|
Post by thegoat on Oct 11, 2021 21:36:18 GMT
But this is Rules as Written... No it isn't.
|
|
|
Post by wundapantz on Oct 12, 2021 4:22:08 GMT
But this is Rules as Written... No it isn't. Lol. This will be my last post in this conversation, and intended as a recap. The undisputable facts: A fanatic has leadership 10 (page 52 of the army book) A fanatic counts as a part of his unit until released (page 52 of the army book) You use the highest leadership of the unit (page 10 of the BRB) Overwhelming consensus is RAI, you don't use LD, just as you don't use Random Movement Arguments against: 1) Random movement - side debate, but RAW says yes. Application of RAW should work both for 2) they are hidden and thus inferred not to be on the table - countered by rules of p52 of AB " count as being a part of the unit until released" So just to underline it We have 3 rules in two official books that say yes you use it And loads of opinions in a forum that say you can't. Repeatedly. Verdict: RAW = units with unreleased fanatics have LD10 RAI (and community practice) = don't be silly, you use the night goblins leadership.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 12, 2021 7:52:31 GMT
Your argument that they are placed not on the table therefore their leadership is not used is another case of inferring a rule when it is not there. On the contrary, as quoted above and once again: BRB p. 10: "If a unit includes models with different Leadership values, always use the one with the highest Leadership." BRB p. 74: "If models in the unit have a different Random Movement value, use the slowest for the entire unit." [ Italics mine] Are there any Fanatic models in the unit? No. They are on the table, they are concealed in their unit as per their rules Sure. O&G AB p. 53: “Fanatics are not placed on the table…” They are not like ambushers off the table as the rules for that are covered in the ambushers special rules They still can be destroyed by other units in the game They still give victory points if they haven't been revealed. Irrelevant for the issue at hand. We both agree the RAI is the fanatics don't take part until they're sprung, but RAI is an interpretation. But this is Rules as Written, and you are either Full Time RAW or arguing for an advantage. Funnily enough, I am the only one who continuously quotes the RAW. Can you point to a rule in the BRB or the OnG army book, or the FAQs for either of them, where it says you do not use the fanatics ld? You are putting the cart before the horse. You must be able to point to a rule for using the leadership Fanatics. This (to quote it again) BRB p. 10: "If a unit includes models with different Leadership values, always use the one with the highest Leadership." is not it, since there are no Fanatic models in the unit. Emphasis on the word model is redundant first of all, on the very first page, you pointed out that the army book special rules trumps the BRB, so here your concealed rule overrules the "models" being placed in a unit. It does not change the highest leadership in the unit. Exactly, it does not change the highest Leadership of the models in the unit, and there are no Fanatic models in the unit. Further to this, fanatics are upgrades to a unit as are the Standard bearers, musicians, champions, shields, heavy armour, spears etc etc. Would you say a character model can't have heavy armour if the model wasn't sculpted with it? It is not a matter of WYSIWYG, but of WYCIWYG (what you count is what you get), or simple arithmetic. Let us take a unit of 17 Night Goblins + Full Command. How many models are there in the unit? 17 + 3 = 20. Let us now add 3 Fanatics to that unit. How many models are there now in the unit? 20 + 3 = 23? No, still 20. How many models are there after the 3 Fanatics are released. 20 - 3 = 17? No, still 20. Because there are no Fanatic models in the unit. And if the unit would be whittled down to a single NG model, that one model could still release 3 Fanatics. How to explain this miraculous multiplication of models? Because there are no Fanatic models in the unit in the first place. What matters is what is what is in the list. You pay 25 points in a night goblin unit and it has a fanatic concealed in it. That fanatic has LD10. The entry for the fanatics rule Hide in Units says " The Fanatics count as part of the concealing unit until they are released" Already answered here: The Hide in Units special rule does state that "you must make a written note of any Night Goblins that include Fanatics," but that is as a special rule, an idea, not models. This is proven beyond any doubt (let alone reasonable), by a simple glance at the unit in question: it just does not include any models of Fanatics at all. They are not even on the table. As so often, the French version is more precise in its language: Les fanatiques ne sont pas placés sur la table au début de la partie comme les autre troups. Au lieu de cela, notez sur un papier quelles unités de gobelins de la nuit dissimulent des fanatiques et combien. On appelle ces unités des unités “cachette.” Les fanatiques s’y dissumulent jusqu’à ce qu’ils soient poussés vers l’ennemi. Si l’unité cachette fuit ou est détruite, les fanatiques non devoilés sont perdus.Which translates into: Fanatics are not placed on the table at the start of the game like other troops. Instead, write down which Night Goblin units conceal Fanatics and how many. These units are called “concealing” units. Fanatics hide there, until they are pushed out towards the enemy. If the concealing unit flees or is destroyed, those fanatics that have not yet been revealed are lost. The side debate about random movement, again RAW, Release The Fanatics talks about what happens when they are released and become an independent unit, but until then they "... Count as part of the concealing unit" so the concealing unit gains the slowest random movement (2d6) however disadvantageous it is. Nope, since, as quoted above and again: BRB p. 74: "If models in the unit have a different Random Movement value, use the slowest for the entire unit." [ Italics mine] There are no Fanatic models in the unit. You actually keep ignoring the main point – because it is irrefutable.
