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.

 SickSix wrote:

SickSix wrote:I don't see this "no successor special characters" thing getting enforced outside an actual GW store.

Because its so insanely stupid.

Godless-Mimicry wrote:How is it stupid? The Chapters are being treated as separate armies. It is no different to how SW, BA, and DA can't mix SCs.

Godless-Mimicry wrote:

Spoiler:

spamthulhu wrote:

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
How is it stupid? The Chapters are being treated as separate armies. It is no different to how SW, BA, and DA can't mix SCs.

Because I can paint my army any way I want sit down with all the proper figures and just TELL you I am playing ultra marines when I am actually playing the jelly bean princess successor chapter.

As far as using sc's from different books, you could never do that before. But there are no restrictions in the Blood angels, space wolves, dark angels books that disallow you to use their special characters in successors. This would be an unprecedented change in the Space marine army books. Never have they made any effort to restrict SC's to their primary chapter ever.

What has the colour of your models got to do with anything? You have saying this to several posters on this thread, but it really is irrelevant. The Chapter Tactics rule has nothing to do with the colours of your models.

As for the SC change, just because it is unprecedented doesn't mean it is stupid automatically. They are treating the Chapters the same way they treat separate armies, and the mechanic for how separate armies are treated is not unprecedented, the only thing unprecendented here is how they have been given to us, i.e. all in one book.

 SickSix wrote:

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
How is it stupid? The Chapters are being treated as separate armies. It is no different to how SW, BA, and DA can't mix SCs.

Oh, I am sorry I must have missed the part in my DA codex that says you can't field Asmodai or Belial in a Angels of Absolution, or Guardians of the Covenant army. Could you point that out to me?

Sorry what? Your argument is that you can take two DA characters, two characters that are in the same chapter, in a DA army, which represents one chapter. How is that in any way contradictory to my post? I am saying Blood Angels can't take Space Wolves SCs for instance, or Dark Angels can't take Blood Angels SCs, because they are not the same chapter. This is no different to what is being done with the Chapters in the new Codex: Space Marines.

You apparently failed actually reading my posts. What part of successor did you not get? You have never been able to mix SC of different codex. You were also never restricted from using BA, SW, UM, or DA characters in a SUCCESSOR chapter using the rules from whatever parent chapter codex.

That is what 40k radio is now saying. That you CANNOT use parent chapter SC in SUCCESSOR chapters, EVEN IF you are using the parent chapters Chapter Traits. How is that not insanely stupid?

Sorry I did indeed misread your initial post.

But going on from there, there is no practical way for that to take place. You just say you are using the actually Chapter, plain and simple. If the whole successor chapter thing is accurate (and I wouldn't bet on it too much since it contradicts something else 40k radio said previously), it is just another case of GW writing in something without thinking about the logical outcome of that scenario. In the end, having your Marines red doesn't make them not Ultramarines as far as the game is concerned. You have written an Ultramarines list and selected the Ultramarines tactics, so short of the book actually saying you need to have blue models (which I reckon is highly unlikely) then there shouldn't be a problem; the models have never truly dictated much in this game.

I will give it to you though, in the highly unlikely event that the book came out and it did in fact say your models need to be blue to be Ultramarines, then that would be insanely stupid.

SickSix wrote:You apparently failed actually reading my posts. What part of successor did you not get? You have never been able to mix SC of different codex. You were also never restricted from using BA, SW, UM, or DA characters in a SUCCESSOR chapter using the rules from whatever parent chapter codex.

That is what 40k radio is now saying. That you CANNOT use parent chapter SC in SUCCESSOR chapters, EVEN IF you are using the parent chapters Chapter Traits. How is that not insanely stupid?

What 40k Radio said was this...
Q: Can child chapters take the SCs of their parent chapters?
A: No (those are unique to their chapter)

I think this is more about taking Black Templar/Crimson Fist characters with Imperial Fists than it is about taking Calgar along with your Doom Eagles. Do you think there's really going to be a rule saying 'This special character can only be unlocked by your strict and unvarying adherence to the following paint scheme and background story...'?

I don't see Games Workshop possibly saying "You has to be Ultramarines to take these characters!"

That just seems unlikely for them, given the history of how they've done everything else in the past.

