PDA

View Full Version : Possibly silly question about Sub Types and Elite Cadres



Ender101
05-09-2014, 08:05 PM
So, I was trying to explain the the new subtype rules to a friend of mine a little while ago, and he asked a question that I've been bouncing around in my head trying to come up with it in a form that doesn't make either of us look like a loophole seeking fun killer/rule lawyer of doom.

The question comes from the 'if the words appear on the card, its part of its subtype' thing.

The question seems silly . . . but here goes:

Do models gain the subtype of their Elite Cadre?

For example: Is Nemo2 a Stormsmith Stormcaller? Is Sorscha a Winterguard Infantry? Is Yuri the Axe a Manhunter? etc.

And if the answer to the above question is yes . . . what stops these models from benefiting from their own elite cadres? In some cases, as most of those listed above, are basically useless to the model, but what about say, Archduke Runewood, would he gain Reform?

Apologies if this question was asked before, I did some extensive searching before deciding to post it.

Thanks,

solkan
05-09-2014, 09:18 PM
The naming rules aren't "If the word appears somewhere on the card, it counts." The words in the brackets for a rule don't count as far as the naming rules go. :)

Shaman
05-09-2014, 10:32 PM
loophole seeking fun killer/rule lawyer of doom ... I love this and am going to start using it immediately, assigning it at the first hint of that behavior.

Stormpuppy_Infantry
05-09-2014, 10:50 PM
The question seems silly but it is required, I think.

So, is the question, is the 'Elite Cadre' only considered as sub tag, or specific type listed in the elite cadre ability is also its name?

Personally I think that it isn't because actual name of the ability is 'Elite Cadre' but only purple will confirm this subject.

Straight Line
05-10-2014, 12:54 AM
Don't know if this helps, but in Protectorate you have Gravus who helps his fellow Exemplars.. And Kreoss is an Exemplar, so he benefits from that rule, no?

Stormpuppy_Infantry
05-10-2014, 01:05 AM
Don't know if this helps, but in Protectorate you have Gravus who helps his fellow Exemplars.. And Kreoss is an Exemplar, so he benefits from that rule, no?

Gravus and Kreoss have 'Examplar' in their name so it is not the case.

MagnustheJust
05-10-2014, 01:29 AM
Don't know if this helps, but in Protectorate you have Gravus who helps his fellow Exemplars.. And Kreoss is an Exemplar, so he benefits from that rule, no?

Kreoss1 and Kreoss2 are, but not Kreoss3...


Kreoss1 : High Exemplar Kreoss

Kreoss2 : Grand Exemplar Kreoss, Protectorate Epic Warcaster

Kreoss3 : Intercessor Kreoss, Protectorate Cavalry Epic Warcaster

Straight Line
05-10-2014, 05:44 AM
Exactly.
So the name works, and the "secondary title" works. If not those, than nothing :)

Stormpuppy_Infantry
05-10-2014, 05:47 AM
Exactly.
So the name works, and the "secondary title" works. If not those, than nothing :)

https://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?196198-Theme-Force-Unwordscramble-Nightmare-Forever&p=2587364&viewfull=1#post2587364

But recent ruling said that model with an 'specific named' ability is 'specific named' model.

Crate123
05-10-2014, 06:01 AM
The Elite Cadre ability is something he does to another model, it is stretching the new rules to assume that the giver of Elite Cadre is also a member of that type of model just because their name appears on the card.

imbob
05-10-2014, 07:06 AM
I think any wording inside of [ ] is treated differently/special.

However, this should be easily answered.

If estryker became stormblade infantry, that would be a huge boost for him.

Wishing
05-11-2014, 01:49 AM
As I see it, the new subtype rules are hugely based on common sense. A "journeyman warcaster" is meant to be a model that can be described as a journeyman warcaster. You then have to use common sense to work out what those are. So far we know that models with a name of "journeyman warcaster" and models with a rule called "journeyman warcaster" count - so far so good.

