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.

 Sim-Life wrote:

pelicaniforce wrote:
I absolutely loathe hearing people use the one with “up” it’s repellent

So is this take.

I think that's unfair. 'Repellent' may be putting it strongly, but I do get a similar feeling. For me it kind of comes from the same place as people saying 'pacific' instead of 'specific', or using the words 'itch' and 'scratch', or 'borrow' and 'lend', interchangeably. It feels viscerally wrong. Words, and symbols, have meanings.

I mean, to get painfully pedantic: this "+" is a plus sign. It's literally written in all the books as 3+. Three plus. If, on the other hand, it was written as 3↑, then I would say 'three up'.

I can see the logic for both, but I've always heard it said as '3 plus' saves.

Crispy78 wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

pelicaniforce wrote:
I absolutely loathe hearing people use the one with “up” it’s repellent

So is this take.

I think that's unfair. 'Repellent' may be putting it strongly, but I do get a similar feeling. For me it kind of comes from the same place as people saying 'pacific' instead of 'specific', or using the words 'itch' and 'scratch', or 'borrow' and 'lend', interchangeably. It feels viscerally wrong. Words, and symbols, have meanings.

I mean, to get painfully pedantic: this "+" is a plus sign. It's literally written in all the books as 3+. Three plus. If, on the other hand, it was written as 3↑, then I would say 'three up'.

People in my local meta use both, so I use both. It's not as problematic as "borrow" versus "lend" since 3+ in this case also indicates that a 3 or higher (and therefore 'up') , so it's not like comparing an action with a noun or the giver with the receiver. There are far more things to be pedantic in language about that are far more important than this one.

It's semantics (study of language), but then half of this whole forum is semantics, so take it as you will.

 Charistoph wrote:
It's semantics (study of language), but then half of this whole forum is semantics, so take it as you will.

Correction: semantics is study of meaning inherent in languages.

^ My favourite post of the last few months.

pelicaniforce wrote:
I absolutely loathe hearing people use the one with “up” it’s repellent

YOU HERETIC

 skchsan wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
It's semantics (study of language), but then half of this whole forum is semantics, so take it as you will.

Correction: semantics is study of meaning inherent in languages.

True, but was applying brevity since sometimes words are hard for some to read. It's a specific study of language, but it is still a study of language.

 Charistoph wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
It's semantics (study of language), but then half of this whole forum is semantics, so take it as you will.

Correction: semantics is study of meaning inherent in languages.

True, but was applying brevity since sometimes words are hard for some to read. It's a specific study of language, but it is still a study of language.

I really wasn't trying to call you out as it was meant to be a playful banter.

Having said, semantics is the study of the capacity of language or 'symbols', whether it be alphabet, hieroglyphics, wall paintings, street signs, etc, to hold meaning, and the importance/pertinence of it. Certain aspects of semantics overlap with, and sometimes rely on linguistics, but it certain should not be considered a 'type' of study of language (I disagree with the google definition which states semantics is a branch of linguistics).

 skchsan wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
It's semantics (study of language), but then half of this whole forum is semantics, so take it as you will.

Correction: semantics is study of meaning inherent in languages.

True, but was applying brevity since sometimes words are hard for some to read. It's a specific study of language, but it is still a study of language.

I really wasn't trying to call you out as it was meant to be a playful banter.

Having said, semantics is the study of the capacity of language or 'symbols', whether it be alphabet, hieroglyphics, wall paintings, street signs, etc, to hold meaning, and the importance/pertinence of it. Certain aspects of semantics overlap with, and sometimes rely on linguistics, but it certain should not be considered a 'type' of study of language (I disagree with the google definition which states semantics is a branch of linguistics).

I was going by Oxford's and Merriam-Webster's definition honestly. As you say, language is not always spoken and can delve in to the symbols present in the language.

I just mention it because people often go, "but that's just semantics," as if to dismiss the argument, even though the argument is completely about the meaning of what we're talking about. Such as the case with this thread here. Though, I have seen it most often in rules discussions, which is the whole point of bringing up a rule question!

-Guardsman- wrote:
Directly inspired by the "forty kay" vs. "forty thousand" poll...

Would you say that Marines have a "three plus save", or a "three up save"?

I'm a "three up" guy. Because, well, 3+ means you have to roll "three or up". Makes sense to say "three up".

Technically 3+ means "3 or more", not "3 or up".

Have always said 3 plus (reading 3+ as it is).

pelicaniforce wrote:
I absolutely loathe hearing people use the one with “up” it’s repellent

I think you might be taking the whole thing too personally.

For me, I use both. If I really think about it, I would say I only really use "up" when talking about saves, and would probably use "plus" for other stats ("three up save" vs "ballistic skill three plus"). I can't really say why I do this, and to be honest it's probably just something I've picked up from podcasts or youtube channels where they say that. I know that when I played ~15 years ago with my school friends, I definitely never used "up".

This is when I'm talking about a specific stat, though. Like, it seems, a lot of others in this thread, I just say "hitting on threes" when actually playing. Variants include "threes to save", "needing threes", or just simply stating "threes" before the roll. Maybe it depends how experienced your group is, but I find that the majority of people don't need you to state "and now I'll roll to save, requiring a three or more on account of my three plus save".

Simply murmur "threes" while your opponent is distracted, roll the dice behind a big wall, and pick it up before they can see!

I personally say Three Plus.

However, during a game I normally say "You hit/wound/save on threes" to indicate you need a physical roll of 3 or more, accounting for modifiers. A bad habit I know and I always have to remember/explain that. Scouts in Cover "save on threes", but they still have a 4+ save, they just roll D6+1 to attempt to pass it.

 Darian Aarush wrote:
Technically 3+ means "3 or more", not "3 or up".

Have always said 3 plus (reading 3+ as it is).

"Up" usually indicates "more", but that is a vertically centric conceit. We are a vertical species, though.