Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 21:31:00
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
No, they aren't. The rules are ambivalent. The rules DON'T specify. the words phrases that you're using DON'T mean what you think they do. Nor do they mean what I WANT them to. Automatically Appended Next Post: And I was referring to the fact that YOU keep using things that don't mean what you say they do. Automatically Appended Next Post: I.E. you're the one that's going to badger.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/02/22 21:31:49
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 21:38:29
Subject: Re:Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
The rules say this.
Options: This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to do so, alongside the associated points cost for each.
The rules do not say this.
Options: This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the models if you wish to do so, alongside the associated points cost for each.
Col has tidied up the argument Rasko was making very simply. You haven't actually addressed it...
As Rasko said, "upgrade", can mean different things. It doesn't only mean promote. It can also mean replace.
There is multiple evidence that points towards replace. While there is no evidence that points towards promote. Not a single one. It isn't even a gray area.
So you have to go with how the Codex uses "upgrade".
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/22 22:02:28
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 21:40:00
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Powerful Phoenix Lord
|
Kriswall, is it legal for me to have a BA Captain in Terminator Armour riding a SM Bike?
|
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 21:48:40
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Implacable Black Templar Initiate
Colorado
|
Happyjew wrote:Kriswall, is it legal for me to have a BA Captain in Terminator Armour riding a SM Bike?
only if you buy the bike first.... LOL
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/22 21:49:57
7000+ 2500 +
2000 10000 + 3000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 22:01:43
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Actually, unless I'm mistaken, isn't there a rule SPECIFICALLY regarding that, saying no, under the general Wargear listing? Automatically Appended Next Post: If there isn't, then i'm good with it as long as the bike is purchased first.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/22 22:02:28
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 22:12:54
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Implacable Black Templar Initiate
Colorado
|
Zarius wrote:Actually, unless I'm mistaken, isn't there a rule SPECIFICALLY regarding that, saying no, under the general Wargear listing?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
If there isn't, then i'm good with it as long as the bike is purchased first.
At least you can poke fun at yourself lol.
|
7000+ 2500 +
2000 10000 + 3000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 22:24:16
Subject: Re:Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
Actually, Terminator Armour captain riding a bike is a legitimate question. It is not a troll comment.
The only restriction that prevents Terminator Armour wearers from taking Space Marine Bikes is stated for the Bikes.
By Zarius and Kriswall's logic, if you take the Space Marine Bike upgrade first, you would be able to buy Terminator Armour after.
Therefore, bypassing the only restriction and allowing Terminator Armour Bikers.
-This is for people that think it was a troll comment... It is a legimiate question. Just thought I'd clear it up a tiny bit.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/22 22:25:38
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 22:36:27
Subject: Re:Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
HondaDaBest wrote:Actually, Terminator Armour captain riding a bike is a legitimate question. It is not a troll comment.
The only restriction that prevents Terminator Armour wearers from taking Space Marine Bikes is stated for the Bikes.
By Zarius and Kriswall's logic, if you take the Space Marine Bike upgrade first, you would be able to buy Terminator Armour after.
Therefore, bypassing the only restriction and allowing Terminator Armour Bikers.
-This is for people that think it was a troll comment... It is a legimiate question. Just thought I'd clear it up a tiny bit.
Like I said, as long as there isn't a specific rule forbidding it, I'm cool. And, even if there is a legit rule against it, it IS a valid question when you bring the logic into play. My reasoning is this:
The reason for that prohibitive rule is purely mechanical, on the part of the bike. The bike (and jetpacks, and Thunderwolf Mounts) are PHYSICALLY not strong enough to do the job. A suit of scout armor is just a suit of power armor with lighter plating, they don't even have a specific model for scout armor that I've found. Terminator armor, on the other hand, is clearly MASSIVE (relatively speaking).
My OFFICIAL stance is that yes, even if there is a rule that you can't take it once you have termie armor, you COULD take it beforehand, but it wouldn't work. Meaning, you could take it, and therefore you could work it into your model, but you'd move at normal rate, not at bike rate, and you wouldn't count as Calvary. Depending on how hard someone tried to argue it, I might even say that you'd move slower because you'd be dragging the useless lump. I'd also let you use it as an improvised ( WS -2) Thunder Hammer either way because, let's be honest, is a guy in termie armor slaps you with a bike, you ARE going down, no questions asked, and the suit IS designed to use much larger weapons, like the Great Wolf Claw, so using it as an improvised club (hammer) would be well within the physical capabilities of the armor.
