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.

I'm sure there's a rule saying only one unit controls an objective.

Specifically came up in a game where 2 units were claiming the benefit of a Skyfire nexus from a mysterious objective.

I'm sure there was something on this in previous editions, but can't find it now.

It's gone down to "none" now:

You control an Objective Marker if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units (see below), and no models from enemy scoring units, within 3" of it.

The objective is simply "contested", no one has it, no one scores it and no one uses it

I meant two friendly units holding it, both gaining the benefits

 grendel083 wrote:
I meant two friendly units holding it, both gaining the benefits

Ah i see. Not completely clear then, but i'd go for a "no" logically:

4 - Targeting Relay. A unit controlling this objective re-rolls failed To Hit rolls of 1 when shooting.

Singular

 BlackTalos wrote:
It's gone down to "none" now:

You control an Objective Marker if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units (see below), and no models from enemy scoring units, within 3" of it.

The objective is simply "contested", no one has it, no one scores it and no one uses it

Also singular.

So "one of" your Units controls the objective for you, and "a unit" that is controlling it in this way gains mentioned bonus. But yeah, it's definitely missing the 6th ed "closest model" wording...

Not trying to start an argument, but I'm not convinced that it's only one. The rule says "at least one model from one of your scoring units." Feels like it could be read either way to me.

 NightHowler wrote:
Not trying to start an argument, but I'm not convinced that it's only one. The rule says "at least one model from one of your scoring units." Feels like it could be read either way to me.

At least one model from one of your scoring units.
Meaning 1 or more models from 1 of your scoring units.

I would honestly say both would get it. Unit A and Unit B control a targeting relay. Unit A is "A unit controlling the objective", and Unit B is also "A unit controlling the objective". There are two units, but if you ask me "what is Unit A" or "what is Unit B", the answer to both of those questions would simply be "a unit controlling the objective". And the rules for the targeting relay say that "A unit controlling this objective...".

I read that as both units get the benefits as both count as controlling the objective.

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:
Not trying to start an argument, but I'm not convinced that it's only one. The rule says "at least one model from one of your scoring units." Feels like it could be read either way to me.

At least one model from one of your scoring units.
Meaning 1 or more models from 1 of your scoring units.

Right.

I'm not saying it can't also be read that way, but another way to read it is that you need at least one model from one of your scoring units to claim an objective.

No where does it say that "only" one unit may hold the objective.

If it DID mean "only" one unit, then it would need to tell you how to decide which one held it, right? The first one to take the objective? The one with the most troops? The one that was OBSEC? The owning player gets to choose? It never says, which makes me lean more towards the possibility that as many units as you can fit on an objective can hold it.

 kingbobbito wrote:
I would honestly say both would get it. Unit A and Unit B control a targeting relay. Unit A is "A unit controlling the objective", and Unit B is also "A unit controlling the objective". There are two units, but if you ask me "what is Unit A" or "what is Unit B", the answer to both of those questions would simply be "a unit controlling the objective". And the rules for the targeting relay say that "A unit controlling this objective...".

I read that as both units get the benefits as both count as controlling the objective.

I think the problem with that thinking is this:

You control an Objective Marker if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units (see below), and no models from enemy scoring units, within 3" of it.

If "you" control the objective with 1 (or more) models from 1 Unit, how can "you" (again) control the objective with 1 (or more) models from 1 Unit.

I don't think that multiple instances of "You" controlling an objective is possible, so only 1 Unit can control it for "you". That Unit can then follow this rule:

4 - Targeting Relay. A unit controlling this objective re-rolls failed To Hit rolls of 1 when shooting.

 NightHowler wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:
Not trying to start an argument, but I'm not convinced that it's only one. The rule says "at least one model from one of your scoring units." Feels like it could be read either way to me.

At least one model from one of your scoring units.
Meaning 1 or more models from 1 of your scoring units.

Right.

I'm not saying it can't also be read that way, but another way to read it is that you need at least one model from one of your scoring units to claim an objective.

No where does it say that "only" one unit may hold the objective.

It does when it says "one of your scoring units."

