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.

don_mondo wrote:No, it says that an IG officer may issue orders "each turn".

Exactly, the OFFICER must issue the order.

Logans rule does not require Logan to do anything.

Check and Mate.

I agree with Sliggoth on all points.

I'm on the fence about whether you get to pick a rule for Logan when he's off the table. With a slight inclination towards the "no" side, based on precedent regarding other models' abilities, though that's pretty well balanced by what I feel is a reasonably convincing case by Gwar! on this point.

Side note: Every time I see this thread topic I sing it in my head like Jim Morrison singing “Mr. Mojo Risin” in L.A. Woman. Mr. Lo-gan Grim-nar…

Once Logan has given the rule to "any unit he is with" ...

What makes the unit loose the rule if Logan leaves the unit mid-turn?

Are they still the same unit that was given the rule at the beginning of the turn? Yes.

Has the turn come to a completion yet? No.

Does any part of Logan's rule require Logan to continually be present within the squad? No/Yes (why? - where does it say).

Logan gets the rule at the beginning of the turn for the duration of the turn. "Any unit he is with.." gets the rule at the beginning of the turn for the duration of the turn. Logan doesn't stop giving the rule to the squad when he leaves, it was only "given" once at the beginning of the turn. Nor does it say anywhere that they loose the rule (apart from after the duration of the turn) by Logan leaving.

Gwar! wrote:

don_mondo wrote:No, it says that an IG officer may issue orders "each turn".

Exactly, the OFFICER must issue the order.

Logans rule does not require Logan to do anything.

Check and Mate.

As has already been pointed out, that's rather ridiculous. The day my miniatures perform actions on their own is the day they get to meet my shotgun.

It's either an always on rule that a models inclusion in your list grants, or its a choice ability that you perform on behalf of a specific model. Logan's rule is in the latter category. Rules in that category don't work off table without a specific exception to allow it.

Gwar! wrote:

don_mondo wrote:No, it says that an IG officer may issue orders "each turn".

Exactly, the OFFICER must issue the order.

Logans rule does not require Logan to do anything.

Check and Mate.

Like I said before, the day he does it without me doing it........................

Razerous- the rule applies to Logan and any unit he is with. I can see a certain degree of ambiguity, so that I don't find your/Gwar's reading ridiculous, but as far as I'm concerned it's equally valid to apply "with" as a condition continually checked. This also has the benefit of making sense.

Khaain & Mondo- the rules are clear that models take actions within the game. For example, a unit which has Gone to Ground can take no actions of any kind. Which is what prevents a pinned Farseer from casting psychic powers, and a pinned IG officer from issuing orders.

Razerous wrote:Once Logan has given the rule to "any unit he is with" ...

What makes the unit loose the rule if Logan leaves the unit mid-turn?

Are they still the same unit that was given the rule at the beginning of the turn? Yes.

Has the turn come to a completion yet? No.

Does any part of Logan's rule require Logan to continually be present within the squad? No/Yes (why? - where does it say).

Logan gets the rule at the beginning of the turn for the duration of the turn. "Any unit he is with.." gets the rule at the beginning of the turn for the duration of the turn. Logan doesn't stop giving the rule to the squad when he leaves, it was only "given" once at the beginning of the turn. Nor does it say anywhere that they loose the rule (apart from after the duration of the turn) by Logan leaving.

I'm lazy, so I'll just paste Sliggoth's answer to that:

Not ignoring the "have that rule for the duration of the player turn", just saying that its always *Logan and whatever unit he is with* that have the rule for the duration of the player turn. In other words, for the whole turn we apply the chosen special rule to Logan and whatever unit he is with....at the moment. We choose which special rule at the beginning of the turn, but we dont apply the special rule only at the beginning of the turn. We always apply it to Logan and the unit that hes with, because that how Logan's own special rule reads.

The previous sentence tells us that at the beginning of the turn we choose a rule from the list. The next line tells us that Logan and any unit he is with have that rule for the duration of the player turn. So whenever we look for what to apply the chosen rule to, we look for Logan and whatever unit he is with. Not whatever unit he may have been with at some time in the past, but the unit he is with when we are applying his own special rule.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mannahnin wrote:
Khaain & Mondo- the rules are clear that models take actions within the game. For example, a unit which has Gone to Ground can take no actions of any kind. Which is what prevents a pinned Farseer from casting psychic powers, and a pinned IG officer from issuing orders.

? Yes, certain rule effects can prevent me from having my models perform certain actions. No argument from me there. Yet, regardless, it's never the "model" deciding what happens, it's always the player and the dice. If my Farseer is not pinned, does he decide which power to cast or do I? Does my IG officer decide which order to issue and to whom or do I? Does either succceed or fail based on their actions or on mine( ie dice roll)? It always comes back to the player. Hence my objection to the semantic sophistry behind the "player chooses" or "model performs" statements. Regardless of which, it's always the player acting/deciding.

Mannahnin wrote:Khaain & Mondo- the rules are clear that models take actions within the game. For example, a unit which has Gone to Ground can take no actions of any kind. Which is what prevents a pinned Farseer from casting psychic powers, and a pinned IG officer from issuing orders.

