Quick Nurgling question

[Screwface]

Just glanced at the new Nurglings warscroll in the Magotkin book. Am I right in understanding that unless you either wipe out the unit in one go, or battleshock them off the table completely, the unit is returned to its full strength at the end of every battleshock phase?

[angrycontra]

35 minutes ago, Screwface said:

Just glanced at the new Nurglings warscroll in the Magotkin book. Am I right in understanding that unless you either wipe out the unit in one go, or battleshock them off the table completely, the unit is returned to its full strength at the end of every battleshock phase?

No just 1 model with wounds is healed to full.

[Screwface]

Are you sure you're looking at the newest warscroll?

41 minutes ago, angrycontra said:

No just 1 model with wounds is healed to full.

 

[EMMachine]

16 minutes ago, Screwface said:

Are you sure you're looking at the newest warscroll?

 

Endless Swarm only says that you heal all wounds on the unit, you don't recover slain models. If a Nurgling has allocated 3 wounds these 3 wounds are healed.

(there is no "return all slain models to the battlefield" in that rule.

[Screwface]

10 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

Endless Swarm only says that you heal all wounds on the unit, you don't recover slain models. If a Nurgling has allocated 3 wounds these 3 wounds are healed.

(there is no "return all slain models to the battlefield" in that rule.

Yes but my point is that healing wounds on the unit and recovering models could be viewed as the same thing. Note also that the rule also doesn't explicitly say you only recover wounds on slain models. It did say that in the previous warscroll - it was very specific  that you only recover wounds to wounded but not slain models. So why change the wording here and say that the "unit" recovers models? The "unit" in this case is the entirety of all the nurglings. If I allocate 8 wounds to the unit, I take off 2 nurglings. If I then add 8 wounds back to the unit... you see? GW have specifically changed the wording on this rule to state unit rather than models wounded but not slain, and they've also increaesd the points cost.  Are you suggesting the wording is clear?

[Screwface]

5 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

Endless Swarm only says that you heal all wounds on the unit, you don't recover slain models. If a Nurgling has allocated 3 wounds these 3 wounds are healed.

(there is no "return all slain models to the battlefield" in that rule.

Yes but my point is that healing wounds on the unit and recovering models could be viewed as the same thing. Note also that the rule also doesn't explicitly say you only recover wounds on slain models. It did say that in the previous warscroll - it was very specific  that you only recover wounds to wounded but not slain models. So why change the wording here and say that the "unit" recovers models? The "unit" in this case is the entirety of all the nurglings. If I allocate 8 wounds to the unit, I take off 2 nurglings. If I then add 8 wounds back to the unit... you see? GW have specifically changed the wording on this rule to state unit rather than models wounded but not slain, and they've also increaesd the points cost.  Are you suggesting the wording is clear?

[EMMachine]

16 minutes ago, Screwface said:

Yes but my point is that healing wounds on the unit and recovering models could be viewed as the same thing. Note also that the rule also doesn't explicitly say you only recover wounds on slain models. It did say that in the previous warscroll - it was very specific  that you only recover wounds to wounded but not slain models. So why change the wording here and say that the "unit" recovers models? The "unit" in this case is the entirety of all the nurglings. If I allocate 8 wounds to the unit, I take off 2 nurglings. If I then add 8 wounds back to the unit... you see? GW have specifically changed the wording on this rule to state unit rather than models wounded but not slain, and they've also increaesd the points cost.  Are you suggesting the wording is clear?

It wouldn't be the first time that GW chose a strange wording.

For once, there are only allocated wounds on the field for living models. Allocations which are killing a model are removed with that model.

And wouldn't you think it would be quite gamebreaking to have a 12 Models unit of Nurglings (48 Wound). This unit would be nearly unkillable (even Archaon could "only" make 42 Wounds in one turn), if all models would return.

[Screwface]

7 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

It wouldn't be the first time that GW chose a strange wording.

For once, there are only allocated wounds on the field for living models. Allocations which are killing a model are removed with that model.

And wouldn't you think it would be quite gamebreaking to have a 12 Models unit of Nurglings (48 Wound). This unit would be nearly unkillable (even Archaon could "only" make 42 Wounds in one turn), if all models would return.