Where as there's nothing to counter-indicate that a snipe-rifle WOULDN'T work with standard power armor. More over, ALL of the other gun gear (pasma pistols, melta guns, yatta yatta) are universal to standard-armor units, such as scouts and WGPLs, so there's no reason to assume it wouldn't work either.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 22:40:27
Subject: Re:Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Guys, don't forget that Kriswall wrote
Kriswall wrote:Of course not. Per Codex: Space Marines we should "Note that these pieces of wargear [referring to the Bike and Terminator Armour] are mutually exclusive." We're told explicitly and unambiguously that a given model can't have both a Bike and Terminator Armour. That's what mutually exclusive means. There is no such wording in Codex: Space Wolves telling us that a WGPL can't ever have a Sniper Rifle.
That was his answer to the question.
However, he is taking things out of context with that quote. The full one is here
•1 May not be taken by models wearing Terminator armour. Note that these pieces of wargear are mutually exclusive. For example, a Librarian riding a Space Marine bike may not also take a jump pack.
It says that the pieces of wargear are mutually exclusive. It is not referring to the Terminator Armour like he says. It is referring to all the wargear that is marked with the 1.
It tells us that any wargear that is marked with the 1, can't be taken by Terminator Armour.
It tells us that any wargear that is marked with the 1, is mutually exclusive.
Context is the most important thing...
Which by their logic, still allows Terminator Armour Bikers by following the "promotion" theory... But I wanted to point out why it is the case, because otherwise, he will just repeats his answer...
But yes, I agree that
Is the simplist way to make our point.
|
This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 2016/02/22 22:55:10
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 22:50:25
Subject: Re:Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity
|
If the rules are on your side, then it should be no issue citing the rule saying that when a specific model is upgraded to a different profile, that all of its previously selected Wargear options are lost. You have yet to cite such a rule, so I assume that you don't actually have one.
And while I realize that the Datasheet says that options provide upgrades to units, the actual option itself says that the model is upgraded. At the very least, advanced trumps general. In this instance the option most certainly is upgrading a model.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 22:58:33
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Rasko, you can keep citing that all you want, but in all actuality, your statement only actually serves to BACK us, not contradicts us. Saying that the UNIT may upgrade says that it's the same UNIT, with a different profile due to upgrades from training/gear, etc. Because that's what the increased stats in the other profile represent: A WGPL gets extra armor because, with the unit's promotion to Squad Commander, he was given a new suit of Power Armour instead of Scout Armour. His extra actions indicate that he's received better training to give him more speed of action. But nothing indicates that UPGRADING the unit would make him a whole different unit/model all together.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:03:35
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Zarius wrote:Rasko, you can keep citing that all you want, but in all actuality, your statement only actually serves to BACK us, not contradicts us. Saying that the UNIT may upgrade says that it's the same UNIT, with a different profile due to upgrades from training/gear, etc.
What?
I literally quoted you what upgrade means. Upgrade means replace in the Codex...
This is Merriam-Webster's definition of upgrade when used as a verb:
-to make (something) better by including the most recent information or improvements
-to choose to have or use something more modern, useful, etc.
-to get something that is better than what you had originally
Zarius wrote:Because that's what the increased stats in the other profile represent: A WGPL gets extra armor because, with the unit's promotion to Squad Commander, he was given a new suit of Power Armour instead of Scout Armour. His extra actions indicate that he's received better training to give him more speed of action. But nothing indicates that UPGRADING the unit would make him a whole different unit/model all together.
I can't tell if you are trolling me. Have you actually read the arguments...
You don't address the arguments themselves...
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/22 23:05:15
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:07:21
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
No... it doesn't... It literally doesn't say that "upgrade" means "replace." Nowhere does it say "One scout may upgrade to a Wolf Guard Pack Leader, replacing the scout model with the Wolf Guard Pack Leader model."
