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.

Beast wrote:I understand your Billy Jack attitude towards the way we discuss things here on YMDC. You can speak out about it all you want, but you will have a hard time being taken seriously if you continue with your academia attitude towards this board and its practices. It comes across as very snobbish, arrogant and aloof. You may be an expert at 'rules' in academia, but the rest of us are not and don't want to be. We just want to understand and clarify how our hobby works. Applying academia-type rules disection is not what we do here. Trying to make us do that is the equivalent of jamming a square peg into a triangular hole... It just doesn't work- not to mention the fact that we see RAW as something very different than you (or academia). And you, the messenger of that effort, will continue to bear a lot of hostility. Or people will just start to ignore you...

Not being sarcastic so please don't take it that way. Just trying to enlighten you as to why a lot of people seem to be getting more and more hostile towards you.

OK, what an egotistical cry of "I want it my way!!!" that was. Beast, speak for yourself, but not for others. I enjoy Nurglitch's posts, especially in that he seeks to resolve a rules discrepancy to the point where it can no longer be mis-interpreted, which is a much more efficient and permanent method than the 'lets agree to disagree' or 'lets wait for FAQ' or 'well that's how we play it!' stuff you're used to.

Nurglitch, please keep posting and don't let those who are too intimidated by your lengthy posts to actually read them (and instead attack you like peasants trying to burn a witch for showing them how electricity works) bring you down. I for one find your outtake on classifying everything into RAI/RAW being stupid as interesting, because up until now I have to admit that I have been somewhat shackled by these defined methods of viewing the rules.

And you clearly missed the entire point and intention of that post Bombadidaloo.

Initially I, like many others, was very annoyed by Nurglitch's attitude and the way he classified the way we discuss things here as 'stupid' (that kind of statement will usually not endear yourself to people). But he is entitled to his opinion as much as anyone else. I was trying to let him know why so many people are being so harsh on him. I got past his attitude once I realized that he has a different idea of what RAW is. My post is not a whine for my way and I was most certainly not speaking for everyone (that truly would be arrogant). But if you read some of the other threads that Nurglitch has been posting in recently you will see that there were many, many people who were extremely annoyed with his attitude. I'm not annoyed with him, because I realized he just has a totally different idea of what RAW is than most other people. Your interpretation of my post shows how wrong (knee-jerk) people can be about the intentions of a post (as I was initially with his). If you actually read it and take it at face value instead of trying to assign some ulterior motive to my post you will see that I was just trying to give him some clarity to the anger he had engendered, not trying to speak for everyone else, nor am I trying to tell him to conform to any particualr way... Personally I don't think his method of academia-type rules dissection works vis-a-vis GW's rules. It is the square peg/triangular hole thing I mentioned IMHO. But if it helps him (or you) then fine... So why don't we all come down off the stacks of soap boxes we are all standing on, eh?

Beast, I do see after reviewing your posts throughout this thread that you've tried to be polite, but comments like calling Nurglitch's posting behavior as "very snobbish, arrogant, and aloof" because you disagree with it is something I can't stand, especially when he is trying to stay neutral and not flame you back. And you do sound like you're including many others on behalf of yourself with comments like "You may be an expert at 'rules' in academia, but the rest of us are not and don't want to be. We just want to understand and clarify how our hobby works." And that part the most made me decide to speak out as part of the "other side" in this little war of words.

Beast wrote:Personally I don't think his method of academia-type rules dissection works vis-a-vis GW's rules. It is the square peg/triangular hole thing I mentioned IMHO.

You're the one with the round hole. Just because you can't hold a square peg doesn't mean others can't. I know there are more "round holes" here that agree with you, but you have to realize this isn't recess at the playground; we're all adults, discussing the logistics of written language in the Games Workshop environment. I've become more and more sick of seeing your "gang" (namely Green Blow Fly) attack others on a personal level. So I guess I've chosen to defend others on a personal level. Whatever, I'd just much rather this be a friendly and sophisticated forum community than a backwater "we dun like yer kind around here" type I'm sadly used to seeing.

Wow, this is really heartwarming and all, but it completely fails to address the question: "Are gretchins orks?"

This is really the same argument as Fabius bile and the interpretation of Chaos space marines. As far as RAI goes it was meant only for the basic troop unit of the same name. But by RAW you can do it to anything because the whole codex is full of chaos space marines.

So by RAI Grots are Grots and are not effected by the mobrule, but by RAW with some fluff backing it up (which makes it less credible) Grots are Orks.

That leaves us with looking at both sides and seeing which is too powerful/broken/crap for the related cost.

