Sang Guard Death Mask vs Walkers

[Grimtooth]

Cannot take the test does not equal a pass. Ergo you are affected by the Death Mask. Please explain otherwise without using notions such as 'common sense' and 'fluff'. As I said before, using logic engines if you need a 'positive' result and get instead an 'error' result then you will not activate. Failure to activate in this instance results in you fighting with WS1.

 

It is very clear in its wording. You must pass a Leadership test otherwise you fight at WS1. If you cannot take a Ld test you cannot pass one. It doesn't make you immune to Leadership as that is not in the rulebook. It is an assumption based on common sense.

 

I am showing you the specific definition given by the BRB as to what constitutes passing a Leadership test. Not even taking the test does NOT constitute not passing the Leadership test. Please quote the pages that specify that not taking a Leadership test constitues not passing a Leadership test. You can't because it doesn't exist.

 

Your RAI of what constitutes "passing a Leadership test" is not the given definition per the BRB. You are completely arguing RAI and completely disregarding RAW.

[SamaNagol]

Are you reading what you write? If the book states what DOES constitute passing a Leadership test, (ie: rolling the sum total on 2 dice equal to or lower than your Ld value), then everything else is NOT passing a Leadership test. It is very simple and you are over-complicating it for no reason. No one is mentioning FAILING a leadership test, simply not passing one.

 

If you cannot pass a Ld test then you are affected by the Death Mask. The reason why you do not pass is inconsequential.

 

Again, I remind you I personally would not use this myself in a game because it is ridiculous extrapolation of RAW and is utterly counter-intuitive. But please realise it IS what the rules say. And for this reason it ANGERS me when GW just disregard rules queries like this as people looking to be nerdy powergames and WAAC players. Laughing it off as nonsense means they do not need to address their rules development or their after-sale support for these rules systems. The very fact that GW have started turning round FAQs and Errata for codices faster than 6 months over the last couple of releases is because people are actually looking at their rules sets in this way and the internet is forcing them to address their slack writing.

 

As I said earlier in the thread, if the Death Mask rules said 'pass Morale test' it would be very simple and straight forward. As they do not, then unfortunately by strict RAW Walkers are affected by them.

 

Edit: as are Fearless models, which is equally ridiculous.

[LordCommanderSamirus]

Fearless models won't by automatically dropped to WS 1 however, they still have a Ld to test against. It is a Leadership test not a morale. The best argument I can find against this is under the characteristics test. You auto-fail a characteristics test if the value in question is 0 or -. However in this case there is no characteristic for Ld at all under walkers. I understand the rule is worded as it is "pass a test". Fact is it is worded very poorly and apparently (although anybody who actually enjoys playing in the spirit of the game will agree with me it shouldn't even be necessary) should be FAQ'd as soon as possible to clear up the confusion. Has anybody even considered calling the rules hotline... if it even still exists, or E-Mailing a query to GW (whichever they're doing these days if either)?

 

-Samirus

[Grey Mage]

Cannot take the test does not equal a pass. Ergo you are affected by the Death Mask. Please explain otherwise without using notions such as 'common sense' and 'fluff'. As I said before, using logic engines if you need a 'positive' result and get instead an 'error' result then you will not activate. Failure to activate in this instance results in you fighting with WS1.

 

It is very clear in its wording. You must pass a Leadership test otherwise you fight at WS1. If you cannot take a Ld test you cannot pass one. It doesn't make you immune to Leadership as that is not in the rulebook. It is an assumption based on common sense.

 

Im using precident here- in other cases where a model is incapable of taking a test GW has ruled that they are not effected by whatever was forcing the test. Explain to me why this one is different?

[SamaNagol]

Can you show me that precedent. However there are precedents which apply to some things but not to others. ThunderWolfMount Strength and Toughness bonuses for example

[shatter]

n/a or immune

pass test yes

pass test no

 

walkers (vehicles) are n/a or immune.

 

Unshakable faith.

