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.

rigeld2 wrote:

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.

If it is the change from one stage to another then it is by your definition is a moment in time, the point of change. You are not listening to yourself.

liturgies of blood wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

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.

If it is the change from one stage to another then it is by your definition is a moment in time, the point of change. You are not listening to yourself.

Yes, the beginning of a new stage is a singular point in time. "this stage" is not a singular point in time. You're limiting the stage to the duration of SA with no rules support.
My apologies for mischoosing my words.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

snakel wrote: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 !!!!

Fluff argument?

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 !!!

But that's literally exactly what you're trying to do.
The unit is RFPaaC. It cannot be rescued.
Placing the unit back on the board is the very definition of rescuing the unit.
EL doesn't create a new unit. It's still the old unit, just rescued from destruction.

Ok. While there is no rules support to say that "at this stage" refers to just the SA phase, I don't see anything that expands it beyond it.
If you sub in at this time or during this process or some other synonym into the sentence then it appears clearer to me at least that it is referring to SA's duration as being up until the unit is dead no rules can intercede.

I am not saying it's like a steve jackson game and you have 2.3 seconds to call shenanigans otherwise EL works, I am just saying SA is self containing within itself. That it wraps itself up in a neat little package and then you can move on to consolidation.

In reference to your above post, if you follow "at this stage" to refer to the process then it is fine to go ahead.

liturgies of blood wrote:I am just saying SA is self containing within itself. That it wraps itself up in a neat little package and then you can move on to consolidation.

So you agree that "at this stage" creates a stage where the unit cannot be rescued.
You're just limiting this stage to when SA resolves.


Why? Where is the rules support saying that the unit can now be rescued?

"For them the battle is over" seems to be the sticking point

I always thought the the rulebook was the general and the codex was the specific. For a large majority of the units that would be true, the battle would be over. However we have specific instances in the codex that say this is not true that is further backed up by the FAQ. I still fail to say where in sweeping advance the rule must save it from sweeping advance rather than from being destroyed which is the effect of sweeping advance.

Leth wrote:"For them the battle is over" seems to be the sticking point

I haven't cited that phrase this entire argument, so it's not a sticking point for me.

So, if "stage" is going to be the word you use. Next game I see the same unit that I swept last game put on the field by you, Ill inform you that nothing can save that unit and that they died last game.
I know you understand the fallacy in the point there.

You claim that the "stage" (in this case, the adjective as written within the sentence) is ongoing until the ... ??? You dont know, but its on going.

When you add the rest of the sentence to the word, it gives you when it has begun, and ended. "At" is the start; "This stage" is the end. Its intention is just as your describing rigeld2. The intended purpose of this rule was to keep the unit down until the end of the game. RAW it does not do that. The stage in which no special rules may be used is contained within the Sweeping Advance. After you finish with the Sweeping Advance, your special rule that pops your guys up chronologically after the Sweeping Advances rule is going to work. If your Special Rule pops your guys up during the Sweeping Advance, you may not as the "No Special Rule or Save may rescue the unit at this stage" is in effect.

I would dare say that your cling to the word 'Stage' is a crux at this point. This game covers steps, phrases and sub-phases, there are no stages in this game and if there is, I WILL be the man with high-score.

Xzerios when did you place the token for EL? During SA? If so please cite a rule allowing that to happen. Seeings how the act of RFPaaC is part of the SA, you cannot place the token, seeings how it is a special rule. Do not even try to say that you place the token after SA, because well once you move onto another thing in the phase you are not allowed by EL to place that token.

EL either is an instantaneous cause and effect (with regards to placing the token) or it doesn't work at all.

I direct you to read the rules for Ever Living. I know what route your about to take too good sir.

I direct your attention to ANY special rule that states that its trigger conditions is that the model is removed as a casualty. ANY special rule sir is what you are stating doesnt work at all for the duration of the Sweeping Advance. That is not the case. Its conditions are that "no Special Rule or save may rescue the unit at this stage;" Suppose for example, my Ever Living Token said "place a blast template over the center of the token at the end of the phase, all models under the template suffer a Str 5 AP- blast." Would you have an issue with the special rule then?

If not, then there is nothing that prevents the token from going down which will allow for the roll for Ever Living to work at the end of the phase.

Xzerios wrote:I direct you to read the rules for Ever Living. I know what route your about to take too good sir.