RAI
30 Grots + 3 Runtherders have to lose 9 models before they must make a morale test on Ld7. If failed you may re-roll but lose D3 grots because of the squig.

RAW
You're Fearless until you have 10 models in the unit.

Conclusion:
The squig being there is evidence enough for me that Grots are NOT effected by the mob rule.

HI! here is the answer. if you look at the army list, or the entry for gretchin, note that they lack the words that every ork has, aka, Waaaagh, mob rule and furious assault. Also vehicles dont get these either. So because in their entry it doesnt say they have it, they dont.

JoeOrks wrote:HI! here is the answer. if you look at the army list, or the entry for gretchin, note that they lack the words that every ork has, aka, Waaaagh, mob rule and furious assault. Also vehicles dont get these either. So because in their entry it doesnt say they have it, they dont.

My understanding is that if it doesn't say you can't, then you can... am I thinking backwards? >.>

Mr. Bombadidaloo wrote:

JoeOrks wrote:HI! here is the answer. if you look at the army list, or the entry for gretchin, note that they lack the words that every ork has, aka, Waaaagh, mob rule and furious assault. Also vehicles dont get these either. So because in their entry it doesnt say they have it, they dont.

My understanding is that if it doesn't say you can't, then you can... am I thinking backwards? >.>

Yes, you are thinking backwards.

The rules don't say I can't declare myself the winner on turn 2 if I roll 3 6's at the same time. The rules might say I don't get a WAAAGH move for vehicles. They do say which units do get the WAAAGH rule in the Ork codex. The rules don't say I can't make a WAAGH role for Space Marines, because I don't have the option to start with.

The rules say what I can do, and might have "can't" restrictions from those base rules. You can normally charge after firing, so the Heavy weapons rule says that you can't charge after firing a heavy weapon as an exception to the general rule.

Right. stupid me.

Nurglitch, I vehemently disagree that hostility directed towards you is because people “can't leave the personal stuff at home.” People read and write in a colloquial manner. I think the hostility directed towards you is because you have a difficult time accepting that.

For example, if there’s a rule that creates a clearly absurd result, really breaks the game kind of thing, but in a colloquial sense could be reasonably susceptible to another meaning, the player community at large will adopt the other meaning, for the sake of the game. You, on the other hand, are a slave to the result of conceptual analysis, and would post up and down the forum about how you’re reading it correctly, and everyone else should too. That’s why you get hostility.

the book does label nobs and boys and all orks as "ork" read their entries and the page numbers you refered. "are Orks", "of all Orks", "the Orks who". Gretchin entry has this only for the herder.

also

the pages listed as examples fail to name the units we are actually talking about, nurglitch. 100 does not call gretchin either a"mob" or an "Ork". and page 34 does indeed let you know what to do with any information in the "brood" section of each tyranid - however, my point was this section DOES NOT EXIST for the tyrant or the tyrant guard. so why does this matter? it seems odd that the RAW is implying things, as you see it, whereas in all other cases it actually writes them.

I have never had the bonesword's catalyst hit the tyrant guard and only the tyrant if he is wielding it.

/shrug maybe I should post a thread on that, I hate to waste my potential to slay things.

why do you give me page numbers that have only my own points on them? or am I missing that too? those were the pages I was reading when I asked for page numbers. . . .

kirsanth wrote:the book does label nobs and boys and all orks as "ork" read their entries and the page numbers you refered. "are Orks", "of all Orks", "the Orks who". Gretchin entry has this only for the herder.

is this suitable reason for them to be declared 'not Orks'? Sounds like it to me.

Mr. Bombadidaloo wrote:Beast, I do see after reviewing your posts throughout this thread that you've tried to be polite, but comments like calling Nurglitch's posting behavior as "very snobbish, arrogant, and aloof" because you disagree with it is something I can't stand, especially when he is trying to stay neutral and not flame you back. And you do sound like you're including many others on behalf of yourself with comments like "You may be an expert at 'rules' in academia, but the rest of us are not and don't want to be. We just want to understand and clarify how our hobby works." And that part the most made me decide to speak out as part of the "other side" in this little war of words.

Fair enough, I should have said ..."but most of the rest of us..." As for him being snobbish, arrogant and aloof... well, since you went back and looked at all the previous posts in other threads he has been making, you will see that my characterization is not limited to just me... War of words... Yes indeed. Grrrr. Welcome to Dakka YMDC!

Mr. Bombadidaloo wrote:

Beast wrote:Personally I don't think his method of academia-type rules dissection works vis-a-vis GW's rules. It is the square peg/triangular hole thing I mentioned IMHO.

