Cursed Earth & "other" Cursed Earth's

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.

**CrownAxe**

Cursed Earth doesn't give the psyker the ability to give +1 invul. CE uses the psyker as a measuring point to determine which models get +1 invul from Cursed Earth.

**statu**

I'm not debating whether or not they are in a unit, of course they are, just that you can't take a power that affects a model and use it to say that it affects the unit, or things like helfrost become godly

**grendel083**

statu wrote:
Cursed earth affects models however. Taking your argument to an extreme you could say that since unit a was effected by cursed earth, the whole army has been effected by it, therefore no one else would be able to gain any benefit

very weak.
Did the whole army gain +1 to their invul save?
Units have directly benefited from the blessing.

So the +1 bonus doesn't come from cursed earth? Where are it's rules found for the bonus?
In the Cursed Earth Blessing. But somehow it magically doesn't come from there of course...

statu wrote:
I'm not debating whether or not they are in a unit, of course they are, just that you can't take a power that affects a model and use it to say that it affects the unit, or things like helfrost become godly

Youre twisting words. No one is implying that the benefit or effect then spreads to every single model, and effects the entire unit. But the unit has definitly been effected.

**Ghaz**

statu wrote:
I'm not debating whether or not they are in a unit, of course they are, just that you can't take a power that affects a model and use it to say that it affects the unit, or things like helfrost become godly

Except by affecting a model, it does affect the unit. You're still trying to read 'affecting the unit' as 'affecting the entire unit'. A unit can be affected even if it only affects one model.

**statu**

But as the rules make the distinction between things that affect a model, and things that affect a unit, the difference between the two is important. Just because a rule affects a model, which would have an effect on a unit, does not mean the rule affects the unit

**grendel083**

statu wrote:
But as the rules make the distinction between things that affect a model, and things that affect a unit, the difference between the two is important. Just because a rule affects a model, which would have an effect on a unit, does not mean the rule affects the unit

The Rulebook often refers to units suffering casualties.
According to the logic being presented here, that isn't possible. As an effect on a model (such as being removed as a causualty for example) has apparently no effect on a unit.

Let's look at another rule, Soulblaze for example.

BRB Soulblaze USR wrote:If a unit suffers one or more unsaved wounds from...

Yet it's models that suffer unsaved wounds. Models that are removed as casualties. Yet you're saying one model effected doesn't mean the unit is effected. So Soulblaze here can never work.

**blaktoof**

if its not stacking, and the unit/model is not gaining the benefit more than once its save is not being modified more than once. If the save is modified more than the number 1, which is how much the blessing modifies it. Then the unit is benefiting from more than one of the same blessing and you are not following the rules.

**BlackTalos**

No, it comes down to simple logic.

If 1 model from Unit X benefits from a blessing, has the Unit been affected by a benefit?

Yes, because the model is indeed part of the Unit.

If i have a Space marine model, part of a Unit of Cultists, does the Unit have a 3+ Save?

If i have a unit of Boltguns, and i have 1 model with a Flamer, does the Unit have a flamer?

Answer is always "Yes". One model has a benefit (+1 Invun save), so the Unit has been affected (has benefited) from the blessing.
The Rules say this can only be done once, so if another model, completely different from the first model, is affected by *another* Cursed Earth, but he is in the same Unit, then that Unit has benefited twice from the blessing. This is breaking the rules.

**statu**

BlackTalos wrote:
If i have a Space marine model, part of a Unit of Cultists, does the Unit have a 3+ Save?

No the unit does not have a 3+ save, there is a model in the unit which has one, but the unit itself does not

BlackTalos wrote:
If i have a unit of Boltguns, and i have 1 model with a Flamer, does the Unit have a flamer?.

Again, no the unit does not have a flamer, one member of the unit has a flamer.

I'm not trying to argue that you can obtain a +2/3/4/5 to a models invulnerable save from multiple cursed earths, only that a unit may be affected by multiple ones so that every model in the unit could potentially be affected. You can't claim that since the rule affects a model, which in turn may have an effect on the unit, that the unit benefited. Otherwise you can claim, if you were that sort, that in one model surviving as a result of a cursed earth, every unit in your army benefited, as there was a bit less dakka coming their way. Trying to expand affects the model, into affects the unit, by using the claim that the unit benefited from it, is the same as the example I have just given, and I'm fairly confident in assuming no one would ever seriously try and claim that

**Frozocrone**

Ugh this is going nowhere. Mod lock please?