 

[All affects on vehicles (crews) are represented by the vehicle damage table's, shaken or stunned results]. brb pg 63 last paragraph

 

ie. despite calls for psycology, leadership or morale testing, results vs vehicle crews can only be found via glance or penetration. The death mask does not glance or penetrate ergo no chance to cause affect. This is the text explanation of why vehicles dont have leadership scores. They are outside and unassailable to all rulesets pertaining to it... despite this, peeps keep trying which has led to some FAQs stating no stat = untestable not autofail.

[SamaNagol]

Read the top of that box. It only applies to Morale tests.

 

Also, not passing is not the same as failing.

[shatter]

'Also states that affects on crews are only via glance or penetrate (shaken, stunned), hence why no leadership score. It's the bit that matters. Not the name of the test: the paragraph title despite being 'morale' is 100% about the n/a status of the vehicles deliberatly missing leadership score.

[SamaNagol]

That paragraph does not use the word leadership once. It only pertains to Morale tests. It is 100% about what it says it is about, which is Morale tests....

 

Again, people are making assumptions based on words which do not appear.

[SamaNagol]

Further more, on further reading of the BA Codex, Fear Of The Darkness specifically states that a Morale test is taken and that all exceptions stand. This is not mentioned anywhere in the rules for Death Masks which appear in the same Codex.

[Brother_Dan'l]

So basically it's the same as Sanguine Sword. Every other psy power has a duration, but Sword does not. Does this mean that when facing BA all your Dreads are WS1 and the Librarian has S10 for the entire game?

 

At what point do all the "But by RAW it's allowed and you can't prove it isn't!" folks just shrug and accept that the rule is poorly worded and that RAW is the WRONG ;) answer? Do you really think that harping on this bit of stupid will get GW to FAQ more quickly or write/edit rules more carefully? Probably just after Microsoft creates an version of Windows that doesn't do more harm than good. ;)

[stinkenheim]

If I don't take History as a subject at school, when it comes to my GCSE's am I assumed to have not passed the exam because I wasn't eligable to take it? No, I simply did not take the test. I am also not considered to have passed the test either (otherwise I would have all sorts of random qualifications).

 

The same logic is true of LD tests for vehicles, not being able to take them does not result in a pass/fail situation.

 

Asking for rules quotes is all well and good but no where in the rule book is this situation covered.

Models lacking a certain characteristic are unable to test against it, this does not equal 'always fail the test' simply that the test is not considered to have occured in the first place.

YesI do realise that the wording in C:BA says 'pass a test', but can you tell me how you would even be able to roll against a characteristic that is non-existant?

Not everything in this game is covered by hard rules, it is a sad fact of GW that often it is left to interpretation and common sense to come up with the correct answer (at least until an FAQ is qritten) but in this case it seems like more than wishful thinking to suggest that vehicles are affected but Ld tests.

As Grey Mage said, why not go the whole hog and start using powers like 'Wind of Chaos' against vehicles, sure they don't have a T but that simply means (according to your logic) that they will always fail the test... hey hey we have Land Raiders turning into Spawns, FTW!!.

 

I would appreciate it if someone could show me page referencs where I can find how to take tests/apply test results against models without the required Characteristic. I don't mean where they have it listed as '0' as that is not the case here, simply the part about taking characteristic tests without having the required characteristic anywhere on the models profile.

[SamaNagol]

If you wanted to study History at university, and as a requirement of the course would need to pass History GCSE, if you did not take History GCSE you would not be able to study History at university. Your delightful allegory works wonders for the RAW interpretation, thank you for that.

 

The answer to your question is, 'you cannot pass a test which you have no characteristic entry to take it against'. So unless it is specified elsewhere in the rules, you are unable to meet the very clear requirements of the Death Mask which is 'pass a leadership test'.

 

Casting Wind of Chaos against vehicles has a very specific effect. I presume you mean Gift Of Chaos, which asks you to roll above the target's toughness. As a vehicle does not have a toughness entry it is also impossible to roll above it. You therefore do not meet the requirements of the power and it has no effect.

 

Quite simple to resolve when you read.

 

The important issue is whether it is possible to meet the requirements of the rule. If yes, follow the instructions, if no follow the instructions, if there is an exception in the rules, follow those instructions. When it comes to Death Masks and any model with a weapon skill, if they are incapable of passing a Leadership test then by RAW they are reduced to WS1.