|
|
|
Post by padre on Oct 12, 2021 12:43:48 GMT
There is another, kind of middle ground, between the various arguments being made here, which also relies on the RAW text.
O&G AB p.52 Hide in Units: "... The fanatics count as being part of the concealing unit until they are released. Fanatics remain hidden ..."
So they ARE part of the unit even though they are hidden in it. We cannot ignore that RAW phrase.
Arguing about the difference between the model of the fanatic and the fanatic himself isn't helpful, as they are of course one and the same, just described in different terms. The fanatic is the fanatic model. What else can it be? An idea in the gamer's head? He knows where on the table it is throughout the game, it just happens to be hidden, and so the actual lead/plastic model cannot be placed in the unit it nevertheless counts as being in.
If the fanatics/fanatic models (one and the same) count as being part of the ... unit, then one might assume their leadership should be used. But that cannot be correct because "... they remain hidden ... until they are ready to be pushed out." If they are to remain hidden (RAW) then obviously their leadership cannot be used, for that would reveal their presence. In tabletop terms that would be when the dice were rolled and the LD10 used for the result(s), in game-world terms because they would be shouting orders etc. In RAW terms, it is simply a matter of obeying what is written.
To summarize, and employing RAW: We must act as if there ARE fanatic models in the unit, as the fanatic models "count as being part of the concealing unit," but if they are to remain hidden, their LD can't be used for that would reveal their presence which is not allowed.
That's my interpretation, working in RAW terms alone, and applying all the relevant phrases RAW gives us.
|
|
|
Post by padre on Oct 12, 2021 13:05:10 GMT
Can you see me? Now can you see me? I was there both times, just 'concealed' in the first pic. Nevertheless I counted as being there, and that's what counts! (Get it?) BTW: In this case I was not concealed by a unit, but by painting myself exactly the same shade as the background. Honest. Ok, so I know you could see my shadow, but it's impossible to remove that, so just assume it is a smudge on the ground.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 12, 2021 13:20:21 GMT
padre : That was my second line of reasoning, also already on the first page of this thread. However, their models are clearly NOT contained in the unit; and that is what required to use their Ld or M. In any case, As so often, the French version is more precise in its language: Les fanatiques ne sont pas placés sur la table au début de la partie comme les autre troups. Au lieu de cela, notez sur un papier quelles unités de gobelins de la nuit dissimulent des fanatiques et combien. On appelle ces unités des unités “cachette.” Les fanatiques s’y dissumulent jusqu’à ce qu’ils soient poussés vers l’ennemi. Si l’unité cachette fuit ou est détruite, les fanatiques non devoilés sont perdus.Which translates into: Fanatics are not placed on the table at the start of the game like other troops. Instead, write down which Night Goblin units conceal Fanatics and how many. These units are called “concealing” units. Fanatics hide there, until they are pushed out towards the enemy. If the concealing unit flees or is destroyed, those fanatics that have not yet been revealed are lost.
|
|
|
Post by padre on Oct 12, 2021 13:42:02 GMT
The models might not be there, but they count as being there. Even the French translates as the 'fanatics hide there', which means they must count as being there. Which is exactly why the Ld issue arises. My point is that the Ld issue disappears again when one strictly applies the RAW rule that they remain hidden, a RAW rule that using their Ld would break.
