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.

JakeSiren wrote:
Unless I'm mistaken a FAQ is not a change in rules...

GW uses FAQs to change the rules all of the time and always have.

You determine which FAQs fall under rules modifications by looking at which FAQs change rules and which don’t. It’s pretty simple.

GW FAQs include changes and Errata. Nature of the beast. FAQs should just clarify but GW ones change things too. That’s the way it is.

I feel you’re over-extrapolating on your post and trying to find justifications and patterns not needed. The FAQ tells you how to handle things - that’s now how we do them. I don’t need to prove any of that, as the FAQ docs are the evidence.

Given the above is all way off topic from the OP, I still believe that “at the end of the turn” is not in a phase. Tiny attempt to steer back N track. Let’s see how successful it is!

JakeSiren wrote:
Unless I'm mistaken a FAQ is not a change in rules, it is the rules writers saying "under our assumptions this is the result we get"

Sadly a lot of FAQs are changes to the rules, because they directly contradict the rules.

These Special Snowflake FAQs are basically just a bad way of doing errata, even I, the Crown Prince of RaW, accept it as such. :EmoticonToIndicateTongueInCheekHumour:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
You determine which FAQs fall under rules modifications by looking at which FAQs change rules and which don’t. It’s pretty simple.

GW FAQs include changes and Errata. Nature of the beast. FAQs should just clarify but GW ones change things too. That’s the way it is.

I feel you’re over-extrapolating on your post and trying to find justifications and patterns not needed. The FAQ tells you how to handle things - that’s now how we do them. I don’t need to prove any of that, as the FAQ docs are the evidence.

Given the above is all way off topic from the OP, I still believe that “at the end of the turn” is not in a phase. Tiny attempt to steer back N track. Let’s see how successful it is!

What should be the default position? Should we assume all FAQ's change rules, or that only in situations where they are inconsolable with the rules? If we can find a straight forward change in assumptions that don't change the rules, but means our understanding is consistent with the FAQ then shouldn't we change our preconceived notions?

JakeSiren, no. You should read the FAQs and apply them as they come. Don’t assume anything, don’t try and join dots that don’t need joining. Tbh I’m not even sure what you’re asking any more. Just accept that FAQs from GW include rules changes as well as clarifications, and approach them as individual rulings.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
JakeSiren, no. You should read the FAQs and apply them as they come. Don’t assume anything, don’t try and join dots that don’t need joining. Tbh I’m not even sure what you’re asking any more. Just accept that FAQs from GW include rules changes as well as clarifications, and approach them as individual rulings.

Like when you agreed with BCB 2 days ago that "it stands to reason that you also ignore vertical movement when normally moving" despite the FAQ in question having nothing to do with normal movement?

Come on. It is entirely reasonable to look at a FAQ answer and ask "Why is it this way? What assumptions does this affect? How does it affect other areas of the game?" But for some reason you don't want these questions asked about this FAQ item.

What I'm asking is, when asking these questions about this particular FAQ item about Strategem timing, is there an answer other than "because it's not considered during the movement phase, even though it is still a part of the movement phase" - an answer entirely consistent within the rules and FAQ clarifications which only changes assumptions we have made about how the rules should play.

You go get em Jake! Wew!

JakeSiren wrote:
[quote=doctortom 755065 9935695 837797a5e63469ae3364b91d45fe22f9.jpeg

That was the result. Now, on to the why. What in the rules would prevent you from playing any during the movement phase stratagems at the end of the movement phase? Keeping in mind that none of the rules have changed, we have only one possibility, that the end of the movement phase is not considered during the movement phase. Otherwise if we considered at the end to be during the phase then we would meet the conditions for playing a "during the movement phase" stratagem.

They amend rules all the time using the FAQs and don't limit it only to errata - that's where your thinking falls apart on this. They did not want sequencing shenanigans occurring with units that are coming in from Reserves and other things that are being claimed to be done at the end of the phase. They meant for those to show up last, as "at the end of the movement phase" indicates, and if you have stratagems being cast on them after they arrive that means they did not arrive at the end. The stratagems say during the phase, but do not say that you are allowed to declare they go off at the end of the phase. That's all you can read into it.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

JakeSiren wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
JakeSiren, no. You should read the FAQs and apply them as they come. Don’t assume anything, don’t try and join dots that don’t need joining. Tbh I’m not even sure what you’re asking any more. Just accept that FAQs from GW include rules changes as well as clarifications, and approach them as individual rulings.