[Spacefrisian]

This must be the biggest fail topic of the moment.

[SamaNagol]

Its the biggest failure in rules writing at the moment. They all seem to be similar as well. Every other psychic power states duration, but Sanguine Sword doesn't. Fear of Darkness says take a morale test, for some reason Death Masks are a Ld test.

[Spacefrisian]

Its not in the rules as the creaters thought that people would use common sense.

[SamaNagol]

Why write any rules at all, people could come to an amicable agreement on the result of each battle based on common sense? Common sense is not a set of rules for a game.

 

Is it common sense that people who are 'Fearless' can look upon some ornate masks and be so afraid they cannot fight in combat, yet happily stare down the 100foot tall denizens of hell?

 

Common sense has no place in a RAW discussion about a permissive rules set. The very reason that using common sense is a very dangerous solution as what may be common sense to you and I may not be common sense to someone else. And while in this instance it may be a very glaring error, in some cases it could be very subtle and nigh on impossible to determine which line of argument is the most 'sensible'. And deciding a ruling on a 4+ is quite frankly ridiculous when you consider the price you pay for these rulebooks and supplements.

 

By RAW Walkers are automatically affected by Death Masks any time they are assaulted because they can never pass a Leadership test. Whilst I personally would not force this correct ruling on my opponent, it does not detract from the fact that it is indeed the correct ruling.

[ImperialReaper]

Its not in the rules as the creaters thought that people would use common sense.

 

Well it is well descriped in all other rules - why not in this?

 

And if this the biggest fail topic at the moment - then because after 4 pages most of the guys here seem to have not understood what the PRO argument is even based about. Because since 4 pages everyone keeps claiming the same rules and the lack of a LD value for walkers - which does in no way affect the represented idea of why they can.

 

Let me put the rule this way:

 

To avoid being reduced to WS of 1 - the walker has to do something it CANT. True to logic the walker will always be reduced to WS1. And even after 4 Pages the rule still did not change and any argument about the lack of a LD stat or any other rules (where it is pretty well said which units they do not apply) is useless due to the formulation of the deathmask rule.

 

Sorry - I still would never claim in a game that this has to happen. But at least I can say: YES - I do understand the logic of the guys who say the masks can affect a walker and RAW you could clan it has to happen.

[stinkenheim]

If a model with no Ld is always assumed to fail its test (which is the opposite of pass. You either pass or fail after all) then surely a model without a T characteristic is also always asumed to fail ay T tests it is required to take.

 

So using the same logic people are using for Death Masks, it is possible to turn a Dread (or indeed any vehicle) into a spawn using a chaos psychic power... Whoop whoop, result for chaos.

Before people moan that Death Masks say you 'unless you pass the test' whereas other things say 'if you fail' it is the same thing. If you fal then you have not passed, and if you pass then you have not failed. There is no difference whichever way round it is written, then end result is the same.

 

I would still like someone to show me where you are able to test against a characteristic when it is missing from the profile. Until someone provides that vital piece of information then this is a pointless arguement.

 

BTW SamaNagol my point, which you seem to have entirely missed, is that by not taking the Exam it didn't result in me failing or passing it. It simply never happened. The same is true in this case, the Ld test cannot be taken by the Dread as it has no Ld, therefore it is impossible for it to either pass or fail the test.

If the wording for Death Masks said 'if the model fails it test xxx happens' then I would still be arguing the same point. You can neither pass nor fail something unless you are able to test against it and nothing any of the 'Pro' people ave written supports their theory that you can test against a characteristic that is missing from a models profile.

[SamaNagol]

A fail is a positive in that instance. It is impossible to achieve a positive result when you cannot take the test. It is possible to not achieve a positive.

 

Not passing IS NOT the same as failing. But I got your point absolutely. Whilst you not taking the exam at any point means it never happened, it means if you wanted to go to university and study that subject or fight using your base Weapon Skill you do not meet the requirements to do so.

 

You cannot test against a characteristic which isn't there. It is impossible. You are entirely correct and I have been saying that all along. But seeing as the rule states 'YOU MUST PASS' then I am afraid unless you are able to pass a leadership test you fight at WS1.