You're the one with the round hole. Just because you can't hold a square peg doesn't mean others can't. I know there are more "round holes" here that agree with you, but you have to realize this isn't recess at the playground; we're all adults, discussing the logistics of written language in the Games Workshop environment. I've become more and more sick of seeing your "gang" (namely Green Blow Fly) attack others on a personal level. So I guess I've chosen to defend others on a personal level. Whatever, I'd just much rather this be a friendly and sophisticated forum community than a backwater "we dun like yer kind around here" type I'm sadly used to seeing.

If you saw where he described what he considers RAW to be (in the Devilfish thread I think), then you will see that it is very different to what most of us here consider RAW to be... We (most of us) discuss things with this basic concept as our frame of reference. If you also don't see the distinction/problem inherent with two very different conceptual contexts in the same discussion, then you also have a square peg and the most of the rest of us are playing with triangular pegs/holes... That is my point... I fully realize this isn't recess (where did that come from?). If you have a problem with GreenBlowFly then address your problem to him. I don't always agree with him (or anyone else for that matter) on all issues so he isn't in my 'gang' (as if it is some sort of 'vast rightwing conspiracy'???). Friendly and sophisticated... Well, yes I agree with you in principle, but perhaps you should also look at the disclaimer/description of YMDC as you click to enter this forum and be prepared for the heat if you want to play in the kitchen...

As for the actual topic of this thread, it doesn't seem that anyone here has a definitive, air-tight case for or against grots being able to count as orks in mob rule checks. I hope someone has more insight, because I am at a loss. Although, as it stands,I think I would lean towards the less powerful interpretation that they can't lend their number to the check...

I too would go with the "less powerful" option of not counting them as orks, as it would prevent anyone in a tournament/serious game setting from accusing you of bending the rules to your advantage, which is an attack on character that we veterans to the hobby would rather do without ^^

ty for your friendly reply Beast (i'm not being sarcastic), I do realize I don't have as much background knowledge on others' posting behaviors as you do, and I should probably refrain from making such blunt remarks and actions in the future because my viewpoint is limited.

Anyway... *hug-tackles Beast* friends? ^^;;

(*hugs* @ Nurglitch too )

Friends? Of course. I don't know you personally (nor Nurglitch, GBF, yak, Meep357, etc) and probably have never been your opponent in a game. But just because we disagree or misinterpret a post here or there doesn't mean we can't be friendly or friends here the rest of the time. I certainly don't hold any kind of 'posting grudge' over this kind of stuff. That would really be pathetic...

Cheers!

Nurg:

The Gretchin mob is an Ork unit, so the Gretchin mob may substitute its Ld for the number of Orks (those models with the Mob Rule) in the unit.

Your use of a parenthetical after "Orks" is what caused my confusion. Using "which have the Mob Rule" instead would have cleared it up, since we were looking for "How do we know if it is classified as an Ork?" as opposed to "Who has the Mob Rule?"

Nurglitch wrote:Beast:

Regardless, I have an interest in my hobby, which just so happens to be our hobby. In particular I have an interest in how people conduct discussions about the rules because rules are my specialty,

I am sorry, but having read so many of your posts I would disagree with this sentence. Part of being able to discuss is to be able to do so in a many that your audience understands. You totally fail at this, and it seems to me that you are so intent on proving you are right (if ever nailed down to a particular opinion) that your writing can actually be indicipherable [spelling, cannot be bothered to dictionary.com it) to many people. That is a major failing of your long and arduous to read posts that sometimes actuallyseem to suck my willingness to live right out of my body. Often you are failing to communicate in the real world out side of skool

I have only read the first page so my points may already have been put in and been oposed, torn to shreds and been used to fetalize a barren ork rok.

All the same...

Orks and Gretchin are both of the same origin, they are separate subspicies in the same creation (yes orks and gretchin have been created, not evolved) they are both greenskins as the empire has named them based on the green fungi that is the part of their genetic makeup that makes them green.

The Mob rule refers to orks, not greenskins and as such the rule only counts actual ork models.

The gretchin mob is a unit in an ork army and thus can be called an ork mob but it is still made upp of a small number of ork runtherds and a large number of grechin "boyz".

To me only models that have the "Mob Rule" special rule benefit and contribute to this.
Thus a unit of 30 gretchin with 3 runtherds may substitute their normal Ld value for the number of orks on the unit if they wish, the number of orks being 3 meens they roll vs 3.

For those of you who ponder why the runtherd has the "Mob Rule"... it is actually briliant that its in there, this allowes the ork player to recieve a charge with their gretchin unit, naturally loose the close combat, choose to roll a Ld test vs Ld 1, 2 or 3 in place and run away leaving the charging unit open to fire and a clean ork countercharge.

Necro post deleted...thread very, very old!