However, extrapolating that into saying that any model that has the words "journeyman warcaster" printed anywhere on their card also counts is stretching the practice of common sense, as this question shows. If a model has the ability to grant the "journeyman warcaster" rule to other models, that clearly does not make them a journeyman warcaster themselves within any realm of common sense. Otherwise a model with a spell that says "target model loses Tough" would also count as a model with Tough.

So if you really need to ask this, go ahead, but I think that the real answer is that the subtype rule is a common sense rule which cannot be rule-scrutinized, at the stage it currently exists in. Maybe things will be different with the new errata.

Ender101
05-11-2014, 04:24 AM
As I see it, the new subtype rules are hugely based on common sense. A "journeyman warcaster" is meant to be a model that can be described as a journeyman warcaster. You then have to use common sense to work out what those are. So far we know that models with a name of "journeyman warcaster" and models with a rule called "journeyman warcaster" count - so far so good.

However, extrapolating that into saying that any model that has the words "journeyman warcaster" printed anywhere on their card also counts is stretching the practice of common sense, as this question shows. If a model has the ability to grant the "journeyman warcaster" rule to other models, that clearly does not make them a journeyman warcaster themselves within any realm of common sense. Otherwise a model with a spell that says "target model loses Tough" would also count as a model with Tough.

So if you really need to ask this, go ahead, but I think that the real answer is that the subtype rule is a common sense rule which cannot be rule-scrutinized, at the stage it currently exists in. Maybe things will be different with the new errata.

Not trying to be a power gamer but I think it's a valid question.

While the subtype rules have a lot of common sense as their background, games are built around solid rules. I don't feel bad asking the question. I have experience as a freelance rules editor, and play tester with Soda Pop and Wyrd minis, so I know even seemingly dumb questions need to be addressed. There has to be a mechanical way to qualify models into their subtype until such an errata comes along.

Personally I don't see why these models are different in some cases. While journey warcasters are common sense warcasters, it still leaves a lot of room for interpretation.

For example, Runewood is obviously a Sword Knight, look at his armor, background, etc. In most cases the Elite cadre rules represent members of that background. I don't think it's easy to dismiss with common sense.

Leo_the_Rat
05-11-2014, 04:47 AM
But Runewood doesn't have the sword knight descriptor anywhere in his name/subtype heading/or even in his rules. The only time that sword knight is mentioned is in his elite cadre rule which obviously only addresses other models.

Stormpuppy_Infantry
05-11-2014, 05:16 AM
Power gaming and rules problem is not related at all. Common sense is not always apply in game, like as LOS rules. If there is an unclear problem, then it is right to ask a question.

If I understand correctly, OP asks a question that, does 'Elite Cadre' is the only name of the ability, or 'Elite Cadre' and '[specific type]' is the name of the model with 'Elite Cadre[specific type].' I think that it is very important question because it have some meaning in new naming rules, which includes every ability's name into the model's name. Also there is no confirmed answer or rule that []section is also name of the ability or not. So we need to know how it does regardless what is the answer.

Even if we think that the answer is no, but the question is not worthless because we don't know how devs will judge it, and we don't have enough clue to find the answer.

Yes, that is a silly question in common sence, but it does not means that it is not necessary.

imbob
05-11-2014, 06:22 AM
But Runewood doesn't have the sword knight descriptor anywhere in his name/subtype heading/or even in his rules. The only time that sword knight is mentioned is in his elite cadre rule which obviously only addresses other models.

It was 'obviously addressed' that the black 13th were not an arcane tempest gun mage unit. So obvious that it was asked and answered years ago.

It was 'obviously addressed' that Allison Jakes was not a journeyman warcaster in sieges NQ trial by fire tier.

It was 'obviously addressed' that the sequence of a unit's activation was quite clear. So obvious that it was asked and answered years ago.

None of that is so obvious any more.

What the main problem is, players don't know what to make of 'clarifications' anymore. Things that were asked and answered years ago are now thrown out the window without a new rule's edition due to the way these 'new clarifications' are being 'not released' in a general fashion via a new rules edition or faq/errata.