[stinkenheim]

And I still say that your logic is twisted. A model can neither pass nor fail an action it is unable to do, therefore without meeting the pre-requisite of being able to test in the first intance the power would be unable to take place.

 

To pass or fail a Ld test you need to have a Ld value to begin with.

No Ld value means no test is possible.

No test being possible means that the power cannot take effect as its basic requirement cannot be met- i.e the test against the models Ld.

 

The very same logic is used to prevent things like Gift of Chaos turning the vehicle into a spawn. No T value means no T test can take place which means it is impossible to either pass or fail the T test therefore the power can never work against that model.

 

Not passing IS the same as failing.

To pass means to succeed. To fail means not to succeed, therefore if you do not pass you have not succeeded.

[Judaz]

If the rule said: 'if you fail' or 'if you pass' I wouldn't have any problems with it, but now it says 'must pass a leadership test or be reduced to weapon skill 1'. If you can't either pass or fail, you are affected.

 

A better wording would be: 'the unit must take a leadership test, if it fails the unit is reduced to WS1'. Then walkers wouldn't be affected since they can't fail the test.

 

BUT they can't pass the test...

[BlackSpike]

Stinkheim: It makes a big difference whether it says "pass" or "not fail".

You state yourself that by not taking the Exam (test), you have neither passed nor failed (contrary to your assertion that you must either pass or fail.)

I would be arguing the exact opposite result if the Mask said "If the Unit fails a Ld test it is reduced to WS1". The dread cannot fail, as it is unable to take the test, so it would never be affected.

 

You want to be shown how to take a test against a non-existent characteristic? Then you are missing the part of the argument where we say you cannot take this test, and cannot, therefore, either pass or fail.

The Mask does not state any effect for failing the test. It states an effect, that can be avoided by Passing the test. As the Dreadnought cannot Take the test, it cannot pass or fail. As it cannot pass, it takes the effect.

 

Let me try another analogy:

You must walk to school, unless you pass a Driving Test.

If you are for some reason (disability, age, being a dreadnought) unable to Take a Driving Test, then you cannot passed the test, and must walk to school.

You have not failed the test. There is no mention of failing the test.

The only qualifier is whether you Pass the test.

 

The same is true in this case, the Ld test cannot be taken by the Dread as it has no Ld, therefore it is impossible for it to either pass or fail the test.

Therefore you must take the effect. No qualifier is given for Failing, only whether you pass or not. You say the dread cannot Pass the test. So why would it be exempt from the effect?

[stinkenheim]

Except a qualifier is given for failing, the Ws is reduced to 1.

To avoid tht reaction the model must test against a Ld value and pass. The dread has no Ld value therefore the test cannot take place in the first place. As such the pre-requisite of the ability can never be met and so it will never take effect.

 

To be reduced to Ws 1 you must fail a test, to take that test you need a certain stat. If no stat is present then you can never take the test and therefore you can never be effected by the ability.

 

Its clear that all sides are convinced their own interpretations are correct, it is also clear that after 4 pages it is unlikely either side will produce rules citing why such a thing is or is not possible. As such I will depart from this futile debate.

[BlackSpike]

Except a qualifier is given for failing, the Ws is reduced to 1.

To avoid tht reaction the model must test against a Ld value and pass. The dread has no Ld value therefore the test cannot take place in the first place. As such the pre-requisite of the ability can never be met and so it will never take effect.

 

To be reduced to Ws 1 you must fail a test, to take that test you need a certain stat. If no stat is present then you can never take the test and therefore you can never be effected by the ability.

 

Its clear that all sides are convinced their own interpretations are correct, it is also clear that after 4 pages it is unlikely either side will produce rules citing why such a thing is or is not possible. As such I will depart from this futile debate.

 

Bold Areas: Quotes please!

I cannot see anywhere that it says you must Fail the test to be effected.

The only pre-requisite for taking the effect are being assaulted by a Unit with the Mask.

As you rightly said (re: exam), if you do not take it, you can neither pass nor fail.

 

The rules quite clearly states (IMHO) that the target Unit is reduced to WS1. The only way to avoid this is to Pass a Ld test.

If you cannot take a test, you are unable to meet the pre-requisite for being exempt.