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.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Well the latter is the explained one already - you have a banner with 2 runes in the unit, and you have a banner with two rune in the unit. The rules only ask about "a" banner, whjich in this case is the same as asking for "1 or more" banners

Yes, but the next paragraph simply begins: "[a] second Rune of Slowness..." That could easily refer to both a second Rune of Slowness on the same standard, as well as a second standard bearing a second Rune of Slowness.

Compare that to the wording for Rune of Battle, whose second paragraph begins with: "[a] standard bearing two Runes of Battle confers a further +2 bonus to the bearer's unit's combat result score..." This wording makes it clear that multiple Runes of Battle will stack to add additional SCR. It's quite reasonable to assume that the writers intended the Runes of Slowness to be interpreted in the same way.

Now the fact that they didn't state that "additional Runes of Battle confer no additional effect" is evidence against this interpretation. But clarity could also have been added by merely wording the first paragraph "a unit containing one or more standards with a Rune of Slowness," then indicating in further paragraphs that only one such standard could trigger at a time.

We can guess at the intent of the writers, but it's still just going to be a guess. The wording here is largely ambiguous, and entirely reasonable people will disagree on how to interpret it. I wouldn't be surprised to see GW faq this issue either way.

Note that the cost difference for stacking on multiple standards is minimal. It's 80 points for stacking 3 Runes of Slowness onto a single standard, or 85 for stacking them onto two. The only difference being that you could, conceivably, spread them out over multiple units depending on your opponent.

Context restricts it to the same banner. Duke already went through this.

This is the same interpretation as stating 6 waaaagh banners in a Nobzx unit makes them WS10. It doesnt.

So still no rules to back up the "a unit containing a banner with two runes of slowness has X effect" claim you've made?

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Well the latter is the explained one already - you have a banner with 2 runes in the unit, and you have a banner with two rune in the unit. The rules only ask about "a" banner, whjich in this case is the same as asking for "1 or more" banners

This is in no way clear - again, what happens if I have a 2 rune banner and a 1 rune banner in the same unit? They have totally different effects and the second rune doesn't have any restriction at all. The comparison to the Ork banner is false - they're multiples of the same banner. As said earlier, you can't argue this in good faith. Here's the exact wording again for all 3 banners:

Any foes charging a unit including a standard bearing a Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

A second Rune of Slowness means a for rolls 2D6 and must choose the highest dice when subtracting from his charge distance.

A third Rune of Slowness maintains the previous effects and, should a foe contact the bearing unit, they have the Always Strikes Last special rule in the first round of combat.

For comparison, here's Rune of Battle (one we are fairly sure stacks):

A standard bearing a Rune of Battle confers a further +1 bonus to the bearer's unit's combat result score.

A standard bearing two Runes of Battle confers a further +2 bonus to the bearer's unit's combat result score.

A standard bearing three Runes of Battle confers a further +2 bonus to the bearer's unit's combat result score, and additionally confers the FIght in Extra Ranks special rule to the bearer's unit.

We can all agree that the way the RoB is worded is very clear, right? A standard with a RoB gives +1 to combat resolution, so 2 banners with 1 RoB should give two lots of +1, right? I mean, that makes sense - the restriction is only on the standard. Or is it clear actually? Well, you can easily argue this the same way people are doing with RoS - it says "a" standard, singular. Hence, if I have 2 standards in the unit, it doesn't matter - I only consider one of them. So which one is it? Is it per banner or per unit? Again, what if we have some combination, like 2 RoB on the BSB in the same unit as 1 on the standard? Logically we get +3, but using the RoS argument, we pick between +1 and +2 arbitrarily.

Ah, but maybe the issue is with charging "a" unit including a standard bearing a Rune of Slowness. Well, then if I charge multiple units because I must (as per the rules - if I can't engage in combat with only one, I MUST charge both) I can totally ignore the Rune of Slowness - it's not a singular unit after all.

Here's the issue with the rules explained then. Here was my initial reading:

Any foes charging (each) unit including (each) standard bearing a Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

But wait, doesn't this have a problem?

