greatcrusade08 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 isnt there a law against flogging a dead horse? all joking aside, it seems logical processes vary from person to person, i dont think the majority can convince the minority of RAW. i think we all agree on how it should be done RAI wise though. i think its becoming very circular, perhaps its run its course? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techmarine Data007 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 It would seem to be an odd rule if it were written with the intent of making Abaddon a loner in a marked army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacinda Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Cut between dotted lines. ....................................... I am wondering about the rules for Abaddon with regards to joining units. It seems like he can not join any marked unit since he will always have a different Mark of Chaos. Can Abaddon join units that have a Mark of Chaos? ........................................... "Please note: Rules questions and gaming related problems can only be answered via email. Please contact us and we will respond within 3 business days" The email address for rules queztions to GW is: mailto:askyourquestion@games-workshop.com We know what the answer will be. We know how the rule SHOULD work. We also know it is not worded with that sort of flexibility. Ask and ye shall receive. Speak and it will be opened unto you. Sit silent and suffer the consequences of future bad rules and TO's who love to be jerks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex567 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 isnt there a law against flogging a dead horse? all joking aside, it seems logical processes vary from person to person, i dont think the majority can convince the minority of RAW. i think we all agree on how it should be done RAI wise though. i think its becoming very circular, perhaps its run its course? If you want to talk about flogging a dead horse, might I introduce you to slannesh? But I also agree, it might be best to agree to disagree. At least we can all agree that cookies taste mighty fine without getting some nurgles rot in your khorne flakes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacinda Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 At least we can all agree that cookies taste mighty fine without getting some nurgles rot in your khorne flakes! Blood for the Blood god! Skulls for the Skull Throne! Milk for the Khorne Flakes! And snickdoodles for me, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puffin Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 It's not: IC has ABCD and unit has A so hooray! :D It's: IC has ABCD and unit has A, so aww. :D I'm seeing a lot of assertions by you and Jacinda along the lines of "This is how the rule works, full stop". Are there other, more well established rules, using the same wording that can be pointed to as precedent? Or is this simply herd mentality brought on by the belief that GW's rules are so bad that we spend more time looking for loopholes than actually trying to comprehend the written word? Neither of you have answered the marble question, either, which I find bizarre. Again, the rule as written says that I may not join a squad if the squad has a different Mark. It doesn't say "has a different mark to any of the marks I have, taken individually". So basically the rule boils down to "what do we mean by different"? Clearly, in a case of 1 Mark on the IC and 1 Mark on the unit it's quite simple - you do an equality comparison of the two Marks and if they are the same Mark then the difference test is passed and the IC may join. However, in the case where an IC has more than one Mark, we are hitting a logical block. To help solve this we need to parse the rule. "An IC with a Mark of Chaos may not join a unit that has a different Mark of Chaos". The first thing to note is that we are not instructed to look at individual Marks, merely that the Mark of the unit must not be different from the IC's Mark(s). So how do we determine whether the unit's Mark is different from the IC's? We apply the same basic logic that we always use when comparing a set to a single item: we look to see if the item is in the set and if so we say that it isn't different. This is the marble proof - proof by contradiction. I contradict your logic by demonstrating that in an analogous situation you would come to the opposite conclusion. Go and ask your mum or dad or partner the question: "If I have a red marble and a blue marble and you have a red one, is the colour of your marble different?" and see what they say. I'm willing to bet the majority will say that their marble is not different. Now substitute Khorne and Tzneetch for red and blue. What is the answer now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Res Ipsa Loquitur Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Do Khorne Berzerkers have the Mark of Slaanesh? No? Well Abaddon does. Is that a different Mark to the Mark of Khorne? It is? Then he can't join them. Do Noise Marines have the Mark of Nurgle? No? Well Abaddon does. Is that a different Mark to the Mark of Slaanesh? It is? Then he can't join them. Do Plague Marines have the Mark of Tzeentch? No? Well Abaddon does. Is that a different Mark to the Mark of Nurgle? It is? Then he can't join them. Do Thousand Sons have the Mark of Khorne? No? Well Abaddon does. Is that a different Mark to the Mark of Tzeentch? It is? Then he can't join them. It does not matter that he has one Mark that the unit also has because he has three that are different. Puffin, the marble analogy is inane. Anyone not made up to support your tenuous case will ask "which marble?" and then will say "one's different and one's the same". It is not proof of anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex567 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Quick question when a character can buy a mark of chaos of many does "a" refer to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Quick question when a character can buy a mark of chaos of many does "a" refer to? a character can only buy one individual mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Mage Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Wich