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.

 karlosovic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
You may do A and B.

This is permitted by:
You may do A, B, and/or C

Agreed?

Absolutely not!!!!!

Then you have failed to understand how and/or works and you can't debate this in good faith. Have a good day.

Disagree.

You may swap (something) for one of the following.

What is something? It is bolt pistol and/or chainsword.

I'm only given permission to perform the swap action once. I'm then told what I can give as a part of the swap. I'm then told what I receive as a part of the swap (one of the following).

Where is your permission to perform the swap action twice? It's not in the and/or wording. That tells me what I can swap as the and/or items are the direct objects of the swap action.

We may as well give up on them, Kriswall, as they seem resolutely determined to misunderstand plain English

 Kriswall wrote:
Disagree.

Another fundamental failure to understand and/or.

The example I gave had nothing to do with the "one of the following". At all. It's the first part in a multi part question to discover where our understandings differ.
If you disagree with the scenario I proposed you have failed to understand how and/or works and therefore can't continue the discussion in good faith. Have a nice day.

My question is is there a rule that prevents multiple selection? I've always thought that each selection from the units wargear/equipment choice was an independent selection dependent on meeting the criteria and paying the points
Just wondering if is a specific rule regarding this? I can find sod all in this 7th rulebook rules appear to be all over the place
Cheers

 karlosovic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
You may do A and B.

This is permitted by:
You may do A, B, and/or C

Agreed?

Absolutely not!!!!!

You may "swap" A or B, in either case for "one"

you may also swap A AND B (call it "c" if you want), but still for only "ONE"

i.e.

You may swap A "and" B
or
you may swap A "or" B

in any case, whatever you swap is only ever for "one"

"One", not the "same one". You can swap A for one item on the list or you can swap B for one item on the list or you can swap A and B for one item on the list each. It never says it has to be the same item.

Kaliban101 wrote:
My question is is there a rule that prevents multiple selection? I've always thought that each selection from the units wargear/equipment choice was an independent selection dependent on meeting the criteria and paying the points
Just wondering if is a specific rule regarding this? I can find sod all in this 7th rulebook rules appear to be all over the place
Cheers

It's inherent in the rule allowing the swap. You're allowed to swap one item for one item.
Just like Tactical Squad special weapons - you're allowed to have one marine swap his boltgun for one weapon.

Dear god this post is still going..I said I was going to stay away but now that I have received my codex and gone over this section here are my thoughts and how I'll play it.

The line that states "items". I interpret this as plural because they are talking about multiple different items, just not Relics, with that being said I feel like "items" is NOT being directed at the multiple use of relics. Again, I agree that it is plural in the way that's its worded but only because it's talking about multiple items and I believe it's not to be directed towards the use of relics.

For me this is clear enough, I'll be playing my HQs with one relic until a FAQ comes out clearly stating the use of multiple relics..

For what it's worth, the guys at BattleScribe coded their program to let you know your unit has too many relics when you try to equip them with two. Seems like the wording in the codex was clear enough for them as well.

rigeld2 wrote:

Kaliban101 wrote:
My question is is there a rule that prevents multiple selection? I've always thought that each selection from the units wargear/equipment choice was an independent selection dependent on meeting the criteria and paying the points
Just wondering if is a specific rule regarding this? I can find sod all in this 7th rulebook rules appear to be all over the place
Cheers

It's inherent in the rule allowing the swap. You're allowed to swap one item for one item.
Just like Tactical Squad special weapons - you're allowed to have one marine swap his boltgun for one weapon.

Thanks rigeldt, yeah that's what I meant by criteria, for grey hunters for example you need 5 models to get a special and then pay the points for that weapon I can't select this option again until I have a further 5 models to meet the criteria
But I can't see any restriction on a wolf lords unit entry that would prevent me taking multiple relics, the only restriction I can see are one unique relic per army and replacement of one weapon
Sorry I'm probably not being very clear, what I'm trying to get at is there anything preventing me from selecting a relic as an individual choice then selecting another relic as a second individual choice?
Just to be clear, I'm returning to the game after a long break of 3 editions and am struggling to try to make sense of a lot of these rather ambitious rules they have written
Cheers

Kaliban101 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Kaliban101 wrote:
My question is is there a rule that prevents multiple selection? I've always thought that each selection from the units wargear/equipment choice was an independent selection dependent on meeting the criteria and paying the points
Just wondering if is a specific rule regarding this? I can find sod all in this 7th rulebook rules appear to be all over the place
Cheers

It's inherent in the rule allowing the swap. You're allowed to swap one item for one item.
Just like Tactical Squad special weapons - you're allowed to have one marine swap his boltgun for one weapon.

