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.

Who gets to decide which one of these auras is gained ? Me ? Opponent ? Dice roll ?

Use this Stratagem in your Command phase. Select one ADEPTUS ASTARTES DREADNOUGHT model from your army (excluding WULFEN and DEATH COMPANY models). Until the start of your next Command phase, that model gains either the Rites of Battle ability or the Tactical Precision ability, as shown below:

Rites of Battle (Aura): While a friendly <CHAPTER> CORE unit is within 6" of this model, each time a model in that unit makes an attack, re-roll a hit roll of 1.

Tactical Precision (Aura): While a friendly <CHAPTER> CORE unit is within 6" of this model, each time a model in that unit makes an attack, re-roll a wound roll of 1.

To save any RAW nonsense I'd assume the owner can choose. I can't see why anyone would actually bring this up in a game besides trying to do a "gotcha".

The person using a strat always makes any decisions in the strat - or in any rule they are using - unless stated.

I dont see the issue here at all.

Edit: reading comprehension fail, ignore me.

 Stux wrote:
The person using a strat always makes any decisions in the strat - or in any rule they are using - unless stated.

I dont see the issue here at all.

Absolutely not.

Strats *seem* more to be the owner of the unit affected by the strat that gets to choose.

Assault Launchers(to take a strat from the same book) has the verbiage: "That enemy unit can either brace or duck for cover."

There are certainly cases where you would want your enemy unit to do one over the other(rather have a Tau Battlesuit unit or some high-attack unit in defensible terrain duck for cover than brace, or a character with 1-4 Wounds left Brace to make killing them easier); but the owner has the choice.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 Stux wrote:
The person using a strat always makes any decisions in the strat - or in any rule they are using - unless stated.

I dont see the issue here at all.

Absolutely not.

Strats *seem* more to be the owner of the unit affected by the strat that gets to choose.

Assault Launchers(to take a strat from the same book) has the verbiage: "That enemy unit can either brace or duck for cover."

There are certainly cases where you would want your enemy unit to do one over the other(rather have a Tau Battlesuit unit or some high-attack unit in defensible terrain duck for cover than brace, or a character with 1-4 Wounds left Brace to make killing them easier); but the owner has the choice.

You missed the text in red, Kommissar Kel. The two of you agree that unless a Stratagem says otherwise, which Assault Launchers does, the decisions are up to the Stratagem user.

I hope to Draigo this version of WoTA gets passed along to Custodes. I'd slander the Emperor in front of a Commissar for a Wound re-roll aura buff bot.

 alextroy wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 Stux wrote:
The person using a strat always makes any decisions in the strat - or in any rule they are using - unless stated.

I dont see the issue here at all.

Absolutely not.

Strats *seem* more to be the owner of the unit affected by the strat that gets to choose.

Assault Launchers(to take a strat from the same book) has the verbiage: "That enemy unit can either brace or duck for cover."

There are certainly cases where you would want your enemy unit to do one over the other(rather have a Tau Battlesuit unit or some high-attack unit in defensible terrain duck for cover than brace, or a character with 1-4 Wounds left Brace to make killing them easier); but the owner has the choice.

You missed the text in red, Kommissar Kel. The two of you agree that unless a Stratagem says otherwise, which Assault Launchers does, the decisions are up to the Stratagem user.

It does not state who chooses. I missed nothing.

I miss your point. "That unit may..." means that unit's controller gets to choose. Otherwise the rule would instruct the Stratagem user to put effect A or B on the unit.

 alextroy wrote:
I miss your point. "That unit may..." means that unit's controller gets to choose. Otherwise the rule would instruct the Stratagem user to put effect A or B on the unit.

Its clear as mud who gets to choose. There is a necron strat which has the same wording.

WOTA doesnt say who gets to choose, there isnt even the slightest hint.

 p5freak wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I miss your point. "That unit may..." means that unit's controller gets to choose. Otherwise the rule would instruct the Stratagem user to put effect A or B on the unit.

Its clear as mud who gets to choose. There is a necron strat which has the same wording.

WOTA doesnt say who gets to choose, there isnt even the slightest hint.

Its extremely clear who chooses. Alex Alextoy has it. The default is the stratagem's controller makes decisions. If the stratagem says a unit itself may do something, then the unit's controller makes that decisuon.

 Stux wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I miss your point. "That unit may..." means that unit's controller gets to choose. Otherwise the rule would instruct the Stratagem user to put effect A or B on the unit.

Its clear as mud who gets to choose. There is a necron strat which has the same wording.