Limiting SCs to armies using that chapter trait makes sense. Saying people "have to play "X" specific chapter to use "X" character would be a break from everything they've ever done, ever.

Sweet crap, if the rules for imperial fists are as rumored, it would be broken.

Some have said the tank hunters is for their heavy support only. Even so imagine the sickness of 3x devastator squads, all with missile launchers. str 8 flakk, str 9 against tanks? yes please. If its army wide, its going to be the most broken thing ever. Terminators with str 9 cyclones, or even str 7 assault cannons against light vehicles? Str 10 lascannons on land raiders, effectively making them 2 man broadside teams minus the ap 1 from 5th?

Im not even trying hard to find something broken, im sure there are worse examples I could give, maybe the centurions. But imagine just using 3 devastator squads with missile launchers, and all the versatility they would then bring. About the only thing that's not a huge improvement over is tyranid flying creatures. In all other aspects their point value just skyrocketed (pun intended!)

 whigwam wrote:

SickSix wrote:You apparently failed actually reading my posts. What part of successor did you not get? You have never been able to mix SC of different codex. You were also never restricted from using BA, SW, UM, or DA characters in a SUCCESSOR chapter using the rules from whatever parent chapter codex.

That is what 40k radio is now saying. That you CANNOT use parent chapter SC in SUCCESSOR chapters, EVEN IF you are using the parent chapters Chapter Traits. How is that not insanely stupid?

What 40k Radio said was this...
Q: Can child chapters take the SCs of their parent chapters?
A: No (those are unique to their chapter)

I think this is more about taking Black Templar/Crimson Fist characters with Imperial Fists than it is about taking Calgar along with your Doom Eagles. Do you think there's really going to be a rule saying 'This special character can only be unlocked by your strict and unvarying adherence to the following paint scheme and background story...'?

I hope you are correct, I hope 40k Radio just misinterpreted the question, BUT this is GW we are talking about. Maybe they aren't selling enough Ultramarines Blue paint...

There has been, like, 5 pages of misunderstanding about this. I'd rather get back to reading Chaos players gripe than keeping hearing people claim that you couldn't use Vulkan if your Salamanders were painted orange or Tigurius if your Ultramarines were painted grey.

Firstly, of course you can. Don't be obtuse.

Secondly, how do you suspect this would be enforced? I am currently painting an Ultramarine army, but I am not using the official GW paint scheme. If my blue's aren't exactly matching the Codex, would you bar me from using Cato Sicarius?

Yellow, black, and white can all be very challenging colors to paint. Should a poorly painted Black Templars army be precluded from using Helbrecht? I imagine you would say "Sorry mate, those lads are more grey than black, I think. Nice try, though"?

OF COURSE NOT. GW will not make such a rule and frankly, I'm disappointed in the critical thinking ability of anybody who thinks they would. It's embarrassing.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
How is it stupid? The Chapters are being treated as separate armies. It is no different to how SW, BA, and DA can't mix SCs.

I think there's a massive difference.

I'm find it ok that Salamanders can't take Tigurius for example (2 different Chapter-LINES).
However I would find it idiotic for say Salamanders-successor-chapter (Black Dragons?) to not be able to take Vulkan.

It's the same as saying that you can't take a "counts-as Mephiston" for the Fleshtearers. I see DA, SW, and BA as "lines" of chapters, with their respective codices focusing on the founding chapters (duh).

But lets take a look at other armies: Imperial Guard or Tau or Eldar.
Do we really have to take the very special snowflake Regiment/Cadre/Craftworld, and paint the modles in the very specific colors just to take a special character?

This would be nonsense.

Instead of giving players a "set" with which to perhaps build semi-unique characters and chapters of their own, they take away even more customization and leave us with "wargear"... because a Captain with a Plasma Pistol is "special".

P.S.: Yes I registered just so I could vent my anger and frustration

This is starting to become painful, lets see if we can break it down. Choosing ultramarines as your chapter tactic means you can have Sicarius, Calgar, Tigurius, Cassius, Chronus and/or Telion in your primary FOC. You can paint your models neon pink, as long as the chapter tactics and the appropriately matching special characters are a match. CT+SC have to equal CT+SC. They don't need colors to match. It means you can't make a successor chapter that has Vulkan "count-as" an Ultramarine captain without using an allied group, that's all. GW cannot limit your paint scheme. If you want Tigurius and Vulkan, you pick Ultramarines as your primary, and Salamanders as your single ally. That's pretty much it in a nutshell.