Any foes charging (each) unit including (each) standard bearing (each) Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

This says we look for each unit, figure out their banners separately (as "a" is just to refer to the banner for the first time - a reasonable assumption) and for each individual single rune subtract D6 - so for multiple banners, do it multiple times. Well, identically any can be read like this:

Any foes charging (at least) one unit including (at least) one standard bearing a Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

Hmm, seems we have a similar issue:

Any foes charging (at least) one unit including (at least) one standard bearing (at least) one Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

Well, now it's even less clear - before we were clearly saying each banner is considered separately. Now, we're saying any foe charging at any given amount of units including any given amount of standards with any given amount of runes always subtracts D6", which will make multiple runes stack AND only looks for one banner. In fact, there's multiple ways we can twist this sentence.


Let's push this to its logical conclusion, by considering all permutations (6 total) which are all valid readings:

Any foes charging (at least) one unit including (at least) one standard bearing (at least) one Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

Any foe charging 1+ units with 1+ standards with 1+ runes subtracts D6" - stacks runes on top of their normal effects; I don't know anyone who accepts this reading.

Any foes charging (at least) one unit including (at least) one standard bearing (each) Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

Any foe charging 1+ units with 1+ standards with 1 rune subtracts D6" - this is the argument against my stance, which is saying you look for one unit and one banner only, regardless of the amount in the unit, then apply the result.

Any foes charging (at least) one unit including (each) standard bearing (each) Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

Any foe charging 1+ units with 1 rune on the banner subtracts D6" per banner - this is how others of us are reading it, where each banner is considered separately, each rune is considered separately but units are considered together.

Any foes charging (each) unit including (each) standard bearing (each) Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

Any foe charging each unit with 1 rune on the banner subtracts D6" per banner on both units - this is how others of us are reading it, where each banner is considered separately, each rune is considered separately and units are considered separately.

Any foes charging (each) one unit including (each) standard bearing (at least) one Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

Any foe charging each units with 1+ rune on the banner subtracts D6" per banner - this is the most broken of all rreadings, making runes stack, units stack and banners stack, which leads to a potential 4D6" potentially being subtracted from a double charge, plus then more for 2/3 runes. Again, no-one seriously considers this.

Any foes charging (each) unit including (at least) one standard bearing (at least) one Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

Any foe charging each unit with 1+ rune on at least one banner subtracts D6" - stacks runes, considers only one banner, considers each unit in turn - again, no-one seriously thinks the runes stack.

Any foes charging (each) unit including (at least) one standard bearing (each) Rune of Slowness subtract D6" from their charge distance (roll after their charge distance has been determined). If the enemy fails to make contact, all the rules for failed charges apply.

Any foe charging each unit with 1+ standards with each rune subtracts D6" - the other counter position.


See, there's no clear intent here whatsoever. I can easily say it's each unit, each banner per rune, as the runes have determined effects, yet be countered by someone saying it's if at least one unit being charged has at least one banner with a single rune of slowness. We're just going in circles. My way is no less valid, nor more valid - and that's before we even get to the issue of 1+2 runes in a unit. I can say I believe my way because otherwise 1+2/2+3/1+3 runes changes how runes are considered as there's 2 banners with different effects. It's even arguable that if you have 2 runic banners in one unit, only one of them is even considered as the term "a" is always used to describe them.

Ultimately, it needs an FAQ and there's little point debating it any more.

I'm with Eyjio: the rule is quite truly ambiguous. I think all of your arguments are perfectly valid, but it's not even remotely as clear-cut as you're trying to hold out.

Oh, man, don't omni quote. (mega quote a zillion times). It makes it really hard to read and respond to.

You can't have the same rune totals on multiple items. So you can never have 2 banners with 1 rune of anything. There's no point in debating that scenario therefore, it's in the basic rules of runes.

I answered this question, I believe, in my updated response through use of the BRB rule that the owning player whose turn it is chooses order. You are splitting apart the rules of the banner, which is why you are making it more difficult. Follow the complete execution of ONE banner before moving on to the next. There is a simple block of text on each banner.

4. 1 Banner says subtract from roll
4.1. Roll die/dice for whichever banner is chosen
4.2. NEXT SENTENCE IN BANNER is to see if charge failed.

Look at 4.2. It doesn't say "check to see if there is another banner," it says see if the charging unit failed. This comes RIGHT after you roll and subtract. The BRB tells you the only way to see if they failed is to see if they succeeded. If you succeeded, you have successfully made it into combat. If you failed your charge, you take another action, which is arguably not affected at all since it isn't the charge but a single die. But the point is, you aren't in a charge at that point--you are in a failed charge--if you have one more or 50 more banners of slowness (impossible, obviously), they cannot activate because you aren't charging.