Thanks rigeldt, yeah that's what I meant by criteria, for grey hunters for example you need 5 models to get a special and then pay the points for that weapon I can't select this option again until I have a further 5 models to meet the criteria
But I can't see any restriction on a wolf lords unit entry that would prevent me taking multiple relics, the only restriction I can see are one unique relic per army and replacement of one weapon
Sorry I'm probably not being very clear, what I'm trying to get at is there anything preventing me from selecting a relic as an individual choice then selecting another relic as a second individual choice?
Just to be clear, I'm returning to the game after a long break of 3 editions and am struggling to try to make sense of a lot of these rather ambitious rules they have written
Cheers

If you look at the ork relics we're told "a model can take one of the following" for relics. If you do not have such a rule there is no limit, the only limit is the number of weapons you have *cough*grenades*cough*

sirlynchmob wrote:

If you look at the ork relics we're told "a model can take one of the following" for relics. If you do not have such a rule there is no limit, the only limit is the number of weapons you have *cough*grenades*cough*

I thought grenades were wargear, not weapons.

 Green is Best! wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

If you look at the ork relics we're told "a model can take one of the following" for relics. If you do not have such a rule there is no limit, the only limit is the number of weapons you have *cough*grenades*cough*

I thought grenades were wargear, not weapons.

pg 180, Weapons
Grenades of the 41st millennium

discuss it with your group before doing it though. it's is a debated topic.

 Kriswall wrote:
"A model can swap bolt pistol and/or chainsword for one of the following" can be rewritten three ways:

1. A model can swap (bolt pistol) for ONE of the following.

2. A model can swap (chainsword) for ONE of the following.

3. A model can swap (bolt pistol and chainsword) for ONE of the following.

Exactly. There is no "4. A model can swap bolt pistol for one of the following and chainsword for one of the following."

Kaliban101 wrote:
Sorry I'm probably not being very clear, what I'm trying to get at is there anything preventing me from selecting a relic as an individual choice then selecting another relic as a second individual choice?

If you do so, have you swapped one weapon for one relic?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Naw wrote:
Exactly. There is no "4. A model can swap bolt pistol for one of the following and chainsword for one of the following."

There is if you understand English. Because that's a perfectly valid rewrite of the sentence.

Actually, the and/or thing is notorious for being ambiguous. There are numerous instances of judges asking lawyers not to use it because it adds confusion to what could be an otherwise straightforward scenario.

In this instance we have a sentence telling us we can swap [something] for one of the following. The and/or tells us the something can be either bolt pistol, chainsword or bolt pistol and chainsword. This is using the most common interpretation of "inclusive or". Using the bolt pistol and chainsword option, we're given "A model may swap his [bolt pistol and chainsword] for one of the following." You still only get one of the following.

I think you guys are putting the and in a different place to support your argument.

Incorrect:
A model may swap his bolt pistol with one of the following and may swap his chainsword with one of the following.

Correct:
A model may swap his bolt pistol and chainsword with one of the following.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a side note, I obviously don't think this is the intention. But you can't have it both ways. You can't point at the word ONE in the Relics list and say you can only pick once while overlooking the word ONE in the other list and say you can pick twice. You can't have it both ways.

Pick one and run with it.

Explain to me how you can swap bolt pistol and chainsword for TWO of the following when the wording clearly states bolt pistol and/or chainsword for ONE of the following. To use your own argument...

ONE means ONE. ONE doesn't mean TWO. ONE means ONE. PROVEN. PROVEN. PROVEN.

 Kriswall wrote:
Incorrect:
A model may swap his bolt pistol with one of the following and may swap his chainsword with one of the following.

This is not incorrect.

You may send an email or make a phone call to contact him.
Same as
You may send an email to contact him or make a phone call to contact him.

Rigeld, I'm afraid that if we are being anally-literal on this (as is the honoured, age old custom on this forum), then you're wrong.

You may exchange your hat or your sunglasses for one monkey. -> lose one item, gain one monkey.
You may exchange your hat and your sunglasses for one monkey. -> lose both items, gain one monkey.

In neither case is gaining two monkeys an option (but then again, one monkey is quite a handful already.)

So, If I'm incorrect, then you are getting two items when the wording specifically states ONE? That means you are violating the permission and can't take two items. ONE means ONE. You'd know that if you'd read the thread! Proven! Proven!

This is fun. One just has to keep repeating the same position and saying proven. I can't wait to practice these new debate skills when I go home and talk to my wife.

In all seriousness, GW is consistently using vague and ambiguous terms within their rules. This is a prime example. We are both correct. I'm willing to admit the ambiguity whereas others aren't. This will probably never be addressed in an FAQ until the Wolf Time when Russ comes back and hires a copy editor or community manager.

In the interval, house rule it.

Crimson wrote:Rigeld, I'm afraid that if we are being anally-literal on this (as is the honoured, age old custom on this forum), then you're wrong.

You may exchange your hat or your sunglasses for one monkey. -> lose one item, gain one monkey.
You may exchange your hat and your sunglasses for one monkey. -> lose both items, gain one monkey.

In neither case is gaining two monkeys an option (but then again, one monkey is quite a handful already.)

Except, as my example shows, you can rewrite the sentence as
You may exchange your hat for one monkey or your sunglasses for one monkey.
And with an and/or in there, the following is perfectly valid as well
You may exchange your hat for one monkey and your sunglasses for one monkey.