Same end result - do not use their Ld - if different, RAW, reasoning. Language makes mere RAW tricky at times.
At least either understanding of RAW gets the same result.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 12, 2021 15:15:20 GMT
There is a difference between the Fanatics as concept and the Fanatics as models. Until released, they are simply a note on a piece of paper. From the fact that they "hide there" no further inference can be drawn, other than that they are hidden there.
|
|
|
Post by padre on Oct 12, 2021 15:35:41 GMT
Except RAW, they 'count as' being there. Which must mean treat them as if they are there, otherwise what the heck does 'count as' mean?
That's the crux of everything I have said in the last few posts.
You are counting them as not being there. That's not RAW.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 12, 2021 16:21:30 GMT
Whatever it may mean, it does not mean that their models are in the unit - because they demonstrably and irrefutably are not. And the French version omits the parts that lead to confusion. To repeat here some of my basic principles: 1. RAW=RAI, unless there are clear indications to the contrary. 2. What are clear indications to the contrary? Primarily, if the following are transgressed upon: - a rule must be playable - it is the same game in all language versions 3. Most rules' discussions turn out to be superfluous, if one adheres to the simple principle: unless specifically stated otherwise, normal rules apply.
|
|
|
Post by padre on Oct 12, 2021 16:44:46 GMT
Saying the physical models aren't in the physical unit changes nothing about my argument, because they 'count as' being so.
1. 'RAW' = 'read as written'.
2. "Counts as ... part of the unit" (English) = in game play they are considered to be in the unit.
3. "Hidden in the unit" (French) = means being in the unit, as opposed to not being in it, or not being hidden.
4. 'Fanatics' = 'fanatic models' For what could they be otherwise? We are not talking material and spiritual planes here! Nor platonic ideals! It is a wargame, not a complex philosophical analysis of what it means to exist. Nor is it philosophy of language or a game of linguistic comparisons. Besides, the different language versions in this case boil down to the same thing - if the French write that the 'fanatics hide there' then the fanatics are there. (See 3. above)
Why would the RAW rules specify 'counts as being in the unit', if we were supposed to presume the models aren't in the unit? We cannot presume the models aren't in the unit, for that would be counting them as not in the unit.
And yet after all that, because they are also (RAW) 'hidden', that rule means that we can't use their Ld.
Simples!
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 12, 2021 17:01:22 GMT
We do not have to presume that the models are not in the unit, because they effectively are not. As pointed out above, from the fact that in the French version Fanatics "hide there" no further inference can be drawn, other than that they are hidden there, until they are released. Basically, it means that the piece of paper has rules' value, until they are released.
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Oct 12, 2021 17:21:55 GMT
The fanatics count as being in the unit for the purposes of the "Release the Fanatics!" rule.
Rules as written it is clear that the concealing unit doesn't use the fanatics leadership or random movement.
Since I used the phrase "rules as written" above, there is no possible counter argument.
|
|
|
Post by padre on Oct 12, 2021 17:22:51 GMT
... no further inference can be drawn, other than that they are hidden there .... If 'they are hidden there', like you said, they are there. The only alternative is that they are not hidden there, in which case they are either not there, or not hidden. If the unit is destroyed, they are also destroyed, because they count as being there. If the unit moves, they move with it, because they count as being part of it. The RAW rules says nothing about 'effectively' this or 'presume' that. Instead they say "The fanatics count as being part of the concealing unit ..." which unsurprisingly leads me to think we should count them as being part of the unit. If you want to keep suggesting we do not count them as being part of the unit, then there's not much I can do. Besides, I have come to the same conclusion regarding the Ld10, due to the RAW rules that follow concerning fanatics being hidden. So I don't need repeatedly to read you insisting they do not count as being there, as it is an argument that leads to the same conclusion as I have drawn: no Ld10. I am sure me pointing out that they count is being there must be doing your head in too! So, for the sake of the forum, I'll go back to painting toy soldiers, and if I don't answer your almost inevitable next post, refer to my statement above. And above that. And above that.
|
|
|
Post by FvonSigmaringen on Oct 12, 2021 22:15:53 GMT
You are starting to sound like anechrome now.
|
|