 DukeRustfield wrote:
Oh, man, don't omni quote. (mega quote a zillion times). It makes it really hard to read and respond to.

You can't have the same rune totals on multiple items. So you can never have 2 banners with 1 rune of anything. There's no point in debating that scenario therefore, it's in the basic rules of runes.

...oh man, now I'm trying to decide whether the Rule of Pride restricts combinations of a single rune (i.e. can't have two standards with two Runes of Slowness in combination with any other rune) or of the entire combination (i.e. can't have two banners with two Runes of Slowness, but CAN have two banners each with two Runes of Slowness in combination with a different third rune).

 DukeRustfield wrote:
I answered this question, I believe, in my updated response through use of the BRB rule that the owning player whose turn it is chooses order. You are splitting apart the rules of the banner, which is why you are making it more difficult. Follow the complete execution of ONE banner before moving on to the next. There is a simple block of text on each banner.

[...]

Look at 4.2. It doesn't say "check to see if there is another banner," it says see if the charging unit failed. This comes RIGHT after you roll and subtract. The BRB tells you the only way to see if they failed is to see if they succeeded. If you succeeded, you have successfully made it into combat. If you failed your charge, you take another action, which is arguably not affected at all since it isn't the charge but a single die. But the point is, you aren't in a charge at that point--you are in a failed charge--if you have one more or 50 more banners of slowness (impossible, obviously), they cannot activate because you aren't charging.

I still think that both of you are stretching.The order of activation is not so clear as to be giving substantial guidance on this issue. I still think that the simplest explanation is simply that you count up all Runes of Slowness in a unit and go from there.

 DukeRustfield wrote:
Oh, man, don't omni quote. (mega quote a zillion times). It makes it really hard to read and respond to.

You can't have the same rune totals on multiple items. So you can never have 2 banners with 1 rune of anything. There's no point in debating that scenario therefore, it's in the basic rules of runes.

I answered this question, I believe, in my updated response through use of the BRB rule that the owning player whose turn it is chooses order. You are splitting apart the rules of the banner, which is why you are making it more difficult. Follow the complete execution of ONE banner before moving on to the next. There is a simple block of text on each banner.

4. 1 Banner says subtract from roll
4.1. Roll die/dice for whichever banner is chosen
4.2. NEXT SENTENCE IN BANNER is to see if charge failed.

Look at 4.2. It doesn't say "check to see if there is another banner," it says see if the charging unit failed. This comes RIGHT after you roll and subtract. The BRB tells you the only way to see if they failed is to see if they succeeded. If you succeeded, you have successfully made it into combat. If you failed your charge, you take another action, which is arguably not affected at all since it isn't the charge but a single die. But the point is, you aren't in a charge at that point--you are in a failed charge--if you have one more or 50 more banners of slowness (impossible, obviously), they cannot activate because you aren't charging.

Well there's a whole lot wrong with this. Firstly it is entirely possible to have 2 banners with 2 Runes of slowness each. You need to read the Rule of Pride again.

Then you need to read the rune of slowness again. Firstly 2 Runes of Slowness never mentions charges failing, and even in the case with 1 rune of slowness it is an if statement not a now you must check statement. So checking for failure must still be done after all intercepts.

"Any foes charging a unit including a standard bearing a Rune of Slowness...."

Do you have A standard bearing a Rune of Slowness?

Yes. Meaning no matter how many banners you have, you satisfy this requirement. Exactly the same as the Ork example.

Pick the one with the highest number of runes, and resolve that

text removed.


Reds8n

nosferatu1001 wrote:
"Any foes charging a unit including a standard bearing a Rune of Slowness...."

Do you have A standard bearing a Rune of Slowness?

Yes. Meaning no matter how many banners you have, you satisfy this requirement. Exactly the same as the Ork example.

Pick the one with the highest number of runes, and resolve that

That wording is not present for 2 or 3 runes only for a banner with a rune...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Banner A: 2 Runes of slowness
Banner B: 2 Runes of Slowness, Strollaz Rune

Entirely legal contains 2 banners with 2 runes of slowness...

