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.

Dracos wrote:Except that your Nob ISNT replaced by a painboy. One of your nobs IS a painboy.

Which means he is no longer a Nob, he is a Painboy.

Even if he did stay a Nob (which he doesn't, just to get that out the way), he would be a "Nob and a Painboy", not a "Nob" so would be unable to take 'evy Armour anyway.

Gorkamorka wrote:...then you have a nonsenstical statement.

It's only a nonsensical statement if you assume that a Painboy is not a Nob. That was the point.

One of your nobs could be replaced with a painboy, but one of the nobs can't be a painboy, because a painboy is not a type of nob.

Except it has to be a type of Nob, otherwise it is impossible for the Nob to be a Painboy. And we know the Nob can be a Painboy, because the unit entry says that one Nob can be a Painboy.

insaniak wrote:

Gorkamorka wrote:...then you have a nonsenstical statement.

It's only a nonsensical statement if you assume that a Painboy is not a Nob. That was the point.

And if I upgrade my cake to a birthday cake with some candles, it's still a cake. Therefore nobs in boyz squads are normal boyz.

The entire point I'm trying to make is that the painboy language is broken given the way the rules are normally structured and what profiles define, and using self fulfilling examples like "cakes that are cakes are still cakes" is completely meaningless because there is no working analogous example because the language doesn't work.

Given that a painboy is defined in the rules as a separate entity from a nob with a completely independant profile, saying "A nob is a painboy" is exactly as nonsensical as saying "A cake is a pie".

If things are going to get all semantical....

In a unit of NOBZ, if one ork becomes a PAINBOY, and a painboy is not a nob - shouldn't that mean that the painboy shoudn't be in the unit becase he is no longer a nob? That explanation makes no sense. It makes much more sense to see the painboy as a "specialist" variety of nob (i.e. the chocolate cake - or the hobnob!!!!)

It's not broken at all. He's a Painboy, which is a specific upgrade to the Nob unit and so uses the Painboy profile... but he's also a Nob, because the bit that upgrades him says that he is a Nob who is a Painboy, and so he can still take Nob options.

That's how I see it, anyway. YMMV, obviously.

liam0404 wrote:
In a unit of NOBZ, if one ork becomes a PAINBOY, and a painboy is not a nob - shouldn't that mean that the painboy shoudn't be in the unit becase he is no longer a nob? That explanation makes no sense.

No, it doesn't. No unit may have members with different names? Where do the rules say that?
You're making up crazy examples that prove nothing.

liam0404 wrote: It makes much more sense to see the painboy as a "specialist" variety of nob (i.e. the chocolate cake - or the hobnob!!!!)

And they could have easily written the rules that way, by simply saying it was the case or by allowing a single nob to make the wargear swaps for a syringe/tools. But they wrote in a separate profile.

But you can't to to a place where it's shown that a painboy is a nob.

The evidence is in the Flash Gitz entry where every nob has 'eavy armour and lo' and behold the take it off him so he can be a painboy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Acutalluy, reading it again according to insaniack interpretation, one could take a PK on the painboy, after all it is a nob, the wargear replacement is not tied to purchadsing the upgrade. This means of course that he doesn't get the Doc tools so the whole squad won't recive FNP, but, hey PK Painboy!

How would giving the Painboy a PK nullify his dok's tools?

You'd have replaced his Choppa, one of the thing that's replaced with Docs tools.

But his dok's tools is an item of wargear. Maybe its the 'Urty Syringe' you're thinking of? (That's a weapon)

Nah mate, got thew codex in my hand now

I'm still confused as to how the PK would remove FNP from the painboy though?

For the sake of argument lets assume that the painboy IS a nob, and thet he can be upgraded etc. Why would giving him a PK remove his Dok's tools? It would remove his choppa for sure, but 100% not his wargear bestowing FNP.

If a Painboy is a Nob is he a Flash Git too?

If he is a Nob may I take Nob Upgrades on him in a Flash Git unit?

'MAY BE' and 'UPGRADE To' are different and not the same.

Here is evidence a Painboy is not an upgrade... A FLASH GIT has 'eavy armor by default. If a Painboy was upgraded from a Flash Git he would retain his 'eavy armor, but a Painboy in a Flash Git unit has a 6+ save. Why doesn't he have a 4+? because he is not an upgrade... he 'may be' a painboy which means he simply is a painboy not an upgraded Flash Git. I am not sure why Nobz would somehow act as an upgrade when Flash Gitz do not.

Painboys are a unique ork models with unique stats that may be taken in place of a flash git or a nob, they are not upgrades from nobs regardless how similar they appear.

A painboy cannot take a PK because he has nothing to replace it with, he already traded in his choppa/ slugga. You can't swap the PK for the choppa then upgrade him to a painboy, it doesn't work that way, that's like upgrading your space marine captain to have a relic blade and then upgrading him to be a terminator.