Also, when I said it makes my head hurt, it's not directed at anyone: it's the state of rumors that are partials and missing a key word in just the right location. But I'm willing to put money down, how I just explained it is what it'll be in the book: CT+SC=CT+SC. No matter the color. It's the names and tactics that decide.

Orock wrote:
Sweet crap, if the rules for imperial fists are as rumored, it would be broken.

Some have said the tank hunters is for their heavy support only. Even so imagine the sickness of 3x devastator squads, all with missile launchers. str 8 flakk, str 9 against tanks? yes please. If its army wide, its going to be the most broken thing ever. Terminators with str 9 cyclones, or even str 7 assault cannons against light vehicles? Str 10 lascannons on land raiders, effectively making them 2 man broadside teams minus the ap 1 from 5th?

Im not even trying hard to find something broken, im sure there are worse examples I could give, maybe the centurions. But imagine just using 3 devastator squads with missile launchers, and all the versatility they would then bring. About the only thing that's not a huge improvement over is tyranid flying creatures. In all other aspects their point value just skyrocketed (pun intended!)

That was what Tank Hunters did in 5th ed. Now, it gives a re-roll on armor penetration.

 whigwam wrote:

SickSix wrote:You apparently failed actually reading my posts. What part of successor did you not get? You have never been able to mix SC of different codex. You were also never restricted from using BA, SW, UM, or DA characters in a SUCCESSOR chapter using the rules from whatever parent chapter codex.

That is what 40k radio is now saying. That you CANNOT use parent chapter SC in SUCCESSOR chapters, EVEN IF you are using the parent chapters Chapter Traits. How is that not insanely stupid?

What 40k Radio said was this...
Q: Can child chapters take the SCs of their parent chapters?
A: No (those are unique to their chapter)

I think this is more about taking Black Templar/Crimson Fist characters with Imperial Fists than it is about taking Calgar along with your Doom Eagles. Do you think there's really going to be a rule saying 'This special character can only be unlocked by your strict and unvarying adherence to the following paint scheme and background story...'?

BT are a Child Chapter of IF
Clearly BT cannot take Lysander

CF are a child chapter of IF
I think this is to address that Lysander and Pedro cannot be in the same army without allies.

I do not believe that Doom Eagles will be prevented from taking Calgar because there is no way to say that your Doom Eagles aren't ultramarines. If you are playing your homebrew successor chapter, it has no rules. You have to use the rules for some chapter that actually has rules like Ultramarines and thus you can take all the options Ultramarines have.

 MandalorynOranj wrote:

Orock wrote:
Sweet crap, if the rules for imperial fists are as rumored, it would be broken.

Some have said the tank hunters is for their heavy support only. Even so imagine the sickness of 3x devastator squads, all with missile launchers. str 8 flakk, str 9 against tanks? yes please. If its army wide, its going to be the most broken thing ever. Terminators with str 9 cyclones, or even str 7 assault cannons against light vehicles? Str 10 lascannons on land raiders, effectively making them 2 man broadside teams minus the ap 1 from 5th?

Im not even trying hard to find something broken, im sure there are worse examples I could give, maybe the centurions. But imagine just using 3 devastator squads with missile launchers, and all the versatility they would then bring. About the only thing that's not a huge improvement over is tyranid flying creatures. In all other aspects their point value just skyrocketed (pun intended!)

That was what Tank Hunters did in 5th ed. Now, it gives a re-roll on armor penetration.

Yeah, there's no way they give Tank Hunters to Devs with 5th rules. S9 MLs all over the place would have ended everything on the board that wasn't AV14 reaaaaaaaaaaaal darn quick.

Still, rerolls are pretty sick, and frankly I like that more. Sure, S9 is nice against AV12, but my luck is so bad I'm liable to roll 1-3s all the time, so getting that reroll for lower AVs is great.

CHOO CHOO, all aboard the missile train!