2 runes very much does mention charges and more specifically charge distances.

As for the if statement requiring it being resolved before other interrupts you'd be right if it stated then or immediately check. It is simply an if A then B we do not yet know A so we wait until we do. Otherwise the game breaks at that point because you can't know if you've failed charge or not because you haven't determined charge distance yet.

 FlingitNow wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
"Any foes charging a unit including a standard bearing a Rune of Slowness...."

Do you have A standard bearing a Rune of Slowness?

Yes. Meaning no matter how many banners you have, you satisfy this requirement. Exactly the same as the Ork example.

Pick the one with the highest number of runes, and resolve that

That wording is not present for 2 or 3 runes only for a banner with a rune...

How, in all of the world, would that wording NOT apply to a banner with 2 runes? Your argument totally defies all logic of common usage and context.

Flinbg - so when you have two runes, you ignore the first sentence entirely?

You replace "a banner with A rune"
with "a banner with 2 runes"
and "a banner with 3 runes"

Notced that the "a banner" part will remain constant?

IF you want to argue this further, you are accepting that, functionally, a banner with 2 or 3 runes does nothing - as you are stating you are ignoring the first sentence, and it is only the first sentence that tells you what to do with those dice you ahve rolled.

The 2 and 3 runes banners have enough wording to work. Intact there is a RaW argument that they get significantly better (as they only require your foe to be charging no qualifier on who).

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Flinbg - so when you have two runes, you ignore the first sentence entirely?

You replace "a banner with A rune"
with "a banner with 2 runes"
and "a banner with 3 runes"

Notced that the "a banner" part will remain constant?

IF you want to argue this further, you are accepting that, functionally, a banner with 2 or 3 runes does nothing - as you are stating you are ignoring the first sentence, and it is only the first sentence that tells you what to do with those dice you ahve rolled.

That's not what the book says. It's what you are INTERPRETING the book to say. The rules refer to "a standard bearing a Rune of Slowness" and "[a] second Rune of Slowness" and "[a] third Rune of Slowness..." It doesn't specify that these must be on the same banner. It doesn't specify that only one such standard activates. I think it's reasonable to infer that this is what was meant, but it's certainly not 100% clear. The wording doesn't contain the typical "one or more" verbiage that exists in practically every other instance where only one such item is meant to activate. And while there's no precedent for runes stacking from multiple sources, it also appears to be the only rune that activates when something acts upon *IT*, rather than it acting on something else.


For instance, you could read the wording thus:

Charging a unit with ONE Rune of Slowness results in subtracting d6.

Charging a unit with TWO Runes of Slowness results in rolling 2d6 and subtracting the highest.

Charging a unit with THREE Runes of Slowness results in rolling 2d6, subtracting the highest, and becoming ASL

The phrase "a standard bearing a Rune of Slowness" COULD be interpreted as continuing through all three paragraphs, to require that the items all be on the same standard. I think that's probably the most reasonable assumption (I've flip-flopped on this one a few times), but it's certainly not the only interpretation.

I don't think you can get multiple standards activating though. The way the rules are written suggest that only a single D6 can ever be subtracted.

Pirate - No, you can only read it your way if you ignore "a banner with..." entirely.

The context is: the rune is on a banner, and a unit is charging the unit with a banner bearing...

Nothing in the following rules alters that, but nothing changes the context either. Ignoring context, that then results in the made up rule above (your first line omits "a banner with", so cannot be correct) is a very weak position to argue from.

Fling - no, if you remove the first sentence, you cannot operate 2 runes at all

"A second Rune of Slowness means a for rolls 2D6 and must choose the highest dice when subtracting from his charge distance." [sic]

Read in isolation, with the typo ignored as not that relevant, does not give you sufficient information - you have no trigger for the rule. You know it reduces charge distance, but cannot ever actually roll any dice as you are not told when to do so. For example I will roll the 2D6 after I have made contact - it reduces my charge distance, but as I am already locked into combat, that isnt relevant any longer. (you have no permission to "un combat me" )

So again: if you ignore "a unit with a banner bearing..." and dont alter it for the 2 and 3 case, you have no permission to trigger 2 or 3 runes.