You are correct (even though you spelled my name wrong ), models are considered to take actions within the game. Logan is choosing a rule as his action within the game. Of course that actually means you are doing it for him. What I (and I think Don_Mondo) are reacting to is the idea that there is a difference in rules between the two. There isn't. Either it's an always on blanket rule, or it is a rule that you the player make a decision on behalf of a specific model for.

This type of debate isn't new. Some folks play the game by parsing the words on the page and refusing to weigh them against unwritten rules obtained through deductive reasoning. That's fine, it's their choice, but I think it is wrong. Also hypocritical, since these same people will tell you things like "doesn't say I can't" isn't a valid rules argument. Really? Page quote please.... (of course the permissive rule set discussion is valid, but these people can't give the page quote to everything they say, but think they win arguments if you bring up something that can't be answered with a page quote).

See, people have different opinions what rules exist through deductive reasoning. If two people don't agree on the "unwritten rules", then rules that build off them are going to have different meanings to those two people.

Kaaihn wrote:Logan is choosing a rule as his action within the game.

Bzzz. Wrong.

The rule says "you may choose", not "Logan may Choose".

Gwar! wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:Logan is choosing a rule as his action within the game.

Bzzz. Wrong.

The rule says "you may choose", not "Logan may Choose".

You might want to reread the whole post again. I just said models never choose anything, the player always chooses on their behalf. Your parsing words and coming up with wrong answers against how the game actually works.

In my opinion, of course.

And in My Opinion, when one codex says that the model makes an action, and the other doesn't, it results in different effects and uses.

But hey, that's just my Opinion.

And the English Languages of course.

This is not magic the gthering with subphases there are multiple instances of beginning of turn etc... lot of things happen at the "beginning of turn".

Including rolling for reserves as it just says beginning of turn as well so i mean really its up to the player to pick his "beginning of turn " order stuff or say it all happens simultaneously althugh that can cause problems.

Gwar! wrote:And in My Opinion, when one codex says that the model makes an action, and the other doesn't, it results in different effects and uses.

But hey, that's just my Opinion.

And the English Languages of course.

Your completely entitled to that opinion. As I have said before, I think you are missing some insight on how the game works by using a strict language interpretation as your finish point for obtaining rules answers. It's the starting point, not the end point. If the game works for you and your friends in this way though, more power to you.

The fact that you have said many times that GW is wrong in their published answers though I think should at some point lead you to re-evaluate whether it is in fact you that is wrong, and not the guys that create the game and have an understanding of it that we as the players are incapable of definitely having unless they tell it to us at some point.

Kaaihn wrote:The fact that you have said many times that GW is wrong in their published answers though I think should at some point lead you to re-evaluate whether it is in fact you that is wrong, and not the guys that create the game and have an understanding of it that we as the players are incapable of definitely having unless they tell it to us at some point.

Protip: 50% of the FAQs were not written by GW.

Incorrect.

Mannahnin wrote:Incorrect.

Correct actually. It even says it at the end of their FAQs.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gwar! wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:Incorrect.

Correct actually. It even says it at the end of their FAQs.

That's another demonstrably untrue statement.

The statement Gwar refers to: Thanks to Jon ‘yakface’ Regul and his FAQ ruling council

Yes, GW did look at the INAT FAQ and borrowed some of them as items they thought needed to be included. This includes some where they posted a question from the INAT and changed the answer.
So yes, some of the Q&As did come almost verbatim from the INAT, others did not, and GW thanked the INAT council for tehir endeavors. However, note that recent FAQs no longer include said statement............ Personally, I wish they'd just post a link to the INAT and say here, these are "official" rules additions. But GW doesn't even think the rulebook is official so I'm not gonna hold my breath.

Hey Don,

Having helped a little with the DakkaFAQ/YakFAQ prior to its being adopted as the INATFAQ, and prior to Yak and the Adepticon council getting credited by them, and having been present for all of the above, I am aware of the history.

GW did look at the INAT FAQ, and did use some questions from it. They even kept a couple of the answers. Even for the FAQs that they did that for, GW did not make use of 50% INATFAQ content. And as you’ve noted, the more recent ones no longer give even the briefest credit to Yak and the council.

Mannahnin wrote:And as you’ve noted, the more recent ones no longer give even the briefest credit to Yak and the council.

Yet more proof they should be ignored.

I couldn't care less who's work GW referenced in developing a FAQ. Regardless of who they gave credit to for contributory work, GW wrote the FAQ and approved the questions and their answers that went into it.

Gwar, are you really sure you want to stand up and claim that when someone writes a FAQ, any material they reference in its creation means the author of the reference is then considered to have written the FAQ? Someone I doubt you are actually saying that, because you went to incredible lengths recently to say exactly the opposite.

Modquisition on.
This thread is closed and will be reviewed by myself ftomorrow to see if disciplinary action is warranted.

Um...ok, I have to ask a question.

This debate has gotten pretty heated, and there's a lot of interwebz rage going on here, but I'm confused...

Assuming a player can make use of this ability when Grimnar isn't on the board, would that really make that tremendous of a game changing affect?

I mean, the most useful purpose I could think of would be podding in a unit of Longfangs with Relentless. That might guarantee a dead vehicle or two, but odds are the Longfangs and Grimnar will be chewed up if not destroyed by the opponent's next turn firing.

I dunno; I can see some advantages to having Grimnar's effect be active when he's not on the board, but I really just don't see it as being such an epic advantage that it justifies this heated of a debate....

Enlighten me.