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.

Out of interest NOS and Rigeld is this both a RAW and HIWPI arguement?

Yes. It is how I have played this all round the UK, as it is both the actual rules AND RAI.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Yes. It is how I have played this all round the UK, as it is both the actual rules AND RAI.

In your opinion.

Given you havent managed to formulate an argument that holds up to any level of scrutiny, its more than that currently.

I'm sorry, your reading of the rules is incredibly narrow and misuse a synonym of now.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also your scrutiny consisted of a sidestep worthy of American political candidates.

HEY! Don't mock my candidates. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert would never sidestep.

Happyjew wrote:HEY! Don't mock my candidates. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert would never sidestep.

Herman Cain FTW!

nosferatu1001 wrote:

snakel wrote:there for consolidation is another sub phase .

More made up rules. Form ignorign to just making gak up now.

Well if you don't understand that there are phases/steps/stages to the CC process, I can understand why your getting the rules wrong.

liturgies of blood wrote:Out of interest NOS and Rigeld is this both a RAW and HIWPI arguement?

It's RAW and I play it however my local TOs rule it.
At first it was your way. After a few months they changed their mind (without direct influence from me - they read Dakka but I'm not sure they frequent YMDC and even if they do I'm not sure they know my username) and only allow models that fall before the sweep to stand back up.

If the person I'm playing doesn't like that ruling (outside a tournament) we'll dice off and I'll play however it comes up. I play to have fun despite what I've been accused of many times.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Xzerios wrote:

at this stage (of the game)
Fig. at the current point in some event or situation; currently.

From the first link, bolded and non colored sentence is what Ive copied.

Also, at this or that stage of the game. At this (that) step, phase, or position in a process or activity, as in I'm not sure if you can help at this stage, but perhaps you can pitch in later, or I don't need an assistant at this stage of the game. The variant uses game in the sense of “a particular process or activity.” [Early 1800s]

Second link.

Whats the point at which they are all referencing?
Now.
At. This. Point.

It'd be great if you actually read my post.

rigeld2 wrote:That's not "this exact moment in time and will never be another moment" or "up to this point" it's "unless something changes"

Every one of those phrases is saying "not this second, maybe later". Which is exactly what I've been saying.

Again, the intended purpose of the rule is to prevent the unit/model from coming back ever. However due to the way its written, they may not get back up after they are removed as casualties as Sweeping Advances calls for at this point, they may not get back up. Afterwards is good to go.

So you've found where the rules move in to the next stage? And where they lift the restriction put in place? Could you share where the information was found?

rigeld2 wrote:
So you've found where the rules move in to the next stage? And where they lift the restriction put in place? Could you share where the information was found?

And you have found where they don't please share your information


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

snakel wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Indeed Rigeld, noone has managed to read your posts. Snakel has entirely forgotten that the special rule is used to place tokens, and is now hoping it will be forgotten instead...

Lol thanks for making me Laugh and just to make it clear even if the token was a special rule(i feel no need to prove to you at all that it is not) which part of it saves the unit from SA and being RFPAAC?

Lol, youre just too funny. Apparently having proven that placement of the token requires a special rule (shock, its RP / EL - i even gave you the page numbers, just to make sure you couldnt keep wiggling and pretending otherwise) you are still convinced it ISNT a special rule

Impressive denial of facts.

so here you show your assumptions that not feeling any need to argue with you over this point you assume you have won the token argument ,and i can only assume in you excitement you forgot to answer the part of where SA and RFPAAC are stopped by a token.

The tour De France has stages clearly marked by a start and finish 40k has stages but users the term Phase , the use of at this stage refers to this point in the process and that Means SA once all aspects of SA have been resolved it is over and to say it not is like saying once they cross the finish line in this stage the stage is still on going ????






Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

snakel wrote:SA is at the end of the combat a sub phase of the assault phase(you could even make an argument SA is a sub phase all of its own )

No, you couldnt. The subphases are defined.

Erm that fact you have argued against this proves that you can argue it and of course the sub phases are defined, which points to SA ending not carrying on to the end of the phase

snakel wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
So you've found where the rules move in to the next stage? And where they lift the restriction put in place? Could you share where the information was found?

And you have found where they don't please share your information

Wrong way round - you need to find proof that it has moved on, not the other way around. Otherwise "at this stage" continues

Thats just basic logic, especially when arguing rules in a permissive rule set. Basic

snakel wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

snakel wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Indeed Rigeld, noone has managed to read your posts. Snakel has entirely forgotten that the special rule is used to place tokens, and is now hoping it will be forgotten instead...

Lol thanks for making me Laugh and just to make it clear even if the token was a special rule(i feel no need to prove to you at all that it is not) which part of it saves the unit from SA and being RFPAAC?

