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:

Nemesor Dave wrote:You see, in all of these examples, the conditions may end when the next stage begins.

The conditions for SA may end when the next stage (Consolidation) begins.

Fixed that for you.
There aren't any rules lifting the restriction. As I've said.
It's. An. Ongoing. Effect.

In a permissive ruleset they end.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:You see, in all of these examples, the conditions may end when the next stage begins.

The conditions for SA may end when the next stage (Consolidation) begins.

Fixed that for you.
There aren't any rules lifting the restriction. As I've said.
It's. An. Ongoing. Effect.

In a permissive ruleset they end.

False. In a permissive ruleset the continue until a rule says they end.

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:You see, in all of these examples, the conditions may end when the next stage begins.

The conditions for SA may end when the next stage (Consolidation) begins.

Fixed that for you.
There aren't any rules lifting the restriction. As I've said.
It's. An. Ongoing. Effect.

In a permissive ruleset they end.

False. In a permissive ruleset the continue until a rule says they end.

While your unit is within 6" of a sang priest, your unit gets FNP. You don't just keep it forever because it never says you lose it. If your unit moves farther than 6" you lose FNP.

While the game is in the SA stage, certain restrictions to saving/rescuing apply. After the stage, those don't continue just because it doesn't say they stop.

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:False. In a permissive ruleset the continue until a rule says they end.

While your unit is within 6" of a sang priest, your unit gets FNP. You don't just keep it forever because it never says you lose it. If your unit moves farther than 6" you lose FNP.

False analogy. You have to re-examine the distance every time the call for FNP comes up.

While the game is in the SA stage, certain restrictions to saving/rescuing apply. After the stage, those don't continue just because it doesn't say they stop.

So you're saying a rule has to explicitly say that it's ongoing?

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:False. In a permissive ruleset the continue until a rule says they end.

While your unit is within 6" of a sang priest, your unit gets FNP. You don't just keep it forever because it never says you lose it. If your unit moves farther than 6" you lose FNP.

False analogy. You have to re-examine the distance every time the call for FNP comes up.

While the game is in the SA stage, certain restrictions to saving/rescuing apply. After the stage, those don't continue just because it doesn't say they stop.

So you're saying a rule has to explicitly say that it's ongoing?

If the rule says "during this stage, you may not do X". It is not ongoing, it has placed the time limit of this stage only.

If it just says "you may not do X". Then it is not ending.

The restriction to saving/rescuing is limited to "this stage".

Nemesor Dave wrote:If the rule says "during this stage, you may not do X". It is not ongoing, it has placed the time limit of this stage only.

Correct. Show me the word "during" in the SA rules.

rigeld2 wrote:

Xzerios wrote:They will be disregarded as you fail to understand this sentence in the rule itself. Ill say it once more, for "at this stage" to be the ongoing effect you claim it to be, it must be written within -this- sentence as follows:

Unless otherwise specified, no save or other special rule may rescue the unit at this stage, for them the battle is over.

There you have it. A sentence that matches what you read. All tenses agree with each other and the semi-colon has been removed to reaffirm the continuation of the check to the end of the game.
To refute this logic at this stage will only prove your lack of understanding of the sentence, for I would concede with the presented information.

a) cyan on white is really hard to read - just FYI.
b) You could turn that comma into a period - it just doesn't matter. It's fluff reinforcement that isn't needed to hold up the rule.
c) Why the change from can to may? "You are not able to." isn't that different from "You do not have permission to." in this context.

I understand. Cyan is just a favorite color.
You read it as reinforcement of fluff. As the sentence before it goes, its a rule, the semi-colon pertains to this rule. How then is it fluff if its in conjunction of a rule?
The simple fact you have asked this question proves you dont get the whole tense form of this sentence. The word "can" limits the "at this stage" to the confines of the rule. This is basic grammar. "May" is a future-tense word which changes the sentence drastically from working now, to working in the future. As the sentence itself is a check for any saves or Special Rules and prevents them from working. The words within it now give you its time frame of working; "at this stage" currently is an end point; It can go the full spectrum of tenses due to the word "this". Its limiting factor however is tied to the word "can" in the sentence. This word currently is a past/future-tense word, no? However, its placement it within the sentence turns it into its past tense form. Thus when you put it into context with the whole sentence, your given your time frame to check for the saves and Special Rules.