Well, I think whether or not it makes the unit broken is irrelevant. The rules are the rules. What's strange to me is that they changed the wording from the old rule to the new to go from specifically recovering wounds on wounded but not slain models, to recovering wounds to the "unit".  There was no need to make the change if they did not want to alter the meaning. If your interpretation is correct it also means that in the new rule they're using the word "unit" to refer to an individual model which makes no sense.

[BaldoBeardo]

Main rules, "Inflicting Damage", last sentence of second paragraph;

"You can't heal wounds on a model that has been slain."

Nothing in the wording of the Nurgling ability overrides that.

[Screwface]

I'm not healing wounds on a model, I'm healing wounds on a unit as per the rule's wording.

 

And you can bring a slain model back with varying ammounts of wounds in some cases if the rule says you can.

[BaldoBeardo]

24 minutes ago, Screwface said:

I'm not healing wounds on a model, I'm healing wounds on a unit as per the rule's wording.

 

And you can bring a slain model back with varying ammounts of wounds in some cases if the rule says you can.

Units don't have wounds. Models have wounds.

A unit is simply a collection of models.

You can't heal wounds on a unit by any other mechanism than by healing wounds on a model.

You cannot heal wounds on a slain model.

The Nurgling rule mentions healing. Not returning slain models.

In addition,the Deathly Invocation ability for LoN has similar  wording and the related errata demonstrate the design intent. 

[Screwface]

Couldn't design intent also be inferred from the fact they changed the wording which, if the original wording was what they intended, they didn't have to do? Plus the points rise?

To be fair the quote from the core rules about returning models is a solid point, but if a unit is a collection of models rather than a specific individual model within a unit, and the rule we're discussing in all cases will effectively apply to a single specific model, why use the word "unit" at all? Why change the wording from the original?

[Zhorphorus]

I don't mean to grab a pitchfork here but they probably changed the wording out of redundancy. If it's accepted that healing, unless stated otherwise, does not bring back models then they don't need to say it. In addition they did a review of every scroll to remove summoning by spell so they were probably just trying to be a bit neater whilst they were editing it. 

Don't mean to be offensive here but I think you're reading what you want to read rather than what's there. 

The ability itself of restoring models to full strength is a strong tarpit tool without being needlessly broken. 

[Screwface]

12 minutes ago, Zhorphorus said:

I don't mean to grab a pitchfork here but they probably changed the wording out of redundancy. If it's accepted that healing, unless stated otherwise, does not bring back models then they don't need to say it. In addition they did a review of every scroll to remove summoning by spell so they were probably just trying to be a bit neater whilst they were editing it. 

Don't mean to be offensive here but I think you're reading what you want to read rather than what's there. 

The ability itself of restoring models to full strength is a strong tarpit tool without being needlessly broken. 

No offense taken,.  We're adults having a conversation here. I accept that the paragraph in the main rules (which I haven't looked at in a while but should probably re-read) looks like it "pre-covers" the situation if you will, similar to how the paragraph in the main rulebook pre-covered any shenanigans with the Lizardmen's predatory fighter rule back in 8th, (although that debate raged on nonetheless).  

[hughwyeth]

3 hours ago, Screwface said:

Couldn't design intent also be inferred from the fact they changed the wording which, if the original wording was what they intended, they didn't have to do? Plus the points rise?

To be fair the quote from the core rules about returning models is a solid point, but if a unit is a collection of models rather than a specific individual model within a unit, and the rule we're discussing in all cases will effectively apply to a single specific model, why use the word "unit" at all? Why change the wording from the original?

I think you're giving more credit to GW than they deserve for rules writing. They are appallingly bad at writing clear rules. It's really quite an achievement to be honest, considering tiny board games companies with 5 figure turnover can write crystal clear rules with no issues. I don't know why they can't have some extremely clear language to make a distinction between bringing back models and healing wounds on remaining models. I've heard this discussion so many times!

Unfortunately (as a nurgle player) the rule intends to say "Heal wounds on any remaining models". They're explicit when it also applies to models (as in bravery rolls for daemons, or undead units).