If it DID mean "only" one unit, then it would need to tell you how to decide which one held it, right? The first one to take the objective? The one with the most troops? The one that was OBSEC? The owning player gets to choose? It never says, which makes me lean more towards the possibility that as many units as you can fit on an objective can hold it.

Since "You" control the objective, it'd be your choice as to which unit controls it.
"You control an Objective Marker if..."

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:
Not trying to start an argument, but I'm not convinced that it's only one. The rule says "at least one model from one of your scoring units." Feels like it could be read either way to me.

At least one model from one of your scoring units.
Meaning 1 or more models from 1 of your scoring units.

Right.

I'm not saying it can't also be read that way, but another way to read it is that you need at least one model from one of your scoring units to claim an objective.

No where does it say that "only" one unit may hold the objective.

It does when it says "one of your scoring units."

If it DID mean "only" one unit, then it would need to tell you how to decide which one held it, right? The first one to take the objective? The one with the most troops? The one that was OBSEC? The owning player gets to choose? It never says, which makes me lean more towards the possibility that as many units as you can fit on an objective can hold it.

Since "You" control the objective, it'd be your choice as to which unit controls it.
"You control an Objective Marker if..."

Can you quote a rule that says you get to choose?

 NightHowler wrote:
Can you quote a rule that says you get to choose?

I've demonstrated that "You" control the objective. I've demonstrated that only one unit can control the objective.
I can demonstrate that the Mysterious Objective rules are singular - "A unit that controls..."

Since you control the objective, you dictate which unit is actually controlling the objective. There's no other option.

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:
Can you quote a rule that says you get to choose?

I've demonstrated that "You" control the objective. I've demonstrated that only one unit can control the objective.
I can demonstrate that the Mysterious Objective rules are singular - "A unit that controls..."

Since you control the objective, you dictate which unit is actually controlling the objective. There's no other option.

You still haven't actually quoted a rule saying, "the controlling player may choose which unit controls an objective" or some approximation thereof.

The reason I point this out to you is because things are not as black and white as you're making them out to be.

The main rule you can quote doesn't say only one unit, it says that the player (that's you) controls an objective if "at least one model from one of your units" (notice there's an at least in there that implies the possibility of more than one), and until you can quote a rule that says that "only" one unit may control an objective you are making assumptions.

The other rule says "a unit that controls this objective..." but if 3 units are controlling that objective I can still use the phrase "a unit" to describe one of those units. It does not state clearly that only one of them may control it.

I'm not saying that it is one way or the other. You're saying that it is only 1 unit but until you can quote a rule that says as much in clear undeniable terms, you're making a HIWPI comment.

 NightHowler wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:
Can you quote a rule that says you get to choose?

I've demonstrated that "You" control the objective. I've demonstrated that only one unit can control the objective.
I can demonstrate that the Mysterious Objective rules are singular - "A unit that controls..."

Since you control the objective, you dictate which unit is actually controlling the objective. There's no other option.

You still haven't actually quoted a rule saying, "the controlling player may choose which unit controls an objective" or some approximation thereof.

The reason I point this out to you is because things are not as black and white as you're making them out to be.

The main rule you can quote doesn't say only one unit, it says that the player (that's you) controls an objective if "at least one model from one of your units" (notice there's an at least in there that implies the possibility of more than one)

The "at least" is tied to the number of models, not units. Basic English.

, and until you can quote a rule that says that "only" one unit may control an objective you are making assumptions.

It's been quoted. The rule says one unit, not at least one unit.

The other rule says "a unit that controls this objective..." but if 3 units are controlling that objective I can still use the phrase "a unit" to describe one of those units. It does not state clearly that only one of them may control it.

If 3 units receive the benefit, is "A" (remember that A is singular) receiving the benefit?

I'm not saying that it is one way or the other. You're saying that it is only 1 unit but until you can quote a rule that says as much in clear undeniable terms, you're making a HIWPI comment.

No, I've demonstrated RAW. You've demonstrated a basic misunderstanding of how English works.

So that's HYWPI.

 NightHowler wrote:
So that's HYWPI.

... Why are you saying that when I've quoted rules and demonstrated where you have a significant lack of understanding how English works?
Because it's not a HIWPI argument.