We don't know what to do with many rules interactions any more. Thus we now have to ask all and any questions since this is such a complex rule set and we are no longer comfortable with how things can be applied. This is what storm puppy was alluding to in the previous post.

Everything is now suspect. Even things that were asked and answered years ago. Thus this question with many more to come.

Grey Templar
05-11-2014, 07:06 AM
Exactly.
So the name works, and the "secondary title" works. If not those, than nothing :)

Or you have a rule, like Guis and Cassian, which says you are a specific model type.

Wishing
05-11-2014, 02:58 PM
Not trying to be a power gamer but I think it's a valid question.

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound like I don't think you have the right to ask the question.

My answer was based on how you are writing as though the rules are mechanically fixed and consistent at the moment. They are not. You write "There has to be a mechanical way to qualify models into their subtype until such an errata comes along." Nope, currently there isn't. DC has written on this issue dozens of times, and always says the same basic thing: It really isn't that hard. Anything that can be used to describe a model is also a subtype. Use common sense to define what it means to describe a model.

If you think that this isn't good enough, and that there has to be 100% precise and exhaustive rules for what defines a key word so that a computer programme could understand it, then make your opinion known (which is what you've basically done already). But there is no point in asking it as a rules-technical question, because there is currently no answer other than a common sense-based answer.

imbob
05-11-2014, 03:39 PM
If you think that this isn't good enough, and that there has to be 100% precise and exhaustive rules for what defines a key word so that a computer programme could understand it, then make your opinion known (which is what you've basically done already). But there is no point in asking it as a rules-technical question, because there is currently no answer other than a common sense-based answer.

Except common sense appears to change. That's the problem. There is no basis to make this on. I understand things change.

But forcing the player base to guess what's going to change and how? With no explanation other than 'common sense'?

That's not going to work.

TheUnknownMercenary
05-11-2014, 05:01 PM
Let's check the handy dandy rulebook:


Elite Cadres:
Some models confer abilities to other models of a certain type in an army.

This means the title listed in the brackets [ ] is the certain type that is effected by the Eltie Cadre ability, it does not make the model with the Elite Cadre that type of model.

imbob
05-11-2014, 05:11 PM
Let's check the handy dandy rulebook:



This means the title listed in the brackets [ ] is the certain type that is effected by the Eltie Cadre ability, it does not make the model with the Elite Cadre that type of model.

Related, but this also means the same thing for ua's, correct?

Stormpuppy_Infantry
05-11-2014, 05:15 PM
Thanks for the answer, TUM. Then, the another ability with [] is also same? Like as Attachment[] imbob quoted.

Crate123
05-11-2014, 05:19 PM
Thanks for the answer, TUM. Then, the another ability with [] is also same? Like as Attachment[] imbob quoted.

Obviously, if anyone claims that the Corollary is a warcaster.....

TheUnknownMercenary
05-11-2014, 06:02 PM
Abilities like Elite Cadre, Companion, Attachment and any other ability with a model type in brackets [ ], the name of those abilities are Elite Cadre, Companion, Attachment, etc... That is the name of the ability. The name in the brackets the type that is affected by that ability.

A Halfjack has the Companion [Captain E. Dominic Darius], this does not make the Halfjack be Darius

Ender101
05-11-2014, 06:15 PM
Thank you for answering Mysterious and Wise unknown mercenary!

Stormpuppy_Infantry
05-12-2014, 03:45 PM
Abilities like Elite Cadre, Companion, Attachment and any other ability with a model type in brackets [ ], the name of those abilities are Elite Cadre, Companion, Attachment, etc... That is the name of the ability. The name in the brackets the type that is affected by that ability.

A Halfjack has the Companion [Captain E. Dominic Darius], this does not make the Halfjack be Darius

Thanks. Then the others are also same as well.

Ender101
05-12-2014, 04:47 PM
Thanks. Then the others are also same as well.

Huzzah for mechanical clarity.