Like when you agreed with BCB 2 days ago that "it stands to reason that you also ignore vertical movement when normally moving" despite the FAQ in question having nothing to do with normal movement?

Come on. It is entirely reasonable to look at a FAQ answer and ask "Why is it this way? What assumptions does this affect? How does it affect other areas of the game?" But for some reason you don't want these questions asked about this FAQ item.

Yes, it's perfectly reasonable to ask "why is it this way?" You have to understand, however, that doing so is trying to divine their intention. Despite BCB's claims, RAI does not always = RAW. For what we are dealing with here we first need to look at the RAW. For most games that should be enough (unless there are some blatant problems with the RAW and there are obvious RAI indications that it shouldn't be played that way). Then, you can try to figure out the RAI. Given that the FAQ is changing the rules, it's a fair bet that the RAI is "they meant for it to work this way instead of how they originally had it", or "we missed some consequences of how it worked earlier, so we changed this to being it more in line with how we want the rule to work."

JakeSiren wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
JakeSiren, no. You should read the FAQs and apply them as they come. Don’t assume anything, don’t try and join dots that don’t need joining. Tbh I’m not even sure what you’re asking any more. Just accept that FAQs from GW include rules changes as well as clarifications, and approach them as individual rulings.

Like when you agreed with BCB 2 days ago that "it stands to reason that you also ignore vertical movement when normally moving" despite the FAQ in question having nothing to do with normal movement?

Come on. It is entirely reasonable to look at a FAQ answer and ask "Why is it this way? What assumptions does this affect? How does it affect other areas of the game?" But for some reason you don't want these questions asked about this FAQ item.

What I'm asking is, when asking these questions about this particular FAQ item about Strategem timing, is there an answer other than "because it's not considered during the movement phase, even though it is still a part of the movement phase" - an answer entirely consistent within the rules and FAQ clarifications which only changes assumptions we have made about how the rules should play.

Or you could just accept it as a specific limitation that in no way changes what Phase it is, just permissions at that moment in time. That’s how it’s written, and the “why” is to limit DS+Stratagem abusive combos.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
JakeSiren, no. You should read the FAQs and apply them as they come. Don’t assume anything, don’t try and join dots that don’t need joining. Tbh I’m not even sure what you’re asking any more. Just accept that FAQs from GW include rules changes as well as clarifications, and approach them as individual rulings.

Like when you agreed with BCB 2 days ago that "it stands to reason that you also ignore vertical movement when normally moving" despite the FAQ in question having nothing to do with normal movement?

Come on. It is entirely reasonable to look at a FAQ answer and ask "Why is it this way? What assumptions does this affect? How does it affect other areas of the game?" But for some reason you don't want these questions asked about this FAQ item.

What I'm asking is, when asking these questions about this particular FAQ item about Strategem timing, is there an answer other than "because it's not considered during the movement phase, even though it is still a part of the movement phase" - an answer entirely consistent within the rules and FAQ clarifications which only changes assumptions we have made about how the rules should play.

Or you could just accept it as a specific limitation that in no way changes what Phase it is, just permissions at that moment in time. That’s how it’s written, and the “why” is to limit DS+Stratagem abusive combos.

Where did I say that it "changes what Phase it is"? Please don't put words into my mouth.

What within the rules controls the permissions of what Stratagems can be played? What restrictions and permissions apply at that point in time?

You keep putting out the argument that items in the "FAQ" section change rules, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that is correct in *some* situations, but you haven't demonstrated that this is the case in this situation.

 doctortom wrote:

JakeSiren wrote:
That was the result. Now, on to the why. What in the rules would prevent you from playing any during the movement phase stratagems at the end of the movement phase? Keeping in mind that none of the rules have changed, we have only one possibility, that the end of the movement phase is not considered during the movement phase. Otherwise if we considered at the end to be during the phase then we would meet the conditions for playing a "during the movement phase" stratagem.