Nowhere does the SW codex or the BRB state that and upgrade to a unit replaces the model. Power armor isn't even a separate configuration in the model options.
You're literally making that up.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:09:30
Subject: Re:Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Kriswall wrote:
If the rules are on your side, then it should be no issue citing the rule saying that when a specific model is upgraded to a different profile, that all of its previously selected Wargear options are lost. You have yet to cite such a rule, so I assume that you don't actually have one.
And while I realize that the Datasheet says that options provide upgrades to units, the actual option itself says that the model is upgraded. At the very least, advanced trumps general. In this instance the option most certainly is upgrading a model.
The unit was upgraded from a unit of 5 scouts to a unit of 4 scouts and a WPGL.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:10:42
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Ah, Zarius, I hope you understand how ironic this is. I was trying to make a point. Listen to this now...
Where does it say "upgrade" means "make something existing better"? Nowhere does it say "One scout may upgrade to a WGPL, making the scout model better to become a WGPL."
Nowhere does the SW codex or the BRB state that upgrade means promote the model.
You're literally making that up.
----------------------
Options: This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to do so, alongside the associated points cost for each.
This clearly means that a new entry has been added to a unit. It clearly contradicts the promotion theory. It is pretty hard to misunderstand that. You guys haven't addressed this at all.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2016/02/22 23:21:19
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:21:47
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
That's.. exactly what the word upgrade means... To alter to an improved state... Automatically Appended Next Post: And actually, ADDING the upgrade to a unit IS the upgrade/promotion theory. That's LITERALLY what it is. We didn't address it because your lack of understanding basic English isn't a problem we can address.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/22 23:26:48
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:27:15
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
You are selectively picking and choosing whatever you like...
I literally quoted you the definition of "upgrade"...
And you "picked" the one that perfectly matches your case.
And ignored the one that perfectly matches mine.
Are you deliberately acting like you didn't do this? You must be...
Which is exactly why dictionary definitions are frowned upon...
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:28:08
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
You take a SCOUT, you ADD an upgrade to WGPL. That's a PROMOTION. If you take a sailor, and you add a single chevron with a crow over it to his uniform, you have UPGRADED him/her to a petty officer 3rd class. That is a promotion. Automatically Appended Next Post: If there isn't a better definition available as to exactly what the terminology means, then you have to go with the dictionary definition as default. YOU keep saying exactly what we're saying, then calling it a statement that contradicts us.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/22 23:29:32
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:30:06
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Zarius wrote:That's.. exactly what the word upgrade means... To alter to an improved state...
Do you have a rules quote on this? Automatically Appended Next Post: Zarius wrote:
If there isn't a better definition available as to exactly what the terminology means, then you have to go with the dictionary definition as default. YOU keep saying exactly what we're saying, then calling it a statement that contradicts us.
Incorrect. You use the word in the way the BRB uses the word.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/22 23:33:05
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:34:12
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Col, since there ISN'T a specific rules quote on the precise definition of the word "upgrade" I'm using the definition in the DICTIONARY, because that's the only one AVAILABLE. There literally is NO definition in any of the manuals that states that the word "upgrade" doesn't use the same definition as the common English language. Since there ISN'T a rule on that, the only thing we CAN do is crack open a dictionary. Unless you can provide a rule that would override the common English. Automatically Appended Next Post: I mean, if you're going to say that THAT isn't how it works, then define the word "inch." Because there's no specific rule that states that the word inch used in the book means a common Imperial inch on an American ruler. Automatically Appended Next Post: I could, instead, call my boot an inch and use my boot as measurements. Automatically Appended Next Post: <.< That would make for an interesting battle system. Each unit moves 6 boots, where a boot is literally the boot on your foot.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/02/22 23:37:36
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:37:42
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Zarius wrote:Col, since there ISN'T a specific rules quote on the precise definition of the word "upgrade" I'm using the definition in the DICTIONARY, because that's the only one AVAILABLE. There literally is NO definition in any of the manuals that states that the word "upgrade" doesn't use the same definition as the common English language. Since there ISN'T a rule on that, the only thing we CAN do is crack open a dictionary. Unless you can provide a rule that would override the common English.