It could be the folk are underestimating how 'Special' the special characters are meant to be

Lysander (for example is unique), a one of a kind, special. There is only one of him

so you shouldn't be able to put a lookie-likey into a homebrew chapter

instead customise a generic HQ with war-gear, write a story for them and always use that set up

it may not be as good as some of the named special characters, but it will be better than others)

(your opinions may vary)

steelshark83 wrote:

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
How is it stupid? The Chapters are being treated as separate armies. It is no different to how SW, BA, and DA can't mix SCs.

I think there's a massive difference.

I'm find it ok that Salamanders can't take Tigurius for example (2 different Chapter-LINES).
However I would find it idiotic for say Salamanders-successor-chapter (Black Dragons?) to not be able to take Vulkan.

It's the same as saying that you can't take a "counts-as Mephiston" for the Fleshtearers. I see DA, SW, and BA as "lines" of chapters, with their respective codices focusing on the founding chapters (duh).

But lets take a look at other armies: Imperial Guard or Tau or Eldar.
Do we really have to take the very special snowflake Regiment/Cadre/Craftworld, and paint the modles in the very specific colors just to take a special character?

This would be nonsense.

Instead of giving players a "set" with which to perhaps build semi-unique characters and chapters of their own, they take away even more customization and leave us with "wargear"... because a Captain with a Plasma Pistol is "special".

P.S.: Yes I registered just so I could vent my anger and frustration

As we have since established (right at the top of this page), I had initially misunderstood the poster's message. You are a little behind in the conversation

Perhaps I am mistaken, but based on that Q&A it sounds like Salamanders/Vulkan just got a downgrade from last codex.

Do we know yet if pre-orders will go up this weekend or the next weekend?

If you are playing your homebrew successor chapter, it has no rules. You have to use the rules for some chapter that actually has rules like Ultramarines and thus you can take all the options Ultramarines have.

This is what I was getting at. I play Red Hunters because I like the backstory and color scheme. That being said, Red Hunters don't have any official rules, they are literally just story and color. So I decided to run Salamanders rules and units, just with the Red Hunters color scheme and model design.

 TBD wrote:
Perhaps I am mistaken, but based on that Q&A it sounds like Salamanders/Vulkan just got a downgrade from last codex.

Do we know yet if pre-orders will go up this weekend or the next weekend?

Next weekend.

As for Sallies, with Vulkan in the army you have traded MC Thunder Hammers for one MC weapon per character. The Chapter themselves TL Flamers which you previously needed Vulkan for, and Vulkan still TLs Meltas. On top however they re-roll saves against Flamers. Seems to me they got better.

 Aerethan wrote:

If you are playing your homebrew successor chapter, it has no rules. You have to use the rules for some chapter that actually has rules like Ultramarines and thus you can take all the options Ultramarines have.

This is what I was getting at. I play Red Hunters because I like the backstory and color scheme. That being said, Red Hunters don't have any official rules, they are literally just story and color. So I decided to run Salamanders rules and units, just with the Red Hunters color scheme and model design.

And this should be totally, 100% ok if I'm interpreting correctly. You pick Sallies as your CT, you get access to Vulkan. You don't get access to Tigurius without using your ally slot.

I apologize for getting carried away with an interpretation that is most likely wrong.

It would be insanely stupid, but unenforceable if it was that way.

So most likely the 'NO' was in regards to BT and CF being 'child' chapters to IF, seing as how they all have their own SC.

Let's move on.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
It could be the folk are underestimating how 'Special' the special characters are meant to be

Lysander (for example is unique), a one of a kind, special. There is only one of him

so you shouldn't be able to put a lookie-likey into a homebrew chapter

instead customise a generic HQ with war-gear, write a story for them and always use that set up

it may not be as good as some of the named special characters, but it will be better than others)

(your opinions may vary)

I don't think that there's a misunderstanding at all. Everyone understands that, according to the fluff, special characters are unique.

However, on the gaming table, they are nothing more than models representing collections of statistics and special rules. The colors painted onto the model are irrelevant in that context. So are their names, the chapter iconography on the decals, and so on. What's important is that it's clear to opponents which codex is being used and which options from that codex are being represented by which models.