They amend rules all the time using the FAQs and don't limit it only to errata - that's where your thinking falls apart on this. They did not want sequencing shenanigans occurring with units that are coming in from Reserves and other things that are being claimed to be done at the end of the phase. They meant for those to show up last, as "at the end of the movement phase" indicates, and if you have stratagems being cast on them after they arrive that means they did not arrive at the end. The stratagems say during the phase, but do not say that you are allowed to declare they go off at the end of the phase. That's all you can read into it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

JakeSiren wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
JakeSiren, no. You should read the FAQs and apply them as they come. Don’t assume anything, don’t try and join dots that don’t need joining. Tbh I’m not even sure what you’re asking any more. Just accept that FAQs from GW include rules changes as well as clarifications, and approach them as individual rulings.

Like when you agreed with BCB 2 days ago that "it stands to reason that you also ignore vertical movement when normally moving" despite the FAQ in question having nothing to do with normal movement?

Come on. It is entirely reasonable to look at a FAQ answer and ask "Why is it this way? What assumptions does this affect? How does it affect other areas of the game?" But for some reason you don't want these questions asked about this FAQ item.

Yes, it's perfectly reasonable to ask "why is it this way?" You have to understand, however, that doing so is trying to divine their intention. Despite BCB's claims, RAI does not always = RAW. For what we are dealing with here we first need to look at the RAW. For most games that should be enough (unless there are some blatant problems with the RAW and there are obvious RAI indications that it shouldn't be played that way). Then, you can try to figure out the RAI. Given that the FAQ is changing the rules, it's a fair bet that the RAI is "they meant for it to work this way instead of how they originally had it", or "we missed some consequences of how it worked earlier, so we changed this to being it more in line with how we want the rule to work."

The FAQ's are divided into Errata and FAQ's. One is specifically for rules changes, the other is for rules clarifications. The rules clarifications helps us identify the rule writers intentions.

How did you "divine their intention" that this particular FAQ item is a change in rules when it is in the Frequently Asked Questions section?

Also, to apply the reasoning both you and Johnny have expressed, I take it you are both more then happy for me to apply "at the end of the movement phase" stratagems on a unit from reserves using sequencing since all "at the end of the movement phase" actions occur simultaneously? The FAQ only specifies that "during the movement phase" stratagems are not allowed.

Jake, even BCB is willing to admit that they make rules changes in the FAQ that aren't limited to the Errata section. You have to learn to accept that. The "rules clarifications" are often actual rules changes.


How did I divine their intention? They made changes to stop using stratagems that apply "during the movement phase" to being able to be used at the end of the phase on reinforcements. We've had a few threads about people wanting to buff reinforcements with stratagems the same phase they arrive, so it's a good bet that they are trying to stop the sequencing shenanigans of people effectively using "during the phase" stratagems after you have done stuff at the end of the phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JakeSiren wrote:

Also, to apply the reasoning both you and Johnny have expressed, I take it you are both more then happy for me to apply "at the end of the movement phase" stratagems on a unit from reserves using sequencing since all "at the end of the movement phase" actions occur simultaneously? The FAQ only specifies that "during the movement phase" stratagems are not allowed.

If the stratagem says that it's used at the end of the movement phase, then I have no problem with it and I don't see GW having a problem with it either - they would have been the ones writing the stratagem so that it says it is used at the end of the movement phase.

Jake, the FAQ section contains rules changes as well as Errata. You can surely see that if you read the FAQ documents? There’s only even called The Big FAQ that is largely changes. If you can’t agree that’s the case I’m not sure there’s any point discussing, as that’s but how it is.

And of course you can use a “play at the end of the Movement Phase” Stratagem at the end of that phase. Nothing against that and why would I disagree with that?

Use it once and move the game forward. Theres to much debate on the use it twice in one phase so on and so forth.

If matched play use it at the end of your turn, one time, and continue to play.

Alright. I accept that there are rules changes in the FAQ.

I would like to quantify one thing from this discussion if nothing else. What process / factors do you use to determine if a particular FAQ item is specifically a rules change?

You read what they've done in the FAQ and look at what there was previously. If it's different, it's a rules change. Honestly, that is how you tell.

JakeSiren wrote:
Alright. I accept that there are rules changes in the FAQ.

I would like to quantify one thing from this discussion if nothing else. What process / factors do you use to determine if a particular FAQ item is specifically a rules change?

Does it contradict the rules? If so it's Special Snowflake. Examples include the Wu-Tang-Klan denial and the prevention of Index Pask ordering himself.

doctortom wrote:You read what they've done in the FAQ and look at what there was previously. If it's different, it's a rules change. Honestly, that is how you tell.