Kriswall wrote:So, If I'm incorrect, then you are getting two items when the wording specifically states ONE? That means you are violating the permission and can't take two items. ONE means ONE. You'd know that if you'd read the thread! Proven! Proven!

Um. No. I'm getting one item from one item swap. The and/or gives permission to make multiple swaps.
You have failed to show how the two rules are similar where it matters.

This is fun. One just has to keep repeating the same position and saying proven. I can't wait to practice these new debate skills when I go home and talk to my wife.

Well, don't blame me when your wife decides to hit you with a frying pan for ignoring half of what she says (as you're doing here).

So just out of curiosity, what does GW mean by this:

Space Wolves Codex wrote:Where an option states that you may exchange one weapon ‘and/or’ another, you may replace either or both, provided you pay the points cost for each.

 Crimson wrote:
Rigeld, I'm afraid that if we are being anally-literal on this (as is the honoured, age old custom on this forum), then you're wrong.

You may exchange your hat or your sunglasses for one monkey. -> lose one item, gain one monkey.
You may exchange your hat and your sunglasses for one monkey. -> lose both items, gain one monkey.

In neither case is gaining two monkeys an option (but then again, one monkey is quite a handful already.)

That could also mean...

You may exchange your hat and your sunglasses for one monkey. -> exchange each item (hat and sunglasses) for a monkey, thus getting 2 monkeys.

 Happyjew wrote:
So just out of curiosity, what does GW mean by this:

Space Wolves Codex wrote:Where an option states that you may exchange one weapon ‘and/or’ another, you may replace either or both, provided you pay the points cost for each.

Where is that in the codex?

Not sure on the exact page number (digi-dex doesn't have them), but it's right before the wargear lists (the ones with point values), in the "Forces of the Space Wolves" section. Specifically number 11 (Options) when describing the stuff on a datasheet.

Good catch!! I wouldnt think to look there.

Unfortunately, that doesn't really help. We all agree that you can replace either or both. It doesn't tell us how many things we get in return. Depending on your interpretation, it could be one or two.

GW needs to be more explicit. Their rules are just awful and full of ambiguous wording.

 Kriswall wrote:
"A model can swap bolt pistol and/or chainsword for one of the following" can be rewritten three ways:

1. A model can swap (bolt pistol) for ONE of the following.

2. A model can swap (chainsword) for ONE of the following.

3. A model can swap (bolt pistol and chainsword) for ONE of the following.

I believe you are misunderstanding how and/or works. In all three instances, only one swap is occurring and only one of the following is received. You are wanting to activate the selection process twice, and per your own arguments throughout the thread, this isn't allowed.

To allow a bolt pistol to be swapped for one item and then subsequently allow a chainsword to be swapped for one item creates a situation where two items have been swapped. Why can I do this on one list, but not the second list?

3. is wrong. The And/Or clause combines actions 1. and 2. - it does not create a third one.

You can do 1. or 2. or both, 3. does not exist.

If i do 1. or 2., i have performed 1 swap.
If i do 1. and 2., i have performed 2 swaps.

Notice how i exchanged the word "or", with "and", but did not create an imaginary "3rd" option....

Remove the /or.

A model may swap bolt pictol and chainsword for one of the following.

The and/or specifically refers to the collection of bolt pistol, chainsword or both.

A model / may swap / his bolt pistol and/or chainsword / for / one of the following.

Who is performing the action? - A model
What action is he performing? - swap
What is he swapping? - one of these three (his bolt pistol, his chainsword, or both)
But wait, there's more. When he swaps, is there a result? - yes, whatever he swapped, in return he gets one of the following.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At the end of the day, if I agree that I can replace bolt pistol with an item and chainsword with an item, why won't you agree that I can replace one weapon with an item and one weapon with an item? I'm told I can take items from the Relics list, and I'm told how that occurs. It occurs by swapping one weapon for one item. I still don't see any restriction keeping me at one item. You have argued that the word ONE doesn't matter as you're fervently trying to demonstrate that one only means one in the context of a single swap.

I agree. One means one in the context of a single swap. I am performing multiple swaps... at a result of one per swap.

 Kriswall wrote:
Unfortunately, that doesn't really help. We all agree that you can replace either or both. It doesn't tell us how many things we get in return. Depending on your interpretation, it could be one or two.

"provided you pay the points cost for each" doesn't mean you can get 2 things?
In what universe? Why are you still only looking at half of the rule? Or are you saying you pay for 2 but only get one? That'd be an interesting argument...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kriswall wrote:
At the end of the day, if I agree that I can replace bolt pistol with an item and chainsword with an item, why won't you agree that I can replace one weapon with an item and one weapon with an item?

Because you continue to compare two rules that aren't comparable. Seriously.
The and/or and GWs explicit statement that it means more than one thing shows that it's a different situation.

How many Flamers can a 10 man Tac Squad have, according to you? I've asked before but you've avoided it and I really want an answer.

This thread would have been far more constructive without all the snark and snide remarks about understanding English from both 'sides' of the discussion.

For future reference, your 'opponent' will be far more inclined to actually listen to the point you are making if you say it in a way that promotes discussion rather than insulting their intelligence.