Units and models

[Dan VK]

This conversation began in another thread and I feel it deserves its own. Below are the relevant posts from the previous thread to get this thread started. As stated in the topic title and topic description, do rules that affect models affect units? Do rules that affect unit affect models?

 

Nice.

The rules must be judged in context, the dictionary lacks that.

It is no better than using fluff or real life examples to prove rules. It doesn't work very well.

 

Units and models are two different things and are treated so by the rules.

Models make up units, but they are treated differently.

IC's can join units but not if they are always one model.

If a unit is the target of a shooting attack models are assigned the wounds, unless it is targeted by a Vindicare assassin, Jaws of the Wolf World or Sgt. Telion in which case the model is singled out.

IC's that are part of a unit cannot be targeted as a single IC could.

If a unit moves though dangerous terrain only the models that move within it are tested.

If one model in a unit moves the entire unit counts as moving.

In close combat IC's are counted as a single model unit until the attacks have been resolved.

Units can be of several types, with different rules and there own FOC slots. Artillery units have a mix of vehicle-like models with infantry models.

They are related but each are unique.

The idea that there is no difference has no basis in the rules.

 

You cannot force a definition by limiting scope to rules only. Either there is a special definition (in which case it will be in the rules) or there is not a special definition (in which case the standard English dictionary definition applies, otherwise it degenerates in what the meaning of is is). Calling some rules "fluff" to justify a "rules" definition is forcing a definition that disregards RAW, since as soon as they are defined as "fluff" it signals that they are not considered "real rules". Might as well get a marker and darken out the inconvenient words in the rules. That makes them RAE(dited) and not RAW.

 

One model units are not treated differently, the model is the unit and all references to "model" or "unit" are treated exactly the same. Therefore a unit is a group of models that must operate in a certain fashion as outlined in the rules.

 

In those special cases, the special attack specifically allows a specific model to be targeted rather than all the models in the unit as a whole.

 

Well duh. If the IC is part of another unit, then it is just another model in the unit. If the IC is acting independently then it is its own unit and can be targeted as such.

 

If one model is in or wants to enter difficult terrain then the every model in the unit is affected, if it is also dangerous terrain, then yes, only those that actually enter the dangerous terrain must test if they become a casualty. Related but not different.

 

One model moves makes the entire unit to be considered moving. Yep, the relationship is there just as I outlined.

 

And the rules explain why that is so, unless you consider the explanatory rules "fluff".

 

Not relevant, it is inherent in the definitions of model, unit and unit types given in the rules.

 

Doesn't make sense, if they are related, how are they unique or as previously discussed distinct. All models are in units and all units are composed of models.

 

Not that there is no difference, but that there is not such a difference that when a rule refers to "model" (since it affects individual models in a unit) it is not contradicted, overruled or otherwise made void by a rule that says "unit" (since it affects all of the models in the unit). Perfect examples given above about unit and model movement.

units and models are obviously two seperate things, although it is possible to have single model units as outlined in the BRB.

 

certain rules affect models. others affect units..

 

there is no confusion

[Isiah]

I'm not sure anything new can be said here that wasn't said in the original topic – specifically the last few posts that you've quoted again above.

 

What specifically did you want answered, as rules effecting models or units will usually specify what is being targeted if it isn't obvious?

 

Cheers

I

[Dan VK]

I'm not sure anything new can be said here that wasn't said in the original topic – specifically the last few posts that you've quoted again above.

 

What specifically did you want answered, as rules effecting models or units will usually specify what is being targeted if it isn't obvious?

 

Cheers

I

There are rules that reference a 'unit' rather than a 'model'. Would special rules that trigger when a 'model' is affected also trigger when a 'unit' is affected? I expect so, but I cannot seem to find anything stating that directly. I am asking for help finding relevant passages in the BRB, or a followable argument instead of "this I say so thus it is."

[greatcrusade08]

Would special rules that trigger when a 'model' is affected also trigger when a 'unit' is affected? I expect so,

 

if we had some examples it would be easier to argue.. but the only time this would ever be problematic is with single model units.. in which case he would likely be prone to both sets of rules..

a set of clusterbombs that goes off would inflict x wounds in the unit.. would be the same whether its a one man unit or a ten man unit.

JotWW which removes the model from play would be the same regardless.

 

i cant really think of any rules that would be too confusing tbh

 

things like seths special swing are intersting becuase they dont affect a unit, but do affect the models in B2B with him.. note this doesnt bypass normal wound allocation so the wounds can still be taken anywhere on the unit..

[Algesan]

Pg 3 of the rules is a good place to start since that had definitions of Model and Unit. Models are individual playing pieces and units are groups of models that have to follow certain rules.

 

pg 22 has Units Partially In Cover, which says that if over half the models in a unit are in cover, then the entire unit is deemed to be in cover and all of the models get cover saves.