During the Sweeping Advance.

Also;

"You are not able to." isn't that different from "You do not have permission to."

These two statements are vastly different. The first one is present-tense statement. Your second statement is a future-tense statement. See the difference?

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:If the rule says "during this stage, you may not do X". It is not ongoing, it has placed the time limit of this stage only.

Correct. Show me the word "during" in the SA rules.

Now i know you are taking the proverbial

Nemesor Dave ,rigeld is doing his best to pick parts of what you say to gain a reaction nothing more .

SA is an action all actions have a beginning and an end theses are defined by the ending of the action before it and the starting of the action after it .

For SA to be ongoing it would have to overlap the next action (sub phase ,stage) which is consolidation ,but you cant consolidate till the SA is resolved IE ended ,concluded, done ,over ,no more .

Next sub phase /stage Consolidation ,SA is now in the past and can not as an action do anything nor can it prevent anything since it is restricted to its own Stage .Just as every thing in the game is restricted to its own Stage ,phase , sub phase turn ,unless stated otherwise .SA does not state it is ongoing ,it does not say you can SA during consolidation ,it does not say it carries on to the end of the game ,phase, turn , SA is nothing more than an action brought about by the combat resolution ,IE i win by one you fail LD i roll 6 you roll 4 i have 8 you have 6 i SA you , your unit is now RFPAAC unless they are Marines next consolidation

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:If the rule says "during this stage, you may not do X". It is not ongoing, it has placed the time limit of this stage only.

Correct. Show me the word "during" in the SA rules.

This is what "at this stage" means.

You may not save/rescue the unit at this stage. The restriction is at this stage, not at the next stage.

There is no restriction to save/rescue at the Consolidation stage.

snakel wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:If the rule says "during this stage, you may not do X". It is not ongoing, it has placed the time limit of this stage only.

Correct. Show me the word "during" in the SA rules.

Now i know you are taking the proverbial

Nemesor Dave ,rigeld is doing his best to pick parts of what you say to gain a reaction nothing more .

Thats absolutely false. ND worded something specifically using the word during, which doesn't exist in the SA rules.
If you thing I'm just trolling go ahead and report me. That's what the yellow triangle is for.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:If the rule says "during this stage, you may not do X". It is not ongoing, it has placed the time limit of this stage only.

Correct. Show me the word "during" in the SA rules.

This is what "at this stage" means.

You may not save/rescue the unit at this stage. The restriction is at this stage, not at the next stage.

There is no restriction to save/rescue at the Consolidation stage.

The restriction begins this stage because that's where it's introduced. You still need permission in a further stage to ignore it.

Once more, I applaud your endurance, rigeld2.

kirsanth wrote:Once more, I applaud your endurance, rigeld2.

I wish my wife could say the same.

rigeld2, your argument is at this point for the Ever Living side to show you what rule ends the check, correct? Thats what your argument up to this point has been, no?


Again, I point you to the sentence itself that calls for the check. As it is written, it is answers your request for the Ever Living side to show the end of the check. Its time frame is clearly outlined. Your argument after this point is now based on RAI of that sentence. The overall intended reason behind this is what your arguing for, however as the rule is written in the book; It does not do what you (and I in this case) want it do.

Intended purpose: To RFPAAC the unit and prevent the model/unit from coming back for the duration of the game.

Written purpose: To RFPAAC the unit and do a single check for the duration of the Sweeping Advance for any saves or Special Rules that prevent the Sweeping Advance from occurring, and returning the models to play during the check.

On this forum, which of these are we arguing for?

Please stop assigning motivation - I have none. I'm not arguing RAI at all. Stop insinuating that I am. I'll be sure to make it clear when I do (as the tenets of the forum require).

Where does it clarify the time frame? Your misinterpretation of at this stage?

rigeld2 wrote:Please stop assigning motivation - I have none. I'm not arguing RAI at all. Stop insinuating that I am. I'll be sure to make it clear when I do (as the tenets of the forum require).

Where does it clarify the time frame? Your misinterpretation of at this stage?

At this stage, it would best for us to agree to disagree. I see you will not budge from your interpretation of the sentence in question. I would not take this as a victory I might add. i will agree to a mutual 'leave this topic be' if you can do so as well.
Until then, good day sir.