**BlackTalos**

statu wrote:
I'm not trying to argue that you can obtain a +2/3/4/5 to a models invulnerable save from multiple cursed earths, only that a unit may be affected by multiple ones so that every model in the unit could potentially be affected. You can't claim that since the rule affects a model, which in turn may have an effect on the unit, that the unit benefited. Otherwise you can claim, if you were that sort, that in one model surviving as a result of a cursed earth, every unit in your army benefited, as there was a bit less dakka coming their way. Trying to expand affects the model, into affects the unit, by using the claim that the unit benefited from it, is the same as the example I have just given, and I'm fairly confident in assuming no one would ever seriously try and claim that

Unfortunately there is indeed an issue with that point of view. Maybe if i phrase the questions differently?

statu wrote:
BlackTalos wrote:
If i have a Space marine model, part of a Unit of Cultists, does the Unit have a 3+ Save?

No the unit does not have a 3+ save, there is a model in the unit which has one, but the unit itself does not

Would you agree that the Unit *contains* a 3+ save?

statu wrote:
BlackTalos wrote:
If i have a unit of Boltguns, and i have 1 model with a Flamer, does the Unit have a flamer?.

Again, no the unit does not have a flamer, one member of the unit has a flamer.

Would you agree that the Unit *contains* a Flamer?

Because the logical gap between "Unit A contains a Flamer" and "Unit A has a Flamer" is not very far.

If i face an opponent in a game and ask: "Does that Unit of marines have a Lascanon?" I would expect him to say "Yes" even if only 1 model out of 5-10 is the one with the weapon...

**BlackTalos**

If a model from a Unit gains a benefit, has that unit gained "the benefit of any one particular blessing"?

Same as with my other 2 examples:
I point at one of your Units on the table, "Daemons A", and ask, is this Unit benefiting from "any one particular blessing"?

I would expect you to point at "Daemon model 21" and say: "This guy is benefiting from Cursed Earth"
But you would not? You would say "Nah, this Unit in not benefiting from anything"?

**BlackTalos**

der soulstealer wrote:
BlackTalos wrote:
If a model from a Unit gains a benefit, has that unit gained "the benefit of any one particular blessing"?

Same as with my other 2 examples:
I point at one of your Units on the table, "Daemons A", and ask, is this Unit benefiting from "any one particular blessing"?

I would expect you to point at "Daemon model 21" and say:"This guy is benefiting from Cursed Earth"
But you would not? You would say "Nah, this Unit in not benefiting from anything"?

The word benefiting is not part of the rule. It does not match the meaning of the rule either. I've pointed this out in previous posts, with the definition of "the", "benefit", and "to benefit" to make it clearer.

Thanks for taking the time to look at these definitions which are key to the understanding of the RAW.

You are simply focusing to much on "The" being a very specific indication.

The rules say "the benefit".

+1 Invun save is, undoubtedly "A benefit". Is "A benefit" the same as "THE benefit"? you say it is not, but you don't have much support for that.

**statu**

But it is a benefit to the model not the unit, however the unit indirectly benefits from it, but not in the sense the unit has gained the benefit of cursed earth, it has benefited from a model which is the receiving the benefit, which is not the same.

**BlackTalos**

statu wrote:
But it is a benefit to the model not the unit, however the unit indirectly benefits from it, but not in the sense the unit has gained the benefit of cursed earth, it has benefited from a model which is the receiving the benefit, which is not the same.

But that is the problem right there.

The Unit benefits indirectly, sure, but that is still considered "a benefit". The term is very loose, and has to be in "The benefit of any one particular blessing can only be gained once per unit per turn".

If you try to specify that "The benefit" is only ever the spell itself (such as the Psyker getting Cursed Earth, *specifically*), then the rule affects very little. And interpreting it that way, the invun save could easily become a (-1)++ or better, something you asserted was not really possible:

statu wrote:
I'm not trying to argue that you can obtain a +2/3/4/5 to a models invulnerable save from multiple cursed earths

Automatically Appended Next Post:

der soulstealer wrote:
BlackTalos wrote:
Is "A benefit" the same as "THE benefit"? you say it is not, but you don't have much support for that.

Hell, if words don't matter you could say THE turkey. Nobody will see the difference. How about THINE benefit ? or tomato benefit ?

It's not like Rules As Written had anything to do with the words written in the rule book right ?

It would really help if you could form some sort of well-worded argument, because this post did not make much sense at all. Sure, the wording is crucial, i don't get the point....?

**statu**

BlackTalos wrote:
statu wrote:
But it is a benefit to the model not the unit, however the unit indirectly benefits from it, but not in the sense the unit has gained the benefit of cursed earth, it has benefited from a model which is the receiving the benefit, which is not the same.

But that is the problem right there.

The Unit benefits indirectly, sure, but that is still considered "a benefit". The term is very loose, and has to be in "The benefit of any one particular blessing can only be gained once per unit per turn".