is probly why this wasnt caught during the editing phase- Abbaddon is the only outlying case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex567 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Quick question when a character can buy a mark of chaos of many does "a" refer to? a character can only buy one individual mark So this "a" refers to one? so in the next sentance a character with one mark cannot join a unit with one different mark? As such this rule doesn't apply to abbadon because he has more then one mark, so the rule doesn't refer to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswanick Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Quick question when a character can buy a mark of chaos of many does "a" refer to? a character can only buy one individual mark So this "a" refers to one? so in the next sentance a character with one mark cannot join a unit with one different mark? As such this rule doesn't apply to abbadon because he has more then one mark, so the rule doesn't refer to him. :) I applaud your efforts to use another thread to try and catch people in logical inconsistencies, but in this case it won't work: "May take a single Mark of Chaos from the wargear list.", C:CSM, Pg.93 A character doesn't take "a" Mark of Chaos, he takes "a single" Mark of Chaos. Hmm... Although that does reinforce my statement in the other thread that "a" can mean "one or more", otherwise its redundant to us "a single". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex567 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I think the issue stems from missinterpritation of the sentance, you could potentially look at it from both ways, I see both points as being valid. Its the same as saying: I never said she stole my handbag. Putting emphasis on each word individually each time you read it changes the meaning of the sentance. Personally if any one said I couldn't put abbadon in the squad I'd ass-rule them each time they tried to take a turn, with this rule said this and this rule said that. The real question is why am I using abaddon in the first place? There are som many cooler chaos characters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Res Ipsa Loquitur Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 No matter how you read the sentence you can't get around the fact that no Marked unit will ever not have a different Mark to Abaddon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex567 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 No matter how you read the sentence you can't get around the fact that no Marked unit will ever not have a different Mark to Abaddon. If you consider the four marks as a whole then they have the same mark as abbadon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azekai Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 If you consider the four marks as a whole then they have the same mark as abbadon But that is not what the rules actual say. Regardless of how you consider it, the rules say that Abbadabadoo has 4 distinct marks. In the old 'dex it stated that he had a unique mark that had the effect of all the other 4, but that is not how it is worded in the 6th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greatcrusade08 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 If you consider the four marks as a whole then they have the same mark as abbadon But that is not what the rules actual say. Regardless of how you consider it, the rules say that Abbadabadoo has 4 distinct marks. In the old 'dex it stated that he had a unique mark that had the effect of all the other 4, but that is not how it is worded in the 6th. exactly right, he doesnt have an undivided mark in this edition.. he has four seperate marks and as such will ALWAYS have a different mark to whatever marked unit you want him to join. the only choice you have RAW speaking, is to place him with an unmarked unit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kol Saresk Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Unless a FAQ comes out and either changes Abaddon's Mark or makes Abaddon an exception to the rule. Until then, Abby can only play with the Undecided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex567 Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 I'm still voting for the "he has more then 1 mark so he doesn't qualify" wording. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShinyRhino Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I'm still voting for the "he has more then 1 mark so he doesn't qualify" wording. +OR+ isn't a democracy. It's a benevolent dictatorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awfulawful Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 +OR+ isn't a democracy. It's a benevolent dictatorship. Strange people posting in threads is no basis for a system of government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azekai Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Strange people posting in threads is no basis for a system of government. This already came up in another thread. If you want to get technical the whole site only exists at the behest of Brother Argos, and the majority doesn't ultimately have a say in the direction of the BnC. I'm still voting for the "he has more then 1 mark so he doesn't qualify" wording. The current rules are stupid, but there is no way any 'wording' ambiguities allow him to join marked units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morollan Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Strange people posting in threads is no basis for a system of government. This already came up in another thread. If you want to get technical the whole site only exists at the behest of Brother Argos, and the majority doesn't ultimately have a say in the direction of the BnC. it was a Monty Python quote. Sort of. A bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex567 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I'm still voting for the "he has more then 1 mark so he doesn't qualify" wording. The current rules are stupid, but there is no way any 'wording' ambiguities allow him to join marked units. Well there is but you'd think I'm being silly, like my previous statement implied. ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.