Fat chance on that Xzerios......


I just do not get all of this, really. If you are saying that at this stage means that specific point in time you may not use any special rules unless they say otherwise. If that is not what you are saying then what are you saying? Are you saying you are allowed to use EL during the SA but since, only half of the rule is used in SA that the remaining unused half gives a trump? WOW, um no. You cannot use a special rule to save the unit. (No matter when you save the unit) That means no part of the rule may be used at this stage, unless otherwise specified......ever. Cheers almost to 20!!!! lol j/k not really but yea.....

rigeld2 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nemesor Dave wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:If the rule says "during this stage, you may not do X". It is not ongoing, it has placed the time limit of this stage only.

Correct. Show me the word "during" in the SA rules.

This is what "at this stage" means.

You may not save/rescue the unit at this stage. The restriction is at this stage, not at the next stage.

There is no restriction to save/rescue at the Consolidation stage.

The restriction begins this stage because that's where it's introduced. You still need permission in a further stage to ignore it.

ND worded something specifically using the word during, which doesn't exist in the SA rules.

"At this stage" means the same thing as "during this stage".

Ok, as an example.
I have stage 1, stage 2, and stage 3.
And I have a rule 'At stage 2 you may not move any models without permission'.
At step three, you may move models.

In the SA rule - at the SA stage you may not save/rescue without permission like ATSKNF.
At the next stage Consolidation, you may save/rescue without permission.

You see, they have specified the restriction is for "this stage" only. It does not say "at this stage and onward".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:Fat chance on that Xzerios......


I just do not get all of this, really. If you are saying that at this stage means that specific point in time you may not use any special rules unless they say otherwise. If that is not what you are saying then what are you saying? Are you saying you are allowed to use EL during the SA but since, only half of the rule is used in SA that the remaining unused half gives a trump? WOW, um no. You cannot use a special rule to save the unit. (No matter when you save the unit) That means no part of the rule may be used at this stage, unless otherwise specified......ever. Cheers almost to 20!!!! lol j/k not really but yea.....

You haven't shown that you not allowed to place an EL counter during Sweeping Advance. We see a rule that says you may not save or rescue the unit at this stage. Placing a counter does not save or rescue the unit during Sweeping Advance. The counter is a reminder to roll at the end of phase.

Sort of like placing a model on its side to remind you to use a special rule to save the unit next turn? Oh wait that one was specifically denied.

"at this stage" absolutely does not mean the same thing as "during this stage".

One requires a stage change and a change of state, one just requires a stage change to change state. I'll let you figure out which is which ND.

rigeld2 wrote:"at this stage" absolutely does not mean the same thing as "during this stage".

One requires a stage change and a change of state, one just requires a stage change to change state. I'll let you figure out which is which ND.

Actually it does mean the same thing as "during this stage". "At this stage" refers only to the present stage. It places no restriction on any following stages. This is where you need to understand better what "at this stage" means in the English language.

If this is your only sticking point, then it is simply a difference in the understanding of English.

As for "stage change" not being a "change of state" - I have no idea what you mean. "This stage" refers to SA. When consolidation begins, "this stage" is now Consolidation and it is no longer the SA stage of combat.

Changing the stage does not inherently change everything that happened in the stage. We know that because wounds still happen, units are still gone, one shot weapons are still used, etc.

Find the permission to ignore the "unless otherwise stated" restriction in later stages. You'd be the first.

rigeld2 wrote:Changing the stage does not inherently change everything that happened in the stage. We know that because wounds still happen, units are still gone, one shot weapons are still used, etc.

Find the permission to ignore the "unless otherwise stated" restriction in later stages. You'd be the first.

I never said it changes everything that happened. During the SA stage, the unit is removed as casualties. They cannot be saved/rescued "at this Sweeping Advance stage". When the stage changes, that restriction is no longer in place.

At the end of phase EL doesn't go back in time and save a model during the SA stage. EL saves the model after the Sweeping Advance stage is over.

Nemesor Dave wrote:When the stage changes, that restriction is no longer in place.