WOTA doesnt say who gets to choose, there isnt even the slightest hint.

Its extremely clear who chooses. Alex Alextoy has it. The default is the stratagem's controller makes decisions. If the stratagem says a unit itself may do something, then the unit's controller makes that decisuon.

It is almost like there is no default(you know, because that is stated exactly nowhere), and that the Strats that allow a choice just state that the affected unit In All Cases can either x or y; we are left with the assumption that the affected unit's controller is the one who gets to make the choice.

The choosing of affected unit, is always the provenance of the user of the strat; the choice of effect is up to the controller of the affected unit, unless otherwise stated.

To be ckear the only affected unit of thos strat is a dreadnaught which reciwves an aura. So if what you say the user decides. Not a rules lawyer in the other army.

It’s not remotely unclear that the unit-owning player who played the Strat gets to choose... unless you’re claiming it’s unclear just to start a thread to try and wrangle a RAW fight out of it. Nowt to see here.

Yeah jonny hell is correct its not remotely unclear the player using the strat gets to choose

 JohnnyHell wrote:
It’s not remotely unclear that the unit-owning player who played the Strat gets to choose... unless you’re claiming it’s unclear just to start a thread to try and wrangle a RAW fight out of it. Nowt to see here.

Exactly this. I still cannot understand how anyone can genuinely in good faith have any other take on this one.

Don't forget a large percentage of gamers seem to be somewhere on the asperger's spectrum, and many are quite (as perhaps a result of that) literal in their mindset. Some others don't speak english, some people don't get to actually play in person much, some people don't get to actually see the game's ongoing culture to inform their use of their native language to try to interpret a game with dozens of rules and a variety of bad writers.

In other words, one shouldn't immediately leap to imagine the other fellow is the complete bad faith jerk he appears to be -- sometimes, its something else.

Sometimes, I will even ask a question in here that looks seriously bad faith-ish, but what I am really trying to do is find the "look, look here" proof that I can carry to my own nearby circle of friends and end an argument one of the more bad faithy people started. Cause I don't know immediatly the "proof that would shut it down" but someone, I hope, in here, does. So I will say "but this and thus" when the argument is glibly answered, to try to draw that proof out of the community.

Based on OP’s prior posting history you get a reasonable gauge of intent, and in this case it’s just trying to be clever. And it isn’t, as this situation isn’t in any way unclear unless specifically trying to be obtuse. Whilst your post is commendable, I guarantee you that this thread started with a bad faith premise.

This is a RAW "question" much like the rolling of dice is a RAW "question".

Which is to say, the rules say to roll the dice but they never tell you to stop the rolling of the dice.

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
This is a RAW "question" much like the rolling of dice is a RAW "question".

Which is to say, the rules say to roll the dice but they never tell you to stop the rolling of the dice.

Or as BCB likes to put it, that they never tell you the dice need to have 6 faces.

Some aspects of the rules are just implicit and requite common sense. And yeah, maybe it isn't common but it is bleedin' obvious if you're not being deliberately obtuse.

The game is literally unplayable otherwise, so if you cant get on board with that then you really need a different hobby because this is, love it or hate it, how GW rules are written.

 Stux wrote:

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
This is a RAW "question" much like the rolling of dice is a RAW "question".

Which is to say, the rules say to roll the dice but they never tell you to stop the rolling of the dice.

Or as BCB likes to put it, that they never tell you the dice need to have 6 faces.

Some aspects of the rules are just implicit and requite common sense. And yeah, maybe it isn't common but it is bleedin' obvious if you're not being deliberately obtuse.

The game is literally unplayable otherwise, so if you cant get on board with that then you really need a different hobby because this is, love it or hate it, how GW rules are written.

Amen.

 Stux wrote:

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
This is a RAW "question" much like the rolling of dice is a RAW "question".

Which is to say, the rules say to roll the dice but they never tell you to stop the rolling of the dice.

Or as BCB likes to put it, that they never tell you the dice need to have 6 faces.

Some aspects of the rules are just implicit and requite common sense. And yeah, maybe it isn't common but it is bleedin' obvious if you're not being deliberately obtuse.

The game is literally unplayable otherwise, so if you cant get on board with that then you really need a different hobby because this is, love it or hate it, how GW rules are written.

To be a little bit of the devils advocate, the rules do indeed say that a die must have 6 faces. What they don't say is what needs to be on each of those faces! (We just assume 1,2,3,4,5,6)

But I get what you meant to say, and yes you're right on the mark there.