Lol, youre just too funny. Apparently having proven that placement of the token requires a special rule (shock, its RP / EL - i even gave you the page numbers, just to make sure you couldnt keep wiggling and pretending otherwise) you are still convinced it ISNT a special rule

Impressive denial of facts.

so here you show your assumptions that not feeling any need to argue with you over this point you assume you have won the token argument ,and i can only assume in you excitement you forgot to answer the part of where SA and RFPAAC are stopped by a token.

Not excitement. Laughter.

I have proven that placing the token requires a special rule, and gave page and paragraph

You provided..... nothing except your assertion otherwise.

So yes, I have "won" the argument that placement of the token requires a special rule.

Given you cannot even accept that basic fact arguing becomes pointless - denial of reality only goes so far

snakel wrote:The tour De France has stages clearly marked by a start and finish 40k has stages but users the term Phase , the use of at this stage refers to this point in the process and that Means SA once all aspects of SA have been resolved it is over and to say it not is like saying once they cross the finish line in this stage the stage is still on going ????

So you are saying stage == phase? Brilliant. So, at this "phase" (Assault) you need a special rule that specifically allows you to save or rescue the unit in order to do so. Otherwise "for them, the battle is over"

Apparently you dont even understand your own argument, as you keep providing ammo against it. All the time.

snakel wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

snakel wrote:SA is at the end of the combat a sub phase of the assault phase(you could even make an argument SA is a sub phase all of its own )

No, you couldnt. The subphases are defined.

Erm that fact you have argued against this proves that you can argue it and of course the sub phases are defined, which points to SA ending not carrying on to the end of the phase

Huh? More made up gak from you. I have not argued that SA is a new "sub phase" - that would be you making gak up. I think youre getting confused.

Liturgies - huh? What is the synonym of "now"? "At this stage" as a phrase does not mean a single instance in time that has ended. AGain, you havent provided any actual rules argument that holds up to any scrutiny.

It means now, at this moment. While a now isn't a quantum mechanical instant, it has an accepted use in english. Either have you sir, you have misrepresented words to find a way to force in your view.

At this stage refers to the SA, nothing more. The fact that there is a semi-colon shows that the "for them the battle is over" is a different clause that is not reliant on the previous one.

liturgies of blood wrote:It means now, at this moment. While a now isn't a quantum mechanical instant, it has an accepted use in english. Either have you sir, you have misrepresented words to find a way to force in your view.

At this stage refers to the SA, nothing more. The fact that there is a semi-colon shows that the "for them the battle is over" is a different clause that is not reliant on the previous one.

It'd be great if you could refer to the definitions you quoted and read them. They don't agree with you.

liturgies of blood wrote:It means now, at this moment. While a now isn't a quantum mechanical instant, it has an accepted use in english. Either have you sir, you have misrepresented words to find a way to force in your view.

At this stage refers to the SA, nothing more. The fact that there is a semi-colon shows that the "for them the battle is over" is a different clause that is not reliant on the previous one.

Again, nonoe of the quotes you provided actually say what you are claiming. Try reading them again.

The semi colon tells you that it IS related to the preceding phrase; it indicates a break that is stronger than a comma cn provide. Again, try again. Context is still eluding you, it seems.

Eh, not sure which of you it was said that "at this stage" refers to the entire phase. That is not what I read within the context of the paragraph.
As I said that is a reading you could have but not one I agree with. Since most of your argument is based on that assertion I question it. By your own admission "at this stage" refers to a stage which you see as being a phase. We see it as a sub-phase.

There is a difference between reliant and related.
I do not see that phrase as being more then filler in the same way as the wounds section on page 2.

It was actually Snakel who was equating Stage to Phase, i was pointing out the consequences of doing so.

Precisely NONE of my argument is based on "at this stage" lasting the phase - it lasts until you are told it has been altered, as the dictionary tells you "at this stage" means.

Your claim is the clear directive "for them the battle is over" is just fluff again then? You keep swapping around. The two statements are related, hence the semi colon.

liturgies of blood wrote:Eh, not sure which of you it was said that "at this stage" refers to the entire phase.

I've never said that. That's what someone is telling me I said, but I haven't. There is no end to the stage in the rulebook.

That is not what I read within the context of the paragraph.
As I said that is a reading you could have but not one I agree with. Since most of your argument is based on that assertion I question it.

liturgies of blood wrote:It means now, at this moment. While a now isn't a quantum mechanical instant, it has an accepted use in english. Either have you sir, you have misrepresented words to find a way to force in your view.

At this stage refers to the SA, nothing more.

That doesn't sound like "a reading you could have but not one I agree with".
It sounds like you're telling me I'm flat out 100% wrong.
Which is interesting because the definitions you posted agree with me.

Of course they are related, for anyone that doesn't have a special rule being RFPaaC does mean the battle is over. Just like page 2 says for models that loose their last wound.
Why does the stage, the moment of a SA causing RFPaaC, continue?

liturgies of blood wrote:Of course they are related, for anyone that doesn't have a special rule being RFPaaC does mean the battle is over. Just like page 2 says for models that loose their last wound.