"My chapter is the Emperor's Warhounds of War. Their chapter colors are orange and pink and the sergeants wear giant Spartan crests on their helmets. But I'm using Ultramarines rules, and that boss-looking dude chewing an orc skull while ripping apart a genestealer is Ezekiel "Howling Fury" McWargod the God of Wars, Battles, and most Barroom Brawls. He counts as Marneus Calgar." For a lot of people, myself included, that sort of thing is no big deal. It's a legitimate way to play.

Even if the paint thing is actually in the Codex, it won't be enforced.

In the 2004 Codex (the original one with Traits) named Chapters were required to stick to pre-set Trait combinations given in the codex while homebrew Chapters were allowed to mix and match. And nobody bat an eye when a first founding Chapter player used non-standard Traits.

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

steelshark83 wrote:

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
How is it stupid? The Chapters are being treated as separate armies. It is no different to how SW, BA, and DA can't mix SCs.

I think there's a massive difference.

I'm find it ok that Salamanders can't take Tigurius for example (2 different Chapter-LINES).
However I would find it idiotic for say Salamanders-successor-chapter (Black Dragons?) to not be able to take Vulkan.

It's the same as saying that you can't take a "counts-as Mephiston" for the Fleshtearers. I see DA, SW, and BA as "lines" of chapters, with their respective codices focusing on the founding chapters (duh).

But lets take a look at other armies: Imperial Guard or Tau or Eldar.
Do we really have to take the very special snowflake Regiment/Cadre/Craftworld, and paint the modles in the very specific colors just to take a special character?

This would be nonsense.

Instead of giving players a "set" with which to perhaps build semi-unique characters and chapters of their own, they take away even more customization and leave us with "wargear"... because a Captain with a Plasma Pistol is "special".

P.S.: Yes I registered just so I could vent my anger and frustration

As we have since established (right at the top of this page), I had initially misunderstood the poster's message. You are a little behind in the conversation

^^ I actually read most of this thread (over many a day) up until the last posts. I just wanted to give this particular dead horse another kick since I think it deserves it
I'm still a bit disappointed we don't get some kind of "lego"-system to customize our characters (Think 4th ed. C:SM).
Special characters could still have stayed special. But a few select goodies to play around with and give an army an extra bit of flavor or a twist would be great. What we now get is cookie-cutter Marines.
Granted the cookies come in 7 exiting colors, but what about Red Scorpions with their "Sergeant-Apothecaries" or other Chapters that deviate from their founding one? The same could be applied to most codices. Aside from choosing wargear and actual units to field there should be minor feats, traits, differences... whatever to give "my" army some spice.

edit: I think some players who use "counts-as" SC's don't want the specific character but ANY character that is different from the "standard" one. I know I do.

I do wish that GW would allow us to build our own special characters, but the problem at this point is we're 5 codices into the edition, and creating a system like that would be unfair to the other 6th ed codices.

Not to mention, the codices near the end of the update cycle would be frustrated.

Precedent sort of dictates that this doesn't happen, unless it's at the start of a cycle.

Then again SM is getting that whole CT thing, which has no real 6th ed. precedent, so maybe they would do something like that with characters.

DogofWar1 wrote:
I do wish that GW would allow us to build our own special characters, but the problem at this point is we're 5 codices into the edition, and creating a system like that would be unfair to the other 6th ed codices.

Just take a normal HQ guy, give him a name and some wargear other than the min/max gak that everyone always takes, and you have someone pretty special.

steelshark83 wrote:
I'm still a bit disappointed we don't get some kind of "lego"-system to customize our characters (Think 4th ed. C:SM).
Special characters could still have stayed special. But a few select goodies to play around with and give an army an extra bit of flavor or a twist would be great. What we now get is cookie-cutter Marines.
Granted the cookies come in 7 exiting colors, but what about Red Scorpions with their "Sergeant-Apothecaries" or other Chapters that deviate from their founding one? The same could be applied to most codices. Aside from choosing wargear and actual units to field there should be minor feats, traits, differences... whatever to give "my" army some spice.

edit: I think some players who use "counts-as" SC's don't want the specific character but ANY character that is different from the "standard" one. I know I do.