Sure. Per the dictionary, upgrade means "to get something that is better than what you had originally".
When I go to rent a car I often get a chance to upgrade my economy rental car to a luxury rental car for the same price.
Common English.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:39:23
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Zarius wrote:If there isn't a better definition available as to exactly what the terminology means, then you have to go with the dictionary definition as default. YOU keep saying exactly what we're saying, then calling it a statement that contradicts us.
Zarius wrote:Col, since there ISN'T a specific rules quote on the precise definition of the word "upgrade" I'm using the definition in the DICTIONARY, because that's the only one AVAILABLE. There literally is NO definition in any of the manuals that states that the word "upgrade" doesn't use the same definition as the common English language. Since there ISN'T a rule on that, the only thing we CAN do is crack open a dictionary. Unless you can provide a rule that would override the common English.
You purposely ignore that there is more than one definition of upgrade...
Why are you doing this? I don't understand why you refuse to even acknowledge the existence of
This is Merriam-Webster's definition of upgrade when used as a verb:
-to make (something) better by including the most recent information or improvements
-to choose to have or use something more modern, useful, etc.
- to get something that is better than what you had originally
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:40:48
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Tzeentch Veteran Marine with Psychic Potential
|
No one can be certain on a large percentage of 40k rules.
Play however you want, however you and your opponents enjoy playing the most, and feth what everyone else thinks and says.
The hobby is too expensive, and life too short to allow your immersion and enjoyment of it to be dictated by strangers on the Internet.
Many of these threads are endless echo chambers, they never lead anywhere because the rules don't actually contain the explicit answer, regardless of how much people are certain that their particular interpretations and rules bits are the most relevant ones.
For me, 40k has been moving more and more into house rule territory since 7th dropped. It's just the way it is, there's always going to be differing opinion somehow, somewhere, on some ruling.
|
7500 pts Chaos Daemons |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:43:54
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Because the dictionary lists the definitions by commonality. To prevent what YOU are doing, which is simply choosing the definition you want to choose, you default to the first, or most common, definition. As such, the correct definition here would be
-to make (something) better by including the most recent information or improvements
I make my scout better by including the WPGL improvement. First definition, thus correct one UNLESS context indicates otherwise. In this instance, context COULD be either the first OR the third (or second, to be honest), because they ALL could make sense here, thus, the first is defaulted. Automatically Appended Next Post: AncientSkarbrand wrote:No one can be certain on a large percentage of 40k rules.
Play however you want, however you and your opponents enjoy playing the most, and feth what everyone else thinks and says.
The hobby is too expensive, and life too short to allow your immersion and enjoyment of it to be dictated by strangers on the Internet.
Many of these threads are endless echo chambers, they never lead anywhere because the rules don't actually contain the explicit answer, regardless of how much people are certain that their particular interpretations and rules bits are the most relevant ones.
For me, 40k has been moving more and more into house rule territory since 7th dropped. It's just the way it is, there's always going to be differing opinion somehow, somewhere, on some ruling.
I'll be honest, that's what I decided to do hours ago. At this point, this is literally just entertainment for me at work. Nothing more.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/22 23:45:15
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:49:52
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Zarius wrote:Because the dictionary lists the definitions by commonality. To prevent what YOU are doing, which is simply choosing the definition you want to choose, you default to the first, or most common, definition. As such, the correct definition here would be
-to make (something) better by including the most recent information or improvements
I make my scout better by including the WPGL improvement. First definition, thus correct one UNLESS context indicates otherwise. In this instance, context COULD be either the first OR the third (or second, to be honest), because they ALL could make sense here, thus, the first is defaulted.
The rules explicitly tell us this . . .
So the third definition is the one the BRB is using.
The burden is on you to prove otherwise.
Options are unit upgrades, not model upgrades. The third definition is the one that works in the context of unit upgrades.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:51:17
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
AncientSkarbrand wrote:No one can be certain on a large percentage of 40k rules.
Play however you want, however you and your opponents enjoy playing the most, and feth what everyone else thinks and says.
The hobby is too expensive, and life too short to allow your immersion and enjoyment of it to be dictated by strangers on the Internet.