 

I can think of only a few cases where unit isn't a shorthand for all of the models in the unit. A Vindicare shooting a specific model out of a unit. The WBB rules which require model to model measurement for actual eligibility for WBB but the Resurrection Orb only requires one model of a unit to be in range for it to work.

 

They are closely related terms that cannot be used to say "this rule says unit, that says model, so the first rule doesn't work because units aren't models and models aren't units". Trivial to reduce that to absurdity, one way is to simply point to any single model unit.

[SeattleDV8]

All models are part of a Unit.

In general anything that effects a Unit can effect all the models in that Unit.

But things that effect Models do not alway effect the Unit.

Like Dangerous terrain, a Vindicare assassin, Jaws of the Wolf World or Sgt. Telion's special shot just to name a few.

 

it's the same old 'all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares' again.

There is a difference.

[Algesan]

All models are part of a Unit.

In general anything that effects a Unit can effect all the models in that Unit.

But things that effect Models do not alway effect the Unit.

Like Dangerous terrain, a Vindicare assassin, Jaws of the Wolf World or Sgt. Telion's special shot just to name a few.

 

it's the same old 'all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares' again.

There is a difference.

 

However, some have tried to claim that they are triangles and circles. Including you.

 

So this isn't the "same old" because you haven't even tried the "squares and rectangles" logic.

 

They are closely related terms that cannot be used to say "this rule says unit, that says model, so the first rule doesn't work because units aren't models and models aren't units". You've said as I linked to above and it is trivial to reduce that to absurdity, one way is to simply point to any single model unit.

[Leonaides]

i dont get your issue here? No-one is trying to say what you seem to be complaining about. Pick a specific rule, use it as an exemplar. That might help you be understood...

[Isiah]

Yes we need a specific question to answer and there isn't one here that I can see.

[Grey Mage]

So, lets get this ironed out now.

 

Units are made up of models. Check.

 

Models have special rules- check.

 

Some of those rules take effect on a model by model basis- Feel No Pain, Furious Charge, etc. These rules come up when a model meets the criteria- ie taking a wound will trigger feel no pain with some exceptions, charging will activate furious charge, etc.

 

Other rules take effect on a unit basis- Stubborn, Stealth, outflank. The unit as a whole takes actions where these things are triggered- being in or out of cover, taking a break test, etc.

 

Same goes with offensive rules from weapons such as pinning. In this case we can see an individuals rule- the scouts sniper rifle- is triggered by causing a wound on an enemy unit. Their individual rules- say feel no pain to try and save it- come into play, AND their unit special rules- Fearless to ignore the pinning test- also come into play.

 

Another example- a unit with slow and purposeful attempts an assault *unit USR is triggered* but each model will strike at initiative because they have frag grenades *model rule, granted by having grenades*.

 

Wether the rule is possessed by a model or by a unit makes no difference in wether or not its executed, or what other rules can be used in the same process as it.

 

Kappeesh?

[Dan VK]

So, lets get this ironed out now.

 

Units are made up of models. Check.

 

Models have special rules- check.

 

Some of those rules take effect on a model by model basis- Feel No Pain, Furious Charge, etc. These rules come up when a model meets the criteria- ie taking a wound will trigger feel no pain with some exceptions, charging will activate furious charge, etc.

 

Other rules take effect on a unit basis- Stubborn, Stealth, outflank. The unit as a whole takes actions where these things are triggered- being in or out of cover, taking a break test, etc.

 

Same goes with offensive rules from weapons such as pinning. In this case we can see an individuals rule- the scouts sniper rifle- is triggered by causing a wound on an enemy unit. Their individual rules- say feel no pain to try and save it- come into play, AND their unit special rules- Fearless to ignore the pinning test- also come into play.

 

Another example- a unit with slow and purposeful attempts an assault *unit USR is triggered* but each model will strike at initiative because they have frag grenades *model rule, granted by having grenades*.

 

Wether the rule is possessed by a model or by a unit makes no difference in wether or not its executed, or what other rules can be used in the same process as it.

 

Kappeesh?

:P

[Algesan]

i dont get your issue here? No-one is trying to say what you seem to be complaining about. Pick a specific rule, use it as an exemplar. That might help you be understood...

 

 

This is where the unit/model as distinct entities popped up:

 

SeattleDV8

 

Okay, WWB is a rule that effects models.

Sweeping Advance is a rule that effects Units

Its a subtle difference, we are not talking about wounds or casualties.

The Sweeping Advance removes the Unit.

Also the Codex in this case Has to mention Sweeping Advance or it does not trump/over-rule the BRB.

Look at ATSKNF for an example of what it takes to trump Sweeping Advance .

WWB does not have this and therefore does not work.

 

In other words Sweeping Advance refers to "units" and WWB refers to "models", therefore WBB cannot happen when SA occurs because it is a whole unit, not the individual models.

 

<snip>

 

Wether the rule is possessed by a model or by a unit makes no difference in wether or not its executed, or what other rules can be used in the same process as it.

 

Kappeesh?

 

Bingo. :P :tu: