Space Wolf Typhoon

[Tanhausen]

Case 2 :D , plus you may not mix a Typhoon in a squadron with any Tornados. The squadron may only consist of one(1) Typhoon and 1-2 basic Land Speeders.

 

Never got to say thank you B)

[Dan VK]

In my opinion, this is a case of a spell/grammar checker error.

I find this very, very likely. I have seen this topic brought up online and in person, in a friendly game and at a tournament, since shortly after the codex was released. Non-English printings of the codex (I can vouch for the French and German versions, at least) use a plural in place of 'a'.

 

I don't mean be come across rude, but it seems a little mean to argue against multiple Typhoons on the a issue, yet more than one foreign C:SW uses plural in its place. And you knew about it

 

The Templar Raider was missing assault ramps, or something like that. And the German version allowed it. I don't think anyone said a thing about not letting Templar players playing it according to what everyone else had.

 

It seems somewhat pedantic to me, just for the sake of argument. I don't understand the point of it. The discussion was not to get to the root of the rules, because (if the a was not already apparent from Intent, which was not some mystic thing in this particular case, but was in fact more than clear) two foreign printings make it very clear what the a was and is.

 

It was exactly and precisely the way I described it. It seems like you were aiming to say 'well, categorically it is not clear, so I will argue against it.'

 

"I'm technically not wrong, because those versions are not in English"

Wow.

 

I don't resent you for it. But when you knew full well what the a was from other sources, even if you did not want to read the clear intent from the unit entry itself, you told other players that they could not take more than one typhoon, so you are actually misleading them, and that just makes my eyes spin. Even though you knew they could take "plurals" of them.

 

This is why I dodge extended forays in this forum nowadays, and try to avoid "discussions". I can argue against you, so I will. This kind of action chases me away. What a waste.

I do not know about other tournaments, but in previous years at Da Boyz GT in Rochester, NY, Black Templar Land Raiders were not allowed to be treated as Assault Vehicles.

 

As far as I know (please correct me if I am wrong), the +OR+ is for explaining what the rules state they are played, not how the rules should be played. If the rules, as they are written, fly in the face of precedent, common sense, and decency, those are still the rules, at least officially. Without a house rule, Space Wolf players get a single Typhoon pattern Land Speeder per squadron, because that is what the rules state. Similarly, the transport capacity of the Land Raider and Drop Pod in C:SM defies precedent, fluff, and common sense, but that does not change what is printed.

 

Regarding non-English printings, it is not uncommon for them to contain errors, sometimes across multiple languages, so I do not think they are a good standard to measure the English codices against. The same rules are in the English versions, albeit worded differently. Yes, the French and German printings of the Space Wolves codex use the equivalent of 'any' rather than 'a' in the Land Speeder entry, but the German BRB requires units to assault an enemy unit if they are in range, and the rules for Multi-Tracker and Target Lock are swapped in the German and French printings of the Tau codex. Should we disregard the English printings and use the German/French rules in stores and at tournaments, and teach new players that the English printings they have in their hands are wrong, or should we only do that for C:SW? ;)

 

I believe you misunderstood my intent. My intent was, and is, to explain the rules as they are written; I am not arguing for the sake of arguing, I actually dislike arguing because I would rather spend the time playing a fun, non-rules-intensive game. I do not even play by the rules, or insist than anyone else do (not that it comes up much). I have let my opponents go over points, use Forge World rules, ignore the Force Organization chart, reduce the cost of Sisters of Battle by a few points a model, and I like to use Drop Pods in my World Eaters army. I do tell people what I think the rule says.

 

 

[EDIT: The usual]

[Grimtooth]

When you interject "only" and "single" into the conversation you are indeed skewing the rule into your RAI from the RAW because neither are in the rules entry.

 

Alternatively is not being used to express exclusivtivity. It is telling you that instead of upgrading a Land Speeder with X weapons it can be upgraded to a Typhoon. Each Land Speeder has the option of either upgrading to X weapons or as an alternate choice, be upgraded to a Typhoon. The "a" is not defining the limit but defining that a Land Speeder that was not upgraded with X weapons can be upgraded to a Typhoon. If you have one Land Speeder, it can be upgraded to a Typhoon. If you have three, each has the choice of being upgraded because each of them is "a" Land Speeder.

[timmytool]

When you interject "only" and "single" into the conversation you are indeed skewing the rule into your RAI from the RAW because neither are in the rules entry.

 

Alternatively is not being used to express exclusivtivity. It is telling you that instead of upgrading a Land Speeder with X weapons it can be upgraded to a Typhoon. Each Land Speeder has the option of either upgrading to X weapons or as an alternate choice, be upgraded to a Typhoon. The "a" is not defining the limit but defining that a Land Speeder that was not upgraded with X weapons can be upgraded to a Typhoon. If you have one Land Speeder, it can be upgraded to a Typhoon. If you have three, each has the choice of being upgraded because each of them is "a" Land Speeder.

 

exactly what I said in post #5

 

In addition to what Brother Ramses and I have said lets look at how it is worded and other entries in the codex. All other entries(squad unit entries not single model unit entries) minus 2 are worded any/the-entire-squad/each, specifies a specific number (one, up to two, if the squad numbers X models...) or specifies a unique model in the unit (the iron priest, etc). the tree entries that dont comply with the norm in this codex are:

our landspeeder entry

the 2 terminator weapon upgrade options for the wolf guard, which could be seen as a child option to the "Any" terminator armour giving option.

 

the only other option that comes close to our landspeeder option is the Swiftclaw bike pack's 2 attack bike enties

Add a single heavy bolter-armed swiftclaw Attack bike...

a Swiftclaw Attack Bike may upgrade its heavy bolter to a:...

 

the first adds one unigue model to the squad note even here it is "Add a single" the author thought that "a" itself is not sufficient to denote one model.

In the second option entry "a" is not necessary as "the" would have worked here as it is a unique model

 

other then the 3 entries mentioned here no other squad entries use the word "a". out of them 2 are not not used as to mean "one" and the third I believe follow this.

[Dan VK]

When you interject "only" and "single" into the conversation you are indeed skewing the rule into your RAI from the RAW because neither are in the rules entry.

The same could be said about 'any' and 'all', which, unlike 'single' and 'one', are not part of the definition of 'a', but disregarding posts by suggesting the poster relies on opinion to push RAI would be rude. ;)

 

Alternatively is not being used to express exclusivtivity. It is telling you that instead of upgrading a Land Speeder with X weapons it can be upgraded to a Typhoon. Each Land Speeder has the option of either upgrading to X weapons or as an alternate choice, be upgraded to a Typhoon.

If a Land Speeder cannot be a Land Speeder Typhoon and a Land Speeder Tornado simultaneously, then the options are exclusive. 'alternatively' offers an 'alternative', no matter how it is (correctly) used. As a conjunction, like in the entry, 'alternatively' replaces the previous piece of information with another. In this case, the option to upgrade Land Speeders to Land Speeder Tornadoes is replaced with the option to upgrade a Land Speeder to a Land Speeder Typhoon. Example: Bob wants to run to the corner. Alternatively, he can ride his bike.

 

The "a" is not defining the limit but defining that a Land Speeder that was not upgraded with X weapons can be upgraded to a Typhoon. If you have one Land Speeder, it can be upgraded to a Typhoon. If you have three, each has the choice of being upgraded because each of them is "a" Land Speeder.

'a' "defining the limit" is the only way the sentence functions as a rule, unless the rule states, "It is possible that a Land Speeder has been upgraded to a Land Speeder Typhoon, but it is uncertain." :lol: Using 'Land Speeder' as a mass noun would be inappropriate in the context of the entry, specifically because of 'may'. In the entry, 'may' is permissive, meaning "A Land Speeder has permission to be upgraded to a Land Speeder Typhoon," and that prevents Land Speeder from being 'any' Land Speeder as a mass noun.

 

I understand that breaking out grammar for a rules argument is taboo, but when someone asks if they will get wet by going outside, and I say, "It's raining," only to be told it is not, I do not see a problem with defaulting to a more detailed system of understand and restarting with, "Copious amounts of polar molecules are falling..." ;)

 

 

In addition to what Brother Ramses and I have said lets look at how it is worded and other entries in the codex. All other entries(squad unit entries not single model unit entries) minus 2 are worded any/the-entire-squad/each, specifies a specific number (one, up to two, if the squad numbers X models...) or specifies a unique model in the unit (the iron priest, etc). the tree entries that dont comply with the norm in this codex are:

our landspeeder entry

the 2 terminator weapon upgrade options for the wolf guard, which could be seen as a child option to the "Any" terminator armour giving option.

 

the only other option that comes close to our landspeeder option is the Swiftclaw bike pack's 2 attack bike enties

Add a single heavy bolter-armed swiftclaw Attack bike...

a Swiftclaw Attack Bike may upgrade its heavy bolter to a:...

 

the first adds one unigue model to the squad note even here it is "Add a single" the author thought that "a" itself is not sufficient to denote one model.

In the second option entry "a" is not necessary as "the" would have worked here as it is a unique model

 

other then the 3 entries mentioned here no other squad entries use the word "a". out of them 2 are not not used as to mean "one" and the third I believe follow this.

This frustrated me as well. The option to add a Swiftclaw Attack Bike redundantly includes 'single', making it an unequal comparison. The Swiftclaw Attack Bike weapon upgrade option is similarly unequal, even if the wording is identical barring 'alternatively', because there is only ever one Swiftclaw Attack Bike to be eligible for the upgrade. All other similar options in C:SW use 'any', and all other codices use 'one', or similar language, instead of 'a'. The wording in the Land Speeder entry seems to be unique, and looks like a mistake. :( I hope it is corrected with errata.

[Isiah]

Can't believe this is still ongoing.

 

To me it's obvious that the only one speeder can get the Typhoon upgrade. The 'a' refers to a single model. "Alternatively a Land Speeder may be upgraded to a Land Speeder Typhoon [...]" is pretty clear.

[Dan VK]

Can't believe this is still ongoing.

That is the problem with discussions like this, no participant can believe the discussion is ongoing. :)

[Marshal Wilhelm]

Can't believe this is still ongoing.

 

To me it's obvious that the only one speeder can get the Typhoon upgrade. The 'a' refers to a single model. "Alternatively a Land Speeder may be upgraded to a Land Speeder Typhoon [...]" is pretty clear.

 

A is not only ever used to mean one alone. This is the problem with that interpretation.

The context is the whole squadron.

 

So you are buying some Ford Transit vans, Mr. S. Wolf?

Well, you can upgrade any of them to have A/C.

Any of them could be upgraded to have anti-lock brakes.

Alternatively, you could paint a van red.

 

Now in no way would the use of a be seen as salesman Bob telling Mr. S. Wolf that only one of his fleet of vans could be turned from white to red.

 

A can be used, and is mostly used, to denote singular. However, this is not its exclusive usage. That is undeniable.

 

Likewise, only a narrow reading (though perhaps the most common usage of a) of a would give the result of a single model and only a single model.

 

As they are both plausible, regardless of usage ratio, AND that the French AND German versions read as plurals AND that the other 5th ed. Dexes have them as plurals AND that only C:DA has this silliness whilst that other 4th ed. Dex, C:BT, has them as plurals, it seems overwhelming that plural is in fact the way it should be, if not unambiguously apparent.

[timmytool]

Can't believe this is still ongoing.

 

To me it's obvious that the only one speeder can get the Typhoon upgrade. The 'a' refers to a single model. "Alternatively a Land Speeder may be upgraded to a Land Speeder Typhoon [...]" is pretty clear.

 

A is not only ever used to mean one alone. This is the problem with that interpretation.

The context is the whole squadron.

 

So you are buying some Ford Transit vans, Mr. S. Wolf?

Well, you can upgrade any of them to have A/C.

Any of them could be upgraded to have anti-lock brakes.

Alternatively, you could paint a van red.

 

Now in no way would the use of a be seen as salesman Bob telling Mr. S. Wolf that only one of his fleet of vans could be turned from white to red.

 

A can be used, and is mostly used, to denote singular. However, this is not its exclusive usage. That is undeniable.

 

Likewise, only a narrow reading (though perhaps the most common usage of a) of a would give the result of a single model and only a single model.

 

As they are both plausible, regardless of usage ratio, AND that the French AND German versions read as plurals AND that the other 5th ed. Dexes have them as plurals AND that only C:DA has this silliness whilst that other 4th ed. Dex, C:BT, has them as plurals, it seems overwhelming that plural is in fact the way it should be, if not unambiguously apparent.

 

you forgot to mention that the point listing for the upgrade which is part of the rule says "40 points per model" like all the other repeatable upgrades in the book.

[Heimdall Skullcrusher]

I think Marshal Wilhelm has the basics of it. Yes "a" tends to apply to singular things, but in the context of the whole entry, it doesn't by any means limit it to being 1 per squad. If it has said "each" instead, "each" represents a single instance, but is implied that it is one of many. As stated, everywhere else there is a limiting number it is clearly stated. And the "40 points per model" only further establishes that it was meant to allow multiple Typhoons. The wording I believe is an attempt at not forcing you to upgrade ALL of your land speeders to Typhoons if you don't want to. I would even argue you could have Tornados & Typhoons in the same squad (not that you would want to).

[Dan VK]

Alternatively, you could paint a van red.

While his intended meaning is clear, salesman Bob actually suggested painting a single van red. That is beside the point, though, as you have effectively made yours. I think a better example is, "A vehicle may make a right turn on red." I stand corrected.

 

Anything written in a passive voice looks grammatically incorrect to me, probably because it is the writing style that most lacks clarity, and I see no reason to use it. And I hate the word 'may'. And unicorns. So there. :(

[Tsuro]

I think we're getting a little hung up on 'a = singular' here, because although it is singular, it's not necessarily restrictively so.

 

Consider the following set of instructions:

 

A tactical Unit of ten Space Marines can be purchased for 200 points.

A Space Marine is armed with a Bolt gun and wears Power Armour.

 

Would we conclude from that passage that only one marine has weapons or armour, or would we decide it was a declarative statement for all marines in the squad?

 

In this instance we're told that a Landspeeder can be upgraded to a Typhoon, but if we look at that as a set of instructions in a logic diagram we see it is inclusive rather than exclusive, because the only requirement for the upgrade is that the model is 'a landspeeder'

 

Is the model a Landpeeder?

YES = it may be upgraded to a Typhoon.

NO = it may not be upgraded to a Typhoon.

 

If the rule was that ONE Landpseeder may be upgraded then things would be different:

 

Is the model a Landpeeder?

NO = it may not be upgraded to a Typhoon.

YES = Has a model in the squad already been upgraded to a Typhoon?

YES = it may not be upgraded to a Typhoon.

NO = it may be upgraded to a Typhoon.

 

"A" can equate to "any" as easily as it equates to "one," because the squadron is made up of single objects.

A squadron consists of three Landpeeders and a Landspeeder may be upgraded to a typhoon.

 

 

Tsuro

[dswanick]

I think we're getting a little hung up on 'a = singular' here, because although it is singular, it's not necessarily restrictively so.

 

Tsuro

Not necessarily. I think most of us agree that 'a = singular' or 'a = each' depending on context.

The pro-'a = each' camp points to the '+40pts per model' as their indicator that the intent should be plural. All well and good, I can see that point of view (and personally prefer it as I like Typhoons).

The pro-'a = one' camp points to the earlier Codex:Space Marine Land Speeder squadron entry which clearly allows multiple Typhoons, and asks 'why re-word the entry if Phil Kelly didn't intend for it to work differently?'. He could have just copy/pasted the entry and not caused any confusion. Of course, he could also have used the word 'one' instead of 'a' and saved the confusion also.

[Grey Mage]

A

indefinite article

1.

not any particular or certain one of a class or group: a man; a chemical; a house.

2.

a certain; a particular: one at a time; two of a kind; A Miss Johnson called.

3.

another; one typically resembling: a Cicero in eloquence; a Jonah.

4.

one (used before plural nouns that are preceded by a quantifier singular in form): a hundred men (compare hundreds of men ); a dozen times (compare dozens of times ).

5.

indefinitely or nonspecifically (used with adjectives expressing number): a great many years; a few stars.

 

A is about as variable as a word can get, wich is why its used so often I suppose. It has no basis on plural or singular in and of itself, and trying to manufacture a meaning for it without something in context showing us the way is an effort in futility.

 

When I read it it tells me a landspeeder can be upgraded to a typhoon. Ie "thats a landspeeder, it can be upgraded to a typhoon". Each one having this option.

 

The SW codex is rather specific throughout its army selection- 'Each' 'One' 'Any' etc are used throughout. The only places wherein we find 'a' used are Landspeeders- for the typhoon option- and Attack Bikes- for the MM option- so we have nothing conclusive to go on. Therefore I see no reason to take the most restrictive option when every other marine codex currently able to take landspeeders has the option to take multiple landspeeder typhoons in a squadron.

 

Now of course, we all know Im a space wolf player, but this is my take on it. Most people I have encountered had the natural reaction of the 'a' refering to one individual, just like each of the other weapon options is selected for an individual- and not in a restrictive sense.

 

*spreads hands*.

[Kisada]

Marshal Wilhelm I applaud you, that was a fantastic breakdown and you sound exactly like the kind of player I'd like to play with.