Sigh

It also defines the context of the phrase, and relates it to the "no special rule" clause.

You keep ignoring it. Dont.

liturgies of blood wrote:Why does the stage, the moment of a SA causing RFPaaC, continue?

Because you're never given permission to end it.

No it doesn't, it refers to the outcome of what came before.
No special rule relates to preventing the outcome of SA not preventing anything more.

If SA never ends then your models are always making a SA, hence they cannot do anything more as they cannot leave assault.

liturgies of blood wrote:If SA never ends then your models are always making a SA, hence they cannot do anything more as they cannot leave assault.

That's absolutely false.
SA does end - it finishes resolving.

BRB 27 wrote:The destroyed unit is immediately removed as casualties. Unless otherwise specified, no save or other special rule can rescue the unit at this stage; for them the battle is over.

Unit is removed as casualties. Stop. They cannot be rescued unless otherwise specified until you move on from this stage.

That does not mean that SA never finishes resolving. Stop with that false straw man argument.

liturgies of blood wrote:No it doesn't, it refers to the outcome of what came before.
No special rule relates to preventing the outcome of SA not preventing anything more.

If SA never ends then your models are always making a SA, hence they cannot do anything more as they cannot leave assault.

The stage of not being able to save or rescue the unit, and their battle being over, continues. Not SA as a whole "state" of rule.

Find permission to end "at this stage". You cannot, so it does not. Again

nosferatu1001 wrote:

liturgies of blood wrote:No it doesn't, it refers to the outcome of what came before.
No special rule relates to preventing the outcome of SA not preventing anything more.

If SA never ends then your models are always making a SA, hence they cannot do anything more as they cannot leave assault.

The stage of not being able to save or rescue the unit, and their battle being over, continues. Not SA as a whole "state" of rule.

Find permission to end "at this stage". You cannot, so it does not. Again

pg 27. That stage clearly and explicitly ends. Consolidation. "At the end of combat...."

EL triggers after Consolidation. Consolidation "ends" combat and all its stages.

Fragile wrote:pg 27. That stage clearly and explicitly ends. Consolidation. "At the end of combat...."

EL triggers after Consolidation. Consolidation "ends" combat and all its stages.

Combat ends.
I don't see a reference saying the stage created by a SA ends.

Is SA an outcome? If so what does it mean?
The rules don't describe it as an outcome, they describe it as a process. The outcome of that process is RFPaaC.

Where does it say that SA carries on?

liturgies of blood wrote:Is SA an outcome? If so what does it mean?

No, SA overall is a process. The outcome is a unit that is RFPaaC and cannot be rescued unless otherwise specified.

The rules don't describe it as an outcome, they describe it as a process. The outcome of that process is RFPaaC.

You left a part off.

Where does it say that SA carries on?

"at this stage".
Where does it say the unit can now be rescued?

No, the "at this stage" refers to during the SA process, ATSKNF is during that process and as such meets the requirements of specifically mentioning how it stops that process.

No honestly explain clearly how "at this stage" (which means at the present time, during this part, or in this step) means that a unit is still caught in the process and that it is now RFPaacC and cannot come back.

http://idioms.yourdictionary.com/at-this-stage

At this (that) step, phase, or position in a process or activity....

Nothing there supports an ongoing action.

liturgies of blood wrote:No, the "at this stage" refers to during the SA process, ATSKNF is during that process and as such meets the requirements of specifically mentioning how it stops that process.

I've shown, using definitions provided by you, how that interpretation is incorrect. "at this stage" is not a singular defined point in time, it is a change from one stage to another.
You're arbitrarily limiting that stage to end when SA finishes resolving with no rules support.

No honestly explain clearly how "at this stage" (which means at the present time, during this part, or in this step) means that a unit is still caught in the process and that it is now RFPaacC and cannot come back.

I have. Are you ignoring my posts?
It doesn't mean that. I've shown you this before. Continuing to insist that it doesn't won't change the definitions you posted.

rigeld2 wrote:

liturgies of blood wrote:Is SA an outcome? If so what does it mean?

No, SA overall is a process. The outcome is a unit that is RFPaaC and cannot be rescued unless otherwise specified.

The rules don't describe it as an outcome, they describe it as a process. The outcome of that process is RFPaaC.

You left a part off.

Where does it say that SA carries on?

"at this stage".
Where does it say the unit can now be rescued?

Rescuing the unit /model would mean saving them from it, you cant save some one from being shot unless you stop the bullet form hitting them !!!!

SA fires, the bullet is the force of SA sweeping over the unit now if EL stopped that bullet from hitting then you would be correct, but it does not ,once the bullet has hit nothing can stop it = no special rule can save them from SA .

Now the bullet has stopped it does not d carry on hitting everything behind that person !!!! and now if your lucky you can save the person from the injuries sustained by the bullet '/shooting but you cant turn back the clock and stop them being shot !!!