Unleash the Lions and unit debuffs

[Kastor Krieg]

> If RAW was clear we most likely wouldn't have a 25 post thread in the OR forum.

No, if someone wasn't trying to bend over backwards to make a case for something that doesn't need a solution, we wouldn't.

 

Sorry, but the "After all, there's not anything that permits you to transfer the effects of a buff/debuff from one unit to another either. This is an undefined case" argument is entirely fallacious. It's as if you could remove the enemy Warlord from the table at the end of your Psychic phase, just because nothing stated that you can't. The ruleset doesn't work like that. It's called a "permissive ruleset", it's a basic design characteristic of most game rulesets, which means that for you to be able to do something, you need to have an explicit PERMISSION to do it.

It's the other way round than the regular law, where what's not FORBIDDEN is permitted, which keeps on tripping people up. So is there a PERMISSION for removal of debuffs?

Q: Can the "Unleash the Lions" stratagem remove previous debuffs on one or more of the new "units"?
A: There is NOTHING that permits a debuff in the "Unleash the Lions" stratagem, or any auxiliary rules, therefore no.

QED.

[wildweasel]

Where is the permission for transferral of effects from one unit to another?

[Eddie Orlock]

Q: Can the "Unleash the Lions" stratagem remove previous debuffs on one or more of the new "units"?

A: There is NOTHING that permits a debuff in the "Unleash the Lions" stratagem, or

Splitting the unit into several models is a novel mechanic, yes. But it only does what it says - splits the unit into several smaller ones. If it affected buffs and debuffs, it would've said it did. It doesn't say it does, ergo it DOESN'T.

TL;DR - you demand a game mechanic that gives you an additional advantage because of the advantage (unit split) you're already permitted. That's a straight up WAAC rules lawyering argument if I've ever seen one. Ugly.

Thrice now I'm reading the same largely ad hominem charges. It's been a while since I've shuttered anything around here on the 'Three Moves' interpretation. Select users should be glad that I've not invoked OR Rule One to start handing out warning points based on the number of exasperation and emotional charge indicating typeface changes.

 

-----------

 

Now, just because I can see a case for one interpretation doesn't mean I can't see the case for the other. With this in mind, I'll reopen this if I'm presented with the usual 'sufficiently novel argument'.