If you try to specify that "The benefit" is only ever the spell itself (such as the Psyker getting Cursed Earth, *specifically*), then the rule affects very little. And interpreting it that way, the invun save could easily become a (-1)++ or better, something you asserted was not really possible:

statu wrote:
I'm not trying to argue that you can obtain a +2/3/4/5 to a models invulnerable save from multiple cursed earths

Firstly at no point did I assert that was not really possible, only that i wasn't going to argue it. I don't think that is the intention of the rules at all, even if it may be worded badly enough to suggest it might be.

The benefit of this blessing is that a model receives plus one to it's invulnerable save. The unit does not benefit from receiving +1 to its invulnerable save. Trying to claim that the unit does benefit from that one guy dying a little bit harder, is the same as claiming every unit has benefited. There may be a slight difference between the benefit, and a benefit, but here that difference matters.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
A model receives THE benefit, while a unit recieves A benefit. The benefit from the power, as applies to the model, is +1 to the invulnerable save. The benefit the unit recieves is that X models have a better invulnerable save. As you can see the unit does not recieve the same benefit as the model, therefore the unit does not receive the benefit of the power

**BlackTalos**

Agreed, "the" benefit from the power is +1 Invun save. Models Only.

But although 'the unit does not benefit from receiving +1 to its invulnerable save', as you say, the Unit still benefits from the Psychic Power, Cursed Earth: One of it's models is receiving +1 to its invulnerable save.

So when we read the rule:

The benefit of any one particular blessing can only be gained once per unit per turn, but benefits from different blessings are cumulative.

One model getting +1 from Cursed Earth means that the Unit he is part of has gained the benefit of Cursed Earth once this turn.

If the question is asked:
Has Daemon Unit X gained "the benefit of any one particular blessing(Cursed Earth)" this Turn? Would you say Yes, or No?

If you say "No", then why am i wrong to assume that none of the models have been affected by the Cursed Earth power?

**BlackTalos**

der soulstealer wrote:
BlackTalos wrote:

If you try to specify that "The benefit" is only ever the spell itself (such as the Psyker getting Cursed Earth, *specifically*), then the rule affects very little. And interpreting it that way, the invun save could easily become a (-1)++ or better, something you asserted was not really possible:

That's exactly what the rule does, it affects every single blessing that targets a unit and provides it with a specific benefit, as I have outlined in my detailed analysis of blessings and their relation to this rule.

The only reason that rule is even being discussed is that people like you would like to see it limiting the effects of Cursed Earth, which the rule does not concern.

In order to help you see that the rule does not concern Cursed Earth, we focus on three different yet major reasons this is not the case per RAW:

1. This rule applies to every single blessing that targets a unit, without any doubt that the benefit is the specific USR and stat boosts the unit gets from the blessing, as specified in the blessing.
2. This rule applies only to "units" getting a specific advantage from a blessing, not unit getting some advantage from a blessing, not models getting a specific advantage from a blessing.
3. This rule talks about "the benefit", a specific advantage that is unvarying and could thus not be "one or more models have an improved invulnerable save" because that is varying and unspecific.

That means that if you want this rule to apply to Cursed Earth, by RAW, you need to demonstrate that:

1. this rule applies to more than just the blessings that target a unit, by finding another case where this rule is relevant than the blessings that specifically target a unit.
2. cursed earth provides a specific advantage to a unit, not a model
3. cursed earth provides a specific advantage to a unit

Failing that, your attempt to show that this rule applies to Cursed Earth would fail.

1. Why does the rule only concern Blessings that target Units specifically? I will need some RaW for that assertion.
2. Again, why "only" to Units gaining a "specific" advantage? Gaining a specific advantage IS, undoubtedly, gaining an advantage.
3. What is "the benefit" of "any one particular blessing"? Some blessings provide multiple benefits, so how can it then be singular?

The rule is simple:

The benefit of any one particular blessing can only be gained once per unit per turn, but benefits from different blessings are cumulative.

This rule only ever calls out "once per unit".
What does it call out?
The benefit of any one particular blessing.

This would not apply to the Psyker "model", would it? Why can the Psyker, who is part of a Unit, not have Cursed Earth on himself twice?
Because the Unit is affected by "The benefit" of Cursed Earth.

"The benefit" of Cursed Earth can be 1 model gaining +1 Invun, or it can be 2 models gaining such. It could be the Psyker+ all models apart from 1.
"The benefit" is not restricted only to Blessings that target Units.

The definition of "benefit" encompasses any of the variations above. The Unit is still gaining a benefit "of any one particular blessing", and it can only do so once.

**Fragile**

der soulstealer wrote:
The only reason that rule is even being discussed is that people like you would like to see it limiting the effects of Cursed Earth, which the rule does not concern..

The only reason is that is in the rules.