I direct your attention to ANY special rule that states that its trigger conditions is that the model is removed as a casualty. ANY special rule sir is what you are stating doesnt work at all for the duration of the Sweeping Advance. That is not the case. Its conditions are that "no Special Rule or save may rescue the unit at this stage;" Suppose for example, my Ever Living Token said "place a blast template over the center of the token at the end of the phase, all models under the template suffer a Str 5 AP- blast." Would you have an issue with the special rule then?

If not, then there is nothing that prevents the token from going down which will allow for the roll for Ever Living to work at the end of the phase.

I'm assuming you meant that if the EL rule said to place a blast marker, and ever model taking the hits. If so, it is not a special rule saving the unit. So it would be allowed. If your EL Token says to do that, it wouldn't matter as you have no permission to make the "attack".

You do not understand now what that sentence is requesting the swept unit to do. You cant flip flop your understanding of the sentence to fit your argument. Please, pick one and stick with it.

In context of the sentence, the only thing that we are not given permission to do is prevent the Sweeping Advance with a Special Rule or save and this effect is ongoing until the end of the Sweeping Advances rule.

As far as what the sentence is baring is any Special Rule that
A: Prevents the Sweeping Advance from occurring unless that Special Rule is ATSKNF.
B: Allows the models to rejoin either the unit, or the board (thats what the sentence after the semi-colon is stating) for the duration of the Sweeping Advance.

Did Everliving prevent the Sweeping Advance?
A: No, it even states that for the duration that the token is down, the model with the Special Rule is dead.
B: No, the model is dead, remained dead for the duration of the Sweeping Advance.'

Wish to attack the token itself?

Did the Token prevent the Sweeping Advance?
A: No, its a placement item. A marker to indicate where the model was when it died. Its also outlined at the end of the phase that if the model comes back, it must do so within 3" of that token. It may not be within 1" of any enemy model and if those conditions cannot be met, then you may not place the model.
B: The token is the placement item for the duration of the Sweeping Advance.



Those are what the sentence is checking for and preventing.

Xzerios wrote:So, if "stage" is going to be the word you use. Next game I see the same unit that I swept last game put on the field by you, Ill inform you that nothing can save that unit and that they died last game.
I know you understand the fallacy in the point there.

You claim that the "stage" (in this case, the adjective as written within the sentence) is ongoing until the ... ??? You dont know, but its on going.

When you add the rest of the sentence to the word, it gives you when it has begun, and ended. "At" is the start; "This stage" is the end. Its intention is just as your describing rigeld2. The intended purpose of this rule was to keep the unit down until the end of the game. RAW it does not do that. The stage in which no special rules may be used is contained within the Sweeping Advance. After you finish with the Sweeping Advance, your special rule that pops your guys up chronologically after the Sweeping Advances rule is going to work. If your Special Rule pops your guys up during the Sweeping Advance, you may not as the "No Special Rule or Save may rescue the unit at this stage" is in effect.

I would dare say that your cling to the word 'Stage' is a crux at this point. This game covers steps, phrases and sub-phases, there are no stages in this game and if there is, I WILL be the man with high-score.

It would be great if you could prove your assertion with rules quotes, or even some kind of definition.
The ones I've used have shown I'm right. And they were provided by someone on your side.

"Unless otherwise specified, no Save or Special Rule can rescue the unit at this stage, for them the battle is over."

Grammatically, this supports your point. The aforementioned time frame for the prevention of saves and Special Rules is extended beyond the first sentences start of the rule to the end of the rule to the reset of the game as Ive demonstrated above. The lynch pin of your gentlemens' argument is a simple punctuation mark. This is why you folks are incorrect. That colored comma above allows the sentence that (as I have written it) to extend the time frame of the check from the duration of the rule to the start of the rule until the end of the game.

As it currently reads;

"Unless otherwise specified, no Save or Special Rule can rescue the unit at this stage; For them the battle is over."

The Semi-colon here is a stop. It goes from being the "until end of game" piece of the puzzle you need to be correct to a agreement sentence to the one just prior to it. As it currently works, that unit gets swept, you check to see if they have ATSKNF and if they dont; Remove the unit as casualties. Check now to see if the model has any special rules that allow them to come back during the stage of the rule. If they do, they may not use them during the Sweeping Advance. For "them" (target: unit, past tense as in its now dead), the battle is over. Due to your semi-colon, the time frame remains the same as the sentence following the punctuation is now locked into the same time frame as the sentence before it. Sweeping Advances rule has now ended. Its time frame to prevent models with any Special Rule from getting back up has now ended as well.