I think that the whole heavy armor, no heavy armor deal is entirely subjective. The entry says one nob may be a painboy, which implies he is also a nob, but he has a separate entry and profile, which implies he is not a nob.

Anyways, I would let my opponents put heavy armor on the painboy, because it's completely reasonable, and in the long run, it's just a 4+ save and a five point upgrade, they're paying for it fair and square to.

Here's a question whose analogue may help this conversation: is the mekboy in a burna unit still a burnaboy? Is the burnaboy a type of mekboy?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, and not to argue purely from fluff (but, hey, it's there), aren't the painboys a type of oddboy, which is distinct from the nob class?

For reference:

Nobz: "One Nob may be a Painboy"
Burnaz: "Up to three Burna Boyz may be upgraded to: Meks"
Tankbustaz: "One Tankbusta may be upgraded to a Nob"
Lootas: "Up to three lootas may be upgraded to: Meks"
Kommandos: "One Kommando may be upgraded to Nob"
Ork Boyz: "One Boy may be upgraded to Nob"
Gretchen: "For every ten gretchen you must take one: runtherd"
Stormboyz: "One Stormboy may be upgraded to Nob"
Warbikers: "One Warbiker can be upgraded to a Nob"
Flash Gitz: "One Flash Git may be a painboy"
Big Gunz: "The unit may include a Runtherd."

"may be" =/= "Upgrade to"

Flash Gits Painboy does not have 'eavy armor even though Flash Gitz defaulty have it. If it was an 'upgrade' the flash Git painboy would have a 4+ armor save on the profile. It doesn't... Which means it isn't an upgrade for Flash Gitz, it is a 'MAY BE' as he just pops into existence as a painboy with painboy stats and gear.

nkelsch wrote:If a Painboy is a Nob is he a Flash Git too?

A Painboy in a Nobs mob is a Nob. A Painboy in a Flash Gitz mob is a Flash Git.

If he is a Nob may I take Nob Upgrades on him in a Flash Git unit?

The Flash Gitz entry makes no mention of any member of the unit being a Nob, or of them being able to take Nob upgrades.

'MAY BE' and 'UPGRADE To' are different and not the same.

That's been the point all along, yes.

Here is evidence a Painboy is not an upgrade... A FLASH GIT has 'eavy armor by default. If a Painboy was upgraded from a Flash Git he would retain his 'eavy armor, but a Painboy in a Flash Git unit has a 6+ save. Why doesn't he have a 4+?

... Because the Flash Gits entry says he trades in the Eavy Armour...

he 'may be' a painboy which means he simply is a painboy not an upgraded Flash Git.

That's backwards. The fact the he 'can be' a Painboy, rather than is upgraded to or replaced by a Painboy is exactly what makes him count as both, because there is nothing that removes his original status.

thunderingjove wrote:Here's a question whose analogue may help this conversation: is the mekboy in a burna unit still a burnaboy? Is the burnaboy a type of mekboy?

The Burna unit has the Mek as an upgrade, rather than simply allowing one of the Boyz to 'be' a Mek, as is the case for Flash Gitz and Nobz.

And it doesn't actually make any discernable difference anyway, since Boyz in a Burna mob don't have any options.

liam0404 wrote:I'm still confused as to how the PK would remove FNP from the painboy though?

For the sake of argument lets assume that the painboy IS a nob, and thet he can be upgraded etc. Why would giving him a PK remove his Dok's tools? It would remove his choppa for sure, but 100% not his wargear bestowing FNP.

Painboyz FNP come from Doc tools which one replaces a slugga and choppa to have.

When you make a nob a Pain boy he replaces his Slugga and Choppa for Doc's tools and a 'urty Syringe; if you have neither Slugga nor choppa(replacing either one for a different weapon) before you make the nob a painboy, then you no longer have both Slugga and choppa to replace with the Docs tools and 'urty syringe.

Also note that tools and syringe do not tell you that each is replaced 1-for-1 for either weapons so you must have both to replace for both(it is all or nothing).

Flash gitz becoming Painboyz is far different then making nobz painboyz; Flash gitz Painpoyz specify that the 'eavy Armor is lost(along with every other item that makes Flashgitz more than mere nobz).

Also, I am glad Flashgitz were brought up already; they also reiterate "upgrade timing" in their FAQ entry(specifically buying badruk/Painboy before upgrading their Snazzguns so you do not waste points on snazzgun upgrades that do not apply to a model).

Bottom line yes he can.

Well this thread is interesting. And I for one always thought it was a nice idea to have a good armour save on a Painboy instead of a ragged 6+. And I did run this by a friend in the first instance of trying orks, to which he said no. I ran with it up to now and this thread has got me thinking again. This time I had more than one insight into the issue from some good friends. Both said no at first, but one changed his mind (only through sportsmanship it ahs to be said). The other has sided with Gwar! in this instance; "A Painboy is not a Nob". Part of that reasoning he derived from the fact there are 2 statlines instead of one and the wargear is not listed under the Painboy's entry.