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:
So that's HYWPI.

... Why are you saying that when I've quoted rules and demonstrated where you have a significant lack of understanding how English works?
Because it's not a HIWPI argument.

Because you haven't quoted a rule that says "one unit" you've quoted a rule that says "a unit that controls this objective" and used that to say "only one" which is only one possible interpretation of that phrase; and you quoted another rule which also doesn't say "one unit" but rather says at least one model from one of your units must be within 3" of an objective for the player to control it but does not set any limit on how many units may control that objective.

So you haven't really shown a rule that nails it down.

I'm not asserting that it is multiple units. I'm also not asserting that it is only one unit. I'm asserting that the way the rules are written it could be read either way quite easily.

 NightHowler wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:
So that's HYWPI.

... Why are you saying that when I've quoted rules and demonstrated where you have a significant lack of understanding how English works?
Because it's not a HIWPI argument.

Because you haven't quoted a rule that says "one unit" you've quoted a rule that says "a unit that controls this objective" and used that to say "only one" which is only one possible interpretation of that phrase; and you quoted another rule which also doesn't say "one unit" but rather says at least one model from one of your units must be within 3" of an objective for the player to control it but does not set any limit on how many units may control that objective.

I'm sorry - how does "from one of your units" not set a limit that one unit controls an objective?

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 NightHowler wrote:
So that's HYWPI.

... Why are you saying that when I've quoted rules and demonstrated where you have a significant lack of understanding how English works?
Because it's not a HIWPI argument.

Because you haven't quoted a rule that says "one unit" you've quoted a rule that says "a unit that controls this objective" and used that to say "only one" which is only one possible interpretation of that phrase; and you quoted another rule which also doesn't say "one unit" but rather says at least one model from one of your units must be within 3" of an objective for the player to control it but does not set any limit on how many units may control that objective.

I'm sorry - how does "from one of your units" not set a limit that one unit controls an objective?

Because it does not. It says that the player controls the objective if at least one model from one of his units is within 3" of an objective. At no point in that statement does it ever say that no more than one unit may be in control.

We really don't need the digs about other users reading ability and so forth.

Here is the deal. The rues for controlling objectives do not work well on a RAW level. They only define how you (the player) control an objective. This is a binary state, you either control it or you don't. Immediately after that the book refers to units controlling objectives but, on a RAW level, has failed to define how a unit can control an objective. With this being a permissive rule-set this means that by RAW a unit never controls the objective and the rest of this argument is moot.

i don't think anyone will reasonably believe that this is the RAI. The question then becomes, by RAI, can more then one unit control an objective? We've already established that, without a special rule to allow it, a friendly and an enemy unit cannot both control the same objective but two ore more friendly units is a different matter all together.

As established earlier, the line "You control an Objective Marker if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units (see below), and no models from enemy scoring units, within 3" of it. " adds nothing to the discussion in its current form. It does not grant a unit permission to control an objective. However we must extrapolate a new line that fits the RAI, the trick will be only to make the changes needed to allow a unit to control an objective.

A scoring unit (see below) controls an Objective Marker if there is at least one model from that unit, and no models from enemy scoring units, within 3" of it.

This seems like the least amount of change to me. I would have to add language to limit the number of units to one so this leans heavily toward more then one unit in my mind. The fact that previous editions of the game did not allow this is a factor, but its not clear if this was an intentional change or not. There have been many changes between the editions and this might very well be an intended change. This is of course, my opinion, or HIWPI because I am forced to guess the RAI for how units can control objectives.

And to those who have fixated on the original form of the sentence as proof that its a single unit that may control an objective. The phrase "at least one model from one of your scoring units" is the entire description. With out commas you need to take the description as a whole. At least one model from one of your units does not prohibit a second model from either the same unit, or a different unit, from also being "at least one model from one of your scoring units". But as I stated earlier, this sentence only serves to determine if you the player controls the objective. It would not matter if you had a single qualifying model a thousand.

tl:dr The RAW is sloppy and incomplete. There is no black and white awnser, this is a RAI or a HIWPI discussion not a RAW discussion and its best we just move on.