It would be great if you could prove your assertion with rules quotes, or even some kind of definition.
The ones I've used have shown I'm right. And they were provided by someone on your side.

Are you referring to the two links you posted on page 13? If so, I already proved that your two links coincide with my argument, which up to now has been building the timeline that Sweeping Advances works within. As far as what Ive covered is concerned, I rightfully expect you to have a grasp on the English grammar at this point, maybe not definitions, but punctuations and tense forms of words. If you dont, I wouldnt recommend arguing in this argument as thats what the subject matter pertains to.

Can you cite one time I've used the "for them the battle is over" for my argument?

Nothing I've said hinges on that punctuation.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/467352.page#4633626

"Unless otherwise stated, no save or other special rule can rescue the unit from this point forward; for them the battle is over." EL does rescue/save the unit from destruction in the phase that it was swept. Therefore, you cannot roll for legally placed EL tokens at the end of that Assault phase.

In this case, your merely quoting the rule so I wont hold it against you. Ive read all your posts and Ive already outlined that your argument of the phrase "as this stage" is by definition a single point in time. Read that tidbit out loud to yourself. Now tell me how that tidbit can be taken to an undefined period of time when its in fact an ending of itself? It has potential to carry on to that undefined period of time but in order for that to do so, it needs help from other words that come after it to help shape it into that ongoing time frame. Only problem is in this situation is that this section IS the end of the sentence. Theres still a glimmer of hope for it yet though, theres another sentence afterwards and the wording defiantly helps move it into the undefined period of time; YET its cut off by a semi-colon! Due in nature to what a semi-colon is, it does not push the "at this stage" into the undefined period that is needed to keep models from coming back for the remainder of the game. Instead, it simply agrees that the models that are dead, may not come back during this rule.



Thats why its important to note punctuation. In this case, it just hucklebucked your arguments dreams of reaching undefined periods of time to prevent models with special rules from coming back at X time outside the predefined time line by "at this stage".

It's not an ending in and of itself.
It talks about a single stage.
A stage cannot, in the context of this phrase, be a specific point in time.
You've still not proven that the stage ends - you're hinging your argument on a semicolon that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. It could be a period for all I care.

"Can I help you?"
"Not at this stage; monkeys like bananas. "
"How about now?"

That's what you're asserting is a logical sequence.
The stage is set/created and you must have permission to end it. Even if it ends, you must have permission to change what was set in that stage. You've proven neither.

Xterios - a semi colon is NOT a period. It is a stronger pause than a comma.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/semicolon

I already gave this infoirmation, you must have missed it.

rigeld2 wrote:It's not an ending in and of itself.
It talks about a single stage.
A stage cannot, in the context of this phrase, be a specific point in time.
You've still not proven that the stage ends - you're hinging your argument on a semicolon that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. It could be a period for all I care.

"Can I help you?"
"Not at this stage; monkeys like bananas. "
"How about now?"

That's what you're asserting is a logical sequence.
The stage is set/created and you must have permission to end it. Even if it ends, you must have permission to change what was set in that stage. You've proven neither.

Why can a stage, a period of time/the time taken to carry out an action/a portion of a process or activity, not be a claimed to be specific period of time? I still amn't getting this. I can't think of a use of the word stage that does not refer to a specific instance(other then other uses of the word such as a performance area).
Even the example above is a specific point in time, the response to the second question could be easily "yes I can take your help now, I have finished with the monkeys. Help me to feed the dingos."

I don't think "for them the battle is over" is an important part of this debate, I think it is flavour text and even if it was a sentence on it's own it's meaning would not change.

"At this stage" could one of a variety of sets of steps.

1. The turn stage of the game.
2. The combat phase stage of the turn.
3. The Sweeping Advance stage of combat.
4. (you cannot dice each process of the game into any finer stages)

The context of all rules in the Sweeping Advance rule describe the Sweeping Advance stage of combat. While the unit is "making a Sweeping Advance" is described in the rules. In a permissive ruleset, for any aspect of that rule to carry on beyond the end of Sweeping Advance it must say. An example would be "Models killed during lose 1 from their attacks for the rest of the game". Otherwise, all effects end. The game cannot work any other way.