I'd like to point out something though. From some reading I have made a rather odd conclusion. The stats are the same to the exact digit. So this implys that when you make a Nob a Painboy, he has not had any upgrades prior to this. Then there is the wargear change. Yes at no point does it suggest said Nob loses his other wargear when changing from Nob to Painboy, but I thought it was interesting how it saud "Slugga and Choppa". Again this implies you have not upgrade the Nob before making him a Painboy. I mean while we argue whether a Painboy keeps the armour, you can equally ask if he keeps the bosspole, Waaagh! banner or ammo runt you give him.

I think overall it is assuming you take a bog standard Nob with no wargear and make him the Painboy. It doesn't fully take into account all his wargear if he was given any and makes no ammendments as such.

The rules are somewhat unclear, but if you follow the unit entry there is nothing to suggest you can't buy the nob equipment before upgrading him to a painboy - so long as you still have the required slugga and choppa to swap for the painboy's gear.

You're right though, I don't see anything stopping you from buying other equipment from the list such as the bosspole or waaaagh banner.

Juvieus Kaine wrote:I'd like to point out something though. From some reading I have made a rather odd conclusion. The stats are the same to the exact digit. So this implys that when you make a Nob a Painboy, he has not had any upgrades prior to this.

Wargear generally has no effect on the basic statline. Specifically, a model with a slugga and choppa does not have the additional attack shown in their profile. You add it in when it is appropriate.

Irdiumstern wrote:Just to chime in, there is a clear precedence for timing in the Ork Faq. There is no clear precedence for units losing wargear unless the entry specifically states it does.

This "timing" is not applicable. It does not deal with a model being upgraded to a new profile IN ANY WAY. It states that if a model takes an option replacing wargear A and the unit containing that model replaces wargear A for another option, the model is unaffected.

At no time did a unit keep something it was entitled to by virtue of it's old profile.

Homer

Most precedents state that "models may replace their wargear" [for this upgrade].

As much finnagling as there has been in this thread, I think the intentions are clear - a Painboy has a seperate entry in the Codex (towards the front), and is a completely seperate thing - a seperate thing that cannot upgrade its wargear.

Similar to how Snikrot is not an IC, yet is a special character in the squad of Kommandoz. Snikrot cannot take Nob gear. If you take a Nob with a Bosspole, you cannot "upgrade him" into Snikrot with a Bosspole.

Of course this is RAI as the Painboy's trip-up is the fact that he is listed with the Nobz in the army list. Unfortunately, it *is* a seperate entry, just like Snikrot is seperate from the Kommandoz. It doesn't matter if the statline is the same: the Painboy is a different model. Most people would play it this way.

Magnalon wrote: Most people would play it this way.

Source?

Every game I've ever played in, at every gaming store in the area.

Logic would state that of all the examples listed above in that giant "=/=" chart, Painboyz wouldn't be a special case. Why not anything else?

I think this is the best argument yet:

nkelsch wrote:Is a Painboy also a Flash Git is he is also a Nob?

Flash gitz have 'may be a painboy' as well. And his statline says 6+ save even though Gitz come with default 4+. And Since Flash Gitz do not have access to Nob armory, there is now way to get him 'eavy armor'.

I don't think a Painboy is a NOB or Flash git anymore than a Slaver is a grot.

I think trying to give a Painboy wargear is reaching. It gives the entire squad feel no pain, cannot be allocated to, and has an 'Urty Syringe. You're not really hurting here, not upgrading it.

I like how you cherry picked that statement, when it has already been proven to be false. The entry for Gitz specifies that the 'eavy armor is replaced, it doesn't just disappear automatically.

Lets flip this around. If the painboy was its own separate model not related to the nobs, why would it have to specify in the entry that the Nob who you are making into a painboy replaces some of his gear? Wouldn't that just be implicit?

The fact is that the entry tells you that you can make one of the nobs a painboy by paying X number of points and changing specifically stated gear for gear a painboy uses. At no part does it mention that the Nob who is being upgraded loses all other equipment or that he can't have purchased some equipment already.

Stating that a Painboy can't take wargear is reaching. See what I did there?

edit: And just FYI, when you are saying that MOST people do something you need a source for that. OTOH, you can confidently say "Most people I know ..."

I just don't see, RAI, how GW would make a Gitz Painboy and a Nob Painboy act differently, and not allow the Gitz Painboy to take Wargear, while allowing a Nob Painboy to do so.

I should have stated that RAW, I do agree that it is a loophole due to the improper wording.

Edit: IMO, saying "most people [I] know play this way", is like saying "in my opinion". It's implied, as there is no feasible way to survey the entire 40K demographic. Although as you can see right here, I do say "IMO" out of courtesy for people who get offended by it. Which I still don't really understand :p

In short, the crux of my argument is that if we took a poll right here, most people would not agree with the loophole.

Challenge accepted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm interested to see how the Dakka community would play it.