JakeSiren wrote:Alright. I accept that there are rules changes in the FAQ.

I would like to quantify one thing from this discussion if nothing else. What process / factors do you use to determine if a particular FAQ item is specifically a rules change?

Yep, this.

 doctortom wrote:
You read what they've done in the FAQ and look at what there was previously. If it's different, it's a rules change. Honestly, that is how you tell.

So if we look at the Razorback FAQ that would be an example of a rules change?

Q: Is a Razorback firing a twin plasma gun destroyed if you roll a 1 to hit?
A: Yes.

I take it that it would be unreasonable to apply this ruling to any other model with a twin plasma gun? Am I understanding correctly?

JakeSiren wrote:

 doctortom wrote:
You read what they've done in the FAQ and look at what there was previously. If it's different, it's a rules change. Honestly, that is how you tell.

So if we look at the Razorback FAQ that would be an example of a rules change?

Q: Is a Razorback firing a twin plasma gun destroyed if you roll a 1 to hit?
A: Yes.

I take it that it would be unreasonable to apply this ruling to any other model with a twin plasma gun? Am I understanding correctly?

Correct, it only applies to the Razorback.

So if beginning, during and end of a phase is three distictive phases, does this mean I can potentially use command reroll 15 times in one turn?
0. at the beginning of turn
1. beginning of movement phase
2. during movement phase
3. end of movement phase
4. beginning of psychic phase
5. during psychic phase
6. end of psychic phase
7. beginning of charge phase
8. during charge phase
9. end of charge phase
10. beginning of fight phase
11. during fight phase
12. end of fight phase
13. morale phase
14. at the end of turn
That doesnt seem right...

 skchsan wrote:
So if beginning, during and end of a phase is three distictive phases, does this mean I can potentially use command reroll 15 times in one turn?
0. at the beginning of turn
1. beginning of movement phase
2. during movement phase
3. end of movement phase
4. beginning of psychic phase
5. during psychic phase
6. end of psychic phase
7. beginning of charge phase
8. during charge phase
9. end of charge phase
10. beginning of fight phase
11. during fight phase
12. end of fight phase
13. morale phase
14. at the end of turn
That doesnt seem right...

I would quite disagree that the beginning and end of a phase are not part of a phase.

Captyn_Bob wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
So if beginning, during and end of a phase is three distictive phases, does this mean I can potentially use command reroll 15 times in one turn?
0. at the beginning of turn
1. beginning of movement phase
2. during movement phase
3. end of movement phase
4. beginning of psychic phase
5. during psychic phase
6. end of psychic phase
7. beginning of charge phase
8. during charge phase
9. end of charge phase
10. beginning of fight phase
11. during fight phase
12. end of fight phase
13. morale phase
14. at the end of turn
That doesnt seem right...

I would quite disagree that the beginning and end of a phase are not part of a phase.

As in you'd disagree they are distinct phase of its own?

 skchsan wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
So if beginning, during and end of a phase is three distictive phases, does this mean I can potentially use command reroll 15 times in one turn?
0. at the beginning of turn
1. beginning of movement phase
2. during movement phase
3. end of movement phase
4. beginning of psychic phase
5. during psychic phase
6. end of psychic phase
7. beginning of charge phase
8. during charge phase
9. end of charge phase
10. beginning of fight phase
11. during fight phase
12. end of fight phase
13. morale phase
14. at the end of turn
That doesnt seem right...

I would quite disagree that the beginning and end of a phase are not part of a phase.

As in you'd disagree they are distinct phase of its own?

Yes.

 skchsan wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
So if beginning, during and end of a phase is three distictive phases, does this mean I can potentially use command reroll 15 times in one turn?
0. at the beginning of turn
1. beginning of movement phase
2. during movement phase
3. end of movement phase
4. beginning of psychic phase
5. during psychic phase
6. end of psychic phase
7. beginning of charge phase
8. during charge phase
9. end of charge phase
10. beginning of fight phase
11. during fight phase
12. end of fight phase
13. morale phase
14. at the end of turn
That doesnt seem right...

I would quite disagree that the beginning and end of a phase are not part of a phase.

As in you'd disagree they are distinct phase of its own?