Why do you keep asserting that? There's no language saying so in SA. You're implying that for something to be ongoing it must be explicitly stated as such. Am I misunderstanding you?

rigeld2 wrote:

Yad wrote:This is where your argument fails. I think I'm pretty safe in saying that we all accept that the ATSKNF rule is the example by which other rules must use to allow a unit to avoid being swept by a SA. Now, how does the ATSKNF rule actually save or rescues the unit from a SA? It stops the SA from happening. It doesn't allow the SA to happen then destroy the unit (RFPaaC) and them bring them back. The restriction in SA about 'unless otherwise specified' is all about stopping the SA from happening to the unit that loses the Assault. This is what you guys aren't getting. For whatever reason your thinking that EL somehow equates to ATSKNF with respect to saving/rescuing a unit from a SA when clearly that's not how either rule mechanic works.

The unit is destroyed. Post EL is the unit still destroyed?
If you answer no, you've rescued the unit.

Saying that since one example of saving you from SA stops the SA from working at all means that all abilities that save you from SA must stop SA from working at all doesn't work.


edit: Oops, I typed yes but meant no. Nos, if you could edit the quote it'd be great.

What?! It's not 'one' example, it's the only example. Not only that, but it also conforms exactly to the restrictions introduced in the SA rule. The only way to avoid (i.e., save or be rescued from) a SA, as written in the SA rule itself, is to have a special rule that allows you to do so. ATSKNF is such a rule. EL does not allow the unit to avoid a SA, It allows a unit to possibly avoid the consequences of an SA, two completely different things.

-Yad

Yad wrote:It's not 'one' example, it's the only example.

Currently.

Not only that, but it also conforms exactly to the restrictions introduced in the SA rule. The only way to avoid (i.e., save or be rescued from) a SA, as written in the SA rule itself, is to have a special rule that allows you to do so. ATSKNF is such a rule.

I've never denied otherwise. ASTKNF avoids the SA completely. Avoiding the SA completely is not the only way to rescue the unit, therefore the way ATSKNF is not the only way to "defeat" SA.

EL does not allow the unit to avoid a SA, It allows a unit to possibly avoid the consequences of an SA, two completely different things.

Right. And both are forbidden unless otherwise specified.

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, what you arent getting is that you are, without any rules support whatsoever (as in none, zip, zilch, nada - not a single shred of rules support at any point in this entire thread that supports your contention) deciding that the only way to rescue / save a unit is to prevent them from being RaaC.

Again: WBB was a "special rule" that did not specify that it could rescue a unit from SA, and it was stated as the canonical example of such. EL is also a special rule, that does not specify it can rescue a unit from SA, so it cannot.

Please, for once provide a rule that supports your contention that the ONLY way to rescue a unit from SA is to prevent the unit from being removed. Language and context of the actual rules states the opposite, so this could be an interesting exercise

lol, because that's what the rule itself says. Unless otherwise specified no special rule or save can rescue them; for them the battle is over (doing that from memory).

If you don't get that this means from the SA itself then I'd question your basic reading comprehension. The consequences of a SA is to RFPaaC the affected unit. This is the action. To prevent this action from taking place (which is all the rules cares about) you must have a specific rule to negate it. EL does not behave in this fashion. It is not a save or a rescue in that it doesn't prevent the SA from destroying the unit, which is exactly what the restriction in SA is there to prevent.

Finally, references to rules from older editions will be noted and duly ignored. They're not relevant. For all your erroneous harping about citing rules, I'm amazed that you'd reach back to previous editions to try to justify your current stance. Find something in the current rulebook and/or codex.

-Yad

Yad wrote:The consequences of a SA is to RFPaaC the affected unit. This is the action. To prevent this action from taking place (which is all the rules cares about) you must have a specific rule to negate it.

The rules don't say the action must be prevented. The rule says you can't rescue the unit.
The unit was destroyed.
The unit is no longer destroyed.

Was the unit rescued?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Aspersions

Odd, usually it is up to one side to prove their case, when the other has done so already.

Personally I HAVE a defined period for the SA effect - the rest of the Battle. As it tells you.

