Volley Fire

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.

**DeathReaper**

nekooni wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
BaconCatBug wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
I am not ignoring the context.

It says Infantry. Conscripts are infantry, as they have the INFANTRY keyword.
Infantry is not the same as INFANTRY in the context of Warhammer 40,000 8th edition. This has been explained to you multiple times now.

Condescending much?

I know that Infantry and INFANTRY can mean different things...

It's been explained in detail multiple times, and yet you're still not grasping that there's Infantry, the keyword, as used in the phrase "any Infantry unit", and there's Infantry Squad, as used in the phrase "There is a datasheet called Infantry Squad". Again - in THIS case it's even used with a specific difference (Squad vs unit), so it's even clearer than in other cases. There's a Predator keyword and a unit called Predator that has the Predator keyword, but both terms refer to different things. There are units with the Predator keyword that aren't "Predator", but e.g. "Deimos Pattern Predators". Keyword vs Name. As indicated by the font style.

You clearly didn't read my post...

**U02dah4**

Oh no we read your post we arejust all in agreement your wrong.

**doctortom**

DeathReaper wrote:
BaconCatBug wrote:
Ghaz wrote:
Again, INFANTRY and Infantry are separate terms in 40K. It's not messy if you don't try and make the words interchangable when they're not.
Agreed. It's only messy if you ignore context.

The "Aerial Spotter" errata alone is proof enough that KEYWORD is not the same as Keyword. If they were, there would have been no need for the errata. Then there is the Deathwatch Intercessor errata to prove that "Name X" is not the same as "Name".

I am not ignoring the context.

It says Infantry. Conscripts are infantry, as they have the INFANTRY keyword.

Conscripts are Conscripts, they are not an Infantry Squad. If Conscripts were going to be affected it would have to say it affects INFANTRY, not Infantry. All caps is the keyword, only the first letter in caps is a designation for a specific unit. There's been a similar issue if I recall about something that affects Predators (not all caps), so it only affects that specific unit and not anything with PREDATOR keyword.

**nekooni**

DeathReaper wrote:
Weird, it references Infantry squad (not INFANTRY SQUAD).

But then goes on to reference P. 93.

Screw GW and their messy rules lol!

To show that I did read your post: see, you even contradicted your own stance here. The stratagem is referencing Infantry Squad, which is the name of the datasheet. You behave as if it said Infantry unit,or should reference Infantry Squad. But it shouldn't as unit/datasheet names are not keywords and therefore not printed in bold.

Unit is not the same as Squad.
Infantry is not the same as Infantry.

Strawberries are not berries just because they have the word "berries" in their name. In fact, they're not berries at all.

**doctortom**

Neooni, the example might have been better if you had used dingleberries instead.

**nekooni**

doctortom wrote:
Neooni, the example might have been better if you had used dingleberries instead.

Dingleberries do not have a stone usually, so one could argue... :p