Beginnings and endings still count as part of their phases, there's just some limitation on things at the beginnings and endings - things that have to be done at those times and things that can't. You don't treat the beginning of the movement phase and the end of the movement phase as separate from during the movement phase for purposes of determining how many times you can use a stratagem in something related to the movement phase.

 skchsan wrote:
So if beginning, during and end of a phase is three distictive phases, does this mean I can potentially use command reroll 15 times in one turn?
0. at the beginning of turn
1. beginning of movement phase
2. during movement phase
3. end of movement phase
4. beginning of psychic phase
5. during psychic phase
6. end of psychic phase
7. beginning of charge phase
8. during charge phase
9. end of charge phase
10. beginning of fight phase
11. during fight phase
12. end of fight phase
13. morale phase
14. at the end of turn
That doesnt seem right...

The rulebook specifies that there are 6 phases, so that's clearly not correct - it even numbers them 1-6.

Reasonably; any 'at the start of the phase' action(s) can be carried out before carrying out any 'ordinary' phase action.
An 'at the end of the phase' action, once carried out, prevents you then carrying out any 'ordinary' action from that phase, but does not prevent any other 'at the end of the phase' action from occurring.
(Ordinary actions being those things specifically listed in the rulebook that occur in a phase, plus any actions that are listed as 'during the phase')

Anything that happens 'before the start of the turn' would have to happen before anything that happens 'at the start of the movement phase'; likewise anything that happens 'at the end of the turn' would have to happen after anything that happens 'at the end of the morale phase' (if there is anything that does that).

What about stuff that happens "at the start of the turn"? Is that in the Movement Phase? Would re-rolling a Close Combat Attack during Acts of Faith prevent me from re-rolling an Advance distance role in the same turn?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
What about stuff that happens "at the start of the turn"? Is that in the Movement Phase? Would re-rolling a Close Combat Attack during Acts of Faith prevent me from re-rolling an Advance distance role in the same turn?

Start of the turn is pretty much the same as the start of the movement phase, except you have to use Start of the turn stuff before you you start of the movement phase stuff.

OP it looks like you forgot the shooting phase, but the list should look something like this:

1 Beginning of turn, beginning of Movement phase, during Movement phase, end of Movement phase.
2. Beginning of Psychic phase, during Psychic phase, end of Psychic phase.
3. Beginning of Shooting phase, during Shooting phase, end of Shooting phase.
4. Beginning of charge phase, during charge phase, end of charge phase.
5. beginning of fight phase, during fight phase, end of fight phase,
6. beginning of morale phase, during morale phase, end of morale phase, end of turn.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
What about stuff that happens "at the start of the turn"? Is that in the Movement Phase? Would re-rolling a Close Combat Attack during Acts of Faith prevent me from re-rolling an Advance distance role in the same turn?

Start of the turn is pretty much the same as the start of the movement phase, except you have to use Start of the turn stuff before you you start of the movement phase stuff.

OP it looks like you forgot the shooting phase, but the list should look something like this:

1 Beginning of turn, beginning of Movement phase, during Movement phase, end of Movement phase.
2. Beginning of Psychic phase, during Psychic phase, end of Psychic phase.
3. Beginning of Shooting phase, during Shooting phase, end of Shooting phase.
4. Beginning of charge phase, during charge phase, end of charge phase.
5. beginning of fight phase, during fight phase, end of fight phase,
6. beginning of morale phase, during morale phase, end of morale phase, end of turn.

Pretty much? So its a no then?

If you have to do one before the other, then they're not done on the same time, and then arguably "start of turn" isn't in the beginning of the movement phase.

Except if there is now also special stuff that happens in the beginning of the movement phase only it happens before all the stuff that usually happens in the beginning of the movement phase.

torblind wrote:
Pretty much? So its a no then?

If you have to do one before the other, then they're not done on the same time, and then arguably "start of turn" isn't in the beginning of the movement phase.

Except if there is now also special stuff that happens in the beginning of the movement phase only it happens before all the stuff that usually happens in the beginning of the movement phase.

There is no start of turn phase...

The start of the turn is not a separate thing, (Unless you have a rules citation that states otherwise) it just happens when you start your turn, and the first thing you do when you start your turn is the movement phase.

But of course, we have had it confirmed in the rules themselves that end of battle round is an example of a non phase specific time that stratagems can be used multiple times. And of course there is no end of battle round phase . So maybe we can use more sensible definitions, like if it isn't called a phase then it's not a phase. Rather than saying something is a phase, despite no guidance to do so.