Red Scorpions are a bad example, since they'll likely get rules including their own chapter tactics from FW.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

DogofWar1 wrote:
I do wish that GW would allow us to build our own special characters, but the problem at this point is we're 5 codices into the edition, and creating a system like that would be unfair to the other 6th ed codices.

Just take a normal HQ guy, give him a name and some wargear other than the min/max gak that everyone always takes, and you have someone pretty special.

I meant with more special rules, closer to what SCs get than what you can get through normal HQs.

In 5th Ed., there was no way to get Bolter Drill except through Lysander, or Fleet for a unit except through Shrike. It would be nice, especially now that you have the walls between chapters and SCs. It's not a huge deal, but when you want to go beyond vanilla wargear you're pretty much out of luck if you don't go with an SC.

The biggest problem, IMO will be with psykers. Will we have access to Mastery Level 3 psykers aside from Tigurius, or just Mastery Level 2? In 5th, if you wanted to hit three powers a turn you had to go with SC Tigur, and if they don't allow you to upgrade to ML3 on regular libbies, then you might not have access to them. That might be the biggest wall getting put up, in that any non-UM army might not have access to Mastery Level 3 psykers.

I guess the argument could be made that ML3 psykers are less often found in the Imperium compared to Chaos and Eldar, but it's still a likely frustrating wall.

DogofWar1 wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

DogofWar1 wrote:
I do wish that GW would allow us to build our own special characters, but the problem at this point is we're 5 codices into the edition, and creating a system like that would be unfair to the other 6th ed codices.

Just take a normal HQ guy, give him a name and some wargear other than the min/max gak that everyone always takes, and you have someone pretty special.

I meant with more special rules, closer to what SCs get than what you can get through normal HQs.
In 5th Ed., there was no way to get Bolter Drill except through Lysander, or Fleet for a unit except through Shrike. It would be nice, especially now that you have the walls between chapters and SCs. It's not a huge deal, but when you want to go beyond vanilla wargear you're pretty much out of luck if you don't go with an SC.
The biggest problem, IMO will be with psykers. Will we have access to Mastery Level 3 psykers aside from Tigurius, or just Mastery Level 2? In 5th, if you wanted to hit three powers a turn you had to go with SC Tigur, and if they don't allow you to upgrade to ML3 on regular libbies, then you might not have access to them. That might be the biggest wall getting put up, in that any non-UM army might not have access to Mastery Level 3 psykers.
I guess the argument could be made that ML3 psykers are less often found in the Imperium compared to Chaos and Eldar, but it's still a likely frustrating wall.

Can DA take Lvl 3 unnamed psykers?

No. Only Ezekiel is LVL 3.

 Deadshot wrote:
I doesn't break my entire army, just prevents me taking more tjan 1 of my HQs at a time, as I have no generics.

Then take the non-generic model, and make a chapter master/libby/etc that has his same wargear and say "This model is a generic chaplain for this battle."

Or take only one HQ, like a good number of us do.

The difference with Ezekial/DAs being that the entire codex has access to a ML3 psyker, where as many armies chosen out of C:SM will not if a standard libby can't upgrade. And, honestly, I think that will be the case. If so, that would be a bit of a shame, but the bigger shame will be that only Ultramarines (based on what we currently know) will have any access to Divination. Ther could be some wargear or abilities as yet unknown that change that, but cutting off large swathes of the codex from the best powers, yet still allowing a small segment to get them, would be very unfortunate.

Exergy wrote:[BT are a Child Chapter of IF
Clearly BT cannot take Lysander

CF are a child chapter of IF
I think this is to address that Lysander and Pedro cannot be in the same army without allies.

I do not believe that Doom Eagles will be prevented from taking Calgar because there is no way to say that your Doom Eagles aren't ultramarines. If you are playing your homebrew successor chapter, it has no rules. You have to use the rules for some chapter that actually has rules like Ultramarines and thus you can take all the options Ultramarines have.

+1 This. Come on people. Really?! Some of you think I have to play blue ultramarines to use SC but I can't play Iron Snakes and use Calgar?! What is wrong with DakkaDakka?!.

tomjoad wrote:...GW will not make such a rule and frankly, I'm disappointed in the critical thinking ability of anybody who thinks they would. It's embarrassing.

Agreed, on both accounts.