Our side has RAW to back it up. Yours does not. The basic premise is that you cannot benefit from the same blessing more than once. This is specifically laid out. The only exception would apply under basic vs advanced rules. In that case a blessing would have to specify that stacks with itself. Cursed Earth does not state it stacks with itself, therefore it cannot.

Your entire argument against this relies on trying to break down (models vs units) and (benefiting is not the same cannot benefit.) This is a RAW failure on your part. There is nothing in your argument that gives explicit permission to stack. You have nothing but this smoke and mirrors illogical argument that has no substance.

The blessings section, unit section and CE rule itself support our argument that it cannot stack. You have nothing but a sad attempt at Websters dictionary.

**BlackTalos**

There is no "entire side argument". There is just a Rule, from the book:

The benefit of any one particular blessing can only be gained once per unit per turn, but benefits from different blessings are cumulative.

Now this rule can be interpreted differently, as you are doing.
But this rule should be clear.

This rule applies to Units.
These Units can only gain the benefit "of any one particular blessing" once.
"any one particular blessing" refers to all the blessings. Not just "a group of them" as you are trying to prove. Why? Because that very rule is found under the "Blessing" section of the rulebook.
It makes no exception (some blessings follow it, some don't... < this is not RaW, or please find it for me if it is).

Conclusion: for ALL blessings, the benefit of said blessing "can only be gained once per unit per turn".

If one model in a Unit of Daemons gets +1 Invun save, then the Unit of daemons is gaining a "benefit of any one particular blessing". It cannot get the benefit a second time: Another Daemon model cannot get +1 Invun save from another Cursed Earth.

It could however get "benefits from different blessings" because they "are cumulative".

**Fragile**

der soulstealer wrote:
Fragile wrote:
Your entire argument against this relies on trying to break down (models vs units) and (benefiting is not the same cannot benefit.)

The entire argument against stacking Cursed Earth so far relies on changing the wording of a single rule that is clearly meant to apply to another family of spells.

Also, please stay calm, this is a civilized rules debate, right ?

So now your claim is that Cursed Earth is not a blessing? Your getting weaker and weaker.

And I am calm. I am simply pointing out that your argument is nothing more than an attempt to break down individual words and twist their meaning to make your interpretation fit. You still have no RAW support, yet vehemently attempt to disclaim the written rule as being incorrect.

**grendel083**

So we're back to the nonsense of "Units cannot suffer casualties".
Because only models are removed as casualties, and something that happens to a model has no effect on a unit....

And apparently "benefitting" and "benefitted" aren't different tenses of "benefit". Who knew?
Best inform the chaps at Oxford that write the dictionary.

**Happyjew**

I know this was in 6th, but not sure if it carried over into seventh (if not apologies).

Don't the rules for the shooting section say that a unit takes a save for each wound in the wound pool?

**grendel083**

Happyjew wrote:
I know this was in 6th, but not sure if it carried over into seventh (if not apologies).

Don't the rules for the shooting section say that a unit takes a save for each wound in the wound pool?

Wounds have been allocated to units at that point.

BRB - Take Saves and Remove Casualties wrote:The model gets to make a saving throw, if it has one.  If it fails, reduce that model’s Wounds by 1. If the model is reduced to 0 Wounds, remove it as a casualty

**Happyjew**

Thanks grendel. Wasn't sure, as I don't have my rulebook atm. I know it was an issue brought up in 6th.

**Myliel**

This topic has to be the most beaten dead horse in the history of tabletop gaming.. can't the guys advocating stacking show some good faith and drop it ?

**Jeffrachov**

Ok, so a hypothetical situation.

I have a unit of 20 deamons, where 1 model is in range of a psyker with CE up. I run up another psyker with CE on later so that it coves all my 20 deamons. By RAW this would mean only one of the models have +1 to their invul, right? As many people have already stated, one particular blessing can only be gained once per turn. This in turn should even mean that if the first psyker dies the deamons will have 0 models with +1 invul (as they have already gained the benefit of CE once that turn).

Also, where does it say that "particular blessing" means one specific blessing and not one instance of that blessing? I don't doubt the rule, just interested.

Should add that I play it so that it does not stack. However, I also use the CE that covers most models (I guess its the controlling player choosing?). But that's not RAW.

ps.
Is it just me, or is the extra wording on CE completely useless? I mean the stuff that it stacks with other effects. By default it does stack... should not need further clarification.

**BlackTalos**

You just can't benefit from it more than once ("of any one particular blessing", as opposed to "benefits from different blessings" => this is not other "instances" of the same).

I would not see why they would HAVE to benefit from the 1st one? Could they not just benefit from the second version? As long as you declare that hey are benefiting from the "other one" that Turn...