You mean the language in the SA rule used to add dramatic flair to the unit being 'run down' by a SA? Hmm, reads like fluff to me

nosferatu1001 wrote:What makes you think it isnt the rest of the battle? The rule DOES say otherwise, so it will be intersting for you to actually provide a decent rules argument showing how it is single instant
(Oh, and if it relates to the same sub phase, EL still cannot occur. As the Fight sub phase is also the end of the assault phase)

The wording and context of the rule makes it rather apparent. When a SA successfully occurs, at that stage of the sub fight phase of the Assault phase, no special rule or save (unless otherwise specified, can be used to rescue the unit. It means that unless the unit has such a rule it can't stop the SA from happening and destroying the unit. What happens after the SA has been resolved is fair game. Thems the rules

-Yad


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

Yad wrote:The consequences of a SA is to RFPaaC the affected unit. This is the action. To prevent this action from taking place (which is all the rules cares about) you must have a specific rule to negate it.

The rules don't say the action must be prevented. The rule says you can't rescue the unit.
The unit was destroyed.
The unit is no longer destroyed.

Was the unit rescued?

It says the unit can't be saved or rescued. From what?

The unit was not rescued [i]from the SA[i]. It was destroyed and RFPaaC. The restrictions in the SA rule are all about stopping the SA from destroying the unit.

-Yad

rigeld2 wrote:

Nemesor Dave wrote:The subject of the whole section under Sweeping Advance is the SA stage of combat. Sweeping Advance section: If X, then do Y "at this stage". Stage here means the current step in a process. That is what "at this stage" means. I won't re-post the link to the phrase definition.

The rule doesn't say "If X, do Y at this stage". It says "X happens. Unless otherwise specified Y at this stage."
The links that have been posted agree with my interpretation, so I understand why you wouldn't want to link them.

Of course it's not talking about some other stage of combat.

I never said "of combat".

No they didn't. The common use of at this stage is now. "At this stage of the game Ireland have really got to pull out something big", a commonly heard phrase from Soccer pundits. English is defined by use and since most people use it to mean now or during this period. You have not got a leg to stand on.

rigeld2 wrote:

Yad wrote:

EL does not allow the unit to avoid a SA, It allows a unit to possibly avoid the consequences of an SA, two completely different things.

Right. And both are forbidden unless otherwise specified.

At that stage. Later on is not forbidden.

Yad wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:No, what you arent getting is that you are, without any rules support whatsoever (as in none, zip, zilch, nada - not a single shred of rules support at any point in this entire thread that supports your contention) deciding that the only way to rescue / save a unit is to prevent them from being RaaC.

Again: WBB was a "special rule" that did not specify that it could rescue a unit from SA, and it was stated as the canonical example of such. EL is also a special rule, that does not specify it can rescue a unit from SA, so it cannot.

Please, for once provide a rule that supports your contention that the ONLY way to rescue a unit from SA is to prevent the unit from being removed. Language and context of the actual rules states the opposite, so this could be an interesting exercise

lol, because that's what the rule itself says. Unless otherwise specified no special rule or save can rescue them; for them the battle is over (doing that from memory).

If you don't get that this means from the SA itself then I'd question your basic reading comprehension.

Given that isnt what any of us have said, I'd have to question yo9ur ability to comprehend any of the points raised so far. Seriously. You also havent answered the question, again.

Im shocked, really and truly.

Yad wrote:The consequences of a SA is to RFPaaC the affected unit. This is the action. To prevent this action from taking place (which is all the rules cares about) you must have a specific rule to negate it. EL does not behave in this fashion. It is not a save or a rescue in that it doesn't prevent the SA from destroying the unit, which is exactly what the restriction in SA is there to prevent.

You are required to show the unit can be rescued. You can rescue someone post event (you can keep on ignoring this fact, but it does you little favour to do so) yet your contention is that this is not possible.

Prove it. Prove, using actual rules, that the only way to rescue the unit is to prevent SA. When you have FINALLY done so, after many times of asking, we can let it rest.
You cant do so, of course, because no such stipulation exists in the language of the SA rule. But hey, give it a go! You may learn something

Yad wrote:Finally, references to rules from older editions will be noted and duly ignored. They're not relevant. For all your erroneous harping about citing rules, I'm amazed that you'd reach back to previous editions to try to justify your current stance. Find something in the current rulebook and/or codex.

-Yad

Wrong. The "No special rule" has not altered, one jot. So how come WBB was not allowed to rescue the unit, but EL can rescue the unit?

Telling that you are utterly incapable of arguing this - incredibly telling on the strength of your position.