A unit makes a Sweeping Advance. Necron Codex requires you to place an EL token.

There is no permission to carry on the SA action beyond the SA stage of combat.

liturgies of blood wrote:Why can a stage, a period of time/the time taken to carry out an action/a portion of a process or activity, not be a claimed to be specific period of time? I still amn't getting this. I can't think of a use of the word stage that does not refer to a specific instance(other then other uses of the word such as a performance area).
Even the example above is a specific point in time, the response to the second question could be easily "yes I can take your help now, I have finished with the monkeys. Help me to feed the dingos."

Yes, it could be - and it would indicate the end of the previous stage.
That's not what the BRB says, however. There's nothing to indicate that the stage is over.
A stage is a period of time, not a specific millisecond of time. It has a beginning and an end. The beginning is mentioned in the SA rules. Not a single person has found the end.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nemesor Dave wrote:Otherwise, all effects end. The game cannot work any other way.

So multi-wound models regenerate at the end of every turn? The rules just say to subtract one from the wounds characteristic on my profile. If all effects end, I can add it right back after subtracting it.

So Rigeld, are you saying that it is just badly worded by the GW team?

Sorry but "at this stage" does not indicate the end of the previous stage, it sets a limit on what may be done during this stage. Now if your contention is that "this stage" is the entire phase then fine, get the forum locked it will never be proven to be one way or another until an FAQ comes out.

rigeld2 wrote:

liturgies of blood wrote:Why can a stage, a period of time/the time taken to carry out an action/a portion of a process or activity, not be a claimed to be specific period of time? I still amn't getting this. I can't think of a use of the word stage that does not refer to a specific instance(other then other uses of the word such as a performance area).
Even the example above is a specific point in time, the response to the second question could be easily "yes I can take your help now, I have finished with the monkeys. Help me to feed the dingos."

Yes, it could be - and it would indicate the end of the previous stage.
That's not what the BRB says, however. There's nothing to indicate that the stage is over.
A stage is a period of time, not a specific millisecond of time. It has a beginning and an end. The beginning is mentioned in the SA rules. Not a single person has found the end.

Oh look, I found it. Consolidation.

Just watching some bad fantasy and now I know how you are reading this.

You read it in a "nothing can be done for him now" kind of way. Am I correct?

Nemesor Dave wrote:Oh look, I found it. Consolidation.

Oh really? It mentions that units that were swept can be rescued now?
... Hrm. I must have a misprint rulebook then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

liturgies of blood wrote:You read it in a "nothing can be done for him now" kind of way. Am I correct?

Yes.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

Oh look, I found it. Consolidation.

So consolidation mentions that units that were swept can now be rescued? Odd, my rulebook doesnt have that wording in it. Care to prove it?

This cannot be worked out, then so.
1) need a special rule to save the unit from here on out
2) need a special rule to save the unit during this step

From the context it could be either, need an faq.

liturgies of blood wrote:This cannot be worked out, then so.
1) need a special rule to save the unit from here on out
2) need a special rule to save the unit during this step

From the context it could be either, need an faq.

How? You agree that "at this stage" talks about a period of time.
You haven't found *anything* that ends that period of time. You're assuming that it ends at the end of SA resolving with zero proof.

liturgies of blood wrote:This cannot be worked out, then so.
1) need a special rule to save the unit from here on out
2) need a special rule to save the unit during this step

From the context it could be either, need an faq.

2) is incorrect, as you havent found ANY proof anywhere of the end of the stage. If you had done you would have posted it.

UNtil you provide proof that the stage has ended, it has not ended.

If you would care to play devils advocate and look at the rules as I read them, then there is nothing to extent the process beyond the resolution of SA.
Since the stage is referring to SA in my reading where does the extension happen.
In your reading it works differently due to how it reads within context.

liturgies of blood wrote:If you would care to play devils advocate and look at the rules as I read them, then there is nothing to extent the process beyond the resolution of SA.
Since the stage is referring to SA in my reading where does the extension happen.
In your reading it works differently due to how it reads within context.

I'm not going to play devils advocate without some basis of fact.
There's nothing restricting effects to only the resolution of the process that creates the effect.
You're arbitrarily limiting it for no reason. You still haven't said why. "I read it that way." isn't valid support.