Bzzzt, stop there. You're now trying to conflate that casualty is a direct replacement for "losing models". it isnt, so dont do it.

haroon wrote:for the purposes of checking moral, but do not think it counts as casualties for the purposes of checking RP then no further argument can continue.

No, there really isnt any argument. Youre conflating two terms and pretending thats the truth.

It is incredibly logical.

Here's a similar type of power on Vortex Missile Launchers (although ramped up for Apocalypse of course) that emphasizes the differences of "Remove From Play":

"After determining the final position of the marker, any models and removable terrain features touched by the blast are removed from the game (flyers are unaffected). Don’t even think about making any form of save, and the vortex isn’t affected by your Eternal Warrior and other special rules either. Just remove them!"

Wow, I have never seen such a flimsy argument in all of my days playing this game.

There are some very specific terms that mean some very specific things in this game, and you need only read through the rulebook, the FAQ and the codices currently in print to understand them.

Removed as a Casualty: Most models will be removed as casualties, and effects triggered by being removed as a casualty will be resolved when this happens. This happens when a model is hit, wounded, fails an armor/invulnerable/cover save and loses its last wound.

Removed from Play: Certain weapons and abilities can remove a model from play. That is, there is usually no need to hit or wound them (though if there is the ability will say so), and they do not get a save (usually not even an invulnerable save, but the ability will say "no saves of any kind" or "may take an invulnerable save if they have one" or something similar). Jaws of the World Wolf does not roll to hit or wound. The model rolls an initiative test, and if it fails it is Removed from Play with no save of any kind. This is different than being removed as a casualty, because the model did not lose its last wound. Effects that trigger from being removed as a casualty do NOT trigger when a model is removed from play, however the model is still "destroyed"

Destroyed: Destroyed is a catch-all term for models that are removed from the board in some way. These models may or may not leave behind a wreck or a crater (if they are a vehicle), but however it happens, they are no longer taking part in the battle. They might have been removed as a casualty, or they might have been Removed from Play or wrecked. Regardless they are all referred to as destroyed.

If a unit loses 25% of its models (that is, 25% of them are destroyed in some way) they must take a morale test, or fall back. Models that are worth a Kill Point that are Destroyed confer that Kill Point to your opponent.

This is generally known and accepted by 99.9999999% of Warhammer 40,000 players, and I would like to see you argue any one of your points in any game club in any country in the world. I would bet my next paycheck on you being laughed out of the club because not a single one of your arguments is valid. Most of this is covered very clearly in the rulebook, and what is not covered is usually covered in the FAQ or individual codices. GW may be known for writing ambiguous rules with unclear wording, but in this regard there is really no room for error. It's all pretty clear.

Aldarionn wrote:Wow, I have never seen such a flimsy argument in all of my days playing this game.

There are some very specific terms that mean some very specific things in this game, and you need only read through the rulebook, the FAQ and the codices currently in print to understand them.

Removed as a Casualty: Most models will be removed as casualties, and effects triggered by being removed as a casualty will be resolved when this happens. This happens when a model is hit, wounded, fails an armor/invulnerable/cover save and loses its last wound.

Removed from Play: Certain weapons and abilities can remove a model from play. That is, there is usually no need to hit or wound them (though if there is the ability will say so), and they do not get a save (usually not even an invulnerable save, but the ability will say "no saves of any kind" or "may take an invulnerable save if they have one" or something similar). Jaws of the World Wolf does not roll to hit or wound. The model rolls an initiative test, and if it fails it is Removed from Play with no save of any kind. This is different than being removed as a casualty, because the model did not lose its last wound. Effects that trigger from being removed as a casualty do NOT trigger when a model is removed from play, however the model is still "destroyed"

Destroyed: Destroyed is a catch-all term for models that are removed from the board in some way. These models may or may not leave behind a wreck or a crater (if they are a vehicle), but however it happens, they are no longer taking part in the battle. They might have been removed as a casualty, or they might have been Removed from Play or wrecked. Regardless they are all referred to as destroyed.

If a unit loses 25% of its models (that is, 25% of them are destroyed in some way) they must take a morale test, or fall back. Models that are worth a Kill Point that are Destroyed confer that Kill Point to your opponent.

This is generally known and accepted by 99.9999999% of Warhammer 40,000 players, and I would like to see you argue any one of your points in any game club in any country in the world. I would bet my next paycheck on you being laughed out of the club because not a single one of your arguments is valid. Most of this is covered very clearly in the rulebook, and what is not covered is usually covered in the FAQ or individual codices. GW may be known for writing ambiguous rules with unclear wording, but in this regard there is really no room for error. It's all pretty clear.

This is really the last time i am going to post on this matter, this guy is obviously trying to troll me but its only going to work once.

Aldarionn wrote: Certain weapons and abilities can remove a model from play. That is, there is usually no need to hit or wound them (though if there is the ability will say so), and they do not get a save (usually not even an invulnerable save, but the ability will say "no saves of any kind" or "may take an invulnerable save if they have one" or something similar)".

Yes and warp rift is one such ability where you take an I test and if you fail you are removed from play with no saves of any kind yet it says you are removed from play as a "casualty" as noted on page 25 in the Gk codex. So if you take all the rules from the codexes faqs and etc as you say then you can see the problem.

Aldarionn Trolling you? I just see common sense applied...
I really hate RAW madness but here things are pretty clear...
Page 29 codex necron: "if a model with reanimation protocols rule is removed as a casualty there is a chance etc..."
Page 25 codex Grey knight, Warp Rift: "... for every test that is failed one model is removed as a casualty"

So RAP definitely work for Warp Rift.

JOTWW on the contrary cause models to be "removed from play" instead of casualties so there isn't any test allowed.
This is reasonable and simple... From a BG perspective remind that the JOTWW make enemies fall in a deep abyss (so they cannot repair... well of course they can but they will still be at the bottom of the abyss), while the warp rift "rends the material realm asunder" so it horribly warps and rends every living or not-so-living creature without taking it to the warp (which is an uncorrect BG interpretation... GK are there to CLOSE portals to the warp, not to open new ones :-) )

No, it says "Removed as a Casualty" not "Removed from play as a Casualty".

Specifically:

Warp Rift
The target unit must take an Initiative test for each non-vehcle model hit. For every test that is failed, one model is removed as a casualty with no saving throws allowed. Vehicles hit take a single penetrating hit.

Emphasis Mine

Removed as a Casualty and Removed From Play are two very different wordings. Jaws of the World Wolf states that models that fail their Initiative test are "Removed From Play" which is NOT the same thing as "Removed as a Casualty". Warp Rift removes models as casualties, and anything that triggers from being removed as a casualty triggers when a model is destroyed by Warp Rift. Jaws does NOT allow these things because models are Removed from Play, which is an established wording that means they cannot come back. Both destroy models, and any models destroyed will count for 25% morale checks and Kill Points as normal, but one is allowed to use rules like Reanimation Protocols, and the other is not. It's very clear.

Anyone else read this article on Cracked recently?

Haroon - so you dont see the logical fallacy you have been making all the way through?

Removed from play, and Removed as a casualty, are 2 entirely different things. They have been for a long time now, and the chances are they will remain different

Andilus Greatsword wrote:Anyone else read this article on Cracked recently?

HA! Yes, and I was thinking about it while writing my previous post.