IF you are arguing that 2 banners with 2 gives you both benefits (2 lots of 2D6 rolled), I will disagree but allow you to use the rule for 1 rune, as a compromise. IF you still insist, then I will do as above - I will roll having already made contact, making your purchase useless. Afterall, you are deliberately altering the rules for your benefit, aka cheating.

Or, follow the actual written rule, not ignoring context, and realise you can only ever get the benefit once, and that it applies to each banner individually not as a combined total of banner runes.

I didn't think you thought deliberately breaking the rules was cheating?

Are you rolling a charge? Then each banner makes you roll 2d6 and remove the highest dice from your total. That is what the rule tells us for a second rune.

Ignoring the first part as OT

Yes, but when do you roll? there is no time instance, if you are reading the second rune sentence in isolation. So I will happily roll the 2D6, after I have already made contact. So my charge distance has had a number taken away from it, but this is irrelevant as you have no permission to remove me from combat

Your interpretation cannot result in an operable 2 rune situation. It also ignores the context the rule was written in. Thats two factors against it being anything like the intended rule, and is two factors against it being the written rule.

I read it as having 2 separate runes equals to having 2 runes, sothe secondary effect would kick in, not 2 d6 off the charge range

 Formosa wrote:
I read it as having 2 separate runes equals to having 2 runes, sothe secondary effect would kick in, not 2 d6 off the charge range

I read it as "a banner with" applies in all instances

So if you have 2 1 rune banners, you get 1 D6 off the range

It's whether you read "a standard" as applying to only the first paragraph, or all subsequent paragraphs as well. I'd say that's probably the more reasonable interpretation, but it seems to me that the writers would have added more clarity if they'd considered the possibility of multiples.

I think that having multiple banners stacking as though they were on the same banner is a nice compromise position, but RAW I'm more inclined to say that only one banner may come into affect and the controlling player has to choose which one it is.

A unit can have at most 2 standards in it at one time. Further the number of units which can afford a multi rune banner is itself a smaller subset. The bsb can have a banner worth any points. This means 5 runes is the most you can possibly have in a unit.

Generally warhammer rules are strict and usually any duplication that does not specifically it can be combined with itself is lost. This is the opposite of say magic the gathering where everything stacks and you follow the letter of the rules even if the conclusion is silly (like how the banners could result in a negative charge)

However there is no specific statement to cover something like this.

In a friendly game I would probably let the runes stack and if you had more than 3 then they are spare.
In a tournament I bet the ruling would be that only the banner with the most runes activates so if your bsb has runes of slowness then the unit he joins shouldn't.

If you don't read it as applying to the further paras, you cannot activate the two rune effect, ever.

Stacking has zero support in the rules

If you don't read it as applying to the further paras, you cannot activate the two rune effect, ever. 

Except of course when your opponent charges as you are instructed to...

 FlingitNow wrote:

If you don't read it as applying to the further paras, you cannot activate the two rune effect, ever. 

Except of course when your opponent charges as you are instructed to...

Ok, then as stated, and ignored by you, I will roll after I have completed the charge. Find a rule disallowing that timing, or allowing the rune to have some effect at that point.

I'm happy with you making the twonrune effect useless by your own argument.

The rune of slowness denies that timing because you haven't minused from your charge distance as instructed by the rule. Charge distance is calculated before you complete charges...

 FlingitNow wrote:
The rune of slowness denies that timing because you haven't minused from your charge distance as instructed by the rule. Charge distance is calculated before you complete charges...

My charge distance is rolled for before completing. Nothing staters, in the subsection of the rules you wish to use to the exclusion of the actual rules, that this recalculation of charge distance has to be made prior to moving chargers.

It's not a recalculation it is calculating your charge distance. Nothing in the rule states you calculate the charge distance twice, so you don't. If you're not rolling 2d6 and taking the highest from your charge distance then you're breaking the rule. If you using your charge distance without that modifier you are breaking the rule.

Again, timing. The 2D6 is clear when reading the written rules, in your butchered subsection of the rules, there is no requirement to subtract the 2D6 before moving chargers

Unless you are claiming that "charge distance", the value, is lost immediately you make contact? page and para.

" If you using your charge distance without that modifier you are breaking the rule."

Teh rule does not state you must calculate the charge distance (2D6 etc) then immediately subtract, when reading just the out of context sentence you insist on using.

UNder the real rules, of course, it does. I'm pointing out your attempt to circumvent the rules fails.