Many of these threads are endless echo chambers, they never lead anywhere because the rules don't actually contain the explicit answer, regardless of how much people are certain that their particular interpretations and rules bits are the most relevant ones.
For me, 40k has been moving more and more into house rule territory since 7th dropped. It's just the way it is, there's always going to be differing opinion somehow, somewhere, on some ruling.
I don't think there is anyone that will disagree with you. Play however you want, it doesn't hurt anyone. It doesn't matter to anyone else.
This is a place to discuss rules though. So we discuss them in an attempt to get a better understanding of the rules.
You are right. There are tons of murky rules in the book. Ones that have no resolution and ones that are clearly ambiguous. This isn't one of those times.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/22 23:52:05
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
WHERE does this say "replace." NOTHING in here says "replace." In lieu of you showing me where this says "replace" or where the rules show a synonymy between "replace" and "upgrade", quote something else. Automatically Appended Next Post: Rasko wrote:AncientSkarbrand wrote:No one can be certain on a large percentage of 40k rules.
Play however you want, however you and your opponents enjoy playing the most, and feth what everyone else thinks and says.
The hobby is too expensive, and life too short to allow your immersion and enjoyment of it to be dictated by strangers on the Internet.
Many of these threads are endless echo chambers, they never lead anywhere because the rules don't actually contain the explicit answer, regardless of how much people are certain that their particular interpretations and rules bits are the most relevant ones.
For me, 40k has been moving more and more into house rule territory since 7th dropped. It's just the way it is, there's always going to be differing opinion somehow, somewhere, on some ruling.
I don't think there is anyone that will disagree with you. Play however you want, it doesn't hurt anyone. It doesn't matter to anyone else.
This is a place to discuss rules though. So we discuss them in an attempt to get a better understanding of the rules.
You are right. There are tons of murky rules in the book. Ones that have no resolution and ones that are clearly ambiguous. This isn't one of those times.
I'll actually agree with you on this point, Rasko. I'm here to try to actually get an OFFICIAL definition, if one can be reached. Automatically Appended Next Post: Because the upgrade may be fore the unit, as a whole to change it from containing 10 scouts to 9 scouts and a WGPL, but the acutal upgrade it self is to ONE scout, thus one MODEL.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/02/22 23:55:42
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/23 00:01:56
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Zarius wrote:
Because the upgrade may be fore the unit, as a whole to change it from containing 10 scouts to 9 scouts and a WGPL, but the acutal upgrade it self is to ONE scout, thus one MODEL.
The rules tell us its a unit upgrade.
So the unit is getting 4 scouts and a WGPL instead of 5 scouts which is better than what it had originally.
You have to prove that it is a model upgrade rather than a unit upgrade when the rules directly contradict you.
You also have to prove that upgrade does not mean "to get something that is better than what you had originally" which 100% works with the rules as they are written.
Good luck. The rules and common English are against you.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/02/23 00:05:25
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/23 00:02:58
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Death-Dealing Devastator
|
I'm unfamiliar with Wolves so tell me...
Are there specific weapon/gear lists that are named in the options list that the guy can take from because that is the end all, be all for his gear.
|
- 535pts
40K - 2000pts
HH - 3000pts
- 40 Wounds |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/02/23 00:03:23
Subject: Clarification on rules with "upgraded units."
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
I will clearly address your points, please address ours.
Zarius wrote:WHERE does this say "replace." NOTHING in here says "replace." In lieu of you showing me where this says "replace" or where the rules show a synonymy between "replace" and "upgrade", quote something else.
Here is the proof that 'upgrade' means 'replace'.
Options: This section lists all of the upgrades you may add to the unit if you wish to do so, alongside the associated points cost for each.
From this, we can see that when the Codex upgrades something, you 'add to the unit'. The key thing to note here is what does it "add" to. It adds to the unit. It does not add to the model.
This means that it is a unit change and not a model change. Therefore, it is not a "promotion" advancement.
You get a Unit Upgrade from 5 Wolf Scouts to 4 Wolf Scouts and 1 WGPL.
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/02/23 00:08:47
|
|
 |
 |
|